http://www.lbagroup.com/hottowerart.php
They make a power isolation coil. Your best bet would be to use one of
those to pass power up the tower and use fiber to transmit data.
I worked with them on an AM tower in the past.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
I believe you can but you'll need to use the CLI
Int wireless set wlan1 frequency=2406
On 9/9/09, Mike m...@aweiowa.com wrote:
I have some questions on the frequency agility of Mikrotik equipment,
FCC regs, and frequency coordination.
There are 3 non-overlapping channels at 2.4G; 1, 6 and
Custom freq gives you the ability to select every 5Mhz as channel option not
useful in 2.4GHz since the channel spacing is already on 5MHz separation.
But you can select 5MHz below channel 1.
/Eje
--Original Message--
From: Mike
Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
To: WISPA General
Anybody else having any luck with these people. They're trying to tell
me I might have to clear all my customer sites for a proposed WiMax
deployment on a case by case basis. I'm at the edge of the 150km
exclusion zone and have a mountain range in between us. This is getting
really
Title: Thank You,
I would try buying a mailing list, map the potential
customers the fall within your wireless footprint, submit that as a
batch and get one approval. You could use the same information for a
targeted marketing campaign.
Thank You,
Brian Webster
pat wrote:
Who are these people? The FCC or the satellite earth station people?
The FCC describes an alternative for determining a safe distance for
locating a station with in an FSS protection zone in Appendix D of the
Report and Order authorizing the 3.65 - 3.70 GHz band. You can read the full
document
SES Americom, and they suffer from cranial rectitus.
Tim Sylvester wrote:
Who are these people? The FCC or the satellite earth station people?
The FCC describes an alternative for determining a safe distance for
locating a station with in an FSS protection zone in Appendix D of the
Report
It sucks to be in the satellite business today.
Tim
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of pat
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 9:59 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Grandfathered satellite
pat wrote:
SES Americom, and they suffer from cranial rectitus.
Pat...what exactly are they saying to you. It is not easy. You may have
to get a 3rd party engineering firm to tdo the analysis. I dealt with
COmsearch for awhile before I switched jobs. Comsearch did one or two
analysis' for
Are you doing this yourself or with a help of an attorney?
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of pat
Sent:
Do you have permission from SES Americom to at least install your base
station? If so, register your base station on the FCC site. Once the base
station is approved, start registering your client sites.
Tim
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
Good idea, but it won't let me. I receive this message:
message=bad band and/or channel, see 'wireless info' for supported
channels;code=4
Apparently, it IS possible with the Wili cards, but still don't have
a total answer to my query. Can anybody help a fellow WISPA member?
Hasn't anybody
And when I look at wireless info, I see this:
2ghz-b-channels=2412:0,2417:0,2422:0,2427:0,2432:0,2437:0,2442:0,2447:0,
2452:0,2457:0,2462:0
So the Extended Frequency License will allow me to modify these? Any
other way? I'd hate to have to buy an extra license for every CPE
I have you tried just setting your MT to a different country and see if
it becomes available? I know brazil gives you access to above the 2462
limit which is nice because we can you much more above that in
unlicensed spectrum.
-Cameron
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
Extended frequency license? Have not heard of this...
I'd take Cameron's suggestion and try the brazil country code and see if you
can pick an odd channel center. Your problem may be the card's inability,
especially if Wili cards can but Compex/Ubiquiti can not.
Josh Luthman
Office:
Title: Thank You,
Pat,
First, I can understand the Earth Station's concern about your customer
sites but by properly engineering your network and showing your
propagation patterns on a map, I believe you can address their
legitimate concerns.
Either prepare or buy a propagation map showing
They sent our site information for the base stations to Comsearch for an
RF analysis so they have a map.
They also have a map of my customer locations, none of which point in
their direction.
I also have a mountain range that goes from around 5000 feet to 7000
feet in elevation between me
Be Careful!! Selecting another Country Code is unwise if you are going
to operate near the band edges because of "spurs" (spurious emissions).
Here's an explanation.
A 20-MHz (or 10 MHz or 5 MHz) channel is really more than 20 MHz (or 10
MHz or 5 MHz) wide when you consider that all of the
Very good point. FFR
ISM – 2450.0 ± 50 MHz
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir
We just finished installing 3 Powerstation 5's and 2 Nanostation 5's on a
160 foot AM tower using an AC power choke fiber to the bottom. We put the
POE's and stuff at the top of the tower.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net
To: WISPA General List
Thanks for the explanation Jack, and thanks to others for their input.
