[AFMUG] 450i LITE AP - 20 SM limit

[Kurt Fankhauser]

Don't know how I missed this at Wispalooza, just seen on streakwave's
website there is a new 450i AP out with a 20sm limit called LITE and can be
upgraded to full capacity with a key upgrade.

Cambium C050045AL02B
5 GHz PMP 450i Connectorized AP FCC LITE

PMP 450i Connectorized Access Point LITE

The LITE version will function exactly as the existing PMP 450i AP but it
will be restricted to having 20 subscribers connected. A key can be
purchased to remove this restriction.

https://streakwave.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=C050045AL02B&eq=&Tp=&o1=0

I can see myself using alot of these! Glad it has a 20 SM limit instead of
10. And there is an integrated 90 degree sector version too.

AWESOME
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] PS Vue Shutting down

[Ken Hohhof]

Looks like "because it was losing money".
https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/29/20938533/sony-playstation-vue-live-tv-st
reaming-shutdown

I suspect a lot of the streaming services lose money.  If you're AT&T or
Disney that may make sense at least in the short term.  Maybe not so much if
you're Sony.  So you try to sell it or you shut it down.


-Original Message-
From: AF  On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 5:29 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: [AFMUG] PS Vue Shutting down

Just got my notice today that VUE is shutting down Jan 20.  Too bad.  I used
a couple of the Live TV services before settling on that one and it was the
best UI of all of them, and had the most channels (at that time).  Wonder
why it didn't work out for them. Or is there some backroom deal where they
shut down and get a cut of someone else's.

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

[AFMUG] PS Vue Shutting down

[Nate Burke]

Just got my notice today that VUE is shutting down Jan 20.  Too bad.  I 
used a couple of the Live TV services before settling on that one and it 
was the best UI of all of them, and had the most channels (at that 
time).  Wonder why it didn't work out for them. Or is there some 
backroom deal where they shut down and get a cut of someone else's.


--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] callsigns for each licensed PTP link

[Daniel White]

And as Tim mentioned earlier it depends on if you are modifying a site 
or getting a new license.


Also if multiple links use the same site you only pay one fee.

I've never seen a coordinator offer a discount for a number of licenses 
in bulk at once.  If you were constantly doing a lot of links though I'm 
sure they would sharpen the pencil so to speak.


photograph  
Daniel White
Co-Founder & Managing Director of Operations
phone: +1 (702) 470-2766
direct:+1 (702) 470-2770

Kurt Fankhauser wrote on 10/28/19 13:29:
Ken, thanks for the heads up on the FCC cost being per site and not 
per path, that is valuable information.


On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:35 PM Ken Hohhof > wrote:


It’s not clear that 25 links is less than 25 times the work of 1
link, but I guess one could ask.

There are also intangibles, like how hard do they work to get all
the links in one sub-band to help you keep down the number of
spares you need to stock.  And to optimize the parameters like
VPOL vs HPOL (I think VPOL is supposed to have less rain fade),
and ACAP vs ACCP vs CCDP/XPIC.  I’d like to think even if they
discounted the price they would still spend just as much time
trying to optimize the parameters for me, but time is money.

*From:* AF mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>> *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett
*Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 1:16 PM
*To:* af@af.afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] callsigns for each licensed PTP link

I did coordination for 25 links at once.  I didn't think to ask
for a discount.

On 10/28/2019 1:39 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

I think we’ve been paying around $500 per path for frequency
coordination and PCNs.

FCC fees will be per site, less for modifications than new. 
If you’re going to license a bunch of paths into the same
site, send all the applications together, the FCC price is the
same for 10 paths into a site as for 1, but if you come back
later, you’ll have to pay for a modification.

I’ve never done 7 at once, I guess it wouldn’t hurt to ask if
they will discount the price a little.

*From:* AF 
 *On Behalf Of *Kurt Fankhauser
*Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 12:03 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 

*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] callsigns for each licensed PTP link

What is going rate for 11ghz freq coordination service? I had
a quote to do 7 links and then on top of their fees there was
FCC filing fees. Thought it was kind of high.

