RE: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-23 Thread Mike DeWaele
Paul, I have a set up on my tower like your thinking of doing. I have a 2 meter and 440 machine. The wireless 900 MHz antenna is on the very top position of the tower. ( I let them have the top so they could take all the lighting hits) Under that about 15 feet are the 2 meter and 440 antennas acro

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-23 Thread Mike Folta
wrote: From: AJ Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower? To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 3:41 PM And scratch out the chance of ever making friends with any other amateur in the area that has deployed, or is

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-22 Thread Paul N1BUG
Kevin Custer wrote: > Ethernet cabling should be of the shielded type and bonded at one end to > earth. > If they are putting up a 900 MHz access point, will it be sectorized? > If yes, how many sectors (how many transmitters)? > What frequencies and bandwidths on 900 (20 MHz) (10 MHz) (5 MHz) ? >

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Kevin Custer
Paul N1BUG wrote: > I could use a little help here. I have a repeater tower with 2 meter > and 440 repeater on it. I have been contacted by a wireless internet > service provider about putting some 900 MHz stuff on my tower. The > deal they are offering is attractive but I'm wondering if there

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Joe
I would include a clause that requires the wireless internet company to be responsible to mitigate any interference to the existing users of the tower. Nice and simple. Joe Mike Pugh wrote: > Paul N1BUG wrote: > >> I could use a little help here. I have a repeater tower with 2 meter >> and

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Mike Pugh
Paul N1BUG wrote: > I could use a little help here. I have a repeater tower with 2 meter > and 440 repeater on it. I have been contacted by a wireless internet > service provider about putting some 900 MHz stuff on my tower. The > deal they are offering is attractive but I'm wondering if there

RE: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Mike Mullarkey
Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower? Find out what gear they are using. Make sure it's FCC certified. If you have a spectrum analyzer, or have access to one, have them fire up the gear and make sure it doesn't have any spurious spikes within the 440 and 2m ham band. -Mike

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Kris Kirby
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009, Jim Brown wrote: > I have a remote receiver site at a 900 mHz distribution point where > the 2.4 gHz baseband is distributed down on 900 mHz and the noise is > really bad.? I can't copy my repeater to test the remote receiver till > I walk about 200 ft from the tower where t

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Jim Brown
I have a remote receiver site at a 900 mHz distribution point where the 2.4 gHz baseband is distributed down on 900 mHz and the noise is really bad.  I can't copy my repeater to test the remote receiver till I walk about 200 ft from the tower where the 900 mHz stuff is located. I have a GE Mast

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread AJ
And scratch out the chance of ever making friends with any other amateur in the area that has deployed, or is thinking of deploying, a 902 MHz ham repeater... The 900 MHz ISM crap makes the 902 Amateur band in a lot of the country almost unusable... We actually had a WISP removed from our site due

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 900 MHz WISP on repeater tower?

2009-01-21 Thread Mike Lyon
Find out what gear they are using. Make sure it's FCC certified. If you have a spectrum analyzer, or have access to one, have them fire up the gear and make sure it doesn't have any spurious spikes within the 440 and 2m ham band. -Mike On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Paul N1BUG wrote: > I c