Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Steve D]

Heh... I got to troubleshoot an Optaphone last summer.  Absolutely nothing
wrong with the equipment, just a n connector that wasn't sealed properly by
the operators doing their own maintenance or something and took on some
water.  I recall that it had been installed circa 2002 in this particular
application but some documentation on it indicated the hardware was older
than that.  Having zero prior experience I was trying to find any info I
could, don't think I figured out exactly how to read rx levels.

-Steve D

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> We installed Optophones in Santa Ana and Coleman Texas!!!  Damn small
> world
>
> Jaime Solorza
> On Feb 21, 2015 3:13 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:
>
>>   I know a guy that used to modify cordless phones back in about 1990.
>> Garberville California.  His name was Nat.  He could get 5 miles out of
>> those things.  At the time Jim Carlson was selling TVs and hot tubs.  Jim
>> decided to make a higher powered (2 watts) UHF version called the
>> OptaPhone.  I bought one of the first OptaPhones.  Immediately told him how
>> it needed to be improved and then went to work for him.  (that was during
>> one of my many breaks from the Beehive crows).
>>
>>  *From:* Jaime Solorza 
>> *Sent:* Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:27 AM
>> *To:* Animal Farm 
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read
>>
>>  speaking of legal.   I hear the Mennonites in Cuahtemoc Chih have their
>> own long range cordless telephone system using 200=300MHz systems from
>> Senao/Engenius with 100 ft. towers.  they use as two way radio as well.
>>
>>  Jaime Solorza
>> Wireless Systems Architect
>> 915-861-1390
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband
>>> in the 420-450 MHz band.  Might have twice the foliage-penetrating
>>> capability of 900 MHz.
>>>
>>> bp
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>>
>>>  Jaime,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>>>
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>>
>>> Wireless Systems Architect
>>>
>>> 915-861-1390
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

[Josh Luthman]

That's good to hear.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Feb 21, 2015 8:59 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
wrote:

> Thanks Jaime. I only dare because I've enough customer examples to know
> I'm more than safe.
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:49 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> Touche' Patrick... its great when you know what your product can do.
>> Wonder who will take the challenge?   To misquote Ten Bears...your words
>> have iron no paper can hold...
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>> On Feb 21, 2015 6:42 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot
>>> out in 3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at
>>> least twice the distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the
>>> gear. If I do, you ALL taking up the dare put in orders. Deal?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patrick Leary
>>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>>> 727.501.3735
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>>> corporate address]
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

[Patrick Leary]

Thanks Jaime. I only dare because I've enough customer examples to know I'm
more than safe.
On Feb 21, 2015 8:49 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

> Touche' Patrick... its great when you know what your product can do.
> Wonder who will take the challenge?   To misquote Ten Bears...your words
> have iron no paper can hold...
>
> Jaime Solorza
> On Feb 21, 2015 6:42 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
> wrote:
>
>> Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot out
>> in 3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at least twice
>> the distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the gear. If I do,
>> you ALL taking up the dare put in orders. Deal?
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

[Jaime Solorza]

Touche' Patrick... its great when you know what your product can do.
Wonder who will take the challenge?   To misquote Ten Bears...your words
have iron no paper can hold...

Jaime Solorza
On Feb 21, 2015 6:42 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
wrote:

> Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot out
> in 3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at least twice
> the distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the gear. If I do,
> you ALL taking up the dare put in orders. Deal?
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

[Gino Villarini]

450 doesn’t have anything over LTE, I see this more what deployment strategy an 
operator wants to follow:


  1.  Macro type deployment, Lte ,high customer count per site ratio, $$$
  2.  Micro site deployment,450 or wifi based gear, med to low customer count 
per site ratio, low $



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr



From: Patrick Leary 
mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 9:42 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot out in 
3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at least twice the 
distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the gear. If I do, you ALL 
taking up the dare put in orders. Deal?

--
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address 
is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate 
address]

[AFMUG] PMP450 vs. COMPACT shootout dare

[Patrick Leary]

Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot out
in 3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at least twice
the distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the gear. If I do,
you ALL taking up the dare put in orders. Deal?

-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Bill Prince]

The issue was the implied inclusiveness.  That is the way it was sold.

Maybe it could do 70 Mbps.

Maybe it could go 70 miles.

Maybe it could support 70 PMP customers.

But it could not do all 3 at the same time.

Whatcha want Bunky; 70 Mbps, 70 miles, or 70 PMP customers?   Pick one.


bp


On 2/21/2015 2:09 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
I remember one WiMax guy putting on a sales pitch for rural telcos 
probably 10 years ago saying it will so 70 Mbps at 70 Miles for 70 PMP 
customers.  I called BS on him right in the meeting.  Almost got 
ejected for not being polite.  It is true, I was not terribly polite. 

Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Patrick Leary]

You missed this part:

"*We have tested both the Cambium PMP450 product in the past, with minimal
success when dealing with NLOS due to foliage (the link would disappear
after a few hundred meters of NLOS coverage). Our testing so far with the
Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000 outdoor CPE has been excellent. "*

Gino, you've talked to Jorge as well, so you know his deal.

Put it this way, you guys want to organize a foliage-based NLOS shoot out
in 3.65? Do it. I'll provide the gear on my end. If I don't at least twice
the distance of the 450 at the same mod, I'll give you the gear. If I do,
you all put in orders. Deal?



On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Gino Villarini  wrote:

>   Iirc Rory wanted a Telrad vs Cambium 450 shootout… not the 320
>
>
>
>  Gino A. Villarini
> President
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
> www.aeronetpr.com
> @aeronetpr
>
>
>
>   From: Patrick Leary 
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 9:24 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment
>
>   Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread:
>
>  *"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our
> terrain is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests
> throughout our network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450
> product in the past, with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to
> foliage (the link would disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS
> coverage). Our testing so far with the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000
> outdoor CPE has been excellent. We successfully completed our latest field
> testing with most tests taking place 4 miles from the tower/sector (where
> current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), with us testing the limits of the
> base stations coverage with successful connections at 10 miles away on a
> side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with data and VoIP. Testing back to
> back between Cambium and Telrad products on the same tower at the same
> azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels with Telrad’s
> equipment." *- Name Withheld Upon Request
>
>
> --
>   Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>



-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Gino Villarini]

Iirc Rory wanted a Telrad vs Cambium 450 shootout… not the 320



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr



From: Patrick Leary 
mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 9:24 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread:


"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our terrain 
is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests throughout our 
network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450 product in the past, 
with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to foliage (the link would 
disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS coverage). Our testing so far with 
the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000 outdoor CPE has been excellent. We 
successfully completed our latest field testing with most tests taking place 4 
miles from the tower/sector (where current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), 
with us testing the limits of the base stations coverage with successful 
connections at 10 miles away on a side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with 
data and VoIP. Testing back to back between Cambium and Telrad products on the 
same tower at the same azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels 
with Telrad’s equipment." - Name Withheld Upon Request


--
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address 
is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate 
address]

Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Patrick Leary]

The name withheld in that one is because the user would rather not upset
their former vendor, yet. I do not think they've broken the news.