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 3:35 PM Seth Mattinen
mailto:se...@rollernet.us>> wrote:

On 10/25/19 10:19, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> For licensed Point to Point links (11ghz) is it common
practice to get a
> separate FCC call sign for each link or can one call
sign be used to
> have multiple links?
>
> What is the best way to do it? Assuming I would never
sell one of the
> links or transfer a license in the future.


One call sign as long as you keep all your gear within 1
arcsecond of
what the coords on the license are.

-- 
AF mailing list

AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



-- 
AF mailing list

AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Electrical connector issue

[Josh Luthman]

Well that's fantastic to hear and definitely helpful to know.  That makes
things so much easier.

Thanks again for the help!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:32 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> Within reason, pretty much all the ring/spade sizes are available in all
> of the wire sizes.   At least in the 10GA and smaller category.
>
> Of course, at extremes, you have a few issues.   The largest ring
> terminals are hard to find in the smallest gauges and the smallest
> spades/rings are hard to find in the largest gauges.
>
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 7:32 AM Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> This should be perfect!
>>
>> I think I was assuming that like wire nuts there were various
>> ranges/sizes and they didn't interchange.  Local hardware is that way so
>> it's just my mistake for the false assumption.
>>
>> I moved up to 16 gauge since it'll work for both.  No harm in some extra
>> copper.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:08 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Lots of options available:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.amazon.com/Install-Bay-Vinyl-Terminal-Connector/dp/B005V9V00E/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal&qid=1572296452&sr=8-6
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.amazon.com/150-PCS-Ring-Terminals-22-16/dp/B07MY8TK7Q/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal+red&qid=1572296521&sr=8-2
>>>
>>>
>>>  Or look at mcmaster carr if you want something a bit more known:
>>>
>>> https://www.mcmaster.com/spade-terminals
>>> https://www.mcmaster.com/ring-terminals
>>>
>>> Personally I'd split the difference and go with 14 or 16GA just because
>>> it's a bit more rugged than 18GA.  But it sounds like you have to buy one
>>> size or another.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:35 PM Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 I have an ICT charger that limits me to small spades.  These spades
 only go as big as 16 gauge.

 The battery terminals have bigger bolts and the hardware store only has
 10-12 gauge ring terminals that fit.

 I only have a 2a load so gauge isn't a concern but I was thinking 18awg.

 Can anyone help with a suggestion or tips?  Pics to show the size of
 what I'm talking about.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373
 --
 AF mailing list
 AF@af.afmug.com
 http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - Forrest
>>> --
>>> AF mailing list
>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>
>
> --
> - Forrest
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Electrical connector issue

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Within reason, pretty much all the ring/spade sizes are available in all of
the wire sizes.   At least in the 10GA and smaller category.

Of course, at extremes, you have a few issues.   The largest ring terminals
are hard to find in the smallest gauges and the smallest spades/rings are
hard to find in the largest gauges.

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 7:32 AM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> This should be perfect!
>
> I think I was assuming that like wire nuts there were various ranges/sizes
> and they didn't interchange.  Local hardware is that way so it's just my
> mistake for the false assumption.
>
> I moved up to 16 gauge since it'll work for both.  No harm in some extra
> copper.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:08 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> Lots of options available:
>>
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/Install-Bay-Vinyl-Terminal-Connector/dp/B005V9V00E/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal&qid=1572296452&sr=8-6
>>
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/150-PCS-Ring-Terminals-22-16/dp/B07MY8TK7Q/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal+red&qid=1572296521&sr=8-2
>>
>>
>>  Or look at mcmaster carr if you want something a bit more known:
>>
>> https://www.mcmaster.com/spade-terminals
>> https://www.mcmaster.com/ring-terminals
>>
>> Personally I'd split the difference and go with 14 or 16GA just because
>> it's a bit more rugged than 18GA.  But it sounds like you have to buy one
>> size or another.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:35 PM Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have an ICT charger that limits me to small spades.  These spades only
>>> go as big as 16 gauge.
>>>
>>> The battery terminals have bigger bolts and the hardware store only has
>>> 10-12 gauge ring terminals that fit.
>>>
>>> I only have a 2a load so gauge isn't a concern but I was thinking 18awg.
>>>
>>> Can anyone help with a suggestion or tips?  Pics to show the size of
>>> what I'm talking about.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>> --
>>> AF mailing list
>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Forrest
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>


-- 
- Forrest
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[Brian Webster]

The reason they want to know the frequencies is to do an RF interference study 
on things like radio navigation aids and/or Radar systems that might be 
affected. Other times it may be to determine if the structure might cause 
shadows on a radar system or if the tower may cause any detuning or antenna 
pattern alteration to low frequency aids they have in place.

