[WISPA] Google wants TV 'white space' for wi-fi

[George Rogato]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080324/ap_on_hi_te/google_fcc;_ylt=AkXJL6.AzyhJMRYi8ue_jqsjtBAF

SAN FRANCISCO - Less than a week after losing in the latest U.S. 
spectrum auction, Google Inc. has started pitching its plan to use TV 
"white space" — unlicensed and unused airwaves — to provide wireless 
Internet.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Chuck McCown - 2]

Note also it stores 270 watt hours of energy.  A 270 watt hour battery would 
cost you about $54 and you can recharge it thousands of times.  The hydropak 
costs you $20 for each 270 watt hours delivered to load.  Or  $74 per kWh. 
I can charge my battery for $0.07 per kWh.  That is a factor of 1000 times 
more for the cost of the energy.

- Original Message - 
From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


> Those are not rechargeable from mains power.  Note the use of the
> "disposable cartridges will retail for $20".  Lots of sources for fuel 
> cells
> that are powered off of hydrogen, methanol, natural gas or propane.  You 
> can
> buy any capacity you want... if you want to deal with the fuel.  But if 
> you
> are dealing with fuel you might as well put in a propane generator and be
> done with it.
>
> Mike's original post was:  "I'm looking to run electricity through a
> hydrogen electrolyzer, store the hydrogen, then later run it through a 
> fuel
> cell as needed.  Does anyone have some good sources of information or
> products?"
>
> The hydropak does not do that.
>
> If you take the hydropak and add something to make the hydrogen it needs 
> and
> compress it or somehow convert it to a form the hydropak can use I 
> guarantee
> you that the whole mess will weigh more and cost more and use more
> electrical energy than a rectifier and battery.
>
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Smith, Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 9:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>
>
>> :)
>> http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2008/01/hydropak_portable_power_gen
>> erator_1.html
>>
>> http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/portable_power.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
>> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:04 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>
>> My batteries last between 10 and 20 years depending on whether they are
>> flooded cells or AGM type.
>> Energy volumetric density is about the same as high pressure hydrogen
>> when
>> you add in the compressor and cylinders.
>> And if you are using low pressure storage you don't have near the energy
>>
>> density as the batts.
>> Hydrolyser/fuel cell is about the same size or larger than a rack
>> mounted
>> switch mode rectifier.
>> Plus you lose energy in the conversion process, more loss than the
>> charge
>> and discharge cycles of batts.
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>
>>
>>> http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html
>>> I have been looking at doing the same. The cost/benefit ratio just is
>>> not there yet from what I have seen. Not unless you can store a very
>>> large amount of fuel and need long (months +) run times between
>>> regeneration/refueling. If I have missed something I would be very
>>> interested in looking at this again.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
 I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.

  Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting
>> equipment
  (batteries die in 2 - 3 years).



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




 - Original Message -
  From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  To: "WISPA General List" 
  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


  >I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.
>> Probably
 an
  >on
  > line version.
  > Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not
>> better.
  > Bound
  > to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes
>> problems
 in
  > cold weather.
  >
  > - Original Message -
  > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  > To: "WISPA List" 
  > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
  > Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
  >
  >
  >> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer,
>> store
 the
  >> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does
 anyone
  >> have some good sources of information or products?
  >>
  >>
  >> --
  >> Mike Hammett
  >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
  >> http://www.ics-il.com
  >>
  >>
  >>
  >>
>> 
>> 
  >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  >> http://signup.wispa.org/
  >>
>> ---

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Chuck McCown - 2]

Those are not rechargeable from mains power.  Note the use of the 
"disposable cartridges will retail for $20".  Lots of sources for fuel cells 
that are powered off of hydrogen, methanol, natural gas or propane.  You can 
buy any capacity you want... if you want to deal with the fuel.  But if you 
are dealing with fuel you might as well put in a propane generator and be 
done with it.

Mike's original post was:  "I'm looking to run electricity through a 
hydrogen electrolyzer, store the hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel 
cell as needed.  Does anyone have some good sources of information or 
products?"

The hydropak does not do that.

If you take the hydropak and add something to make the hydrogen it needs and 
compress it or somehow convert it to a form the hydropak can use I guarantee 
you that the whole mess will weigh more and cost more and use more 
electrical energy than a rectifier and battery.



