Redline itself, does not have spectrum analasys capability, from what I understood. Generally Redline user can use it to see if their radio can work well on a channel, by looking for loss, and what channel worksbest. but the fact that the Redline smashes through 5.8G fine does not mean that others are not hammered by it.

Using the Long coax is not that big a deal, as the loss can be factored in. However, if using Redline, the coax was probably the cable used to connect the indoor and outdoor equipment, which is spec'd to easilly do 150 feet. it is not used to carrt the RF signal like a standard radio, the transmitter is actually up at the top of the tower with the antenna. The Redline design is actually a preferred design because you can get away from CAt5 jacks (easilly soiled by weather and electricity), but not have large singal loss like with typical COAX carrying the RF signal to antenna.

I think you need to bring connection to "f". They say no interference, and you know there is. Therefore that conclusion is false. however maybe you should just get better clarification on wether the finding was really, zero interference. maybe they meant that some channels are free, so 5.8Ghz will be a good option. Its also possible that the polarity used was opposite. Was the purpose to test that the Redline would work above noise floor, or to determine what the noise floor was in completeness?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


----- Original Message ----- From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 11:07 AM
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/

Reply via email to