> > --=====================_722114203==.ALT > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > At 06:51 PM 10/12/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Brian - > > > >Try going back 10 years before that - you're looking at the > >last *RENEWAL* - the KC prefix was filled back in 1991 -92 > > > >and your incorrect categorization of a "newbie tech" is excatly why > >people don't become hams, and exactly why hams loose > >spectrum to corporations who will make use of it. Oversimplified. > >But people who stereotype and discriminate against a person > >based on a date / callsign (especially when they are dead wrong) > >just contribute to a bad reputation for all hams, not just yourself. > > > >Pat yourself on the back. You've demonstrated the problem with > >about 10% of the ham population which pisses off the other 90% > > > Hmm, well he DOES have a point. That's why Ham's lost > part of 220 to UPS. It was under-utilized and the hobby > was dying on the vine until they lowered standards with the > no-code tech. Now it's like CB in the 70's. > > Exactly the reason I hold an FCC Commercial RF License, and NOT a > ham license. > > Almost every interaction with "hams" during my professional lifetime as > an RF Engineer was negative. From super sloppy radios at mountain top > repeater sites, to > the general bad attitude.
I've gotten to the point I refuse to deal with them too - exactly the same reasons. They make lousy customers becuase they are always trying to do something dumb like run 2.4G through 50 feet of old 10 base 2 ethernet cable they bought at a hamswap. I normally provide free tech support, but if I find the customer in the hamcall database, it's suspect when a trouble call comes from their direction. - instead of asking "what's wrong" it's more like "what have you done to cause this?" I do have *one* sharp ham customer - he did his own install and did it right the first time - and he's usually got a letit issue if he calls for tech help. I wish he were the rule and not the exception. he even pays his bill on time. If they were all that way, I'd make it a ham only network. Their sloppy work in repeater bunkhouses is almost comical - I had to yank the plug on one because they didn't install the circulator properly and the property owner got a REAL FCC notice of violation - I was hired to track it down and shure nuff - the ham repeater was the culprit. The site owner yanked their lease after I took some photos of what they had been doing inside his building and submitted them along with an engineering report. Ham mobile radios sitting next to paging transmitters was what finally did them in. When the owner submitted my report, photos, and invoice to the FCC to prove he responded responsibly, along with the eviction of the ham occupants, the FCC closed the matter with no fines. It wasn't really the property owner's fault, so the FCC must understand what hams can do to a well engineered transmitter site. I've also seen some really nice ham installs - made out of commercial gear that was re-tuned into the ham band. Never a problem. Unfortunately, again, they are the rarity compared to the hack jobs. I thought this whole issue was DEAD - I blocked Jeff's wasted bandwidth at my edge routers and on my sendmail box- then for some dumb reason this brian guy pops up who can't even read a computer screen correctly and starts the whole thing over again calling me a newbie - i've been a ham for well over a decade and he calls me *ME* a newbie?. It didn't involve him - he's just trying to keep it going. He should have never posted to this list in the first place. His posting had nothing to do with wireless. There are a handful of hams for whom I have the ultimate respect - but there are so many who fall into the stereotype that Brian has shown that it's sickening. It's what sendmail filters are for. > > But back to wireless.... > Ah yes - why we're really here. > What type/output on the RF amplifier was used with the Cisco gear, and what > was the range with the antenna/amp combo ? > This was the older hyperlink amp and the older 340 series cisco - 30 mW out (honest) and the hyperlink would peak at 900-930 mw (close to a watt). You had to open up the amp and move smt resistors around to make a 50 ohm term on the input attenuator, so 925/1000 is doing pretty good. If you look at my (Newly compressed!) equipment webpage - http://www2.uwave.com/labrent/index.html - scroll down mid way and you'll see a metcal tweezer- both heating elements are hot (700f) - they use a 13.56 ISM band heater in the tweezer, which compresses by the handle. It can be used to move those smt resistors around to change the input power attenuator network on older hyperlink hardware to match input power to the amp. That tool **IS** the right tool for the job when re-arranging SMT parts! > Any frensel degredation from the antennas ? There were areas this was *NOT* supposed to work in - yet it did! Fresnel bending effect was the only explanation. I get reports from topo that look like this: (this is not from this box - but it's an example of what