 

When I used to file structures I would add not only the unlicensed bands, but 
also the typical cellular bands. Technically any time a new frequency has been 
added to a tower by any tenant and if the frequency/range and not previously 
noted on the application, the tower owner is required to refile for an updated 
approval. The FAA does not just do studies on a tower to check for airspace 
obstructions, the RF implications are just as important to them. 

 

Of the issues on a NEPA filing that was not completed, you could be in some 
historic preservation area/viewshed. They notify the tribal organizations for 
any possible issues, they many times have their “fee” to run their study (more 
like I won’t file anything and will go away fee).

 

If I was concerned that a NEPA study was not done, the first thing I would look 
at is the ASR number filing in the database. That filing typically has any FFA 
study reference number in the record. If a no hazard determination was issued, 
that file number should have a year it was completed as part of the number. You 
can also search the FAA files to review that document.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 8:08 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

 

I know when I file FAA studies I always pick a single frequncy range in the 
unlicensed spectrum, say 902-9258 or claim 5.65-5.7G. I figure its not their 
business anyway.

 

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 6:23 AM Tim Hardy  wrote:

>From an FAA perspective, purposefully so.  In 2004, they tried a massive power 
>play to take authority from the FCC through Rule change that would have 
>required licensees and applicants to get prior FAA approval for any change or 
>addition to a previously cleared tower.  Industry raised hell, and in 2007 FAA 
>issued this Co-location Policy:

 

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/downloads/external/content/CVCC_FR_2007.pdf

 

Funtimes!

 

On Oct 28, 2019, at 11:03 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:

 

“structure will emit frequencies” seems pretty vague.

 

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

 

Good points. I would suppose that an existing tower is unlikely to have been 
built without it but you never know.

But since the whole discussion started with legal issues that is likely the 
biggest one. It wasn't brought up until later that a 350' tower was close by. 

As you said, the FAA site has a criteria tool that tells you if you have to 
file. Nice catch.

 

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy <  
thardy...@gmail.com> wrote:

Lewis,

 

I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed out 
that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR.  The 200’ requirement is one 
of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice Criteria 
tool here:   

 
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm

 

Here are some other instances where towers of any height can require an ASR: 

 

You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if:

· your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level

· your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed the 
slope ratio

· your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, 
railroad, waterway etc...) and once adjusted upward with the appropriate 
vertical distance would exceed a standard of 77.9(a) or (b)

· your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the 
conditions of the  
 FAA 
Co-location Policy

· your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might 
exceed part 77 Subpart C

· your proposed structure will be in proximity to a navigation facility 
and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception

· your structure will be on an airport or heliport

· filing has been requested by the FAA

Thanks,

Tim

Sent from my iPad

 

On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Lewis Bergman <  
lewis.berg...@gmail.com> wrote:



Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it over 
200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to s

Re: [AFMUG] Electrical connector issue

[Josh Luthman]

This should be perfect!

I think I was assuming that like wire nuts there were various ranges/sizes
and they didn't interchange.  Local hardware is that way so it's just my
mistake for the false assumption.

I moved up to 16 gauge since it'll work for both.  No harm in some extra
copper.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:08 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> Lots of options available:
>
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Install-Bay-Vinyl-Terminal-Connector/dp/B005V9V00E/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal&qid=1572296452&sr=8-6
>
>
> https://www.amazon.com/150-PCS-Ring-Terminals-22-16/dp/B07MY8TK7Q/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=3%2F8+ring+terminal+red&qid=1572296521&sr=8-2
>
>
>  Or look at mcmaster carr if you want something a bit more known:
>
> https://www.mcmaster.com/spade-terminals
> https://www.mcmaster.com/ring-terminals
>
> Personally I'd split the difference and go with 14 or 16GA just because
> it's a bit more rugged than 18GA.  But it sounds like you have to buy one
> size or another.
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:35 PM Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> I have an ICT charger that limits me to small spades.  These spades only
>> go as big as 16 gauge.
>>
>> The battery terminals have bigger bolts and the hardware store only has
>> 10-12 gauge ring terminals that fit.
>>
>> I only have a 2a load so gauge isn't a concern but I was thinking 18awg.
>>
>> Can anyone help with a suggestion or tips?  Pics to show the size of what
>> I'm talking about.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
>
>
> --
> - Forrest
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[Lewis Bergman]

