Re: [AFMUG] 6ghz (lower) interference

If that -85 dBm carrier is co-channel or within the occupied bandwidth, it could be problematic. Typical co-channel interfering level requirement is around -99 dBm. Anything higher than that could be causing some issues. > On Jul 23, 2025, at 6:24 PM, TJ Trout wrote: > > Yes it's clean, only

Re: [AFMUG] Killer 900MHz?

So, more likely one of these https://extension.psu.edu/juniper-diseases - these idiots need to spray their plants but it's always easier to blame it on everything else. > On Apr 20, 2024, at 3:27 PM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote: > > I would go with the vent as the number one suspect. > > The

[AFMUG] FCC Proposes $62 Million penalty against Q Link Wireless for violation of EBB program rules

docs.fcc.govSo many redactions, it’s like reading the Mueller report.Sent from my iPad-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] OT Political

So how come there’s 133% democrats in the racial column as an example. On this question in particular, did they ensure the sample included the same percentages of minorities in every category? Maybe they explain all this, but I have better things to do with my time.. > On Oct 7, 2022, at 4:45 P

Re: [AFMUG] LENT

Glad that shit is over. You’ll be happy with your Tesla, our Model Y is is 2 years old today and its been a great experience. The wife’s car and I still have the gas guzzling 911! Peace out. > On May 25, 2022, at 6:35 PM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote: > > Model 3 They predict Sept to December de

Re: [AFMUG] OT: SpaceX PCN

I haven’t seen the PCN you reference, but I suspect it is a standard satellite ground station PCN since 18 GHz would be their downlink and 28 GHz the uplink. Part 25.203(c2) covers the coordination requirements for ground stations in shared bands and the PCN must include an antenna horizon gain

Re: [AFMUG] Off topic by a long way

Chuck - we loved the video! My parents were both British and I have many relatives in Devon, the next county East of Cornwall. Looking forward to seeing more until Pamela & I can get back over the pond. > On Jan 21, 2022, at 3:03 PM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote: > > My oldest daughter lives in C

Re: [AFMUG] C band 5G vs Radar Altimeters

Deja Vu all over again. Very similar to the OBE / adjacent channel concerns voiced in the 6 GHz unlicensed proceeding. The FCC’s total lack of understanding of receiver filtering in even current devices is astounding and its fairly clear that money / politics beats physics everyday. > On Dec 11

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed Dish RF Pattern

Nate, I think this is the radiation pattern envelope that you were looking for. Keep in-mind that the RPE is “smoothed” over the peaks and does not show the valleys. scx2-190c171013.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document > On Nov 4, 2021, at 10:55 AM, Nate Burke wrote: > > We were aligning an

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Breakfast is served

Mid 1990s, $2,700 “lunch” for 3 at Il Giardino (French Restaurant in DC) with Tom Leming, VP of Engineering at MCI. I don’t remember much as there was a bottle of Louis XIV Cognac involved. Sent from my iPad > On Nov 1, 2021, at 7:19 PM, Robert Andrews wrote: > > $1800 dinner with my boss in

Re: [AFMUG] Employee Handling - Did I handle this correctly?

Comsearch was built on Friday afternoon keg parties - at least the first 15 years, till we sold the company to someone with a lot more sense and brain cells.. > On Aug 4, 2021, at 11:20 AM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote: > > Damn, I have a mini lunch party planned for today. But I missed out on Z

Re: [AFMUG] Favorite high capacity 11Ghz XPIC backhaul

Whatever you end up with, make sure to pay attention to system gain. It is absolutely critical for modulations above 512 QAM.. Sent from my iPad > On Mar 3, 2021, at 6:19 PM, Darin Steffl wrote: > >  > Aviat > > Our link is solid > >> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 4:02 PM TJ Trout wrote: >> Ahh t

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

alb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/comp

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

book.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

Not something you feel is equivalent. > > > From: AF On Behalf Of Ryan Ray > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 12:09 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar > > Hey Tim, > > Does this rule have a reason? Or is it just a rul

