Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

[Hardy, Tim]

The previous Trillion licenses are now held by Affiniti LLC

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 10:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama


I heard stories and even used to talk to a guy who worked there.  Unfortunately 
a heart attack got him several years ago.
The "public" story was "Trillion Texas" purchased them, I believe.

- Original Message -
From: Rory Conaway
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 2:42 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] What happened to Trillion in Alabama

Trying to understand why they failed and lost their grant.  There were 
allegations that they spent money on things not allowed and that they were 
supposed to bring in matching funds that never materialized.  Just wanted to 
confirm that.

Rory Conaway * Triad Wireless * CEO
4226 S. 37th Street * Phoenix * AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

"A hot dog at the game beats roast beef at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart

Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

[Hardy, Tim]

Jirous 4' also only meet Cat B and would also be subject to upgrade at the 
licensee's expense.

From: Af  on behalf of Eric Kuhnke 
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 6:58:23 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Yes. It is a pretty effective way to make use of a dual polarity 80 MHz channel 
that you might upgrade to much more expensive equipment someday. $799 + 
additional diplexer per end for radio vs $6000 to $9000 per end with expensive 
stuff. The only caveat being that if you install an AF11 link with the 3' 
Jirous dishes you might be forced to upgrade to better dishes someday in the 
future if another operator can't coordinate an 11 GHz link because of your 
stuff. The Jirous 3' are reasonably priced but have pretty big sidelobes and 
not the best f/b ratio compared to more expensive dishes.



On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
So in order to operate an AF11X at its maximum channel width of 56mhz you would 
have to register a path for 80mhz license is that true? So basically your 
wasting some spectrum right? So could you have dual 40mhz  AF11X links on the 
same path operating in your licensed 80mhz of spectrum that way your not 
wasting any spectrum? Will that or can that even work?

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
As of today, no US paths have been coordinated or applied for with these radios.

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of 
SmarterBroadband mailto:li...@sbb.net>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:43:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Any members using Cablefree Licensed Links?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:31 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Dear all,

Apologies I've only just seen this post,
A small input from CableFree. Aware we are a vendor so only leaving a short 
post.

The CableFree FOR3 product line is popular with ISPs in some countries.
Available in many bands including 11GHz (and other bands 5-26GHz, including 24 
UL, if interested)

www.cablefree.net/for3<http://www.cablefree.net/for3>

Up to 880Mbps full duplex using 1024QAM, single polarisation, and 112MHz 
spectrum.
You can of course set the radio to narrower channels, for example 440Mbps full 
duplex in 56MHz.
This is a "telecom design" FDD radio with separate transmit/receive channels, 
so you get symmetric links up/down and low latency.

Comments & questions welcome -
Best regards
Stephen

On 31 May 2017 at 16:58, Kurt Fankhauser 
mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
How many usable 11ghz channels are there? I looked on the Mimosa cloud map and 
only one other 11ghz registered link in my area and it doesn't appear to be in 
path with any of my towers.

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Dennis Burgess 
mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>> wrote:
Yep, called links ☺


Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant
MikroTik Certified 
Trainer/Consultant<http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5>
 – MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE

For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/>
Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com<http://www.towercoverage.com/>
Office: 314-735-0270
E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of SmarterBroadband
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

We are on TowerCoverage.  I did not know it did path calcs.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 9:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Towercoverage.com has done 11ghz for years ☺

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 6:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Found this on ubnt forum - can't comment on accuracy.  FYI, we use PathLoss.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/New-AF11FX-Link-Calculator/m-p/1741139#M32848

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of 
SmarterBroadband mailto:li...@sbb.net>>
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 8:17:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Well I suppose I could, but hell I don’t want to.. 😊


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 2:22 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>

Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

[Hardy, Tim]

Just a guess, but wouldn't be surprised if the Beehive applications were highly 
scrutinized by Uncle Charlie..

MG radio service has only recently seen this reduced turn around speed - MW 
(Homeland Security, Public Safety) have had it for several years.  CF (Common 
Carrier) will not see this as these applications are required to go on 30-day 
Public Notice prior to license grant.

From: Af  on behalf of Chuck McCown 
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 6:26:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

I have had the opposite condition always before.

From: Steve Jones
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 4:01 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

its just weird having assembled undeployed gear sitting here with an approval 
on it

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Hardy, Tim  wrote:
Nothing to do with Trump or even the new commissioner - even though they'll 
probably take credit for it.  Two big changes made this possible - first, MG 
and MW radio services no longer require 30-day Public Notice periods, and 
second, ULS processing software has progressed to where the FCC can implement 
their "auto-grant" program that has been in the pipeline for many years.  95% 
of all applications are already eligible for Conditional Authorization, so this 
increased speed of service doesn't really do much.  It can actually cost you 
more money if a mistake is made on the application - previously, you had some 
time to change it before license grant at no cost.  Now, you would be hit with 
modification fees if the licenses had already been granted.

From: Af  on behalf of Jaime Solorza 

Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 3:02:16 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

72

Jaime Solorza

On Aug 22, 2017 10:50 AM, "Kurt Fankhauser"  wrote:
This is probably a Trump executive order getting things done faster in all 
branches of government, GO TRUMP!

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Steve Jones  wrote:
wow

i didnt know anything at the fcc happened in less than 30 days

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Jaime Solorza  
wrote:
You mean like Bennies or Yellow Jackets?  Have no idea what those are but the 
spooks in high school took them along with huffing paint and glue.

Jaime Solorza

On Aug 22, 2017 8:53 AM, "Josh Luthman"  wrote:
wuht


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

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Steve Jones  wrote:
Our 11ghz app went in last week. Got approval this morning. Is there good meth 
going around fcc or what?

Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

[Hardy, Tim]

Nothing to do with Trump or even the new commissioner - even though they'll 
probably take credit for it.  Two big changes made this possible - first, MG 
and MW radio services no longer require 30-day Public Notice periods, and 
second, ULS processing software has progressed to where the FCC can implement 
their "auto-grant" program that has been in the pipeline for many years.  95% 
of all applications are already eligible for Conditional Authorization, so this 
increased speed of service doesn't really do much.  It can actually cost you 
more money if a mistake is made on the application - previously, you had some 
time to change it before license grant at no cost.  Now, you would be hit with 
modification fees if the licenses had already been granted.

From: Af  on behalf of Jaime Solorza 

Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 3:02:16 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is fcc doing speed?

72

Jaime Solorza

On Aug 22, 2017 10:50 AM, "Kurt Fankhauser" 
mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
This is probably a Trump executive order getting things done faster in all 
branches of government, GO TRUMP!

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Steve Jones 
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
wow

i didnt know anything at the fcc happened in less than 30 days

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Jaime Solorza 
mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
You mean like Bennies or Yellow Jackets?  Have no idea what those are but the 
spooks in high school took them along with huffing paint and glue.

Jaime Solorza

On Aug 22, 2017 8:53 AM, "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
wuht


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

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Steve Jones 
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Our 11ghz app went in last week. Got approval this morning. Is there good meth 
going around fcc or what?

Re: [AFMUG] Figuring out what our FCC application says

[Hardy, Tim]

Steve  - sorry I missed this thread, am on vacation this week - but if you have 
any questions on the license, etc. hit me off-list.


I would add that it is certainly odd that any radio would allow the user to 
drive the power past the distortion level at any modulation - one would have to 
wonder how they could possibly meet the FCC mask in these situations.  We are 
constantly seeing suggestions on various forums for the user to "reduce power 
to stay in highest modulation".  Why isn't the radio setup to do this 
automatically?  Everything else till now has a max power per modulation.


From: Af  on behalf of ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 10:31:51 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Figuring out what our FCC application says

Probably due to linearity issues in the power amp section.  Higher order 
modulations are harder to amplify without distortion.  There are methods like 
pre-distortion to help but that gets pricy.

From: Rory Conaway
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 10:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Figuring out what our FCC application says

5Ghz doesn’t interfere with it.  I’ve got one link on a tower with multiple 
5GHz Ubiquiti and I think Cambium sectors on it.  This link is 50 miles and I 
haven’t seen an issue.

As for the power issue, once you get above 23dBm I think (have to check the 
specs), it starts lowering the modulation rate the same as any other radio.  I 
can go back and check some of my links I have up but since all of them are 
under 23dBm anyway, it hasn’t been an issue.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 7:02 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Figuring out what our FCC application says

They are upconverted 5ghz chipsets, but I don't know that I'd call it 
ubntesque. If 5ghz was interfering, I would assume it would show up on the 
spectrum analyzer, and it doesn't (although the first radios that we got 
replaced did show abnormally high noise floors... so it wouldn't surprise me if 
that was 5ghz leaking in)... but being upconverted chips, I can't help but 
wonder.

I don't think it's too hot, because our other link is at somewhere around 
-41,and it's running at higher modulation. I think I do have the tx power set a 
little lower on the other link though, so I guess that could be making a 
difference.

I wouldn't call these radios junk, but they're no SAF.

On Aug 17, 2017 8:34 PM, "Brett A Mansfield"  
wrote:
I'm with Steve. I just bought a couple B11s and they are going on a tower that 
has so much 5GHz that is very loud. If 5GHz interferes with it then I'm screwed.


Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

On Aug 17, 2017, at 7:27 PM, Steve Jones  wrote:
So, there is potential for interference from 5g? If this is a garbage chip like 
that i dont want this gear. I wasnt behind the purchase, i want saf, i like 
saf, saf support is awesome, everyone in the saf sales channel has been 
awesome, even the saf guy who doesnt work for them.

I got into junk gear im going to regret, didnt i?

On Aug 17, 2017 7:23 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:
Ha..not same animal...B11 uses same chip sets as 5GHz radios I am told and up 
converted.  It offers user a lower cost option.  You pay what you get for..
Jaime Solorza

On Aug 17, 2017 10:14 AM, "Bill Prince"  wrote:

I could give a crap about a snazzy GUI, and would much rather have a device 
that could run full modulation and full duplex. Prior to "experiencing" a B11, 
I'd never used a license radio that could not modulate at the full modulation.

bp




On 8/17/2017 9:08 AM, Rory Conaway wrote:
Steve, the interface is far more functional and simpler than most of the other 
licensed links.  I can’t even get real-time bandwidth numbers out of them in 
the GUI’s which is kind of pathetic.   The B11 and the Cloud are far more 
useful.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve Jones
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 8:53 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Figuring out what our FCC application says

So we have completed the PCN on a couple mimosa B11 links (so very, very 
unimpressed with these radios interface and function) We went through 
comsearch. Trying to configure this, Im not sure what channel settings to put 
in. I went to the application, I see the centers, but no size. Is there a code 
on here that tells me what channel size we are applying for?

And I notice the Application says the radio does not have ATPC, I thought these 
did, maybe im wrong

Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x

[Hardy, Tim]

Just make sure that you meet the bit rate and payload requirements of 101.141.  
If you can't do that, getting the "widest channel you can" would be problematic.

From: Af  on behalf of Mathew Howard 

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 10:39:20 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x

Seems pointless not to ask for the widest channel you can get. Unless you're 
absolutely sure you're never going to need more bandwidth, then I guess you 
could be nice and try to leave some more spectrum open, but if there's even a 
tiny chance you're going to ever need more capacity, I'd just go for the widest 
you can get.

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Yes, I have been looking at the matrix.  It appears that almost all of them 
will work with a 2 foot dish at up to perhaps 10 miles.
So the question will be what to ask for on the license.  I presume I should ask 
for the widest channel I can get.

From: Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 7:41 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x

Suggestion..  Look at the Users guide from ubnt.com website 
for the AF11X.

AF11x can work on a number of configurations..
   Channels width of 5mhz to 56(80mhz)mhz
   SISO horizontal or vertical only channels
   MIMO both polarities (horizontal + Vertical), this configuration needs the 
additional diplexer.
   ( any combination of above ! ).

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chuck McCown" mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 6:12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x
Yeah, not too worried about the dupler/diplexer cost.  If licensing is the 
same, why not.

From: Jon Langeler
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 4:11 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x

I like using both polarities to maximize Rx sensitivity. Coordination is the 
same cost. Duplexers are also not that much more.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On Aug 15, 2017, at 5:59 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:

Max channel bandwidth is 56mhz, but you should easily be able to get 250Mbps 
out of a 40mhz channel... I'm not sure there's much point in going in narrower 
than that. Actually, doing SISO at a 56mhz channel might make more sense, that 
should get around 275mbps at 256qam (and a bit more if the link will do 
1024qam, obviously), but then you'd only need a one polarity, so it may save a 
bit on coordination, and you wouldn't need to buy the extra duplexers.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
What is a common channel BW?  40 MHz?  I suppose it depends on congestion.  I 
only need about 250 Mbps so lower order modulation may be desirable and perhaps 
narrower channels too.

From: Jeremy
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 10:54 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF-11x

Of course, the exact configuration is based on your license and which 
frequencies it is supposed to operate on.  The above configuration is just an 
example.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Jeremy  wrote:
They are like that, but 3x bigger.  On top, the lid comes off and the duplexers 
go beneath the cover.  If your link is 'High' then you will want 'High' 
duplexers for both sides of the link (x4 total - two extra to purchase) - they 
will go in a configuration like 1-3-3-1 on one side and 3-1-1-3 on the other 
side.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
They come with 1 duplexer (setup for SISO) - you need to buy the second one 
separately to do MIMO. You do need to figure out what frequencies you're going 
to be using before you buy the radios, since there are two different duplexers, 
depending on which half of the band you're in.
You need one frequency pair on both polarities (for MIMO).

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
Do they all come with two N connectors or do you have to pay more for 
duplexers?  Not quite sure how to buy or license.  I guess you have to have two 
pairs of frequencies?  Or at the very least, both polarizations on the same 
frequency?

Trying to collect some budgetary estimates on what my project is going to cost.

Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

[Hardy, Tim]

30 days is specified in 101.103, but as mentioned – most PCNs today are 
expedited to 10-business days.  If it’s a dire emergency – life and limb, 
public safety or restoration of service, the FCC allows STAs (Special Temporary 
Authority).  These can be granted immediately by email but must be followed up 
with formal applications and fees.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 1:57 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

Can't you do a rush file or something like that?  7 or 14 days?

Is 30 days really not enough for you?


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

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
There is no authority to operate until the applications have been filed – 
period.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

Has the PCN passed with no objections? What does your coordinator say?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions<http://www.ics-il.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]<https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange<http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP<http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]


<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>

From: "Steve Jones" 
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>>
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:46:37 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval
Im pretty sure the answer is an absolute no, and I know I CAN do it without 
likely being caught.

If we have the gear on hand and are just waiting on the FCC, I know we can 
physically install the radios, its just storage at height at that point, but 
can we turn it on long enough to do fine alignment?

Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

[Hardy, Tim]

Filed and only then if in a frequency and area where Conditional Authorization 
is allowed.  There are some areas / bands that are designated quiet zones.  
Denver, DC, Santa Monica at 18 GHz, all bands around Green Bank, WV, etc.  If 
you’re not in one of these areas and the stations are not within 56 kilometers 
of an international border you should be eligible for Conditional Authorization 
which will allow you to operate legally as soon as the applications have been 
filed and pending formal FCC license grant.

I would add to Chuck’s comments a word of caution.  If your coordinator has to 
make changes to the initial coordination (reducing power, changing frequencies, 
etc.) this is strong indication that the proposal wasn’t properly engineered in 
the first place and the changes were likely the result of complaints of actual 
interference from other licensees and coordinators.  Most PCNs today are 
expedited to 10-business days or so which is usually much less time than 
ordering and shipping of equipment.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve Jones
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 1:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

we have the radios and the expedited coordination is in process. Ill be gone 
for a week but want to knock it out as soon as possible. If nothing else ill 
just set the AZ/EL on them and wait to plug them in.

I was hoping there was a backdoor thats legal, but i can be patient

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:22 AM, mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> 
wrote:
It does not take that long to get a license.

The frequency coordinator can clear a pair in a day if there is a pair to be 
had.

Once they find you some freqs, if you are on a short time line, order the 
radios and antennas.

I would risk firing them up and aiming them before you get the PCN clearance as 
the frequency coordinators are pretty danged good.  Low chance of harming 
someone else.  I would not leave them on for any longer than it takes to aim 
them.

The absolutely safe way of doing it is to give the rest of the world the 30 
days to respond to the PCN stuff.
Then if no objections buy the radios and antennas.
Then file with the FCC.
Then install and aim and operate.

From: Steve Jones
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:10 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

filed or approved?

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
There is no authority to operate until the applications have been filed – 
period.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

Has the PCN passed with no objections? What does your coordinator say?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions<http://www.ics-il.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]<https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange<http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP<http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]


<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>

From: "Steve Jones" 
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>>
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:46:37 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval
Im pretty sure the answer is an absolute no, and I know I CAN do it without 
likely being caught.

If we have the gear on hand and are just waiting on the FCC, I know we can 
physically install the radios, its just storage at height at that point, but 
can we turn it on long enough to do fine alignment?

Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

[Hardy, Tim]

There is no authority to operate until the applications have been filed – 
period.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval

Has the PCN passed with no objections? What does your coordinator say?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Steve Jones" 
mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:46:37 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] installing licensed link before approval
Im pretty sure the answer is an absolute no, and I know I CAN do it without 
likely being caught.

If we have the gear on hand and are just waiting on the FCC, I know we can 
physically install the radios, its just storage at height at that point, but 
can we turn it on long enough to do fine alignment?

Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

[Hardy, Tim]

And good luck finding one – none made for years.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 3:22 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

Not only that, the beamwidth would make them impossible to aim.

From: Chris Wright
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 1:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

8’ dishes are stupid-big for a 10 mile link on 18GHz. What kind of speeds are 
you trying to push?

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 8:49 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

My 10 mile Dragonwave links had 3 footers I think.

From: Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 9:38 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

Use a pair of B5cs with RD-34 dishes with RF Armor shield kits, I’d be shocked 
if you can’t get 100Mbps without disrupting anything else.

I just checked a 10 mile 18GHz link in Arizona and they wanted me to use 8’ 
dishes.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 8:18 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

Yeah, I have used 18 GHz out to 10 miles before in Utah.

From: Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 6:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

Seems like a waste. 11 GHz is ripe for four miles. In a dry climate, 18 GHz 
would work as well.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Jay Weekley" 
mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 7:53:09 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Four Mile Link

What about 6 GHz?

Adair Winter wrote:
> Forget 24, 60, 80Ghz if that's what you're thinking
> If you can't do 5 (and you probably can if you think you can pull on
> DFS or UNII-1) than 11 and 11ghz are about your only options.
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:47 AM, Eric Rogers mailto:ecrog...@precisionds.com%20%0b>> > 
wrote:
>
> I need a link that is capable of 4.25 miles, and something over
> 100M.  I fear that 5GHz will be out because of all the used
> spectrum, but wanted to ask what are my options?
>
> Eric Rogers
>
> PDSConnect_logo-Connecting You to the World - Signature Logo
>
> www.pdsconnect.me 
>
> (317) 831-3000 x200 
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Adair Winter
> VP, Network Operations / Co-Owner
> Amarillo Wireless | 806.316.5071
> C: 806.231.7180
> http://www.amarillowireless.net 
> 
>
>
>
> 
> Virus-free. www.avg.com
> 
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

[Hardy, Tim]

Understand that - not an FCC issue - a frequency congestion issue.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 12:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

On 8/1/17 08:59, Hardy, Tim wrote:
> “XPIC is not available due to FCC issues. “  What would this be?


Channel not available. Happens all the time.

Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

[Hardy, Tim]

“XPIC is not available due to FCC issues. “  What would this be?



