Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers
Back when it was Cingular, I tried getting on a tower they own. They wanted $1600/mo and an engineering study done (usually $2500 or so). I just talked to the land owner, and he let me build a tower on equally high ground and I am spending WAY less than $1600/mo and I OWN the tower for co-locating. If you go with the tower management company, I bet you could get it quite a bit less. I DO know that another tower owner that rents to me at $1/ft on his towers, and according to SBA, they manage his tower. They wanted over $400/mo (almost $2/ft) next to a town about 400 people... The bottom line is that you might do some research before you make any decisions. You might find another deal you didn't know existed. Eric Rogers Precision Data Solutions, LLC (317) 831-3000 x200 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 8:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Has anyone worked with a cell company for collocation on THEIR towers? IE: ATT, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. Not interested in hearing about American Tower, GTP, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan
Hey johhny, I think we might be there is this in the Encantada community? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan Gr - Why didn't I think of Mr. Puerto Rico Wi-Fi himself. JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan That would be most likely [EMAIL PROTECTED] , or he could point you in the right direction. -forrest JohnnyO wrote: Will need service at this location. Please respond offline with quotes. This is for me personally. I will be renting this home for 180days. I can do my own install ! ! ! ! and prob have the equipment for it also quote accordingly :) Parque Montebello street 1 A-19 Trujillo Alto Puerto Rico 00976 Regards, JohnnyO 337.368.7188 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ATT Coverage in Puerto Rico ????
They are the biggest here ... currently running hsdpa on the data network. If you have a national plan, I think you're covered... What cell project you'll be working on? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 11:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] ATT Coverage in Puerto Rico We're about to head to Puerto Rico for a cellular project. Can anyone here confirm if ATT/Cingular will work there, and if so, any additional charges ? Thanks, JohnnyO WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ATT Coverage in Puerto Rico ????
It's not ATT LOL My NDA doesn't allow me to discuss at this point. I am hashing out the final details. I will let you know once and if we are in market so we can spend some time together. JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 8:57 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] ATT Coverage in Puerto Rico They are the biggest here ... currently running hsdpa on the data network. If you have a national plan, I think you're covered... What cell project you'll be working on? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 11:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] ATT Coverage in Puerto Rico We're about to head to Puerto Rico for a cellular project. Can anyone here confirm if ATT/Cingular will work there, and if so, any additional charges ? Thanks, JohnnyO WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan
Parque Montebello community. JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan Hey johhny, I think we might be there is this in the Encantada community? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan Gr - Why didn't I think of Mr. Puerto Rico Wi-Fi himself. JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Needed in San Juan That would be most likely [EMAIL PROTECTED] , or he could point you in the right direction. -forrest JohnnyO wrote: Will need service at this location. Please respond offline with quotes. This is for me personally. I will be renting this home for 180days. I can do my own install ! ! ! ! and prob have the equipment for it also quote accordingly :) Parque Montebello street 1 A-19 Trujillo Alto Puerto Rico 00976 Regards, JohnnyO 337.368.7188 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
I have an application where I need a 5.8 omni antenna with downtilt. The coverage diameter of the area is only about 1/10th of a mile total, and my HAAT is about 50 ft so I will need some pretty severe downtilt. Gain doesn't really matter, but a higher gain antenna is going to give me a flatter pattern- I just need it to be tilted down. This is to keep an access point from interfering with a mesh deployment further out that I want to protect as much as possible. Anyone got a suggestion for such an antenna.. Oh yeah- this has to be vertically polarized WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] How it used to be done!
yikes. Not me! Not ever! marlon - Original Message - From: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:00 PM Subject: [TowerTalk] How it used to be done! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W_7uIapoHc Free-climbing the ladder, a bosun's chair at the top, and then just walking around on the scaffolding! And a demolition- note the source. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htGqgW3SkS8 And a tram line. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJ_XIE0h9t8 73, doug ___ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner. You could always make your own. With a mount hieght of only 50 ft though, not sure why this is a problem, if you are only needing to extend 1/10th of a mile coverage. A nice 10dbi Omni with 2 deg elect downtilt, Proxim makes one, or Tessco's terrawave Omni, would probably work just fine for that application. For such short range, even a 7-9db antenna would be fine, giving you a plenty large enough verticle beamwidth and high enough power. If its not good enough because of NLOS foliage or Noise, I'd argue you shouldn't be using an Omni in the first place. If a low bandwdith applications, as perfect application for a StarOS system, using 4 radios (or 3 radio in this app), each on their own 5 Mhz channel, using directional antennas using the Front to back ratio advantage, buying verticle pol 120 deg sector antennas for under $150 each. Its sometimes easier to do that, than get 1 channel to survive the noise in all directions. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt I have an application where I need a 5.8 omni antenna with downtilt. The coverage diameter of the area is only about 1/10th of a mile total, and my HAAT is about 50 ft so I will need some pretty severe downtilt. Gain doesn't really matter, but a higher gain antenna is going to give me a flatter pattern- I just need it to be tilted down. This is to keep an access point from interfering with a mesh deployment further out that I want to protect as much as possible. Anyone got a suggestion for such an antenna.. Oh yeah- this has to be vertically polarized WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers
Two issues 1) People so quickly forget the scale involved. It is more hassle for these companies to do business with a small entity than the revenue they would receive. Think about it. A sales office with 5-6 agents to manage the sales for the towers they own. Then there are 5-10,000 towers managed. Then think about the hassle to make agreements with the other large volume propsect customers. The time involved in considering all the special exceptions written in on every other small customer's tower agreement? If they wanted to do a global agreement with Clear wire, that takes 1 agreement made with the legal council, it would mean they had to look at 5-10,000 agreements if each tower had a colocater that only had space on one tower, which would mean legal fees times 5-10,000. 2) The cell providers are now looking at possibilties to do add-on services in mobile broadband, and do they really want to lease to a competitor? The way to get space on these towers, is to take a different angle. What that angle is, well thats for you to discover. And that is what will seperate you from all the others that are not successful. For me it may have been Making friends or earning the respect of the Tower agent, The person that owns the property the tower sits on, the local zoning board, etc etc. In Montgomery County, its required that the tower companies rent to other competitors. They are required to rent to atleast three other entities to get their towers approved in the first place. Maybe with Wifi its to add a value to the community, so residence stop complaining about the ugly cell tower? Maybe its sellling your potential to grow to larger volume. Maybe its persistence and just not going away or giving up. Maybe, its an offer to make the cell company look good, to combat negatism that had developed due to their anti-competition tactics that they are known for. If you want to get on the tower, you can likely find away to get on it cost effectively. But the arguement is is it worth it? Is it worth taking risk by compromising contractual terms that protect you? Absolutely NOT! Never pay money for being on a tower, without provisions to protect your investment. Your loss if they try to screw you later would be far greater than what you pay them to be on the tower. One way is to start the process to build the tower yourself. Send them a copy of the tower permit. And say they can compete against you when you become a tower owner with free space to rent, or they can rent to you, and save their margins from other colocaters, if they agree to do it before you build. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Seconded.. WOW, they are obnoxious. I just spent 6 months working with an outsourced, outsourced, outsourced tower lease management company for Verizon. (yes, 3 TIMES removed from the company) to be told nope, you are too small, we are waiting for ClearWire to come spend money with us This was for a tower overlooking a highway and a town with around 400 people in it. I even offered to take second rights space on the tower to allow them to kick me off with 90 days notice and still no go. ryan On Jan 12, 2008, at 5:43 PM, JohnnyO wrote: you can't afford it JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 7:29 PM Subject: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Has anyone worked with a cell company for collocation on THEIR towers? IE: ATT, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. Not interested in hearing about American Tower, GTP, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List:
Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers
On a side note... I generally pay less to be on a cell tower than I do to pay to be on a commercial building roof top of equivellent height. Cell Towers- More expensive to climb and mainteain, there fore less valuable Cell Towers- Dont have office space tenants, there fore only valued for the value of the market around, not also the market within. Cell Towers- Cell tower prospects, negotiate lowest dollar possible, because of volume, and know exactly what it costs. Cell Towers- are taller allowing for more channel re-use through verticle speration. What Cell Towers care about the most is to do leases that do not restrict them from larger opportunities with larger prospects, and does not piss off their larger customers. If you can submit a plan, that shows renting to you is just extra income, without risk to their existing contracts and prospects, you might be able to get them to jump. The best way to do it is to argue the trutgh, which is that unlicensed spectrum is slop spectrum, the big boys don't want it, and it would never work for their business models. The community service value of supporting local companies is far greater than the risk of renting to you. What we are learning is Can we trust any tower leasor? Financially, will we be able to enforce a contract? Can we risk being help hostage by renting jsut one tower? Do we really need that tower that we thought was so valuable? Thos questions ahve to be answered. We believe the best answer is to not rely on just one. The best way to do that is to get the right price so you can afford to have more. If you don;t get the price, its usually not worth the risk. Send them a copy of the front page of one of your agreements with their competitors. It amazing how quickly they take you seriously when their pride relizes you are good enough for their competition. At minimum it sparks their interest, to at least take your phone call, and listen to your pitch to consider it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 8:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers you can't afford it JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 7:29 PM Subject: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Has anyone worked with a cell company for collocation on THEIR towers? IE: ATT, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. Not interested in hearing about American Tower, GTP, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] sources
Is this because they are pulls from de-installed customers? Or new, because they buy quantity. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher To: WISPA General List Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 12:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] sources Same here. I get them at $1 a piece. They probably have 1000 sitting in a pile right now. Every once in a while they just take them to the scrap yard. Brian Tim Wolfe wrote: I buy all of mine through the local Direct TV installer. They sell them to me at $4 a unit which is much lower than the price on the Pacwireless website. I can also buy them from him in lots of 25 which is a great way to purchase them. Travis Johnson wrote: The universal mounts that are often used with satellite TV installs. It has a flat foot with a pipe that is bent in the shape of a J. http://www.pacwireless.com/products/UM.shtml Travis Microserv George Rogato wrote: What is a J mount? got a picture by chance? Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Where is everyone buying their J-mounts for doing installs? I use about 100 per month and my previous source no longer carries them. thanks, Travis Microserv WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput clients. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. Scriv Clint Ricker wrote: Tom, I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms of deliverables. My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves using buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your product. Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is that the end user understands what you are saying and more truth is communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. Now, using terms that mislead the customer into
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput clients. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. Scriv Clint Ricker wrote: Tom, I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms of deliverables. My
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