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

A note of caution: Some vendors have been pushing the notion that at 11 GHz, one can coordinate and license an 80 MHz bandwidth pair along with a 40 MHz bandwidth pair separated by 60 MHz to in effect get a contiguous 120 MHz of spectrum. This is okay as long as you are transmitting two distinct

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

The dual-core WTM-4200 radio only suffers a coupler loss hit. I think you’re referencing the single-core WTM-4100 using Adaptive Dual Carrier (A2C) which has a significant power hit at 1024 QAM and above. > On Jan 4, 2021, at 3:01 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: > > Yeah, you can do 2 x 80mhz channel

Re: [AFMUG] 2+0 Co-Polar

2+0 Co-Polarization will add couplers and losses on each end, and I believe that LinkPlanner automatically puts those in when you specify this. With the Aviat WTM, you would be using the WTM-42C (coupler version) which has the coupler losses baked-in to the specs. > On Jan 4, 2021, at 2:51 PM,

Re: [AFMUG] FCC coordinate verification

Heck, when we were laying out the MCI system in 1971, the best maps in most area were 1:250,000 - and some areas out west, even worse than that. Try getting accurate anything at those scales, particularly when the contour granularity was up to 250’! > On Dec 28, 2020, at 3:13 PM, Chuck McCown v

Re: [AFMUG] FCC coordinate verification

For FAA Obstruction Evaluations only and this is where the 2C survey requirement applies. FCC has its own set of rules and requirements.. From FAA FAQs on filing FAA Form 7460-1: 12. How do I get the latitude and longitude? The geographic coordinates may be obtained by utilizing a U.S. Geograph

Re: [AFMUG] MG part 101 - why does license need specific hardware?

It is primarily needed for adjacent channel or non-co-channel interference situations as there can be wide differences in filtering. But even for co-channel, its important to know the practical threshold as well as the required T/I value that allows no more than 1 dB of degradation due to inter

Re: [AFMUG] HFT

Its a lot more complicated than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_Boys > On Nov 28, 2020, at 7:17 AM, Matt Hoppes > wrote: > > Sure but their operations could be. > >> On Nov 28, 2020, at 1:30 AM, Colin Stanners wrote: >> >>  >> I'm assum

Re: [AFMUG] 11ghz etiquette

Ken nailed it - all of this is Frequency Coordination / Efficient Spectrum Utilization 101 - there’s at least one “Coordinator” out there that could desperately use your help! > On Nov 11, 2020, at 12:52 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > It also pays to plan out your HI and LOW side towers and which l

Re: [AFMUG] MG License AGL height margin of error

Hardy guy weighing-in! Mark and Daniel are both correct, except: Bullet point 6 should read: Any change in transmit antenna polarization https://www.rfvenue.com/blog/2015/07/01/polarization-polarity-and-polar-pattern-whats-the-difference Daniel’s points below come from § 1.929(d) Classificatio

Re: [AFMUG] coordinated power - licensed link

Your maximum power levels should be set to the levels for each modulation step that are listed on the attached Adaptive Modulation Data Sheet. In the example below, the coordinator has used the ATPC “coordinated power” advantage to clear interference into another user. The “coordinated power” wh

Re: [AFMUG] Ultra low latency PTP

Like Cielo, SAF, etc., Aviat also has a low latency version of their IRU and ODU 600 radio lines. > On Sep 1, 2020, at 2:10 PM, Daniel White wrote: > > If you are the second fastest on a route you might as well not have a route. > > These guys will rip and replace even if they just put it up i

Re: [AFMUG] FAA determination ... finally

This is correct. ULS automatically checks all Part 101 applications and any that fail TOWAIR are red lighted - the application cannot be filed without additional information, such as documentation that it passes FAA Notice Criteria (TOWAIR sometimes fails things that the FAA passes), an FAA app

