I didn't say free, I said Not $90,000.
What should it cost to do a feasibilty study for a city?
Why does every city need to start from Ground Zero?

I'd rather $10,000-$20,000 go into a study with a competent engineer like you, and the other $$70-80,000 go into actually paying an integrator to build the network. Or better yet, keep the government out of it, and let the Local WISP that already knows the environment and how to do it, be on the top of the list to get the job. My understanding is that Downtown St Louis aint that big (But haven't been there), whats there to study?

Here's a MESH budget for you....
$10,000 to get an OEM StarOS system FCC certified.
$10,000 for a "study"
(Maybe use OSLR for the MESH).
$30,000 for 60 AP repeaters ($500 each w/ antennas, mounts, and CM9s).
(Remember the CM9s support 2.4G-6G on the fly, so the integrator would have the flexibilty to adjust as they identified the obstacles that needed consideration) $40,000 to install and troubleshoot (5 hours per Access Point @ $100 per hour, plus an extra $10,000 for the final over view and documenting of what was found)

If the network didn't work, you'd know exactly why, and you'd have only spent the $90,000 to get equivellent data as the Feasibilty study.
If the network did work, you'd be done.
If the network partially worked, you'd be half way there, and would have a clear picture on whta moneys was needed to finish the job.

I could replicate this model using Alvarion, with their new low cost Comnet program, in a PtP platform. (Although would be less flexible on which spectrum appropriate, so maybe would need an exchange program from a distributor if channels needed varying). And maybe the end project would cost a tad bit more, if more super cells were needed than expected intially.

The point is, to many people spend time trying to predict, rather than just going and finsing out what the situation really is. No better way to know for sure, than to put up gear and listen.

Now what about support.... Local WISP, already has paid executives and local isntallers. Local WISP already has support department. Sure local WISP will want grant to help increase his staff size to handle demand, but thats an understandable cost, and a shared cost. The biggest costs are the learning curve and the management costs, but none of that would need to be paid, as the WISP already has that knowledge and experience, and peices in place, so the local governement would only be paying for just the new working staff (The hands on the end of the arms).

Sure, I understand, my approach is not realistic based on the Politicaly correct proceedures a governement needs to follow in an award/bid situation using others(taxpayers) money. Sure you could argue that those that do not plan in advance pay for it later. But its likely a local WISP already did the bulk of the planning years ago. I'm just saying that its IRONIC that a network can be built for near the price of a feasibilty study, if the politics was not involved. The truth is, Muni Wireless is expensive to launch, because they generally duplicate the effort that is already available locally, select an out of state provider not familiar with the local land, and they have unknowlegeable people needing to make decission on how to use knowledgeable industry bidders.

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

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces


I'm just wondering who should perform the necessary feasibility study for free?


Tom DeReggi wrote:

I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it.
The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what impact it would have on existing providers.

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

----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about "consultants" etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc
is capable of.

A recent "study" was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study
that netted some "consultant" over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for? To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless
network covering downtown.   Hmmmm.  My first thought on this was....

"So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?" Does he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a
bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the
research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.

This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight. We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars. We need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor of
large, non-local companies doing the work.

A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready to
listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone
that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then we will do something with it. Don't happen very often. If someone calls the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them? I have heard
interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists).

The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime
example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about.  And also
some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several
questions and things are open to "interpretation", not closed down enough to
be "solid" in court or anywhere.

Just a few thoughts.


<earlier discussions pruned>

Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to