Re: [smartBridges] Strange dbm values

[Dan @ Wyoming.com]

If you don't like the way SB has their Radio set up then don't use it. 
If you think they are so expensive they why are you using them?  Why 
don't you just go use your Cisco raio's?  Then there won't be anything 
to bitch about.  As for price they are much much cheaper then most 
everything else out there.

????



On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 05:09:08 -0500
"beckman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
What I am 'bitching' about is that a AB will report -19dbm when the 
signal
is actually -65. I have quality tools. I have a calibrated spectrum 
analyzer
and many years of experience using it. I also have a 802.11b (Cisco) 
card
that I have a known reference level to, so It is accurate. What I am 
saying
is that other manufactures easily make an accurate 'out of the box' 
RSSI
display, normally within 10% accuracy, and I expect the same from 
smart
bridges.

Displaying -19dbm on a 7 mile link with only 29db EIRP on the head 
end and
24 gain on the client end does not compute. My techs know to convert 
it, and
not trust it, but it is dam annoying and for the price we pay for
smartbridges, they can fix the software. We have taken to always 
putting a
coax down the pole and using a pen-tablet with a Cisco Aironet card 
to aim
the antenna and verify the link before we ever put the smartbridges 
on. (we
originally started that because of the failure rate in smart 
bridges, its
annoying to have to lower a H50 telescoping pole)

Don't bitch at me for my demanding a quality product. Smartbridges 
are not
cheep, I expect them to live up to their price. They are ESPECIALLY 
not
cheep when we have to do a @#$%$ truck roll to fix them when they 
break. And
Yes, I know many of you have had no problems with smart bridges, and 
I have
had many sites with no problems too. But the most common thing in 
these
sites with no problems seem to be that every thing is 'perfect'. 
Great
ground, great signal, SB in the shade, 3 added lightning protectors 
(coax,
power supply, and CAT5, adds 75$ to the cost, BTW), and low 
frequency of
lightning and other bad weather nearby. the SB product line has a 
very low
fudge factor.

Donald Beckman
Fort Worth, Texas
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of RFMS
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 8:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Strange dbm values


Beckman,

None of them are accurate enough for a self respecting
person to use more than once, unless you use the same
card all the time to test the signal level, off-air.
It would be best for the manufacturer to produce a
QoS for data,AKA, BER instead of everyone discussing
what the signal level should be for a CPE when installed.
You want good data, start demanding it in print, with
a corroborative source behind the printed spec's and
then those folks selling junk will not be discussed
here and this problem will cease to waste everyone's
time here.
In short, you do get what you pay for.  Stop bitching.

Ron
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://archives.part-15.org
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://archives.part-15.org  
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://archives.part-15.org