Re: [AFMUG] OT Unifying dislike

This 100%. Realize that it’s not all about you - it’s about your fellow humans. Do no harm.. Sent from my iPad > On Jun 26, 2020, at 6:38 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: > >  > Wear the mask...stop the spread...our state got worse and today Abbot, a > lackey, closed bars againnever should hav

Re: [AFMUG] RV Park Fiber

My read is the RV Park is on very shaky ground here. Most RVs and trucks now have fixed antennas underneath radomes on the roof. There’s just no basis for restricting one from receiving satellite signals through these antennas - as Chuck commented, are you going to knock on their door to ensur

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat vs Bridgewave multi-carrier battle

t rule? > > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > The Brothers WISP > > > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tim Hardy" > To: "AnimalFarm Microwave User

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat vs Bridgewave multi-carrier battle

Daniel is correct, and the notion that one could coordinate and license an 80 MHz channel pair with a 40 MHz pair separated by 60 MHz to somehow block out a 120 MHz chunk to then operate a 112 MHz bandwidth ETSI configuration is patently false. Any vendor (integrator, radio OEM or coordinator) t

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat vs Bridgewave 11GHz

fo below... > > Thanks, > > > > Joe Schraml > VP Sales Operations & Marketing > SIAE Microelettronica, Inc. > +1 (408) 832-4884 > joseph.schr...@siaemic.com <mailto:joseph.schr...@siaemic.com> > www.siaemic.com <http://www.siaemic.com/> >

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat vs Bridgewave 11GHz

est... > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > >> On Jun 4, 2020, at 7:59 AM, Tim Hardy 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 wit

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat vs Bridgewave 11GHz

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

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

; > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > From: "Tim Hardy" > To: "AnimalFarm Microw

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

utionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwes

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

Actually, they are eligible but only in the same areas that other Part 101 licensees would be eligible. They are not eligible under Part 74. > On Apr 26, 2020, at 8:10 AM, Tim Hardy wrote: > > Radio is not eligible for 7 GHz > >> On Apr 25, 2020, at 8:56 AM, Mike Hammett &

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

> wrote: > > > > The primary influencers behind the rule change are some small, no-name > > companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Broadcom. I doubt you've heard of > > them. They're interested in unlicensed 6GHz for the indoor low power > &g

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

ULS is just the data set that will be used - the software and hardware will be state-of-the-art. > On Apr 24, 2020, at 5:37 PM, Caleb Knauer wrote: > > ULS is gonna have to get way more gerbils, it barely runs on a good day. > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 8:25 AM T

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

6) >> usage. >> >> I'm certain they've dropped millions lobbying for this. >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:45 PM TJ Trout > <mailto:t...@voltbb.com>> wrote: >> There must be some ulterior motive here there is no way th

Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum

FCC has total authority over these bands. On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:29 PM Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > How can the FCC make spectrum available for un-licensed without an act of > Congress? > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:30 PM Erich Kaiser > wrote: > >> yes you are right. >> >> >> Erich Kaiser >> N

Re: [AFMUG] TOWAIR and ASR for existing tower

The FAA Notice Criteria tool mentioned by Lewis is also more accurate than TOWAIR and we have seen instances where it will clear towers that TOWAIR failed. All we had to do was file the FAA Report data along with the TOWAIR data and the application was accepted. > On Apr 14, 2020, at 7:45 PM,

Re: [AFMUG] 5.9 FCC Form 601/STA?

The FCC has a process that they must go through. Each application must go through a number of steps including IRAC review and you can see exactly where the application stands by going into ULS, searching for the file number and clicking on the History Tab. On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:14 PM Mike Melu

Re: [AFMUG] 5.9

It’s actually the DSRC band, 5850 - 5925 MHz below the licensed point-to-point 6 GHz band. Sent from my iPad > On Mar 31, 2020, at 8:46 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: > >  > Lol...5.9 to 6.1 GHz is flooded in most of our areaRF signals don't stop > at US Mexico border ese homies! > >> On Tue

Re: [AFMUG] licensed link high/low question

o I assume there is some logic behind it. > > > From: AF On Behalf Of Steve Jones > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 8:21 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] licensed link high/low question > > Who do you have doing the engineering >