Been a long time coming. I saw things go the other way back in the old
Alvarion days.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 8:28 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Name withheld...
>
> From where I'm looking I haven't seen any one from WISPA or AFMUG speak
> highly about the product publicly.  I'm concerned why.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:24 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
> wrote:
>
>> Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread:
>>
>> *"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our
>> terrain is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests
>> throughout our network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450
>> product in the past, with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to
>> foliage (the link would disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS
>> coverage). Our testing so far with the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000
>> outdoor CPE has been excellent. We successfully completed our latest field
>> testing with most tests taking place 4 miles from the tower/sector (where
>> current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), with us testing the limits of the
>> base stations coverage with successful connections at 10 miles away on a
>> side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with data and VoIP. Testing back to
>> back between Cambium and Telrad products on the same tower at the same
>> azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels with Telrad’s
>> equipment." *- Name Withheld Upon Request
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Mike Hammett]

There have been several, Josh. 

Nathan Stooke liked it to much he is buying $2.3M worth of it. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 7:28:38 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment 


Name withheld... 
>From where I'm looking I haven't seen any one from WISPA or AFMUG speak highly 
>about the product publicly. I'm concerned why. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Feb 21, 2015 8:24 PM, "Patrick Leary" < patrickleary.af...@gmail.com > 
wrote: 




Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread: 



"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our terrain 
is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests throughout our 
network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450 product in the past, 
with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to foliage (the link would 
disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS coverage). Our testing so far with 
the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000 outdoor CPE has been excellent. We 
successfully completed our latest field testing with most tests taking place 4 
miles from the tower/sector (where current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), 
with us testing the limits of the base stations coverage with successful 
connections at 10 miles away on a side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with 
data and VoIP. Testing back to back between Cambium and Telrad products on the 
same tower at the same azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels 
with Telrad’s equipment." - Name Withheld Upon Request 

-- 



Patrick Leary 
Director BD, North America, Telrad 
727.501.3735 
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] 
p atrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] 

Re: [AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Josh Luthman]

Name withheld...

>From where I'm looking I haven't seen any one from WISPA or AFMUG speak
highly about the product publicly.  I'm concerned why.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Feb 21, 2015 8:24 PM, "Patrick Leary" 
wrote:

> Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread:
>
> *"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our
> terrain is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests
> throughout our network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450
> product in the past, with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to
> foliage (the link would disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS
> coverage). Our testing so far with the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000
> outdoor CPE has been excellent. We successfully completed our latest field
> testing with most tests taking place 4 miles from the tower/sector (where
> current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), with us testing the limits of the
> base stations coverage with successful connections at 10 miles away on a
> side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with data and VoIP. Testing back to
> back between Cambium and Telrad products on the same tower at the same
> azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels with Telrad’s
> equipment." *- Name Withheld Upon Request
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>

[AFMUG] COMPACT vs. PMP450 Shootout Comment

[Patrick Leary]

Rory, so this is not buried in the last thread:

*"We have seen exceptional results when testing Telrad’s equipment. Our
terrain is rough at best, abrupt elevation changes with thick forests
throughout our network footprint. We have tested both the Cambium PMP450
product in the past, with minimal success when dealing with NLOS due to
foliage (the link would disappear after a few hundred meters of NLOS
coverage). Our testing so far with the Telrad COMPACT1000 and their CPE7000
outdoor CPE has been excellent. We successfully completed our latest field
testing with most tests taking place 4 miles from the tower/sector (where
current Cambium PMP320 customers reside), with us testing the limits of the
base stations coverage with successful connections at 10 miles away on a
side/backlobe, and over 13 miles away with data and VoIP. Testing back to
back between Cambium and Telrad products on the same tower at the same
azimuth, we found an average of 10dB better RF levels with Telrad’s
equipment." *- Name Withheld Upon Request


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

We installed Optophones in Santa Ana and Coleman Texas!!!  Damn small world

Jaime Solorza
On Feb 21, 2015 3:13 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

>   I know a guy that used to modify cordless phones back in about 1990.
> Garberville California.  His name was Nat.  He could get 5 miles out of
> those things.  At the time Jim Carlson was selling TVs and hot tubs.  Jim
> decided to make a higher powered (2 watts) UHF version called the
> OptaPhone.  I bought one of the first OptaPhones.  Immediately told him how
> it needed to be improved and then went to work for him.  (that was during
> one of my many breaks from the Beehive crows).
>
>  *From:* Jaime Solorza 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:27 AM
> *To:* Animal Farm 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read
>
>  speaking of legal.   I hear the Mennonites in Cuahtemoc Chih have their
> own long range cordless telephone system using 200=300MHz systems from
> Senao/Engenius with 100 ft. towers.  they use as two way radio as well.
>
>  Jaime Solorza
> Wireless Systems Architect
> 915-861-1390
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince  wrote:
>
>>  My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband
>> in the 420-450 MHz band.  Might have twice the foliage-penetrating
>> capability of 900 MHz.
>>
>> bp
>> 
>>
>>
>>  On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:
>>
>>  Jaime,
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>>
>>
>>
>> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> Wireless Systems Architect
>>
>> 915-861-1390
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Rory Conaway]

It’s the best way to deploy Ubiquiti because the APs are inexpensive and the 
processors can’t handle a lot of overhead or users.   You make a lot of new 
friends too because people with APs on their house are the first to call when 
it goes down.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:54 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

They had a microcell vs macrocell seminar at show but I was in Phoenix Contact 
training off site
in 20 words or less what is difference?

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Jason McKemie 
mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>> 
wrote:
The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's 
equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type 
setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen much more consistent 
jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary 
mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com>> wrote:
That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though think the 
latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've never in my 
entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling latency caused them 
problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better than UBNT on that. Our 
first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between 
his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie 
mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>> 
wrote:
Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base Station 
either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is releasing, I 
could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at a lower price - 
this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm sure your equipment 
has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A 
competent operator coming to any given area with your equipment does not equal 
a shut door.

-Jason
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary 
mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your 
market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you 
comfortable.




--
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address 
is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate 
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Except for the fact that gamers will always complain, there's never been a
legitimate complaint. As the customer quote mentioned, his gamer's
performance improved compared to UBNT...even running WiMAX. That's with a
gamer who does several hundred gig a month. That's because the jitter under
WiMAX (and LTE) is almost non-existent, like 1-2ms.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

>   If you never had a latency complaint,  you never served many gamers...
>
>  *From:* Patrick Leary 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:40 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just
> "Powerpointware"?
>
>  That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
> terms of gaming performance.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>>  Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>
>> -Jason
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
>>> comfortable.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>  Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> pmailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
> corporate address]
>



-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Chuck McCown]

If you never had a latency complaint,  you never served many gamers...

From: Patrick Leary 
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:40 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though think the 
latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've never in my 
entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling latency caused them 
problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better than UBNT on that. Our 
first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between 
his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance. 

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie 
 wrote:

  Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base Station 
either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is releasing, I 
could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at a lower price - 
this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm sure your equipment 
has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A 
competent operator coming to any given area with your equipment does not equal 
a shut door.

  -Jason

  On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary 
 wrote:

Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your 
market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you 
comfortable.






-- 

Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
pmailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Chuck McCown]

I know a guy that used to modify cordless phones back in about 1990.  
Garberville California.  His name was Nat.  He could get 5 miles out of those 
things.  At the time Jim Carlson was selling TVs and hot tubs.  Jim decided to 
make a higher powered (2 watts) UHF version called the OptaPhone.  I bought one 
of the first OptaPhones.  Immediately told him how it needed to be improved and 
then went to work for him.  (that was during one of my many breaks from the 
Beehive crows).  

