Re: [WISPA] info on securing a 3.65 license

Mark..3373687188 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 12:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] info on securing a 3.65 license Actually, getthing the license is real easy. Finding your way through the FCC's web

Re: [WISPA] info on securing a 3.65 license

Actually, getthing the license is real easy. Finding your way through the FCC's web mess, that's a different story. however, when you go to register your location, that's when it gets harder. They use terminology and expect stuff we've never even heard of.

Re: [WISPA] Press Release...

Butch, I have referred your complaint to the Board list for a proper evaluation. I expect that the Board will post a response either affirming the policy that I quoted below or else clarifying it . jack Butch Evans wrote: > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Jack Unger wrote: > > >> I'm copying and past

Re: [WISPA] Press Release...

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Jack Unger wrote: >I'm copying and pasting the text from a June 17, 2008 email that >states WISPA's current policy regarding Press Releases. To help set >your mind at ease, the Link Technologies Press Release DID go >through the proper channels. The fact that the Press Rele

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

The most dreaded words in the world "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!". We can survive competition and bad spectrum and mediocre equipment and high prices, but we cannot survive the helping hand of govenrment. I would suggest asking them to cite the statutes that requires t

[WISPA] White Space Tests Get Mixed Results

I hope you will find this article to be of some value to you. jack http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10014456-94.html?hhTest=1&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=News-Wireless -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - "Deploying Lice

Re: [WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Dishes are 2 foot 5ghz pac wireless ones and even with the 125 foot coax on the higher one the loss on that is only 6-7db. I really don't need a 2 foot fish for this link is only 6 miles but the dish is helping make up for some of the loss and both backhauls are a rock solid and connection rates ar

Re: [WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Another very nice install! I envy u for your flat land installations! Scott -- Original Message -- From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:19:18 -0400 >Just got some pictures uploaded of another

Re: [WISPA] Press Release - Link Technologies and Ask-Wi.Com Announce Online Wireless Training -- doesn't this need to go through the board?

Hi Charles, I'm copying and pasting the text from a June 17, 2008 email that states WISPA's current policy regarding Press Releases. To help set your mind at ease, the Link Technologies Press Release DID go through the proper channels. The fact that the Press Release is posted on the WISPA webs

Re: [WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Very nice! Is all your stuff 2.4GHz or are those dishes 5.8GHz? I'd worry about loss at 5.8GHz on a run that long Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Just got some pictures uploaded of another one of my AP sites if you want to check it out. This site is completely all COAX with no radio's at top!

[WISPA] Alvarion 900 Mhz OFDM

I want some news? Is it being sold? Feedback? How does it compare to canopy? Somebody sell me on this stuff... -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be con

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Mike, It might be wise to think twice before throwing around emotional trigger words like "idiot" on a public email list. You may or may not realize just who or how many people you might be insulting. Also, if you have yet to rise to their demonstrated level of knowledge, it's possible that ot

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

Thanks, good input 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 Faisal Imtiaz Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 7:58 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Su

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

I guess you've taken that step and joined the fraternity then, correct? Mike Hammett wrote: > A requirement, yes. A burden, no. Just about any idiot can become an > amateur operator these days. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > -

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

No, but because I am lazy. ;-) All of my friends got their licenses during my 6 week Naval career (medical discharge) and I lost the ambition to go take the test. Several years ago I was scoring over 80% on the extra practice tests, but I ran out of time in my day to do the Morse. I wanted t

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

KB3PHD here. BTW, I have not used the above approach. It was a last resort plan. After 9 months of council meetings, writing letters to residents, countless trips to the county gov't building, and other shenanigans, I was able to get the permit I needed "by the books". Patrick Shoemaker Presid

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Do you have your license, Mike? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem A requirement, yes. A burden, no. Just about an

Re: [WISPA] Press Release - Link Technologies and Ask-Wi.Com Announce Online Wireless Training -- doesn't this need to go through the board?

