[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 6:59 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
It's not the output power that differentiates SR radios from XR radios. We
got better quality links from 100mW CM9s than SR cards. The XR radios are
finer
Hi,
Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5
cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link?
We have a 15 mile shot (using MT) that is just _barely_ line of site
enough to establish a link. I am just wondering how much increase in
signal we would see by switching
You could just toss the cards in there and do a quick configure.
$216 for the parts should be easy to show on the books. :)
ryan
Travis Johnson wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5
cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link?
We have a 15 mile
Hi,
It's a 2 hour drive (each way) and requires taking the link down
(again). I have XR5 cards sitting on my desk... but if I'm only going
to see 1db of improvement, it's not worth 5 hours of time. ;)
Travis
Microserv
D. Ryan Spott wrote:
You could just toss the cards in there and do a
There is a difference between u.fl and mmcx on signal levels?
Blair Davis wrote:
I-2db.
Maybe more, but only if you are going from u.fl pigtails to mmcx
pigtails...
Travis Johnson wrote:
Hi,
It's a 2 hour drive (each way) and requires taking the link down
(again). I
I've seen about 2 dB difference from sr5 to xr5.
Jim
Travis Johnson wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5
cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link?
We have a 15 mile shot (using MT) that is just _barely_ line of site
enough to establish a
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive db reading
as in the CCQ. I don't remember how much it changed, but I have a
couple of links that were having issues with intermittent drops that
went away with the XR5 cards.
Travis Johnson wrote:
Hi,
It's a 2 hour drive (each
@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive db reading
as in the CCQ. I don't remember how much it changed, but I have a
couple of links that were having issues with intermittent drops that
went away with the XR5 cards.
Travis Johnson
MMCX cables typically use a larger cable, so less loss.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
From: Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
There is a difference between u.fl
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:55 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive
--
From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:55 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive db reading
as in the CCQ. I don't remember how much
.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: "Scott Reed" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:55 PM
To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:55 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive db reading
as in the CCQ. I don't remember how much it changed, but I have
13 matches
Mail list logo