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 11:06 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

XPIC is not available due to FCC issues.
Cambium hits about that same speed.  But I still don’t know the price.
What is the CableFree price?

From: Stephen Patrick
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 9:03 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

CableFree FOR3 with 1024QAM in 60MHz:  477.7Mbps
www.cablefree.net/for3

CableFree HCR (split mount)  with 1024QAM in 60MHz:  489Mbps
If you want to/can use XPIC for 2+0, you can double these figures.
CableFree HCR with 1024QAM in 60MHz:  978Mbps
www.cablefree.net/hcr

I hope that helps,

Best regards
Stephen

On 1 August 2017 at 01:48, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Since you mentioned it, I have no clue what the PTPL6820C would cost.
What does the SAF cost?

From: Sean Heskett
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 6:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Max BW on a 6 GHz 60 Mhz wide channel

SAF integra-gs will do 451mbps in a 60mhz channel.  It'll do 1gbps with header 
compression or you can do 2+0 to get 1gbps.

https://www.saftehnika.com/en/integrags

5 year warranty and it won't break the bank.

-Sean

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:57 PM Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Cambium will do almost 500 Mbps.
Anyone else do better?

Re: [AFMUG] 6 ghz xlic radio options?

[Hardy, Tim]

Aviat WTM, Nokia, maybe NEC?

From: Af  on behalf of Gino A. Villarini 

Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 5:49:22 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 ghz xlic radio options?

About 400+ mbps in a 30 mhz xpic setup

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Chuck 
McCown mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Date: Friday, July 21, 2017 at 4:04 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 ghz xlic radio options?




Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

What is the total throughput and price of these?

From: Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 2:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 6 ghz xlic radio options?

SIAE Also Plus 2
Ceragon / Cambium IP20/820

Anything im missing?



Gino A. Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:429DDECE9D4E4ED6AD3F26EA4FD16EED@MTC.local]

Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

[Hardy, Tim]

As of today, no US paths have been coordinated or applied for with these radios.

From: Af  on behalf of SmarterBroadband 
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:43:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Any members using Cablefree Licensed Links?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:31 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Dear all,

Apologies I've only just seen this post,
A small input from CableFree. Aware we are a vendor so only leaving a short 
post.

The CableFree FOR3 product line is popular with ISPs in some countries.
Available in many bands including 11GHz (and other bands 5-26GHz, including 24 
UL, if interested)

www.cablefree.net/for3<http://www.cablefree.net/for3>

Up to 880Mbps full duplex using 1024QAM, single polarisation, and 112MHz 
spectrum.
You can of course set the radio to narrower channels, for example 440Mbps full 
duplex in 56MHz.
This is a "telecom design" FDD radio with separate transmit/receive channels, 
so you get symmetric links up/down and low latency.

Comments & questions welcome -
Best regards
Stephen

On 31 May 2017 at 16:58, Kurt Fankhauser 
mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
How many usable 11ghz channels are there? I looked on the Mimosa cloud map and 
only one other 11ghz registered link in my area and it doesn't appear to be in 
path with any of my towers.

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Dennis Burgess 
mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>> wrote:
Yep, called links ☺


Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant
MikroTik Certified 
Trainer/Consultant<http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5>
 – MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE

For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/>
Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com<http://www.towercoverage.com/>
Office: 314-735-0270
E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of SmarterBroadband
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

We are on TowerCoverage.  I did not know it did path calcs.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 9:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Towercoverage.com has done 11ghz for years ☺

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 6:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Found this on ubnt forum - can't comment on accuracy.  FYI, we use PathLoss.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/New-AF11FX-Link-Calculator/m-p/1741139#M32848

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of 
SmarterBroadband mailto:li...@sbb.net>>
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 8:17:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Well I suppose I could, but hell I don’t want to.. 😊


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 2:22 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think they have that stuff in airlink, but you can always just look up the 
spec sheets for all the relevant parts and calculate it manually.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:18 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
I can use Link Planner to check LOS.  But the 820 in Link Planner will have 
very different radio Tx powers and receive sensitivities.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 1:07 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think airlink,ubnt.com<http://ubnt.com> supports 11ghz now, so that can be 
used to get a fairly good idea of what it's going to do... also, Mimosa's tool 
is pretty nice.
But when you know you have a clear path and what the distance is, it's not very 
hard to calculate what the link is going to do... frequency planning is done by 
your coordinator.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 2:59 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
Using?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 12:55 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

DIY

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:45 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
How are you Link Planning your AF11 links?

Does UBNT do link Planning?

Reseller?

DIY?

Other??



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew

Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

[Hardy, Tim]

6 pairs @ 80 MHz bw
12 pairs @ 40 MHz bw
13 pairs @ 30 MHz bw

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 2:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

10.7-11.7 / 2 for duplex channel pairs. I forget exactly how it's laid out, but 
I think it's something like 5 or 6 pairs for the 80MHz channel plan and 11 or 
12 pairs for the 40MHz channel plan.
On 5/31/2017 10:58 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
How many usable 11ghz channels are there? I looked on the Mimosa cloud map and 
only one other 11ghz registered link in my area and it doesn't appear to be in 
path with any of my towers.

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Dennis Burgess 
mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>> wrote:
Yep, called links ☺


Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant
MikroTik Certified 
Trainer/Consultant<http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5>
 – MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE

For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/>
Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com<http://www.towercoverage.com/>
Office: 314-735-0270
E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of SmarterBroadband
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

We are on TowerCoverage.  I did not know it did path calcs.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 9:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Towercoverage.com has done 11ghz for years ☺

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 6:04 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Found this on ubnt forum - can't comment on accuracy.  FYI, we use PathLoss.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/New-AF11FX-Link-Calculator/m-p/1741139#M32848

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of 
SmarterBroadband mailto:li...@sbb.net>>
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 8:17:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Well I suppose I could, but hell I don’t want to.. 😊


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 2:22 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think they have that stuff in airlink, but you can always just look up the 
spec sheets for all the relevant parts and calculate it manually.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:18 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
I can use Link Planner to check LOS.  But the 820 in Link Planner will have 
very different radio Tx powers and receive sensitivities.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 1:07 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think airlink,ubnt.com<http://ubnt.com> supports 11ghz now, so that can be 
used to get a fairly good idea of what it's going to do... also, Mimosa's tool 
is pretty nice.
But when you know you have a clear path and what the distance is, it's not very 
hard to calculate what the link is going to do... frequency planning is done by 
your coordinator.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 2:59 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
Using?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 12:55 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

DIY

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:45 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
How are you Link Planning your AF11 links?

Does UBNT do link Planning?

Reseller?

DIY?

Other??



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 5:43 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

We have one up... other than some very ugly issues right after we put it up 
(which was apparently a bug in the firmware they shipped with... upgrading to 
the latest beta firmware fixed it), it has been working perfectly, and I 
haven't touched it since.
The AF11 is certainly worth a look in my opinion, but it all depends on what 
you need it to do.

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Jon Langeler 
mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>> wrote:
Ignoring a few software bugs and delayed fixes, it's good for '2nd string' 
links. If this is for high priority link, I'd try SIAE or Cambium.
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On May 25, 2017, at 2:46 PM, SmarterBroadband 
m

Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

[Hardy, Tim]

Found this on ubnt forum - can't comment on accuracy.  FYI, we use PathLoss.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/New-AF11FX-Link-Calculator/m-p/1741139#M32848

From: Af  on behalf of SmarterBroadband 
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 8:17:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

Well I suppose I could, but hell I don’t want to.. 😊


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 2:22 PM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think they have that stuff in airlink, but you can always just look up the 
spec sheets for all the relevant parts and calculate it manually.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:18 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
I can use Link Planner to check LOS.  But the 820 in Link Planner will have 
very different radio Tx powers and receive sensitivities.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 1:07 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

I think airlink,ubnt.com supports 11ghz now, so that can be 
used to get a fairly good idea of what it's going to do... also, Mimosa's tool 
is pretty nice.
But when you know you have a clear path and what the distance is, it's not very 
hard to calculate what the link is going to do... frequency planning is done by 
your coordinator.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 2:59 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
Using?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 12:55 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

DIY

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 1:45 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
How are you Link Planning your AF11 links?

Does UBNT do link Planning?

Reseller?

DIY?

Other??



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 5:43 PM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AF11 Experiences

We have one up... other than some very ugly issues right after we put it up 
(which was apparently a bug in the firmware they shipped with... upgrading to 
the latest beta firmware fixed it), it has been working perfectly, and I 
haven't touched it since.
The AF11 is certainly worth a look in my opinion, but it all depends on what 
you need it to do.

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Jon Langeler 
mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>> wrote:
Ignoring a few software bugs and delayed fixes, it's good for '2nd string' 
links. If this is for high priority link, I'd try SIAE or Cambium.
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


On May 25, 2017, at 2:46 PM, SmarterBroadband 
mailto:li...@sbb.net>> wrote:
We are looking to add some more Licensed Links to our network.

Does anyone actually have the AF11 in service.  Is it worth a look?  How is it 
performing for you?  Any issues?

Just not sure if it is worth considering or should I be looking at existing 
companied like;

Exalt ?
Dragonwave ?
SAIE ?

Or newer ones like

Alcoma
Cablefree FOR3

Anyone tried the last two?

Just looking for best bang for the buck in non core ring usage.

Re: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

[Hardy, Tim]

Seth was with Gabriel back in the glory days when they were selling hundreds of 
antennas to Ma Bell - he should be able to help

Sent from my iPhone

On May 24, 2017, at 8:36 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I just looked at the mwave website, and wow, they're one of the few in the 
world who make a 3'/90cm size 71-86 GHz antenna. Good for 80 GHz PTP stuff I 
guess, but having aimed more than a few 60cm size 80 GHz links, I bet that 
thing must have a really narrow center beam width.

So narrow that I bet it drifts off peak RSL considerably when one end of a link 
on a tall building sways in the wind, or tower steel expands/contracts with 
sunlight in the daytime.

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
If you want to contact them, GD sold the Gabriel line to mWave and these are 
the guys that were at the old Gabriel in Maine.  Contact Seth Hanson - listed 
on their web page and he should be able to answer almost anything on these 
antennas

From: Af mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>> on behalf of Eric 
Kuhnke mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 8:20:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

Yeah, found that page, I am going to try. General Dynamics Satcom bought 
Gabriel a long time ago. But they are primarily concerned with satellite 
antenna stuff (compact cassegrain and such). Hoping they will bother to answer 
the email and dig up a paper installation manual/schematic/specification sheet. 
I'll take whatever I can get...

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:18 PM, George Skorup 
mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
Teh Google didn't turn up anything. Well this http://gdsatcom.com/patterns.php, 
but none of the PDF links work. Maybe email them and see if they can send it to 
you?


On 5/24/2017 6:39 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
Gabriel UCC6-59ASE

It's huge...  And pretty much pre-dates the commercial Internet or the 
existence of PDF datasheets for products.

Wondering if anyone might have a binder of paper hanging around with a 
datasheet for it.

Re: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

[Hardy, Tim]

If you want to contact them, GD sold the Gabriel line to mWave and these are 
the guys that were at the old Gabriel in Maine.  Contact Seth Hanson - listed 
on their web page and he should be able to answer almost anything on these 
antennas

From: Af  on behalf of Eric Kuhnke 
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 8:20:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

Yeah, found that page, I am going to try. General Dynamics Satcom bought 
Gabriel a long time ago. But they are primarily concerned with satellite 
antenna stuff (compact cassegrain and such). Hoping they will bother to answer 
the email and dig up a paper installation manual/schematic/specification sheet. 
I'll take whatever I can get...

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:18 PM, George Skorup 
mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
Teh Google didn't turn up anything. Well this http://gdsatcom.com/patterns.php, 
but none of the PDF links work. Maybe email them and see if they can send it to 
you?


On 5/24/2017 6:39 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
Gabriel UCC6-59ASE

It's huge...  And pretty much pre-dates the commercial Internet or the 
existence of PDF datasheets for products.

Wondering if anyone might have a binder of paper hanging around with a 
datasheet for it.

Re: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

[Hardy, Tim]

We probably have some info on it.  I'll check tomorrow.  If not, I have some 
contacts from the old Gabriel that can probably help you.

From: Af  on behalf of Eric Kuhnke 
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 7:39:11 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Looking for specs/datasheet for a big, old 6 GHz PTP dish

Gabriel UCC6-59ASE

It's huge...  And pretty much pre-dates the commercial Internet or the 
existence of PDF datasheets for products.

Wondering if anyone might have a binder of paper hanging around with a 
datasheet for it.

Re: [AFMUG] FCC part 101 80mhz channel size??

[Hardy, Tim]

Upper 6 can use smaller B2 antennas, but there are specific designated 
congested areas that require Cat A (6' or larger) antennas.  Any licensee that 
uses the smaller B or B2 antennas in any band should realize that the antenna 
could be subject to upgrade to a Cat A at their sole expense if another user 
cannot coordinate around the B/B2 antenna.

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup 

Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2017 4:59:17 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC part 101 80mhz channel size??

60MHz and 3' HP dishes in lower 6GHz only. Upper is still 30MHz and 6' minimum. 
Bigger channels and smaller dishes probably wasn't the greatest idea though. 
Great way to trash a band. Just sayin. We have one lower 6GHz link on the 60MHz 
channel plan and it was hard enough to coordinate even on KS15676's aka horns 
which IIRC do also have the upgraded side-lobe suppression kits installed at 
both ends.

On 4/15/2017 2:16 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
Yes, you can get 60MHz channels in 6GHz.  I was referring to 7 and 13.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Apr 15, 2017, at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:

30 MHz, I think? I think one of the 6 GHz ones is still 30 MHz with the other 
being 60?

My memory could be faulty.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From: "Jeff Broadwick - Lists" mailto:jeffl...@att.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2017 2:02:21 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC part 101 80mhz channel size??

And the channel sizes are very small.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Apr 15, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

7&13 are not available in many areas.
6 is used up in many places

From: Mitch Koep
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2017 12:31 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC part 101 80mhz channel size??


6 and 7

11

13

18

23

https://www.intelpath.com/

Mitch Koep

218-851-8689 cell



On 04/14/2017 09:46 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
Awesome!  Are there any other bands besides 11ghz and 18ghz??

Thanks!

-Sean

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:17 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:
Yes, 18 GHz has supported 80 MHz wide channels for a long time. This is how the 
Exalt ExtremeAir 18 accomplishes 1 Gbps full duplex FDD in both polarities 
between two radio units (H&V) using 256QAM 5/6 in each polarity. Single data 
payload ethernet interface on each side. Others on the list can correct me if 
I'm wrong but it was the first real 1 Gbps transparent bridge (not sub-1Gbps 
something, or 1Gbps with header/payload compression) and started shipping in 
early 2012.



On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Sean Heskett  wrote:
Hello all,

Which FCC part 101 bands support 80mhz channel sizes besides 11ghz??  Does 
18ghz support 80mhz channels??

Thanks!

-Sean



--
Mitch Koep

A Better Wireless
218-851-8689 cell

Re: [AFMUG] Anyone familiar with the highest capacity Microwave Radio Ever?

[Hardy, Tim]

The ad says 2.5 Gbps - ETSI has 112 MHz bandwidths and the chips they are using 
will take full advantage of this bandwidth with modulations up to 4096 QAM.  I 
think it takes XPIC (CCDP) to get 2.5 Gbps.  Data sheets are available for the 
ETSI version of this radio.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of fiber...@mail.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 3:55 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Anyone familiar with the highest capacity Microwave Radio 
Ever?

What alternative reality is this ad from? There are a few 10 Gbps radios out 
there. 

Jared
 
 

Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017
From: "Rory Conaway" 
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: [AFMUG] Anyone familiar with the highest capacity Microwave Radio Ever?

WTM 4000

http://s214106484.t.en25.com/e/es?s=214106484&e=2613&elqTrackId=4956d41eca78444a9dd67ae96217210b&elq=ec8b41f8c57a4a11b26adb8741316357&elqaid=334&elqat=1
 
Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO
4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040 602-426-0542[tel:602-426-0542] 
r...@triadwireless.net[mailto:r...@triadwireless.net]
www.triadwireless.net[http://www.triadwireless.net/]
 
“First rule of Racing, whats behind you does not count.” – Gregory White
 

Re: [AFMUG] Odd email about Double Radius

[Hardy, Tim]

Google search the company address and then the owner of the property – enough 
said.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Head
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 4:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Odd email about Double Radius

There is this...http://www.waveworksinc.com/
Looks like an interesting company but not the same people, obviously.


On 3/14/2017 3:35 PM, Jeremy wrote:
"
WaveWorks - News Alert - The next Generation of supplier after DoubleRadius



[http://pliinc.imgus11.com/public/38ca21deecd58bcc839de52a87a1f54d.jpg?r=562800115]








WaveWorks employees originally worked for DoubleRadius. Due to the situation of 
DoubleRadius's sales plunge and their contract with Ubiquiti being compromised, 
they may be going out of business. For that reason we are moving all WISP 
customers over to WaveWorks to continue supporting their requirements. Please 
contact us for more details:   Click here for More 
Information







On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Jeremy 
mailto:jeremysmi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yes, I did.  It didn't come to this email address though, it seemed to be 
derived from the WISPA list.  I emailed them about it and they said it is 
absolutely false.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
No, it is real.  DR knows about it.  Just trying to figure out how the email 
address list was derived.

From: Josh Reynolds
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Odd email about Double Radius

I haven't seen it. Are you sure it's not some kind of malware attack or 
phishing scam?

On Mar 14, 2017 2:27 PM, "Chuck McCown" 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Did anyone receive an odd email about Double Radius going out of business?  It 
certainly is not true.  I think it said something about them losing UBNT as a 
product line.  I think I tossed it.  There are others that would like  to see 
it if anyone has a copy.

Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

[Hardy, Tim]

Not necessarily harder for us - every band has its challenges!

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Adam Moffett 
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

So 6ghz is harder for you, the coordinator.  Same difficulty for the operator :)


-- Original Message --
From: "Hardy, Tim" mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>>
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Sent: 2/9/2017 3:45:57 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Umm, Tim – not the other guy - author or actor!  Coordination distance is 
actually 125 miles with a 125-mile keyhole +/- 5 degrees around the main beam.  
You might think this is overkill, but we have seen catastrophic interference 
cases beyond even these distances, so industry settled on these to make sure 
that longer main beam cases were examined.  A couple of additional things to 
consider at 6 GHz:

The FCC minimum path distance at 6 GHz is 17 kilometers - paths less than this 
distance can be licensed but there are required EIRP restrictions.  Usually, 
you would want to reduce power on a shorter path anyway to avoid saturating 
your receivers.

Do not forget about c-band satellite ground stations.  These transmit in the 
lower 6 GHz band (some even in upper 6) in magnitudes of power much greater 
than a fixed point-to-point system.  Most of these stations in the States are 
licensed full-band, full-arc so if a problem is indicated and there is no 
clutter or other shielding, it is difficult to clear anything.  We have seen 
major issues when these cases are overlooked.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 3:11 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

You have to look out to 50 miles and check the energy coming off your antenna 
in all directions.
Tom Hardy or Liz Creekmore could tell us much more.

From: Brett A Mansfield
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 1:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Okay, so in The valley I'm looking at there is one 6GHz link that is nowhere I 
near where I plan to put mine, there are two 11GHz links, neither of which 
would cross paths with mine, no 13 GHz at all, and two small links in 18 and 23 
GHz that might conflict.