- Original Message - 
From: "Smith, Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


> :)
> http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2008/01/hydropak_portable_power_gen
> erator_1.html
>
> http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/portable_power.htm
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:04 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>
> My batteries last between 10 and 20 years depending on whether they are
> flooded cells or AGM type.
> Energy volumetric density is about the same as high pressure hydrogen
> when
> you add in the compressor and cylinders.
> And if you are using low pressure storage you don't have near the energy
>
> density as the batts.
> Hydrolyser/fuel cell is about the same size or larger than a rack
> mounted
> switch mode rectifier.
> Plus you lose energy in the conversion process, more loss than the
> charge
> and discharge cycles of batts.
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>
>
>> http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html
>> I have been looking at doing the same. The cost/benefit ratio just is
>> not there yet from what I have seen. Not unless you can store a very
>> large amount of fuel and need long (months +) run times between
>> regeneration/refueling. If I have missed something I would be very
>> interested in looking at this again.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.
>>>
>>>  Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting
> equipment
>>>  (batteries die in 2 - 3 years).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>>  Mike Hammett
>>>  Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>  http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>>  From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>  To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
>>>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>>
>>>
>>>  >I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.
> Probably
>>> an
>>>  >on
>>>  > line version.
>>>  > Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not
> better.
>>>  > Bound
>>>  > to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes
> problems
>>> in
>>>  > cold weather.
>>>  >
>>>  > - Original Message -
>>>  > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>  > To: "WISPA List" 
>>>  > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
>>>  > Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer,
> store
>>> the
>>>  >> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does
>>> anyone
>>>  >> have some good sources of information or products?
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >> --
>>>  >> Mike Hammett
>>>  >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>  >> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
>>>  >>
> 
> 
>>>  >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>  >> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>  >>
> 
> 
>>>  >>
>>>  >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>  >>
>>>  >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>  >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>  >>
>>>  >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>  >>
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
> 
> 
>>>  > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>  > http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>  >
> 
> 
>>>  >
>>>  > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>  >
>>>  > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>  >
>>>  > Archive

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Smith, Rick]

:)
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2008/01/hydropak_portable_power_gen
erator_1.html

http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/portable_power.htm



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

My batteries last between 10 and 20 years depending on whether they are 
flooded cells or AGM type.
Energy volumetric density is about the same as high pressure hydrogen
when 
you add in the compressor and cylinders.
And if you are using low pressure storage you don't have near the energy

density as the batts.
Hydrolyser/fuel cell is about the same size or larger than a rack
mounted 
switch mode rectifier.
Plus you lose energy in the conversion process, more loss than the
charge 
and discharge cycles of batts.

- Original Message - 
From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


> http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html
> I have been looking at doing the same. The cost/benefit ratio just is
> not there yet from what I have seen. Not unless you can store a very
> large amount of fuel and need long (months +) run times between
> regeneration/refueling. If I have missed something I would be very
> interested in looking at this again.
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>> I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.
>>
>>  Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting
equipment
>>  (batteries die in 2 - 3 years).
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Mike Hammett
>>  Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>  http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>  From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  To: "WISPA General List" 
>>  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
>>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>
>>
>>  >I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.
Probably 
>> an
>>  >on
>>  > line version.
>>  > Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not
better.
>>  > Bound
>>  > to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes
problems 
>> in
>>  > cold weather.
>>  >
>>  > - Original Message -
>>  > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  > To: "WISPA List" 
>>  > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
>>  > Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer,
store 
>> the
>>  >> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does 
>> anyone
>>  >> have some good sources of information or products?
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> --
>>  >> Mike Hammett
>>  >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>  >> http://www.ics-il.com
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>


>>  >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  >> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>  >>


>>  >>
>>  >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>  >>
>>  >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>  >>
>>  >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >


>>  > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  > http://signup.wispa.org/
>>  >


>>  >
>>  > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>  >
>>  > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>  >
>>  > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  >
>>
>>
>>
>>


>>  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  http://signup.wispa.org/
>>


>>
>>  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>>  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wisp

Re: [WISPA] 700 MHz winners list

[Bo Hamilton]

Thanks Mac!

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For those of you interested in seeing the winners of the 700MHz auction
> 73:
>
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-595A2.pdf
>
>
>
> Mac
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Chuck McCown - 2]

My batteries last between 10 and 20 years depending on whether they are 
flooded cells or AGM type.
Energy volumetric density is about the same as high pressure hydrogen when 
you add in the compressor and cylinders.
And if you are using low pressure storage you don't have near the energy 
density as the batts.
Hydrolyser/fuel cell is about the same size or larger than a rack mounted 
switch mode rectifier.
Plus you lose energy in the conversion process, more loss than the charge 
and discharge cycles of batts.