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 11:27 AM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

speaking of legal.   I hear the Mennonites in Cuahtemoc Chih have their own 
long range cordless telephone system using 200=300MHz systems from 
Senao/Engenius with 100 ft. towers.  they use as two way radio as well.   

Jaime Solorza 
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince  wrote:

  My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband in the 
420-450 MHz band.  Might have twice the foliage-penetrating capability of 900 
MHz.


bp


On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:

Jaime,



Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?



What, exactly, can we do with this?



Jaime Solorza

On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html


Jaime Solorza

Wireless Systems Architect

915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

I'm looking forward to their entry. As far as I see it, only two companies
are out there really trying to break the mold. We are defining what it
means to do fixed LTE and they are setting the bar in traditional
unlicensed.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Mimosa will be a contender in the big boy WISP arena when they finally
> release their PtMP. I dunno that UBNT will have the advanced capabilities.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> --
> *From: *"Jason McKemie" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 21, 2015 12:31:04 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just
> "Powerpointware"?
>
> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>
> -Jason
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
>> comfortable.
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Mike Hammett]

Mimosa will be a contender in the big boy WISP arena when they finally release 
their PtMP. I dunno that UBNT will have the advanced capabilities. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Jason McKemie"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 12:31:04 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"? 



Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base Station 
either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is releasing, I 
could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at a lower price - 
this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years. I'm sure your equipment has 
its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly be helpful. A competent 
operator coming to any given area with your equipment does not equal a shut 
door. 


-Jason 

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary < patrickleary.af...@gmail.com 
> wrote: 


Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your 
market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you 
comfortable. 

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Yes. With three sectors, our engineers though prefer A20/B10/A20. With 4
sectors, they prefer A20/B20/A20/B20. We do have 3.65 GHz customers in
denser markets up north doing as much as 8 sectors. Not sure the channel
size being used on those.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 2:51 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

> Can you even use 20mhz channels in 3.65? What about 6 20mhz channels for 3
> sectors per tower (each sector with 2 carriers)? Or is this only realistic
> if 355 comes available ?
> On Feb 21, 2015 11:38 AM, "Stefan Englhardt"  wrote:
>
>> We'll do a test setup with Telrad soon. So I am eager to see it work.
>>
>> But Patick (it's his job) do some powermarketing here so some thoughts.
>>
>> The Compact does 64QAM. 64 QAM is something like 100Mbit/20MHz Channel.
>> So 25Mbit/Subscriber does only scale to some extent with Netflix Users.
>> Higher quality gear like Compact is expected to scale better than cheap
>> wifi-stuff.
>> It can do 2 Channels so 200Mbit is what we expect to see.
>> Talking higher numbers is promising higher LTE Categories/higher
>> Modulation which
>> will/might be implemented with Compact but not with the Compact and the
>> 7000 CPE
>> you buy today. This is what my reps say.
>> Doing Wimax Compact does 2x10MHz Channels. So 100Mbit/s is to be expected
>> (Enabling the second channel is a option to pay for ...). It will deliver
>> higher per/CPE speeds
>> than older wimax gear.
>>
>> Compact needs additional components which WISPs do not like (we want
>> plain layer 2 transport).
>> This components differ between Wimax and LTE. So upgrade from WiMAX to
>> LTE needs some work and money.
>>
>> Comparing e.g. a ePMP or upcoming Mimosa Network to a LTE Network we see
>> at least 3 times the
>> money for the same amount of subscribers with LTE. Mimosa promises some
>> features like
>> beamforming and dual radio that comes close to the Compact and it does
>> 256QAM.
>> At microcells with clear LOS a good .ac radio outperforms a 2x20MHz LTE
>> Radio without problem.
>> Mimosa will do 2x80MHz. 2x40 sounds realistic.
>>
>> Why we want to use the Compact? We need a gear with additional coverage
>> to reach customers we cant
>> reach with 5GHz Gear. Here we expect the Compact to shine. We are happy
>> with Purewave 6600 in this regard.
>> But it seems there is no progress with Purewave (now Mercury).
>>
>>
>>
>> >The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
>> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
>> setup, if for no other reason than price.  >I've seen much more consistent
>> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>> > think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring.
>> > I've never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear
>> > telling latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and
>> > we do better than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at
>> > Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between his Telrad and
>> > COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>> > j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>> >> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and
>> >> Mimosa is releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to
>> >> the end user at a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at
>> >> for many years.  I'm sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS
>> >> capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A competent operator coming
>> >> to any given area with your equipment does not equal a shut door.
>> >>
>> >> -Jason
>> >> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> >> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>> >>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that
>> >>> makes you comfortable.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Patri

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Current CPE is cat. 4, so limited to QAM16 on the UL. I've shared the chart
showing what to expect at given modulations and coding.



The great shipping today will support QAM64 in the DL, as well as MU-MIMO,
which is the most important thing. Not initially, but via software upgrade,
just like current WiMAX COMPACTs have been getting upgraded to LTE. We told
customers we be able to do it and here we are now doing it. It will be the
same with the features on the roadmap.



Every quote going out now -- unless someone wants to give new life to his
320s and still have a smooth path to LTE -- is based on LTE to start. We
have the numbers now very close to what they were under WiMAX.


Re our EPC, we are offering a layer 2 path, even MAC level authentication.

I should note Stefan, North America is leading the LTE transition. Other
markets are behind what we are doing.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Stefan Englhardt  wrote:

> We'll do a test setup with Telrad soon. So I am eager to see it work.
>
> But Patick (it's his job) do some powermarketing here so some thoughts.
>
> The Compact does 64QAM. 64 QAM is something like 100Mbit/20MHz Channel.
> So 25Mbit/Subscriber does only scale to some extent with Netflix Users.
> Higher quality gear like Compact is expected to scale better than cheap
> wifi-stuff.
> It can do 2 Channels so 200Mbit is what we expect to see.
> Talking higher numbers is promising higher LTE Categories/higher
> Modulation which
> will/might be implemented with Compact but not with the Compact and the
> 7000 CPE
> you buy today. This is what my reps say.
> Doing Wimax Compact does 2x10MHz Channels. So 100Mbit/s is to be expected
> (Enabling the second channel is a option to pay for ...). It will deliver
> higher per/CPE speeds
> than older wimax gear.
>
> Compact needs additional components which WISPs do not like (we want plain
> layer 2 transport).
> This components differ between Wimax and LTE. So upgrade from WiMAX to LTE
> needs some work and money.
>
> Comparing e.g. a ePMP or upcoming Mimosa Network to a LTE Network we see
> at least 3 times the
> money for the same amount of subscribers with LTE. Mimosa promises some
> features like
> beamforming and dual radio that comes close to the Compact and it does
> 256QAM.
> At microcells with clear LOS a good .ac radio outperforms a 2x20MHz LTE
> Radio without problem.
> Mimosa will do 2x80MHz. 2x40 sounds realistic.
>
> Why we want to use the Compact? We need a gear with additional coverage to
> reach customers we cant
> reach with 5GHz Gear. Here we expect the Compact to shine. We are happy
> with Purewave 6600 in this regard.
> But it seems there is no progress with Purewave (now Mercury).
>
>
>
> >The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
> setup, if for no other reason than price.  >I've seen much more consistent
> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> > think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring.
> > I've never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear
> > telling latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and
> > we do better than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at
> > Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between his Telrad and
> > COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance.
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> > j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
> >> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and
> >> Mimosa is releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to
> >> the end user at a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at
> >> for many years.  I'm sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS
> >> capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A competent operator coming
> >> to any given area with your equipment does not equal a shut door.
> >>
> >> -Jason
> >> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
> >> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
> >>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that
> >>> makes you comfortable.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[TJ Trout]

