Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your de

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 02:28:09 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Actually, I've found some of the _cheaper_ USB wifi "dongles" have an
aerial socket (they come with a stubby "rubber duck" type aerial, but
removable) - this sort of thing: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/27241640286.
The router end _often_ has aerials on removable sockets.

Hi J.P. Gilliver,

That might be a neat idea for pjp (and others) to explore.

Unfortunately, that link shows up "dead" when I just tried it:
<https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/27241640286>

Do you have a working link so we can take a look at it for pjp?
o What's important is the transmit power & antenna gain!

Also, does anyone know what COUNTRY pjp is in?

For the aerials, this doesn't look too bad
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/233366568286:

Let's look at that antenna, where, I entered its description into Google:
o 2.4Ghz Wifi Antenna 25Dbi Rp Sma Outdoor Wireless Yagi Antenna Directional B S2P
Which found it for $18 at Amazon:

To see what my favorite distributor, Streakwave, sells like it:
<https://www.amazon.com/2-4GHz-RP-SMA-Antenna-Wireless-Outdoor/dp/B075TGCR3G>

And $14 at Walmart:
<https://www.walmart.com/ip/TSV-RP-SMA-2-4GHz-25dBi-Directional-Outdoor-Wireless-Yagi-Antenna-WiFi-For-Router-VP/784752332>

Where this has a nice photo of the connector, which seems to be, on first
inspection, to be an "N-connector" (like those the bullets have):
<https://www.amazon.com/Antenna-Booster-802-11b-GETWIREDUSA-US70/dp/B01BTE2WCY>

Given you need to reduce losses when connecting these things, the $75
"bullet" should plug right in, and that gives you 630mW of transmit power:
<https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Bullet-M2-HP-Wireless/dp/B00HXT8DNM>

Note: You do NOT want to be futzing around with the connectors!
(You can lose decibels in just the connection, even when done right!)

even includes the fixings for a
pole or wall. Obviously, you'd need the pole (and a lot more cable,
which not to lose signal at those frequencies isn't going to be cheap),
but I would hope a lot less than 300.

Hi John,
You have to consider that the user doesn't TOUCH the RF cabling.

The "cable" for RF is always as short as it can possibly be.
o Notice there is ZERO cable in my powerbeams, for example.
<https://i.postimg.cc/CLBXc080/antenna03.jpg>
o And notice my bullet attached to a planar antenna has zero cable
<https://i.postimg.cc/cHLndnbY/antenna.jpg>

Your setup costs about the same as my setup pictured above does.
o Depending on how much your radio costs, of course

That claims to be 25 dBi; dishes
are harder to search for on ebay, but the few I found seem also to be 24
or 25 dBi, but a lot more expensive (and I suspect would be more
wind-susceptible).

The wind is NOT a problem for any of these dish antennas properly mounted.
o Neither is the rain.

I wouldn't choose my antenna based on worrying about what won't happen.
o I'd choose the antenna based on gain and location

I'd also diligently MATCH the RF connector!

[Those, as I see them, are post free, about 2 pounds for the dongle and
8 for the aerial; if they come out differently where you are, search for
"wifi yagi" and "USB wifi dongle" (or similar) on your local ebay.]

John,
The USB dongle "might" be a good idea
o But your link didn't work for me.

Do you have a description of it?
o Particularly the transmit power & antenna gain

--
When Usenet works like it should, adults share valueable information.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 02:28:15 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

Which is why I said "Nanobeam" and not "Powerbeam". I also specified
the higher end "AC" models. The older NBE-M5 is quite a bit less.

Hi Dan,
Thanks for pointing that out, where I apologize if I misunderstood.
(it happens to the best of us on Usenet, from time to time).

I'm all for the cheapest best solution that does the job for pjp.

And, Lord knows, I have experience with those nanobeams, one of which is in
my photo below, where you see it at the far left on the shelf (it's the
dark tan steel dish to the left of the plastic dish powerbeam, and to the
right of the T-Mobile cellular repeater on the shelf):
<https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>

I've even written a tutorial on Usenet (of many) to help people set it up:
o How to set up Ubiquiti Nanobeam M2 as an Access Point, wired to a wired extender, on WISP?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/bntXcBthi7o/sRvoqauSCQAJ>

That tutorial was written in 2017, but since then, as I already noted to
Johann, we've soured on the steel-dish nanobeams, in favor of the newer
plastic-dish PowerBeams (which, we replaced with much larger 2GHz rockets,
and then we replaced them with less-noise susceptible 5GHz rockets).