Question I understand that Link Technologies is a vendor member and supporter of WISPA, but I am under the impression that those types of announcements have to go through the proper WISPA channels (e.g., WISPA Sponsored announcement...etc) and went towards are monthly/quarterly "allotment" of a

Re: [WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Very nice installsthe birds eye view reminds me why I'm glad I gave up tower climbing for ground mounted VSAT's. Stu Browne Command Networks FCC PG - 23-1159 WH6H On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just got some pictures uploaded of another one of my

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Don't call me an idiot you imbecile, I am an moron. - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem >A requirement, yes. A burden, no. Just about any idiot

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

Gino, The answer to your question of to do Cisco GSR or not To, will depend on what you are going to be comfortable with. Since you are currently working with the Mikrotik Appliance, you may find working with a router of similar format, me be more suited to your needs (You could use Vyatta ap

Re: [WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Nice work. Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > Just got some pictures uploaded of another one of my AP sites if you want to > check it out. This site is completely all COAX with no radio's at top! 150 > foot tower that is all LMR-900. Check it out and I'll answer any questions. > Just trying to help you guys

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

A requirement, yes. A burden, no. Just about any idiot can become an amateur operator these days. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

Matt what you migrated to? gino -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 7:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers On Aug 12, 2008, at 6:51 PM, Scott Lambert wrote: >> > What if you figure in the cost of a year

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

On Aug 12, 2008, at 6:51 PM, Scott Lambert wrote: >> > What if you figure in the cost of a year or three of trying to feed > the > GSRs enough amps to keep them passing packets and enough amps to the > air > conditioner to keep them from melting? > For us it is irrelevant. We would need a VXR

[WISPA] another tower site install (WAS coax cables)

Just got some pictures uploaded of another one of my AP sites if you want to check it out. This site is completely all COAX with no radio's at top! 150 foot tower that is all LMR-900. Check it out and I'll answer any questions. Just trying to help you guys out. I did this one all coax cause lightni

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

We installed a GSR with two processor cards and a single OC3 card. The load on our UPS went up by 1% (APC 12kva). The heat generated by that is nothing compared to the three Akamai caching servers (2u HP's with 8 SCSI drives each and dual power supplies). Travis Microserv Scott Lambert wrote:

Re: [WISPA] Cisco GSR Routers

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:21:13AM -0400, Matt Liotta wrote: > On Aug 12, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote: > > GSRs are overkill for what you are doing. In the Cisco world, a > > couple of mid-range VXRs would be a better solution. > > > > Or you could use a couple of ImageStream Rebel or G

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

We've had really good luck with these guys, used them for years here in Qwest territory: http://www.dtnettech.com/store/comersus_viewItem.asp?idProduct=1877 and http://www.dtnettech.com/store/comersus_viewItem.asp?idProduct=1876 Tell them InfoWest sent you. Jerry Richardson wrote: > We have be

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

We have been using the dlink --- airCloud Communications Jerry Richardson 925-260-4119 Sent Mobile -Original Message- From: Mark McElvy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 1:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem r

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Remember that one of the ham radio provisions is that you need to be a ham... :) Patrick Shoemaker wrote: > Also, read the actual code/charter that regulates the activity to find > exemptions. Here in Prince George's county, MD, antennas that fall below > a certain size and power output are co

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Thats interesting. It might be worth seeing if Montgomery County, followed suit, and did something similar? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesda

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

I was not clear. I was not talking about getting a HAM license. I was talking about the local "permit fee", for the tower application. It is rediculously low, atleast in my county. (maybe it was as high as $300 max?) The HAM guys did a good job protecting their rights over the years. They are a

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

Where my advice applies depends on the motive for delaying the a Tower application. I agree one must fiirst identify what the local laws/ordinances are, and make sure that they comply with them, prior to building. Building in a way that is known to be against allowable rules, is a really bad id

Re: [WISPA] FCC geographic search

http://wireless.fcc.gov/uls/index.htm?job=alerts#71 Seems like there is always some sort of technical difficulties there. I enjoy getting pdf reports from ULS that are generated with the following footer: ReportMill Evaluation. Call 214.513.1636 for license :) Brian Webster wrote: > Chuc

Re: [WISPA] FCC geographic search

Brian Webster wrote: > Chuck, > What exactly are you having problems with? Any FCC ULS searches have > been a > crap shoot for me. Much of the time I find that for any queries to work > well, you need to be as simple as possible. It seems that if you give it > more complex conditions to filt

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Also, read the actual code/charter that regulates the activity to find exemptions. Here in Prince George's county, MD, antennas that fall below a certain size and power output are considered "minimal" (forget the exact wording) and can be installed on an existing structure without going through

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Well we are looking at wholesaling through Socket. We are mainly in Embarq territory. I there a better way to go? Mark McElvy AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wyble Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:48 PM

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Mark McElvy wrote: > End user DSL modem recommendation. > Hmmm.. What are you using as your DSLAM? Generally you want to pair a similar brand. Can you tell us a bit more about your service and architecture? DSL is ridiculously complex. I have been researching it extensively and ATM alone is