I know when I file FAA studies I always pick a single frequncy range in the
unlicensed spectrum, say 902-9258 or claim 5.65-5.7G. I figure its not
their business anyway.

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 6:23 AM Tim Hardy  wrote:

> From an FAA perspective, purposefully so.  In 2004, they tried a massive
> power play to take authority from the FCC through Rule change that would
> have required licensees and applicants to get prior FAA approval for any
> change or addition to a previously cleared tower.  Industry raised hell,
> and in 2007 FAA issued this Co-location Policy:
>
> https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/downloads/external/content/CVCC_FR_2007.pdf
>
> Funtimes!
>
> On Oct 28, 2019, at 11:03 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
> “structure will emit frequencies” seems pretty vague.
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman
> *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer
>
> Good points. I would suppose that an existing tower is unlikely to have
> been built without it but you never know.
> But since the whole discussion started with legal issues that is likely
> the biggest one. It wasn't brought up until later that a 350' tower was
> close by.
> As you said, the FAA site has a criteria tool that tells you if you have
> to file. Nice catch.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy  wrote:
>
> Lewis,
>
> I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed
> out that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR.  The 200’ requirement
> is one of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice
> Criteria tool here:
> https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm
>
> Here are some other instances where towers of any height can require an
> ASR:
>
> You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if:
>
>- your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level
>- your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed
>the slope ratio
>- your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway,
>railroad, waterway etc...) and once adjusted upward with the appropriate
>vertical distance would exceed a standard of 77.9(a) or (b)
>- your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the
>conditions of the FAA Co-location Policy
>
>- your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might
>exceed part 77 Subpart C
>- your proposed structure will be in proximity to a navigation
>facility and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception
>- your structure will be on an airport or heliport
>- filing has been requested by the FAA
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it
> over 200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone
> else you technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any
> structure regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting
> licensed PTP links and letting people find the tower that might want to
> rent it for instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR,
>
> I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely
> only matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that
> a NEPA isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front
> of you and know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway
> is that the Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No
> ASR needed, no NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing
> the work, hiring experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no
> NEPA was required. It seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all
> the studies and if they come back clean the only place it is recorded is in
> the E-106 study, not the ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The
> tower below had a full NEPA/NHPA
> ASR 1302897
> 
> Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental
> Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. "
> You don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing
> is the same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one
> isn't needed. You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at
> least not the last time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC
> that they can't even underatand why you would say that.
> *Environmental Compliance*
> Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules for
> environmental notice?
> Is the applicant submitting an Environmental Assessment?
> No
> No
> Is another Federal Agency taking responsib

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[Tim Hardy]

From an FAA perspective, purposefully so.  In 2004, they tried a massive power 
play to take authority from the FCC through Rule change that would have 
required licensees and applicants to get prior FAA approval for any change or 
addition to a previously cleared tower.  Industry raised hell, and in 2007 FAA 
issued this Co-location Policy:

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/downloads/external/content/CVCC_FR_2007.pdf 


Funtimes!

