I have a chance to put new node or nodes on a local 200 foot tower to encourage local activity. Currently there is a bullet on 2.4 with an omni antenna. Tower work is being done which would allow new an additional nodes, possible 5 ghz to be installed. Currently no local activity but some interest. What hardware would be a good choice to install? Barney K3LA
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer
I would use a 'MikroTik RouterBOARD LHG 5HPnD-XL'.
73 - Mike
Where are the other stations who are interested relative to the tower? What range of distances? Is the tower out in the open, or is terrain blocked in one direction?
Most tower sites are best served by multiple 120 degree sectors with some downtilt, on different channels. Folks close in can easily connect, and folks more than 5 miles away can connect fine to a sector with something a bit more powerful.
Answer ... it all depends. Give more detail and get more out of the question. BTW all 5ghz going forward, no point getting any 2.4
Ed
Both devices use a 'hose clamp' to connect to the tower so that makes it 'easy' and a huge pain if you did not bring the correct tools and are 180ish feet up the tower. Something you want to play with on the ground first.
73
Matthew KN9U
Way to go! :-)
I think you could get better throughput with a wider bandwidth.
Your link is 12 miles and our link is 14 miles.
Your SNR is 27/29.
Our SNR is 24/27.
Your TxMbps is 6.5.
Our TxMbps is 104.
Your/our Iperfspeed tests are
Your/our profiles:
73, Chuck
We installed the Melbourne side blind, and it sat for awhile before we got the Palm Bay side up. We had a slew of work to do on the Palm Bay tower and the AREDN gear was the last to go up. Wether was taking a turn and everything was rushed into place. We did not get the time to aim the gear, Got a signal and locked it down in a rush.
We are going back out to the site to re-aim the dish. Hopefully we can squeeze 20Mhz outta the link, and get the sector in a better position. It's a clear LOS with no fresnel issues.
Awesome, guys!
Our longest link installation was similar:
1. Install the easier to access site first and aim the antenna in a best guess direction.
2. Install the harder to access site and aim the antenna for best SNR.
3. Revisit the easier to access site and aim the antenna for best SNR.
73, Chuck
p.s. Have you viewed the new UI scheduled for release this fall?
http://kn6plv-test-lhg-5nd.local.mesh:8080/a/status
http://kn6plv-test-sxt-lite5.local.mesh/a/status
So, steeping up to 10Mhz drops the SNR a bit. At 10Mhz it’s 24/25 I’ll let it sit and check back for errors. Re aiming the dishes may improve the SNR.
Client: N4TDX-PalmBay-Melbourne-Link
Server: N4TDX-Melbourne-PalmBay-Link
Connecting to host N4TDX-Melbourne-PalmBay-Link, port 5201
[ 5] local 10.214.47.179 port 51952 connected to 10.214.55.29 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.00 MBytes 8.38 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 768 KBytes 6.29 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 768 KBytes 6.29 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 640 KBytes 5.25 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 768 KBytes 6.29 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 768 KBytes 6.29 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 384 KBytes 3.15 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 512 KBytes 4.19 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 384 KBytes 3.15 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 384 KBytes 3.14 Mbits/sec 0 164 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 6.25 MBytes 5.24 Mbits/sec 0 sender
[ 5] 0.00-10.05 sec 6.00 MBytes 5.01 Mbits/sec receiver
We have been working on the n4tdx-parish-titusville-link backhaul and have it smokin at 144Megs with a SNR around 48/46, it’s much shorter than the Palm Bay link, of course, Both of them are direct LOS with no obstructions.
Connecting to host N4TDX-Parish-Titusville-Link, port 5201
Awesome!
IMHO, LQ/NLQ is the best indicator of a link.
Aim for the wider bandwidth that still displays 100% LQ/NLQ.
The OLSR algorithm to choose MCS favors throughput as #1 priority, not error rates.
I feel that error rates are not a best metric.
73, Chuck