- Original Message - 
From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


> http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html
> I have been looking at doing the same. The cost/benefit ratio just is
> not there yet from what I have seen. Not unless you can store a very
> large amount of fuel and need long (months +) run times between
> regeneration/refueling. If I have missed something I would be very
> interested in looking at this again.
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>> I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.
>>
>>  Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting equipment
>>  (batteries die in 2 - 3 years).
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Mike Hammett
>>  Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>  http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>  From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  To: "WISPA General List" 
>>  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
>>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>
>>
>>  >I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.  Probably 
>> an
>>  >on
>>  > line version.
>>  > Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not better.
>>  > Bound
>>  > to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes problems 
>> in
>>  > cold weather.
>>  >
>>  > - Original Message -
>>  > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  > To: "WISPA List" 
>>  > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
>>  > Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer, store 
>> the
>>  >> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does 
>> anyone
>>  >> have some good sources of information or products?
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> --
>>  >> Mike Hammett
>>  >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>  >> http://www.ics-il.com
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> 
>> 
>>  >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  >> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>  >> 
>> 
>>  >>
>>  >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>  >>
>>  >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>  >>
>>  >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > 
>> 
>>  > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  > http://signup.wispa.org/
>>  > 
>> 
>>  >
>>  > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>  >
>>  > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>  >
>>  > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  >
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>> 
>>  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>  http://signup.wispa.org/
>>  
>> 
>>
>>  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>>  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Jeromie Reeves]

http://www.fuelcells.org/basics/types.html
I have been looking at doing the same. The cost/benefit ratio just is
not there yet from what I have seen. Not unless you can store a very
large amount of fuel and need long (months +) run times between
regeneration/refueling. If I have missed something I would be very
interested in looking at this again.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.
>
>  Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting equipment
>  (batteries die in 2 - 3 years).
>
>
>
>  --
>  Mike Hammett
>  Intelligent Computing Solutions
>  http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>  From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  To: "WISPA General List" 
>  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>
>
>  >I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.  Probably an
>  >on
>  > line version.
>  > Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not better.
>  > Bound
>  > to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes problems in
>  > cold weather.
>  >
>  > - Original Message -
>  > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > To: "WISPA List" 
>  > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
>  > Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>  >
>  >
>  >> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer, store the
>  >> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does anyone
>  >> have some good sources of information or products?
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> --
>  >> Mike Hammett
>  >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>  >> http://www.ics-il.com
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> 
> 
>  >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>  >> http://signup.wispa.org/
>  >> 
> 
>  >>
>  >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>  >>
>  >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>  >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>  >>
>  >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > 
> 
>  > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>  > http://signup.wispa.org/
>  > 
> 
>  >
>  > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>  >
>  > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>  >
>  > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>  >
>
>
>
>  
> 
>  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>  http://signup.wispa.org/
>  
> 
>
>  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] RB411 enclosure

[Eric Rogers]

I have been using the WAR Cases for this.  They fit an RB411 or an
RB333.  We made a custom bracket to turn it sideways and we change out
their connector for a N-Female to N-Female Bulkhead that is hermetically
sealed so we can change the internal pigtail to MMCX, u.FL or anything
else.  My only complaint is the threads won't let you use the ECS.
BOO..

Hit me offlist if you would like more details.

Eric Rogers
Precision Data Solutions, LLC
(317) 831-3000 x200



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 11:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] RB411 enclosure

Hi,

Anyone have suggestions for an outdoor enclosure to hold a single RB411 
and wireless card? I'm looking for a small, plastic type enclosure to 
make an "external" version of an RB411 (using an RJ45-ECS and N-female 
connector). The PacWireless DCE will work, but it's kind of heavy and 
big and I'm hoping to find something I can "mount" to the back of the 
antenna directly.

thanks,

Travis
Microserv




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneertrashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"

[Jeff Booher]

of course, thats to an indoor device, assuming macro diversity gain as  
well.

outdoor 3.65ghz, 5-7 miles NLOS is capable in a flat, rural  
environment. Estimate around 4 miles in a mixed ( suburban / trees  )  
enviorment.   This is NLOS as well.