In fact, perfectly apropos for the topic of this thread, here is that same
nanobeam connected to my IBM Thinkpad laptop, to vastly extend the WiFi
range of that ThinkPad laptop so I could work outside by the pool.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

Notice that you get hundreds of times the power of the laptop WiFi simply
by plugging that nanobeam into the Ethernet port on the Thinkpad!

Maybe even thousands.
o It's that simple to extend the WiFi range of a computer with Ethernet.

BTW, I have a few nanobeams myself in use, but I hate them, as we had to
replace ALL of them, over time, for the powerbeams and then the rockets.

They're just unreliable in our use model (which I said prior to Johann):
o Even so, how much cheaper are nanobeams than the newer $100 powerbeams?

If the NanoBeams are appreciable less expensive than the PowerBeams
o I'm all for it since a kilometer for any of these radios is child's play

--
People converse on Usenet to exchange ideas with other helpful adults.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 03:04:45 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

If the NanoBeams are appreciable less expensive than the PowerBeams
o I'm all for it since a kilometer for any of these radios is child's play

Hmm... the AC NanoBeam is about the same price as the PowerBeam...

Here's a set of two, for $198, for example, on Amazon:
o NanoBeam AC Gen2 NBE-5AC-Gen2-US 5GHz airMAX CPE with Dedicated Management Radio Bridge (2 Pack)
<https://www.amazon.com/NanoBeam-NBE-5AC-Gen2-US-airMAX-Dedicated-Management/dp/B07NNWY9Y8>

But, it doesn't really matter all that much, since pjp can choose almost
_any_ radio that Ubiquiti sells, and it will throw Wi-Fi a puny kilometer.

All he has to do, essentially, is:
a. Mount the antennas (they're designed to be mounted to a "J arm" or pole)
b. Plug in the Ethernet cable on each end
c. Enjoy his Intenet over WiFi, easily a kilometer away from where started

While pjp can certainly do the job for less than $200, I'd suggest he
compare every option to the $200 PowerBeams, in terms of:
o Transmitter power
o Antenna gain
o Weatherproofing standards

Bearing in mind, the more powerful the radio, the more re-uses you end up
finding for it (you can always dial the transmit power down or use the horn
without the antenna, for example).

Here's an example of me using the NanoBeam to extend the WiFi of a laptop:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

Where, it didn't occur to me at the time, but I could have used just the
"horn", which would have been more convenient while wardriving.....

--
Usenet is a public potluck where adults share items of technical value.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 03:06:15 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

In fact, perfectly apropos for the topic of this thread, here is that same
nanobeam connected to my IBM Thinkpad laptop, to vastly extend the WiFi
range of that ThinkPad laptop so I could work outside by the pool.
https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg

BTW, as Johann Beretta noted prior, you "could" pull the horn out of that
radio, and it would be a LOT smaller, and still be a LOT more powerful than
the utterly puny 30mW (or whatever) 1/2 dBi (or whatever) Wi-Fi output of
that anemic IBM ThinkPad WiFi.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

Notice that simply by plugging the Ethernet cable coming out of the horn
into the Ethernet port of the IBM ThinkPad, the WiFi range of that laptop
is instantly extended (by a LOT).

That's a key point of this thread, is that this power is availble to all.
o If you simply know what to buy & what it can do for you when you have it

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 23:33:35 -0400, Paul wrote:

Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 02:28:09 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Actually, I've found some of the _cheaper_ USB wifi "dongles" have an
aerial socket (they come with a stubby "rubber duck" type aerial, but
removable) - this sort of thing: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/27241640286.
The router end _often_ has aerials on removable sockets.

Hi J.P. Gilliver,

That might be a neat idea for pjp (and others) to explore.

Unfortunately, that link shows up "dead" when I just tried it:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/27241640286

Do you have a working link so we can take a look at it for pjp?
o What's important is the transmit power & antenna gain!

Also, does anyone know what COUNTRY pjp is in?

For the aerials, this doesn't look too bad
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/233366568286:


2.4Ghz Wifi Antenna 25Dbi Rp Sma Outdoor
Wireless Yagi Antenna Directional B S2P

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/233366568286

"the signal can be send more far away in distances"

*******

150M Mini USB WiFi Wireless LAN 802.11 N/G/B
Adapter Dongle & Antenna black KJ

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/272416402866

*******

The problem with products like this, is the RF
chain is in the single CMOS chip, and after three
months, the "output" can drop enough to make them
a bad bargain. At least this one demonstrates
that the antenna is detachable.

