That does not seem right. What does LinkPlanner say you should get?
Are you getting –73 at both the AP and the SM?
Is this with a Cambium 90 degree sector at the AP end?
Any downtilt, and if so, how much?
Are you near the edge of the sector?
Are you using a 10 MHz channel? The 1W/MHz EIRP rule will punish you if you
use a narrower channel.
But even limiting your xmt EIRP at the SM to +40 dBm, it seems you should have
around –61 at the SM and –64 at the AP.
With clear LOS, I don’t see why the signal should deviate substantially from a
free space loss calculation.
From: Craig House via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 2:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 3.65 pmp450 results - was Dear Cambium
My 4.7 mile link at - 73 with the dish is not going through any trees it's
actually tower to tower
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 21, 2014, at 14:10, Ken Hohhof via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote:
Why do you say that? I’m not deploying it to go through trees. I even have
a tower with 4 sectors of 3.65 plus a 900 MHz FSK panel pointed toward an area
with those pesky green things because I don’t expect the 3.65 to go there
unless it’s a short link with maybe a tree or two in the middle somewhere, same
as I would do with 2.4 GHz.
I view 3.65 as spectrum not fouled by consumer devices or FHSS, and so far
the only WISP we can see is using Ubiquiti so if we stay in the upper 25 MHz we
should not bump heads with them. And the prospect of an additional 100 MHz of
spectrum in the future is a plus. Even though it is not licensed exclusive
use, you don’t have interference from every Tom, Dick and Harry. I am viewing
it kind of like a replacement for 2.4 GHz with the possibility of getting
access to 3550-3650 in the future.
So should we assume that when people say they are not getting much distance
in 3.65 with bare SMs, it is not a comment on the 450 product per se, but the
lack of magical foliage penetrating power? Also, it would help to know if
people are using the Cambium sectors, third party sectors, or omnis. I have a
couple dual pol omnis in 5 GHz and the distance is unimpressive, I don’t think
I’d try an omni in 3.65 especially if I was trying to go through trees and not
use a dish, that’s 3 strikes against you. Maybe 4 strikes if you consider no
WIMAX/LTE super sauce.
I really wish people would loosen their grip on the concept that the main
reason to consider PMP450 in 3.65 GHz is for NLOS. Even if that works for you,
it’s way too narrow a view of the product.
From: CBB - Jay Fullervia Af
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 1:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 3.65 pmp450 results - was Dear Cambium
Surely ppl using 3.65 are going through trees ?
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
----- Reply message -----
From: "Ken Hohhof via Af" <af@afmug.com>
To: <af@afmug.com>
Subject: [AFMUG] 3.65 pmp450 results - was Dear Cambium
Date: Sun, Sep 21, 2014 12:14 PM
We did a bare SM the other day 0.6 miles –58 and 8X in a 10 MHz channel, that
tells me we can go a lot farther without a dish, probably 1.5 miles or more.
Or are you talking about through trees? I have not been impressed with
performance through trees, even with a dish. But I’m not happy with –80 and
4X, I don’t want to eat up all the capacity on such an expensive piece of gear
with just a few subs. And I don’t want customers calling every time the leaves
get wet or covered with snow.
At some point I think we’ll see something similar to the Force100 but for now
it’s a dish or a connectorized SM with a panel. When I asked about a
Stinger/CLIP type of product, I was told the size at 2.4 or 3.65 GHz get too
big or else the gain isn’t worth it.
From: CBB - Jay Fuller via Af
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:58 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 3.65 pmp450 results - was Dear Cambium
We didn't get very far without a dish ; what are you seeing in terms of how
far you can get before you have a dish?
Are you using a dish with most, or is there a stinger available or something
"mid-term" ?
Must be honest, we haven't tried the dish yet. Need to very soon as fall is
basically here...
----- Original Message -----
From: David Milholen via Af
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dear Cambium
Chris,
We are rockin 3.65 450 AB channels replacing 90% of our 900 subs. Migration
is taking time due to cap X.
I took down our first 900AP which was our first aP900 installed last week.
On 9/19/2014 4:34 PM, Christopher Tyler via Af wrote:
I love the 450, 450 is awesome, but 90% of our subs are on 900 MHz, what do we
do there, where is our upgrade path, what is the replacement for PMP100 in 900
MHz?
We have no alternative to 900 for most of our customers where we are, too many
hills and trees. We are still deploying 900 MHz radios in large quantities
simply because we can't use anything else. Sure would be nice to have an easy
way to configure those radios, we (Animal Farm) have only been asking for that
feature for the last 8 years, not like they didn't know about it or have the
time to figure it out. Now they are giving it to us, but only on a platform
where we don't really need it yet.
While I understand that PMP100 is somewhat antiquated, Cambium is still making
money on it and will continue to make money on it, so why not give us at least
some development beyond bug fixes at least until there is a 900 replacement?
Why not a 450 in 900 MHz that's using the newer hardware but still only 2x
modulation. We would literally buy thousands of them within the next year.
--
<Davidmvcf.jpg>