The radios I am finding are agile down to 5 MHz. So the example I
used would put the center of a sub channel 1 device at 2407. If it
is a 10MHz device, their very well could be spurious emissions below
2400, but not
Thank You,I've been trying to deal with SES too. They are nearly impossible to
deal with. They want a commsearch for EVERY link. I've tried to explain that
these are ptmp systems. Brick wall..
sigh
marlon
- Original Message -
From: Jack Unger
To:
The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and now is the
time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e drum in a
manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX
standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper it put
out in November
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/applications/search.cfm
[cid:image001.jpg@01CA3173.C2138660]
Redline Communications Inc.
Kevin Suitor
Vice President, Corporate Marketing
302 Town Centre Blvd. Markham, ON L3R 0E8 CANADA
o: +1 905.948.2299 f: +1 647.723.0451 m: +1 416.508.1252
Im 802.16c, C as in Canopy
Ducking!!!
Hello Patrick!
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
And you know that is fine. Just tired of the goofy drum beat for E. Even
though we are building E too, my opinion is that E is a standard looking
for a home now that LTE is clearly eating E's lunch for mobile
operators. So those guys who have gone all-or-nothing with E are
desparately trying to
Patrick,
Motorola has an 802.16e variant product coming out early next year.
Supposed to be a fixed implementation of the 802.16e standard.
I'm sure we would all like to hear your thoughts on it
Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com
-Original Message-
From:
I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I would
like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB dongle. Does
anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz?
Tim
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable with the
current 3650 rules.
-Matt
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote:
I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I would
like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in
Nothing as far as I know... but the lower power limits and the higher
frequency don't make it too feasible.
If you have to be within 1/4 mile of the tower to make mobility work... it
seems like your going to spend a lot of money for nothing
Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com
I would if I were them. It will be interesting to see what sort of
variant it is. For sure it will have to be stripped down heavily since
their .16e is built for the likes of Sprint. Not sure what their .16e
status is anyway, since it looks like Clearwire is moving to Chinese
product from Huawei.
I didn't state E was not supportable. I stated mobile was not supportable
because of the current rules, which severally limit the power of mobile
devices. Couple that with the poor physics of 3650 and the limited power
available at the base stations to compensate; mobile will never work.
-Matt
On
Is a 1/4 a rough estimate or has someone been able to test E at 3.65GHz?
What type of range have people seen in the field with E at 3.65GHz with
indoor subscriber units?
I would a agree that a 1/4 mile in rural area of Colorado or Iowa (where I
grew up) is not very useful but now I live in a
Does anyone know exactly what the nesc codes for fiber on poles are?
We have a run that we want to do and the poles are kinda crowded. The
electric company told us the phone company has to stay on bottom and
there has to be certain gaps. If they have to move people up to make
room they may need
The 802.16e standard was a gallant effort, but by not be able to get
the cellular carriers on board early on was an ominous sign and I knew
right from the start that they wouldn't jump on board...open standards
scare telephone (AKA cellular) companies because it removes their
ability to
It is not a technology issue Tim. It is an economics issue.
1. The FCC's power limits for mobile in 3.65 is 1/10th or so the power
of outdoor fixed.
2. The WiMAX Forum, which does all profiles and certifications, is not
including 3.65 GHz in its profiles since it is a fixed band.
3. The
Amen from the peanut gallery Bret. You'd find interesting the, ahem,
discussion taking place between us and the big guys inside the WiMAX
Forum board room. I think it is fair to say some are dillusional about
the LTE. Maybe I would be too if I'd bet my entire company on mobile
WiMAX. And it is not
..and what's worse is even if E did take off, most of the business is
now going to the Chinese vendors ZTE and Huawei, who have the power of
their whole government behind them in terms of offering can't-say-no
sweet heart financing deals that vendors in capitalist countries can't
come close to
Amen Brother!
--
From: Patrick Leary ple...@apertonet.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 6:25 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
..and what's worse is even if E did take off, most of the
By the way, it will also be interesting to see what the price points on
this will be. I can get you a 3-sector 60 mbps net capacity cell (at
full QoS load) for $20k, complete with local sync (no separate sync
module needed for local cell sync) and NMS with enterprise CPE (around
20 mb/s) for
Well actually that it's a whole ne subject
What benefits do I have with a 802.16x product over a over propiertary
system?
802.16x products are propietary cause vendors lock you down to theit
CPE, NMS ect...
Canopy has the GPS sync, has a good QOS (not so extensive as 802.16x),
Has lower
The work we do with Idaho Power here requires us to be 30 below the lowest
conductor (grounded neutral in our case) from power and 40 from the lowest
primary distribution. However, if triplex is coming off the pole (secondary
single phase 120/240v from transformer to house, basically the power
42 matches
Mail list logo