"600Mbps USB WiFi Adapter Dongle Card Wireless"

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/600Mbps-USB-WiFi-Adapter-Dongle-Card-Wireless-Network-Laptop-Desktop-PC-Antenna/383004055738

Paul

Hi Paul,

Thanks for locating the dongle that JP (presumably) had suggested:
<https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/600Mbps-USB-WiFi-Adapter-Dongle-Card-Wireless-Network-Laptop-Desktop-PC-Antenna/383004055738>

Those things certainly are damn cheap, that's fer' sure!
o If they work for pjp ... then that's a GREAT idea.

As you can see from this photo, I'm all for just plugging stuff into a
typical laptop like my IBM ThinkPad to instantly extend its WiFi range:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

I didn't think about it at the time I took that photo (in 2017), but, I
could have pulled out the horn, as Johann Beretta noted, and then it would
have been a LOT smaller also.

Those "dongles" list the "Mbps" but what about what really matters?
o We need the transmit power & antenna gain

That's really what matters.
o Whenever they won't say it ... I start worrying.

But I have to easily admit - those things are damn cheap!
o If only they work!

Dunno.

Does anyone have experience with these things?

For example, one option for pjp is to only put the Ubiquiti radio on his
roof and then use one of those dongles at the RV.

The limitation would be in the weakest equipment which, of course, would be
the WiFi dongle so that's why it's critically important to ascertain:
o What is the transmit power & antenna gain of those dongles?

--
Usenet is great as a public potluck where adults helpfully share ideas.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 19:41:56 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:

The term is "wireless bridge" or "wifi bridge". Both are accepted
definitions in the WISP business.

https://kb.netgear.com/227/What-is-a-wireless-bridge

Hi Johann,

Thanks for the purposefully helpful terminology hint.
o Particularly since the way Ubiquiti uses 'bridge' always confused me

From the Netgear KB article:
<https://kb.netgear.com/227/What-is-a-wireless-bridge>
o #1 Bridge: Network part 1 ... separation distance ... Network part 2
o #2 Bridge: Computer 1 ... sends traffic ... directly to computer 2

Even in _that_ article, the term "bridge" was loosely used.
o Worse - I think - is how Ubiquiti seems (to me) to use that term!

For example, here is a photo of my "nanobridge" & "nanobeam" on the shelf
o But, I always used them for exactly the same things (don't you?)
<https://i.postimg.cc/0NYJn7mF/nanobridge-nanobeam.jpg>

Here's a closeup snapshot of the back end of the respective horns:
<https://i.postimg.cc/905nFgxX/nanobeamnanobridge.jpg>

In terms of size & construction, they're relatively similar in that they
both have similarly sized steel dishes (those are magnets in the photo
below) & plastic horns:
<https://i.postimg.cc/pLXCzFxC/powerbeam-nanobeam.jpg>

Which, kind of, is why I'm a bit confused about what's the difference
o Between a "nanobeam" and a "nanobridge"

For now, based on your help, I'll call _this_ setup, a Nanobeam bridge!
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>
(More correctly, it's a "nanobeam bridge horn".)
--
Asking fact-based questions of strangers on the Usenet potluck for decades.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:33:05 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:

Not a big deal when speaking to lay persons. More of a deal when
speaking to other "experts".

Hi Johann,

With respect to colloquial terminology...

As you can see from the numerous worthless trolls who infested this thread
o That they insist on proving they can't add any technical value whatsoever

It's clear this newsgroup is composed of extremely few of those "experts".
o There's you & Jeff Liebermann who know enough to be considered damn good

Nobody else posted showing anywhere near your current knowledge level
o Not even me - where at least I've used this stuff for years to do this
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>
In order to easily and vastly increase the range of my laptop.

Where the point of this thread was to ask others what distance they get.
o And to also show others how they can EASILY increase their range too

Where that picture shows just one of many ways to bridge their laptop
o Doing something as simple (& powerful) as connecting this to it
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

--
When Usenet works like it should, adults share useful information.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 17:46:04 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

I think I'll just call _both_ these things, "nano's"...
https://postimg.cc/rRFnrzTN

Hi Dan Purgert,

One more thing, which surprised me just now, is that when I log into the
device that I've been calling a "PowerBeam" but which is labeled as a
"NanoBeam M2", the router firmware shows up everywhere as "PowerBeam".
<https://i.postimg.cc/905nFgxX/nanobeamnanobridge.jpg>

Specifically PowerBeam M2 or PowerBeam M2 400
<https://i.postimg.cc/Dzq9Bsjs/pb-m2-400-nanobeam.jpg>

Since it's unlikely I flashed the firmware, it could be that it came that
way, which would agree with the fact I've always thought it was a PowerBeam
from the day I had opened the box (as I recall, I think it was sent to me
by my WISP to replace a NanoBridge I had prior lent out to replace a bad
NanoBridge in the days we were swapping out NanoBridges due to its many
failures in the field).