Now to start looking at a product to use. What do people recommend for 6 and 11 
GHz? Would it be cheaper and easier to just put up a few hops and use the AF? 
What do you guys suggest? I got the exact path length. It's only a mere 8 
miles. I really thought it would be 15, but I was pleasantly mistaken.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:55 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
My teachers told me about the coming ice age...

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 12:42 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Trust the math... It's science and engineering based Like global 
warming Zaz. Too easy Recipes on the way

On Feb 9, 2017 9:27 AM, "Ken Hohhof" mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> 
wrote:
Something else that gets some people into trouble is the difference in how path 
loss and rain fade act with increased distance.  The post Mike linked to makes 
this clear.

We get used to double the distance = 6 dB more path loss, which can be made up 
via antenna gain.

But double the distance potentially means double the rain fade in dB.  So 40 dB 
could become 80 dB.  You’re not going to make that up with bigger dishes.

Of course, your local weather patterns are also a factor.  If you typically get 
big storms with heavy rain for 20+ miles, this analysis is correct.  But if you 
typically get little popup storms, or front boundaries that move across a 
microwave path without actually raining on the entire path, this analysis is 
overly pessimistic.  It also matters whether the path is north-south or 
east-west, if like us you typically get storms moving from west to east.

How people use the Internet is also a factor.  It used to be, as long as you 
could get email and look stuff up on Google, your Internet was working.  But 
now if an HD video stream stops to rebuffer, you have “no Internet”.  Which may 
seem silly to us, but if watching movies is the only thing you use the Internet 
for, and you can’t watch movies, then your Internet is broken.  And while 10 
years ago people were doing totally new things via the Internet, today they are 
more likely replacing something like satellite TV with a streaming service to 
save money or add convenience.  But they still expect DirecTV Now to be as 
simple and reliable as broadcast TV, they don’t expect to pay more for their 
Internet, but whenever there’s a problem they are told it must be their crappy 
Internet.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf

Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

[Hardy, Tim]

Umm, Tim – not the other guy - author or actor!  Coordination distance is 
actually 125 miles with a 125-mile keyhole +/- 5 degrees around the main beam.  
You might think this is overkill, but we have seen catastrophic interference 
cases beyond even these distances, so industry settled on these to make sure 
that longer main beam cases were examined.  A couple of additional things to 
consider at 6 GHz:

The FCC minimum path distance at 6 GHz is 17 kilometers - paths less than this 
distance can be licensed but there are required EIRP restrictions.  Usually, 
you would want to reduce power on a shorter path anyway to avoid saturating 
your receivers.

Do not forget about c-band satellite ground stations.  These transmit in the 
lower 6 GHz band (some even in upper 6) in magnitudes of power much greater 
than a fixed point-to-point system.  Most of these stations in the States are 
licensed full-band, full-arc so if a problem is indicated and there is no 
clutter or other shielding, it is difficult to clear anything.  We have seen 
major issues when these cases are overlooked.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 3:11 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

You have to look out to 50 miles and check the energy coming off your antenna 
in all directions.
Tom Hardy or Liz Creekmore could tell us much more.

From: Brett A Mansfield
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 1:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Okay, so in The valley I'm looking at there is one 6GHz link that is nowhere I 
near where I plan to put mine, there are two 11GHz links, neither of which 
would cross paths with mine, no 13 GHz at all, and two small links in 18 and 23 
GHz that might conflict.

Now to start looking at a product to use. What do people recommend for 6 and 11 
GHz? Would it be cheaper and easier to just put up a few hops and use the AF? 
What do you guys suggest? I got the exact path length. It's only a mere 8 
miles. I really thought it would be 15, but I was pleasantly mistaken.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield

On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:55 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
My teachers told me about the coming ice age...

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 12:42 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Trust the math... It's science and engineering based Like global 
warming Zaz. Too easy Recipes on the way

On Feb 9, 2017 9:27 AM, "Ken Hohhof" mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> 
wrote:
Something else that gets some people into trouble is the difference in how path 
loss and rain fade act with increased distance.  The post Mike linked to makes 
this clear.

We get used to double the distance = 6 dB more path loss, which can be made up 
via antenna gain.

But double the distance potentially means double the rain fade in dB.  So 40 dB 
could become 80 dB.  You’re not going to make that up with bigger dishes.

Of course, your local weather patterns are also a factor.  If you typically get 
big storms with heavy rain for 20+ miles, this analysis is correct.  But if you 
typically get little popup storms, or front boundaries that move across a 
microwave path without actually raining on the entire path, this analysis is 
overly pessimistic.  It also matters whether the path is north-south or 
east-west, if like us you typically get storms moving from west to east.

How people use the Internet is also a factor.  It used to be, as long as you 
could get email and look stuff up on Google, your Internet was working.  But 
now if an HD video stream stops to rebuffer, you have “no Internet”.  Which may 
seem silly to us, but if watching movies is the only thing you use the Internet 
for, and you can’t watch movies, then your Internet is broken.  And while 10 
years ago people were doing totally new things via the Internet, today they are 
more likely replacing something like satellite TV with a streaming service to 
save money or add convenience.  But they still expect DirecTV Now to be as 
simple and reliable as broadcast TV, they don’t expect to pay more for their 
Internet, but whenever there’s a problem they are told it must be their crappy 
Internet.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 9:58 AM
To: af mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11GHz and 18GHz real throughput

Yeah, I really don't trust them that much either, but they're certainly useful 
for getting an idea of how different areas compare. Things will certainly work 
differently in Utah than they do for us in southern Wisconsin/northern Illinois.

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Assuming you trust the models.

I for one, don't.

https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp/posts/956205354504917?match=cmFpbg%3D%3D


-
Mike Hammett
Intelli

Re: [AFMUG] 3650 quick look

[Hardy, Tim]

Sorry, we had a server change:

http://solutions.comsearch.com/applications/search_3650/search3650MHZ.jsp

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brian Sullivan
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 2:33 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 3650 quick look

My shortcut died also.  It's still there.
On 2/6/2017 1:26 PM, Dave wrote:
What happened to this site?
http://www.comsearch.com/applications/search_3650/search3650MHZ.jsp

Is there an alternative to those who were using this site on occasion ?


--
[cid:image001.jpg@01D28086.66B9C7B0]

Re: [AFMUG] 11ghz vertical separation

[Hardy, Tim]

If you are operating the B11 in MiMo mode, you will need to have sufficient 
frequency separation between the B11 frequencies and the AF11’s since the B11 
will be transmitting in the same half band (high/low) that your AF11 will be 
receiving in at the same location.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11ghz vertical separation

I am not an expert.. but I believe that answer is going to be None !

Regards

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Mathew Howard" mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>>
To: "af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 10:53:55 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] 11ghz vertical separation
I'm planning on adding an 11ghz link to a tower that we already have one 11ghz 
link on (existing link is B11, current plan is to add an AF-11FX), how much 
vertical separation am I going to want to have between the two dishes?

Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

[Hardy, Tim]

Chris,

It might help us design these properly if we knew what the saturation levels 
were.  We have these for most other radios.

Thanks,

Tim

From: Af  on behalf of Chris Trout 
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:22:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

The PHY (Layer 1) is affected by EVM and PER which cause changes in modulation.
The MAC (Layer 2), where TDMA lives, makes use of the PHY but does not change 
it directly.
Changes in the amount and direction of traffic across the link do affect EVM 
and PER, however.

It is likely that the PHY rate is more stable on your link at 1300 Mbps (MCS7) 
than at 1560 Mbps (MCS8), and Auto TDMA is reacting faster to changing 
conditions since it sends a shorter duration of packets for training the PHY 
rate.

As others have recommended, reducing power will avoid saturating the receiver, 
and reduce (improve) EVM. I think that is what we may be seeing here on a very 
short link.

Chris Trout
Mimosa Networks, Inc.

From: Af  on behalf of Chris Wright 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 1:55 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

Traffic Split set to Auto:
PHY1300/1300

Traffic Split set to 75/25, 8ms window:
PHY1560/1300

Anyone can see why one should prefer setting the Traffic Split to 75/25 – it 
provides more bandwidth in one direction.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Cc: Chris Wright
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

Hi Chris,

I want to compare something with my link...

Can you please share what's the listed PHY rates were on your PCN for the link.

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:21:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
Power is already at the minimum (10dBm) on both sides. 2.2km link.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 9:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

>SNR 41, 42, 41, 41

Turn down your power, and bring the SNR in the 30-35 range...
it will improve thruput and allow for the higher modulation.

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:41:37 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
Firmware 1.4.4
SNR 41, 42, 41, 41
Flow Control had no effect so it remains disabled for now.
Sent via mobile phone.

On Jan 24, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>> wrote:
What version for firmware is on the radio ?

and   What your SNR on the two chains (both directions, i.e. 4 readings).

I can tell you that we do not see the behavior you are describing below...
But I can also tell you that we had to do some 'tuning' on settings including 
flow control ..
our B11's plug into netonix Switches

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 8:02:58 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
According to Mimosa, I should be telling my customers that if they’re using the 
most popular metric in the world for testing internet speeds, they’re doing it 
wrong (I concede that while this may be technically correct, my customers – and 
yours too – don’t do technically correct very well.”

When TDMA is set to 75/25, 8ms window, MAC Tx/Rx is 980/290. This gives me as 
much Tx bandwidth as I require for peak times, but no one client IP can 
download more than 20mbps of TCP traffic (from my 
speedtest.net at the edge, nor anyone else’s beyond my 
edge).

When TDMA is Auto, MAC Tx/Rx is 780/780 (lower Tx, which is undesirable as it’s 
100mbps shy of what I need during peak hours), but TCP throughput per client is 
greatly increased (150+mbps).

So I’m in a pickle. Either my scrupulous customers can get those coveted 
speedtest.net results they love seeing as they run them 
every thirty seconds ad-nauseum at the cost of overall Tx capacit

Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

[Hardy, Tim]

“Or mis-align your B11 link”

Strictly illegal!

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

AF24Š

Or mis-align your B11 link

On 1/25/17, 2:36 PM, "Af on behalf of Daniel White" mailto:afmu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

>Not with a B11.
>
>If the equipment is at the minimum TX power and that high of a SNR is
>going to cause problems... then it¹s the wrong gear for that path.
>
>Siklu or SIAE 80GHz would be my first bet for a 2.2km link.
>
>Daniel White
>Managing Director ­ Hardware Distribution Sales
>ConVergence Technologies
>Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>dwh...@converge-tech.com
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:36 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
>>
>> On 1/25/17 09:30, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> > Thanks for pointing that out !
>> >
>> > So any thoughts on how to 'attenuate' the signal ?
>>
>>
>> I would guess waveguide and attenuators, but I don't have any personal
>> experience with a B11.
>>
>> ~Seth
>
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>

Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

[Hardy, Tim]

2’ is the minimum allowable antenna size at 11 GHz.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:42 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

Wow... that is a short link for 11ghz..
what size dishes are you using ? 2ft or 1ft ?   please tell me 1ft...

Are your B11's reporting to the Cloud ? there are more stats which get exposed 
on the Mimosa Cloud App.

I was seeing some strange performance issues.. sort of similar to yours.. (you 
can see details from my post in the Mimosa Community Forms).

Someone pointed out that B11's like to have SNR between 32-35, when it is lower 
or higher they have modulations issues..
My performance improved after we turned the power down.. my link was a bit 
longer.. 3.9 miles (6.3km) with 2ft dishes, ...

and yes, they do not go below 10dBm on tx power...

maybe some sort of a material on the radome to reduce energy ?

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:21:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
Power is already at the minimum (10dBm) on both sides. 2.2km link.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 9:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP

>SNR 41, 42, 41, 41

Turn down your power, and bring the SNR in the 30-35 range...
it will improve thruput and allow for the higher modulation.

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:41:37 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
Firmware 1.4.4
SNR 41, 42, 41, 41
Flow Control had no effect so it remains disabled for now.
Sent via mobile phone.

On Jan 24, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>> wrote:
What version for firmware is on the radio ?

and   What your SNR on the two chains (both directions, i.e. 4 readings).

I can tell you that we do not see the behavior you are describing below...
But I can also tell you that we had to do some 'tuning' on settings including 
flow control ..
our B11's plug into netonix Switches

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Chris Wright" mailto:ch...@velociter.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 8:02:58 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] B11, TDMA, and TCP
According to Mimosa, I should be telling my customers that if they’re using the 
most popular metric in the world for testing internet speeds, they’re doing it 
wrong (I concede that while this may be technically correct, my customers – and 
yours too – don’t do technically correct very well.”

When TDMA is set to 75/25, 8ms window, MAC Tx/Rx is 980/290. This gives me as 
much Tx bandwidth as I require for peak times, but no one client IP can 
download more than 20mbps of TCP traffic (from my 
speedtest.net at the edge, nor anyone else’s beyond my 
edge).

When TDMA is Auto, MAC Tx/Rx is 780/780 (lower Tx, which is undesirable as it’s 
100mbps shy of what I need during peak hours), but TCP throughput per client is 
greatly increased (150+mbps).

So I’m in a pickle. Either my scrupulous customers can get those coveted 
speedtest.net results they love seeing as they run them 
every thirty seconds ad-nauseum at the cost of overall Tx capacity of the link. 
Or I give myself some headroom in link capacity but the fastest speeds my 
100mbps clients can see is 20mbps.

What’s even stranger is that client upload seems unaffected. I can upload 
150+mbps from my test on the link no matter what TDMA is configured. I hit up 
Mimosa’s chat support was as chipper as they were unyielding in their idea that 
I should test in a way that caters to the B11’s shortcomings. I’ve been a 
Mimosa fanboy for a while now but boy am I feeling burned right now.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience

[Hardy, Tim]

Post 6 here discusses the use of ARQ rather than FEC.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/AF11x-Capacity/td-p/1737631

From: Af  on behalf of George Skorup 
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 6:41:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience

Which I don't understand. Sounds like strong FEC?

On 1/13/2017 5:36 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
According to Link Planner, PTP820S (IP20S) gets around 243M at 256QAM, 347M at 
2048QAM (350M with header compression).  So add that to George’s 
Trango/Exalt/SAF list.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chris Gustaf
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 5:20 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience

Real usable capacity at Layer 2 Ethernet depends on several variables besides 
the modulation level and the regulatory bandwidth.  For 1024 QAM there are 10 
bits per symbol so theoretically one would expect to get 400 Mbps in a 40 MHz 
channel (10 bits x 40 MHz symbol rate).

To actually make a radio that meets FCC spectrum masks, a reduction of the 
symbol rate down to around 35 MHz is required plus filtering, giving a max of 
350 Mbps over the air.

After that, Forward Error Correction (FEC) is required which is typically 
around 85-90 % for most microwave radios using LDPC, giving a net throughput of 
around 300 to 315 Mbps.

Add header compression at layer 2 which in the worst case for large packets 
adds about 2.5 % improvement and you get to around 325 Mbps, which is what 
Trango and others get on a single 40 MHz channel with the newest technology.

Ubiquiti maybe using a lower FEC rate like 75-80% (or a lower symbol rate if 
the filtering is not steep enough) and no header compression, which would give 
them about 250 Mbps for large packets.

Hope that helps!

Chris Gustaf
Trango Systems

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Mathew Howard 
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
What other radios will only do 250Mbps (502.4Mbps capacity according to the 
data sheet...) on one 40mhz single polarity channel at 256qam? The other's I've 
looked at are typically around 300Mbps...
Not that I'm saying the AF11 is a bad radio, I plan on putting up at least a 
few of them this year... but I find it a little funny that they use 1024qam as 
a selling point, when it can't do as much throughput at 1024qam as other radios 
do at 256qam.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I think this whole thread can be summed up that there's no magical way to get 
around the shannon limit and bps/Hz coding efficiency for a given channel size 
and modulation...   From the technical perspective of people who have to really 
understand the FDX capacity of a new PTP link, the ubnt marketing department is 
divorced from reality, it's not 1200 Mbps no matter how many slick PDFs they 
publish.
One 40 MHz channel single polarity at 1024QAM 5/6 code rate is going to be 
nearly the same efficiency bps/Hz from many different manufacturers. Multiply 
as necessary for dual polarity or for larger channel sizes such as 60, 80 or 
112 MHz.


On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Faisal Imtiaz 
mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>> wrote:
FYI... on a "single"  40mhz channel 'dual polarity' (mimo) the expected 
throughput on Af11x is 500meg duplex.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net


From: "Josh Baird" mailto:joshba...@gmail.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 10:30:10 AM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience
But if I can get 80mhz channels in both polarities (running at 56Mhz/1024QAM 
with this radio), I should be able to at least double he capacity of my PTP-800 
link which can do 228Mbps.  Right?

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
At 40 MHz and a single polarity, you're looking at an almost insignificant 
increase in throughput.

Their claim is 1.2 gb+.
Cut that in half as they're advertising the aggregate, so 600 mb+.
That's using both polarities, so now only 300 mb+.
Only I haven't heard of anyone getting much more than 500 in a single direction 
(they may certainly exist, I just haven't seen them), so now that 300 is really 
only 250.


Not much of an upgrade unless you can also get larger channels in both 
polarities.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP






From: "Josh Baird" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 11:47:42 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our UBNT AF11x experience
This PTP800 is only capable of running at 40Mhz (ODU-A) so it can only do 
228Mbp

Re: [AFMUG] Question Regarding 11ghz Links.

[Hardy, Tim]

I worked on this one - we did the interference analysis, coordination and will 
do the licensing, but we did not design the links or select antennas, radios, 
etc.  I believe the answer is that the system had to be able to withstand 155 
MPH + winds and the smallest 11 GHz antennas that meet these requirements are 4 
footers.  Here's more information if you're interested.

http://www.commscope.com/docs/extremeline_microwave_antennas_br-105563.pdf

Get Outlook for iOS

_
From: Bill Prince mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Question Regarding 11ghz Links.
To: mailto:af@afmug.com>>



The PCN had 3 links with a 4' dish at each end of each link for a total of 6 
dishes.


bp

On 12/30/2016 1:32 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
A good quality 4' dish will have tighter RPE and better f/b ratio than a 2' or 
3' dish. Or maybe they happened to have an extra 4' dish in stock and used it 
because it was "free".

If it's a new purchase of a 4' dish for a 2 to 4 mile 11 GHz link that would be 
pretty silly unless they need seven nines of uptime at full modulation (1024QAM 
5/6 code rate?) in ITU rain zones M, N or P. Tropical locations.

http://www.racom.eu/images/radost/images/hw/ray/rain_zone_h.png


On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 7:21 AM, Faisal Imtiaz 
mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>> wrote:

I am curious, what is the wisdom behind installing 4ft dishes for a 2/4 mile 
11ghz link ?

Is there a technical reason ? or is it just a way to maximize the return for 
the vendor ?


Regards

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Something beautiful happened on Election Night

[Hardy, Tim]

Congratulations!  What a beautiful family.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ben Royer
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 1:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] OT: Something beautiful happened on Election Night

My love and I welcomed our newest family member into the world, our daughter 
Isabelle!

