Luck of the draw; position of cables, blah blah blah.
I've seen it the other way around too.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 7/23/2015 2:54 PM, Craig House wrote:
However there are UBNT aps on the tower at 100fd with no noise from them
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2015, at 16:52, Craig House <cr...@totalhighspeed.net> wrote:
We have not tried 10fd Ethernet but the cables are only 10' or less and are
shielded
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2015, at 16:50, Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sounds like you're getting interference from the ethernet cable?
have you tried running the 900 FSK on 10BaseT? That would lower the frequency
of the ethernet by an order of magnitude.
Alternately, using shielded cable or putting the ethernet in a metal conduit
would also attenuate the ethernet noise.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 7/23/2015 2:15 PM, Craig House wrote:
We have another tower that we have installed 900 FSK equipment on that seems to
be causing problems with a 2 way repeater system. The noise floor on the 2 way
system is 20 db higher when the equipment is on. The down side to this is the
tower owner is the repeater owner and without his repeater his business suffers
and the need for the tower is gone. We have in the past had this issue and ran
coax all the way up the tower to have only the antennas on top and it solved
this issue but I dont want to do this for a FSK 900 radio? So my question
would be, what are the odds that the new 450 900 mhz that is only moments away
from being released would work without running Coax up the tower? I think this
is an issue with the processor in the FSK board not the RF @ 900mhz that is
causing the problem. What have others done about this. We have another
tower that seems to be on the brink of this same issue as well and I dont want
to completely pull off all 900 FSK but maybe I should? Should I just go to
UBNT 900 until the 450's release?