-

Jeff

On Mar 24, 2008, at 12:25 PM, chris cooper wrote:

> So that is roughly 10 square miles per cell for rural deployment?   
> Seems
> like a pretty tough sell in rural markets with low pop. Densities.
>
> Chris
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
> On
> Behalf Of Jeff Booher
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX
> pioneertrashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"
>
> I would agree.
>
> In a dense urban enviorment the usual cell size for a 3.65ghz  wimax
> deployment is a 1km/ cell. Suburban, 2km cell, and rural, 3km cell.
> Obviously once you get below 3ghz the propogation gets better. It
> really doesnt get any better until you are talking 2ghz or lower. Of
> course, then once you get below 1ghz you have issues with surface
> refactivity and self induced interference limiting the CINR.
>
>
> -
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneertrashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"

[chris cooper]

So that is roughly 10 square miles per cell for rural deployment?  Seems
like a pretty tough sell in rural markets with low pop. Densities.

Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeff Booher
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX
pioneertrashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"

I would agree.

In a dense urban enviorment the usual cell size for a 3.65ghz  wimax  
deployment is a 1km/ cell. Suburban, 2km cell, and rural, 3km cell.   
Obviously once you get below 3ghz the propogation gets better. It  
really doesnt get any better until you are talking 2ghz or lower. Of  
course, then once you get below 1ghz you have issues with surface  
refactivity and self induced interference limiting the CINR.


-






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"

[Jeff Booher]

I would agree.

In a dense urban enviorment the usual cell size for a 3.65ghz  wimax  
deployment is a 1km/ cell. Suburban, 2km cell, and rural, 3km cell.   
Obviously once you get below 3ghz the propogation gets better. It  
really doesnt get any better until you are talking 2ghz or lower. Of  
course, then once you get below 1ghz you have issues with surface  
refactivity and self induced interference limiting the CINR.


-

Jeff



On Mar 24, 2008, at 11:59 AM, Brian Webster wrote:

> Jeff,
>   Just to clarify my point, I was not hammering on any one  
> manufacturer. I
> was more trying to make the point that there is no magic bullet to  
> be able
> to use an indoor CPE and have a large coverage area. This goes for  
> any magic
> spectrum as well. Anything that will give you a large coverage will  
> start to
> be impeded by the buildings/wavelength ratio. Indoor really only  
> works with
> a lot of signal and many base stations.which of course means  
> more money
> invested in the network.which keeps the small guy out of the game.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Jeff Booher
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 2:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer
> trashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"
>
>
> All,
>
> In Airspan's defense,  I am assuming the product that customer
> received was the version 3.00 product that only supported 20dbm output
> power. Its no surprise it didn't work and of course, the manufacturer
> has retooled the product and now the product supports 27dbm
> ( micromax ) at the AP and 24dbm @ the CPE. If you ran a link
> calcuation using their tools for that version of hardware, its totally
> not surprising the coverage was shoddy. As far as the latency is
> concerned, dont know what to tell you there. What I have seen in the
> field is much better performance. There is no excuse for overselling
> the solution's performance however, and I dont know the customer or
> what specifically caused them to get that upset.
>
> Honestly though using an 802.16-2004 product for indoor will not give
> you the performance that you will see with  802.16-2005, as far as
> latency and coverage is concerned. However, 802.16-2005 base stations
> will be a LOT more expensive ( try 80-120k ) over fixed which run
> around 3k-10k per sector.
>
> -
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Mar 24, 2008, at 9:16 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
>> I'd say it's probably little fault with the company and a lot of
>> fault with
>> people promoting or expecting more out of it than it can technically
>> deliver
>> (indoor install at 2 miles).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Jenco Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes
>> technologyas"miserablefailure"
>>
>>
>>> I have a local competitor who uses Wi-Max equipment - maybe even
>>> the brand
>>> you mentioned (sorry - I don't want sued) - I have had calls from a
>>> customer
>>> or two of theirs who are looking for something better.  I have no
>>> way of
>>> knowing all of the details (signal strength, etc.), but at one of
>>> their
>>> customers homes I did some testing and it really did look like crap
>>> (500-600
>>> ms lag times).  I have been saying to myself for a long time, self
>>> - it's
>>> all just hype until you see differently for yourself.  I may have
>>> been
>>> right.  I like it when I'm right :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Brad H
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Gino Villarini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Well, It still amazes me how well cell 3g is working.

