I have some at 300 with the 120's. I was never able to get a straight answer on the down tilt for NLOS deployments so we deployed them with LOS down tilt calculations. Was curios if there were any new deployments at the same range and what that experience has been with down tilt.
Dustin -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Larson Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 11:03 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz Dustin, Typically 50 feet above the tree line for this customer gets their 1 mile cell sites which is what the business model plans for. They garner better tower rates when not asking for the primo higher tower locations. I've been trying to get Tom to travel and see a site for a long time. The base station antennas are the 90 or 120 sectors we ship with the BreezeAccess VL platform. Brad Brad Larson Northeast Regional Manager Alvarion -----Original Message----- From: dustin jurman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 10:48 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz Hey Brad, what are the heights of the base stations? Are they tower mounted and what antenna's are they using? Dustin -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Larson Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 10:34 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz Not all OFDM radios are created equally (especially PTMP). In many areas of NorthEast USA we have 1 mile radius's with eave mounted BreezeAccess VL Subscribers (5.8 Ghz) doing mod 6 which reflects a 10 meg true data rate. Typically these are obstructed NLOS links instead of going thru 1 mile of solid treelines. Rain/Ice does occasionally change mod levels but more than adequate data rates are achieved with this model. I have 2,400 subscribers (and growing) deployed in this fashion with one customer. Brad -----Original Message----- From: Blair Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 9:37 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz My practical tests show that 2.4GHz works better in a rural Near LosS environment. This is using 802.11b/g vs 802.11a. I have had no luck with 5.3/5.8GHz in a rural Near/Non LoS environment. On the other hand, 5.8Ghz seems to be fine at range in LoS conditions. Go figure. Paul Hendry wrote: >Just noticed that the document also says that 5GHz is better for >passing through damp tree areas than 2.4GHz as 2.4GHz is very close to >the O-H frequency which water is full of and therefore water absorbs >2.4GHz signals considerably more than 5GHz. If this is true then why is >2.4GHz better for tree NLOS environments than 5GHz? > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Paul Hendry >Sent: 03 January 2006 11:48 >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz > >I thought that was it but needed someone to clarify ;) What about 5GHz >penetrating walls much better than 2.4GHz? > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Mike Delp >Sent: 03 January 2006 11:44 >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz > >Paul, > >5 GHz works NLOS in an urban environment. Bouncing around buildings, etc. >Look at the success of Redline and Orthogon. OFDM and 5 GHz works well >for them. An environment with trees is different. Trees absorb the >signals, instead of bouncing them. Especially wet trees! > >We utilize 2.4 at every pop, mainly because of the low cost for >deployment, and general coverage. We utilize 5 GHz frequently and also >900 MHz for NLOS >issues. > > >I hope this helps > >Mike > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Paul Hendry >Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 4:44 AM >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz > >Ola everybody, > > I hope everyone had a great Christmas and New Year and are all ready >for 2006, the year of the WISP :) > When I have setup wireless in an area it has always depended on the >Geographic's of the area as to if we deploy 2.4GHz or 5GHz and I have always >decided that 2.4 should be used where NLOS could be an issue. This >decision has always been based on the fact that the lower frequency >will pass through >trees a lot easier however I have recently read a white paper that >suggests otherwise. Basically the document says that the higher the >frequency, the better the scatter (the ability to bounce of and around >objects). It also says that 5GHz is better at penetrating walls. > So my question is, have I been basing some of our deployments on false >information or am I missing something here? I know that in tests I have >seen a more stable signal at 2.4GHz in a NLOS environment but is this >just a fluke? > >Cheers, > >P. > > > > -- Blair Davis AOL IM Screen Name -- Theory240 West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 A division of: Camp Communication Services, INC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com **************************************************************************** ******** This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******** This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com **************************************************************************** ******** This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******** -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com **************************************************************************** ******** This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******** This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com **************************************************************************** ******** This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******** -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
