Coming from 2.4 Ubnt do you think it would meet or exceed capacity? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jun 7, 2016 2:59 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
> I have tried a few, one short link through trees is still in service, but > if the trees are near the customer it is unimpressive. You can probably > replace any 2.4 FSK customers, but the NLOS ones are going to be 2X or 4X > or MIMO-A, so not taking advantage of the 450 capabilities and eating up > airtime on an expensive platform with probably a 10 MHz channel. > > LOS however it rocks. > > > *From:* Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 07, 2016 1:49 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP > > > Has anyone tried 450 3.65 for near Los situations like this discussion? > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > On Jun 7, 2016 2:46 PM, "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: > >> Take into account the 24-25dBm Tx power on a 2.4 FSK AP vs 22dBm on a 2.4 >> 450 AP. And you'll probably get a better pattern on a sector vs omni. A >> V-pol omni doesn't typically have a horrible pattern though. Except for >> vertical beamwidth. Then you play with electronic downtilt models, etc. So >> it's probably moot as far as Rx power levels go between the two. >> >> We get OK penetration on the 2.4 450 sector we have up. Not so much the >> noise at the tower as it is at the SMs. We're going to get rid of it >> eventually along with all of the other 2.4 shit. It's a dead band just like >> 900 to us now. >> >> On 6/7/2016 1:33 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: >> >> Omni to a sector, of course. You're probably getting more than 2 db >> unless it was a bonkers big omni and super small sector. >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> I have moved from pmp100 to 450 on 2.4ghz. Didn't do a cluster though. >>> Went from a 2.4FSK on a 12db Omni to a two 450 sectors from KP 120 beam >>> width (think 14db) . Was able to hook up every single customer I has on the >>> FSK to the 450 and some were near-LOS. The 450 in 2.4ghz actually has >>> impressively decent nLOS. I think its a lot better than the 3.65 for NLOS. >>> ( I have used all the 450 frequency bands except 900) >>> >>> If you thinking about going 450 in 2.4 and you already have FSK up on >>> 2.4 and nothing abmormal with your noise floor then do it. You'll love it. >>> The 450 is actually better because you can run 10-mhz channels to get >>> around some of the noise in 2.4 vs the FSK which was stuck at 20mhz >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Matt <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> So has anyone moved a PMP100 2.4 cluster too PMP450 2.4 and how did >>>> that go? With PMP100 in 2.4 we do pretty good on near LOS >>>> connections. Only deployed PMP450 in 3.6 and 5ghz so far though. >>>> >>>> >>>> > 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? >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>