Re: [WISPA] FCC geographic search

Chuck, What exactly are you having problems with? Any FCC ULS searches have been a crap shoot for me. Much of the time I find that for any queries to work well, you need to be as simple as possible. It seems that if you give it more complex conditions to filter down the results, it gets fu

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

End user DSL modem recommendation. Mark McElvy AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation Just mo

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

One way to do it is... You get the tower up via HAM rules, and don't provide commercial use. BUilt it just large enoug that it would hold only your antennas. Then after the fact There are some local code issues that often incourage someone to attempt to find a pre-existing structures to col

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Just modems or dslams? Randy Mark McElvy wrote: > Well actually was referring to a DSL modem recommendation... > > Mark McElvy > AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Tuesday, Augus

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Well actually was referring to a DSL modem recommendation... Mark McElvy AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 2:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT -

Re: [WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Yes. We use IAKNO wholesale DSL. They have been great. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark McElvy Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:33 PM To: WISPA General

[WISPA] OT - DSL Modem recomendation

Just wondering if there are others doing DSL along with their wireless? Would like a product recommendation and source. Thanks Mark McElvy AccuBak Data Systems, Inc. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://si

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

Hold on, I am heading out the door right now the the camera I'm gonna get some pics of another tower I setup that is all COAX and I think you'll be drooling when you see it. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [

[WISPA] Press Release - Link Technologies and Ask-Wi.Com Announce Online Wireless Training

http://www.wispa.org/?p=265 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subs

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

I have and still do, in some cases, long, (100ft+), cable runs. LMR-400 is the minimum cable size for that on 2.4GHz. You will need an amp. At 5GHz, I would expect LMR-600 or better. However, at 5GHz, I think I would go with tower top radios. I doubt that you will get good results at 5GHz w

Re: [WISPA] He knows what we don't... ???

Jack Unger wrote: > If you believe they mean true Wi-MAX then do you believe it's licensed > Wi-MAX or licensed-lite Wi-MAX in 3650? > For 2.5 million I'm thinking licensed. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI projec

Re: [WISPA] info on securing a 3.65 license

Rogelio wrote: > Charles et al, > > Below is a 14 MB file detailing some of the steps needed in order to > secure a 3.65 GHz license. > > http://www.alvarion.com/upload/images/stepbystep_wp.pdf > > Yes that is a fantastic link and quite informative. I think my blog post still beats it on goog

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

Where did you get the information about building a HAM tower for a $95 licensing fee? That information seems incorrect. Getting a HAM radio license requires passing the appropriate HAM radio licensing tests for the license class that you want. Tom DeReggi wrote: > You may wanted to argue two po

Re: [WISPA] He knows what we don't... ???

ClearWire managed to bridge the digital divide with Wimax in many places. So whats the big deal with what this guys doing other than the free investment advertisement? He's charging monthly for access, and you still need a CPE to use it. So did Towerstream. If someone gave me 2.5 million I'd

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

Tom, Your suggestions are valid for an OTARD situation, but ill advised in this case. The burden of proof is not on the municipality, however compliance is expected. Failure to comply and operating a facility could likely result in fines being assessed daily. The first question is how are they

Re: [WISPA] He knows what we don't... ???

If you believe they mean true Wi-MAX then do you believe it's licensed Wi-MAX or licensed-lite Wi-MAX in 3650? Charles Wyble wrote: > Jack Unger wrote: > >> Here's a guy who is "building" a Muni WiMAX network all by himself. >> >> >> >>

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

> They cannot require colocation, that is considered a "taking". Sure about that? If so I'd like more info. In Montgomery County Maryland, their position is that before they'll issue a tower permit (excluding HAM towers), one of the requirements is that you must prove that you have been unable

Re: [WISPA] Tower site liscensing problem

You may wanted to argue two points 1) That your company/broadcast site does not match the description of "telecom facility" as defined in the County Code. And that there is no provision listed in the county code that specifically states your business type and use, and that bundling you int

Re: [WISPA] He knows what we don't... ???