[Isabelle]


Thank you,
Ben Royer, Operations Manager
Royell Communications, Inc.
217-965-3699 www.royell.net

Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

[Hardy, Tim]

At 11 GHz, 5 km is correct and paths under 5 kms can be coordinated and 
licensed as long as the EIRPs are restricted per the equation.  At 6 GHz, the 
minimum distance is 17 kms. and the same equation applies for paths less than 
this distance.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 9:05 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

H, can you clarify on minimum distance?  I was not aware of a min distance 
on 11 GHz, but if it's only 5 km, maybe that was just never an issue.  But I 
thought min distance at 6 GHz was more like 10 miles.  Did I miss a change?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel White
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 6:29 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

Mostly answered... but I'll take a stab:

Class A vs Class B is about side-lobe suppression and F/B ratio.  ETSI classes 
are the same way - and Class 4 antennas as Eric pointed out are a rare beast


-  For 11GHz, the smallest Class A antenna is the VHLP800 (2.6ft).   
Most 3ft antennas are actually a little bit bigger than 3ft (99cm)

-  For 18GHz, the smallest Class A antennas I am aware of are 2ft

-  Minimum distance for 11GHz and 6GHz is covered under FCC Part § 
101.143, with the minimum distance being 5km (roughly 3.12mi).  If you want to 
go shorter, than the max coordinated power you can use is calculated like this:

EIRP = MAXEIRP-40*log(A/B) dBW

EIRP = The new maximum EIRP (equivalent isotropically radiated power) in dBW.
MAXEIRP = Maximum EIRP as set forth in the Table in Section 101.113(a). *This 
is +55dBW for 11GHz*
A = Minimum path length from the Table above for the frequency band in 
kilometers.  *This is 5km for 11GHz*
B = The actual path length in kilometers.

NOTE:  For transmitters using Automatic Transmitter Power Control, EIRP 
corresponds to the maximum transmitter power available, not the coordinated 
transmit power or the nominal transmit power.

Daniel White
Managing Director - Hardware Distribution Sales
ConVergence Technologies
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
dwh...@converge-tech.com

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of SmarterBroadband
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 6:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

Does anyone make a 2 foot Class A antenna for 11 GHz?  Or is 3 foot the minimum.

Does anyone make a 1 foot Class A antenna for 18 GHz? Or is 2 foot the minimum.

Is there a minimum distance for a 11 GHz link?

Thanks

Adam

[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-tick-v1.gif]

Virus-free. 
www.avast.com

Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

[Hardy, Tim]

A couple of clarifications:

The VHLP800 (800 mm) is obsolete and no longer available - it was replaced by 
the VHLP3-11W (3').  There was a lot of discussion about the difference between 
A and B being sideline suppression and F/B and that certainly is true, but the 
main difference between a 2', 2.6' and 3' is the main beam gain and beam width. 
 In order to meet Cat A at 11 GHz, the minimum size antenna that meets either 
of these requirements is 2.6'.  There's not a demonstrable difference in 
co-polar patterns between these smaller antennas (Sentinel excluded of course) 
and the ability to coordinate them (or not) depends on congestion and what's 
within about +/- 30 degrees of main beam.  There are major and demonstrable 
differences between differing manufacturer's models of the same size.  As 
someone pointed out, the RW HP2-11 may be cheaper than RFS or Commscope, but 
the cross-pol patterns pale in comparison and we have seen many instances where 
a VHLP2 will coordinate where the HP2 will not.

Anyone that licenses a 2' or Cat B antenna needs to understand the liability of 
doing so.  In congested areas, it is certainly a risk that you may be required 
to upgrade to a Cat A if another user cannot coordinate around your Cat B 
antenna.  All costs associated with this upgrade would be your responsibility.

Finally, I could mention that there are larger very high performance 
(ultra-high) antennas (F/B > 80) that allow significant frequency re-use.  Take 
a look at Mt San Miguel near San Diego where almost every path is using 
multiple 11 GHz frequencies and ultra-high performance antennas.

Get Outlook for iOS

_
From: Rory Conaway mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 7:35 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas
To: mailto:af@afmug.com>>


And availability.  The B11’s were available almost a year ago.  Here is another 
thing, the B11’s can get up to 480Mbps of real throughput in a 40MHz channel.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 5:05 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas


Just $1,200+ more per end than an AF11x.

You could buy a pair of Cisco SFPs for that savings! At list price! ;)

(Yes, I understand business case vs product cost, just ribbing you a bit.]

On Nov 8, 2016 6:00 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
I haven't bought B11s, just while scouting for options, I *COULD* do B11s. I 
could also swap them out later for something else like an AlfoPlus2.

Why would I do a B11? Cheapest 11 GHz link with an SFP.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]




From:"Bill Prince" mailto:part15...@gmail.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 10:51:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Class A and B antennas

+1

Inquiring minds.



bp




On 11/7/2016 8:47 PM, Sean Heskett wrote:
If you are in a congested RF environment why on earth would you waste the 
spectrum on a B11? It only does 256QAM

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:42 PM Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
*nods* I asked about going from a 3' to a 6' SHP dish, no go.

That said, I've got a couple paths in HFT central where I can still do B11s.  
:-)



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.

Re: [AFMUG] international MW Links?

[Hardy, Tim]

Every nation has its own requirements and rules that must be met before filing 
for a license.  All Part 101 paths with a station in US territory must be prior 
coordinated prior to filing and other nations, Mexico, Canada, BVI, etc. have 
differing requirements that must also be satisfied.  There are also various 
treaties that the FCC is required to satisfy when granting licenses – for 
example, all stations within 56.3 kilometers of an international border are 
ineligible for Conditional Authorization and must wait for formal FCC license 
grant before beginning operations.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 2:30 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] international MW Links?

What is the rule of law concerning MW links between 2 nations? Say FCC and 
Canada or FCC and Mexico?

How its coordinated?

Re: [AFMUG] Downtilt Calculator

[Hardy, Tim]

https://www.comsearch.com/index2.jsp


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brandon Yuchasz
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 1:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Downtilt Calculator

Looking for a very simple down tilt calculation tool and I am wondering what 
most of you guys are using. There has to be an easier way then using math and 
my brain every time.


Best regards,
Brandon Yuchasz
GogebicRange.net
www.gogebicrange.net

Re: [AFMUG] OT TIVO Roamio

[Hardy, Tim]

As I mentioned the other day the Roamio OTA with 500 gb hard drive is $399 on 
the website, including lifetime service for the device.

TiVo Roamio™ OTA 1TB DVR - No Subscription Fees. Only 
$399‎

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 4:41 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT TIVO Roamio


Website looks like $499 model plus 14.99/mo?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 6, 2016 4:21 PM, "Travis Johnson" mailto:t...@ida.net>> 
wrote:
If you buy the $399 model, they have basically bundled the monthly subscription 
into the price. Or you can buy the $150 version and pay $12/month.

Travis

On 6/6/2016 2:09 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
How is it you're getting around the monthly subscription?


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

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Sound and image is better than on a Roku.  Best picture I think I have ever 
seen on any device.

Re: [AFMUG] Cord is cut

[Hardy, Tim]

Lifetime (of the device) subscription is included in the price.  This is for 
the TiVo Roamio OTA only.

Get Outlook for iOS

_
From: Chuck McCown mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>>
Sent: Saturday, June 4, 2016 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cord is cut
To: mailto:af@afmug.com>>


No subscription charge for the Tivo Roamio.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 11:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cord is cut

Tivo has a monthly subscription for the channels.  Channel Master does not.


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

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Jay Weekley 
mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>> wrote:
ESPN?

Josh Luthman wrote:

Monthly subscription?

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

On Jun 4, 2016 12:17 AM, "Chuck McCown" 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> 
>> wrote:

Got my Tivo Roamio going.  I get 51 OTA channels. Lots of
features, still learning my way around.
Youtube and Hulu seem to be better quality images than on the
playstation.

Re: [AFMUG] Fw: OT Tivo Roamio

[Hardy, Tim]

Ha! My wife now calls the remote a Ba dooper!

Get Outlook for iOS




On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:32 PM -0700, "Chuck McCown" 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

Plus all the OTT clients and aggregated searching, season passes for favs etc 
etc.
Hopefully it still makes the cool ba doop sound when fast forwarding.
We tell people to ba doop when they forget they are watching a recorded 
commercial.

From: Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 6:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Tivo Roamio

OTA tuner
1 TB DVR
Whole house DVR

All in one box.

From: Bill Prince
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 6:01 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Tivo Roamio


How does that differ from the Roku (I got a Roku 2, which I think is about 
$69)? It has an all-inclusive search that picks up all the OTT streams that I 
can think of. Netflix, Hulu, Vudo, Amazon, Freeflix, and on and on (a lot).

We also use a Channel Master DVR+ which catches all the local channels we care 
about, and about 50 we don't care about, plus several more OTT streams that we 
haven't really explored.

BTW - Tivo is now a part of Rovi, or Rovi is now Tivo, depending on your 
perspective.



bp




On 5/25/2016 4:45 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Ordered the Roamio today.� $399+ taxes
1 TB DVR.
�
Excited.� No subscription fees.� Aggregates all the searching for content 
from various OTT providers to one search function.
Can do multi room DVR if you buy the smaller units.�
�
It sounds ideal.�
Now I gotta find my OTA antenna again.�

Re: [AFMUG] OT Tivo Roamio

[Hardy, Tim]

Me too!  Cord cutters!

Get Outlook for iOS




On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:45 PM -0700, "Chuck McCown" 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

Ordered the Roamio today.  $399+ taxes
1 TB DVR.

Excited.  No subscription fees.  Aggregates all the searching for content from 
various OTT providers to one search function.
Can do multi room DVR if you buy the smaller units.

It sounds ideal.
Now I gotta find my OTA antenna again.

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

[Hardy, Tim]

Sean,

You’re probably looking at the MAS (Multiple Address System) band that is 
addressed under 101 Subpart O (Rule Sections 101.1301 – 101.1333).  Call our 
customer service number if you need additional information.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 4:06 PM
To: af@afmug.com; memb...@wispa.org
Subject: [AFMUG] Licensed spectrum for utility companies

can anyone point me in the direction of what licensed spectrum is available and 
how to obtain the spectrum for electrical and water utility companies that want 
to do advanced metering.

our local co-op is about to deploy a 900Mhz system and they stated that they 
couldn't get any licensed spectrum.

Any and all advice is greatly appreciate!

Thanks,
Sean

Re: [AFMUG] 6 & 11 Ghz Dish?

[Hardy, Tim]

Yes, they used to make a dual-pol version but they just don’t sell enough of 
these.  If you need a dual-polarized model I can check with PLM to see if that 
feed is available.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 3:56 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 6 & 11 Ghz Dish?

Tim ,those are single pol

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
The smallest is 8 FEET for 5 & 11 GHz???


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

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
Commscope has 8’ & 10’ shrouded models available.  HP8-611 & HP10-611

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 3:20 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] 6 & 11 Ghz Dish?

Such monster exists?

Re: [AFMUG] 6 & 11 Ghz Dish?

[Hardy, Tim]

Commscope has 8’ & 10’ shrouded models available.  HP8-611 & HP10-611

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 3:20 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] 6 & 11 Ghz Dish?

Such monster exists?

[AFMUG] FCC UNVEILS CONSUMER BROADBAND LABELS TO PROVIDE GREATER TRANSPARENCY TO CONSUMERS

[Hardy, Tim]

Labels Will Help Consumers Make Informed Broadband Purchasing Decisions and 
Serve as a Safe Harbor Format for Meeting Transparency Rule Requirements.  News 
Release. News Media Contact: Will Wiquist at (202) 418-0509, email: 
will.wiqu...@fcc.gov  CGB

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-338708A1.pdf

Re: [AFMUG] Is this a typo? Google builds 100kW 80 GHz transmitter.

[Hardy, Tim]

This is not a typo, with 0.5 w power, it would only require a 3' antenna.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 9:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is this a typo? Google builds 100kW 80 GHz transmitter.

Most of the EIRPs are listed as dBW (not dBm), and the EIRP in the 82-84GHz 
band is listed as 52 dBW/96411 W. That's consistent, and I don't think it's a 
typo.

bp


On 3/2/2016 6:49 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
>
> http://hackaday.com/2016/03/02/google-is-building-a-100kw-radio-transm
> itter-at-a-spaceport-and-no-one-knows-why/
>
> Based on the eirp sounds like a typo or copy/paste error.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License Requirements- Hypothetical

[Hardy, Tim]

You can coordinate anything you want and hopefully the coordination process and 
back-and-forth negotiation with other coordinators and licensees will take care 
of any issues.  The rules do say that no response to a PCN can be considered an 
agreement or clearance of the proposal.  However, you are also supposed to do 
actual engineering and interference analysis before even coordinating and this 
analysis would have clearly seen the licensed, co-located system.  So your 
coordination exhibit cannot simply ignore the fact that you predict 
interference into another licensed user.  Whether this user responded to the 
PCN or not – he still enjoys first in-place protection afforded by his license.

In the case of a non-operational, licensed system, you should gather proof 
(photos, spectrum analyzer photos, etc.) that the other party is not operating 
and file this with the FCC WTB to get the licenses formally canceled per 
101.65.  This is strongly recommended to protect your interests in-case the 
other user decides to fire his system up or even sell it and transfer the 
license to someone else to operate under the existing license.

There are hundreds if not thousands of records in the ULS database of licensed 
paths that are no longer in operation.  The FCC relies solely on the licensee 
to keep things up-to-date, and if he takes a path down or moves it from one 
location to another without properly removing the old path from the license, 
the FCC and everyone else assumes the old path is still there.  You also have 
the problem of bankruptcy and the debtor-in-possession treating the licenses 
(whether operating or not) as assets.

It’s hard to keep track of all of this but a good competent coordinator should 
be constantly maintaining his own database and keeping track of changes, and 
deletions that he knows about outside of ULS action.  Relying solely on ULS, 
which is known to be incomplete and have numerous errors, omissions and extra 
non-operational data could lead the coordinator to unnecessarily reduce power, 
upgrade antennas or even fail the path completely.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Forrest Christian (List 
Account)
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 8:10 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License 
Requirements- Hypothetical


Let me ask another hypothetical here, the answer of which may be part of your 
answer.

If you were able to convince a coordinator to send out pcns for the exact same 
path and frequencies as the existing license,  and no one replied, is it legal 
to complete the license filing and operate on that path?

If ISP B is just refusing to take any action as opposed to actively opposing 
the transfer this might be an option.  Coordinating on different frequencies 
may be another.

But consult a lawyer.   Just a thought to check into.
On Mar 2, 2016 3:00 PM, "cjwstudios" 
mailto:cjwstud...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I have a hypothetical I would appreciate some opinions on, knowing no one is a 
lawyer;
If ISP A acquires ISP B's fixed microwave point to point stations which have 
operating licenses in an asset acquisition, and ISP B refuses to transfer said 
licenses to ISP A, which CFR or ruling governs ISP A's solution?  Since ISP A 
is now the operator of the control point they would be illegally operating the 
point to point stations without assuming them from ISP B, am I correct?
Any rulings, court cases, opinions would be super. Thanks in advance.

Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License Requirements- Hypothetical

[Hardy, Tim]

Part 1.948 makes it a requirement and there have been very large fines levied 
for transferring licenses without first gaining FCC approval

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of cjwstudios
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 5:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License 
Requirements- Hypothetical

Thanks Tim, it feels like 101.55 is optional, don't you think?  Would be neat 
to say that the trigger of a merger or similar action requires the transfer of 
a license.

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
Not a lawyer – but 101.55 is the rule section

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of John Woodfield
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 5:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License 
Requirements- Hypothetical


I had this situation, in our case the links were unneeded and antiquated so we 
opted to replace them.



That probably doesn't help you but it was easiest for us.







John Woodfield, President

Delmarva WiFi Inc.

410-870-WiFi


-Original Message-
From: "cjwstudios" mailto:cjwstud...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 5:00pm
To: "af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License Requirements- 
Hypothetical
I have a hypothetical I would appreciate some opinions on, knowing no one is a 
lawyer;
If ISP A acquires ISP B's fixed microwave point to point stations which have 
operating licenses in an asset acquisition, and ISP B refuses to transfer said 
licenses to ISP A, which CFR or ruling governs ISP A's solution?  Since ISP A 
is now the operator of the control point they would be illegally operating the 
point to point stations without assuming them from ISP B, am I correct?
Any rulings, court cases, opinions would be super. Thanks in advance.

Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License Requirements- Hypothetical

[Hardy, Tim]

Not a lawyer – but 101.55 is the rule section

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of John Woodfield
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 5:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License 
Requirements- Hypothetical


I had this situation, in our case the links were unneeded and antiquated so we 
opted to replace them.



That probably doesn't help you but it was easiest for us.







John Woodfield, President

Delmarva WiFi Inc.

410-870-WiFi


-Original Message-
From: "cjwstudios" mailto:cjwstud...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 5:00pm
To: "af@afmug.com" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] Fixed Point to Point Microwave Stations License Requirements- 
Hypothetical
I have a hypothetical I would appreciate some opinions on, knowing no one is a 
lawyer;
If ISP A acquires ISP B's fixed microwave point to point stations which have 
operating licenses in an asset acquisition, and ISP B refuses to transfer said 
licenses to ISP A, which CFR or ruling governs ISP A's solution?  Since ISP A 
is now the operator of the control point they would be illegally operating the 
point to point stations without assuming them from ISP B, am I correct?
Any rulings, court cases, opinions would be super. Thanks in advance.

Re: [AFMUG] Unlicensed for dummies

[Hardy, Tim]

A part 101 license (other than area-wide licenses or bands that were auctioned) 
does not grant “exclusive use” of a frequency at a location.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 11:32 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Unlicensed for dummies

When did they go up there?  Was it before U-NII-1 was opened up?  Maybe you can 
argue that is a separate band, since it wasn’t even available when they located 
there.

It is common for a lease to specify exclusivity on that tower for certain 
unlicensed bands, or to contain a non-interference clause.  Apparently the 
lease doesn’t specify.  Probably the city won’t want to get involved, that’s 
why it’s easiest for a site owner to only allow one unlicensed tenant, or one 
per band, they don’t want to play Judge Judy in a technical area they know 
nothing about.

Maybe show the city a copy of one of your Part 101 licenses showing you have 
exclusive use of that frequency at those locations.  Or borrow a 2-way license 
from somebody in the area and show the city a copy.  Or find a cellular or 
paging company that is on a city structure, look up and make a copy of their 
FCC license.  Tell the city this is the paperwork someone will have if the FCC 
has granted them exclusive use of spectrum, and of course the other tenant will 
not have anything of the kind to show.  Maybe then turn their WiFi router 
upside down and show them the Part 15 sticker so they can understand this is 
exactly the same rules you and the other tenant are operating under.  It would 
be like saying you can’t use WiFi because your next door neighbor had WiFi 
first.

That’s not how unlicensed works.  That’s not how any of this works.


From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:14 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Unlicensed for dummies


The basic part 15 rule says it all
On Feb 26, 2016 9:13 AM, "Ty Featherling" 
mailto:tyfeatherl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
We have a co-tennant on a water tower saying that since they were there first, 
they get exclusive use of the entire 5GHz unlicensed band. There lease warrants 
no such thing and we told the the FCC doesn't either. Is there a plain english 
"for dummies" explanation of Part 15, specifically regarding interference and 
co-location? The city is involved and we need to make this stupid easy to 
understand.


-Ty

Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

[Hardy, Tim]

4 GHz is still a fixed point-to-point band, but it’s extremely difficult to 
engineer anything new due to the thousands of satellite ground stations that 
share the band on a co-primary basis.  The HFT crowd has been coordinating 4 
GHz between Chicago and New York and it will be interesting to see if any of 
this actually gets built.

Engineering 6 GHz point-to-point can be just as difficult in many areas due to 
co-primary satellite uplinks that are licensed full-band, full arc.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 2:11 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines


The great Chuck has spoken...probably read something similar in CQ rag when God 
was a baby..
On Jan 28, 2016 12:07 PM, "Chuck McCown" 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
There was a time when C band satellite shared spectrum with terrestrial 
microwave.  In a town I grew up near, they had a hard time with their first HBO 
TVRO installation due to a Pacific Northwest Bell radio a few blocks away.

