It is not the gear that is the issue. It is the regulations, unless your
name is Progeny. The max TPO is 30 dBm and EIRP is 36. So, at 17 dBi
antenna means you /should /only be running about 20 dBm out of your
transceiver.
The frequency regulations have a significant impact on throughput in the
frequency ranges too. A 20 mHz channel is the entire 900 band while it
is merely a channel in 2.4 or 5.x .
I wish I could get out of 900 completely. Nothing else (we can use) can
penetrate, refract, reflect like it does. But it just cannot deliver
bandwidth to enough customers.
So, stepping back a little, I must say that a cheap pair of UBNT units
is worth testing in your area to see if it is sufficient. But unless you
hang it on the tower for testing, your tests will be meaningless. As to
which brand equipment will work better, it depends on your definition of
better. You cannot get the throughput out of Cambium right now. You
might be able to get it from UBNT. You can get sync with Cambium which
allows for more APs without tight RF engineering. If your tower and
customer distribution can support sectors, you may be in luck with UBNT.
If you are going to support more than 20-30 people with omnis, you had
better look at Cambium with GPS sync. I wish it was different. But that
is our real world, non-vacuum test, experience.
Hope that helps make a decision. If not, spend a few hundred bucks to
test UBNT in your area.
On 8/22/2013 4:13 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
The frequency that it operates has no impact on the throughput or the
latency. Sure there's more noise in our 900 MHz band, but that's
because of other users, not something native to that frequency.
The bulk of the 900 MHz gear that we have just doesn't have sufficient
gain, small enough beamwidth (kinda same thing), sufficient shielding.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Steve Barnes" <[email protected]>
*To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:09:36 PM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
But Mike that is the Rub. All things are never the same. 900 is dirty
and Susceptible to so much noise and reflection because the signal
does not die as quick. I understand the "Theory" but still have a
hard time understanding how a slower carrier wave (900MHz) can carry
the same Data as 5800MHz carrier wave but I know that it could in a
vacuum. The issue is we don't live in a vacuum.
*Steve Barnes*
General Manager
PCSWIN.com
Howard LLC.
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
*On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
*Sent:* Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:28 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
900 will move the same amount as data as 2.4, 3.65 and 5 GHz with all
else being the same.
If your throughput is low, you have too little signal for the noise
you're seeing.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Sam Tetherow" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 2:13:52 PM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
I don't have anything to compare it to other than Tranzeo 900, but I
have had decent results with it. It obviously won't push the
throughput that 5G or even 2.4G will, even with the same channel
sizes, but UBNT salvaged most of my 900 customers when the Tranzeo
gear started running into problems.
On 08/22/2013 09:03 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
How is it junk? IIRC, everyone I've asked that claimed a given 900
MHz system was junk had a poor RF environment.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Erik Anderson" <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 8:49:55 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas
98% of our terrain is heavily wooded. Ubiquiti 900 is junk (but
their other products perform quite well when they can be used).
Cambium 900 is better. Out limited experience with whitespace has
been good. All of these technologies have very low bandwidth.
On 8/22/2013 12:04 AM, Chris Fabien wrote:
What are you guys deploying lately in heavily wooded areas?
We've used both Cambium pmp320 Wimax and UBNT M900, with mixed
results on both. We just put up a 130ft tower in a heavily
wooded river valley area, leaning towards the UBNT solution
but hate putting money into something I'm not really satisfied
with.
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
