Are you talking about the 14.5 or 17.5 dBi yagis from KP?  I would hate to use 
a 6 ft yagi as my standard for all installs, also when going through trees 
especially near the subscriber, experience says higher gain / narrower beam 
isn’t always better.

 

Another thing, what are you setting the antenna gain to in the SM?  In our case 
upstream is often the challenge because the AP sees so much interference, so 
receive gain at the CPE while dialing down the xmt power to maintain +36 dBm 
EIRP may not work.

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 10:03 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

George,
 Myself and another ISP here in Arkansas have been using the new 450i 900 gear 
and for what its worth we have been amazed at 
some of the penetration and numbers we able to see. 
 Using KP sectors and yagis is the ticket.
We have been able to increase marginal shots in upwards of 10+ points or more.

The only gotcha I have with the stuff is the number of clients that can be 
sustained on an AP. 
Which all revolves around Frame Utilization. We have been ok with about 20 subs 
with a 5x5 sustained rate package.
I am sure you could squeeze more by tweaking the sustained and burst.
I used the Capacity planner cambium has for this and it was really close for 
what we see.
 Yes, even through some pine



On 09/24/2016 02:45 PM, George Skorup wrote:

And what happens when the noise floor increases and the eNB can't hear those 
shitty CPEs anymore? Nevermind, that question answered itself.

The boss keeps wanting to try an LTE sector at sites where we have a mile or 
more deep trees (where we know 900 FSK barely works now, not only due to power 
levels but noise floor too). My fear is that it actually does "work" (meaning 
horrible mod levels) and he'll want to run with it. So we'll get what, a couple 
Mbps out of a sector. Sounds a lot like 900 FSK. Sounds a lot like 900 450i 
with a horrible noise floor. So we gain nothing and spent a ton of money. Great 
idea. And we won't end up getting all of the customers off of the 900 anyway, 
that I'm sure.

On 9/24/2016 11:47 AM, Adam Moffett wrote:

In Wimax it's 4x4....I'm pretty sure we'll have 4x4 in LTE as well, but I think 
feature was released only a month or so ago.  We have a few places with split 
sectors, so we'll be able to compare to 2x2.

 

>From what I understand, LTE's frame structure is such that it can hang on to a 
>crummy signal longer than Wimax.  It was explained to me that Wimax puts the 
>synchronization data in the pre-amble which has to be received on every 
>subcarrier, whereas LTE has that data interspersed among the subcarriers, so 
>where your weak wimax CPE sometimes cuts in an out, an LTE CPE in the same 
>conditions can stay connected.   It also has lower mod levels that let it 
>operate right down to the noise floor.  And at least in theory you'll get more 
>throughput than you get in the same conditions on Wimax.

 

I have the same reservations as you about the low mod levels thing.  Just 
because they work doesn't mean you want them.  We're not intentionally 
installing anything weaker than a -80 RSSI right now, so we really ought to be 
ok on that front.

 

-Adam

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com <mailto:geo...@cbcast.com> >

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> 

Sent: 9/23/2016 11:23:57 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

Well, let me ask this. Are you doing 2x2 or 4x4 on the Telrad? Obviously 4x4 
would give a slight advantage.

My whole thing is, OK, it might work through a shit ton of trees. Linked up and 
able to move some traffic is one thing. But a whole bunch of low modulation 
customers on a sector is not worth the investment. LTE, Wimax, 450i 900.. 
whatever it may be.

I know of a Telrad installation where they couldn't make it work. Turned out to 
be interference. They had some guys from Israel come "fix" it. I won't say any 
names, but I now see what they did to get it working. It's in the 3.5 band.. 
because I can see them on my 450's spectrum analyzer. >From multiple sectors on 
multiple towers, so I know what direction it's coming from. And I have no doubt 
they're running it over powered.

Welp, we have a BaiCells demo kit, so we'll see what happens.

On 9/23/2016 9:52 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

We've had Telrad Compact 1000's for around 2.5 years, but they're running Wimax 
firmware because we were replacing older 16e installations.  We have a number 
of sites now that have entirely dual mode CPE so we're about to pull the 
trigger on LTE.  We're installing four LTE base stations next week on brand new 
sites, and assuming those go well we'll upgrade some existing Wimax sites.

 

So yeah, within the next few weeks I'll know more.  I'll definitely report back.

 

It's interesting that you phrase it as "if it works at all."  The issue with 
Wimax has never been it "working", it's just that it comes with a lot of quirks 
and it sucks at administration and troubleshooting.  I'm speaking of Wimax in 
general here, not Telrad specifically....and I've used Wimax from three 
different vendors now.  I have no fear about LTE working.  I am afraid it will 
turn out to be cut from the same cloth as Wimax.

 

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com <mailto:geo...@cbcast.com> >

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> 

Sent: 9/23/2016 8:04:34 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

Aren't you doing Telrad? Please let us know if it works at all.

On 9/23/2016 4:05 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:

I'll let you know in a few weeks.

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From: ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> 

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> 

Sent: 9/23/2016 5:01:02 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

I wonder what LTE would do with the same RSSI.

 

From: Adam Moffett <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>  

Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 2:46 PM

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>  

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

Oh I also have somebody with a -88 who gets about half that.

900 was the last ditch effort for both of these.

With wimax from the same tower we got a big fat nothing at both locations.

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com> >

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> 

Sent: 9/23/2016 4:44:21 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

On the other end of the quality spectrum:

 

Link Test with Bridging


VC

Downlink

Uplink

Aggregate

Packet Transmit

Packet Receive


Actual

Actual


19

6.07 Mbps

1.32 Mbps

7.39 Mbps,  474 pps

821 (410 pps)

128(64 pps)

That's a -85 on a 5mhz channel.  On any wider channel I lose this guy.

 

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "Dave" <dmilho...@wletc.com <mailto:dmilho...@wletc.com> >

To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> 

Sent: 9/23/2016 4:17:36 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers?

 

This is from one of ours


Current Results Status


Stats for LUID: 3   Test Duration: 5   Pkt Length: 1714   Test Direction 
Bi-Directional

RF Link Test


VC

Downlink

Uplink

Aggregate

Packet Transmit

Packet Receive


Actual

Actual


19

26.13 Mbps

6.78 Mbps

32.92 Mbps,  2367 pps

2389 (477 pps)

9450(1890 pps)


Efficiency


Downlink

Uplink


Efficiency

Fragments
count

Efficiency

Fragments
count


Actual

Expected

Actual

Expected


100%

255254

255254

78%

84124

66231


Link Test ran on 03:59:48 01/09/2011 UTC 

Currently transmitting at: 


VC 19 Rate 8X/8X MIMO-B

 

On 09/23/2016 03:12 PM, Bill Prince wrote:

We're looking at doing a forklift on a couple of 900 MHz FSK APs. What are real 
world throughput numbers that any of you pioneers are getting? We would 
probably want to do 10 MHz channels at first, and I would hope that we could 
get > 15 Mbps in download, but maybe I'm being too conservative? 

 

The places we are looking at do not have Smart Meter issues.


 

--

bp

part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com

 

-- 


 

 

 

 

-- 


Reply via email to