From: George Skorup
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 12:03 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

They regularly did 6 and 11 common carrier bands. I don't remember what 4GHz 
was paired with, possibly 8GHz.
On 1/28/2016 8:26 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
They made some crazy circular feeds for those horns.  You could put a very wide 
range of frequencies through them and with the correct feed, you can have many 
radios and many different bands on all at the same time.

From: Erich Kaiser
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 6:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

More info on the Horns

http://www.telephonecollectors.info/index.php/wiring-diagrams/doc_view/8708-402-421-100-i3


Erich Kaiser
North Central Tower
er...@northcentraltower.com
Office: 630-621-4804
Cell: 630-777-9291
[https://docs.google.com/a/northcentraltower.com/uc?id=0B12mNmVrr3-PbU1UMFk0OUFhOGs&export=download]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Erich Kaiser 
mailto:er...@northcentraltower.com>> wrote:
We deployed 6ghz microwave utilizing the horn antennas, they require 
maintenance but, work really well...That was the network I sold to JAB/T6.  
They have no idea how that stuff works or any care to learn...

https://www.google.com/search?q=KS-15676+microwave&rlz=1C2GGGE___US556US556&biw=1920&bih=911&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJp9vxq8vKAhUmvIMKHSrKBMIQ_AUICSgE&dpr=1#imgrc=8xtXypST-6HK4M%3A

I still have waveguide parts(Keeping) and circular waveguide(Which is going to 
the scrap yard)

Awesome stuff... Still CatA for 6ghz.

Erich Kaiser
North Central Tower
er...@northcentraltower.com
Office: 630-621-4804
Cell: 630-777-9291


On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Sean Heskett 
mailto:af...@zirkel.us>> wrote:
there is a "Long Lines" coffee table book.
For all of you that would like to geek out on some antenna porn ;-)

http://spencerjharding.com/project/the-long-lines/

http://spencerjharding.com/books/the-long-lines/

-sean



On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
There are some amazing Long Lines sites in WA and ID that serve almost no 
useful purpose, now that all long distance traffic moves via fiber...  The ones 
closer to major metro areas have more tenants and more value to their new 
owners.

The Long Lines sites that were built solely as a means to get a PTP relay over 
a major mountain range are amazing. Built with massive diesel tanks and 
ventilation intakes 18' off the ground due to snow pack. These ones have the 
original horn antennas and not much else, maybe some VHF/UHF omni radio 
repeaters for forestry/national parks.
Bethel Ridge WA, about 1820 meters elevation
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=46.71724,-121.10068&z=14&t=h
Goldendale WA
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=45.99800,-120.69536&z=14&t=h
Leadore ID, one of the highest I can find, it's at 2750m elevation
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=45.99800,-120.69536&z=14&t=h

Bring a snow-cat in winter


On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
I have a bunch I took of a Long Lines concrete tower in Springfield, OH that 
was being torn down on my FB somewhere.

Then there's long-lines.net


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


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 7:56:50 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines
I didn't get enough pics on this site:  
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cfk3jvi6u5jaq1x/AACv12KJ32ZrUbw5mwSuAVuxa?dl=0   
Lots of awesome stuff here.


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


From: "Josh Reynolds" mail

Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

[Hardy, Tim]

6 and 11 weren’t “paired” but the two bands were used together for frequency 
diversity.  Most of the systems that had these were extremely old TM-1 600 
channel analog on 30 MHz bandwidth.  Major routes would have full blocks of 4, 
6 GHz and even some 11 GHz maximum bandwidth allowed on the same antennas.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 2:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

They regularly did 6 and 11 common carrier bands. I don't remember what 4GHz 
was paired with, possibly 8GHz.
On 1/28/2016 8:26 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
They made some crazy circular feeds for those horns.  You could put a very wide 
range of frequencies through them and with the correct feed, you can have many 
radios and many different bands on all at the same time.

From: Erich Kaiser
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 6:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

More info on the Horns

http://www.telephonecollectors.info/index.php/wiring-diagrams/doc_view/8708-402-421-100-i3


Erich Kaiser
North Central Tower
er...@northcentraltower.com
Office: 630-621-4804
Cell: 630-777-9291
[https://docs.google.com/a/northcentraltower.com/uc?id=0B12mNmVrr3-PbU1UMFk0OUFhOGs&export=download]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Erich Kaiser 
mailto:er...@northcentraltower.com>> wrote:
We deployed 6ghz microwave utilizing the horn antennas, they require 
maintenance but, work really well...That was the network I sold to JAB/T6.  
They have no idea how that stuff works or any care to learn...

https://www.google.com/search?q=KS-15676+microwave&rlz=1C2GGGE___US556US556&biw=1920&bih=911&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJp9vxq8vKAhUmvIMKHSrKBMIQ_AUICSgE&dpr=1#imgrc=8xtXypST-6HK4M%3A

I still have waveguide parts(Keeping) and circular waveguide(Which is going to 
the scrap yard)

Awesome stuff... Still CatA for 6ghz.

Erich Kaiser
North Central Tower
er...@northcentraltower.com
Office: 630-621-4804
Cell: 630-777-9291


On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Sean Heskett 
mailto:af...@zirkel.us>> wrote:
there is a "Long Lines" coffee table book.
For all of you that would like to geek out on some antenna porn ;-)

http://spencerjharding.com/project/the-long-lines/

http://spencerjharding.com/books/the-long-lines/

-sean



On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
There are some amazing Long Lines sites in WA and ID that serve almost no 
useful purpose, now that all long distance traffic moves via fiber...  The ones 
closer to major metro areas have more tenants and more value to their new 
owners.

The Long Lines sites that were built solely as a means to get a PTP relay over 
a major mountain range are amazing. Built with massive diesel tanks and 
ventilation intakes 18' off the ground due to snow pack. These ones have the 
original horn antennas and not much else, maybe some VHF/UHF omni radio 
repeaters for forestry/national parks.
Bethel Ridge WA, about 1820 meters elevation
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=46.71724,-121.10068&z=14&t=h
Goldendale WA
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=45.99800,-120.69536&z=14&t=h
Leadore ID, one of the highest I can find, it's at 2750m elevation
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=45.99800,-120.69536&z=14&t=h

Bring a snow-cat in winter


On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
I have a bunch I took of a Long Lines concrete tower in Springfield, OH that 
was being torn down on my FB somewhere.

Then there's long-lines.net


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


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 7:56:50 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines
I didn't get enough pics on this site:  
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cfk3jvi6u5jaq1x/AACv12KJ32ZrUbw5mwSuAVuxa?dl=0   
Lots of awesome stuff here.


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


From: "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 7:41:12 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] AT&T Long Lines

Some of the old AT&T sites are cool. Hardened bunkers with walls many feet 
thick.
On Jan 26, 2016 7:36 PM, "Ken Hohhof" mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> 
wrote:
Yeah, you wouldn’t want information like this getting out:

http://wikimapia.org/10668587/AT-T-Norway-IL-Class-1-Switching-Center

Not a big secret, since it’s a very distinctive looking tower visible from 
10-20 miles away due to the high ground it sits on.  It was also one of the 
ground sites for the Air Force 1 secure communications network, I don’t know if 
that’s still operational, I think maybe it is.

Last I heard DeKalb, IL is 

Re: [AFMUG] PR Towers..

[Hardy, Tim]

Yep, old PRTC site.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 5:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com; af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PR Towers..

peter, you need to call me next time you are in town

that tower was built by the local ilec.  it sits atop of El Yunque peak.
Sent from Outlook Mobile



On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:05 PM -0800, "Peter Kranz" 
mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com>> wrote:
So during my visit to Puerto Rico I think I saw most of the transmitter sites 
on the island. This particular tower stood out as the most epic tower on the 
island. My guess is it was designed to have a bunch of AT&T style long-line 
horn antennas installed in it that have since been removed.

Peter Kranz
www.UnwiredLtd.com
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
Mobile: 510-207-
pkr...@unwiredltd.com

Re: [AFMUG] Trango Apex Issue

[Hardy, Tim]

Paul,

Hit me off list, I’ll take a look at it for you.

Tim

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of can...@believewireless.net
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 4:11 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Trango Apex Issue

A reboot doesn't fix it.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Adam Moffett 
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I was wondering about ducting as welllike maybe when the weather is just 
right their link bumps into yours.

I would guess that's something a frequency coordinator could look into.

On 12/11/2015 2:46 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
It would appear to be interference into Side 1.  MSE=SNR, and –7.70 is 
terrible, not good enough apparently to link even at QPSK.

So who is stepping on your frequency and polarization?  Or legally on your 
frequency but not supposed to be aimed at you.  Could possibly be some 
reflection or ducting thing, but the interfering signal appears to be at about 
–55, which is more than just some low level interference keeping you from 
achieving full modulation.

The other possibility is a radio problem.


From: mailto:p...@believewireless.net
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 12:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Trango Apex Issue

Twice a year for a few weeks we have a Trango Apex 11GHz link that acts up. 
Here is what we are seeing:

Side 1:
# linktest
LOCK   RSSI  MSEBER TX  
RX
  1> 0  -43.40 dBm  -7.70 dB0.00E+00QPSK
QPSK

Side 2:
# linktest
LOCK   RSSI  MSEBER TX  
RX
  1> 1  -45.00 dBm  -34.30 dB   0.00E+00QPSK
64QAM

Any idea what could be causing this? We saw something similar on Giga 11GHz 
links as well.

[AFMUG] 'Self-sufficient Wireless Transmitter Powered by Foot-pumped Urine Operating Wearable MFC

[Hardy, Tim]

Now I've seen it all!
And finally... A new wearable energy generator could use urine to power a 
wireless transmitter. Article

Re: [AFMUG] To strong of a signal?

[Hardy, Tim]

All radios have a distortion or oversaturation level – usually listed in their 
specs.  For example, the PTP-800 series is listed at -35 dBm maximum – it will 
work at stronger levels but you will start to get dribbling errors, etc.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 2:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To strong of a signal?

I have used licensed radios in the upper –20s before.  Damage probably will not 
happen until the single digits or positive numbers.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 12:33 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] To strong of a signal?

AF can probably handle it, but you're pushing a lot of power into the air for 
no reason.  I'd suggest bringing it down.  It will help you and your neighbors.


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

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 2:32 PM, John Babineaux 
mailto:john.babine...@reach4com.com>> wrote:
What would be a signal that is to strong?
-30 for a backhaul.  If I have a backhaul at what point should I start turning 
down the power or should I do it just because?
I have an Air Fiber 5 link and it's in the -30s


John Babineaux
System Administrator
REACH4 Communications | Website: www.REACH4Com.com
Phone: 337-783-3436 x105 | Email: 
john.babine...@reach4com.com
927 N Parkerson Ave, Crowley, LA 70526

Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

[Hardy, Tim]

Here's 6 GHz, 30 MHz bw for PTP800:

30 MHz  
CH  
1   5945.2000   6197.2400   Band 1
2   5974.8500   6226.8900   Band 1
3   6004.5000   6256.5400   Band 1
4   6034.1500   6286.1900   Band 2
5   6063.8000   6315.8400   Band 2
6   6093.4500   6345.4900   Band 3
7   6123.1000   6375.1400   Band 3
8   6152.7500   6404.7900   Band 3

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 6:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

If you have the 6GHz plan it would be greatly appreciated!


On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Hardy, Tim  wrote:

> Here's the 40 MHz bandwidth plan - let me know if you need others
> 
> 40 MHz
> CHQ1  J1  
> 1 10735   11225   Band 5
> 2 10775   11265   Band 5
> 3 10815   11305   Band 5
> 4 10855   11345   Band 5
> 5 10895   11385   Band 6
> 6 10935   11425   Band 6
> 7 10975   11465   Band 6
> 8 11015   11505   Band 6
> 9 11055   11545   Band 7
> 1011095   11585   Band 7
> 1111135   11625   Band 7
> 1211175   11665   Band 7
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Petermann
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 5:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands
> 
> Is there a document that shows the sub-bands for the 11GHz radios?

Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

[Hardy, Tim]

Chuck,

Not in the licensed point-to-point bands (4,6,10.5,11,18,23 GHz).  You would 
need to go to 24,28,31, or 38 GHz and lease from one of the "area" license 
holders.

Tim

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 9:24 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

Hey Tim,
Between 2 and 4 in the morning, when I do most of my thinking

I wondered - is there a way to license a frequency for an area so we could use 
the pair many times in an area?  We would only be interfering with ourselves.



-Original Message-----
From: Hardy, Tim
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 7:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

I'll send it in the AM, 30 MHz bw?

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Dan Petermann [d...@wyoming.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 6:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

If you have the 6GHz plan it would be greatly appreciated!


On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Hardy, Tim  wrote:

> Here's the 40 MHz bandwidth plan - let me know if you need others
>
> 40 MHz
> CHQ1  J1
> 1 10735   11225   Band 5
> 2 10775   11265   Band 5
> 3 10815   11305   Band 5
> 4 10855   11345   Band 5
> 5 10895   11385   Band 6
> 6 10935   11425   Band 6
> 7 10975   11465   Band 6
> 8 11015   11505   Band 6
> 9 11055   11545   Band 7
> 1011095   11585   Band 7
> 1111135   11625   Band 7
> 1211175   11665   Band 7
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Petermann
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 5:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands
>
> Is there a document that shows the sub-bands for the 11GHz radios?

Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

[Hardy, Tim]

I'll send it in the AM, 30 MHz bw?

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Dan Petermann [d...@wyoming.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 6:04 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

If you have the 6GHz plan it would be greatly appreciated!


On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Hardy, Tim  wrote:

> Here's the 40 MHz bandwidth plan - let me know if you need others
>
> 40 MHz
> CHQ1  J1
> 1 10735   11225   Band 5
> 2 10775   11265   Band 5
> 3 10815   11305   Band 5
> 4 10855   11345   Band 5
> 5 10895   11385   Band 6
> 6 10935   11425   Band 6
> 7 10975   11465   Band 6
> 8 11015   11505   Band 6
> 9 11055   11545   Band 7
> 1011095   11585   Band 7
> 1111135   11625   Band 7
> 1211175   11665   Band 7
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Petermann
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 5:24 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands
>
> Is there a document that shows the sub-bands for the 11GHz radios?

Re: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

[Hardy, Tim]

Here's the 40 MHz bandwidth plan - let me know if you need others

40 MHz  
CH  Q1  J1  
1   10735   11225   Band 5
2   10775   11265   Band 5
3   10815   11305   Band 5
4   10855   11345   Band 5
5   10895   11385   Band 6
6   10935   11425   Band 6
7   10975   11465   Band 6
8   11015   11505   Band 6
9   11055   11545   Band 7
10  11095   11585   Band 7
11  11135   11625   Band 7
12  11175   11665   Band 7

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 5:24 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] PTP800 11GHz bands

Is there a document that shows the sub-bands for the 11GHz radios?

Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

[Hardy, Tim]

80 MHz will get you 700 Mbps each way with one carrier, double that with 2 or 
XPIC which the dual core C model would allow.  I think you mentioned frequency 
congestion and that certainly would make XPIC or a 2nd pair that much more 
difficult to get.

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Sterling Jacobson 
[sterl...@avative.net]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 8:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

Yes, 11Ghz.

So that would be 80MHz total on the license?

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 6:19 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

I seem to recall it was 11 GHz, right?  If so, and you have the wideband 
license you should try for 80 MHz bandwidth and depending on your capacity 
needs, you can go XPIC or other options.

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Jon Langeler 
[jon-ispli...@michwave.net]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 7:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

Yes, ask for dual pol 60MHz. Or you can buy the 'splitter adapter' instead of 
the OMT and use two 60MHz channels on same polarity. This is for 6GHz right?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>
> Question about this Ceragon IP20 I have.
>
> If I want the full 1Gbps out of it, according to these charts, I should use 
> two 30MHz channels per polarity, right?
> That would be for the 2+0 DP (2 x 500Mbps) Ceragon configuration.
>
> And when I go to license it, I ask the coordinator to allocate a 60MHz dual 
> polarity channel license?
>
> Or how exactly does this work?
>
> Thanks for your help peoples!
>
> [cid:image003.png@01CEF1AE.8F52B9D0]
> [cid:image004.png@01CEF1AE.8F52B9D0]

Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

[Hardy, Tim]

I seem to recall it was 11 GHz, right?  If so, and you have the wideband 
license you should try for 80 MHz bandwidth and depending on your capacity 
needs, you can go XPIC or other options.

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Jon Langeler 
[jon-ispli...@michwave.net]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 7:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon IP20 1Gbps License Question

Yes, ask for dual pol 60MHz. Or you can buy the 'splitter adapter' instead of 
the OMT and use two 60MHz channels on same polarity. This is for 6GHz right?

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:12 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>
> Question about this Ceragon IP20 I have.
>
> If I want the full 1Gbps out of it, according to these charts, I should use 
> two 30MHz channels per polarity, right?
> That would be for the 2+0 DP (2 x 500Mbps) Ceragon configuration.
>
> And when I go to license it, I ask the coordinator to allocate a 60MHz dual 
> polarity channel license?
>
> Or how exactly does this work?
>
> Thanks for your help peoples!
>
> [cid:image003.png@01CEF1AE.8F52B9D0]
> [cid:image004.png@01CEF1AE.8F52B9D0]

Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

[Hardy, Tim]

Agreed, but if you can fade to threshold when the other user is not there, but 
cannot get to threshold when he is - you know you have interference.  Typical 
monitoring would not reveal minor degradation to the threshold (fade margin).

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 5:03 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

Sometimes you have to monitor for years to make sure you get good test data...

From: Hardy, Tim<mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 2:54 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

“Monitor” = A detailed fade test to see how much of the fade margin is affected 
(if any).

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of 
ch...@wbmfg.com<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 4:31 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

60 to 80 MHz @ 11 GHz, pretty narrow beamwidth on the antenna.
If you actually knew who the other licensees are in the area that might get 
interfered with, it would be a fun test.

Have them monitor while you switched to the wider bandwidth.  My guess is they 
will not even be able to detect it.

From: Adam Moffett<mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 2:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

I can't tell if you're joking.  If you're not joking then I wonder how you walk 
with the giant sack between your legs.
On 11/24/2015 3:57 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
Be fun to find the others on the freq, get them to see if  you actually do 
interfere with a wider channel.

From: Sterling Jacobson<mailto:sterl...@avative.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 1:22 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

Well, it was intended to replace an existing link that I thought already had 
the channel width.

But I think I found an existing licensee and link that works.

I’ll just be replacing the link again, and updating the license to work with 
this link.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of 
ch...@wbmfg.com<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 12:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

You can always accidentally use a wider channel until someone says something...

From: Daniel White<mailto:afmu...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

He needs to use a wider channel, not increase modulation or something.

I’m pretty sure if you use 80MHz instead of 60MHz in Salt Lake/Ogden/Provo 
areas you’re going to interfere with a currently licensed link.  Actually part 
of me is surprised Sterling got 60MHz.

Sterling you might want to ask your frequency coordinator to look at Sential 
antennas from Commscope or some larger UHP antennas.  Yes it will cost money 
and will suck to install, but it might narrow the pattern enough to get you 
what you need.

Thank you,

Daniel White
afmu...@gmail.com<mailto:afmu...@gmail.com>
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>: 
Twitter<https://twitter.com/DanielWhite84>

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 9:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

If he already has a license, a little more BW isn’t gonna hurt anyone.

