we've been able to go thru a cpl trees at less than 1/2 mile with cambium 450 in 3.65Ghz, thru 1 tree at ~1 mile, thru a branch at greater than 1 mile.
-Sean On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com> wrote: > Josh, > > In my experience the on the 450 - 3.65 is about in the middle of the 5ghz > band and 2.4ghz band for near-LOS capabilities. > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > wrote: > >> 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> >>>> 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? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >
