You will be waiting several months or more for multi-user LTU, same as other 
products still coming out.

We always looks at ROI.  Except for 1 rare case that we bought 900Mhz 450's 
for, and even then my ROI is well over 16 months or more, starting from scratch 
makes the 450 a challenge for profitability.  I'm also not convinced that the 
450 will keep up with the rest of the industry in terms of capacity without 
much more investment whereas 802.11 products are cheap to upgrade.

As for capacity, not starting with 802.11ac is DOA.  New 802.11ac chipsets are 
already pushing on 1024QAM and some other amazing features that will change how 
we deploy on towers.  RF Elements horns have already done that.

For example, you can run 12 Ubiquiti Prisms with 12 horns, each covering 30-40 
degrees (overlap and minimizing the dropoff) for less than $5K.  Even if you 
use 50/50 on GPS, you are still talking about at least 1.2Gbps of download 
capacity (40MHz channels, 200Mbps per customer average).  Need more, RF 
Elements is shipping an even more narrow horn to double that.  What's even more 
amazing is that the need for GPS goes down significantly depending on how you 
deploy the horns meaning even more capacity.  

We have found that deploying Mimosa with 2 antennas covering 60-120 degrees or 
Ubiquiti covering 30 degrees per AP in the directions we needed, meant we 
didn't have to cover 360 degrees.  If we added users that weren't in the 
pattern, we just added more APs or in the case of Mimosa, swapped out the 
antenna with more narrow patterns and added more APs to expand coverage .  A 
single user pays for a Ubiquiti/Horn AP in the first 8 months and 2 users 
Mimosa.   I understand this doesn't work well for tower deployments with 
outsourced climbers or with towers that are billed by cable pulls, antenna 
square footage, number of APs, etc...  which is also why we rarely use towers.  
I'd rather find a few lower locations that have easy access than a single tower 
but that's not always realistic.

Rory   

-----Original Message-----
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stefan Englhardt
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 1:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp

At the moment I would wait to see what this LTU is all about. Should soon 
arrive at US Beta store. An airfiber class radio mounted to horns may give a 
real boost. There would be a lot capacity even using them at smaller Channels. 
They will use power below 10W and will be much cheaper than 450m so you could 
install a 360 degree cluster which you might densify at the direction where 
most customers live. Using an EP-S16 you could aggregate them to 10GE and feed 
them with a Licensed gear right up there. You only need to bring 48V DC up to 
the tower.