From: Josh Luthman<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 9:43 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

The people using all of the 11 GHz spectrum he can't =P


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

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Just use it.  Whose gonna know?

-Original Message- From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 8:07 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>'
Subject: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale


11GHz licensing is a joke.

I pulled my Ceragon 1Gbps link because of the inability to get the full license 
for the full spectrum needed for this radio link.

I think it was over $40k when I bought it.

Does anyone want it for some reasonable price?

I think the dishes were 3'.

Ceragon IP20c 11G 60MHz

I'm still trying to work a deal to get the full license for the link path(s) I 
want, but honestly there are too many squatters and complaints from Rise 
(Digis) e

Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

[Hardy, Tim]

“Monitor” = A detailed fade test to see how much of the fade margin is affected 
(if any).

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 4:31 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

60 to 80 MHz @ 11 GHz, pretty narrow beamwidth on the antenna.
If you actually knew who the other licensees are in the area that might get 
interfered with, it would be a fun test.

Have them monitor while you switched to the wider bandwidth.  My guess is they 
will not even be able to detect it.

From: Adam Moffett
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 2:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

I can't tell if you're joking.  If you're not joking then I wonder how you walk 
with the giant sack between your legs.
On 11/24/2015 3:57 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote:
Be fun to find the others on the freq, get them to see if  you actually do 
interfere with a wider channel.

From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 1:22 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

Well, it was intended to replace an existing link that I thought already had 
the channel width.

But I think I found an existing licensee and link that works.

I’ll just be replacing the link again, and updating the license to work with 
this link.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of 
ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 12:58 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

You can always accidentally use a wider channel until someone says something...

From: Daniel White
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:56 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

He needs to use a wider channel, not increase modulation or something.

I’m pretty sure if you use 80MHz instead of 60MHz in Salt Lake/Ogden/Provo 
areas you’re going to interfere with a currently licensed link.  Actually part 
of me is surprised Sterling got 60MHz.

Sterling you might want to ask your frequency coordinator to look at Sential 
antennas from Commscope or some larger UHP antennas.  Yes it will cost money 
and will suck to install, but it might narrow the pattern enough to get you 
what you need.

Thank you,

Daniel White
afmu...@gmail.com
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn: 
Twitter

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 9:44 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

If he already has a license, a little more BW isn’t gonna hurt anyone.

From: Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 9:43 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale

The people using all of the 11 GHz spectrum he can't =P


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

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Just use it.  Whose gonna know?

-Original Message- From: Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 8:07 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com'
Subject: [AFMUG] Ceragon 1Gbps 11Ghz link for sale


11GHz licensing is a joke.

I pulled my Ceragon 1Gbps link because of the inability to get the full license 
for the full spectrum needed for this radio link.

I think it was over $40k when I bought it.

Does anyone want it for some reasonable price?

I think the dishes were 3'.

Ceragon IP20c 11G 60MHz

I'm still trying to work a deal to get the full license for the link path(s) I 
want, but honestly there are too many squatters and complaints from Rise 
(Digis) every time I try that I'm about to give up.

It's in Utah, so shipping would be crate, unless someone local wants it.

It's been used a few months on a path using half capacity this summer.

Give me a reasonable offer.



[Avast logo]


This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

[AFMUG] FS: Training Introducing Comsearch's Microwave Engineering eLearning Center

[Hardy, Tim]

To view this email as a web page, click 
here
[www.comsearch.com]

[Comsearch Microwave Engineering eLearning 
Center]

[http://www.commscope.com/emailer/comsearch/2015/mwTowerIconSmallBlue.png]

Now Available Online!
Microwave Path Engineering 
Fundamentals

[Flexible training]You can set
your own
pace from
any location
at any time.

Comsearch's Microwave Engineering eLearning Center
offers a comprehensive and interactive online course on
Microwave Path Engineering 
Fundamentals.
Learn the basics of microwave engineering including the key elements of a 
microwave path, the role propagation plays in the design, the components of 
good path design, basic interference calculations and regulatory 
considerations. The course is geared to those with varied backgrounds including 
technical and non-technical. Translation support is provided in 16 languages.

For more details, download the course 
syllabus.

[Learn more]

[Learn more]

www.comsearch.com©2015 
CommScope, Inc. All rights reserved.

Re: [AFMUG] Dish polarity question

[Hardy, Tim]

VHLP and RW antennas that are sold with the 820S work with an OMT

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 12:41 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dish polarity question

I think Daniel and I are saying the same things.

-Original Message-
From: Daniel White
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 10:13 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dish polarity question

This comes up all the time with many manufacturers.

Almost all licensed microwave antennas a WISP is going to come in contact with 
have circular feedhorns, meaning their polarity is determined by the interface 
on the feedhorn.  Typically, they are rectangular and single polarity.

Then an OMT is added... depending on the radio it may be an external or 
internal device.  This combines the transmitters into a circular feed.

No voodoo required.  The OMT makes a single polarity dish dual polarity.

Thank you,

Daniel White
afmu...@gmail.com
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn: Twitter

> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Craig Baird
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 10:07 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] Dish polarity question
>
> We are getting ready to put up a licensed 11 GHz 2+0 link using 
> Cambium PTP820S radios.  We have two 11 GHz frequencies that are 
> oppositely polarized for use on this path.  I had assumed that we 
> would need to use dual polarity dishes in order to make this work, but 
> Cambium and our
vendor
> are saying that we need to use single-pol dishes.  This completely 
> baffles
me.
> How can a single-pol antenna transmit in two polarities?  Cambium's 
> answer is that it's because we're using an OMT, and that device 
> essentially makes
the
> single-pol antenna circularly polarized, so it will transmit both
polarities.  My
> first thought is "what kind of voodoo is this?"  Will this really work???
I'd sure
> hate to start transmitting, only to find out from an existing license
holder that
> we're interfering with them because one of our frequencies is coming 
> out the antenna in the wrong polarity.
> Can someone confirm for me that this will really fly?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Craig



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [AFMUG] PTP-800 56mhz channel width?

[Hardy, Tim]

AFAIK, ODU-A does not support this but ODU-B does.  The actual occupied 
bandwidth is 52.8 MHz.  You would have to re-coordinate and license this before 
making the change.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Baird
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:05 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] PTP-800 56mhz channel width?

We have a PTP-800 in 11ghz (ODU-A) that is only capable of a maximum 40mhz 
channel width.  I know that at least one model of the PTP-800 (ODU-B maybe) had 
a software/firmware upgrade that it allowed it to use a 56mhz channel.

Does anyone know if the ODU-A model is capable of running in a 56mhz channel 
with any type of upgrade?  I'm running out of capacity on this link, and being 
able to bump it up to 56mhz would allow us to get a little more time before we 
have to upgrade the radios.

Josh

Re: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

[Hardy, Tim]

Interference could be degrading your threshold.. Let me know the site names and 
I’ll take a look.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 3:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

Maybe there's a clifffrom -65 to suddenly nothing
On 10/23/2015 2:53 PM, Scott Vander Dussen wrote:
Ken-
Thanks, all good observations and questions that I’ll need to dig into.  I know 
for certain we have HAAM (Hitless automatic adaptive modulation) enabled, not 
sure why it’s dropping around -65, that’s more weirdness.

`S

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 10:56
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

Yeah, that’s what it looks like.  I would also worry that you only seem to be 
getting into the 40’s around sunrise and your steady readings are around –56.  
Do calculations and past experience say you should be that low?

What I’m thinking is that if you tried to align it during a fade, you may have 
misaligned the elevation.  I would only do alignment when the signal is stable. 
 It is possible to get a reflection off a wide area of flat ground or a thermal 
layer at dusk/dawn that is stronger than the main path, and to align on the 
reflection.

Another question is why the link is dropping at around –60?  I would expect a 
licensed link to stay up as low as –80, unless you have it set for fixed 
modulation.  Do you have ACM on this link?


From: Scott Vander Dussen
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 12:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

Yes, “thermal inversion layer” or whatever- I wasn’t involved in the call to 
SAF, but I believe this is why they wanted us to lower the tall side to avoid 
“reflecting” off the thermal differences.  The signal swing is a bit rhythmic

[cid:image001.png@01D10DA5.B8D9C720]

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Keefe John
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 10:31
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

signal can change from thermal ducting
On 10/23/2015 11:40 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
Signal don’t change unless you have rain, etc.  The last two things are wind 
(antenna alignment) and tx power.  That’s it..

Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.
den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 x103 – 
www.linktechs.net

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vander Dussen
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 11:31 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] 20+db swing

17 mile link, 11GHz, 3’ dishes- it’s worked fine for years and over the past 
few months there has been an increasing fluctuation with signal quality.  SAF 
support suggested we were too high on one side and actually lowering it would 
help, it didn’t change.  We’ve verified LOS, even switched out to a DragonWave 
11ghz pair of radios and it exhibited the same behavior as the SAF.  We then 
moved one side of the link to a different tower about 6 miles away (still makes 
overall link 17 miles) and we’re getting the exact same behavior.  In years’ 
past the signal was consistent, now we’re seeing this:

[cid:image002.png@01D10DA5.B8D9C720]

Am I missing something?  Same behavior with two different radios, frequencies, 
and towers.  There are no environmental conditions like moisture, etc. that are 
obvious culprits.

Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?

[Hardy, Tim]

Run this for FAA / ASR:

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

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 2:28 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?

The FAA stuff applies everywhere.


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


From: "Rory Conaway" mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 1:26:42 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?
We are 5 miles from a private airstrip so I don’t think the FAA issue comes 
into play.  Nothing else even close.  I’m checking with the country now but I 
don’t think I need anything.  This guy is just trying to be an jerk.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 11:09 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?

Go research the local tower zoning laws for the municipality the tower is 
located in. That will tell you if you need to so anything. He may be confused 
and thinking things like FAA approvals. Is this tower a FAA previously approved 
site? If so technically any time you add new frequencies to a tower you have to 
refile. Nobody does but it is required. Not only does the FAA study for 
airspace obstructions but they also do RFI studies for their RADAR and radio 
navigation systems. So each new addition to a tower gets studied for RFI if the 
height is not changed.

If you did not install a meter for your own equipment then you should not have 
to pull an electrical permit.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 1:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?

A Podunk town with a population of 1500.  We found the biggest jerk and put 
equipment on his tower.  Now he wants permits 3 months later.  We are looking 
elsewhere for another tower now.

Rory


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?

Depends on local regulation?


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


From: "Rory Conaway" mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 11:57:49 AM
Subject: [AFMUG] When do you need permits to put an antenna on a tower?


Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO
4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

“Progress always involves risks. You can't steal second base and keep your foot 
on first. “~Frederick B. Wilcox

Re: [AFMUG] Dead Broadcast Support squatting on PTP paths

[Hardy, Tim]

If you have documented proof that it is no longer there - pictures, etc. - send 
an email to Enforcement and the Media Bureau and ask them to cancel the 
licenses.  BTW, this is licensed in the broadcast 7 GHz band and is probably in 
an area where Part 101 would be excluded anyway - if that's what you're looking 
for.  I'll check on it later today.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 20, 2015, at 10:42 PM, Daniel White  wrote:
> 
> If you’re lucky and the dish was removed.  How many of those AT&T dishes
> from 30+ years ago still sit on towers :-D
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel White
> 
>  afmu...@gmail.com
> 
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
> 
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social:   LinkedIn:
>  Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 8:05 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dead Broadcast Support squatting on PTP paths
> 
> 
> 
> The easy thing about finding zombie 6 GHz paths is that it's hard to miss a
> 6' dish, even without a spotting scope or zoom lens.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Daniel White   > wrote:
> 
> And yes, let your frequency coordinator know a license is dead and they can
> take care of it.  I’ve seen it done before (but I don’t recall the specifics
> of how they took care of it).
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel White
> 
>  afmu...@gmail.com
> 
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590  
> 
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social:   LinkedIn:
>  Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com  ] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 7:51 PM
> 
> 
> To: af@afmug.com  
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dead Broadcast Support squatting on PTP paths
> 
> 
> 
> I talked to Liz about abandoned HFT licenses...  never had time to follow
> up. They do have 30 days from ceasing transmission to cancel their license.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  _  
> 
> 
> From: "Ken Hohhof" mailto:af...@kwisp.com> >
> To: af@afmug.com  
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 8:41:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dead Broadcast Support squatting on PTP paths
> 
> It would be interesting if you could convince a frequency coordinator to
> issue a PCN and if anyone would object.  I’m not sure the FCC would ever
> notice the conflict, they rely on the PCN process.  It would also be
> interesting to run by your coordinator if there is a process to get a zombie
> license cancelled when the licensee no longer exists to file the
> cancellation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Adam Moffett   
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 8:28 PM
> 
> To: af@afmug.com   
> 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dead Broadcast Support squatting on PTP paths
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe they're supposed to, but realistically if this place goes out of
> business that'll be the last thing on anybody's mind.
> 
> On 10/20/2015 9:16 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> 
> Grr.
> 
> So there is a defunct television station. It's been gone for 3+ years. Its
> building is empty as its its adjacent tower. Definitely no 6 or 8 GHz 6' or
> size dishes in sight.
> 
> http://bbjtoday.com/blog/new-owners-turning-former-kvos-tv-studios-into-bus
> iness-center/19341
> 
> http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1331160357/
> 
> Yet its 6 GHz PTP paths remain active in the ULS. Isn't the owner supposed
> to cancel these? 
> 
> I've emailed the POC to see what they say. Doing new links is hard enough
> without dead things squatting on paths.
> 
> 
> 
> license_id = 962882
>  source_system = ULS
>   callsign = KOP75
>facility_id = 35862
>frn = 21010624
>   lic_name = OTA BROADCASTING (SEA), LLC
>common_name = OTA BROADCASTING (SEA), LLC
> radio_service_code = TS
> radio_service_desc = TV Studio Transmitter Link
>   rollup_category_code = Broadcast Support
>   rollup_category_desc = Broadcast Support
> grant_date = 03/19/1986 00:00:00
>   expired_date = 02/01/2023 00:00:00
>  cancellation_date =
>   last_action_date = 09/12/2015 01:56:47
>lic_status_code = A
>lic_status_desc = Active
> rollup_status_code = A
> rollup_status_desc = Active
>   entity_type_code = C
>   entity_type_desc = Corporation
> rollup_entity_code = B
> rollup_entity_desc = Business
>lic_address = 11710 PLAZA AMERICA DRIVE SUITE 2000
>   lic_city = RESTON
>  lic_state = VA
>   lic_zip_code = 20190
> lic_attention_line =
>contact_company = Covington & Burling LLP
>   contact

Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?

[Hardy, Tim]

ve.com>

[logo.png]

black & associates

Frequency Coordination ● FCC Licensing ● Engineering Design









-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 8:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?



In the olden golden days building the MCI route with full block systems, we 
would have "bucks" or "bumps" in frequency plans when required, and we learned 
first hand how important it was to use ultra high performance antennas or 
better in such situations.  With very little free space loss, antenna 
performance is key and there is very little reliable data on close-coupling 
antenna performance, so it is extremely difficult to accurately calculate 
expected interference levels in these situations.  With the prevalence of 2&3' 
antennas these days, antenna isolation will be an even larger challenge.



Sent from my iPhone



> On Oct 19, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Seth Mattinen 
> mailto:se...@rollernet.us>> wrote:

>

>> On 10/19/15 16:56, George Skorup wrote:

>> To make Tim's point, we're co-located on a couple towers with other

>> 11GHz users and using both the high and low of a channel pair at both

>> ends is unpossible. (yes, that's a word :)

>

> It's a perfectly cromulent word.

>

> ~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?

[Hardy, Tim]

It is completely different.  FDD systems rely on frequency separation not time 
to mitigate interference.  If a TDD system transmits and receives the same 
frequency from a given site, it (and possibly adjacent channels to it) cannot 
be re-used from that site by another FDD system.  With FDD systems, frequency 
re-use is generally a function of difference in path azimuth and antenna 
performance.  As long as the high/low plan is maintained, all interference 
cases will be limited to the far-end site where there’s at least some free 
space loss and antenna discrimination to reduce the interfering signal.  When 
TDD is introduced as proposed here (transmitting and receiving the same 
frequency at each site), the interference potential is co-located.  Let’s not 
forget that 99.9% of everything licensed and installed today is FDD.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 7:57 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?

Agreed. I don't see how it's any different. You license any channel + polarity 
+ direction you would Tx on and the standard interference checks have you taken 
care of.


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


From: "Faisal Imtiaz" 
mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>>
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 6:06:48 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?
>>>Instead, the challenge is in assessing and accepting the risk of possibly 
>>>bucking your own 11GHz links or other operator's 11GHz links on or near your 
>>>two endpoints.  As there is no reliable way to calculate this type of 
>>>interference, you may only become aware of the problem after you have 
>>>installed and turned up your TDMA system.


Call me stupid, and please explain how that is ..I can understand the issue 
of channel/polarity availability...however how is this potential interference 
different from current . Today, one cannot use the same channel/polarity on 
the same site anyway...

The B11, actually opens up the possibility of channel reuse, on the same site 
with angular separtion ...(possibility being a key word).

Regards

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net<mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net>


From: "Mike Black" mailto:mbl...@bamicrowave.com>>
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 12:45:25 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?

+1 to Tim's remarks in this thread.  The challenge isn't in coordinating the 
same frequency pair in H and V between two sites, in both directions.  Instead, 
the challenge is in assessing and accepting the risk of possibly bucking your 
own 11GHz links or other operator's 11GHz links on or near your two endpoints.  
As there is no reliable way to calculate this type of interference, you may 
only become aware of the problem after you have installed and turned up your 
TDMA system.



If there are no other 11GHz systems within about a half km of either site and 
you don't plan to expand either site with additional 11GHz equipment from other 
vendors, you may be ok.  If not, then ?

Mike Black
Black & Associates
727-773-9016
www.bamicrowave.com<http://www.bamicrowave.com>

[logo.png]

black & associates

Frequency Coordination ● FCC Licensing ● Engineering Design









-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 8:29 PM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?



In the olden golden days building the MCI route with full block systems, we 
would have "bucks" or "bumps" in frequency plans when required, and we learned 
first hand how important it was to use ultra high performance antennas or 
better in such situations.  With very little free space loss, antenna 
performance is key and there is very little reliable data on close-coupling 
antenna performance, so it is extremely difficult to accurately calculate 
expected interference levels in these situations.  With the prevalence of 2&3' 
antennas these days, antenna isolation will be an even larger challenge.



Sent from my iPhone



> On Oct 19, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Seth Mattinen 
> mailto:se...@rollernet.us>> wrote:

>

>> On 10/19/15 16:56, George Skorup wrote:

>> To make Tim's point, we're co-located on a couple towers with other

>> 11GHz users and using both the high and low of a channel pair at both

>> ends is unpossible. (yes, that's a word :)

>

> It's a perfectly cromulent word.

>

> ~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa B11: Exactly what does the mounting look like?

