Heck I have a very old 5.2 BH20 extended range (software scheduling) at 7.3 miles with a rx of -76. Its been up since 2003 or 2004 running 7.2.9.
On Feb 12, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Matt Hoppes <[email protected]> wrote: > What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will > easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want > more gain. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: >>> Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP >>> environment. >>> A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII >>> >>> People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than >>> intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. >>> >> >> Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but >> when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the >> requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So >> 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). >> U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands >> shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of >> radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. >> >> The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile >> links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into >> panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. >> >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 5265-5320 >>> 5500-5580 >>> 5660-5700 >>> 5735-5840 >>> >>> Are these not USA channels? >>> If am wrong let me know and I will change them. >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Forrest...what is your offlist email ? >>> >>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone >>> >>> ----- Reply message ----- >>> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <[email protected]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? >>> Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM >>> >>> >>> I'm going to agree with others... >>> >>> Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds >>> like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining >>> about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use >>> than to exceed the limits. >>> >>> I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they >>> should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My >>> experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific >>> tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed >>> over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf >>> than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. >>> >>> Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either >>> dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you >>> are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which >>> is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which >>> makes us a bit grumpy. >>> >>> I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better >>> understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your >>> operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd >>> drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. >>> >>> In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you >>> reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. >>> >>> On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, "Art Stephens" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of >>> these frequencies. >>> Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that >>> platform. >>> First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about >>> 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 >>> runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, >>> Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. >>> Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with >>> it. >>> Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. >>> Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports >>> 5170-5875. >>> >>> Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more >>> money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both >>> wisps and consumers. >>> >>> -- >>> Arthur Stephens >>> Senior Networking Technician >>> Ptera Inc. >>> PO Box 135 >>> 24001 E Mission Suite 50 >>> Liberty Lake, WA 99019 >>> 509-927-7837 >>> ptera.com >>> facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is >>> intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. >>> Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or >>> opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not >>> intended to represent those of the company." >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Arthur Stephens >>> Senior Networking Technician >>> Ptera Inc. >>> PO Box 135 >>> 24001 E Mission Suite 50 >>> Liberty Lake, WA 99019 >>> 509-927-7837 >>> ptera.com >>> facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is >>> intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. >>> Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or >>> opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not >>> intended to represent those of the company." >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> -- >> Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" interisle.net >> Interisle Consulting Group >> +1 617 795 2701 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
