I was not making a point as to whether it is the end all be all solution for NLOS or anywhere close to that just stating the fact that it is shooting through a tree and getting a great power level at that distance. Obviously it doesn't have the penetration of lower bands and I don't intend for it to do so. I am using the Cambium sectors as I had issues with the KP sectors with 5ghz on the 450 and have chosen to stay away from them even though it was a 1st gen sector from. I'll stick with the cambium sectors especially being they require less effort to be mounted being the ap is attached to the sector itself. An omni would definitely be wasted effort in my personal point of view for the 3.65 450's.
Only reason I mention anything about down tilt on the sectors is I had issues at the beginning of deployment versus the FSK stuff as to how it needed to be mounted, coverage and so on. I would imagine even with 5ghz omnis on 450 would be near worthless as far as distance considering the lack of TX power on the AP compared to the FSK stuff. Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:35 PM, Craig House via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: > > 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>
