Thank you Tim, I'll send it over to you. They are adjacent channels, I think maybe Micronet meant that because there was at least 2.8 MHz between the two that it should be OK. The emission designator 74M4D7D implies the AF-11FX actually occupies 74.4 MHz. I just get nervous sometimes about adjacent channels. I use Comsearch for our coordinations, hopefully it was a good 40 years for you.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, 2:04 PM Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com> wrote: Matt, Send me the PCN and I'll take a look at it and let you know. 2.8 MHz separation doesn't sound right at 11 GHz since there is no frequency plans that would give you that kind of separation. Thanks, Tim Hardy FYI, I was one of the three founders of Comsearch back in 1977 and retired in 2017 after 40 years - enjoying life at the beach, so you can see, I have no dog in this fight. > On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:43 PM, mhopk...@onlinenw.com wrote: > Hello, > We have a SAF 80MHz 11GHz link between a couple of towers. There is a > new PCN for a new 80MHz UBNT AF-11FX link that is at the same tower site as one of our ends. Their path would shoot past our tower at that site. There is 2.8MHz of separation between our channels and the polarity is the same (H). We have many licensed links but we are pretty rural and have not had any other PCNs this close to our > channels. Would you be comfortable with allowing this link? We reached out to the coordinator for the new link and they said it is within the acceptable range. Thank you in advance for any insight you can > provide. > Matt Hopkins > Network Administrator > 503.687.1030 > mhopk...@onlinenw.net > onlinenw.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