Based on the references I already quoted, others had problems with the
NanoBridges that they didn't have with the PowerBeams, so again, I'd
recommend, for pjp, he start with the PowerBeams and work down from there.

Even so, a kilometer for WiFi is utter child's play for these CPE devices.
o Hence, for pjp to attain a puny kilometer over Wi-Fi is a given.

All pjp needs is to be able to "see" the antenna, where a bit of foliage is
OK (there are tons of references of people pushing through foliage despite
that there were a few trolls here who claimed it's not possible).

The signal strength is attenuated - but that's why you want the most
powerful equipment that fits the application, not the most anemic.

--
Bringing useful ideas to share on the public Usenet potluck for decades.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:26:47 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_zone
If the system/signal is circular polarized, the Fresnel
zone will have no effect

Hi Jeff,

I hope you feel better.

Thanks for the details on the Fresnel Zone calculations.
o Obviously all our stuff is typical Ubiquiti CPE

We often push through foliage, but, of course, we prefer not to.
o And even then, only for short distances or sparse foliage

In other words, if you happen to be using circular (or at least
elliptical) polarization on your link, you can forget about the
Fresnel Zone.

It's nice to know that the polarizations matter.

Most Wi-Fi hardware uses linear (vertical and
horizontal) polarization.

We're only using Ubiquiti (& some old Surfnet Mikrotik) wifi CPE stuff.

Also, if your path goes from a mountain top, to ground level in a
valley, and you have to deal with a temperature inversion layer,
chances are good that when the inversion layer is particularly
noticeable and at some specific altitude, the signal will disappear
for a while when it decides to wander off along the inversion line.

This "inversion layer" may be why some paths, which are about the same in
length (all less than ten miles for example), have vastly different signal
strength using the same rooftop devices to the same source access point.

You might be able to visually see the other end of the link, but can't
get a decent RF signal along the same path.

In my situation, I'm only about 6 miles from the WiFi AP, where I generally
get about -55 dBm on a Rocket M5 which, for me, is good enough.

It's mountain top to mountain top, so I'm not sure "if" an inversion layer
is involved, as the heights are within a thousand feet or so of each other.

Also, please consider the effects of fade margin or system operating
margin. This is how much stronger the signal happens to be than some
reference level, usually somewhere near a minimum usable signal level
or BER (bit error rate). This fade margin statistically translates to
the amount of time per year your link will be down.
SOM Reliability Downtime
dB Percent per year
8 90 876 hrs
18 99 88 hrs
28 99.9 8.8 hrs
38 99.99 53 mins
48 99.999 5.3 mins
58 99.9999 32 secs

I don't profess to understand this stuff like you and Johann Beretta do,
but what I "think" you're calling the fade margin is what I colloquially
refer to as the "headroom", which is that I strive for a dozen decibels
above what works.

For wi-fi, I like 20dB as a good but arbitrary fade margin for
calculations.

I'll take 20 decibels above a working signal any day!

Lastly, the various link calculations and data sheet specifications
tend to be for the BEST case situation. In other words, reality sucks
and your results will follow accordingly.

On this, I fully agree with you, in that, for example, the nanobridge M2
"should" work, and 'does' work, but for various degrees of "work".

When we went from the NanoBridge M2 to the NanoBeam M2, all of a sudden,
with no other change, we got 3 to 8 decibels better signal strength. Who
knows why or how.

Then, over time, we went to the much bigger Rockets, where we progressed
from the M2 to the M5 due to noise considerations, where, at the moment, at
about 6 miles distance for our WiFi access point, the Rocket M5 with a 34
dBi dish (maybe it's a 30 dBi dish?), our signal is fine at around -50 dBm
with good quality metrics and noise floors around 104dBm (as I recall).

Heck, since I feel uncomfortable guessing, let me log into the rooftop
radio and take a peek (I hate that "certificate error" we get every time)
o Signal strength = -56 dBM (chain0/chain1 -58/-59dBm
o Noise Floor = -104 dBm
o Transmit CCQ = 76.5%
o TX/RX Rate = 144.444 Mbps / 144.444 Mbps
o airMAX = enabled
o airMAX Quality = 97%
o airMAX Capacity = 75%

That has no problem using a WiFi access point about 5 to 6 miles away.

