900 MHz Wireless link, Need Opinions on My Setup

imported_bungee91

Junior Member
May 17, 2007
22
0
0
I am in the process of possibly setting up a wireless link between my friends house and mine for the reason of a broadband connection that I can't get at my location.

Anyhow the range is roughly 1.6 Miles and I am able to mount my antenna about 50' up on an extended pole and he will be roughly 5' above the top of his house (roughly 40' up).

I am a bit new to using anything 900Mhz but it seems to be a need as their are definitely some tress between us and I have HIGH doubts on 2.4Ghz working in that condition. Please give opinions on the equipment I am thinking of, or if their would be something better priced near the same. Also if you have experience on this how feasible do you think it will be (I am thinking it should work ok, but this isn't my field of work).

I am planning to use 2 Ubiquiti XtremeRange 9's http://www.ubnt.com/products/xr9.php
Hooked into 2 RouterBoard model 411A's http://www.routerboard.com/pdf/rb411mA.pdf
Using 2 13Dbi Yagi Antenna's http://www.l-com.com/productfamily.aspx?id=6324

Also here are my Google Earth Location's of the link needing to be made (Just load both into Google Earth)
http://jeffreyanton.com/random/Network%20Link.kmz
http://jeffreyanton.com/random/Network%20Link2.kmz

Thank you for your responses!
 

skyking

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
22,620
5,726
146
If you can't see his house or neighborhood from the top of your '50 pole, you are likely wasting money.
 

xSauronx

Lifer
Jul 14, 2000
19,582
4
81
Originally posted by: skyking
If you can't see his house or neighborhood from the top of your '50 pole, you are likely wasting money.

with 900mhz you can go through a surprising amount of foliage and still get usable speeds. nothing lightning fast, maybe 1 or 2Mbps, but its better than dial-up. However it wont go through

first: OP, keep in mind that if youre going to be using his broadband connection he can potentially get in trouble with his ISP for sharing it with you, as its generally against the ToS.

second: if either of you have 900mhz phones or other devices (not as common as 2.4ghz gear, but still) they can cause interference.

third: do you know how to setup what you want to do with routerOS? do you have a weatherproof enclosure for the board/900mhz adapter to be outside with the antenna?

fourth: if youre mounting this stuff over the roof line of your house and above nearby trees, please understand that this can attract lightning, and understand that that is a very bad thing when it hits your home.

i dont have google earth so i didnt look (i do have an internet connection and access to google maps, which seems like it would have been just as easy to link to) so im not sure if your link would even work well. ive installed many 900mhz links but even that can only tolerate so much physical interference.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
I think it will work. I have seen successful links in the 4 mile range without LOS. As long as there isn't a hill or dense trees in the way , you can probably get a link.

Looking at the points on the map links, the thing to look at is elevation.
Marion is at 710 ft
Home is at 681 ft

So Marion will be at the top looking down on Home. There is a 29 foot difference so if Marion uses the rooftop + 5ft that is probably another 35 ft on top of that making it ~ 64 ft higher than you at ground level. In between the two points there is a fair bit of trees, and one or two houses that might be an issue. Height is hard to tell on google earth. Around the trees near Beckwith Lane it is 712ft elevation. So if any tree is over 30 feet it will decrease signal strength. You just need to draw a line on google earth and read the elevations at spots that have homes or trees in the way then go to that spot and see the height of the object. If it is just a couple trees , you should be fine. But a stand of trees like the ones around Beckwith that are 700ft thick could be a problem if they are too tall.

Really what you need is to be at about 760 ft at Marion and about 740ft at Home. That would allow for the trees in the path to have to be over 50ft to be a problem. That would mean a 50ft pole at both ends.

It is doable but it is not going to be cheap. You are probably looking at $1500 to do it and have it work.

