Hi,

I didn't run the numbers, but since this sounds like a point-to-point link
you may be able to legally install a 250mw or possibly even a 500mw
bidirectional amplifier at one or both ends.  There are several calculators
online that can help you identify how large of an amp you can legally use;
you could also try to understand the FCC's rules for point-to-point links.
>From what I've read and understood, the FCC allows higher powered amps on a
point-to-point link than on point-multipoint links.

That said, I'd also recommend trying more powerful cards with more
sensitive receivers before investing in an amp.  (Amps are expensive.)  You
can get a 200mw Senao for about $75 or the similar Zcomax, Demarctech, or
Engenious cards.  Some people say the new Atheros chipset is good (I
haven't tried it):

From: Jim Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 10/23/03
"The newer Atheros cards support 20dBm up to about 18Mbps, and have 
better rx sensitivity than the Senao or Zcomax (Demarc) cards.   They 
essentially have a better baseband, and sorry, I can't expose the 
numbers.

If I"m connected to Atheros, you need to let both Atheros and I know.

Jim"

Finally I'm kinda interested in the (expensive) antenna products made by
wifi-plus.com  I think they may hold some promise as they are "nil-jon
multipolarized" antennas for 2.4ghz.  I was able to find some good reviews
of earlier nil-jon antennas for lower frequencies (compared to regular
antennas), and have reason to believe these newer models could have similar
benefits.  (I have no connection to the makers of these antennas.)  

http://www.wifi-plus.com/pages/2/index.htm
forum:
http://www.wifi-plus.shoppingcartsplus.com/page/page/567784.htm

related info:
http://www.noard.com/niljon.htm
http://www.electronicstalk.com/news/nil/nil100.html
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1326
http://www.niljon.com/pages/1/index.htm
http://www.strongsignals.net/access/boards/viewpost.cgi?board=antenna&num=2503

-hk

At 01:30 PM 10/28/2003 -0600, Jeff King wrote:
>
>Greg:
>
>In that light, wouldn't circular polarizaion be the best solution since any 
>reflection of a CP polarized changes its twist, hence giving a CP antenna
20+ 
>db rejection of the 1st order multi-path?
>
>I guess the downside here though is I'm not aware of any off the shelf CP 
>antennas with 24 dBi gain.
>
>Still, even though it is fairly clear what the problem is, we still do not
know 
>the link margin to begin with. It sounds like it is just a 1megabit link
on the 
>peaks, hence I'm suspecting we have a poor link margin to begin with. 
>The "quick solution" may be as simple as replacing the WAP11's with some 
>AP's/clients with hotter recievers. Otherwise it will be up and down the
towers 
>and adding a diversity dish possibly.
>
>Quoting Greg DesBrisay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Countermeasures can include (1) using horizontal polarization instead
>> of
>> vertical polarization (vertically polarized waves flip and change
>> phase
>> by 180 degrees when reflected from a conductor, horizontally polarized
>> waves don't change phase when reflected), and (2) positioning your
>> antennas so the area where signal reflects off the water is over
>
>--
>general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
>[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>

"The Net treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

"Government is like a fire, useful in the fireplace, but if it gets out of
it's place, it will consume everything you own." - George Washington

--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to