The boys down in the Southern Yellow Pine parts of the world say that pine is 
worse than other types of trees.  

From: Mathew Howard 
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 3:56 PM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Equivalent Loss When Moving NLOS from 3 to 5 GHz?

I don't think there really is such a thing as typical loss through trees... 
there are way too many variables to be able reliably calculate anything, in my 
experience. But it's a pretty good bet that 5ghz will be worse.... although if 
it's a PTP link, you do have the benefit of being able to use a lot more TX 
power with 5ghz, so you might be able to make up for the additional loss.


On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote:

  5GHz through trees?  100% loss at that range.  Seriously, I don't know, but 
I'd be willing to bet that is not going to work well at all.

  On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:

    for 3.65ghz I've been told 125db / km is typical loss through trees.  So I 
guess if that's true in your case then you've got 100m or so of trees to get 
through.

    I do not know the equivalent number for 5.8ghz.  Maybe somebody else can 
fill in the blank.




    ------ Original Message ------
    From: "Christopher Gray" <[email protected]>
    To: [email protected]
    Sent: 4/17/2017 4:51:23 PM
    Subject: [AFMUG] Equivalent Loss When Moving NLOS from 3 to 5 GHz?

      I'm looking doing some calculations for a link that is currently 4.7 
miles effectively with M365 NanoBridges.  

      The signal calculates out to -59 dBm, but in reality it is -71 dBm (12 db 
loss through foliage).

      Is there a decent way to estimate what the equivalent foliage loss would 
be at 5 GHz?

Reply via email to