What was used for the 4 mile link :
Everything was from here except mast and cables :http://store.microcom.us/index.html
WILIGEAR WOE-001 outdoor enclosure - $50 - plenty of room, and tough for outdoor use
M2 ANTENNA SYSTEMS YA-9-11 -$55 - this is a grounded antenna which makes it really easy to setup, the pole becomes the connection to the ground.
UBIQUITI XTREMERANGE9 - $130 - 700mw output at 900mhz
MIKROTIK RB/411 ROUTERBOARD - $50 - small but more than enough to handle a link
UBIQUITI NETWORKS POE-15-EU - $13 - power over ethernet adapter with DC protection
PROTECTOR, 0.1-3GHZ 90V, N BULKHEAD FEMALE TO N FEMALE - $18 - lightning protection for the card and router

Channel Master Model 1640 - $180 - 40ft telescoping mast.
Guy wires - needed to secure mast.
Grounding cable and clamps + ground rod for mast.






 

ScottMac

Moderator<br>Networking<br>Elite member
Mar 19, 2001
5,471
2
0
Not gonna happen.

At VHF and above, foliage (moisture in general) eats the signal.

Line of sight is mandatory, even at 900 MHz.

I hope your 50' pole is well stabilized; motion (alignment) will also kill the signal in major increments. The beamwidth for the Yagi is probably wide enough , but two masts waving in the wind ain't gonna cut it. Coupled with no line of sight, it's the kiss of death, IMO.

 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: ScottMac
Not gonna happen.

At VHF and above, foliage (moisture in general) eats the signal.

Line of sight is mandatory, even at 900 MHz.

I hope your 50' pole is well stabilized; motion (alignment) will also kill the signal in major increments. The beamwidth for the Yagi is probably wide enough , but two masts waving in the wind ain't gonna cut it. Coupled with no line of sight, it's the kiss of death, IMO.

Line of sight is not mandatory. I have done links without line of sight as long as the objects in between are not dense. We passed a 900mhz link through a stand of trees that were about 60 feet thick from where the trees started to where they stopped. I have also passed a signal through the second story of a block building that was in the way. You cannot have a lot of things in the way, but line of sight is not required.

The mast used does have to have guy wires attached and that generally takes care of any antenna movement.
 

ScottMac

Moderator<br>Networking<br>Elite member
Mar 19, 2001
5,471
2
0
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: ScottMac
Not gonna happen.

At VHF and above, foliage (moisture in general) eats the signal.

Line of sight is mandatory, even at 900 MHz.

I hope your 50' pole is well stabilized; motion (alignment) will also kill the signal in major increments. The beamwidth for the Yagi is probably wide enough , but two masts waving in the wind ain't gonna cut it. Coupled with no line of sight, it's the kiss of death, IMO.

Line of sight is not mandatory. I have done links without line of sight as long as the objects in between are not dense. We passed a 900mhz link through a stand of trees that were about 60 feet thick from where the trees started to where they stopped. I have also passed a signal through the second story of a block building that was in the way. You cannot have a lot of things in the way, but line of sight is not required.

The mast used does have to have guy wires attached and that generally takes care of any antenna movement.

Over a mile-and-a-half distance? In an amateur setup with cheap cable (versus Heliax, for example)?

It ain't gonna happen.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: ScottMac


Over a mile-and-a-half distance? In an amateur setup with cheap cable (versus Heliax, for example)?

It ain't gonna happen.


It happens all the time.

Read the ubiquiti forums, there are people doing way more than 1.5 miles. I've done 4 miles so I know it is possible. Cable used isn't much of a factor since you only use about 2 feet of it at most.
http://www.ubnt.com/forum/

 

xSauronx

Lifer
Jul 14, 2000
19,582
4
81
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: ScottMac


Over a mile-and-a-half distance? In an amateur setup with cheap cable (versus Heliax, for example)?

It ain't gonna happen.


It happens all the time.