 Currently Im on a Cruise Ship sailing out of San Juan towards
 Aruba, we
 are bordering the north coast of Puerto Rico ... about 3 miles out
 and I
 have 3 out of 5 bars in my AT&T Hsdpa Card, inside my
 stateroom ...not
 that bad, AT&T will eventually migrate to LTE which promises more
 speed
 ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless-
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Brian Webster
 Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:58 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technology
 as"miserablefailure"

  This does not surprise me. I have never thought that any
 type of
 indoor CPE
 business plan would do well for wireless internet. There are just
 too
 many
 unknown factors when it comes to placing a low power CPE without an
 external
 antenna in the hands of customers. They do not understand the
 limitations of
 wireless

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"

[Brian Webster]

Jeff,
Just to clarify my point, I was not hammering on any one manufacturer. I
was more trying to make the point that there is no magic bullet to be able
to use an indoor CPE and have a large coverage area. This goes for any magic
spectrum as well. Anything that will give you a large coverage will start to
be impeded by the buildings/wavelength ratio. Indoor really only works with
a lot of signal and many base stations.which of course means more money
invested in the network.which keeps the small guy out of the game.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Jeff Booher
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 2:26 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer
trashestechnologyas"miserablefailure"


All,

In Airspan's defense,  I am assuming the product that customer
received was the version 3.00 product that only supported 20dbm output
power. Its no surprise it didn't work and of course, the manufacturer
has retooled the product and now the product supports 27dbm
( micromax ) at the AP and 24dbm @ the CPE. If you ran a link
calcuation using their tools for that version of hardware, its totally
not surprising the coverage was shoddy. As far as the latency is
concerned, dont know what to tell you there. What I have seen in the
field is much better performance. There is no excuse for overselling
the solution's performance however, and I dont know the customer or
what specifically caused them to get that upset.

Honestly though using an 802.16-2004 product for indoor will not give
you the performance that you will see with  802.16-2005, as far as
latency and coverage is concerned. However, 802.16-2005 base stations
will be a LOT more expensive ( try 80-120k ) over fixed which run
around 3k-10k per sector.

-

Jeff



On Mar 24, 2008, at 9:16 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> I'd say it's probably little fault with the company and a lot of
> fault with
> people promoting or expecting more out of it than it can technically
> deliver
> (indoor install at 2 miles).
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jenco Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes
> technologyas"miserablefailure"
>
>
>> I have a local competitor who uses Wi-Max equipment - maybe even
>> the brand
>> you mentioned (sorry - I don't want sued) - I have had calls from a
>> customer
>> or two of theirs who are looking for something better.  I have no
>> way of
>> knowing all of the details (signal strength, etc.), but at one of
>> their
>> customers homes I did some testing and it really did look like crap
>> (500-600
>> ms lag times).  I have been saying to myself for a long time, self
>> - it's
>> all just hype until you see differently for yourself.  I may have
>> been
>> right.  I like it when I'm right :-)
>>
>>
>> Brad H
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Gino Villarini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, It still amazes me how well cell 3g is working.
>>>
>>> Currently Im on a Cruise Ship sailing out of San Juan towards
>>> Aruba, we
>>> are bordering the north coast of Puerto Rico ... about 3 miles out
>>> and I
>>> have 3 out of 5 bars in my AT&T Hsdpa Card, inside my
>>> stateroom ...not
>>> that bad, AT&T will eventually migrate to LTE which promises more
>>> speed
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Gino A. Villarini
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>>> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless-
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Brian Webster
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:58 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technology
>>> as"miserablefailure"
>>>
>>>   This does not surprise me. I have never thought that any
>>> type of
>>> indoor CPE
>>> business plan would do well for wireless internet. There are just
>>> too
>>> many
>>> unknown factors when it comes to placing a low power CPE without an
>>> external
>>> antenna in the hands of customers. They do not understand the
>>> limitations of
>>> wireless. Things like aluminum siding and stucco with wire mesh
>>> are just
>>> a
>>> couple of the big problems that you will run in to. Other items like
>>> metallic mirror film on windows and too many interior walls
>>> between the
>>> CPE
>>> and tower site are others. From an RF perspective it is always
>>> preferable to
>>> be above all of that (i.e. Rooftop) with the radio/antenna. If
>>> most of
>>> the
>>> buildings in the neighborhood are of the same height, building
>>> losses
>>> are a
>>> non-issue because you are now above them. The only thing left to
>>> worry
>>> about
>>> is the trees. Using outdoor antenna/CPE combinations should also
>>> allow
>>> you
>>> higher 

Re: [WISPA] The best Firewall - for the money

[Tom DeReggi]

Sonicwalls are pretty hard to beat nowadays. The 170 series, 25 user models, 
can be gotten wholesale around $650 new.
A lot of our consultants are very happy with Fortigate, also.