Re: [AFMUG] licensed link high/low question

is > actually I think a Rohn 45 and the antennas would be close to each other, > although not the same azimuth. > > > > It sounds like I should ask them to look at it again with one of the > shorter links in 18 GHz. > > > > *From:* AF *On Behalf Of *Tim Hardy >

Re: [AFMUG] licensed link high/low question

required to have a buck in order to match the prevailing plan at the established site. In these instances, one would want to have as much frequency separation as possible between T & R at the co-located site. Sent from my iPad Sent from my iPad > On Mar 13, 2020, at 8:38 PM, Tim Hardy

Re: [AFMUG] licensed link high/low question

The radios certainly don’t have any isolation from this type of interference, so what you’re relying on is totally on the antennas - there’s not much FSL on these and I wouldn’t bet my life on a 2’ Category B to provide the kind of close-coupling loss needed on a co-located system. AT&T and MCI

Re: [AFMUG] 3.65 NN License Expiry

For what it’s worth, I researched current FCC license records for Radio Service NN and here is the number of licenses that expire by year: 2020969 Most of these on 4/17/2020 2021363 2022298 2023260 2024220 202583 20261 > On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:31 AM, Mark Radabaug

Re: [AFMUG] New stuff

The TV aux band you speak of ends at 7.125 GHz. The radio used here operates in the Gov’t 7-8 GHz (7.125 - 8.50 GHz) band managed by NTIA. This is the band that FWCC, and CTIA among others is trying to get reallocated for sharing with Part 101 in an attempt to relocate paths from a portion of

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti stock

Animal Farm - the home of Infectious Disease Experts that just happen to work in the WISP industry, throwing their 12+ years of higher education away to bring us the Internet LOL. On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:56 PM Bill Prince wrote: > The incubation period is most certainly not 14 weeks. It is pro

[AFMUG] THE C-BAND. Repurposing Mid-Band Spectrum for 5G FCC FACT SHEET.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-362335A1.pdf -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] FCC Enforcement actions - unauthorized operation in 3650 - 3700 MHz band

z one? > > > > I wish that more people had been nailed, its said other "license" holders > had no recourse, it took a fixed station to be interfered with > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:35 PM Tim Hardy wrote: > > BREVARD WIRELESS, INC. DBA FLORIDA HIGH

[AFMUG] FCC Enforcement actions - unauthorized operation in 3650 - 3700 MHz band

BREVARD WIRELESS, INC. DBA FLORIDA HIGH SPEED INTERNET, LICENSEE OF STATION WQMJ660. Brevard Wireless, Inc. dba Florida High Speed Internet agrees to $16,000 settlement and compliance plan resolving investigation into unauthorized operation in the 3650-3700MHz band . Action by: Deputy Chief, En

Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner

-band. > > It seems pretty unlikely that there are any N type couplers available, > since N connectors aren't exactly common on 11ghz radios... > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 4:07 PM Tim Hardy wrote: > >> I’m not sure if there are any N type couplers, but there are WR90 t

Re: [AFMUG] 11 ghz combiner

I’m not sure if there are any N type couplers, but there are WR90 to N connectors and UDR/PDR couplers available (these are used when combining frequency pairs together on the ODU 600 for example). Bigger question would be how two AF-11s would work together on the same path/same antenna system.

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed radios

radios? I > don't see anything listed on the publicly available spec sheet for the > Bridgewave. > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 1:29 PM Tim Hardy <mailto:thardy...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Just so we’re comparing apples to apples, Aviat’s values are typical. > Guaranteed

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed radios

;> SIAE questions if Aviat is reporting correct numbers but I don't think >>> they are incorrect either >>> >>> Even if Aviat's numbers are a bit exaggerated and there was only a 3db >>> difference that's still a whole antennas size! >>>