Can you even use 20mhz channels in 3.65? What about 6 20mhz channels for 3
sectors per tower (each sector with 2 carriers)? Or is this only realistic
if 355 comes available ?
On Feb 21, 2015 11:38 AM, "Stefan Englhardt"  wrote:

> We'll do a test setup with Telrad soon. So I am eager to see it work.
>
> But Patick (it's his job) do some powermarketing here so some thoughts.
>
> The Compact does 64QAM. 64 QAM is something like 100Mbit/20MHz Channel.
> So 25Mbit/Subscriber does only scale to some extent with Netflix Users.
> Higher quality gear like Compact is expected to scale better than cheap
> wifi-stuff.
> It can do 2 Channels so 200Mbit is what we expect to see.
> Talking higher numbers is promising higher LTE Categories/higher
> Modulation which
> will/might be implemented with Compact but not with the Compact and the
> 7000 CPE
> you buy today. This is what my reps say.
> Doing Wimax Compact does 2x10MHz Channels. So 100Mbit/s is to be expected
> (Enabling the second channel is a option to pay for ...). It will deliver
> higher per/CPE speeds
> than older wimax gear.
>
> Compact needs additional components which WISPs do not like (we want plain
> layer 2 transport).
> This components differ between Wimax and LTE. So upgrade from WiMAX to LTE
> needs some work and money.
>
> Comparing e.g. a ePMP or upcoming Mimosa Network to a LTE Network we see
> at least 3 times the
> money for the same amount of subscribers with LTE. Mimosa promises some
> features like
> beamforming and dual radio that comes close to the Compact and it does
> 256QAM.
> At microcells with clear LOS a good .ac radio outperforms a 2x20MHz LTE
> Radio without problem.
> Mimosa will do 2x80MHz. 2x40 sounds realistic.
>
> Why we want to use the Compact? We need a gear with additional coverage to
> reach customers we cant
> reach with 5GHz Gear. Here we expect the Compact to shine. We are happy
> with Purewave 6600 in this regard.
> But it seems there is no progress with Purewave (now Mercury).
>
>
>
> >The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
> setup, if for no other reason than price.  >I've seen much more consistent
> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> > think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring.
> > I've never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear
> > telling latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and
> > we do better than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at
> > Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between his Telrad and
> > COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance.
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> > j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
> >> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and
> >> Mimosa is releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to
> >> the end user at a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at
> >> for many years.  I'm sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS
> >> capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A competent operator coming
> >> to any given area with your equipment does not equal a shut door.
> >>
> >> -Jason
> >> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
> >> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
> >>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that
> >>> makes you comfortable.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Leary
> > Director BD, North America, Telrad
> > 727.501.3735
> > patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> > patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
> > corporate address]
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://afmug.com/pipermail/af/attachments/20150221/bcfa534c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 11:54:04 -0700
> From: Jaime Solorza 
> To: Animal Farm 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[TJ Trout]

Show me 100w amp that will work on this? Then you need the same amp on the
customer side. These cards are old news
On Feb 21, 2015 11:04 AM, "Philip Rankin"  wrote:

> Paul, Absolutely not legal for any commercial purpose and can only be used
> by a licensed amateur radio operator, not the general public in any way!!!
> I doubt that even the Ham operator can even access the general Internet
> with it legally!  But, as a Ham, and as a tinkerer, it would be really
> interesting to see what 100 watts at 420MHz would do through trees at say,
> 25 or more miles with a decent tower site.  As an experiment, it might give
> a guy a little more insight into our commercially legal operations that we
> all use today.  And then again, it might just be an exercise in futility!
>  :)  I may mess with it some!
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>
>>  Would it be  usable for commercial purposes?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jaime Solorza
>> *Sent:* Saturday, February 21, 2015 1:22 PM
>> *To:* Animal Farm
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read
>>
>>
>>
>> Well if you have a HAM license for this band you can transmit data in the
>> 420 to 450MHz band US or 430 to 450MHz Europe at very high power levels
>> using 5 and 10MHz channels!!!
>>
>>
>>
>> They use an approach used by many to up or down convert a frequency from
>> say 2.4GHz down to 902-928MHz..  eg  .(Shireen, Teletronics, others) using
>> an external UDC or Ubiquiti's 3.65GHz down converted from 5GHz band
>> internally.   Old School one was Solectek taking 902.928MHz NCR WaveLAN
>> signal into a Transverter which gave you three channels at 2.4GHz back in
>> the 90s.   Most modern RF systems use an IF frequency which is up converted
>> to desired one.   This is a source of potential interference if not
>> properly shielded.  simple example is what 100 base LAN connections do to
>> VHF two way radio stations when they are on same tower.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was actually playing around Solecteck Transverter the other
>> day...cleaned it up and going to see if it works.   I only have some  WiLAN
>> 900 MHz radios to test so I will have to attenuate signal since I can't get
>> into the settings of these anymore.   I use them to send a signal and
>> adjust my SAI am surprised they still work
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   Jaime Solorza
>>
>> Wireless Systems Architect
>>
>> 915-861-1390
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>>
>> Jaime,
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>>
>>
>>
>> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>>
>> Wireless Systems Architect
>>
>> 915-861-1390
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Philip J. Rankin
> Wireless Telecommunications Services
> PO Box 24
> Pittsburg, KS  66762
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Stefan Englhardt]

We'll do a test setup with Telrad soon. So I am eager to see it work.

But Patick (it's his job) do some powermarketing here so some thoughts.

The Compact does 64QAM. 64 QAM is something like 100Mbit/20MHz Channel.
So 25Mbit/Subscriber does only scale to some extent with Netflix Users.
Higher quality gear like Compact is expected to scale better than cheap 
wifi-stuff.
It can do 2 Channels so 200Mbit is what we expect to see.
Talking higher numbers is promising higher LTE Categories/higher Modulation 
which
will/might be implemented with Compact but not with the Compact and the 7000 CPE
you buy today. This is what my reps say.
Doing Wimax Compact does 2x10MHz Channels. So 100Mbit/s is to be expected
(Enabling the second channel is a option to pay for ...). It will deliver 
higher per/CPE speeds
than older wimax gear.

Compact needs additional components which WISPs do not like (we want plain 
layer 2 transport).
This components differ between Wimax and LTE. So upgrade from WiMAX to LTE 
needs some work and money.

Comparing e.g. a ePMP or upcoming Mimosa Network to a LTE Network we see at 
least 3 times the
money for the same amount of subscribers with LTE. Mimosa promises some 
features like
beamforming and dual radio that comes close to the Compact and it does 256QAM.
At microcells with clear LOS a good .ac radio outperforms a 2x20MHz LTE Radio 
without problem.
Mimosa will do 2x80MHz. 2x40 sounds realistic.

