Our ALFOPlus2 radio is true dual-carrier radio capable of up to 2x 112 MHz
channels. In instances where a customer can get the FCC to license wider than
80 MHz channels (11 GHz & 18 GHz), we can unlock the modems to provide up to
112 MHz bandwidth. With 4096QAM, this yields just over 2 Gbps full duplex
throughput (no compression).
This radio has independent modems and RF, so you have the flexibility to put
one of the carriers on say an 80 MHz channel using 4096QAM, and the other
carrier on 40 MHz using 256QAM. You also have the flexibility to set RF power
to different levels for the independent carriers. But most folks license CCDP
for max throughput, and there is no loss between the ODU and the antenna in
this mode.
We've also supplied 4+0 configurations (two ALFOPlus2 radios with a combiner
sandwiched between them), which doubles the capacity. Sure, there's a 3dB
coupler loss on each end, but you're getting 2x the throughput....
We've been shipping this radio since 2016. We've recently added a 10Gbe
interface to the radio (this is the AP2XG), so you can run a single 10G fiber
to the radio instead of two 1G connections.
Need more info? My contact info below...
Thanks,
Joe Schraml
VP Sales Operations & Marketing
SIAE Microelettronica, Inc.
+1 (408) 832-4884
joseph.schr...@siaemic.com
www.siaemic.com
>>> Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com> 6/4/2020 6:48 AM >>>
Should be easy enough to check to ensure that you have two (2) dual core radios
each transmitting a discrete frequency 60 MHz apart from one another. Anything
else would lead one to believe that they actually are just using their ETSI
configuration (112 MHz) within the 120 MHz block. Seems suspicious when two
sets of radios are about the same cost as one.
On Jun 4, 2020, at 8:04 AM, Jon Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
I’m not sure details other than I verified multiple times 120Mhz of actual
usage and the speed matched. Our frequency coordinator worked with them on the
rest...
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jun 4, 2020, at 7:59 AM, Tim Hardy <thardy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Just confirming that this is actually two (2) dual core radios - one CCDP at
80 MHz bandwidth and the other CCDP at 40 MHz bandwidth with the two transmit
frequencies separated by 60 MHz - correct? This will require couplers and
associated losses on both ends (approximately 7 dB). Any attempt to stack an
80 and a 40 to get a 120 MHz block in order to “cover” the band for an ETSI 112
MHz bandwidth radio configuration would be strictly illegal in North America,
and any single transmitter bandwidth greater than 80 MHz bandwidth (11 GHz) is
likewise illegal.
On Jun 4, 2020, at 12:28 AM, Jon Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
11Ghz is 80MHz per channel, plus another 40Mhz= 120Mhz (two channels per
polarity). But the channels have to be stacked and available.
Ignore the promos and prices. Tell him what price you need to be at and he will
try to make it happen.
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jun 3, 2020, at 10:36 PM, TJ Trout <t...@voltbb.com> wrote:
Jon,
I'm pretty dumb with this stuff, is this possibly two descrete 60mhz channels
per TX side?
TJ
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 5:40 PM Jon Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
11Ghz...2 channels in FCC assignment -similar- to AF11FX.
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jun 3, 2020, at 8:08 PM, TJ Trout <t...@voltbb.com> wrote:
What band can you do 120mhz in?
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 5:04 PM Jon Langeler <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> wrote:
SIAE just licensed me 2Gbps links in 120Mhz x2. Price was basically all the
same
Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.
On Jun 3, 2020, at 6:16 PM, Jason McKemie <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com>
wrote:
Yeah, the throughput is pretty comparable between the two.
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020, TJ Trout <t...@voltbb.com> wrote:
aviat can do the same with dual channels on a single radio, it's called a2c or
active two channel, we use it on the wtm4100
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:38 PM Josh Baird <joshba...@gmail.com> wrote:
The WTM4200 is dual core which is why it can do 1.4Gbps. The Bridgewave has
some other magic.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:41 PM Jason McKemie
<j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
I may have gotten the Aviat model wrong, whatever their dual core version is -
4300? I think the power on the Aviat is better, probably in part due to the
field replaceable diplexer in the Navigator.
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020, Josh Baird <joshba...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think the Navigator DT will have a higher overall throughput (~3Gbps if you
have the channels available).
The WTM4200 and the Navigator ST are a better comparison - each capable of
~1.4Gbps.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:27 AM Jason McKemie
<j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> wrote:
Does anyone have any experience with the two of these (Aviat WTM4200 vs
Navigator Dual)? I'm having a hard time deciding.
-Jason
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