Thanks for the suggestion. I am not a fan of any omnis, really, but this needs to be an omni because this is a mesh AP. Not only that, it is a gateway or root (place where bandwidth is injected). I don't have the option of different RF hardware. An array would work, but I don't really want the (RX) loss from a power divider and an omni will do the job. It is a historic bell tower, used in many popular movies and the array would also be a lot harder to stealth. The reason I want severe downtilt is that in a mesh, you need to make sure that you don't make yourself heard by radios that are too far away because CSMA will keep both them and you from being able to transmit and will seriously harm the rest of the mesh. If I could get the antenna lower, I would. Unfortunately this is only mounting location choice to achieve LOS for this area. I am familiar with the 2 degree downtilt antennas, but for this case, I need much more that that I believe for this short of a range. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner. You could always make your own. With a mount hieght of only 50 ft though, not sure why this is a problem, if you are only needing to extend 1/10th of a mile coverage. A nice 10dbi Omni with 2 deg elect downtilt, Proxim makes one, or Tessco's terrawave Omni, would probably work just fine for that application. For such short range, even a 7-9db antenna would be fine, giving you a plenty large enough verticle beamwidth and high enough power. If its not good enough because of NLOS foliage or Noise, I'd argue you shouldn't be using an Omni in the first place. If a low bandwdith applications, as perfect application for a StarOS system, using 4 radios (or 3 radio in this app), each on their own 5 Mhz channel, using directional antennas using the Front to back ratio advantage, buying verticle pol 120 deg sector antennas for under $150 each. Its sometimes easier to do that, than get 1 channel to survive the noise in all directions. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt I have an application where I need a 5.8 omni antenna with downtilt. The coverage diameter of the area is only about 1/10th of a mile total, and my HAAT is about 50 ft so I will need some pretty severe downtilt. Gain doesn't really matter, but a higher gain antenna is going to give me a flatter pattern- I just need it to be tilted down. This is to keep an access point from interfering with a mesh deployment further out that I want to protect as much as possible. Anyone got a suggestion for such an antenna.. Oh yeah- this has to be vertically polarized WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers
I think this is where WISPA really needs to come in. Why are we not negotiating contracts with the cell companies that benefit ALL WISPA members? Cell companies do it why can't we, as an association do it? just my $0.1 worth. ryan On Jan 13, 2008, at 11:57 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote: On a side note... I generally pay less to be on a cell tower than I do to pay to be on a commercial building roof top of equivellent height. Cell Towers- More expensive to climb and mainteain, there fore less valuable Cell Towers- Dont have office space tenants, there fore only valued for the value of the market around, not also the market within. Cell Towers- Cell tower prospects, negotiate lowest dollar possible, because of volume, and know exactly what it costs. Cell Towers- are taller allowing for more channel re-use through verticle speration. What Cell Towers care about the most is to do leases that do not restrict them from larger opportunities with larger prospects, and does not piss off their larger customers. If you can submit a plan, that shows renting to you is just extra income, without risk to their existing contracts and prospects, you might be able to get them to jump. The best way to do it is to argue the trutgh, which is that unlicensed spectrum is slop spectrum, the big boys don't want it, and it would never work for their business models. The community service value of supporting local companies is far greater than the risk of renting to you. What we are learning is Can we trust any tower leasor? Financially, will we be able to enforce a contract? Can we risk being help hostage by renting jsut one tower? Do we really need that tower that we thought was so valuable? Thos questions ahve to be answered. We believe the best answer is to not rely on just one. The best way to do that is to get the right price so you can afford to have more. If you don;t get the price, its usually not worth the risk. Send them a copy of the front page of one of your agreements with their competitors. It amazing how quickly they take you seriously when their pride relizes you are good enough for their competition. At minimum it sparks their interest, to at least take your phone call, and listen to your pitch to consider it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 8:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers you can't afford it JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 7:29 PM Subject: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Has anyone worked with a cell company for collocation on THEIR towers? IE: ATT, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. Not interested in hearing about American Tower, GTP, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers
I agree. A number of years back Part-15 attempted to negotiate this type effort with Crown Castle. I never really learned why the effort fell through. Its interesting now that Crown Castle, has bought out some of the other larger players, and has much less competition to justify the need to make special deals. However, dealing direct with Telco Owned towers, is a different game than negotiating with Managed towers that lease to telcos. It can be complicated because of the many different inconsistent ways a tower may be owned. Who's authorized for decissions on one tower in the portfolio may be different than another. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers I think this is where WISPA really needs to come in. Why are we not negotiating contracts with the cell companies that benefit ALL WISPA members? Cell companies do it why can't we, as an association do it? just my $0.1 worth. ryan On Jan 13, 2008, at 11:57 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote: On a side note... I generally pay less to be on a cell tower than I do to pay to be on a commercial building roof top of equivellent height. Cell Towers- More expensive to climb and mainteain, there fore less valuable Cell Towers- Dont have office space tenants, there fore only valued for the value of the market around, not also the market within. Cell Towers- Cell tower prospects, negotiate lowest dollar possible, because of volume, and know exactly what it costs. Cell Towers- are taller allowing for more channel re-use through verticle speration. What Cell Towers care about the most is to do leases that do not restrict them from larger opportunities with larger prospects, and does not piss off their larger customers. If you can submit a plan, that shows renting to you is just extra income, without risk to their existing contracts and prospects, you might be able to get them to jump. The best way to do it is to argue the trutgh, which is that unlicensed spectrum is slop spectrum, the big boys don't want it, and it would never work for their business models. The community service value of supporting local companies is far greater than the risk of renting to you. What we are learning is Can we trust any tower leasor? Financially, will we be able to enforce a contract? Can we risk being help hostage by renting jsut one tower? Do we really need that tower that we thought was so valuable? Thos questions ahve to be answered. We believe the best answer is to not rely on just one. The best way to do that is to get the right price so you can afford to have more. If you don;t get the price, its usually not worth the risk. Send them a copy of the front page of one of your agreements with their competitors. It amazing how quickly they take you seriously when their pride relizes you are good enough for their competition. At minimum it sparks their interest, to at least take your phone call, and listen to your pitch to consider it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 8:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers you can't afford it JohnnyO - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 7:29 PM Subject: [WISPA] Cell Company Towers Has anyone worked with a cell company for collocation on THEIR towers? IE: ATT, T-Mobile, US Cellular, etc. Not interested in hearing about American Tower, GTP, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
Two vertical collinear antennas. One mounted above the other. Fed slightly out of phase. You can have as much downtilt (or uptilt) as you want. - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Thanks for the suggestion. I am not a fan of any omnis, really, but this needs to be an omni because this is a mesh AP. Not only that, it is a gateway or root (place where bandwidth is injected). I don't have the option of different RF hardware. An array would work, but I don't really want the (RX) loss from a power divider and an omni will do the job. It is a historic bell tower, used in many popular movies and the array would also be a lot harder to stealth. The reason I want severe downtilt is that in a mesh, you need to make sure that you don't make yourself heard by radios that are too far away because CSMA will keep both them and you from being able to transmit and will seriously harm the rest of the mesh. If I could get the antenna lower, I would. Unfortunately this is only mounting location choice to achieve LOS for this area. I am familiar with the 2 degree downtilt antennas, but for this case, I need much more that that I believe for this short of a range. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner. You could always make your own. With a mount hieght of only 50 ft though, not sure why this is a problem, if you are only needing to extend 1/10th of a mile coverage. A nice 10dbi Omni with 2 deg elect downtilt, Proxim makes one, or Tessco's terrawave Omni, would probably work just fine for that application. For such short range, even a 7-9db antenna would be fine, giving you a plenty large enough verticle beamwidth and high enough power. If its not good enough because of NLOS foliage or Noise, I'd argue you shouldn't be using an Omni in the first place. If a low bandwdith applications, as perfect application for a StarOS system, using 4 radios (or 3 radio in this app), each on their own 5 Mhz channel, using directional antennas using the Front to back ratio advantage, buying verticle pol 120 deg sector antennas for under $150 each. Its sometimes easier to do that, than get 1 channel to survive the noise in all directions. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt I have an application where I need a 5.8 omni antenna with downtilt. The coverage diameter of the area is only about 1/10th of a mile total, and my HAAT is about 50 ft so I will need some pretty severe downtilt. Gain doesn't really matter, but a higher gain antenna is going to give me a flatter pattern- I just need it to be tilted down. This is to keep an access point from interfering with a mesh deployment further out that I want to protect as much as possible. Anyone got a suggestion for such an antenna.. Oh yeah- this has to be vertically polarized WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