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von Josh Reynolds
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 09:34
> An: af@afmug.com
> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> 
> I agree, it makes sense if you already have a cambium network on 450.
> 
> For greenfield? Probably not.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:42 AM, George Skorup 
> <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> > One 450m = two 450i in cost (roughly), but delivers 3-4x the 
> > throughput based on real-world results. Yes, it *can* talk to 7 SMs 
> > in the
> same frame.
> > But even Cambium said 3-4 is realistic. Maybe 5 in the right 
> > conditions. And you don't have to visit a single customer site. And 
> > instead of pointing 3x 20MHz channels the same direction, you need 
> > only one. Plus there's 30 and 40MHz support. Like Sean said, just 
> > another
> tool in the toolbox.
> >
> > On 2/13/2018 1:26 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> >>
> >> I was saying one direction IS 90 degrees in the "standard tower plan"
> >> :)
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:17 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> how else would you suggest building a tower?!?!
> >>>
> >>> friends don't let friends use omni's ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Josh Reynolds 
> >>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> If you do the standard 4xAP so you can do 2 channels and back to 
> >>>> back frequency reuse, 90 degrees is one direction...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> actually you don't want them all in one direction, you want the 
> >>>>> clients evenly spread in a 90* swath so that you can take 
> >>>>> advantage of the MU-MIMO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we have clients connected out to 8 miles running in 6x (which is 
> >>>>> 64qam).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it actually saves on tower rent because to do the same thing 
> >>>>> with regular
> >>>>> 450 APs (which we were prior to deploying the 450m's) you would 
> >>>>> need 3 APs each using 20Mhz so 60Mhz total of spectrum used.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> win, win, win.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> but i also wouldn't install them at every tower.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2 cents
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -sean
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:58 PM, Josh Reynolds 
> >>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm just saying it doesn't make sense, unless all your clients 
> >>>>>> are short range, in all one direction, and tower rent is costly.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's a niche of a niche.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (I'm not saying it is a bad product, I'm not saying that at 
> >>>>>> all, I'm just saying it's not the second coming like people 
> >>>>>> make it out to be.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Sean Heskett 
> >>>>>> <af...@zirkel.us>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Then by all means don’t deploy any 450m’s josh.  Geeze dude 
> >>>>>>> take a chill pill.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I’m just stating what I have on my network in a real world 
> >>>>>>> environment, earning me real world dollars and conserving much 
> >>>>>>> needed spectrum.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It’s not the right tool for every situation, BUT under the 
> >>>>>>> right conditions the 450m delivers.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers bud
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -sean
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:46 PM Josh Reynolds 
> >>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Further note: You can see I did those calcs at 1024QAM, so 
> >>>>>>>> reduce that down the 256QAM for closer to real numbers :)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Josh Reynolds 
> >>>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Let's break this down a bit.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Firstly, what outdoor PTMP platform is really using WiFi anymore?
> >>>>>>>>> *shakes head*
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Mu-MIMO only works if the clients are sufficiently spread 
> >>>>>>>>> apart (physically), and their tx/rx windows can fit into 
> >>>>>>>>> almost the same timeframe. Any degradation in signal of one 
> >>>>>>>>> client that ends up in the same window as other clients 
> >>>>>>>>> reduces the overall capacity of the AP (like in many other 
> >>>>>>>>> situations). It can, in some situations, lead to cumulative 
> >>>>>>>>> transfer windows where overall throughput ends up getting 
> >>>>>>>>> reduced as the rx/tx hold time for the other clients end up 
> >>>>>>>>> taking a hit in efficiency. This is one of the few failings 
> >>>>>>>>> of MU-MIMO, not even taking into account "massive" systems 
> >>>>>>>>> like
> >>>>>>>>> 14x14 that end up costing quite a bit in overall power 
> >>>>>>>>> budget due to the number of elements, further meaning that 
> >>>>>>>>> your range is severely limited in a system like this... so 
> >>>>>>>>> only decent in very dense situations.
> >>>>>>>>> That's a
> >>>>>>>>> unique niche.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> So, 80 clients. That's a pretty average number for a modern 
> >>>>>>>>> system (450, Mimosa, AC Prism Gen2).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 30Mbps per client... okay, but most customers are actually 
> >>>>>>>>> streaming.
> >>>>>>>>> Let's throw another margin on top of that and say a few Mbps 
> >>>>>>>>> for gaming. 10Mbps is a nice round number. Now, that data 
> >>>>>>>>> gets sent in most services in bursts and buffered, so it's not 
> >>>>>>>>> continuous.
> >>>>>>>>> Let's
> >>>>>>>>> take that average number down to about 8 Mbps. Now let's 
> >>>>>>>>> assume that maybe 70% of those 80 customers is doing 
> >>>>>>>>> something like that, and that's probably a generous number. 
> >>>>>>>>> 56 customers. So 56 customers x 8Mbps = 448Mbps. On a 20Mhz 
> >>>>>>>>> channel? Wait, this doesn't seem to work out!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Soo.... 1024 QAM on a 20MHz channel gives you 250Mbps, very 
> >>>>>>>>> roughly.
> >>>>>>>>> If you're optimistic about modern patterns, you're between 
> >>>>>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>>> 80/20
> >>>>>>>>> and a 60/40 Download/Upload ratio on a split GPS synced system.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 80/20 = 200Mbps Down, 50Mbps Up
> >>>>>>>>> 60/40 = 150 Down, 100Mbps Up
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Let's say for the sake of argument that you're in the 80/20 
> >>>>>>>>> camp, giving you 200Mbps to work with in above perfect 
> >>>>>>>>> conditions, gives you
> >>>>>>>>> 3.57 Mbps per subscriber. Roughly 4M/sub, good for 480p
> streaming.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> That's a very expensive platform for that kind of throughput 
> >>>>>>>>> and subscriber count with such limitations in range and 
> >>>>>>>>> needed a "perfect storm" of client distribution and data 
> >>>>>>>>> patterns to really take advantage of. With working GPS in 
> >>>>>>>>> all modern platforms, I would be hard pressed to not use an 
> >>>>>>>>> additional 20mhz channel if available, or just cut the 
> >>>>>>>>> channel width in half to 10MHz each, and put up 4 Mimosas or 
> >>>>>>>>> 4 Gen2 Prism radios and have far more than 4x the possible 