topo! can do - this is from a point to point link I just finished engineering.) www2.uwave.com/path1.jpg I've also installed customers in los altos on fresnel effect - they're just feet outside LOS, but it works. There is definitely a fresnel bending effect there. I had to use it exclusively to design an antenna for channel 12 (HDTV) for someone living behind a bunch of dirt from their transmitter. The antenna was unique in that it relied soly on fresnel effect - No LOS - but he got a signal - and strong eough to get the HDTV 8VSB signal strictly from fresnel effect. We did the math - he was 6 degrees behind LOS, and at ~200 Mhz he made it in. The other people are getting local channels by sat (LSD) and don't get HDTV. Unfortunately - he's waaay blocked for sutro, so he only gets NBC HD. I think that ended up being the most expensive ch. 12 antenna ever engineered, but he could afford it and now he has HDTV NBC for life. > > Also what was the general altitude of the system it was in use on > ? Surburban rooftop or ? > This unit was pulled out of a suburban area - serviced from a mountaintop repeater. > I'm looking for a quick and dirty metro area network, point to multi-point. > Starting from scratch without altitude - this is what I'd recommend: A good way to start is to look at the cisco AP 350's abilities to find each oher - and to find their way home. You could theoretically make your own mesh network out of cisco APs without the nasty latencies most specialty mesh-only hardware has. You're stuck with a totally wireless net though - anyone who wants to go wired somewhere along the way needs both the AP350 and WGB350 - alot of h/w! - but it peacefully coexists (after some of the postings here I am surprised when things can peacefully coexist) Your per hop latencies are on the order of 1ms - some mesh nets are 60 ms per hop, and not compatible with 802.11b. They're also priced way above the discount rate for an AP350 - which leaves me to doubt they'll be around forever. I use a high altitude site with sectorized antennas and different channels and ssids into each pocket. The antennas are picked for their pattern, and the customer base in their area, so only two are alike. I've found the flat panel radiators are very effective and can be easily horizontally polarized to buy some isolation from the noise out there (I have plots of vertical and horizontal noise floor in the area - it's a good way to start and decide if you want to be vertical or horizontal). I should download all the traces out of my portable SA and post them! Once people look at their noise floor - they often forget the single vertical omni hub in the center with everything feeding it. Thats when flat panels excel. If you just have one central point, I have made phased arries of flat panels that are horizontal - email me if you want more info on that one. I have a strong perference for H polarization here. - not sure what your area is like tho. Enjoy! Everett > Thanks > > > --=====================_722114203==.ALT > Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" > > <html> > <body> > <font size=3>At 06:51 PM 10/12/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:<br> > <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Brian -<br><br> > Try going back 10 years before that - you're looking at the<br> > last *RENEWAL* - the KC prefix was filled back in 1991 -92<br><br> > and your incorrect categorization of a "newbie tech" is excatly > why <br> > people don't become hams, and exactly why hams loose <br> > spectrum to corporations who will make use of it. > Oversimplified.<br> > But people who stereotype and discriminate against a person <br> > based on a date / callsign (especially when they are dead wrong) <br> > just contribute to a bad reputation for all hams, not just > yourself.<br><br> > Pat yourself on the back. You've demonstrated the problem > with<br> > about 10% of the ham population which pisses off the other > 90%</font></blockquote><br><br> > Hmm, well he DOES have a point. That's why Ham's lost<br> > part of 220 to UPS. It was under-utilized and the hobby<br> > was dying on the vine until they lowered standards with the<br> > no-code tech. Now it's like CB in the 70's.<br><br> > Exactly the reason I hold an FCC Commercial RF License, and NOT a > <br> > ham license.<br><br> > Almost every interaction with "hams" during my professional > lifetime as<br> > an RF Engineer was negative. From super sloppy radios at mountain > top repeater sites, to<br> > the general bad attitude.<br><br> > But back to wireless....<br><br> > What type/output on the RF amplifier was used with the Cisco gear, and > what<br> > was the range with the antenna/amp combo ?<br><br> > Any frensel degredation from the antennas ?<br><br> > Also what was the general altitude of the system it was in use on ? > Surburban rooftop or ?<br><br> > I'm looking for a quick and dirty metro area network, point to > multi-point.<br><br> > Thanks<br><br> > </body> > </html> > > --=====================_722114203==.ALT-- > > -- > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
