Al: Note that with those frequencies and transmission modes that "not quite line-of-site" doesn't cut it. In fact, having a clear visual path doesn't always cut it. If there's any significant Fresnel Zone intrusion by obstructions, your reliability goes right out the window. In fact, it's possible to have situations where you can see the other end just fine, but you can't use the path at all.
Unfortunately, way too many fixed wireless companies determine if the path is good by trying it from the customer's location. If it works, they assume it's OK. But in reality, all they know is that it worked at that point in time. You may run into the same thing. If you don't have a known good path, it might work when you set it up but become unreliable at times after that. If it's something you want to rely on, you should really do a path study. Below is a link to software that will help. http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html Chuck - N8DNX Al Wolfe wrote: > Thanks to all who responded. We are playing with the idea of an 802.11? > link to one of a couple of hams who are about two miles away. However, the > path is not quite line-of-site. Guess we'll have to find a couple of boxes > and play. > > Al, K9SI > > [ED - Tim K6BIV uses wifi on 5Ghz from his access point to the K6MDD Mount > Diablo repeater site in CA - 73, Steve NU5D] > >
