The majority of my nodes are channels 133-150 (5Mhz wide), we have a new site available which already has a 2.4 and 5.8 WISP there, and they are very protective of their 5.8ghz spectrum(long story, they have priority with the landlord).
How well do the Airmax 5.8 sectors work in 5.9ghz or are there any 5.9 dish antennas out there which don't cost a fortune?
My experience with the Powerbeam 620 showed the performance at the top-edge of 5.8 to be poor and 5.9 to be near non-existent.
How well do the Airmax 5.8 sectors work in 5.9ghz or are there any 5.9 dish antennas out there which don't cost a fortune?
My experience with the Powerbeam 620 showed the performance at the top-edge of 5.8 to be poor and 5.9 to be near non-existent.
Joe AE6XE
I was researching this because one club was operating under the assumption that anything below channel 178 was "part 15", we disagreed so I began experimenting.
Does this mean that when you shifted the dish alignment, it did work on ch 180, when before it did not? ...or it has never worked with any alignment on ch 180.
While there is future concern of additional overlap, I understand part 15 and part 97 share below 5850 or ch 170.
Joe AE6XE
Andre, K6AH
How does it work a PtMP link with a 2X2 MIMO sector antenna and the neighbor nodes with SISO vertical polarized antennas?
Now I have a PtMP node made with a Bullet M5HP + a 60 ° 17dBi sector and all the neighbors also with Bullet M5HP with a 27 dBi directive antenna and would like to replace the Bullet M5HP + the sector antenna with a Rocket M5 + a 2X2 MIMO sector 19dBi 120°. Is it worth to do?
Thanks and 73 de Leo.
Joe AE6XE
as Joe points out - a 19 dBi MIMO is really two 16 dBi antennas, And your existing antenna is 1 dB better than that.
But if you need the 120 degree field of view, it may be worthwhile.
On the other hand, if all your "customer" stations are within a 60 degree field then you are going backwards - the only advantage being that the Rocket has more memory than a Bullet.
1) -3dB because only able to receive ~half of the MIMO's transmitted power -- the 90 deg off polarity energy is mostly lost
2) -3dB because the single aligned polarity antenna gain on the sector is only 16dBi
This would be the modeling for 802.11n MCS0 to MCS7 modes where the same data is transmitted out both polarities (which are the only modes or link rates the SISO can do).
This means the SISO is -6dB disadvantaged as compared to a MIMO when receiving the signal from the tower site.
Joe AE6XE
https://arednmesh.readthedocs.io/en/latest/arednHow-toGuides/siso-mimo.html
Joe AE6XE
So covering a solid angle of 120° against the actual 60° at no cost could be worthy. The problem is that the SISO devices are going out of production and replacing all the SISO with MIMO is very expensive.
Thanks for your support
Thanks for that!
I tested some 2.4 antennas and found that SWR tended to shoot up at the band edges more quickly for the higher gain antennas than the lower gain version of the same antenna. Not surprising suppose.
I would suggest that as long as you get more than 10 dB return loss, it will work just fine.
Could you explain the S21 measurement? is that a measure of isolation between H and V (ch0 vs ch1)?
It would be interesting to see how gain varies with frequency. That is a bit harder to do propoerly ...
Ken