un...@wispa.org>] On Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:58 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
In a LOS situation with say -70 or so what kind of throughput with
UBNT 3.65? Also on the FCC Registration do I file as Common
iginal Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Simon Westlake
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 10:41 AM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
>
> I am shooting through a hill and a forest, abou
9:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
>However, if you are only putting one AP on a tower, you could go with a 25MHz
>wide channel and get 25watts EIRP (44dB) at the AP and CPE ends. That's A LOT
>of punch to get hrough foliage, BUT leaves no room f
ss-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:58 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
>
> In a LOS situation with say -70 or so what kind of throughput with UBNT
> 3.65
BUT leaves no room for growth.
- Jerry
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:58 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
In a LOS situation with say -70
You are asking a fair question, but the answer to this question is based
on a lot of IF's and But's
Frequency of 3.65 should have very similar characteristics of 2.4
UBNT Dual Polarity appears to have a great advantage over single
polarity when shooting thru Foliage
Going thru "Foliage" ha
<http://stlbroadband.com/> St. Louis Broadband
314.974.5600
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 11:01 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
Hi Victoria,
In total seriousness, i
org] On
Behalf Of Simon Westlake
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 10:41 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
if 3.65GHz could
: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
It wasn't working at the time. I don't know if it was a signal issue
though, this guy just ended up being in a good spot to beta test worst
case 3.65GHz scenario.
On 6/22/2011 10:47 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> What was the signal of the first link in 900?
.org] On
> Behalf Of Simon Westlake
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 10:41 AM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
>
> I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
>
> The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did thi
It wasn't working at the time. I don't know if it was a signal issue
though, this guy just ended up being in a good spot to beta test worst
case 3.65GHz scenario.
On 6/22/2011 10:47 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> What was the signal of the first link in 900?
>
> On Jun 22, 2011 11:41 AM, "Simon Westl
: [WISPA] Ubiquiti 3.65 Airmax
I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
if 3.65GHz could handle it.
I am using one of the KPP reflectors on the Nanostation as a test. It is
linked up with a noise
What was the signal of the first link in 900?
On Jun 22, 2011 11:41 AM, "Simon Westlake" wrote:
> I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
>
> The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
> if 3.65GHz could handle it.
>
> I am using one of
I am shooting through a hill and a forest, about ~2.5miles with 3.65GHz.
The link was marginal at 900MHz, I really did this one as a test to see
if 3.65GHz could handle it.
I am using one of the KPP reflectors on the Nanostation as a test. It is
linked up with a noise floor of -95 at about -85
Less coverage then 3.65 for sure.
On Jun 22, 2011 11:28 AM, "Patrick D. Nix, Jr"
wrote:
> How does the Ubnt 3.65 perform where going thru light foliage perhaps
> only one or two trees? What kind of throughput? We are thinking of
> switching some of our 2.4 over to 3.65 because of interference issu
How does the Ubnt 3.65 perform where going thru light foliage perhaps
only one or two trees? What kind of throughput? We are thinking of
switching some of our 2.4 over to 3.65 because of interference issues.
Thanks
Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
I
16 matches
Mail list logo
