Duh Sam.... :) One last question: What antennas have you had the best luck with on a p-t-p shot like this? I was thinking something along the line of a 2 foot parabolic, but would much rather defer to the experiences of the group than to guess.
Thanks for everyone's help! Sam On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Jason wrote: > You just answered your own question. You are limited to > the integrated antenna with the Total. If you want to > minimize interference, go with the APPO. > > Jason > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sam > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:10 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [smartBridges] 4 Mile Backhaul Link - What > to Use > > Bill > > Thanks for your response. Have you noticed any problems > with the p-t-p > shot interfering with the access point? That was a > concern, but if I use a > narrow beam on the antennas this would be a minimal > disruption (and only > along that beam) if anything. Also, would you recommend > the APPO or the AP > Total? > > Thanks > Sam > > On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Bill Flood wrote: > > > Sam, > > > > I too cannot justify the cost of 5Ghz yet. We have > used a SB APPO to > > connect to the next town at 12.6 miles. Your > customer base should really > > not matter at this time. A 11 mb radio can pass 6 mb > of data. 60% rule of > > ethernet. We have used H-pol for quite some time > between towns, best way > > to stretch 2.4Ghz. It would be worth checking to see > if anyone else in the > > area is doing the same with H-pol. The only > issue/problem SB has right now > > it there is no way to monitor the p-t-p link between > towns without > > switching modes. I certainly hope SB is working on > this too. So to answer > > your question, yes a 4 mile hop should be real easy > if it is LOS. > > > > Bill > > > > At 04:35 PM 6/10/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > >I'm looking at putting up a 4 mile backhaul link. It > will be hauling at > > >most probably fifty CPE @ 256k/128k. What would you > recommend for this? > > >Will the APPO or AP Total work for this? I really > cannot afford a 5.8 shot > > >right now, and was hoping that a set of these put > with with the opposite > > >polarization of the Access Point would work in lieu > of an expensive 5.8 > > >shot. (The access point will be vertical, the > backhaul horizontal. The > > >access point will be at 200 feet, and the backhaul > at 100.) > > > > > >Thanks > > >Sam > > > > > > > > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > > >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body > type subscribe > > >smartBridges <yournickname> > > >To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body > type unsubscribe > > >smartBridges) > > >Archives: http://198.63.203.6 > > > > Bill Flood > > AirRunner Networks LLC --- We make the web fast! > > If you get tired of the wait call 715-443-3700! > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body > type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body > type unsubscribe smartBridges) > > Archives: http://198.63.203.6 > > > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type > subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body > type unsubscribe smartBridges) > Archives: http://198.63.203.6 > > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges > <yournickname> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) > Archives: http://198.63.203.6 > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) Archives: http://198.63.203.6