[Hardy, Tim]

In the olden golden days building the MCI route with full block systems, we 
would have "bucks" or "bumps" in frequency plans when required, and we learned 
first hand how important it was to use ultra high performance antennas or 
better in such situations.  With very little free space loss, antenna 
performance is key and there is very little reliable data on close-coupling 
antenna performance, so it is extremely difficult to accurately calculate 
expected interference levels in these situations.  With the prevalence of 2&3' 
antennas these days, antenna isolation will be an even larger challenge.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Seth Mattinen  wrote:
> 
>> On 10/19/15 16:56, George Skorup wrote:
>> To make Tim's point, we're co-located on a couple towers with other
>> 11GHz users and using both the high and low of a channel pair at both
>> ends is unpossible. (yes, that's a word :)
> 
> It's a perfectly cromulent word.
> 
> ~Seth

[AFMUG] FAA levies $1.9 M civil penalty

[Hardy, Tim]

The Federal Aviation Administration wants to levy the “largest civil penalty” 
it has proposed against an unmanned aircraft system operator “for endangering 
the safety of our airspace” by operating drones in a “careless or reckless 
manner,” the agency said in a Tuesday announcement. The proposed $1.9 million 
civil penalty against SkyPan International of Chicago alleges that between 
March 21, 2012, and Dec. 15, 2014, SkyPan conducted 65 unauthorized operations 
“in some of our most congest­ed airspace and heavily populated cities 
[including New York City and Chicago], violating airspace regulations and 
various operating rules,” the FAA said. The flights involved aerial 
photography, and the aircraft were “not equipped with a two-way radio, 
transponder, and altitude-reporting equipment,” the FAA said. SkyPan also 
failed to obtain a certificate of waiver or authorization for the operations, 
the release said. SkyPan has 30 days to respond to the FAA’s enforcement 
letter, it said. SkyPan didn’t have an immediate comment.

Re: [AFMUG] FCC ULS webpage/search function offline?

[Hardy, Tim]

Back to ULS - System is working now, but depending on the search you're doing 
you may have better results using this  
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/


From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Eric Kuhnke 
[e...@kuhnke-international.com]
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 5:25 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC ULS webpage/search function offline?

re: PCNs and broken ULS:


" ...You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? 
I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.' But the plans were on 
display...' o n display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find 
them.' `That's the display department.' `With a torch.' `Ah, well the lights 
had probably gone.' `So had the stairs.' `But look you found the notice didn't 
you?' `Yes,' said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a 
locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door 
saying "Beware of The Leopard".' -- 
Douglas Adams.



On 9/28/15 2:16 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 9/28/15 13:57, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
hey, I found a picture of the FCC ULS server room:

http://i.imgur.com/Q1I7nFX.jpg



That router doesn't deserve to be in that room.

~Seth

Re: [AFMUG] Mimosa 11GHz Link

[Hardy, Tim]

If you license both POLARIZATIONS (this isn't magnetic north/south) at the same 
time, there are no additional FCC fees!  The FCC fee is per station, not per 
frequency.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 25, 2015, at 6:15 PM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:

not exactly double, in my experience it is a few hundred dollars more (for the 
FCC) than licensing a single polarity on a part101 PTP link.

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Jason McKemie 
mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>> 
wrote:
I guess I should re phrase that, do you have to pay double go license both 
polarities? I was referring to the Mimosa radio with the 1024 QAM comment.

On Friday, September 25, 2015, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yes you need to license both polarities. Most frequency coordinators know what 
the ExtremeAir is and will license it as XPIC. Same licensing requirement as if 
you do a 2+0 XPIC configuration with 4 radio heads.

There is no 1024QAM version of it yet, the product is a few years old. 1024QAM 
wouldn't improve things much as right now it's a line rate 1GbE radio, so 
between two routers logically indistinguishable from a patch cable. 1024QAM 
wouldn't get to 2Gbps, and I don't think they want to put a 10GbE SFP+ 
interface on it and then tell the customers "oh yeah it has a 10GbE interface 
but it actually does 1.35 Gbps".

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Jason McKemie 
 wrote:
Do you have to license each polarity? Seems like most of the new stuff is 
capable of at least 1024 QAM.

On Friday, September 25, 2015, Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

If it is 80 MHz wide and both polarities at 256 qam, that is the same bps/Hz 
and capacity as an exalt extremeair 18.

That radio (which is great, but costly) is a transparent 1 Gbps FDD bridge. 
true 1 Gbps each way simultaneously.

On Sep 25, 2015 10:51 AM, "Jason McKemie"  
wrote:
It seems a bit odd that it is 256 QAM.

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Jason McKemie 
 wrote:
Here you go...

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:
Can we see the PCN? =)


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

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Jason McKemie 
 wrote:
I just received a PCN for a Mimosa 11GHz link.  Has anyone heard of this?

Re: [AFMUG] Fulton County, GA discovers new and amazing 3000+km MW path

[Hardy, Tim]

Typical example of the many errors one can find in ULS and why it’s a bad idea 
to use this data for interference analysis / coordination.  To make this 
particular example even worse, the receive call sign is supposed to be WNTN687 
– but the transmit license in the example (WNEQ438) is still listed as current 
and active in ULS but we know that the station was moved in 2005 and this 
license is no longer valid.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 1:16 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Fulton County, GA discovers new and amazing 3000+km MW path


From the FCC ULS...

Nice path, I guess?

Attached image.

Re: [AFMUG] 4700 MHz band and FAA

[Hardy, Tim]

It's 6.875 - 7.125 and max bandwidth is 25 MHz. Unfortunately, most congested 
areas are unavailable.

From: Af [af-boun...@afmug.com] on behalf of Mike Hammett [af...@ics-il.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 7:41 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 4700 MHz band and FAA

7/8 has smaller channels though, right?



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


From: "Eric Kuhnke" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1:41:38 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 4700 MHz band and FAA

re: 8GHz, there's plenty out there in the 7/8 GHz band for FDD...  It used to 
be restricted to AM/FM/VHF and UHF TV broadcasters. Now it's not, in a big part 
of the US.  See:

http://www.comsearch.com/newsletter/WirelessPulse.html

Less availability of equipment than the regular 6 and 11 GHz bands, however.

7 through 9 GHz is also used for NATO (X-band) two way satellite stuff, the 
BUCs are very similar to large C-band BUCs for models in the 20W to 400W range.

You thought your EIRP and path loss was high, try putting 400W Tx (consumes 
about 2400W electrical load) into a 37dB gain dish.

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:24 PM, George Skorup 
mailto:geo...@cbcast.com>> wrote:
No, that was 3.7-4.2. They used 6 and 11GHz too. I've also heard that 8GHz was 
in use in some places. And all that on the same antenna. Those horns are good 
from about 3.2GHz up to something like 13GHz IIRC. Amazing stuff for the late 
50s / early 60s. Terry has a bunch of that 4GHz rigid rectangular waveguide 
laying around. No idea why he doesn't scrap it since it's all useless. He just 
doesn't like letting go of some things.


On 9/22/2015 8:55 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Didn't Long Lines operate there too?

I think there's a commercial licensed band around there too, but no licenses 
issued in forever.



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


From: "George Skorup" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:16:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 4700 MHz band and FAA

IIRC, 4.2-4.9GHz is all DoD.

On 9/22/2015 7:46 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:

Think so and we have lots of military communication outfits at Bliss Biggs 
McGregor and WSMR bases.airport is surrounded by Bliss and Biggs on two 
sides

On Sep 22, 2015 6:12 PM, "Rory Conaway" 
mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:
Isn’t that military?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:54 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] 4700 MHz band and FAA


FCC folks are in town looking for interference in aviation 119.5MHz and 4.7GHz. 
 Who operates in 4.7? Thx

[AFMUG] FCC ULS site down and unavailable 12:00 AM 9/2 thru 8:00 AM 9/8

[Hardy, Tim]

FYI-

ULS will be unavailable starting 12:00AM Wednesday, September 2, 2015 through 
8:00 AM September 8, 2015.  Please review the Public Notice for more detailed 
information: 
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-databases-unavailable-filing-deadline-extensions-early-september

Re: [AFMUG] what are the limitions on 7GHz and 13GHz

[Hardy, Tim]

7 GHz is 25 MHz max and 13 GHz is 50 MHz max - send me your coordinates off 
list and I'll tell you if the path is eligible.

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 4, 2015, at 11:22 PM, Rory Conaway 
mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:

Is it 25MHz?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] what are the limitions on 7GHz and 13GHz

Very small channels compared to 6 and 11.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Aug 4, 2015, at 9:44 PM, Rory Conaway 
mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>> wrote:
I have to shoot 54 miles so 6’ isn’t even big enough.  We were looking at 8’.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Daniel White
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] what are the limitions on 7GHz and 13GHz

In your area most likely:

http://www.comsearch.com/newsletter/WirelessPulse.html

Only place I’ve seen 13GHz used was the US Virgin Islands and rural Utah.  
Everywhere else has sufficient spectrum in 11GHz or 6GHz.

Note 7GHz requires 6ft antennas… 13GHz requires at least 3ft antennas.

Thank you,

Daniel White
afmu...@gmail.com
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn: 
Twitter

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 7:03 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] what are the limitions on 7GHz and 13GHz

I’m being told it’s only available to cable or TV companies.

Rory Conaway • Triad Wireless • CEO
4226 S. 37th Street • Phoenix • AZ 85040
602-426-0542
r...@triadwireless.net
www.triadwireless.net

“Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson 
afterwards.” – Vern Law



[Avast logo]


This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Re: [AFMUG] stupid FCC license question

[Hardy, Tim]

Adaptive modulation was allowed before Oct 2012 but only for modulations that 
met the minimum bits/Hz requirements.  Oct 2012, the rules were changed to 
allow lower modulations as long as the two-way availability on the path meets 
99.95% at the lowest compliant modulation.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 10:57 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] stupid FCC license question

Really? How were we coordinating and licensing ACM well before that?

On 7/31/2015 7:32 AM, Hardy, Tim wrote:
> Licensing adaptive modulation has only been legal (in the US) since Oct 2012, 
> so the vast majority of licensed paths will be licensed for one fixed 
> modulation only.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 5:02 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] stupid FCC license question
>
> There are a lot of old telco paths licensed with fixed 30MHz and 128QAM.
> They usually have large antennas and lots of Tx power. You'll see their 
> receive power in the -20's. I guess they don't want fade. :)
>
> On 7/30/2015 3:54 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>> I can't imagine why anyone would have licensed this path this way.
>> Oh well.
>>
>> On 7/30/2015 4:11 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>>> Yup, fixed.
>>>
>>> On 7/30/2015 2:57 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>>>> I'm looking at a path in ULS that only shows one modulation type.
>>>> I've seen others in the past that will list several modulations.
>>>>
>>>> Is this path ONLY allowed to use 16QAM?  No ACM permitted?
>>>>
>>>> 30M0D7W
>>>> Baseband Digital Rate (kbps): 132270.0 Digital Modulation Type:
>>>> 16QAM
>>>>

Re: [AFMUG] stupid FCC license question

[Hardy, Tim]

Licensing adaptive modulation has only been legal (in the US) since Oct 2012, 
so the vast majority of licensed paths will be licensed for one fixed 
modulation only.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of George Skorup
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 5:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] stupid FCC license question

There are a lot of old telco paths licensed with fixed 30MHz and 128QAM. 
They usually have large antennas and lots of Tx power. You'll see their receive 
power in the -20's. I guess they don't want fade. :)

On 7/30/2015 3:54 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
> I can't imagine why anyone would have licensed this path this way.
> Oh well.
>
> On 7/30/2015 4:11 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>> Yup, fixed.
>>
>> On 7/30/2015 2:57 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>>> I'm looking at a path in ULS that only shows one modulation type. 
>>> I've seen others in the past that will list several modulations.
>>>
>>> Is this path ONLY allowed to use 16QAM?  No ACM permitted?
>>>
>>> 30M0D7W
>>> Baseband Digital Rate (kbps): 132270.0 Digital Modulation Type: 
>>> 16QAM
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM

[Hardy, Tim]

Various software models may have this feature but LinkPlanner does not.  
PathLoss and IQ.Link will take whatever you put in them - if you have both data 
sets (SRTM, NED) you can easily run profiles with each set

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:31 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM

Does any of the RF modeling software automatically compare NED with SRTM to 
extrapolate clutter height?  It seems like it would be a straightforward 
feature to add.

On 7/22/2015 8:35 AM, Hardy, Tim wrote:
> Another point to remember:
>
> The end points of an SRTM profile sometimes need to be adjusted downwards (or 
> at the very least, verified) to account for the morphology above terrain that 
> may have been included in the SRTM data.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brian Webster
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:22 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM
>
> NED is the national elevation dataset and is based on actual ground elevation 
> data and digitized topo maps.
>
> SRTM is a combination of RADAR and LIDAR data from the shuttle missions. They 
> do not reflect actual ground elevation, they are a processed echo return of 
> whatever radar and LIDAR returns that were received on the shuttle.
>
> The source of the data should also be known as to the resolution. SRTM data 
> was published at 30 meter resolution meaning the hard data points are spaced 
> at 30 meter intervals. NED data is available in various resolutions the most 
> common nationwide being 1/3 arc second or 10 meter resolution or actual data 
> points every 10 meters. This produces a much more accurate terrain model 
> which in turn creates much more accurate RF propagation information.
>
> I have attached a real rough paper with images that illustrate the various 
> differences in terrain data and resolution.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
> www.wirelessmapping.com
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 6:19 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM
>
> If there's a 5 meter discrepancy between USGS National Elevation Data and the 
> Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, who would you trust? Would you bet $500 on 
> it?
>
> In this case, with NED I'll have LOS on a backhaul, and with SRTM I'm 
> in the woods.  I'm under the impression that SRTM sometimes gets you 
> treetops rather than the ground.  If I'm wrong I have alternate paths, 
> but I'd have to pay for a new PCNso it really is a $500 bet. :)
>

Re: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM

[Hardy, Tim]

Another point to remember:

The end points of an SRTM profile sometimes need to be adjusted downwards (or 
at the very least, verified) to account for the morphology above terrain that 
may have been included in the SRTM data.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:22 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM

NED is the national elevation dataset and is based on actual ground elevation 
data and digitized topo maps.

SRTM is a combination of RADAR and LIDAR data from the shuttle missions. They 
do not reflect actual ground elevation, they are a processed echo return of 
whatever radar and LIDAR returns that were received on the shuttle.

The source of the data should also be known as to the resolution. SRTM data was 
published at 30 meter resolution meaning the hard data points are spaced at 30 
meter intervals. NED data is available in various resolutions the most common 
nationwide being 1/3 arc second or 10 meter resolution or actual data points 
every 10 meters. This produces a much more accurate terrain model which in turn 
creates much more accurate RF propagation information.

I have attached a real rough paper with images that illustrate the various 
differences in terrain data and resolution.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 6:19 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] NED vs SRTM

If there's a 5 meter discrepancy between USGS National Elevation Data and the 
Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, who would you trust? Would you bet $500 on it?

In this case, with NED I'll have LOS on a backhaul, and with SRTM I'm in the 
woods.  I'm under the impression that SRTM sometimes gets you treetops rather 
than the ground.  If I'm wrong I have alternate paths, but I'd have to pay for 
a new PCNso it really is a $500 bet. :)

Re: [AFMUG] FCC ULS broken?

[Hardy, Tim]

It is extremely SLWWW today..

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 12:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC ULS broken?

I was getting that just trying to log in.



bp




On 6/23/2015 8:59 AM, Hardy, Tim wrote:
Its working for me, but I just searched for a license.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:55 AM
To: Motorola III
Subject: [AFMUG] FCC ULS broken?


Tried to get in this morning, and I get a page with this:
An Error has occurred. Please contact Technical Support
http://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/support/index.html
Phone (877) 480-3201
TTY (717) 338-2824
And report the following information.


Error at Tue, Jun 23 at 11:52:56 EDT on Server wireless2.fcc.gov:kern
Error Message
Exception Message javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: java.lang.Exception: 
java.rmi.RemoteException: EJB Exception: ; nested exception is: 
javax.ejb.EJBException: Exception Error. Please check system logs


Anyone/everyone else seeing it too?



--



bp

Re: [AFMUG] FCC ULS broken?

[Hardy, Tim]

Its working for me, but I just searched for a license.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Bill Prince
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:55 AM
To: Motorola III
Subject: [AFMUG] FCC ULS broken?


Tried to get in this morning, and I get a page with this:
An Error has occurred. Please contact Technical Support
http://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/support/index.html
Phone (877) 480-3201
TTY (717) 338-2824
And report the following information.


Error at Tue, Jun 23 at 11:52:56 EDT on Server wireless2.fcc.gov:kern
Error Message
Exception Message javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: java.lang.Exception: 
java.rmi.RemoteException: EJB Exception: ; nested exception is: 
javax.ejb.EJBException: Exception Error. Please check system logs

Anyone/everyone else seeing it too?


--



bp

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium LinkPlanner and Licensed Frequencies

[Hardy, Tim]

I would guess that SAF's calculations are based on Vigants-Barnett and your 
LinkPlanner results used ITU-R.  You can toggle LinkPlanner to Vigants-Barnett 
in the Project Properties window.

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory McCann
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 9:00 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Cambium LinkPlanner and Licensed Frequencies

Hey guys,

Running into a strange problem with LinkPlanner. I have a couple of exisitng 
5GHz links I'm looking at replacing with a licensed solution - one of which is 
about 27 miles.

According to LinkPlanner this shot should be no problem (granted not with more 
than 3 9s of uptime, which is fine considering I have redundancy via another 
path) using 3 foot dishes, but the SAF engineers are telling me my only option 
is 6GHz with 6 foot dishes using the same parameters.

The best the engineers at SAF could promise was about 150Mbps on Integra, 
whereas according to LinkPlanner I can get over 800Mbps using an 820s.

Is LinkPlanner this far off, or are there some special knobs I need to turn to 
get real-world results? Or is Cambium somehow that much superior to the other 
products out there?

--
Rory McCann
MKAP Technology Solutions
Web: www.mkap.net

Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

[Hardy, Tim]

These Returned applications should still show-up as “Pending” in a GenMen Search

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/engineering_search.cfm?accessible=NO&wild_select=on



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9:20 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

They can be on file but in a return state which is harder to find.

Mark

On 4/22/15 9:18 AM, Hardy, Tim wrote:
But in order to be legal and operate under Conditional Authorization, 
applications must be on file with the FCC.  The PCN provides no authority to 
operate.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9:10 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

It could just be paperwork issues, though 9 months is a bit long.I know we 
have had links pass PCN, filed the license, and then had the FCC return it due 
to minor errors.  The link is legal to transmit based on the PCN but the 
license lags with the FCC.

Mark

On 4/21/15 8:54 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
I'd guess that it might be one they just forgot to submit the license for after 
a PCN.

I'd just give them a holler and let them know that you couldn't find it in the 
FCC license database and was wondering if it had been coordinated recently.
-forrest

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Darin Steffl 
mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>> wrote:
Hey guys,

We've been looking at a new site for the last 12 months now and finally got to 
climb it last week to do the survey. 9 months ago from the ground, we could see 
two SAF licensed links up there but upon searching the FCC database, could not 
identify any licensed links on this site. I figured maybe they were in process 
and don't show up right away. Anyway, fast forward to today and we climbed and 
saw the links are 18GHz links and have the company's sticker on there we 
thought they belonged to. We checked the FCC database and found all their other 
licensed links and confirmed they're accurate and used their exact spelling and 
FRN to search all the licensed links and none of them correspond to their two 
SAF radio on this site that have been installed and running for 9 months now. 
So to sum up, their other licensed links are registered and correct but the two 
links on this site do not show up anywhere.