> On Oct 28, 2019, at 11:03 PM, Ken Hohhof  wrote:
> 
> “structure will emit frequencies” seems pretty vague.
>  
>  
> From: AF  On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30 PM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer
>  
> Good points. I would suppose that an existing tower is unlikely to have been 
> built without it but you never know.
> But since the whole discussion started with legal issues that is likely the 
> biggest one. It wasn't brought up until later that a 350' tower was close by. 
> As you said, the FAA site has a criteria tool that tells you if you have to 
> file. Nice catch.
>  
> 
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy  > wrote:
>> Lewis,
>>  
>> I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed 
>> out that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR.  The 200’ requirement 
>> is one of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice 
>> Criteria tool here:  
>> https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> Here are some other instances where towers of any height can require an ASR: 
>>  
>> You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if:
>> your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level
>> your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed the slope 
>> ratio
>> your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, 
>> railroad, waterway etc...) and once adjusted upward with the appropriate 
>> vertical distance would exceed a standard of 77.9(a) or (b)
>> your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the conditions of 
>> the FAA Co-location Policy 
>> 
>> your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might exceed part 
>> 77 Subpart C
>> your proposed structure will be in proximity to a navigation facility and 
>> may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception
>> your structure will be on an airport or heliport
>> filing has been requested by the FAA
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Lewis Bergman >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it 
>>> over 200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone 
>>> else you technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any 
>>> structure regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting 
>>> licensed PTP links and letting people find the tower that might want to 
>>> rent it for instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR, 
>>>  
>>> I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely 
>>> only matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that 
>>> a NEPA isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front 
>>> of you and know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway 
>>> is that the Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No 
>>> ASR needed, no NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing 
>>> the work, hiring experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no 
>>> NEPA was required. It seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all 
>>> the studies and if they come back clean the only place it is recorded is in 
>>> the E-106 study, not the ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The 
>>> tower below had a full NEPA/NHPA
>>> ASR 1302897 
>>> 
>>> Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental 
>>> Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. " 
>>> You don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing 
>>> is the same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one 
>>> isn't needed. You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at 
>>> least not the last time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC 
>>> that they can't even underatand why you would say that.
>>> Environmental Compliance
>>> Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules for 
>>> environmental notice?
>>> Is the applicant subm

Re: [AFMUG] 450SMs

[Gino A. Villarini]

Ill have over 50 450D units for sale if anyone is interested


Gino Villarini
Founder/President
@gvillarini
t: 787.273.4143 Ext. 204
m:
[https://image.ibb.co/ctQ7jU/aeronet-logo.png]   
[https://image.ibb.co/noQeyp/inc500.png]   
[https://image.ibb.co/e4pBB9/fb-logo.png]  
[https://image.ibb.co/nxuuW9/insta-logo.png] 
   
[https://image.ibb.co/jhSEW9/in-logo.png] 
 
[https://image.ibb.co/dqqq4U/tw-logo.png] 

[https://image.ibb.co/bAJcjU/yt-logo.png] 

www.aeronetpr.com | Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 
Guaynabo, PR 00968
From: AF  on behalf of SmarterBroadband 
Reply-To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Date: Monday, October 28, 2019 at 7:46 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450SMs

Hi Adam

I have over 100 new 450 Connectorized SM Uncapped. Plus same number of MTI 23 
dBi panels.

Make me an offer if interested.

-Original Message-
From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 8:04 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 450SMs

Okay I haven't paid a lot of attention to PMP450 since I've been in a Telrad 
shop for a few years. It looks like the old style SM was discontinued.

The Old SM + Reflector was said to have 25dbi of gain.

The replacement 450b "high gain" integrated dish is 22dbi.

Are you kidding me? Cambium, why you takin' my db's away bro?



--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[chuck]

I would argue that the tower does not emit frequencies.  At least not RF 
frequencies.

From: Ken Hohhof 
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 4:03 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

“structure will emit frequencies” seems pretty vague.

 

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

 

Good points. I would suppose that an existing tower is unlikely to have been 
built without it but you never know.

But since the whole discussion started with legal issues that is likely the 
biggest one. It wasn't brought up until later that a 350' tower was close by. 

As you said, the FAA site has a criteria tool that tells you if you have to 
file. Nice catch.