Why we want to use the Compact? We need a gear with additional coverage to 
reach customers we cant
reach with 5GHz Gear. Here we expect the Compact to shine. We are happy with 
Purewave 6600 in this regard.
But it seems there is no progress with Purewave (now Mercury).



>The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's 
>equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type 
>setup, if for no other reason than price.  >I've seen much more consistent 
>jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary < patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring.
> I've never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear
> telling latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and
> we do better than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at
> Unggoy in Iowa) even had his link scored between his Telrad and
> COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms of gaming performance.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and
>> Mimosa is releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to
>> the end user at a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at
>> for many years.  I'm sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS
>> capabilities would certainly be helpful.  A competent operator coming
>> to any given area with your equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>
>> -Jason
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that
>>> makes you comfortable.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
> corporate address]
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://afmug.com/pipermail/af/attachments/20150221/bcfa534c/attachment-0001.html>

--

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 11:54:04 -0700
From: Jaime Solorza 
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just
"Powerpointware"?
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

They had a microcell vs macrocell seminar at show but I was in Phoenix Contact 
training off site
in 20 words or less what is difference?

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Jason McKemie < 
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.
> Telrad's equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a
> macrocell-type setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen
> much more consistent jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell 
> applica

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Philip Rankin]

Paul, Absolutely not legal for any commercial purpose and can only be used
by a licensed amateur radio operator, not the general public in any way!!!
I doubt that even the Ham operator can even access the general Internet
with it legally!  But, as a Ham, and as a tinkerer, it would be really
interesting to see what 100 watts at 420MHz would do through trees at say,
25 or more miles with a decent tower site.  As an experiment, it might give
a guy a little more insight into our commercially legal operations that we
all use today.  And then again, it might just be an exercise in futility!
 :)  I may mess with it some!


On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Paul McCall  wrote:

>  Would it be  usable for commercial purposes?
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jaime Solorza
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 21, 2015 1:22 PM
> *To:* Animal Farm
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read
>
>
>
> Well if you have a HAM license for this band you can transmit data in the
> 420 to 450MHz band US or 430 to 450MHz Europe at very high power levels
> using 5 and 10MHz channels!!!
>
>
>
> They use an approach used by many to up or down convert a frequency from
> say 2.4GHz down to 902-928MHz..  eg  .(Shireen, Teletronics, others) using
> an external UDC or Ubiquiti's 3.65GHz down converted from 5GHz band
> internally.   Old School one was Solectek taking 902.928MHz NCR WaveLAN
> signal into a Transverter which gave you three channels at 2.4GHz back in
> the 90s.   Most modern RF systems use an IF frequency which is up converted
> to desired one.   This is a source of potential interference if not
> properly shielded.  simple example is what 100 base LAN connections do to
> VHF two way radio stations when they are on same tower.
>
>
>
> I was actually playing around Solecteck Transverter the other
> day...cleaned it up and going to see if it works.   I only have some  WiLAN
> 900 MHz radios to test so I will have to attenuate signal since I can't get
> into the settings of these anymore.   I use them to send a signal and
> adjust my SAI am surprised they still work
>
>
>
>
>   Jaime Solorza
>
> Wireless Systems Architect
>
> 915-861-1390
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Paul McCall  wrote:
>
> Jaime,
>
>
>
> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>
>
>
> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>
>
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> Wireless Systems Architect
>
> 915-861-1390
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Philip J. Rankin
Wireless Telecommunications Services
PO Box 24
Pittsburg, KS  66762

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Jason McKemie]

Moving the AP closer to the user vs. trying to serve customers further out
from a central site. The microcell model works a lot better than macrocell
when it comes to unlicensed IMO.  There are also many different levels of
micro and macro cells.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> They had a microcell vs macrocell seminar at show but I was in Phoenix
> Contact training off site
> in 20 words or less what is difference?
>
> Jaime Solorza
> Wireless Systems Architect
> 915-861-1390
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
>> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
>> setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen much more consistent
>> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>>> terms of gaming performance.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>>
 Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
 Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
 releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
 a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
 sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
 be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
 equipment does not equal a shut door.

 -Jason
 On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
> comfortable.




>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patrick Leary
>>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>>> 727.501.3735
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>>> corporate address]
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Here are the jitter quotes I was looking fro from Daniel Moore:

"There is a higher latency on the WiMAX platform. With LTE we see an
average of 20 ms added vs 40-60 ms with WiMAX. That said- the latency &
jitter is much more stable than our WIFI gear. Almost no jitter on both
WiMAX and LTE. With UBNT we see 5-8 ms of jitter. 1-2 on WiMAX & LTE."


"We haven’t used the built in VoIP client on any CPE’s yet. We have tested
VoIP services behind a Telrad CPE on both WiMAX & LTE- so far we haven’t
seen a difference in quality over our 5 Ghz network. We have however
noticed a huge improvement in online gaming- we have found that the
scheduler is great at keeping a connection consistent in terms of ping and
jitter which is important for both services.  Pingtest.net actually rates
our Telrad clients at a higher quality than our legacy clients connected
using other gear. We will be testing the built in VoIP clients soon, I can
report our feedback at a later point in that aspect."




On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Jason McKemie <
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
> setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen much more consistent
> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>> terms of gaming performance.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
 market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
 comfortable.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>
>


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

No one is saying f'off but you. I responding to your disbelief. I'm never
going to convince everyone, nor will we ever be a fit for everyone, nor do
we want everyone. Right now we are attracting a pretty good crowd, mostly
consisting of long time Cambium users. And I mean major WISPs; lots of
them. They'll be outing themselves as they move beyond trials. Some already
have. You don't think Cambium's sudden promo re paying you to upgrade from
320 to 450 is an accident or simple act of good will do you?

In any event, the question of affordability is not one I can answer for
you. I can only inform what WE think and share the feedback of others.
Making the economic works is just as much a "it depends" reality on your
side as is my not having a stock number for a "system" I can quote you.
Notice though I have tried anyway and I've been clear on CPE numbers; those
are simple enough to provide. I have lots of small WISPs entering trials
and a few in deployment. When BridgeNet in Ocala, FL pulled the trigger,
they only have about 200 UBNT up. They tried that and all the usual
suspects for almost 2 years to no success. Then they tried the COMPACT and
it completely altered their entire business model.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:48 PM, That One Guy 
wrote:

> So the solution to the price points and the legitimate concerns of smaller
> operators is not to address them directly, but rather to insult prospective
> customers? I understand, a customer concerned about cost is likely not
> going to be a good long term prospect when selling a higher ended product
> with an associated price point. But to just simply not address the concerns
> raised from a technical or diplomatic standpoint, rather just dismissively
> insult that little guy is cause for alarm. Is that the stance of the entire
> company or a single rep?
> UBNT, the thorn in every manufacturers side vehemently defends their
> product, right or wrong, and tries to win over their customers
> Cambium, the dominant manufacturer in the WISP market will make contact
> and resolve reservations, either with good or bad final outcomes.
> Telrad apparently is going to just tell consumers to fuck off.
>
> I dont mind being told to fuck off, if you have a product that works as
> advertised. When we were an Alvarion shop, Alvarion told me to fuck off on
> more than one occasion. But then again, their products had their pudding
> sitting right on the table at the time.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Meant to say between his Telrad gear and his UBNT links.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>>> terms of gaming performance.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>>
 Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
 Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
 releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
 a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
 sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
 be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
 equipment does not equal a shut door.

