Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread Scott Reed
$149 in qty 1, 119 in qty 10.

Chuck Profito wrote:
 Their $135 against $119.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote  
 controlling our generator:

 http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a  
 commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

 Greg

 On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

   
 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you  
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto  
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto  
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units  
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated  
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think  
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts  
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the  
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike


   
 ---
   
 -
 
 
 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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread jp
Just a little mad. Antennas and cable do fail. That's something you need to 
consider in 
your fault tolerance. We've seen stuff fail from pac wireless, gabriel, 
superpass, etc.. 
The whole price range. We've also seen MTI ones fail when struck by lightning.

As far as sectors go, there is often enough overlap that people may be able to 
reassociate on the neighboring sector if you can use virtual APs.

We frequently do have a backup backhaul; we leave the old gear in place when we 
do a 
backhaul upgrade. 

Separate UPSs would be good too, as those are often the only thing that gives 
in a high 
uptime environment.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 08:04:46PM -0500, Mike wrote:
 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower setup.
 
 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio 
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be 
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.
 
 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4 
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would 
 contain a router and one of each radio.
 
 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that 
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily 
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline 
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer 
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were 
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides 
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.
 
 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.
 
 Am I mad?  Mike
 
 
 
 
 
 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/

-- 
/*
Jason Philbrook   |   Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL
KB1IOJ|   Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting 
 http://f64.nu/   |   for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.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/


Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
OK, I've got a customer that's already in love with that controller.  Anyone 
know of something that'll give temp and pressure readouts?  The farmers are 
gonna go nuts for these things.
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Chuck Profito cprof...@cv-access.com
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment


 Yes I see that, good point, the dl will do 40Vdc but 24 is max 
 recommended.
 It also drops out at 8.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:18 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Yeah but it goes to 28vdc vs 24vdc. Those 4 extra volts might make a
 difference for folks doing 24 volt solar.
 On Oct 29, 2009, at 11:44 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Their $135 against $119.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote
 controlling our generator:

 http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a
 commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

 Greg

 On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no
 issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant
 tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would
 be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike



 ---
 -
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread Mike
Have you ever used diplexers at each end of a coax run?  I am liking 
that idea for a couple repeater sites.  One LMR 900 would be half the 
price of two.  All the repeater sites have antennae at different frequencies.

Mike

At 09:30 PM 10/29/2009, Marlon wrote:
How high is the tower this is all on?

If you run the calcs for line loss, even at 5 gig, up to 100' of coax isn't
horrible much of the time.  I'm putting more and more radios back on the
ground these days.

LMR 600 or 900 can pay for it's self in a climb or two.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message -
From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 6:04 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment


 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.
 
  1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
  failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
  taken out of the EMERGENCY category.
 
  A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
  (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
  contain a router and one of each radio.
 
  I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
  could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
  available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
  divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
  instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
  dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
  redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.
 
  Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.
 
  Am I mad?  Mike
 
 
 
 
  
 
  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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread Mike
Chuck,

Have you written any scripts to automate those din relays based on 
input from another application?  Like if a radio or router becomes 
unreachable, throw relays to take the bad one out of line and put the 
backup one in?  You've gotten me thinking ...

Mike

At 10:20 PM 10/29/2009, Chuck wrote:
Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you don't
have to go to the tower.

http://www.dinrelay.com

this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto reboot, 16
port $295

All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto reboot on
most of the radio boards,
it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
into service.

So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

Mike


At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.
 
 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be
 best IMO
 
 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102
 
 
 
 
 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment
 
 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.
 
 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.
 
 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.
 
 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.
 
 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.
 
 Am I mad?  Mike
 
 ---
-
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-30 Thread Chuck Profito
No, I'm not a coder, I'm a farm boy.  Our definition of tower, 2 or more way
into it, a repeater just one.
So, if you know it's down, log in and turn one off and one on.

Marlon, educate me, why do the farmers want these? Starting irrigation
pumps?

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 8:09 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Chuck,

Have you written any scripts to automate those din relays based on 
input from another application?  Like if a radio or router becomes 
unreachable, throw relays to take the bad one out of line and put the 
backup one in?  You've gotten me thinking ...

Mike

At 10:20 PM 10/29/2009, Chuck wrote:
Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you don't
have to go to the tower.

http://www.dinrelay.com

this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto reboot, 16
port $295

All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto reboot on
most of the radio boards,
it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
into service.

So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

Mike


At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and
fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.
 
 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs
than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a
well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be
 best IMO
 
 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102
 
 
 
 
 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment
 
 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.
 
 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.
 
 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.
 
 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.
 
 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.
 
 Am I mad?  Mike
 

---
-
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Scott Carullo
I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and fault 
tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs than 
more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a well 
planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be 
best IMO

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102




From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower 
setup.

1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio 
failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be 
taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4 
(or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would 
contain a router and one of each radio.

I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that 
could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily 
available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline 
divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer 
instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were 
dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides 
redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.

Am I mad?  Mike



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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Mike
Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio 
on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power 
supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go 
into service.

So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router 
died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant 
radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

Mike


At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and fault
tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs than
more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a well
planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be
best IMO

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102




From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
setup.

1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
(or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
contain a router and one of each radio.

I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.

Am I mad?  Mike



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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
How high is the tower this is all on?

If you run the calcs for line loss, even at 5 gig, up to 100' of coax isn't 
horrible much of the time.  I'm putting more and more radios back on the 
ground these days.