Interesting. How do you get them slightly out of phase? Is the difference in length of the LMR, enough? And is the distance apart the mechanism to increase downtilt, or the amount out of phase? I'm assuming distance apart? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Two vertical collinear antennas. One mounted above the other. Fed slightly out of phase. You can have as much downtilt (or uptilt) as you want. - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Thanks for the suggestion. I am not a fan of any omnis, really, but this needs to be an omni because this is a mesh AP. Not only that, it is a gateway or root (place where bandwidth is injected). I don't have the option of different RF hardware. An array would work, but I don't really want the (RX) loss from a power divider and an omni will do the job. It is a historic bell tower, used in many popular movies and the array would also be a lot harder to stealth. The reason I want severe downtilt is that in a mesh, you need to make sure that you don't make yourself heard by radios that are too far away because CSMA will keep both them and you from being able to transmit and will seriously harm the rest of the mesh. If I could get the antenna lower, I would. Unfortunately this is only mounting location choice to achieve LOS for this area. I am familiar with the 2 degree downtilt antennas, but for this case, I need much more that that I believe for this short of a range. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner. You could always make your own. With a mount hieght of only 50 ft though, not sure why this is a problem, if you are only needing to extend 1/10th of a mile coverage. A nice 10dbi Omni with 2 deg elect downtilt, Proxim makes one, or Tessco's terrawave Omni, would probably work just fine for that application. For such short range, even a 7-9db antenna would be fine, giving you a plenty large enough verticle beamwidth and high enough power. If its not good enough because of NLOS foliage or Noise, I'd argue you shouldn't be using an Omni in the first place. If a low bandwdith applications, as perfect application for a StarOS system, using 4 radios (or 3 radio in this app), each on their own 5 Mhz channel, using directional antennas using the Front to back ratio advantage, buying verticle pol 120 deg sector antennas for under $150 each. Its sometimes easier to do that, than get 1 channel to survive the noise in all directions. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:14 AM Subject: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt I have an application where I need a 5.8 omni antenna with downtilt. The coverage diameter of the area is only about 1/10th of a mile total, and my HAAT is about 50 ft so I will need some pretty severe downtilt. Gain doesn't really matter, but a higher gain antenna is going to give me a flatter pattern- I just need it to be tilted down. This is to keep an access point from interfering with a mesh deployment further out that I want to protect as much as possible. Anyone got a suggestion for such an antenna.. Oh yeah- this has to be vertically polarized WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives:
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Perhaps, but what good is an FCC rule if there's no equipment available to use it? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput clients. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. Scriv Clint Ricker wrote: Tom, I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in terms of deliverables. My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves using
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is not for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput clients. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
You can slightly adjust the lengths of the coax between the antennas and the splitter. You will have to have a quarter wave matching segment too. There are telescoping transmission lines for this. Line stretchers, phase shifters, phase adjustable SMA connectors... they go by many names. Some of them have threaded portions that allow a very fine adjustment. http://www.atmmicrowave.com/coax-Line-stretcher.html http://www.microwavedistributors.com/pdfs/midisco/21-30/pg_25.pdf The distance apart will affect the pattern and will influence the amount of phase difference you have to add. Pretty much it is all trig that you have to work out on a case by case basis. If I was doing it for myself, I would work out the trig and then put them on my outdoor test range and rotate them and obtain some cuts for verification. In the real world, you could have a beacon transmitter in the center region of your coverage area and adjust the phasing section to maximize received signal from the beacon. A bit tricky as your body will foul up the works. So, adjust-get out of the way-test, rinse and repeat. Get some of those N or SMA phase shifting connectors. At 5.8 you only have to have about a quarter inch of adjustment or less. If the antennas are close enough to each other, you will eliminate the multiple lobed pattern called a grating pattern. Again, it is all trig. I suppose you could work out an excel spreadsheet to calculate the antenna spacing and phasing vs downtilt angle. The minor and unintended length difference in the combining harness are going to foul up a good pattern at this frequency in any event so having a way to adjust phase would be good even when you are not trying to add downtilt. Perhaps a new product in the making here. Adjustable downtilt omnis. I think the 2 way industry has had them for years. - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Interesting. How do you get them slightly out of phase? Is the difference in length of the LMR, enough? And is the distance apart the mechanism to increase downtilt, or the amount out of phase? I'm assuming distance apart? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Two vertical collinear antennas. One mounted above the other. Fed slightly out of phase. You can have as much downtilt (or uptilt) as you want. - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Thanks for the suggestion. I am not a fan of any omnis, really, but this needs to be an omni because this is a mesh AP. Not only that, it is a gateway or root (place where bandwidth is injected). I don't have the option of different RF hardware. An array would work, but I don't really want the (RX) loss from a power divider and an omni will do the job. It is a historic bell tower, used in many popular movies and the array would also be a lot harder to stealth. The reason I want severe downtilt is that in a mesh, you need to make sure that you don't make yourself heard by radios that are too far away because CSMA will keep both them and you from being able to transmit and will seriously harm the rest of the mesh. If I could get the antenna lower, I would. Unfortunately this is only mounting location choice to achieve LOS for this area. I am familiar with the 2 degree downtilt antennas, but for this case, I need much more that that I believe for this short of a range. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner. You could always make your own. With a mount hieght of only 50 ft though, not sure why this is a problem, if you are only needing to extend 1/10th of a mile coverage. A nice 10dbi Omni with 2 deg elect downtilt, Proxim makes one, or Tessco's terrawave Omni, would probably work just fine for that application. For such short range, even a 7-9db antenna would be fine, giving you a plenty large enough verticle beamwidth and high enough power. If its not good enough
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service I guess I am a bit perplexed by this premise. Why would people in urban areas pay for low bandwidth wireless broadband options? What problem does this platform solve under that scenario? Scriv Mike Hammett wrote: I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I thought it was Airspan 5 mhz channel: 4.07 w 10 mhz channel 7.24 w Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:19 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
Are you sure those channel sizes are correct? I thought Redline used 3.5 and 7 while AirSpan used 5 and 10. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles in the country? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I've already sent an email into Redline asking why AirSpan is so much higher and then why the documentation filed with the FCC further limits what the grant's maximum is for, The documentation that accompanies the grant has everything limited to 26 db, well, for 7 MHz. There's no way I'd use 3.5 MHz. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Exactly. What good is an AP that can only do 15 megs throughput in the city? What good is an AP that can only do 2 - 5 miles
Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service
I very well could have been wrong on channel size, not understanding what I was reading. The FCC cert on link showed a spectrum range of 20Mhz wide: 4.07 w 15Mhz wide: 7.24 w I have no idea if that has anything to do with available channel widths. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:27 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Are you sure those channel sizes are correct? I thought Redline used 3.5 and 7 while AirSpan used 5 and 10. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wow- Thats a huge difference. For those that don't want to pull up the link... Redline: 25Mhz ch: 1.3w AirSpan: 20Mhz ch: 4.07 w AirSpan: 15Mhz ch: 7.24 w Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service and the Redline grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=549096fcc_id=QC8-AN100UA So Redline unit does have FAR less power available then AirSpan. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Airspan grant: https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COP YRequestTimeout=500application_id=686827fcc_id=O2J-365T Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Mike, Now that I've read those posts of yours, I better understand your position. I was not taking reduced power into consideration. I just had in my mind the 25watts EIRP often mentioned in FCC precentations over the years. To the best of my knowledge, the AirSpan product that I am familiar with, do not have that same limitation. Although I do not have that data off the top of my head, to respond accurately. But regardless... What we have here is not a limitation by WiMax, nor by 3.6G, nor FCC, but a limit posed by the manufacturers and their designs. Doesn't anyone have any insight on why the FCC rules allow more power for wider channels? I realize that wider channels create larger internal system noise, which could be a reason for needing more power for wider channels. But that is in contradiction to 2.4Ghz rules for Smart Array antennas, that rewarded in highr power for those that had narrower beamwidths, and interfere less. In that spirit, I would think it would have been wise to reward those who strived to use smaller channels, apposed to penalize them for being more efficient. There obviously has to be a technical reason apposed to spectrum ediquete. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service See my other post about Redline's comments and their FCC filed documents. It just doesn't have the power. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service Wimax APs can go much fartehr than 2-5 miles. You are spec'ing the distance limits of their advanced NLOS features. In LOS, they can go just as far as any other unlicened gear. I think its important to define country. If you are talking about Idaho with houses 20 miles apart, yes, you'd be correct. 2.4Ghz and less is the better option. But where 3.6 Wimax could be exciting is small little towns. where 3 6Mhz channels would actually be enough to get decent speed, and able to acheive high modulations because its noise free. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless
Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt
Again, interesting post/idea. The thing about 5.8G omnis (compared to 900 and such) is they are short. Would be easy to have the vert space to stack one on top of the other. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt You can slightly adjust the lengths of the coax between the antennas and the splitter. You will have to have a quarter wave matching segment too. There are telescoping transmission lines for this. Line stretchers, phase shifters, phase adjustable SMA connectors... they go by many names. Some of them have threaded portions that allow a very fine adjustment. http://www.atmmicrowave.com/coax-Line-stretcher.html http://www.microwavedistributors.com/pdfs/midisco/21-30/pg_25.pdf The distance apart will affect the pattern and will influence the amount of phase difference you have to add. Pretty much it is all trig that you have to work out on a case by case basis. If I was doing it for myself, I would work out the trig and then put them on my outdoor test range and rotate them and obtain some cuts for verification. In the real world, you could have a beacon transmitter in the center region of your coverage area and adjust the phasing section to maximize received signal from the beacon. A bit tricky as your body will foul up the works. So, adjust-get out of the way-test, rinse and repeat. Get some of those N or SMA phase shifting connectors. At 5.8 you only have to have about a quarter inch of adjustment or less. If the antennas are close enough to each other, you will eliminate the multiple lobed pattern called a grating pattern. Again, it is all trig. I suppose you could work out an excel spreadsheet to calculate the antenna spacing and phasing vs downtilt angle. The minor and unintended length difference in the combining harness are going to foul up a good pattern at this frequency in any event so having a way to adjust phase would be good even when you are not trying to add downtilt. Perhaps a new product in the making here. Adjustable downtilt omnis. I think the 2 way industry has had them for years. - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 3:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Interesting. How do you get them slightly out of phase? Is the difference in length of the LMR, enough? And is the distance apart the mechanism to increase downtilt, or the amount out of phase? I'm assuming distance apart? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Two vertical collinear antennas. One mounted above the other. Fed slightly out of phase. You can have as much downtilt (or uptilt) as you want. - Original Message - From: rwf [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Thanks for the suggestion. I am not a fan of any omnis, really, but this needs to be an omni because this is a mesh AP. Not only that, it is a gateway or root (place where bandwidth is injected). I don't have the option of different RF hardware. An array would work, but I don't really want the (RX) loss from a power divider and an omni will do the job. It is a historic bell tower, used in many popular movies and the array would also be a lot harder to stealth. The reason I want severe downtilt is that in a mesh, you need to make sure that you don't make yourself heard by radios that are too far away because CSMA will keep both them and you from being able to transmit and will seriously harm the rest of the mesh. If I could get the antenna lower, I would. Unfortunately this is only mounting location choice to achieve LOS for this area. I am familiar with the 2 degree downtilt antennas, but for this case, I need much more that that I believe for this short of a range. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 2:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8 vertical antenna w downtilt Yes, to not use an Omni, but to use an Array. Max Rad made some of the first ones for 2.4G. Hyperlinktech makes some 4 sector arrays for 5.8Ghz. If needing only Verticle polarity, this is easy. Thats the configuration they sell them in. Will probably cost you around $600, for the kit with all antennas and the combiner.
[WISPA] OT: Make your own tubes
http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/01/make_your_own_vaccum_tube.html -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 FCC License # PG-12-25133 Author of the Cisco Press Book - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