 -Jason
 On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
> comfortable.




>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patrick Leary
>>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>>> 727.501.3735
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>>> corporate address]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>
>
>
> --
> All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
> parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
>



-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telr

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Jaime Solorza]

They had a microcell vs macrocell seminar at show but I was in Phoenix
Contact training off site
in 20 words or less what is difference?

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Jason McKemie <
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
> equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
> setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen much more consistent
> jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>> terms of gaming performance.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
 market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
 comfortable.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Jason McKemie]

The more I do wireless, the more I prefer the microcell model.  Telrad's
equipment certainly seems like something you would use in a macrocell-type
setup, if for no other reason than price.  I've seen much more consistent
jitter when using Ubiquiti in a microcell vs macrocell application.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
> terms of gaming performance.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>
>> -Jason
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
>>> comfortable.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[That One Guy]

So the solution to the price points and the legitimate concerns of smaller
operators is not to address them directly, but rather to insult prospective
customers? I understand, a customer concerned about cost is likely not
going to be a good long term prospect when selling a higher ended product
with an associated price point. But to just simply not address the concerns
raised from a technical or diplomatic standpoint, rather just dismissively
insult that little guy is cause for alarm. Is that the stance of the entire
company or a single rep?
UBNT, the thorn in every manufacturers side vehemently defends their
product, right or wrong, and tries to win over their customers
Cambium, the dominant manufacturer in the WISP market will make contact and
resolve reservations, either with good or bad final outcomes.
Telrad apparently is going to just tell consumers to fuck off.

I dont mind being told to fuck off, if you have a product that works as
advertised. When we were an Alvarion shop, Alvarion told me to fuck off on
more than one occasion. But then again, their products had their pudding
sitting right on the table at the time.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Patrick Leary <
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Meant to say between his Telrad gear and his UBNT links.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>> terms of gaming performance.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
 market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
 comfortable.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>



-- 
All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not
use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Here is  Daniel Moore quote from when he first fired up his new gear:
"

We deployed two Compacts this week, different towers.  Our first two
installations were completed tonight on Tower 1, here are the results---

 The first- customer is aprox 6 miles from the base station. Behind a small
hill. To make things better, on top of the hill? -- A housing complex-full
of HOMES & TREES! The result? -74.

The second- customer is apox 2.5 miles from the base station. Lives on the
far east side of a golf course. Our tower is a mile to the west side of
said golf course. The Telrad result? -70, full modulation.

 I am pretty much speechless at this point. I have been giggling like a
little school girl all night. I can’t even sleep, I just want to get back
out in the field and install 10 more of these things so I can continue to
wrap my head around how any of this is working.

 We have a list of well over 100 customers that we have turned down
before—this list comprises of customers that want calls when we know that
this “new system” will “work for us”. I’m pretty sure that time is now. Our
bank account is about to scream, for good reasons!"

.Unicorns. I love unicorns.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Patrick Leary  wrote:

> Meant to say between his Telrad gear and his UBNT links.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
>> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
>> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
>> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
>> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
>> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
>> terms of gaming performance.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
>> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
 market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
 comfortable.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Leary
>> Director BD, North America, Telrad
>> 727.501.3735
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
>> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my
>> corporate address]
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>



-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Meant to say between his Telrad gear and his UBNT links.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Patrick Leary  wrote:

> That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though
> think the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've
> never in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling
> latency caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better
> than UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even
> had his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in
> terms of gaming performance.
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
>> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
>> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
>> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
>> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
>> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
>> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>>
>> -Jason
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
>>> comfortable.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Leary
> Director BD, North America, Telrad
> 727.501.3735
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
> patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
> address]
>



-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

That just me drinking the Koolaid and believing it Jason. I do though think
the latency ding Moto users have always done is a red herring. I've never
in my entire career had an actual operator using my gear telling latency
caused them problems. The issue is really jitter, and we do better than
UBNT on that. Our first LTE beta Daniel Moore at Unggoy in Iowa) even had
his link scored between his Telrad and COMPACT and the Telrad won in terms
of gaming performance.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jason McKemie <
j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:

> Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
> Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
> releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
> a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
> sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
> be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
> equipment does not equal a shut door.
>
> -Jason
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
>> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
>> comfortable.
>
>
>
>


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Jason McKemie]

Ok, with all due respect, this is BS (and I'm not talking about Base
Station either). With some of the new gear that Ubiquiti has and Mimosa is
releasing, I could get more bandwidth and lower latency to the end user at
a lower price - this is what WISPs have excelled at for many years.  I'm
sure your equipment has its place and the NLoS capabilities would certainly
be helpful.  A competent operator coming to any given area with your
equipment does not equal a shut door.

-Jason
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Patrick Leary <
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Know this though, should a competent COMPACT operator come into your
> market...your goose is cooked. Until then, hold any opinion that makes you
> comfortable.

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

speaking of legal.   I hear the Mennonites in Cuahtemoc Chih have their own
long range cordless telephone system using 200=300MHz systems from
Senao/Engenius with 100 ft. towers.  they use as two way radio as well.

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince  wrote:

>  My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband
> in the 420-450 MHz band.  Might have twice the foliage-penetrating
> capability of 900 MHz.
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:
>
>  Jaime,
>
>
>
> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>
>
>
> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>
>
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> Wireless Systems Architect
>
> 915-861-1390
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Paul McCall]

Would it be  usable for commercial purposes?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 1:22 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

Well if you have a HAM license for this band you can transmit data in the 420 
to 450MHz band US or 430 to 450MHz Europe at very high power levels using 5 and 
10MHz channels!!!

They use an approach used by many to up or down convert a frequency from say 
2.4GHz down to 902-928MHz..  eg  .(Shireen, Teletronics, others) using an 
external UDC or Ubiquiti's 3.65GHz down converted from 5GHz band internally.   
Old School one was Solectek taking 902.928MHz NCR WaveLAN signal into a 
Transverter which gave you three channels at 2.4GHz back in the 90s.   Most 
modern RF systems use an IF frequency which is up converted to desired one.   
This is a source of potential interference if not properly shielded.  simple 
example is what 100 base LAN connections do to VHF two way radio stations when 
they are on same tower.

I was actually playing around Solecteck Transverter the other day...cleaned it 
up and going to see if it works.   I only have some  WiLAN 900 MHz radios to 
test so I will have to attenuate signal since I can't get into the settings of 
these anymore.   I use them to send a signal and adjust my SAI am surprised 
they still work


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Paul McCall 
mailto:pa...@pdmnet.net>> wrote:
Jaime,

Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?

What, exactly, can we do with this?


Jaime Solorza
On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

Well if you have a HAM license for this band you can transmit data in the
420 to 450MHz band US or 430 to 450MHz Europe at very high power levels
using 5 and 10MHz channels!!!

