Open waveguides have about 10 dB gain and about a 50 degree pattern.  

From: Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 10:47 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small ePMP AP

I like the horn design because they're very clean as far as antenna coverage 
goes, and they're also good for covering both close in customers as well as 
several miles out. Much better than a standard sector.

Also they're small "A F", but solidly built. Low wind load means you can put 
more of them on a micropop 25G.

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote:

  People seem to forget that gain is inversely proportional to coverage area. A 
sector that moves the vertical beamwidth from 4 degrees to 90 degrees will have 
a very detrimental effect on gain.

  That said, the lack of gain everywhere outside of the intended area is 
non-existent, meaning much lower noise.




  -----
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions

  Midwest Internet Exchange

  The Brothers WISP






------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:32:11 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small ePMP AP 


  They're great for 802.11ac style micropops

  Good vertical coverage though, much better than a sector. Clean
  beamwidth / edges.

  On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Josh Luthman
  <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
  > It's another option anyway =)
  >
  > I'm kind of liking the horn antenna, but the gain is low.  A 90* is only
  > 10dbi but a 40* is 16dbi.  Or the 50* at 14dbi.
  >
  >
  > Josh Luthman
  > Office: 937-552-2340
  > Direct: 937-552-2343
  > 1100 Wayne St
  > Suite 1337
  > Troy, OH 45373
  >
  > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
  >>
  >> Nevermind, I missed the "short of buying a connectorized AP" part.  Also,
  >> these are small in physical size, but not so much in beamwidth.
  >>
  >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
  >>>
  >>> AM-M-V5G-TI
  >>>
  >>>
  >>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Gino Villarini <ginovi...@gmail.com>
  >>> wrote:
  >>>>
  >>>> ebay is your friend
  >>>>
  >>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Gino Villarini <ginovi...@gmail.com>
  >>>> wrote:
  >>>>>
  >>>>> blessed that you can use 40 mhz...
  >>>>>
  >>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
  >>>>> wrote:
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>> Those only have 100mbps ethernet, correct?  On a 40mhz channel they
  >>>>>> can do 180mbps+ aggregate which is why I've been using the Force110 
for the
  >>>>>> little sites.
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>> On 4/15/2016 11:04 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>> If you dont need gps syc, just do a Epmp 1000 integrated...
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Josh Luthman
  >>>>>> <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
  >>>>>>>
  >>>>>>> Force 180.  It's more gain, very narrow azimuth (great for a CPE).
  >>>>>>> It's the same thing turned 90*.
  >>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>
  >>>>>>> Josh Luthman
  >>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
  >>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
  >>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
  >>>>>>> Suite 1337
  >>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
  >>>>>>>
  >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Brian Sullivan
  >>>>>>> <installe...@foxvalley.net> wrote:
  >>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>> I guess I fell asleep at the ePMP wheel, why would they EOL these?
  >>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>> On 4/14/2016 5:30 PM, George Skorup wrote:
  >>>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>>> We bought a bunch of integrated 5GHz radios and keep them in a safe
  >>>>>>>>> place for this very reason.
  >>>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2016 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
  >>>>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have a suggestion for a small AP antenna?  Previously
  >>>>>>>>>> with Ubnt we would do an NSM5.  This would give us 45*.  The use 
case is
  >>>>>>>>>> just to service a few homes around the corner from the trees.
  >>>>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>>>> The original integrated radios are 30* but they're EOLed
  >>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>>
  >>>>>>>
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>>
  >>>>>
  >>>>
  >>>
  >>
  >


Reply via email to