That's when you get on with the satellite reseller program. You get monthly revenue and don't have to worry about that site anymore.
On Nov 22, 2016 10:52 AM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote: > I imagine it was easier back when you could sell 256k and expect people to > be happy. In some places it's 900mhz or nothing. In that case, maybe you > charge whatever is required to make it work. > > At the moment the only new 900mhz we have are fringe cases. The only > other 900 we have is legacy stuff. On the legacy ones, we hate fussing > with the interference and the customers hate the available speed, and there > aren't enough customers to easily justify an upgrade. So I get what you're > saying, but I have to believe there's somebody for whom 900 is either the > right move or the only move. > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 11/22/2016 10:41:34 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dual-slant 900mhz omni (for PMP450) ordering group > > > I would need to see a map. Maybe some of your guys experiences with 900mhz > were different from mine in rural Alaska, but the use of the band + lack of > density just didn't make any investment viable. Even if the thought was to > backfill with towers and nlos/los later on down the road, the return just > wasn't there. > > On Nov 22, 2016 9:38 AM, "Kurt Fankhauser" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> 900mhz is a good solution to get a lot of coverage into an area you are >> building into and then you come in later and put up more towers to get >> people switched off of it and on a LOS technology and then maybe you still >> will only need the 900 sectors to cover a couple directions from the tower >> so you can take all the sectors down but 1 or 2. >> >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Considering 900mhz is only going to get worse in almost every location, >>> why would one continue throwing money at this? Is the time and money even >>> expected to be recovered? Equipment costs, installation, configuration, >>> constant tweaking, etc... Only to find out that in the very near future you >>> will have to go a different route. >>> >>> What am I missing? >>> >>> On Nov 22, 2016 9:29 AM, "Bill Prince" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Could also use a 2-way splitter, and only lose about 3db. Then put two >>>> up with an ABAB configuration. You'd still be using 2 APs, but the >>>> performance would be quite a bit better. >>>> >>>> >>>> bp >>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/22/2016 7:24 AM, Adam Moffett wrote: >>>> >>>> Maybe he's the one guy with no noise in 900mhz. We don't know that >>>> from back here. >>>> >>>> You could use a cheaper V+H antenna on the AP as long as you use V+H >>>> antennas on the CPE. >>>> >>>> You could also build an array of four sector antennas with a four-way >>>> splitter. You lose at least 6db on the splitter, but if you're looking at >>>> 5dbi and 7dbi omnis then it's probably in the same ballpark. The good >>>> thing is you could set a different tilt angle in different directions and >>>> if load required it in the future you could go to two 2-way splitters and >>>> two APs. >>>> >>>> ------ Original Message ------ >>>> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Cc: [email protected] >>>> Sent: 11/22/2016 10:12:13 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dual-slant 900mhz omni (for PMP450) ordering group >>>> >>>> >>>> You are wasting you time with omni's on 900mhz. So your sacrificing a >>>> lot of gain to get 360 degree coverage which in turn will result in higher >>>> overall noise floor and lower signal when this 450 product really starts to >>>> shine you need 25db+ SNR at the client side to get the higher modulation >>>> connections. So even if you got the Omni you'd going to be lucky to get >>>> 8-10db SNR to the client which means your only going to be running at 2x >>>> speed and getting 10mbps download which will probably be intermittent. I >>>> had a lot of omnis on FSK 900 and I can tell you that after having used the >>>> cambium slant sector on 450 I am a firm believer in sectors only for 900 >>>> from here on out. I have connections that are 3-4 miles out running 10mhz >>>> channels and getting 40mbps down/10mbps up. You will never get that with an >>>> Omni unless you have LOS and if you have LOS then why aren't you using >>>> another frequency band? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Colin Stanners <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've been looking for dual-slant 900mhz omni options that would allow >>>>> lower-cost PMP450 900mhz deployment on middle-of-the-woods towers where >>>>> there are only a small number of customers (and low noise). I know that >>>>> "omnis suck compared to sectors", but having nothing at all sucks more. >>>>> Due to the difficulty of designing dual-slant antennas and the small >>>>> market, options are very few. >>>>> >>>>> Commscope has the CH360QS, only 5dbi gain at ~900mhz... and it's a >>>>> cellular base station omni with all the fancy doodads: 1800-2200Mhz band >>>>> that WISPs can't use, internal GPS antenna, internal diplexer, >>>>> remote-controlled signal tilt on the upper band, etc. At $3500 per >>>>> antenna I hope that it makes your breakfast too. >>>>> >>>>> Alpha has the best design that I found at present, the AW3464. ~7dbi >>>>> gain http://alphaantennas.com/products/small-cells/aw3464/ . It's >>>>> ~$1200 USD which is still inexpensive compared to any other NLOS options. >>>>> >>>>> But currently those antennas cannot be bought - I spoke with Crossover >>>>> Distribution and Alpha, they haven't received enough POs to make a >>>>> production run, need 50 orders at a bare minimum. So if anyone else is >>>>> really interested in one or more of these antennas, ready to buy for sure >>>>> if they are available, e-mail me "If available, I will buy x number of the >>>>> Alpha AW3464 at $1200/USD each from Crossover." and I'll make a list, once >>>>> it hits 50+ antennas I'll speak with Crossover and see if it can happen. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>