They use an approach used by many to up or down convert a frequency from
say 2.4GHz down to 902-928MHz..  eg  .(Shireen, Teletronics, others) using
an external UDC or Ubiquiti's 3.65GHz down converted from 5GHz band
internally.   Old School one was Solectek taking 902.928MHz NCR WaveLAN
signal into a Transverter which gave you three channels at 2.4GHz back in
the 90s.   Most modern RF systems use an IF frequency which is up converted
to desired one.   This is a source of potential interference if not
properly shielded.  simple example is what 100 base LAN connections do to
VHF two way radio stations when they are on same tower.

I was actually playing around Solecteck Transverter the other day...cleaned
it up and going to see if it works.   I only have some  WiLAN 900 MHz
radios to test so I will have to attenuate signal since I can't get into
the settings of these anymore.   I use them to send a signal and adjust my
SAI am surprised they still work


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Paul McCall  wrote:

>  Jaime,
>
>
>
> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>
>
>
> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>
>
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> Wireless Systems Architect
>
> 915-861-1390
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jason McKemie]

And not legal for commercial use I'm sure...

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Bill Prince  wrote:

>  My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband
> in the 420-450 MHz band.  Might have twice the foliage-penetrating
> capability of 900 MHz.
>
> bp
> 
>
>
> On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:
>
>  Jaime,
>
>
>
> Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?
>
>
>
> What, exactly, can we do with this?
>
>
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>
> Jaime Solorza
>
> Wireless Systems Architect
>
> 915-861-1390
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Bill Prince]

My take on it is that it is a "semi-off-the-shelf" way to do broadband 
in the 420-450 MHz band. Might have twice the foliage-penetrating 
capability of 900 MHz.


bp


On 2/21/2015 9:59 AM, Paul McCall wrote:


Jaime,

Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?

What, exactly, can we do with this?

Jaime Solorza

On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" > wrote:


http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html

Jaime Solorza

Wireless Systems Architect

915-861-1390 

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Paul McCall]

Jaime,

Can you put this in a more simplified explanation please?

What, exactly, can we do with this?


Jaime Solorza
On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

yeppers...I think our military uses something similar in 300MHz band using
Atheros based transceiver and UDC from ???.   I said too much

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Philip Rankin 
wrote:

> As an old time Ham Operator, it would be pretty cool to operate a data
> station at 420MHz using 100 watts or more!  I intend to research it more.
> On Feb 21, 2015 10:53 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> Well I found it interesting
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>>> Jaime Solorza
>>> Wireless Systems Architect
>>> 915-861-1390
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Patrick Leary]

Ryan, that should be the very worst case on the CPE and that's all in (no
caps of course), except for the cable. It even includes the mount bracket,
as shown circled here:

[image: Inline image 1]

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Ryan Ray  wrote:

> Assuming we did have the fiber what would be an accurate number for
> everything needed to hang a bts. Earlier in your comments you said about
> $275 per cpe?
>
> Sent while mobile
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2015, at 5:07 AM, Patrick Leary 
> wrote:
>
> Neighborhood style micro pop would be doable. Not sure the economics would
> work  though and that's be a lot of backhaul unless you had fiber hung, ala
> the cable cos, which could well support a strand-mounted micro pop model.
> $8k won't get you there either; that would be too good to be true.
> On Feb 21, 2015 2:05 AM, "Ryan Ray"  wrote:
>
>> Also could this be something interesting for a neighbourhood style
>> install? Place a BTS nearby and cover 4km and have 400Mb/s to use for ~$8k?
>> Just seems too good to be true really.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Ryan Ray  wrote:
>>
>>> How many CPE's can one BTS handle? Can you post a webinar showing a
>>> system setup and an overview of the BTS and the CPE? Any special licensing
>>> requirements for Canada or the US? Any QoS on board / OOB management?
>>>
>>> If I wanted to buy today how would I do that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Patrick Leary <
>>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Yes. Yes, you can:

 Beamwidth of the sectors? Your call TJ. Our preference is Alpha
 Wireless brand antennas. Expensive. Very high quality with excellent front
 to back ratios. Their 4 port dual pol.dual slant 65 degree antennas roll
 off nicely at 3dB and essentially provide a 120 pattern. Wanna see what a
 really nice F to B looks like? We like the 65s, because at 18dBi they
 maximize power density and, as always, are simply good design because they
 minimize the ambient noise they hear.:
 


 Max range?:

 Currently our latest LTE rev has its ranging up to 39 km before it
 losing timing. At 30 km (18 miles) we can do full modulation with true (as
 in Fresnel-based true) LOS. So all day long -75 at 30 km LOS. NLOS" we all
 know the only thing in common with our understanding is the inability to
 see the other side due to "trees." How many trees, the trajectory, the tree
 type, etc. defines the reality. THAT SAID, what we've learned is the
 WHATEVER you can do with 900 where YOU are, you can do a tab better in
 range with our 3.65 GHz and at much higher capacity. Now that might mean
 you hit a -83 with your 900 MHz and we are -91, but even at that I'm doing
 over 7 Mbps DL.

 Total per sector throughput?:

 As it ships today, about 100 Mbps in a 20 MHz channel. When both
 carriers are active, 200 Mbps. In about 15 months, if connecting in higher
 mods, that will double with MU-MIMO, so 400 Mbps per BTS, or 1,200 Mbps in
 a 3 BTS tower.

  Msrp or street price aprox?:

 Street price? Maybe about $6,800 per BTS, but that's not the full
 answer, which is more complex. I'm happy to do a dedicated one-on-one
 webinar with anyone, or all of you.

 Availability? :

 Terrible right now. Our increase in business has hurt availability and
 our channels are minimal. All our guys are trying to scale to meet the new
 demand, but it's hell catching up. Our largest partner has seen his
 business increase over 75% in 3 months. We just brought on ISP Supplies;
 they've been great, doing every single thing they said they'd do. They'll
 be scaling up shortly.

 On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 8:26 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

> Can we get some basic info on this system ? Beamwidth of the sectors ?
> Max range ?, total per sector throughput, msrp or street price aprox?
> Availability?
> On Feb 20, 2015 5:11 PM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> I see I should have paid attention in math class.  Lol.  I am
>> familiar with radios going down to -125dbm from SCADA work.  I had an SA
>> which dug down to -135it makes sense.
>>
>> Jaime Solorza
>> On Feb 20, 2015 3:14 PM, "Patrick Leary" <
>> patrickleary.af...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's just the spec Jaime. Nothing to do with LTE on that front. 4x4
>>> MIMO adds 3 dB to the uplink. Then, our sensitivity is crazy. We are 
>>> -75 at
>>> QAM64 5/6. That's about 8dB better than most stuff at the same mod and
>>> coding, so that 8 dB + the 3 dB on the UL due to 4x4 and that's where 
>>> much
>>> of the NLOS is coming from. The other is power. We are 30 dBm PER PORT, 
>>> so
>>> 36 dBm in 4x4. That means we can use most any antenna and get maximum 
>>> power
>>> density. In fact, it'd be rare where you would not have to turn down the
>>> power t

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Philip Rankin]

As an old time Ham Operator, it would be pretty cool to operate a data
station at 420MHz using 100 watts or more!  I intend to research it more.
On Feb 21, 2015 10:53 AM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

> Well I found it interesting
>
> Jaime Solorza
> On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza" 
> wrote:
>
>> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
>> Jaime Solorza
>> Wireless Systems Architect
>> 915-861-1390
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Grail or Gauntlet? ...or Maybe Just "Powerpointware"?