Jack Unger wrote: > Here's a guy who is "building" a Muni WiMAX network all by himself. > > > > Either: > > a) This gentleman believes he knows a whole lot more than WISPA members > know (because very few WISPA members are single-handedly bu

Re: [WISPA] He knows what we don't... ???

ralph wrote: > Please elaborate, Jeff. > > Ralph > Yes Jeff. Please elaborate. There are various community projects that are somewhat successful. Various muni service networks that are operational. Certainly providing free access to everyone didn't and isn't going to work (see earthlink :)

[WISPA] info on securing a 3.65 license

Charles et al, Below is a 14 MB file detailing some of the steps needed in order to secure a 3.65 GHz license. http://www.alvarion.com/upload/images/stepbystep_wp.pdf (Others may already know this, but this was new for me) --

Re: [WISPA] FCC ULC

Jerry Richardson wrote: > Thank you > > Link for the international bureau search page: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/ -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project -

[WISPA] FCC geographic search

Anyone else having trouble using the FCC geographic search feature? I called tech support and they said there were known issues. But nothing further. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

OTARD was modified to recognize that CPE can also be part of the infrastructure allowing CPE to be repeaters. So, it really doesn't matter if it is an AP or CPE anymore. As long as there is a customer at the site. The customer doesn't have to live at the site. - Original Message - From

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Would OTARD apply in a scenario of a mesh AP/CPE antenna? - Original Message - From: "Joe Fiero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem > OTARD does not apply to any commercial usage. It

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

OTARD does not apply to any commercial usage. It will apply to a commercial end user, but not a system operator. Statutes that apply to HAM operators are just that, for HAM operators. Certainly you could make a claim, but that's about the same as saying you garage your car in another state to sav

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

" Who defines reasonable? " In this case the city ordinance. If you want the permit granted, you comply with the provisions. We chose to move on to a more reasonable jurisdiction. Joe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Rogers Sent:

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Jack, I am a Brooklyn boy that ran a communications business in Midtown Manhattan for 15 years. I had rooftops secured before anyone knew what they were worth. We leased space to Winstar (Ouch!), all the paging companies ( more ouch) and ran several 20 channel SMR systems in addition to about

Re: [WISPA] FCC ULC

Thank you __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:59 AM To: WISPA General List Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Marlon, We never went before the board for a variance. The overwhelming burden placed on us was apparently more of a fight than we needed to take on with alternate locations just a hilltop away. We cut our losses with the $1000 deposit on the property which had a usage-acceptance clause in the c

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

They do if the local county or city attorney believes they do. Moreover, if you are leasing the site, the landowner can be the customer thereby giving OTARD a toe hold. If you are a HAM you can make the case that you are also using the site for ham purposes. Not saying any would stand scrutiny i

Re: [WISPA] FCC ULC

* Jerry Richardson wrote, On 8/12/2008 11:55 AM: > How accurate is the FCC ULC? > > I am searching by call sign for grandfathered earth stations and all > four of the call signs come back not found. > It's not in there except a reference to the grandfathered PDF. The International Bureau is w

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

All of it can be applied where it is talking about how to work with the locals. I have had great success with many jurisdictions doing many of the things specified on that page. - Original Message - From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > None of that can be applied. Strictly HAM

[WISPA] FCC ULC

How accurate is the FCC ULC? I am searching by call sign for grandfathered earth stations and all four of the call signs come back not found. Jerry Richardson VP Operations 925-260-4119 P Please consider the environment before printing this email <>

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/Uuse TUE, AUG 12, 2008»

Use LDF4.5 Heliax for this run. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:55:16 To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U I hate radios at the top of the tower so I'd like to run coax cables t

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

There were many good on-list responses to your post so I'll be short here with my comments. Local jurisdictions can't prohibit your tower but your tower is subject to their local zoning rules and regulations. Co-location requirements are often made to minimize the number of towers in an area i

[WISPA] Fw: Hutton Communications Expo, Phoenix! REMINDER

I'm trying to decide if I want to go to this. Anyone else planning on being there? marlon - Original Message - From: Hutton Marketing Team To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:35 AM Subject: Hutton Communications Expo, Phoenix! REMINDER

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

Yes. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:06:08 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U I thought so. Thats why I asked. So, LMR400 or 600? -RickG On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:58 AM

Re: [WISPA] Connect Ohio Program? anyone heard of this

If I know Chip his name's not rining a bell right now. But I've talked to or met a LOT of people over the years and I tend to forget names far too quickly. All programs like this give me the heeby geebies. At least so far they do. One good note is that it's about time Government started proac

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Hey Joe, What happened when you went before the city council and lined out the fee's vs. your expected income? Is there possibly a DSL or cable competitor already there that didn't want any competition etc.? laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Joe Fiero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

