i just replied to the thread On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
> So by penetration, do you mean LOS range, or signal attenuation through > foliage? > > Another possibility, foliage probably depolarizes the signal, perhaps the > two radios have differing ability to recover the two streams and achieve > full MIMO-B throughput. Although I would expect they would both be relying > on the 802.11 chip processing for this. > > > *From:* Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 4:10 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP > > And I've tried IT Elite dual pol panels, Force 200 2.4, integrated + > reflector for CPEs. Continues to suck. > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > >> I’m thinking more the CPE antennas. >> >> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <par...@cyberbroadband.net> >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:59 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >> >> >> hmm, i will check into that. Pretty sure with ubnt we're using kp >> performance. With epmp, i think it is bundled antennas... >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:50 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >> >> Jay, I suspect the difference you are seeing may be mainly in the >> antennas. 2.4 GHz from any vendor should penetrate the same, the radio >> waves don’t care what brand radio launched them. And I think the >> difference between the platforms will be most evident in low interference >> environment where they can achieve their full modulation and throughput. >> With low SNR, I think it’s kind of like arguing Ferrari vs Porsche for off >> road racing, neither will be able to show off its capabilities. Receiver >> sensitivity and bits/sec/Hz won’t matter. >> >> >> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <par...@cyberbroadband.net> >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >> >> >> Also interested in interference rejection of the pmp450 - is there any >> (in 2.4) >> we are getting better foliage penetration with ubnt 2.4 than epmp 2.4 - - >> and from the performance of >> the epmp 2.4 i wish wish wish it penetrated better! >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Matt <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 2:25 PM >> *Subject:* [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >> >> We have mostly PMP100 and PMP450 deployed. Some Ubiquiti we tried and >> some we inherited as well. Have some ePMP we have tested but so far >> have not deployed more then couple test links. >> >> For those who have tried both ePMP and PMP450 what are the differences >> you have seen in performance? Interference tolerance among others? >> >> For those that have gone with PMP450 over ePMP what was the reasoning? >> >> > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