[Ryan Ray]

Assuming we did have the fiber what would be an accurate number for everything 
needed to hang a bts. Earlier in your comments you said about $275 per cpe?

Sent while mobile


> On Feb 21, 2015, at 5:07 AM, Patrick Leary  
> wrote:
> 
> Neighborhood style micro pop would be doable. Not sure the economics would 
> work  though and that's be a lot of backhaul unless you had fiber hung, ala 
> the cable cos, which could well support a strand-mounted micro pop model. $8k 
> won't get you there either; that would be too good to be true.
> 
>> On Feb 21, 2015 2:05 AM, "Ryan Ray"  wrote:
>> Also could this be something interesting for a neighbourhood style install? 
>> Place a BTS nearby and cover 4km and have 400Mb/s to use for ~$8k? Just 
>> seems too good to be true really.
>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Ryan Ray  wrote:
>>> How many CPE's can one BTS handle? Can you post a webinar showing a system 
>>> setup and an overview of the BTS and the CPE? Any special licensing 
>>> requirements for Canada or the US? Any QoS on board / OOB management?
>>> 
>>> If I wanted to buy today how would I do that?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Patrick Leary 
  wrote:
 Yes. Yes, you can:
 
 Beamwidth of the sectors? Your call TJ. Our preference is Alpha Wireless 
 brand antennas. Expensive. Very high quality with excellent front to back 
 ratios. Their 4 port dual pol.dual slant 65 degree antennas roll off 
 nicely at 3dB and essentially provide a 120 pattern. Wanna see what a 
 really nice F to B looks like? We like the 65s, because at 18dBi they 
 maximize power density and, as always, are simply good design because they 
 minimize the ambient noise they hear.:
 
 
 
 Max range?:
 
 Currently our latest LTE rev has its ranging up to 39 km before it losing 
 timing. At 30 km (18 miles) we can do full modulation with true (as in 
 Fresnel-based true) LOS. So all day long -75 at 30 km LOS. NLOS" we all 
 know the only thing in common with our understanding is the inability to 
 see the other side due to "trees." How many trees, the trajectory, the 
 tree type, etc. defines the reality. THAT SAID, what we've learned is the 
 WHATEVER you can do with 900 where YOU are, you can do a tab better in 
 range with our 3.65 GHz and at much higher capacity. Now that might mean 
 you hit a -83 with your 900 MHz and we are -91, but even at that I'm doing 
 over 7 Mbps DL.
 
 Total per sector throughput?:
 
 As it ships today, about 100 Mbps in a 20 MHz channel. When both carriers 
 are active, 200 Mbps. In about 15 months, if connecting in higher mods, 
 that will double with MU-MIMO, so 400 Mbps per BTS, or 1,200 Mbps in a 3 
 BTS tower.
 
  Msrp or street price aprox?:
 
 Street price? Maybe about $6,800 per BTS, but that's not the full answer, 
 which is more complex. I'm happy to do a dedicated one-on-one webinar with 
 anyone, or all of you.
 
 Availability? :
 
 Terrible right now. Our increase in business has hurt availability and our 
 channels are minimal. All our guys are trying to scale to meet the new 
 demand, but it's hell catching up. Our largest partner has seen his 
 business increase over 75% in 3 months. We just brought on ISP Supplies; 
 they've been great, doing every single thing they said they'd do. They'll 
 be scaling up shortly. 
 
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 8:26 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:
 
> Can we get some basic info on this system ? Beamwidth of the sectors ? 
> Max range ?, total per sector throughput, msrp or street price aprox? 
> Availability? 
> 
>> On Feb 20, 2015 5:11 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  
>> wrote:
>> I see I should have paid attention in math class.  Lol.  I am familiar 
>> with radios going down to -125dbm from SCADA work.  I had an SA which 
>> dug down to -135it makes sense.  
>> 
>> Jaime Solorza
>> 
>>> On Feb 20, 2015 3:14 PM, "Patrick Leary"  
>>> wrote:
>>> It's just the spec Jaime. Nothing to do with LTE on that front. 4x4 
>>> MIMO adds 3 dB to the uplink. Then, our sensitivity is crazy. We are 
>>> -75 at QAM64 5/6. That's about 8dB better than most stuff at the same 
>>> mod and coding, so that 8 dB + the 3 dB on the UL due to 4x4 and that's 
>>> where much of the NLOS is coming from. The other is power. We are 30 
>>> dBm PER PORT, so 36 dBm in 4x4. That means we can use most any antenna 
>>> and get maximum power density. In fact, it'd be rare where you would 
>>> not have to turn down the power to meet the FCC's 43 dB EIRP at 20 MHz 
>>> in 3.65 GHz. Compare that to those with only 22 dBm per port and only 
>>> 2x2, so about 25 dBm max output power. Not a lot of choice there 
>>> that'll still let you get even to FCC max.
>>> 
 On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 a

Re: [AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

Well I found it interesting

Jaime Solorza
On Feb 21, 2015 8:44 AM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

> http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
> Jaime Solorza
> Wireless Systems Architect
> 915-861-1390
>

[AFMUG] Info for Telrad COMPACT FCC filing in 3.65 GHz LTE

[Patrick Leary]

I was advised to post this info. This would be a typical case, assuming the
4-port 65 degree antenna.


Antenna manufacturer: Alpha Wireless

Antenna Model Number: AW3023

Antenna gain: 18.0 dBi

Beamwidth: 65°

Azimuth: 70.0°

Polarization: Dual polarity, dual slant, +/- 45°

Elevation angle: out of the box -4.0°

Transmitter Model Number/FCC ID Number: ARA-COMPACT3X

Transmit range: 30 km

Transmitter Emission Designator: 10M0W7D

EIRP: 30 dBm per port

Modulation Scheme: OFDM

Transmission Method or Protocol (i.e. OFDM):  LTE


-- 
Patrick Leary
Director BD, North America, Telrad
727.501.3735
patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG]
patrick.le...@telrad.com  [this is my corporate
address]

[AFMUG] Interesting read

[Jaime Solorza]

http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/dl435/index.html
Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] FS: Canopy FSK 5.2 and 5.4 SMs

[Daniel Gerlach]

yes

2015-02-21 7:36 GMT+01:00 Kurt Fankhauser :
> $5 per radio?
>
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
>
> Wavelinc Communications
>
> P.O. Box 126
>
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>
> http://www.wavelinc.com
>
> tel. 419-562-6405
>
> fax. 419-617-0110
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Daniel Gerlach 
> wrote:
>>
>> i also have some 5.4 FSK for sale..
>>
>> 100 x 5.4 GHz PMP 100 7 mbit used but all checked and working for 500 $
>>
>> 2015-02-21 0:05 GMT+01:00 George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
>> :
>> > I also have some 5.4 FSK available if anyone is interested.
>> >
>> > (2) 5450APDD
>> > (1) 5400SMDD
>> > (5) 5400SMG
>> >
>> > $1150 for all.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2/20/2015 9:34 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
>> >
>> > P9 and P10 FSK available
>> >
>> > 55 5.2 units
>> > 30 5.4 units
>> >
>> > Taking any reasonable offers
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Gino A. Villarini
>> > President
>> > Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>> > www.aeronetpr.com ��
>> > @aeronetpr
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>