Read the ubiquiti forums, there are people doing way more than 1.5 miles. I've done 4 miles so I know it is possible. Cable used isn't much of a factor since you only use about 2 feet of it at most.
http://www.ubnt.com/forum/

ive done many 900mhz links through a surprising amount of foliage between the CPR and an AP, but it was all with motorola canopy gear and i always had the advantage of the AP being at least 200' in elevation above the CPE (and often quite a bit more than that) at 1 - 5 miles away.

if theres significant foliage and the elevation is pretty similar between points, I wouldnt bother. im not saying it wont work, you might get a signal, but id be surprised if you got one good enough to keep up a link (if you could even make one at all), and I dont think the cost and headache of the setup is worth the trouble.
 

skyking

Lifer
Nov 21, 2001
22,620
5,726
146
I am saying it is a $1500 gamble to try it right, and you'll never get all your money back. It is a different thing when you can just use the gear on the next job. Fill that foliage with a steady rain and see what happens. It might be months until you get to find out it is long term unstable.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Filling in all the numbers , terrain, tree loss, height of antenna, and the antenna type, the radios used, here are the results:
Tree loss was figured at 300 feet using 9dbi /150ft , loss is at 18.5dbi

The numbers:
Distance between Unit 1 and Unit 2 is 2.6 km (1.6 miles)
True North Azimuth = 252.4°, Magnetic North Azimuth = 255.7°, Elevation angle = 0.2192°
Terrain elevation variation is 11.5 m
Propagation mode is line-of-sight, minimum clearance 0.7F1 at 0.4km
Average frequency is 912.500 MHz
Free Space = 100.1 dB, Obstruction = -2.1 dB, Urban = 0.0 dB, Forest = 15.6 dB, Statistics = 25.7 dB
Total propagation loss is 139.2 dB
System gain from Unit 1 to Unit 2 is 144.3 dB ( yagi.ant at 252.4° gain = 13.0 dB )
System gain from Unit 2 to Unit 1 is 144.3 dB ( yagi.ant at 72.3° gain = 13.0 dB )
Worst reception is 5.0 dB over the required signal to meet 98.000% of situations


It should work , even with rain you have another 5db you can lose and those figures are already worst case, provided there are no trees in the path that would be more than 300ft in total thickness in the path. Then there is also diffraction at 900mhz that may allow the signal to be even stronger than above. All depends on where everything is in the landscape.

This was done with a -90db requirement for the 12Mbps speed , the above radio allows for -95db minimum for a connection at 1.1Mbps, so at worse you would have to lose another 12db before you would lose the connection entirely.

If you have no other alternatives, it looks viable .




 

bobdole369

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2004
4,504
2
0
Lets start with this: I'm a ham radio operator, having extensively worked 2m (144mhz) 440, 900mhz, and 1.2ghz in years past. Also HF stuff, but thats not relevant here. I only mention this so folks will understand that I have an inkling of how RF does and doesn't work.

I'm going to take apart some of this post and correct a lot of it, so bear with me.

If you can't see his house or neighborhood from the top of your '50 pole, you are likely wasting money.

Just plain wrong. Lets get it straight - up to about 1.2ghz - line of sight is not absolutely mandatory. The lower towards VHF you go the less of an issue it becomes, but 1.2ghz is sort of a barrier of sorts where you almost NEED to actually see the other antenna.

Case in point - Police radio's. Most are on 800/900mhz band now - trunked systems. The portables they use are 100mw, 300mw, 1W, 5W and all manner of in-between. You do not need 100% signal reception for data to go through. The 900mhz protocol retransmits as needed, so as long as something is getting through, you'll just end up latent. Cop radios almost never get LOS and have to work in all situations. Similar situation in the amateur radio world. I can talk on 900mhz with 100mw in my living room and light up a repeater that sits at 30 feet over 5 miles away with aplomb. You don't need to see the other antenna at all. It is not 2.4ghz where a tree wipes everything out. Forget about that. It's a non-issue in this freq range for all intents and purposes. Sure it does attenuate, but it's NOT 2.4 where the wavelength actually interacts with the h20. It passes basically right through it.

if either of you have 900mhz phones or other devices (not as common as 2.4ghz gear, but still) they can cause interference.