LMR 600 or 900 can pay for it's self in a climb or two.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 6:04 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment


I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower 
setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.

 Am I mad?  Mike




 
 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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Chuck Profito
Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you don't
have to go to the tower.

http://www.dinrelay.com 

this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto reboot, 16
port $295

All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto reboot on
most of the radio boards, 
it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards. 


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio 
on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power 
supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go 
into service.

So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router 
died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant 
radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

Mike


At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and fault
tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs than
more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a well
planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be
best IMO

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102




From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
setup.

1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
(or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
contain a router and one of each radio.

I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.

Am I mad?  Mike

---
-

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] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Mike
Those are cool.  I use their web switches already; never looked at 
that relay product.

Marlons idea is good for repeater sites.  I am thinking of my main 
tower -- 180'.  Scott, I have not lost a radio on that tower in 4 
years, but DID lose an Ethernet port on one after 2 direct strikes in 
a row.  Even threw me out of bed when that happened.

Yeah, it would be more expensive initially, but the peace of mind 
might be worth it.  It would still cost less than single radio 
deployments cost me four years ago.

How about those dual band sectors.  Anybody use any they would recommend?

Mike


At 10:20 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you don't
have to go to the tower.

http://www.dinrelay.com

this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto reboot, 16
port $295

All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto reboot on
most of the radio boards,
it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
into service.

So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

Mike


At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.
 
 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts would be
 best IMO
 
 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102
 
 
 
 
 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment
 
 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.
 
 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.
 
 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.
 
 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.
 
 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the net.
 
 Am I mad?  Mike
 
 ---
-
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread os10rules
Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote  
controlling our generator:

http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a  
commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

Greg

On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you  
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto  
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto  
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units  
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated  
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think  
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts  
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the  
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike

 ---
 -
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Chuck Profito
Their $135 against $119.

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote  
controlling our generator:

http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a  
commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

Greg

On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you  
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto  
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto  
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units  
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated  
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think  
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts  
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the  
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike


---
 -
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Chuck Profito
Oops, my bad DL's is $150 each 10 + 119

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote  
controlling our generator:

http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a  
commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

Greg

On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you  
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto  
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto  
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units  
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated  
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think  
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts  
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the  
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike


---
 -
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread os10rules
Yeah but it goes to 28vdc vs 24vdc. Those 4 extra volts might make a  
difference for folks doing 24 volt solar.
On Oct 29, 2009, at 11:44 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Their $135 against $119.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote
 controlling our generator:

 http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a
 commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

 Greg

 On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no  
 issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant  
 tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would  
 be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike


 ---
 -
 
 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

Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

2009-10-29 Thread Chuck Profito
Yes I see that, good point, the dl will do 40Vdc but 24 is max recommended.
It also drops out at 8.

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

Yeah but it goes to 28vdc vs 24vdc. Those 4 extra volts might make a  
difference for folks doing 24 volt solar.
On Oct 29, 2009, at 11:44 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Their $135 against $119.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:46 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Some remote control devices I've been looking at for remote
 controlling our generator:

 http://www.controlbyweb.com/webrelay-quad/   (this one comes in a
 commercial model that accepts 9-28vdc power)

 Greg

 On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Chuck Profito wrote:

 Or do it your way and add this to the mix, and to switch radios you
 don't
 have to go to the tower.

 http://www.dinrelay.com

 this unit saves the trip up the hill.  Small one $125 with auto
 reboot, 16
 port $295

 All of our towers have these and a few repeaters. Now with auto
 reboot on
 most of the radio boards,
 it's mostly used to boot routers, switches, or hung boards.


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:29 PM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 Based at least partly on what I've learned on this list:

 An enclosure can contain radios from 2 different bands with no  
 issues.

 A dual band sector has less wind loading than one of each.

 Radios and enclosures have gotten cheaper.

 It really wouldn't be any more complicated than having a spare radio
 on the tower, if implemented properly. If an entire router or power
 supply failed there would be an entirely redundant unit ready to go
 into service.

 So there would be no single unit.  If either radio, or either router
 died, the drone would take over.  Each antenna would have a redundant
 radio in a DIFFERENT enclosure.

 Mike


 At 09:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
 I think the concept of combining functionality into single units
 and fault
 tolerant redundancy are mutually exclusive.

 I believe more people have had problems with more complicated
 installs than
 more simple ones vs. failed components on simple installs.  I think
 a well
 planned combination of both including redundancy where it counts
 would be
 best IMO

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102


 

 From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com
 Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:05 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Fault tolerant tower deployment

 I have been thinking of putting together a fully fault tolerant  
 tower
 setup.

 1 antenna; two radios.  Separate CAT5, separate box. If one radio
 failed, the other would come on-line.  The replacement climb would  
 be
 taken out of the EMERGENCY category.

 A complete system would be a 3) 5.8 120 degree sectors, plus 3) 2.4
 (or 900 MHz) degree sectors.  6) small waterproof enclosures would
 contain a router and one of each radio.

 I know on some of the MT router boards there is a fan header that
 could be used to energize a relay.  Microwave relays are readily
 available and have acceptable insertion loss.  Would a stripline
 divider like Cameron suggested in another thread be the answer
 instead? Passive solutions are always better.  If the antennas were
 dual-band, wind load on a tower could really be lowered.  Besides
 redundancy, consolidating wind load would be my goal.

 Has anybody done anything like this?  Can't seem to find any on the
 net.

 Am I mad?  Mike



---
 -
 
 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