Whatever happens along the
path, environment, or with the equipment, will ALWAYS increase losses
and decrease range. I can post (for find in the Usenet archives) how
I do a link calculation if anyone wants it.

I looked up a few articles on how far people push through foliage.

Here's the first hit explaining that "it's complex":
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7725440>
"foliage attenuation is a function of a multitude of parameters,
including frequency, foliage depth, tree types, foliage thickness, leaf
density, leaf size, branches, trunks, humidity, wind speed, height of the
tree relative to the antenna heights, path length through foliage, etc."

Lots of forum threads talk about WiFi penetration of foliage:
o Effect of Wind on Foliage Obstructed Line-of-Sight Channel at 2.5 GHz
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3041106_Effect_of_Wind_on_Foliage_Obstructed_Line-of-Sight_Channel_at_25_GHz>
o Ubiquiti Nanostation M2 & M5 penetration of 1.1km and 7 treetops
<https://papermovementblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/how-to-setting-upconfigure-the-ubiquiti-nanostation-m2-m5-to-share-an-internet-connection/>
o 500 meters of foliage
<https://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?topicid=243113>
o Networking over 0.5km with trees in line of sight
<https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/2002396-networking-over-0-5km-with-trees-in-line-of-sight>
o How severe is the attenuation of trees?
<https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?t=1139584>
o 2.5 KM link(right tools) through trees
<https://community.ui.com/questions/2-5-KM-linkright-tools/b6456537-8282-4456-ba32-dab28006c38c>
o High throughput foliage penetration
<https://community.ui.com/questions/High-throughput-foliage-penetration/77014ac4-7dfa-4bba-8a0c-b8f9ddd7ec40>
o Outdoor wifi through wooded area
<https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/707754-outdoor-wifi-through-wooded-area>
o Device Selection for Tree Penetration?
<https://community.ui.com/questions/Device-Selection-for-Tree-Penetration-Picture-Included/174f3546-e166-41e1-b2ec-8a2d0deb4e84>
o Another 5ghz trees question
<https://community.ui.com/questions/Another-5ghz-trees-question/ec4d5709-5689-43fe-833d-bf5c60350587>
o Best Wi-Fi frequency for penetrating woods
<https://superuser.com/questions/474213/best-wifi-frequency-for-penetrating-woods>
o 2 kilometers with 500 meters of forest in between
<https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/2km-wireless-bridge.2370688/>
o How much signal do Trees block?
<https://community.ui.com/questions/How-much-signal-do-Trees-block/c5cf1e36-ab73-45e0-b600-11f1963b6aad>
o Non line of sight (NLOS) considerations for wireless
<https://www.aowireless.com/blog/bid/39035/Non-Line-of-Sight-Point-to-Point-Wireless-Backhaul>
o Any Ubiquiti equipment able to punch through trees?
<https://community.ui.com/questions/Any-Ubiquiti-equipment-able-to-punch-through-trees/f637c513-27af-417a-a6db-a154115376fc>
o WiFi to gate camera through trees
<https://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/787413-Outdoor-WiFi-to-gate-camera>
o Ubiquiti Nanobeam for Point-to-Point wireless through some trees?
<https://www.reddit.com/r/homelab/comments/70vqfo/ubiquiti_nanobeam_for_pointtopoint_wireless/>
o Long range (1000') outdoor WiFi connection transmission question
<https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/long-range-1000-outdoor-wifi-connection-transmission-question.1886797/>
o Does *anything* work through trees ?
<https://www.reddit.com/r/Ubiquiti/comments/3n1xr4/does_anything_work_through_trees/>
o Need to make a link over tree covered terrain
<https://community.ui.com/questions/Need-to-make-a-link/070516c2-6a44-4f24-9e34-5f13f8fb4ee2#answer/7578abfb-78c3-4189-b60d-c1ab293a5d90>
o WISP and the love of Trees and Rural
<https://community.ui.com/questions/WISP-and-the-love-of-Trees-and-Rural/efab087f-2d10-49aa-bbcc-b81da2206b8c>
etc.

In the end, we just pop up a radio on each end and try it out.

We check signal strength, and, if it's good, we leave it working.
If not, then we deal with changing things around.

Note: I had some surgery Monday, am recovering normally, but feeling
lousy. I need some time to recover. Please forgive me if I don't
reply to questions and comments immediately.

Please get better.