For the longest time 900mhz ISM cordless phones were the most common, though not as common as 46/49mhz devices - those were huge for a decade. Lots of these 900mhz ones still around, likely many more than 2.4ghz. Most are the 5mw/30mw variety. It's ISM - it comes with the territory, you'll be way above most of it and you won't be interfered with much at all.

do you have a weatherproof enclosure for the board/900mhz adapter to be outside with the antenna?

It's not necessary. feed line lengths up to 100ft with LMR400 lose less than 3db. If mounted up on the mast (kinda silly to do it that way at this freq) you lose less than a DB (0.5). If using some of the equip I saw linked you'll lose a couple hundred mw. No issue.

if youre mounting this stuff over the roof line of your house and above nearby trees, please understand that this can attract lightning, and understand that that is a very bad thing when it hits your home.

Now this is terribly, terribly important. I'm assuming that the mast in question is all metal and goes at least 8 feet into the ground (beyond concrete). If not, start pounding ground rods. You'll want several bonded with 0AWG or 1-2inch copper strap in a circle around the mast, going to the mast itself. Give 8 feet radius for this circle and pound preferably 5-8 of these rods 8 feet into the ground.

Now you need arresters on the feedline. These are gas discharge tubes - when static builds up on the antenna It arcs over the gas gap and connects the antenna to earth ground for as long as it takes for the static to discharge. You'll consider the mast itself earth ground. You'll bond the arrester to the mast. If you have the equip up on the mast, you'll need arresters on the power, ethernet, and any other conductor that enters the home.

So Marion will be at the top looking down on Home. There is a 29 foot difference so if Marion uses the rooftop + 5ft that is probably another 35 ft on top of that making it ~ 64 ft higher than you at ground level.

If using an omnidirectional antenna - the other side could be 500 feet below you and it still works. Beamwidth is not an issue here. These aren't lasers.

So if any tree is over 30 feet it will decrease signal strength.
Simply wrong. Might be accurate at 2.4ghz, but not 900mhz.

700mw output at 900mhz
With that much power, that high up - you could go 10-20 mile radius using a 3dbi omni on both sides.


Not gonna happen.

At VHF and above, foliage (moisture in general) eats the signal.

Line of sight is mandatory, even at 900 MHz.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

LOS is nice, but its not the same thing at nearly 2.4ghz. It doesn't even really mean the same thing. LOS at 2.4ghz means you gotta actually see the antenna with your eyes. At 900mhz - you really just gotta see that there isn't a brick wall or concrete or a big steel hangar in the way.

Think of it this way: Your cell phone works in elevators. It has a 300mw or 100mw transmitter. Most phones use 900mhz/1900mhz. If LOS was really that important, you couldn't make a call in your living room.

I suggest using an omni. But something like a 9db yagi is cheap enough and has a very wide beamwidth and is nice insurance.












 

ScottMac

Moderator<br>Networking<br>Elite member
Mar 19, 2001
5,471
2
0
Originally posted by: bobdole369
Lets start with this: I'm a ham radio operator, having extensively worked 2m (144mhz) 440, 900mhz, and 1.2ghz in years past. Also HF stuff, but thats not relevant here. I only mention this so folks will understand that I have an inkling of how RF does and doesn't work.

I'm going to take apart some of this post and correct a lot of it, so bear with me.

If you can't see his house or neighborhood from the top of your '50 pole, you are likely wasting money.

Just plain wrong. Lets get it straight - up to about 1.2ghz - line of sight is not absolutely mandatory. The lower towards VHF you go the less of an issue it becomes, but 1.2ghz is sort of a barrier of sorts where you almost NEED to actually see the other antenna.

Case in point - Police radio's. Most are on 800/900mhz band now - trunked systems. The portables they use are 100mw, 300mw, 1W, 5W and all manner of in-between. You do not need 100% signal reception for data to go through. The 900mhz protocol retransmits as needed, so as long as something is getting through, you'll just end up latent. Cop radios almost never get LOS and have to work in all situations. Similar situation in the amateur radio world. I can talk on 900mhz with 100mw in my living room and light up a repeater that sits at 30 feet over 5 miles away with aplomb. You don't need to see the other antenna at all. It is not 2.4ghz where a tree wipes everything out. Forget about that. It's a non-issue in this freq range for all intents and purposes. Sure it does attenuate, but it's NOT 2.4 where the wavelength actually interacts with the h20. It passes basically right through it.

if either of you have 900mhz phones or other devices (not as common as 2.4ghz gear, but still) they can cause interference.

