Sorry, you’re right.
My brain keeps getting confused by Ubiquiti’s claims of “1.2+ Gbps throughput” and “greatest spectral efficiency in its class”. It’s hard to compare Ubiquiti (or Mimosa) licensed band radios to all the rest. I guess you can view it as “thinking outside the box” or “get back in the damn box”. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 1:56 PM To: AFMUG <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner You would need dual carrier, because I'm talking about using the single core Aviat radios, to keep it as cheap as possible. An AF11 link can typically do ~700M one direction (using both polarities), which is about the same as each 80mhz channel on an Aviat. On Sun, Jan 19, 2020, 1:36 PM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com> > wrote: I would also run link performance analysis on both approaches. Or at least consider 2 antennas instead of splitters with the airFiber approach. If I take one of my Cambium CCDP (XPIC) links and change it to ACCP in LinkPlanner, it knocks 9 dB out of the system gain. I assume due to the additional loss of the splitters instead of OMTs. And with AF11X radios compared to something like Aviat you are already starting out with lower system gain. At least with separate antennas you don’t need the splitters. I’m also not seeing why you would need dual carrier on Aviat to match the throughput of two AF11X radios, just make sure you are comparing apples to apples. In other words, full duplex capacity, not aggregate. Maybe I’m not familiar enough with the Ubiquiti and Aviat radios, but it seems to me the appropriate cost comparison would be 2 x AF11X vs 1 x single carrier Aviat. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> > On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 1:08 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner I don't see how it can be a lot cheaper. Ignoring potential differences in licensing/coordination, last I checked a complete AF11 link with all the parts is somewhere in the neighborhood of $3k (for the hardware only). It looks to me like I can get an Aviat WTM 4100 with dual carrier enabled for a bit over $7k total. I'm assuming that I'm going to be able to license adjacent channels on the same polarity on most paths that I can license two full AF11 links, and that's going to yield similar capacity. To me, it seems well worth the difference in price to get better radios and not have to deal with an extra set of dishes. Granted, having two sets of radios does give you a redundancy advantage, but I'd still rather have better radios. On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 11:00 AM Matt Hoppes <mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net <mailto:mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> > wrote: Two 11x even with two dishes is still cheaper than an Aviat. I see the Aviat being an option when we crest 1.4 gigabit. Until then my dual 11x setup is much less expensive. > On Jan 19, 2020, at 11:15 AM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com > <mailto:af...@kwisp.com> > wrote: > > Maybe we should ask what you are trying to accomplish. Is it more capacity, > or something else? > > Because if it's more capacity, you will take such a hit on price and > performance using 2 radios and combiners that you'd be better off with one > more conventional radio. You shouldn't even have to buy a dual core radio to > get approx. double the throughput of an AF11x. Start with the lower > throughput and lower system gain of the AF11X, lose I think someone said ~7 > dB for combiners, pay for 2 radios and combiners, then need external LAG. > It's a Rube Goldberg if you're just trying to get ~1.5 Gbps full duplex > capacity, just buy one of the alternatives that people have suggested like > Aviat. Or if money isn't a big issue and you want to license both > polarizations (which I believe you need to do for the AF11X), then buy a true > dual core radio with an OMT and have tons of capacity for the future. Either > way, feel good that you're making efficient use of spectrum. > > If capacity isn't the objective, maybe some more info. > > If money is the main issue, yes the AF11X is very affordable, but not if you > have to use 2 of them and some outboard stuff to do what other vendors can do > with one radio. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> > On > Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 8:33 AM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com > <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner > > The problem is keeping one transmitter out of the other. So you have hybrid > combiners and circulators. Those are the only methods I know. You can get > both at 11 GHz with waveguide or SMA connectors. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Radabaugh > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 7:06 AM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner > > This is usually done using wave guides rather than at the electrical level > due to the high losses that occur when trying to do it using transmission > lines. It’s a pretty complex piece of waveguide design - not something you > can cobble together. The vendors with full product lines in the microwave > backhaul market have these solutions already designed and available. > > Mark > >> On Jan 18, 2020, at 4:20 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com >> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> That would be a tall order. AF11 radios are two-pole already, and the >> diplexers have a N connector. if you had the right frequencies; maybe, >> but it is difficult for me to visualize. >> >> bp >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >>> On 1/18/2020 12:23 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote: >>> Does anyone know of a 10-12ghz combiner module? >>> >>> Example - I want to run two airFiber 11x radios on one dish. >>> >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