Re: [AFMUG] Licensed radios

Yes, as I mentioned previously the system gain of the WTM 4200 at 80 MHz bandwidth, 4096 QAM is 77.5 dBm (threshold is -52.0 dBm and tx power is 25.5 dBm). This provides 7.5 dB more fade margin than the AF-11 at 80 MHz bandwidth, 1024 QAM (system gain 70.5 dBm, threshold -52.5 dBm and tx power

[AFMUG] FCC'S ENFORCEMENT BUREAU REACHES $1.13 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH SCRIPPS ON MONITORING OF TV TOWER LIGHTING

FCC'S ENFORCEMENT BUREAU REACHES $1.13 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH SCRIPPS ON MONITORING OF TV TOWER LIGHTING. by News Release. News Media Contact: Will Wiquist at (202) 418-0509, email: will.wiqu...@fcc.gov . EB. DOC-361864A1.docx

Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti AF-11x licensed links

Attaining and keeping the higher modulations is a matter of system gain and proper design, but this radio is seriously lacking in gain when compared to other radios. For example, at 80 MHz bandwidth, the AF-11’s system gain at 1024 QAM is 70.5 dBm, the WTM 4200’s system gain at 1024 QAM is 86.0

Re: [AFMUG] More Part 101 Noise

Won’t do you much good without some kind of directional horn or antenna. Sent from my iPad > On Jan 7, 2020, at 8:28 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > >  > Need to strap one of those SAF thingies to a drone. > > From: AF On Behalf Of Sean Heskett > Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 7:18 PM > To: AnimalF

Re: [AFMUG] More Part 101 Noise

Nate, send me the link call signs and I’ll see if I can find the issue. Have you ever done a fade test during normal operation? This should be done on every hop during implementation to establish a noise baseline. Do you have access to a spectrum analyzer? Tim Sent from my iPad > On Jan 7, 2

[AFMUG] Fwd: Daily Digest 2019-12-10

Scroll down for the others Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: nore...@info.fcc.gov > Date: December 10, 2019 at 5:30:56 PM EST > To: FCC Daily Digest > Subject: Daily Digest 2019-12-10 > Reply-To: > >  > > > Daily Digest > Federal Communications Commission > 445 12th St.,

[AFMUG] FCC Enforcement Actions

 > They issued 24 of these today. Looks like they’re trying to make a > statement: > > NORTH TEXAS BROADBAND, LLC. The Enforcement Bureau cites North Texas > Broadband, LLC for failure to disclose information regarding its network > management practices, performance, and the commercial terms

Re: [AFMUG] OT Movies

Sounds like a fun place! https://www.villages-news.com/2019/05/04/villages-101-whats-the-truth-behind-urban-legend-of-stds-in-the-villages/ DUIs in Golf Carts.. https://www.vill

Re: [AFMUG] Cybertruck

Umm, Bill - fake news. Came in my 2016 Cayman GTS for nada… > On Nov 22, 2019, at 7:37 PM, Bill Prince wrote: > > Yeah. Only $4K each. > > > bp > > > On 11/22/2019 3:51 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: >> woah! you can get cupholders in a Porsche these days?! >> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 3:30 PM

Re: [AFMUG] Aviat

Really old timers will remember that Aviat’s genesis starts at Lenkurt in 1958. Here’s an excerpt from George Kizer’s book, Digital Microwave Communication: Engineering Point-to-Point Microwave Systems. Aviat is by far the largest US supplier for Public Safety, Utilities, Railroads, local gover

[AFMUG] FCC's Pai Aims To Sell C-Band Licenses Through Public Auction

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-360855A8.pdf -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] 650 / 670 dual polarity

So, I’m retired - its a cold day so no golf. Something drummed into my feeble brain from Freshman year of EE back in ought one - when discussing antennas or signals the correct term is polarization not polarity. Here’s a pretty good explanation for what its worth: https://www.rfvenue.com/bl

Re: [AFMUG] Exalt Extendair Antenna Interface

From my recollection, most radio vendors had proprietary mounts and they had contracts with the antenna OEMs that forbade them from selling or even manufacturing these.. Sent from my iPad > On Nov 8, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Daniel White wrote: > >  > If they are 2ft dishes the cost for adapters an