For the longest time 900mhz ISM cordless phones were the most common, though not as common as 46/49mhz devices - those were huge for a decade. Lots of these 900mhz ones still around, likely many more than 2.4ghz. Most are the 5mw/30mw variety. It's ISM - it comes with the territory, you'll be way above most of it and you won't be interfered with much at all.

do you have a weatherproof enclosure for the board/900mhz adapter to be outside with the antenna?

It's not necessary. feed line lengths up to 100ft with LMR400 lose less than 3db. If mounted up on the mast (kinda silly to do it that way at this freq) you lose less than a DB (0.5). If using some of the equip I saw linked you'll lose a couple hundred mw. No issue.

if youre mounting this stuff over the roof line of your house and above nearby trees, please understand that this can attract lightning, and understand that that is a very bad thing when it hits your home.

Now this is terribly, terribly important. I'm assuming that the mast in question is all metal and goes at least 8 feet into the ground (beyond concrete). If not, start pounding ground rods. You'll want several bonded with 0AWG or 1-2inch copper strap in a circle around the mast, going to the mast itself. Give 8 feet radius for this circle and pound preferably 5-8 of these rods 8 feet into the ground.

Now you need arresters on the feedline. These are gas discharge tubes - when static builds up on the antenna It arcs over the gas gap and connects the antenna to earth ground for as long as it takes for the static to discharge. You'll consider the mast itself earth ground. You'll bond the arrester to the mast. If you have the equip up on the mast, you'll need arresters on the power, ethernet, and any other conductor that enters the home.

So Marion will be at the top looking down on Home. There is a 29 foot difference so if Marion uses the rooftop + 5ft that is probably another 35 ft on top of that making it ~ 64 ft higher than you at ground level.

If using an omnidirectional antenna - the other side could be 500 feet below you and it still works. Beamwidth is not an issue here. These aren't lasers.

So if any tree is over 30 feet it will decrease signal strength.
Simply wrong. Might be accurate at 2.4ghz, but not 900mhz.

700mw output at 900mhz
With that much power, that high up - you could go 10-20 mile radius using a 3dbi omni on both sides.


Not gonna happen.

At VHF and above, foliage (moisture in general) eats the signal.

Line of sight is mandatory, even at 900 MHz.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

LOS is nice, but its not the same thing at nearly 2.4ghz. It doesn't even really mean the same thing. LOS at 2.4ghz means you gotta actually see the antenna with your eyes. At 900mhz - you really just gotta see that there isn't a brick wall or concrete or a big steel hangar in the way.

Think of it this way: Your cell phone works in elevators. It has a 300mw or 100mw transmitter. Most phones use 900mhz/1900mhz. If LOS was really that important, you couldn't make a call in your living room.

I suggest using an omni. But something like a 9db yagi is cheap enough and has a very wide beamwidth and is nice insurance.

I disagree. I'm reasonably certain it won't work.
I am also a Ham radio guy. I'm an Extra Class, and have been for 20 years. I worked VHF/UHF and 1200, as well as some 900MHz and Microwave. I had (when I had rooftop access) a full satellite station to work the OSCARS, MIR, and the ISS on HF, VHF,UHF, and 1200MHz.

I also have some commercial licenses that aren't relevant here.

That reason that cell and 800MHz trunked radios work is because there is a network of repeaters, that network is engineered and researched to make sure the areas are sufficiently covered. The reason Cell works in (some) elevators is because of the signal saturation, and the signal's bouncing, not penetrating properties.

Both cell and trunk are permitted much more power than consumer p2p bridging products.

Those situations are far, far different than a couple n00b radio guys trying to connect on the cheap. Professional engineering and installation with more power versus "some guys" that want to set up some radios.

