How does the Ubnt 3.65 perform where going thru light foliage perhaps
only one or two trees? What kind of throughput? We are thinking of
switching some of our 2.4 over to 3.65 because of interference issues.
Thanks
Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
Less coverage then 3.65 for sure.
On Jun 22, 2011 11:28 AM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr pni...@cnetworksolutions.com
wrote:
How does the Ubnt 3.65 perform where going thru light foliage perhaps
only one or two trees? What kind of throughput? We are thinking of
switching some of our 2.4 over to 3.65
I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
if 3.65GHz could handle it.
I am using one of the KPP reflectors on the Nanostation as a test. It is
linked up with a noise floor of -95 at about -85
What was the signal of the first link in 900?
On Jun 22, 2011 11:41 AM, Simon Westlake si...@powercode.com wrote:
I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
if 3.65GHz could handle it.
I am
In a LOS situation with say -70 or so what kind of throughput with UBNT 3.65?
Also on the FCC Registration do I file as Common Carrier, Non-Common, or
Private?
Thanks,
Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
IT Manager
http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
It wasn't working at the time. I don't know if it was a signal issue
though, this guy just ended up being in a good spot to beta test worst
case 3.65GHz scenario.
On 6/22/2011 10:47 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
What was the signal of the first link in 900?
On Jun 22, 2011 11:41 AM, Simon Westlake
I tested by driving my car about a mile away from the tower and holding
an NSM365 through the sunroof of my car. I was at ~-75 or so.
I was pulling 18Mbps x 19Mbps at 10MHz channel width.
Granted this was the only SM connected to the AP at the time.
On 6/22/2011 10:52 AM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr
In a LOS situation with say -70 or so what kind of throughput with UBNT 3.65?
Also on the FCC Registration do I file as Common Carrier, Non-Common, or
Private?
Thanks,
Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
IT Manager
http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
Hi Victoria,
In total seriousness, if one of my installers did something like this,
even for a temp job, I would fire them..
This person appears to have no clue as to be able to estimate what load
/ leverage / mechanical setup at all about.
:)
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet Telecom
7266
LOL, agreed J, but it was for more of a site survey, to see what these guys
would do and to check the noise level.
We still have to run conduit, it is a pretty massive roof and we did not
want to take that job on if the UNBT wasn't for us.
Victoria Proffer
President/CEO
You are asking a fair question, but the answer to this question is based
on a lot of IF's and But's
Frequency of 3.65 should have very similar characteristics of 2.4
UBNT Dual Polarity appears to have a great advantage over single
polarity when shooting thru Foliage
Going thru Foliage has
When deploying 3.65 you'll want to consider that
- There is only 25MHz of spectrum to use, you'll have nowhere to run if you
have interference
- To get three AP's on a tower you'll probably have to use to use 7MHz channels
(using the 5.5 beta2 software)
- 7MHz channel will get get ~15Mbps TCP
However, if you are only putting one AP on a tower, you could go with a
25MHz wide channel and get 25watts EIRP (44dB) at the AP and CPE ends.
That's A LOT of punch to get hrough foliage, BUT leaves no room for growth.
What's wrong with 25 watts and 7Mhz channels?
Josh Luthman
Office:
1W/MHz is the rule
7MHz channel = 7W (38.5dB)
Plus you don't get to use the antenna rules for CPE's, max EIRP is fixed
regardless of antenna used.
- Jerry
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 9:30 AM
To:
Speedyquick
John Silva
357 E. Watertower St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
United States
Telephone Number:
208-344-3837
1 watt per MHz limit in 3650.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
On 6/22/2011 11:29 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
However, if you are only putting one AP on a tower, you could go with
a 25MHz wide channel and get 25watts EIRP (44dB) at the AP and CPE
ends.
Looking for ME Equipment
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
17 matches
Mail list logo