LMR 400 will work. If you really want to lower your loss, use eliptical waveguide, but be prepared for a very high cost. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "RickG" <[EMAIL PROT

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Reasonable is more often than not going to be based on what a similiar tower would lease similiar space in a similiar area. And its always a good idea to involve an attorney any more. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card t

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

OTARD and PRB1 do not pertain to AP or backhaul locations Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:43:37 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem There are two part

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

I thought so. Thats why I asked. So, LMR400 or 600? -RickG On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Blake Bowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > RG8 is totally wrong. > > > Don't take your organs to heaven, > heaven knows we need them down here! > Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. > > - Ori

Re: [WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

RG8 is totally wrong. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "RickG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 9:55 AM Subject: [WISPA] coax cable

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Who defines reasonable? I would justify that our costs in the construction of the tower, namely permitting and engineering studies required are part of the "Rent". Just like a building, I wouldn't rent it less than it costs to construct it. That doesn't make sense. At $1000/mo, it would take ne

Re: [WISPA] coax cables

It can but the loss is high and the braid is much less. Stick with LMRs 400 *,5 '22@ )+_3 "2,/(:4 32*" 4:+3( Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:33:57 To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] coax cables I

[WISPA] coax cables - RG8/U

I hate radios at the top of the tower so I'd like to run coax cables to an enclosure at the bottom and add amps to make up for the loss. I'm looking for a 9 mile link. The drop is 150 feet. At any rate, I found an old RG8/U cable. Will that work on 5GHz? I also have LMR400? If not, what would you r

Re: [WISPA] coax cables

No Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:33:57 To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] coax cables I'm running coax down my tower and came across and RG8/U. Can this be used on 5GHz? -RickG --

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

None of that can be applied. Strictly HAM radio stuff, non-commercial. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent:

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Nope. Trying to hide behind the HAM radio provisions will get you caught. I know first hand of a tower in Alabama constructed under PRB-1. About a year after it was constructed, a VHF antenna was installed for a commercial antenna. Soon after, the zoning folks got wind. The tower owner was giv

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

They can, and do require collocation. Whats even worse, is many places will REQUIRE that the tower owner provide free space for local government services. Its not legal, but the big boys of the tower industry have agreed thousands of times to this, which only hurts us regional operators. With th

[WISPA] Warehouse clean up sale

No Offers would be rejected! Prefer to sell in bundles Switch Bundle 1 Milan SM801ST 1 Dlink DSS-16 1 Dell 3424 3 3com XM3300 1 Netgear FVX-538 Dual Wan Router DS-3 Bundle 1 Net to Net 6 port Converter 1 Net to Net 1 port Converter Offlist for more info, Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] A

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

There are two parts of the telecom act, OTARD and the Ham ruling that "should " be able to be used to mitigate most of this. Especially of the city attorney doesn't want to do much research. OTARD and the Ham ruling could probably combat the visual impact aspect. I have successfully used the

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

And you would be sued, and you would lose. Reasonable accommodations have to be made for collocation. If your competitor is required by the town to collocate, and you unreasonably keep him from complying with the city statutes, he has firm legal footing to pursue you. A few quotes for comparable

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Actually, visual impact CAN be applied. Lambs Knoll MD is a good example of a recent application where the tower company lost. A municipality can heavily regulate tower placement, and if they show that another site without that visual impact, or even multiple sites without that visual impact can

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

Good bunch of info here. Almost all of can be applied to us. http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/local/prb-1_program.html - Original Message - From: "Joe Fiero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tower site

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

We have found that most municipalities have not regulated, beyond a building permit, towers below a certain height. Some were very generous at 100-110 feet, some were a bit stingy at 50 feet, but the majority has been open for anything of 70-80 feet or below. That to me is a reasonable ordinance

[WISPA] coax cables

I'm running coax down my tower and came across and RG8/U. Can this be used on 5GHz? -RickG WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---

Re: [WISPA] new site install pictures

Really nice work Kurt! I need you to come down to Kentucky and do that for me on a few tower! -RickG On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys I just got some pictures uploaded of one of my AP sites if you want > to check it out. Hopefully someone star

Re: [WISPA] Tower site licensing problem

I ought to pull out our arguments we have used and put them on the wiki. There are four bits of federal code that you can use. Two of them apply to cell phone towers, but since we are part of the femtocell structure now, we are in that business if we want to be. OTARD covers two way broadband d

  1   2   >