Trees/ foliage /moisture start sucking signal strength well down in the vhf ranges, well below 900MHz, even down to the 220Mhz ranges.

If they want to spend the money and time, they are certainly welcome to ... I have no say in it. They asked for opinions, I gave 'em mine. I've been doing this stuff for decades and, in my opinion, they're wasting their time and money.

 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: ScottMac


If they want to spend the money and time, they are certainly welcome to ... I have no say in it. They asked for opinions, I gave 'em mine. I've been doing this stuff for decades and, in my opinion, they're wasting their time and money.

I'm not saying you are wrong. There is certainly a lot that can be done wrong in a link like this that someone with more experience would do right.

I'm just curious as to why you say it will not work. You seem to have a lot of experience with Rf so I'm really just trying to add to my knowledge here.


I put in all the data into radio mobile and ran the numbers, even allowing for the trees and it came out that it should work with room to spare. So I'm just asking what is it that is the factor that makes it not work ?
 

xSauronx

Lifer
Jul 14, 2000
19,582
4
81
Originally posted by: Modelworks

I put in all the data into radio mobile and ran the numbers, even allowing for the trees and it came out that it should work with room to spare. So I'm just asking what is it that is the factor that makes it not work ?

im gonna go with the big ole X factor. your calculations might work in a perfect world if you really knew everything you had down was correct, but odds are theres something you cant tell. since none of us with any wireless experience are on the ground there to see exactly what is in the way, or make sure the install is steady and configuration done properly, a lot of things could pose a problem.

i expect, more than anything, that the mounts wont be stable enough or the physical interference will be bad enough to keep a steady signal. i dont doubt that you could get a signal if the mounts are high enough, i just doubt that this guy could get a stable one.

i wouldnt recommend doing this given the cost requirements and likely lack of experience from the OP. it could work, but id sooner tell the guy to get satellite internet and deal with the meh connection and lag times than dump $1500 or so into this project (unless he has money to burn and likes to tinker),

we really dont even know if the has the know-how configure and setup everything and do the install without more input from him. id like to think he could since it was his idea, but its impossible to know without more input from him.
 

imported_bungee91

Junior Member
May 17, 2007
22
0
0
I am sorry I have been away this long without checking!!.. I posted this somewhere else, and was getting a decent amount of responses so I lost a bit of focus on this.

I do think the $1500 quote is a bit on the high side, but I could see the little things adding up quickly (it always does!). I'm not even gonna try to get through all the responses...LOL (Thank you much though!!!) but I will try and answer some of it and give some backing to this here.

On my side I can go about 50' with 60' possible if needed. I already have a 50' pole securely mounted with guy wires every 10' over 20' from a previous (years ago) broadband direct account (sprint broadband from the Sears Tower). So on my side that's a non issue.

On "Marlon's" (sorry HE was referred to as "Marion"...LOL) side I have noticed he has a higher elevation which is spectacular as he does not want a 50' pole on the top of his house. Lucky for me he has one of the taller houses than most of his neighbors so I am hoping to only be about another 10' above the peak of his roof.

I have no care in regards to "sharing" an internet connection. I will willfully subscribe to my own and pay for my use!. Satellite internet can go suck it hard!... That is all on that topic.. =P

I had NO plans on mounting the router boards outside, they are planned to be inside the house / garage (my garage is unattached, it is actually the house NEXT to the house labeled "Home") and am hoping on my side I will get to be able to reuse my 50' 600 series (50 ohm) cable I bought a while ago for 2.4Ghz playing. The length may be wrong for 900Mhz, so I may have to look into that.

I will admit I am a bit of a novice here, but no reason to shun me if so (not saying you are). There is definitely more to this than I fully know, and a BIG reason I asked for the expert opinion of people who do know.

I KNOW not everyone will agree it will or won't work so having a bit of disagreement normally spurs deep thought, so I look at that as a good thing!

