Are you saying that antenna patterns could have a significant difference between 5740 and 5780 on some antennas?
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > And that plot is for one specific frequency. They frequently do not > tell you the test frequency. I have had antennas have horrible ugly plots > at some frequencies but nice ones at other frequencies. > > *From:* Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2015 11:35 AM > *To:* af <af@afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG]Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz > > Yes, assuming they're accurate, but that may be a lot to assume... > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > >> Assuming the plots are accurate, they're all that matters. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"Jerry Richardson" <je...@richardson.bz> >> *To: *af@afmug.com >> *Sent: *Wednesday, February 18, 2015 12:22:27 PM >> >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz >> >> That’s what I was basing my first reply on, but then I saw that note. >> >> >> >> So, which to believe? The hand drawn plot or the note? LOL >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:12 AM >> *To:* af >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz >> >> >> >> If the pattern in the spec sheet is accurate, this one looks like it's >> actually a bit more than 120 at -3db >> http://www.streakwave.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=HW-SA58-120-16D&eq=&Tp=&o1=0 >> >> These also look to be a full 120 at -3db >> http://www.streakwave.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=SA4958-120-19-D&eq=&Tp=&o1=0 >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Jerry Richardson <je...@richardson.bz> >> wrote: >> >> You are right, there’s a little note that says 120* is -6dB. Bastards… >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2015 9:11 AM >> *To:* af >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz >> >> >> >> That's the one I was talking about, but it's not exactly a real 120 >> either... >> >> * All beam widths are listed at the 3dB point except for 120° beam >> >> on horizontal polarization is listed at 6dB point >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Jerry Richardson <je...@richardson.bz> >> wrote: >> >> Here’ a real 120deg dual pol sector. >> >> >> >> http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/ARC-VS5821SD1_DS_061312.pdf >> >> >> >> Jerry >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Bill Prince >> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 5:13 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz >> >> >> >> This needs to sync with a full cluster of Canopy APs that is only 3 miles >> away. >> >> bp >> >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> >> >> On 2/17/2015 5:09 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >> >> There is always the business case to use another vendor with lower ROI. >> >> Josh Reynolds >> >> CIO, SPITwSPOTS >> >> j...@spitwspots.com >> >> www.spitwspots.com >> >> On 2/17/2015 3:50 PM, Bill Prince wrote: >> >> This site is not ABAB. It's not even AB. It is merely A. One sector; >> 120° wide, with about 15 subs. About as low as you can go. The problem is >> that most of the subs are near the outer edges of a 120° sector. Dividing >> it into 2 sectors would be an option if we had (or expected) more subs, but >> this one I don't think that will happen. I'm not inclined to burn a Canopy >> AP (or two even) on 7 or 8 subs each. >> >> bp >> >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> On 2/17/2015 12:13 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: >> >> I think asking for 3 dB down at 120 degrees in dual pol with matching >> patterns, good F/B and good sidelobes is not going to happen. I’d plan on >> ABAB and look for a 90 degree sector. >> >> >> >> Hmmmm, the published patterns for the KPP “Gen III” are kind of ugly, >> aren’t they? Plus the HPOL and VPOL azimuth patterns don’t match very well. >> >> >> >> *From:* Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2015 2:05 PM >> >> *To:* af <af@afmug.com> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG]Decent "true" DP 120° sector in 5 GHz >> >> >> >> I thought the KP sectors were suppose to be -3db at 120... I think almost >> everything is rated at -6db now. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> The new 120 is the old 90....search for something advertised as wider >> than 120 I guess? >> >> What I'm looking for is a 120° sector that drops off no more than 3db >> at the edges. The 6 db bull that seems to be common these days is not >> what I'm looking for. >> >> Also want good F/B ratio, good cross-pol performance, and tiny side >> lobes. In perfect world, it would drop off 30db at 121°. >> >> I want a pony too. >> >> bp >> >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> On 2/17/2015 10:50 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: >> >> Good drop off is a good thing IMO. >> >> >> >> If you want less drop off probably go with an original Airmax sector. >> Those things bleed for days and the f/b isn't very good. We installed >> half a dozen people 180* off one of them. >> >> >> >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> No one? >> >> bp >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> On 2/17/2015 9:55 AM, Bill Prince wrote: >> >> >> Has anyone found a decent TRUE 120° dual-polarity sector in 5 GHz? >> We're using a KP on one of our POPs and the drop-off at the edge of >> the 120° is just too much for our taste. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
