2.4FHSS was a different beast, for whatever reason at distance it penetrated better than 900mhz, maybe the higher power, maybe how the frequency hopping worked, I dont know. just sucks it was 1.5mbps. 900mhz failed 50% of the time where 320 would pick them up, and there were just some that only worked on the FHSS, so we are stuck with 3 operational systems that all suck.
A little more power will buy us some time with the 320 where we can deliver a 3/2 and occasional 6/2 reliably until global warming...erpp climate change, burns off all the trees and turns us in the midwest into a desert and we dont have to worry about foliage or rain fade anymore On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > So what are people using to replace their 3.65 WiMAX equipment like > Cambium 320 and Purewave/Mercury? Is Bai Cells the answer? In any case, > it seems like a forklift upgrade. I would like to say some other frequency > band, but what? If not 900 MHz, it seems there is no unlicensed band that > can do what we need. > > My original trip down the WiMAX rabbit hole was actually intended to be a > preliminary step toward licensed 2.5 GHz, until I found out that was not > feasible for us. But now I’ve got a lonely Purewave basestation that I > don’t want to add customers to, I don’t think the latest Mercury help, and > I don’t know what to do with the existing customers. Some are LOS so maybe > the NLOS subs just need to go bye-bye? > > We are using Cambium 450 in 3.65 GHz and it is working out great for us as > a 2.4 GHz replacement, but only for LOS or through a tree or two. Can’t > afford low modulation clients <4X. > > > *From:* That One Guy /sarcasm <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 02, 2016 2:43 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium 320 Revisited > > one of the documents i was reading said 20% throughput loss from extended > range, thats what i was asking about real word experience from, 320 > documentation across the board was always questionable. > I would love to not use it, but 320 was the (dont start the penetration > argument) only thing at distance we could pick customers up through foliage > to get them off 2.4fhss, even 900mhz wouldnt work, I assumed it was wimax > and multipath that allowed it to happen > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Eric Muehleisen <ericm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> See attached link budget sheet. Back in the day, 5%-8% capacity loss was >> the number thrown around with extended range enabled. >> >> IMO, disable extended range and deny those distance subs. You'll increase >> your overall capacity as a result. >> >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:05 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> at 10mhz we get 40 eirp correct? >>> >>> Anyone using the extended range know how much real world sector capacity >>> loss we have? is the aggregate with loss on 10mhz going to be less than the >>> throughput at 7mhz? >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Eric Muehleisen <ericm...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, but there is an extended range config parameter that overcomes >>>> that limitation. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 9:24 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> at 10 mhz isnt the max distance dramatically limited over 7mhz? >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Eric Muehleisen <ericm...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We do it like this... >>>>>> >>>>>> A = 3655 >>>>>> B = 3682 >>>>>> C = 3669 >>>>>> D = 3695 >>>>>> >>>>>> It'll give you at least 1mhz separation between sectors (which is >>>>>> required). >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Paul McCall <pa...@pdmnet.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Can the Cambium 320 radios operate in ABCD fashion (10 Mhz channels >>>>>>> using covering from 3650 to 3700) with 4 Cambium sectors? I know AABB >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> splitters is common and we did some that way, but we had to remove >>>>>>> splitters to get extra gain in some areas. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I seem to recall there was some “edge issues” or something like >>>>>>> that?? We always lock the customer down to a given >>>>>>> frequency/basestation, >>>>>>> for what that’s worth. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Paul McCall, President >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PDMNet, Inc. / Florida Broadband, Inc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 658 Old Dixie Highway >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Vero Beach, FL 32962 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 772-564-6800 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> pa...@pdmnet.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> www.pdmnet.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> www.floridabroadband.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