The best choice is really a question of support, and your goal of what to 
deliver. You give them a Sonicwall, and your recommendation is backed by 
every other IT guy on the planet, that probably has experieince with it 
also.  Linux firewalls, are a bit less intuitive for people not specializing 
in Linux.  If you are intending to manage their network, MT's can be a good 
way to offer value, powerful features, and remain more valuable yourself in 
the future maintenance operations.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Ron Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA" 

Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 2:51 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The best Firewall - for the money


> to All,
>
> I have a small Medical practice that has requested a firewall for their 
> LAN. Which would you all recommend? Price rane below $1000, Doc woule 
> prefer $500.
>
> Ron Wallace
> Hahnron, Inc.
> 220 S. Jackson Dt.
> Addison, MI 49220
>
> Phone: (517)547-8410
> Mobile: (517)605-4542
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.8/1339 - Release Date: 3/22/2008 
> 4:43 PM
>
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technologyas"miserablefailure"

[Jeff Booher]

All,

In Airspan's defense,  I am assuming the product that customer  
received was the version 3.00 product that only supported 20dbm output  
power. Its no surprise it didn't work and of course, the manufacturer  
has retooled the product and now the product supports 27dbm  
( micromax ) at the AP and 24dbm @ the CPE. If you ran a link  
calcuation using their tools for that version of hardware, its totally  
not surprising the coverage was shoddy. As far as the latency is  
concerned, dont know what to tell you there. What I have seen in the  
field is much better performance. There is no excuse for overselling  
the solution's performance however, and I dont know the customer or  
what specifically caused them to get that upset.

Honestly though using an 802.16-2004 product for indoor will not give  
you the performance that you will see with  802.16-2005, as far as  
latency and coverage is concerned. However, 802.16-2005 base stations  
will be a LOT more expensive ( try 80-120k ) over fixed which run  
around 3k-10k per sector.

-

Jeff



On Mar 24, 2008, at 9:16 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> I'd say it's probably little fault with the company and a lot of  
> fault with
> people promoting or expecting more out of it than it can technically  
> deliver
> (indoor install at 2 miles).
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jenco Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes
> technologyas"miserablefailure"
>
>
>> I have a local competitor who uses Wi-Max equipment - maybe even  
>> the brand
>> you mentioned (sorry - I don't want sued) - I have had calls from a
>> customer
>> or two of theirs who are looking for something better.  I have no  
>> way of
>> knowing all of the details (signal strength, etc.), but at one of  
>> their
>> customers homes I did some testing and it really did look like crap
>> (500-600
>> ms lag times).  I have been saying to myself for a long time, self  
>> - it's
>> all just hype until you see differently for yourself.  I may have  
>> been
>> right.  I like it when I'm right :-)
>>
>>
>> Brad H
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Gino Villarini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, It still amazes me how well cell 3g is working.
>>>
>>> Currently Im on a Cruise Ship sailing out of San Juan towards  
>>> Aruba, we
>>> are bordering the north coast of Puerto Rico ... about 3 miles out  
>>> and I
>>> have 3 out of 5 bars in my AT&T Hsdpa Card, inside my  
>>> stateroom ...not
>>> that bad, AT&T will eventually migrate to LTE which promises more  
>>> speed
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Gino A. Villarini
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>>> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless- 
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Brian Webster
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:58 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technology
>>> as"miserablefailure"
>>>
>>>   This does not surprise me. I have never thought that any  
>>> type of
>>> indoor CPE
>>> business plan would do well for wireless internet. There are just  
>>> too
>>> many
>>> unknown factors when it comes to placing a low power CPE without an
>>> external
>>> antenna in the hands of customers. They do not understand the
>>> limitations of
>>> wireless. Things like aluminum siding and stucco with wire mesh  
>>> are just
>>> a
>>> couple of the big problems that you will run in to. Other items like
>>> metallic mirror film on windows and too many interior walls  
>>> between the
>>> CPE
>>> and tower site are others. From an RF perspective it is always
>>> preferable to
>>> be above all of that (i.e. Rooftop) with the radio/antenna. If  
>>> most of
>>> the
>>> buildings in the neighborhood are of the same height, building  
>>> losses
>>> are a
>>> non-issue because you are now above them. The only thing left to  
>>> worry
>>> about
>>> is the trees. Using outdoor antenna/CPE combinations should also  
>>> allow
>>> you
>>> higher EIRP since the maximum permissible exposure rules would  
>>> change
>>> with
>>> the unit being away from the general public.
>>>   While you can make the case for customer self installs, you
>>> would need to
>>> have many more base stations so that you would have plenty of  
>>> signal to
>>> overcome the building  losses. This may work in a densely  
>>> populated area
>>> where you can justify the numbers (but you also have more  
>>> competition).
>>> In
>>> rural markets I would suggest to anyone making a business plan,  
>>> figure
>>> on
>>> doing fixed outdoor CPE installations. With a properly equipped  
>>> WIMAX
>>> base
>>> station costing around $40,000, a small WISP would be able to  
>>> conduct
>>> many
>>> truck r

Re: [WISPA] 900 MHz 60 Degree Horizontal Polarization SectorRecommendation

[Tom DeReggi]

Jack,

Not sure if this helps (if Mars has what you want) but...

The Superpass was the only one we were aware of for sure.
Based on the wavelength characteristics, its tough finding a good quality 
60deg 900 sector, considering that 10dbi antennas are often the max allowed 
with radios that typically put out 26dbm.
MTI (mtiwe.com) has a 13dbi 90 deg sector which is pretty high quality, 
which is getting closer to 60deg than the typical 120deg models offered.
You may also want to consider subscriber panel antennas which often have 
near 60 degree beamwidths.
For example PacWireless's 12dbi panel I think is near 60 degrees.
Ironically, one alternative is... buy a Trango 900 SU, remove electronics, 
make MMCX pigtail, voila 60 degree dual pol sector antenna. Its got about a 
13db F/B ration.
You may want to try Radial/Larson, just because I seem to remember that they 
may have made one or two of the older discontinued Metrocom 900 antennas. 
Although, most of the Metrocom ones had 30 degee horiz beamwidths and 60 
degree verticle beamwidths, opposite of what a WISP would normally want 
though.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:00 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 MHz 60 Degree Horizontal Polarization 
SectorRecommendation


>I want to thank everyone who was kind enough to take the time to give me
> suggestions about this antenna. So far, I've looked at Tiltek and Antel
> but didn't find an appropriate model. I'm still researching
> Kathrein/Scala. Superpass (although offering excellent value) isn't in
> the needed quality range. Mars does have an appropriate model
>  so I looking to
> find who might distribute it in the U.S.
>
> Again, thanks everybody for your help.
>
> jack
>
>
> Jack Unger wrote:
>> Does anyone know who makes a 900 MHz horizontally polarized 60-degree
>> horizontal beamwidth moderate-to-high quality sector antenna? I can't
>> seem to find any.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any help.
>>
>> jack
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
> Author of the Cisco Press Book - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
> Vendor-Neutral Wireless Training-Design-Troubleshooting-Consulting
> FCC License # PG-12-25133
> Phone 818-227-4220   Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.8/1339 - Release Date: 3/22/2008 
> 4:43 PM
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power

[Mike Hammett]

I lost my reply, so I'll see what I can come up with.

Smaller package for equivalent energy storage.  Longer lasting equipment 
(batteries die in 2 - 3 years).


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Chuck McCown - 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power


>I get fuel cell magazine each month.  It is full of sources.  Probably an 
>on
> line version.
> Just curious, why?  Battery efficiency is just as good if not better. 
> Bound
> to be much cheaper.   Fuel cells make water, and that causes problems in
> cold weather.
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA List" 
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:41 PM
> Subject: [WISPA] Hydrogen Power
>
>
>> I'm looking to run electricity through a hydrogen electrolyzer, store the
>> hydrogen, then later run it through a fuel cell as needed.  Does anyone
>> have some good sources of information or products?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technologyas"miserablefailure"

[Mike Hammett]

I'd say it's probably little fault with the company and a lot of fault with 
people promoting or expecting more out of it than it can technically deliver 
(indoor install at 2 miles).