What would be the best course of action to see if there's something wrong here? 
This WISP has not been friendly to us in the past and I just want to make sure 
their links don't interfere with ours if they're illegally operating in 
licensed bands. Thank you

--
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com<http://www.mnwifi.com/>
507-634-WiFi
[http://www.snoitulosten.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/facebook-small.jpg]<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
 Like us on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>



--
Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com<mailto:forre...@imach.com> | 
http://www.packetflux.com<http://www.packetflux.com/>
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/linkedin.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
 [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/facebook.png] 
<http://facebook.com/packetflux>  
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png] 
<http://twitter.com/@packetflux>

Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

[Hardy, Tim]

But in order to be legal and operate under Conditional Authorization, 
applications must be on file with the FCC.  The PCN provides no authority to 
operate.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9:10 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

It could just be paperwork issues, though 9 months is a bit long.I know we 
have had links pass PCN, filed the license, and then had the FCC return it due 
to minor errors.  The link is legal to transmit based on the PCN but the 
license lags with the FCC.

Mark

On 4/21/15 8:54 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
I'd guess that it might be one they just forgot to submit the license for after 
a PCN.

I'd just give them a holler and let them know that you couldn't find it in the 
FCC license database and was wondering if it had been coordinated recently.
-forrest

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Darin Steffl 
mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>> wrote:
Hey guys,

We've been looking at a new site for the last 12 months now and finally got to 
climb it last week to do the survey. 9 months ago from the ground, we could see 
two SAF licensed links up there but upon searching the FCC database, could not 
identify any licensed links on this site. I figured maybe they were in process 
and don't show up right away. Anyway, fast forward to today and we climbed and 
saw the links are 18GHz links and have the company's sticker on there we 
thought they belonged to. We checked the FCC database and found all their other 
licensed links and confirmed they're accurate and used their exact spelling and 
FRN to search all the licensed links and none of them correspond to their two 
SAF radio on this site that have been installed and running for 9 months now. 
So to sum up, their other licensed links are registered and correct but the two 
links on this site do not show up anywhere.

What would be the best course of action to see if there's something wrong here? 
This WISP has not been friendly to us in the past and I just want to make sure 
their links don't interfere with ours if they're illegally operating in 
licensed bands. Thank you

--
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
[http://www.snoitulosten.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/facebook-small.jpg]
 Like us on Facebook



--
Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | 
http://www.packetflux.com
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/linkedin.png]
 [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/facebook.png] 
  
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png] 

Re: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

[Hardy, Tim]

Darin,

Give me a set of coordinates and I’ll check it out for you.

Tim

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Darin Steffl
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 8:27 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Illegal 18ghz links on a new site

Hey guys,

We've been looking at a new site for the last 12 months now and finally got to 
climb it last week to do the survey. 9 months ago from the ground, we could see 
two SAF licensed links up there but upon searching the FCC database, could not 
identify any licensed links on this site. I figured maybe they were in process 
and don't show up right away. Anyway, fast forward to today and we climbed and 
saw the links are 18GHz links and have the company's sticker on there we 
thought they belonged to. We checked the FCC database and found all their other 
licensed links and confirmed they're accurate and used their exact spelling and 
FRN to search all the licensed links and none of them correspond to their two 
SAF radio on this site that have been installed and running for 9 months now. 
So to sum up, their other licensed links are registered and correct but the two 
links on this site do not show up anywhere.

What would be the best course of action to see if there's something wrong here? 
This WISP has not been friendly to us in the past and I just want to make sure 
their links don't interfere with ours if they're illegally operating in 
licensed bands. Thank you

--
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
[http://www.snoitulosten.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/facebook-small.jpg]
 Like us on Facebook

Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

[Hardy, Tim]

+1!

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 2:49 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

If Tim is wrong about something like that, we all have problems...

-Original Message-
From: Jeff Broadwick
Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 12:08 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

You are correct Tim:

http://blog.aviatnetworks.com/2012/08/06/fcc-rule-changes-lower-the-cost-of-microwave-deployments/



Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
Senior Account Manager, Convergence Technologies, Inc.
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

Can't go below 3' at 6 GHz..

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

What sort of throughput are you looking for Matt?

You can't go below 2' dishes with 6GHz and with that distance, the dish size 
will be a significant factor in determining throughput.


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
Senior Account Manager, Convergence Technologies, Inc.
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 3:50 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

This is a 10 mile hop in USA.  Would like to stay at 2 foot dishes or even 
18 inch on one end.  Limited tower space on one end of link.


On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Daniel White  wrote:
> SAF does 24GHz too.
>
> If you have Lumina... Integra is a nice step up (performance wise, GUI
> wise, feature set wise).  Also Integra 24GHz is the only radio
> certified for use with 4ft antennas in the unlicensed band (and that
> goes for Canada too) :-)
>
> **
> *
> Daniel White - Managing Director
> SAF North America LLC
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
> daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social: LinkedIn
>
> **
> *
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
>> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 10:09 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear
>>
>> Instead of making it licensed, if it's short, why not use 24GHz?
>>
>> Rory
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
>> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 7:48 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear
>>
>> Looking at updating a short 5Ghz link to licensed.  In past we have
>> used SAF and pretty happy with it.  What other affordable gear is out 
>> there now?
>

Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

[Hardy, Tim]

Can't go below 3' at 6 GHz..

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:05 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

What sort of throughput are you looking for Matt?

You can't go below 2' dishes with 6GHz and with that distance, the dish size 
will be a significant factor in determining throughput.


Regards,

Jeff


Jeff Broadwick
Senior Account Manager, Convergence Technologies, Inc.
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell

-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 3:50 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear

This is a 10 mile hop in USA.  Would like to stay at 2 foot dishes or even 18 
inch on one end.  Limited tower space on one end of link.


On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Daniel White  wrote:
> SAF does 24GHz too.
>
> If you have Lumina... Integra is a nice step up (performance wise, GUI 
> wise, feature set wise).  Also Integra 24GHz is the only radio 
> certified for use with 4ft antennas in the unlicensed band (and that 
> goes for Canada too) :-)
>
> **
> *
> Daniel White - Managing Director
> SAF North America LLC
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
> daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social: LinkedIn
>
> **
> *
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
>> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 10:09 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear
>>
>> Instead of making it licensed, if it's short, why not use 24GHz?
>>
>> Rory
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt
>> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 7:48 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: [AFMUG] 11Ghz Licensed Gear
>>
>> Looking at updating a short 5Ghz link to licensed.  In past we have 
>> used SAF and pretty happy with it.  What other affordable gear is out there 
>> now?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Free Space Loss calculator

[Hardy, Tim]

Yep, I think this is the formula for meters and MHz:

FSL = 32.5 + 20 log F + 20 Log D

Where:

D = Km
F = MHz

If Gt and Gr were gains, they would be additive – not subtracted, so I’m 
unclear as to what these actually stand for.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 4:11 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Free Space Loss calculator

Well do you want to use miles and GHz or meters or feet KHz or or or?
This formula may be for meters and cycles per second.

That is what the constant does, the 32.44 it adjusts for units.

Then the Gt and Gr are the gains of the antennas I presume.



From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 2:05 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] Free Space Loss calculator

Which one>
96.6 + 20logD + 20log F  Where F & D are GHz and Miles.

or  20logD + 20log F  + 32.44 -Gt -Gr = FSPL  where t is tx pwr and r is 
receiver sensitivity.


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

[Hardy, Tim]

Sounds logical – a 3’ dish at 2° would be down about 10 dB and at 3° about 20 
dB according to the pattern

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:14 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Hum...I have always used it this way and have good results.  I know from 
experience that "funny things" happen above 10GHz...guess all this new fangled 
stuff is showing my age.

but I still hold that monopole moves just enough to affect stability of link.  
That's my story and I am sticking to it..

Thanks gentsI feel more confident for tomorrows presentation.

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Hardy, Tim 
mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>> wrote:
The urban area figure you’re using includes clutter – not applicable to a los 
microwave path.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf 
Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Wow ..close... I come up with 132.89 dB FSL and 143.41 dB urban area FSL   ..so 
I guess if I back out the 2dB loss I am within 1.2dB of the calculations sent 
to me.

Okay  i am close.  Cool...I can still add and subtract..yeah me!

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
I have never had problems using simple free space path loss for these 
frequencies.
I doubt there is significant cable or waveguide loss.
Dragonwaves mount to the antenna and the gain of the antenna is at the 
interface.

96.6 + 20logD + 20log F  Where F & D are GHz and Miles.

96.6 + 10.5 + 25.1 = 132.2 dB

From: Jaime Solorza<mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:31 AM
To: Animal Farm<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Hello Smart Dudes on the list:
Running a 3.348 mile path for 18 Ghz Dragonwave link to compare what someone 
else came up with.I am wondering if they used just unfaded free space loss 
calculation and coming up with a figure 10dB better than mine,   I am using 
unfaded urban area free space loss for mime.  I use just free space loss we are 
within 3db of each other.  I added 1 db of cable loss since I do not know if 
waveguide was used or many other details.  I will get all that information on 
site.
I have always engineered paths on conservative side since the start.

What are your thoughts  Hobson?

Thx


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

[Hardy, Tim]

The urban area figure you’re using includes clutter – not applicable to a los 
microwave path.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:00 PM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Wow ..close... I come up with 132.89 dB FSL and 143.41 dB urban area FSL   ..so 
I guess if I back out the 2dB loss I am within 1.2dB of the calculations sent 
to me.

Okay  i am close.  Cool...I can still add and subtract..yeah me!

Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
I have never had problems using simple free space path loss for these 
frequencies.
I doubt there is significant cable or waveguide loss.
Dragonwaves mount to the antenna and the gain of the antenna is at the 
interface.

96.6 + 20logD + 20log F  Where F & D are GHz and Miles.

96.6 + 10.5 + 25.1 = 132.2 dB

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:31 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Hello Smart Dudes on the list:
Running a 3.348 mile path for 18 Ghz Dragonwave link to compare what someone 
else came up with.I am wondering if they used just unfaded free space loss 
calculation and coming up with a figure 10dB better than mine,   I am using 
unfaded urban area free space loss for mime.  I use just free space loss we are 
within 3db of each other.  I added 1 db of cable loss since I do not know if 
waveguide was used or many other details.  I will get all that information on 
site.
I have always engineered paths on conservative side since the start.

What are your thoughts  Hobson?

Thx


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

[Hardy, Tim]

(+/- 2.0 db)!

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Hardy, Tim
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:03 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

So, assuming 2’ antennas at 38.7 dBi, your RSLs should be around -33.8 dBm (+/1 
2.0 dB)

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 11:54 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

I have never had problems using simple free space path loss for these 
frequencies.
I doubt there is significant cable or waveguide loss.
Dragonwaves mount to the antenna and the gain of the antenna is at the 
interface.

96.6 + 20logD + 20log F  Where F & D are GHz and Miles.

96.6 + 10.5 + 25.1 = 132.2 dB

From: Jaime Solorza<mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:31 AM
To: Animal Farm<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Hello Smart Dudes on the list:
Running a 3.348 mile path for 18 Ghz Dragonwave link to compare what someone 
else came up with.I am wondering if they used just unfaded free space loss 
calculation and coming up with a figure 10dB better than mine,   I am using 
unfaded urban area free space loss for mime.  I use just free space loss we are 
within 3db of each other.  I added 1 db of cable loss since I do not know if 
waveguide was used or many other details.  I will get all that information on 
site.
I have always engineered paths on conservative side since the start.

What are your thoughts  Hobson?

Thx


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

[Hardy, Tim]

So, assuming 2’ antennas at 38.7 dBi, your RSLs should be around -33.8 dBm (+/1 
2.0 dB)

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 11:54 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

I have never had problems using simple free space path loss for these 
frequencies.
I doubt there is significant cable or waveguide loss.
Dragonwaves mount to the antenna and the gain of the antenna is at the 
interface.

96.6 + 20logD + 20log F  Where F & D are GHz and Miles.

96.6 + 10.5 + 25.1 = 132.2 dB

From: Jaime Solorza
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:31 AM
To: Animal Farm
Subject: [AFMUG] Smart guys on lost question

Hello Smart Dudes on the list:
Running a 3.348 mile path for 18 Ghz Dragonwave link to compare what someone 
else came up with.I am wondering if they used just unfaded free space loss 
calculation and coming up with a figure 10dB better than mine,   I am using 
unfaded urban area free space loss for mime.  I use just free space loss we are 
within 3db of each other.  I added 1 db of cable loss since I do not know if 
waveguide was used or many other details.  I will get all that information on 
site.
I have always engineered paths on conservative side since the start.

What are your thoughts  Hobson?

Thx


Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization

[Hardy, Tim]

This describes it fairly well

http://www.thebdr.net/articles/ops/xmtr/RF-pol.pdf



Sent from my iPad

On Feb 18, 2015, at 10:30 PM, Adam Moffett 
mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Please enlighten me
Glad to see that for the most part this thread kept the discussion on 
"polarization" rather than "polarity" these sound similar but they are not 
synonymous.

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 18, 2015, at 6:13 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

Technically that is impossible to answer due to the infinite number of 
waveguide modes.
�
However, the practical answer is that we always use a very simple mode.� And 
in that mode, the probe always comes out of the broad wall, about a quarter 
wavelength from the end of a dead ended waveguide.� And that probe is the 
polarization.�
�
You have to match the openings.� The internal dimensions of the waveguide and 
the hole in the radio must line up.� In the event the mechanical orientations 
are at right angles, you have to use a section of flexible waveguide to make 
the twist.
�
From: Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 4:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization
�
Hmm, now I am not so sure.
�
Is it the orientation of the waveguide that determines the polarity or the 
orientation of the probe?
�
For example, waveguide exits the radio with wider dimension in a left/right 
direction, and enters antenna in a up/down direction, did the polarization of 
the signal rotate 90 degrees?
�
On Feb 18, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

If you ever need to question this again, it is opposite the major dimension.�
If you could see the little probe /antenna that feeds the waveguide, you would 
see it sticking up out of the broad wall.�
�
The polarization of that little probe is the polarization of the waveguide.� 
And it is parallel to the short walls.�
�
From: Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization
�
Great!� Thanks to all who answered.�
�
�
�
�
On Feb 18, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Daniel White 
mailto:afmu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Josh I hate to disagree with you here� but a waveguide is a waveguide.� 
Maybe your link is in the wrong polarization :-)
�
Top is correct.
�
***
Daniel White - Managing Director
SAF North America LLC
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com
Skype: danieldwhite
Social:�LinkedIn
�
***
�
From:�Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]�On Behalf Of�Josh Luthman
Sent:�Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:55 PM
To:�af@afmug.com
Subject:�Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization
�
On SAF CFIP Lumina it was opposite.� Like your first image.

�
Josh Luthman
Office:�937-552-2340
Direct:�937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
�
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Dan Petermann 
mailto:d...@wyoming.com>> wrote:
If you have a waveguide connection to an antenna, what direction (up/down or 
left/right) does the wider portion of the waveguide go?


___
|���� |
|���� | = H Pol?
|���� |


or
___
|������������ | = H Pol?
�
�

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization

[Hardy, Tim]

Glad to see that for the most part this thread kept the discussion on 
"polarization" rather than "polarity" these sound similar but they are not 
synonymous.

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 18, 2015, at 6:13 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

Technically that is impossible to answer due to the infinite number of 
waveguide modes.

However, the practical answer is that we always use a very simple mode.  And in 
that mode, the probe always comes out of the broad wall, about a quarter 
wavelength from the end of a dead ended waveguide.  And that probe is the 
polarization.

You have to match the openings.  The internal dimensions of the waveguide and 
the hole in the radio must line up.  In the event the mechanical orientations 
are at right angles, you have to use a section of flexible waveguide to make 
the twist.

From: Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 4:10 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization

Hmm, now I am not so sure.

Is it the orientation of the waveguide that determines the polarity or the 
orientation of the probe?

For example, waveguide exits the radio with wider dimension in a left/right 
direction, and enters antenna in a up/down direction, did the polarization of 
the signal rotate 90 degrees?

On Feb 18, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Chuck McCown 
mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

If you ever need to question this again, it is opposite the major dimension.
If you could see the little probe /antenna that feeds the waveguide, you would 
see it sticking up out of the broad wall.

The polarization of that little probe is the polarization of the waveguide.  
And it is parallel to the short walls.

From: Dan Petermann
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:35 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization

Great!  Thanks to all who answered.




On Feb 18, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Daniel White 
mailto:afmu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Josh I hate to disagree with you here… but a waveguide is a waveguide.  Maybe 
your link is in the wrong polarization :-)

Top is correct.

***
Daniel White - Managing Director
SAF North America LLC
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn

***

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:55 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Waveguide polarization

On SAF CFIP Lumina it was opposite.  Like your first image.


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

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Dan Petermann 
mailto:d...@wyoming.com>> wrote:
If you have a waveguide connection to an antenna, what direction (up/down or 
left/right) does the wider portion of the waveguide go?


___
| |
| | = H Pol?
| |


or
___
| | = H Pol?

Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP

[Hardy, Tim]

Chairman Powell?  Not for the last 6 years...

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 21, 2015, at 8:02 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller 
mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>> wrote:


This posted on the facebook page of Athena Broadband of TN today:

Chairman Powell of the FCC plans to reclassify the Internet as a regulated 
utility on Feb 26th. The chairman has confirmed in a house hearing today that 
USF fees WILL apply to Internet service. The current USF collection rate is 
16.8% and adjusts automatically depending on how much money the government 
spends. If the FCC does this everyone's bill is going up by at least 16.8%. Be 
on the lookout as we may need your help again supporting our cause in DC 
against these types of actions!


Looks like i've confirmed most the points of this post:

*  Unless we REALLY make some noise, we are probably being reclassified as a 
utility (title II).  Yuk
*  Folks screaming on the radio tonight (talk radio) - internet bills go up by 
16.8%.

Comments?  How do we break this to our customers?  When will it take effect?  
How do we stop it?
Can we stop it?  How will you answer customer questions about this?

Re: [AFMUG] Business Radio Licensing?

[Hardy, Tim]

The FCC notifies all licensees that have not filed the required build out 
notification at least 90-days prior to expiration.  So, while it’s safe to 
disregard these Business Radio Licensing notices, never, ever disregard 
something from Uncle Charlie.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:00 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Business Radio Licensing?

But to their credit, they are usually right that you forgot to file the form 
Tim referenced.  So while it is kind of a scam, get thee hence forthwith to the 
FCC website and file your construction notice.  The license should state the 
filing deadline, it’s fairly generous, like 12 or 18 months, I forget.  But if 
you forget, your license will be placed in Pending Termination and you could 
actually lose it.


From: Hardy, Tim<mailto:tha...@comsearch.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Business Radio Licensing?

Make sure that you filed 601 Schedule K (build out notification).  As Vlad 
mentioned, these guys “scare” folks with these notices that threaten fines just 
to get your money to enter a date and push a button in ULS.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of James Howard
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:37 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Business Radio Licensing?

Maybe you were supposed to drink some milk when you had the cookies.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com<mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Business Radio Licensing?

Is there something more Im supposed to do that hasnt been done? we put the link 
up, did a little dance, had some cookies.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Vlad Sedov 
mailto:v...@atlasok.com>> wrote:
junk.. they've been at it for a while. Charge you $95 to click a button or two 
on ULS.


vlad


On 1/21/2015 10:32 AM, That One Guy wrote:
This looks like junk mail, just needed to verify. The back of it has a menacing 
list of FCC fines.

--
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




--
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

Total Control Panel

Login<https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net>


To: 
ja...@litewire.net<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net>

From: 
014b0d59de6d-36c258e2-1dbf-4cb0-9d26-77fff48078b3-000...@amazonses.com<https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=2996992171&domain=litewire.net>


Remove<https://asp.reflexion.net/FooterAction?ver=2&un-wl-sender-domain=1&rID=242260993&aID=2996992171&domain=litewire.net>
 amazonses.com from my allow list



You received this message because the domain amazonses.com is on your allow 
list.