 

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy  wrote:

  Lewis,

   

  I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed out 
that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR.  The 200’ requirement is one 
of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice Criteria 
tool here:  
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm

   

  Here are some other instances where towers of any height can require an ASR: 

   

  You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if:

a.. your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level 
b.. your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed the 
slope ratio 
c.. your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, 
railroad, waterway etc...) and once adjusted upward with the appropriate 
vertical distance would exceed a standard of 77.9(a) or (b) 
d.. your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the conditions 
of the FAA Co-location Policy 
e.. your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might exceed 
part 77 Subpart C 
f.. your proposed structure will be in proximity to a navigation facility 
and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception 
g.. your structure will be on an airport or heliport 
h.. filing has been requested by the FAA
  Thanks,

  Tim

  Sent from my iPad





On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Lewis Bergman  wrote:



Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it 
over 200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone else 
you technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any structure 
regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting licensed PTP 
links and letting people find the tower that might want to rent it for 
instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR, 

 

I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely 
only matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that a 
NEPA isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front of 
you and know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway is that 
the Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No ASR needed, 
no NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing the work, 
hiring experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no NEPA was 
required. It seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all the studies 
and if they come back clean the only place it is recorded is in the E-106 
study, not the ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The tower below had 
a full NEPA/NHPA

ASR 1302897

Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental 
Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. " You 
don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing is the 
same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one isn't needed. 
You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at least not the last 
time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC that they can't even 
underatand why you would say that.

Environmental Compliance
   
 
Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules 
for environmental notice?
   Is the applicant submitting an Environmental Assessment?
   
No  
   No  
   
Is another Federal Agency taking responsibility for 
environmental review?
   Does the applicant certify to No Significant Environmental 
Effect pursuant to Section
   
No  
   Yes  
   
Reason for another Federal Agency taking responsibility for 
environmental review
   Basis for Certification
   
 
   Environmental Notification is complete and an Environmental 
Assessment is not required.  
   
Name of Federal Agency
 

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[chuck]

Google Earth is pretty accurate.  I have a centimeter accurate Trimble R8 that 
can get me down to an inch repeatability.  When compared with GE it is always 
under 10 feet and frequently 5 feet.

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:54 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

First you have to take ownership, then you can easily correct the ASR 
coordinates. I use google earth for that as it seems as accurate as anything 
with the exception of a survey. 
If they already have an ASR, you kind of have to keep it for the 200'. The 350' 
you have no choice. If you are buying that one and it needs paint or the lights 
go out you want to take the opportunity to have it changed to reflect the LED 
lights you put on and it is cheaper to buy dual strobe red/white than paint a 
tower.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:51 PM Roland Houin  wrote:

  This site has 2 towers, aprox 50’ apart

  1, 200’ built aprox 1005

  1, 350’ built in 1980’s

  The gps coordinates don’t match the asr (the 350’ is off by 470’), the 200’ 
is off by 3300’

  Thanks for the advice.





  Roland



  From: AF  On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman
  Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 4:44 PM
  To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer



  Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it 
over 200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone else 
you technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any structure 
regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting licensed PTP 
links and letting people find the tower that might want to rent it for 
instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR, 



  I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely only 
matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that a NEPA 
isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front of you and 
know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway is that the 
Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No ASR needed, no 
NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing the work, hiring 
experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no NEPA was required. It 
seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all the studies and if they 
come back clean the only place it is recorded is in the E-106 study, not the 
ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The tower below had a full 
NEPA/NHPA

  ASR 1302897

  Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental 
Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. " You 
don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing is the 
same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one isn't needed. 
You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at least not the last 
time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC that they can't even 
underatand why you would say that.

  Environmental Compliance
 
   
  Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules for 
environmental notice?
 Is the applicant submitting an Environmental Assessment?
 
  No  
 No  
 
  Is another Federal Agency taking responsibility for environmental 
review?
 Does the applicant certify to No Significant Environmental Effect 
pursuant to Section
 
  No  
 Yes  
 
  Reason for another Federal Agency taking responsibility for 
environmental review
 Basis for Certification
 

 Environmental Notification is complete and an Environmental 
Assessment is not required.  
 
  Name of Federal Agency
 Local Notice Date
 

 05/25/2017 
 
  National Notice Date
  
  05/30/2017 
   
   



  Anyway, up to you for what its worth. The bottom line, you are not required 
to do anything if you don't want an ASR. If you do, you have to start playing 
the Feds games.





  On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:30 PM Roland Houin  wrote:

My concern is that there are rumors that this site may not have been 
compliant with fcc requirements.

Tower installed after 2000, no nepa?