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Jenco Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes 
technologyas"miserablefailure"


>I have a local competitor who uses Wi-Max equipment - maybe even the brand
> you mentioned (sorry - I don't want sued) - I have had calls from a 
> customer
> or two of theirs who are looking for something better.  I have no way of
> knowing all of the details (signal strength, etc.), but at one of their
> customers homes I did some testing and it really did look like crap 
> (500-600
> ms lag times).  I have been saying to myself for a long time, self - it's
> all just hype until you see differently for yourself.  I may have been
> right.  I like it when I'm right :-)
>
>
> Brad H
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Gino Villarini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>
>> Well, It still amazes me how well cell 3g is working.
>>
>> Currently Im on a Cruise Ship sailing out of San Juan towards Aruba, we
>> are bordering the north coast of Puerto Rico ... about 3 miles out and I
>> have 3 out of 5 bars in my AT&T Hsdpa Card, inside my stateroom ...not
>> that bad, AT&T will eventually migrate to LTE which promises more speed
>> ...
>>
>> Gino A. Villarini
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Brian Webster
>> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:58 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Australian WiMAX pioneer trashes technology
>> as"miserablefailure"
>>
>>This does not surprise me. I have never thought that any type of
>> indoor CPE
>> business plan would do well for wireless internet. There are just too
>> many
>> unknown factors when it comes to placing a low power CPE without an
>> external
>> antenna in the hands of customers. They do not understand the
>> limitations of
>> wireless. Things like aluminum siding and stucco with wire mesh are just
>> a
>> couple of the big problems that you will run in to. Other items like
>> metallic mirror film on windows and too many interior walls between the
>> CPE
>> and tower site are others. From an RF perspective it is always
>> preferable to
>> be above all of that (i.e. Rooftop) with the radio/antenna. If most of
>> the
>> buildings in the neighborhood are of the same height, building losses
>> are a
>> non-issue because you are now above them. The only thing left to worry
>> about
>> is the trees. Using outdoor antenna/CPE combinations should also allow
>> you
>> higher EIRP since the maximum permissible exposure rules would change
>> with
>> the unit being away from the general public.
>>While you can make the case for customer self installs, you
>> would need to
>> have many more base stations so that you would have plenty of signal to
>> overcome the building  losses. This may work in a densely populated area
>> where you can justify the numbers (but you also have more competition).
>> In
>> rural markets I would suggest to anyone making a business plan, figure
>> on
>> doing fixed outdoor CPE installations. With a properly equipped WIMAX
>> base
>> station costing around $40,000, a small WISP would be able to conduct
>> many
>> truck rolls for that price. The low housing density markets just don't
>> justify the cost of a properly engineered indoor CPE wireless network
>> (meaning it would take many more towers to work correctly). There would
>> never be the return on the invested dollar.
>>That is just my opinion, I am sure others will disagree with me.
>> If you
>> want a good way to think about it,  how many times have you run around a
>> building with your cell phone in a weak coverage area to keep a good
>> call
>> going? WIMAX indoor CPE's will be no different. The bigger problem will
>> be
>> that the customer will not want to move their computer in the house just
>> to
>> get a better broadband signal. This will easily create an unhappy
>> consumer,
>> and then an unhappy investor (and also clueless management). I read some
>> commissioned market studies (can't tell you where, but they were good
>> ones)
>> about the average customer expectation of how and where wireless
>> internet
>> should work. The scary thing was that they honestly believed that they
>> should be able to run around the house ANYWHERE with their laptop and
>> their
>> broadband should just work. This was how they perceived "wireless
>> internet"
>> working and they did not believe that they would have to install their
>> own
>> wireless AP in the house to achieve this. This basic perception by the
>>

Re: [WISPA] 900 MHz 60 Degree Horizontal Polarization Sector Recommendation

[Jack Unger]

I want to thank everyone who was kind enough to take the time to give me 
suggestions about this antenna. So far, I've looked at Tiltek and Antel 
but didn't find an appropriate model. I'm still researching 
Kathrein/Scala. Superpass (although offering excellent value) isn't in 
the needed quality range. Mars does have an appropriate model 
 so I looking to 
find who might distribute it in the U.S.

Again, thanks everybody for your help.

jack


Jack Unger wrote:
> Does anyone know who makes a 900 MHz horizontally polarized 60-degree 
> horizontal beamwidth moderate-to-high quality sector antenna? I can't 
> seem to find any.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> jack
>
>   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the Cisco Press Book - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Training-Design-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Phone 818-227-4220   Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/