That would be the part of a horn antenna that is most important, the very high fall off outside of the spec'd beam width without the nulls and peaks outside. Short story, ran into a FAA tech looking for interference of a ground radar at the local airport. He was on a hill with a 5! foot horn antenna looking for the source ( it was a Macintosh! with a bad rf seal about 6 miles away from the radar ).. Huge work to swing that 30 db antenna but knowing the radial of the interference was exact. He nailed the location in 1/2 day to the exact house.

On 4/11/18 8:21 AM, wrote:
Speaking generally here, not about this product specifically:
A 30 is a 30 at some dB down from peak.  Most reputable antenna manufacturers cite the beamwidth at the 3 dB down points on each side of the main lobe.  That is called HPBW or half power beam width. Some go out farther to the 6 dB point to make their beam width seem wider than their competitors.  Personally I believe that is false advertising.  But I am sure they do not share my opinion. Look at the type of beamwidth.  Should state how many dB down somewhere on the spec sheet. Other than that, horn antennas are very well characterized.  They are used as lab standard calibration antennas.  Other than the point where they choose to specify the beamwidth I think you can totally trust the specs.
*From:* Steve Jones
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:01 AM
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Rfelements
so if im getting the right feel, here, I CAN trust these spec sheets? a 30 is actually 30 and not 90? FB is real? Ive had two in play on EPMP1000 for some time but i keep pulling them and moving them elsewhere because of changes, so Ive never had one up long enough to see. I have use case for narrower patterns and more APs at some sites because the uplinks are getting more interference than id prefer, my only other option is to add the secondary antenna on the 2000, im not a fan of adding windload with no net capacity gain On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Steve Jones <> wrote:

    we have a substantial garbage dump
    On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Jaime Solorza
    <> wrote:

        There's mountains near Steve's WISP footprint?

        Jaime Solorza
        On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 7:45 AM Mike Hammett <> wrote:

            You have that the other way around. A horn would be ideal in
            a mountain area.

            Mike Hammett
            Intelligent Computing Solutions <>
            Midwest Internet Exchange <>
            The Brothers WISP <>

            *From: *"Sean Heskett" <>
            *To: *
            *Sent: *Tuesday, April 10, 2018 10:49:19 PM
            *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Rfelements

            I Totally agree with josh.
            They have a specific purpose so if you can deploy within
            those parameters they are great.
            Unfortunately our area isn’t conducive to that type of
            deployment because of terrain.  In the mountains you need
            antennas with a wider vertical beam because your towers are
            on mtn peaks and some clients are same height as the tower
            and other clients are on the valley floor. It’s hard to use
            a spot beam to cover all that.
            In the Midwest or other flat areas I could see them being
            useful to spot beam the population centers.
            On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 8:29 PM Josh Reynolds
            <> wrote:

                They are great for stuff like 30/40Mhz wide, gps sync,
                put 4-6 on a pole in a subdivision  or on a tower leg
                kinda thing.
                If anybody thought they were for something else (ie long
                range), they didn't read the data sheets.
                Lightweight, low size, low wind load, perfectly circular
                pattern - great spot beams. Good F/B ratio.
                On Tue, Apr 10, 2018, 9:12 PM Robert
                <> wrote:

                    I recently did a couple of tests with RF horns.   I
                    was hoping for a lot
                    and was disappointed.   I was hoping that they could
                    be colocated
                    closer than regular sectors that I use and the
                    crosstalk signal levels
were just about the same as the shielded sectors. As far as the
                    signals at the CPE's they were pretty good but not
                    amazingly better for
                    as small as the target area got reduced to.

                    On 4/10/18 6:43 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
                     > Can i get some non fanboy real world on these
                    guys? Btw, i hate facebook
                     > groups almost as much as dslreports or the ubnt
                    forums, this is
                     > literally the only place to get legitimate
                    product info.

Reply via email to