Someone else sent me this http://i41.tinypic.com/sb6dms.jpg and advised if possible looking at alternatives like an alarm circuit/dry copper pair from my Telco however it was thought to be a reasonable price but in my case (and maybe it got pricier) I was quoted $76.40 a month! Which is a reoccurring charge and not worth it to me.

Overall if it IS to work, and I will have to try it / possibly waste money, the equipment I linked to (maybe lesser gain antenna's as I am definitely over the EIRP limit with this) seem to be a good choice?

Thanks, and sorry for a quite lengthy response.
 

imported_bungee91

Junior Member
May 17, 2007
22
0
0
Also to add to this once I know that the equipment I picked for the price should be a good choice (input on that), and get a bit more feedback, I will just have to buy it and see... =P
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: bungee91


Someone else sent me this http://i41.tinypic.com/sb6dms.jpg and advised if possible looking at alternatives like an alarm circuit/dry copper pair from my Telco however it was thought to be a reasonable price but in my case (and maybe it got pricier) I was quoted $76.40 a month! Which is a reoccurring charge and not worth it to me.

Overall if it IS to work, and I will have to try it / possibly waste money, the equipment I linked to (maybe lesser gain antenna's as I am definitely over the EIRP limit with this) seem to be a good choice?

Thanks, and sorry for a quite lengthy response.

That picture is from the same software that I used.
I would advise for you to download it yourself and follow the tutorials on how to use it . It really does give some good info on how different antennas, heights, and frequencies change the range.

You can get it for free here:
http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html

Here is what the plot looks like with the terrain. Marlon is unit 2 on the high end.
http://img99.yfrog.com/img99/3201/fresnel2.jpg

Also consider contacting some of the local Ham operators for advice since they know how RF works in that area the best.
Go here:

http://www.qrz.com/db/

Then enter

grid:EN61EL

in the search box to see the operators in your area. Most are pretty nice guys that will help if they can.

Good luck !
 

imported_bungee91

Junior Member
May 17, 2007
22
0
0
Originally posted by: Modelworks

Really what you need is to be at about 760 ft at Marion and about 740ft at Home. That would allow for the trees in the path to have to be over 50ft to be a problem. That would mean a 50ft pole at both ends.


This seems about right but I would be a bit lower. I can't guarantee the elevation on Google Earth to when it was taken as Marlon's house was built only a couple of years ago and when built they added roughly 8' of dirt to his location prior to the house being built, and you can definitely tell when in his driveway as there is quite a slope.

Anyhow I am guessing for his house the 710' (Google Earth) plus around 40' = 750' which is where the antenna would be.

Home is 681' plus 50' pole so roughly 730' up.
 

imported_bungee91

Junior Member
May 17, 2007
22
0
0
I see when going down in Dbi in antenna's that the beam width seems to widen (yagi style), is there a certain width that I should be aiming for here (bit of a pun their!)...
I figure the wider, the less energy I have in that direction. However if wider I would think a bit of wavering on each side which I'm sure will happen, then a better chance of the signal staying locked.
Is their a certain beam width you'd recommend knowing the distance and setup I am going for?
 

bobdole369

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2004
4,504
2
0
I can't tell you for certain what is the appropriate beamwidth vs. signal strength, too many factors. The biggest being wind moving your antenna around. That is precisely why I recommended an omni with a bit of gain, or a mild yagi.

When I first started working for this company, someone had put up a 802.11b "link" to another building across the parking lot - about 600ft free air.

They used 24dbi parabolic dishes on either side. I could watch the signal strength drop when the wind blows. Now a parabolic at 24dbi gain has 3 degrees of beamwidth. THink they were even aimed properly? Of course not. The issue there wasn't signal strength, but as you mentioned - maintaining a "lock". It's your job to figure that part out. THis is where it gets hard and expensive.

ScottMac - we can agree to disagree. I understand where you are coming from, I feel the other way. I think these guys have a shot if they are willing to spend a bit of dough. I'm not insisting, nor am I selling anything, just providing info that I've come across, along with my own 13 years exp as an amateur (now general), 20 years in electronics, and 10 working in IT.