Want to make sure that there aren’t any suprises…

Thanks for the advice..



Roland



From: AF  On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 3:13 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer



Funny, when I saw the original post my first thought was: “do whatever 
Lewis says to do”



From: Lewis Bergman 

Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 6:11 PM

To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer



 

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

[chuck]

I have had NEPA take 9 years to finish on some BLM turf.

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 9:44 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

Well, First, an ASR isn't required on anything 200 foot or under. So is it over 
200 foot? If yes and you don't plan on renting space out to someone else you 
technically don't need an ASR. You can get an ASR for almost any structure 
regardless of height. ASR's make some things easier, like getting licensed PTP 
links and letting people find the tower that might want to rent it for 
instance. If it is over 200 foot or already has an ASR,  

I won't bore you with the story but the fact it has no NEPA will likely only 
matter to a carrier. You can actually get an ASR and self certify that a NEPA 
isn't required in about 15 minutes if you have all the info in front of you and 
know what you are doing. The only reason you need a NEPA anyway is that the 
Feds say you need one to get an ASR, which is a Fed thing. No ASR needed, no 
NEPA required. NEPA can be frustrating. I spent months doing the work, hiring 
experts, etc, etc. all to come to the conclusion that no NEPA was required. It 
seems cyclical but the bottom line is you can do all the studies and if they 
come back clean the only place it is recorded is in the E-106 study, not the 
ASR.I'll show you an example of what I mean. The tower below had a full 
NEPA/NHPA
ASR 1302897

Here is the Enviro section. As you can see, it says " Environmental 
Notification is complete and an Environmental Assessment is not required. " You 
don't know it isn't required until you do it, but the effect of doing is the 
same as if you just clicked the box that it isn't required, one isn't needed. 
You can't submit an assessment if one isn't required, at least not the last 
time I did one. Kind of Catch 22 but if you tell the FCC that they can't even 
underatand why you would say that.
Environmental Compliance 
 
Does the applicant request a Waiver of the Commission's rules for 
environmental notice? Is the applicant submitting an Environmental Assessment? 
No   No   
Is another Federal Agency taking responsibility for environmental 
review? Does the applicant certify to No Significant Environmental Effect 
pursuant to Section 
No   Yes   
Reason for another Federal Agency taking responsibility for 
environmental review Basis for Certification 
  Environmental Notification is complete and an Environmental 
Assessment is not required.   
Name of Federal Agency Local Notice Date 
  05/25/2017  
National Notice Date  
05/30/2017  
 


Anyway, up to you for what its worth. The bottom line, you are not required to 
do anything if you don't want an ASR. If you do, you have to start playing the 
Feds games.


On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:30 PM Roland Houin  wrote:

  My concern is that there are rumors that this site may not have been 
compliant with fcc requirements.

  Tower installed after 2000, no nepa?

  Want to make sure that there aren’t any suprises…

  Thanks for the advice..



  Roland



  From: AF  On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
  Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 3:13 PM
  To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer



  Funny, when I saw the original post my first thought was: “do whatever Lewis 
says to do”



  From: Lewis Bergman 

  Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 6:11 PM

  To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 

  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer



  In my experience, lawyers are really good at screwing up deals. But, if you 
are buying an asset, there aren't a lot of legal issues that follow assets 
other than sales taxes. I'm not saying you don't need a lawyer, just that a lot 
of lawyers gum up the negotiations so bad you can't get a deal done. To save 
money and time you should a very well defined idea of what the lawyer is going 
to do for you and communicate that. They aren't experts in everything and they 
charge you for the time it takes them to learn stuff. 



  The last tower I bought from Crown Castle all I got was a bill of sale. No 
contract, no nothing.



  On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:08 AM Roland Houin  wrote:

Does anyone have recommendation for a lawyer etc to handle tower issued.

I’m thinking of purchasing a tower, & want to make sure it’s compliant with 
todays legal issues.



Roland

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com





  -- 

  Lewis Bergman 

  325-439-0533 Cell


--

  -- 
  AF mailing list
  AF@af.afmug.com
  http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

  -- 
  AF mailing list
  AF@af.afmug.com
  http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



-- 

Lewis Bergman 
325-439-0533 Cell


-