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

o > file. Nice catch. > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 8:22 PM Tim Hardy <mailto:thardy...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Lewis, >> >> I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed >> out that towers under 200’ can still require a

Re: [AFMUG] Tower lawyer

Lewis, I don’t have a comment on the NEPA side of this, but it should be pointed out that towers under 200’ can still require an ASR. The 200’ requirement is one of many and the only way to know for sure is to run the FAA Notice Criteria tool here: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisToo

Re: [AFMUG] callsigns for each licensed PTP link

This is correct - one call sign per station in the licensed, fixed pt-to-pt bands, at least that is what the FCC prefers. However, if you are adding a path to an existing station (one that has a call sign) and file the application as “New”, the FCC will grant a new, separate call sign for the f

Re: [AFMUG] Tracking Down Licensed Noise

Nate, Send me the call signs or path information on the path you’re concerned about + any info on the other entities and we’ll run an analysis for you. Tim Hardy On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:22 AM Josh Luthman wrote: > I would use the SAF spectrum analyzer and go to where that dish is, si

Re: [AFMUG] El Paso Mass shooting

So what you really meant to say after all that bull shit is thoughts and prayers - well we’re getting tired of that bull crap! WTF? Sent from my iPad > On Aug 3, 2019, at 9:27 PM, Tim Reichhart > wrote: > > Ya ok he posted manifeso but it still doesnt mean he is linked to trump > anybody say

Re: [AFMUG] 20 Db Loss with AF-11FX Adapters

> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On Jul 3, 2019, at 4:27 PM, Tim Hardy wrote: >>>> >>>> Dragonwave never made antennas - they private labeled either Commscope >>>> ValueLine or RadioWaves antennas. These would r

Re: [AFMUG] 20 Db Loss with AF-11FX Adapters

Dragonwave never made antennas - they private labeled either Commscope ValueLine or RadioWaves antennas. These would require an OMT or dual-polarized feeds to get both polarizations. > On Jul 3, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Keefe John wrote: > > The TX power is correct. > > We'll double check the tigh

Re: [AFMUG] 20 Db Loss with AF-11FX Adapters

Exactly - mislabeled duplexers has been a known problem. > On Jul 3, 2019, at 12:18 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: > > Did you make sure you have the duplexors connected the right direction? I did > that wrong once... and make sure you have the right duplexors for the > sub-band you're on. > > On W

Re: [AFMUG] 11,6ghz same antenna

Yes, but you won’t find anything less than an 8’ shrouded platform. https://www.commscope.com/catalog/antennas/product_details.aspx?id=7 Sent from my iPad > On Jun 27, 2019, at 8:28 PM, Steve Jones wrote: > > are there solutions to run both freqs on the same antenna? > -- > AF mailing list >

Re: [AFMUG] Proposed Licensed Link Potential Conflict

was tied up an a US bank account. > > -----Original Message- From: Tim Hardy > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:04 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Proposed Licensed Link Potential Conflict > > Matt, > > Send me the PCN and I’ll take a

Re: [AFMUG] Proposed Licensed Link Potential Conflict

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 retir

Re: [AFMUG] SpaceX Says Its 60 Starlink Satellites Are All Phoning Home (and Fading Out) | Space

Basically inverse square law - see http://www.spaceacademy.net.au/spacelink/spcomcalc.htm Sent from my iPad > On Jun 1, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Sean Heskett wrote: > > Same amount of clouds tho. > > What’s the free space path loss of outer space?? > > > >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:20 PM Bill Pri

Re: [AFMUG] FCC Forfeiture for TDWR interference in PR

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-19-433A1.pdf Sent from my iPad -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium

The radios were the 820s which is the Ceragon IP20. Sent from my iPad > On May 18, 2019, at 2:17 PM, wrote: > > No idea, but I sure never had support issues with Cambium other than perhaps > a bit of an initial delay. > > From: Bill Prince > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 11:44 AM > To: af@a

