Sas is suppposed to eliminate the rogue ubnt gear. Im assuming there is
recourse if there is an illegal operator, but as far as i know, that path
is not clearly defined

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019, 8:43 AM Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote:

> Great feedback everyone.  Kinda what I figured though.  No special sauce
> added on the MU-Mimo part of the 450 APs that overcome tree penetration
> issues.  We have had good luck with the 320s for the most part, but they
> are only ¾ baked as a system , and far from being future proof, capacity
> wise.
>
>
>
> The 3.65 band  in general makes they choice a bit tentative.  Meaning  you
> can spend a bunch of money on LTE gear and have a $ 150 UBNT device start
> interfering with you, with little recourse.  Ouch.  No 2.5ghz band
> available in my area.
>
>
>
> And, In Florida our ROI sheet has to account for more equipment damage
> that most, so its not an easy call.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * Steve Jones
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 20, 2019 11:36 AM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Medusa in 3.65
>
>
>
> We are at decision time on what to do with the 320/ubnt 3ghz, same boat on
> decisions. LTE is a brand new horse to us, but the historic issues of
> interference frighten my more than walking in on my wife with another man
> when she should be doing laundry, I need clean work shirts. We had done
> some base testing with baicells and we considering the trigger pull, but we
> have the 450 out, and its performed as well or better than expected, this
> is not i or m but it was considered, by us to be a drop in replacement for
> the wimax, and ePMP to pick up the LOS UBNT junk.
>
> Ive been trying to find out what SAS is actually doing real world, but I
> dont know that the trial operators are allowed to speak of it without
> ending up in a lake with concrete shoes. If SAS solves all the worlds woes
> regarding interference, its a cost no brainer to deploy the crap out of
> baicells, take the range hit, and fill the gaps with microcells where
> required.
>
> but, 450, being the horse it is, works, and works well, even in the
> interference we have. Its drop in for us on the wimax because we were very
> careful on EIRP to not push our luck. we may take a 1x hit here and there,
> but offloading the LOS customers to EPMP will make up for that. May still
> require the occasional non standard solution for the customers that just
> dont work on anything other than the wimax, solely because it connected at
> such a crummy level. We should have addressed them historically anyway
> though.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:17 AM Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Probably not applicable to PMP320, but with the Purewave basestations, I’m
> convinced many operators were setting them to max xmt power ignoring FCC
> limits on EIRP.  That of course didn’t help upstream, and the CPE was
> fairly anemic.  But downstream, I think that was part of the “magic”.
>
>
>
> I think with CBRS there is the potential of increased EIRP over what we
> are allowed under Part 90.  Given the huge power consumption of the 3.6 GHz
> PMP450m, I have to suspect it has the power amps to take advantage of
> higher EIRP, not sure about the regular 450 AP.  If I remember correctly
> though, it doesn’t have as many antenna beams as the 5 GHz 450m.  And given
> the size, weight and power consumption, we have sites I doubt we could
> deploy 4 sectors.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Colin Stanners
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 20, 2019 9:50 AM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Cambium Medusa in 3.65
>
>
>
> I agree on the PMP320's impressive tree penetration. We moved some sites
> from PMP320 to PMP450... with the added gain of the PMP450 reflector dish
> (8+11dBi vs the PMP320's 14dBi) I expected it to make up for the PMP450's
> lower transmit power, and as a result have "similar" final signal levels.
> In the end, some customers heavily in trees "lost" up to 10dB of signal and
> required moving their mounts etc. So the WiMAX / flat-panel-in-NLOS magic
> seems to have been adding around 10dB.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:58 AM Josh Baird <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Quite the opposite for us.  PMP320 could burn through trees!
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 8:30 AM Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> WiMAX had little to no magical power against trees when we deployed it.
> Trees apparently are hype resistant.  YMMV.
>
>
>
> *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Paul McCall
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 20, 2019 4:22 AM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Cambium Medusa in 3.65
>
>
>
> We were told recently by Cambium that their Medusa product in 3.65
> competes favorable with LTE competitors.  We ONLY need it for tree
> penetration challenged customers.
>
>
>
> I have a healthy skepticism on 3.65 Medusa being able to magically work
> better that standard 2.4 Ghz penetration, seeing the regular 450SM in 3.65
> performed as expected compared to a 2.4 Ghz 450SM, meaning not as well.
> Seeing that LTE or Wimax far exceeds normal 2.4 Ghz gear, expecting 3.65 in
> 450 series (even Medusa) is a strong leap of faith.
>
>
>
> We are open minded but skeptical of these recent claims.  We are not happy
> with the LTE options available ATM, having field tested Baicells and Bliniq
> for a while now.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *Paul McCall, President *
>
> *Florida Broadband / PDMNet*
>
> *658 Old Dixie Highway*
>
> *Vero Beach, FL 32962*
>
> *772-564-6800*
>
>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to