140" are 15 db loss plus 2 for the connectors.. the effective gain on the
antenna would be 11 db ... run your calcs

Gino A. Villarini, 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.aeronetpr.com
787.273.4143


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Cliff Leboeuf
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 12:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Flawed Spectrum Analysis (I think!)

Gino,
It was Redline's 2' panel.
- Cliff

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of G.Villarini
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:15 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Flawed Spectrum Analysis (I think!)

What redline antenna was used? A sector a panel ?

Gino A. Villarini, 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.aeronetpr.com
787.273.4143


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Cliff Leboeuf
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 12:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Flawed Spectrum Analysis (I think!)

We proposed a spectrum analysis for a client. This analysis was to be
performed with a hand-held spectrum analyzer at the height that the
equipment was to be mounted. Our offer was rejected.

However, we were asked to provide the climber for the other party's
analysis.


Their analysis was performed as follows:
1. Using a 'nice' spectrum analyzer
        a. the analyzer remained in their truck
        b. the antenna from a 5.8Ghz Redline system was hauled about
140'
        c. the original RF cable used was RG6 for 140'(duh?)
        d. the next 140' of RF cable used was LMR400
        e. we know that we shoot directly through one of the sites
surveyed with 5.8Ghz P2P link, and have 5.8 P2Mp links at two other
locations surveyed
        f. all analysis showed no RF interference (go figure!)

I'm not an RF engineer, so would someone help me to explain why there
was no 5.8Ghz interference shown at these locations even though I know
there to be other 5.8Ghz equipment hitting the towers tested.

What is the RF cable loss at 140' of using LMR400 as described above?
Also factor in about 4 connectors to adapt the RF cable from the
analyzer to the antenna. 

Is this a valid analysis, or am I wrong to comment to this customer that
I feel this analysis if flawed?

"Ammunition" that anyone is willing to supply would be appreciated as
well as advice for me to keep my mouth shut. :)

- Cliff


-- 
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/
-- 
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/

Reply via email to