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium

Done! > On May 18, 2019, at 11:21 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: > > I just checked the membership list of this list. I don’t have any aviat or > aviatnetworks domains subscribed. If someone knows someone there they might > want to forward some of this list traffic. This could be a high profile fa

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium

mparing Cambium and Aviat? > > From: Tim Hardy > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 4:12 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Cambium > > I researched this some and here’s some additional information: > > The original Bald - Passive - Castle Pk pa

Re: [AFMUG] Cambium

I researched this some and here’s some additional information: The original Bald - Passive - Castle Pk path was built in the 1992 time frame and it was 2.1 GHz digital. The 2.1 GHz radios and antennas were changed out to 11 GHz when the 2.1 GHz band was reallocated to PCS in 2010. PCS licensee

Re: [AFMUG] Antenna Aligner

That is correct - these are True North. > On May 13, 2019, at 10:26 AM, wrote: > > I believe path profiles and FCC licensing are true bearings. > > From: Steve Jones <> > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 8:22 AM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Antenna Aligner > >

Re: [AFMUG] LightPointe

The major urban areas - NYC, Chicago are littered with them. Building to building connecting brokerage firms, etc. Sent from my iPad > On May 6, 2019, at 9:37 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: > > Seems that a FSO product would be too short ranged for HFT folks. > > From: Daniel White > Sent: Monday,

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Tax cut my ass...

wrong - the deduction for taxes - state, property, sales, etc. was capped at $10K. If itemized deductions were capped at $10K there would be a lot of unhappy campers out there! > On Mar 31, 2019, at 8:03 PM, justsumname wrote: > > The IRS website shows what changed. Tax rates did in fact g

Re: [AFMUG] Harris radios

This is correct. Harris Microwave Communications Division (MCD) was spun off and merged with Stratex in 2007 under Harris-Stratex. The company was renamed Aviat Communications in 2010. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 28, 2019, at 5:15 PM, wrote: > > Good to know. Thanks. > > From: Tim Withro

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

Mobile: 510-207- > pkr...@unwiredltd.com <mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com> > > From: AF On Behalf Of Tim Hardy > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 3:53 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios.. > > We need to know what they are

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

> www.UnwiredLtd.com > Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 > Mobile: 510-207- > pkr...@unwiredltd.com > > From: AF On Behalf Of Tim Hardy > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 3:53 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios.. >

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

Just checked, 4200 80 MHz 18 GHz is coming soon.. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 26, 2019, at 6:41 PM, Tim Hardy wrote: > > I was looking at 4100 - let me research this.. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Feb 26, 2019, at 5:58 PM, Peter Kranz wrote: >> >>

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

ich is interesting given the 25% more theoretical BW. > > Aviat 50 Mhz/2048QAM = 850 Mbps > Aviat 80Mhz/2048QAM = 1370 Mbps > DW 64 Mhz/2048 QAM = 1252 Mbps > > Peter Kranz > www.UnwiredLtd.com > Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 > Mobile: 510-207- > pkr...@unwiredltd.com

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

g > which eats into the cost savings. Especially at 11 GHz where I assume you > aren’t just throwing in a few inductors and capacitors to create a brick wall > filter. > > > From: AF On Behalf Of Tim Hardy > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 4:23 PM > To: AnimalF

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

0-207-0000 > pkr...@unwiredltd.com > > From: AF On Behalf Of Tim Hardy > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 11:53 AM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios.. > > > Just an FYI.. > According to this chart, the occup

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

ranz > www.UnwiredLtd.com > Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 > Mobile: 510-207-0000 > pkr...@unwiredltd.com > > From: AF On Behalf Of Tim Hardy > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 11:53 AM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios.. >

Re: [AFMUG] Higher power 18Ghz radios..

Sloppy filters. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 26, 2019, at 5:18 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: > > Well, I'm just guessing, but what other reason would there be for occupying > 79mhz with a 56mhz radio? > >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:08 PM Tim Hardy wrote: >> If

  1   2   >