> >>>>>>>>> subscriber account, improved tx/rx efficiency, improved 
> >>>>>>>>> range (increasing distance and SNR in many situations), and 
> >>>>>>>>> greatly reduced cost.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Again, I'm far more excited about the 4x increase in 
> >>>>>>>>> spectral efficiency via OFDMA that doesn't cause you to cut 
> >>>>>>>>> down on tx/rx chains for multi-client transmission (costing 
> >>>>>>>>> your range, per client snr, and per-client throughput in the 
> >>>>>>>>> process). MU-MIMO is and will always be a niche hack that 
> >>>>>>>>> never lived up to what was promised.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Sean Heskett 
> >>>>>>>>> <af...@zirkel.us>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Being able to load a 450m AP with 80 subs and deliver 
> >>>>>>>>>> 30mbps service to all of them at peak Netflix time in a 
> >>>>>>>>>> 20mhz channel without breaking a sweat is worth every penny.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> But it’s one tool in the tool box and isn’t the best 
> >>>>>>>>>> solution for every deployment.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2 cents
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> -sean
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:32 PM Josh Reynolds 
> >>>>>>>>>> <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The more I dig into MU-MIMO, the more I realize it's not 
> >>>>>>>>>>> all that great.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I am far more excited by the 9 client simultaneous 
> >>>>>>>>>>> transmissions in 802.11ax via OFDMA.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:00 PM, Adam Moffett 
> >>>>>>>>>>> <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 450 still does a few things that ePMP doesn't.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Plus there's that 14 chain MU-MIMO thing......ePMP will 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> probably never have something like that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> UI is still sluggish on ePMP.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand ePMP has gotten so many feature 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> improvements over these past few years that it's gotten 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> really hard to argue with the value it provides.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ------ Original Message ------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: af@afmug.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 2/12/2018 8:27:56 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The UI server was probably the worst I have ever seen.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> So, less than 25 subs per site, what speed packages do 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> you sell to those 25?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Packetflux GPS sync.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: Joe Novak
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:20 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: af@afmug.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What didn't you like about it? The interface came a long 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> way since the early days of EPMP. We've got quite a bit 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> deployed. A lot of people are having weird GPS situations 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> come up with the on-board GPS, we have this problem once 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in a while too. Our packetflux sites are rock solid though.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> That is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> assuming density isn't more then 25 per AP, because then 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't exactly have enough experience with it. Most of 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> our APs are sitting right around
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 25
> >>>>>>>>>>>> customers, and according to airtime we still have quite a 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bit of room.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Jaime Solorza 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I separated frequencies to three I found cleanest on 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> AFx5s...On Rockets and Powerbeams I choose one frequency 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and shut off the rest on APs and on PowerBeams I only 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> use two...this method has worked well since August of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> when I replaced all the radios on this network and have 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> had to change them since.  Two of the WISPs live in 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fabens and work with us on issues.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other one from El Paso uses my services once in a while 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and works with us as well.  Texas Gas put up allot of 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 5GHz units around Fabens but still no issues. I used 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> larger dishes at Wells and lift stations as well.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:50 PM, "Jaime Solorza"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Two AF5x on same tower, One AP on second tower 20 ft 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> away...all other radios within 4 mile radius...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:43 PM, "Chuck McCown"
> <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All on the same tower, right?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Jaime Solorza
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:41 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Animal Farm
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] mini wisp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes..I have two AF5X links as PTP and 25 radios all in 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5 GHz off
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> APs
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Fabens, Texas sharing spectrum with 3 WISPs...no 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jaime Solorza
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018 4:32 PM, "Chuck McCown"
> <ch...@wbmfg.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Talking to a friend that wants to build a small wisp.  
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is about
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5.5
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miles from a backbone connection.  I would suggest 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AF5X
> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gonna want to use 5 GHz for his wisp I presume.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can an AF5X and some 5 GHz cambium (or others) access 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points peacefully coexist on a tower?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Very rural area.  Not expecting much interference 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other than home routers.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >

Reply via email to