You've helped advise us many times over the years, which we appreciate.

If only the trolls would disappear, Usenet would be a lot more valuable.

--
Asking questions & sharing useful information on Usenet for decades.

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 10/20/2019 10:38 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
..

If only the trolls would disappear, Usenet would be a lot more valuable.

PerhSps they would if you STFU about them/ Maybe it is self inflicted.

 

[Elder Jones]

It seems that recently said:


> PerhSps they would if you STFU about them/ Maybe it is self inflicted.

Jeeez. You dont realize you are the trolls that should stfu you idiots.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:58:21 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

Based on the references I already quoted, others had problems with the
NanoBridges that they didn't have with the PowerBeams, so again, I'd
recommend, for pjp, he start with the PowerBeams and work down from there.

Nobody said to use a Nanobridge (which is a legacy device). I continue
to hold the opinion that he should grab a pair of Nanobeam, either the
$100 (or so) "gen2" NBE-5AC-19, or the $80 (or so) NBE-M5-19. They are
perfectly suited to a kilometer shot, linking at 256QAM with as little
as 12 dBi conducted.

Ah. Finally. Now you're doing the hard stuff, which is give good advice.
o It's trivially easy to quibble (that's why the trolls do it all the time)

The trolls can't actually add _any_ on-topic value to this thread topic.
o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch.

What's harder is to advise people like pjp who have real-world questions.
o It seems to me that almost any Ubiquiti CPE will work for a kilometer.

Nothing wrong with those CPE choices for pjp, which others can also use:
o $100 NBE-M5-19
o $175 NBE-5AC-19

Even just one of these radios will vastly increase what you can do at home.

o Ubiquiti NBE-M5-19-US NanoBeam M Series 5 GHz 19dBi dual pol
<https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NBE-M5-19-US-NanoBeam-19dBi-dual/dp/B00JEJDJ7E>

Here's what an ad says, for the people on the ng who aren't familiar:
o 5 Ghz frequency, 150+ Mbps Throughput, 15+ km range
o Networking Interface: 10/100 Ethernet Port, Enclosure: Outdoor UV Stabilized Plastic
o Power Supply: 24V, 0.5A PoE Adapter (Included), Power Method: Passive PoE (Pairs 4, 5+; 7, 8 Return)
o Wind Loading: 45.4 N @ 200 km/h (10.2 lbf @ 125 mph), Wind Survivability: 200 km/h (125 mph)
<https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Networks-Nanobeam-NBE-M5-19-High-Performance/dp/B00JFQV6GC>

The reader may note the wind & the distance claims (15+km is ~10miles)
o Note we still don't know what country pjp is in (nor wind conditions).

This set is a bit more expensive but it's AC:
o Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-19 2-PACK 5GHz NanoBeam AC 19dBi Airmax AC Bridge CPE
airOS
<https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NBE-5AC-19-2-PACK-NanoBeam-Airmax/dp/B015YN8VJO>

Even so, a kilometer for WiFi is utter child's play for these CPE devices.
o Hence, for pjp to attain a puny kilometer over Wi-Fi is a given.

Even so, a pair of AirMAX radios do not use "WiFi" between them;
especially the modern "5AC" line.

True.

It depends on how pjp (and others) set up their radios.
o For example, in this setup as an AP, it's using WiFi
<https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>
o Likewise with this setup as a bridge (using latop Ethernet)
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>

For a puny kilometer LOS, WiFi will work just fine also, IMHO
o Assuming he can punch through whatever foliage he must punch through

All pjp needs is to be able to "see" the antenna, where a bit of
foliage is OK (there are tons of references of people pushing through
foliage despitethat there were a few trolls here who claimed it's not
possible).

It's "possible", if one wants to accept the potential of spotty
connectivity, and reduction of throughput by at least 50% (or more),
depending on the thickness of the foliage.

A few stray branches from a tree here and there? Certainly not the end
of the world, but can cause issues on windy days.

Trying to punch through 100 meters (or more) of thick foliage? The plan
is bad, get another one.

We punch through foliage all the time Dan.
o So do lots of other people Dan.

Yes, it attenuates the signal, no doubt about it.
o But the claims by the trolls it can't be done are just not correct

To help pjp I posted _lots_ of articles on punching through foliage.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/fG7iOl_kCAAJ

Can the trolls do that? Nope. They're all childish & sadistic.
o They can't & won't ever post anything purposefully helpful.

In their entire lives! (They love their worthless chitchat.)
o And yet, if they disappeared, the world would be a better place.

Worthless trolls infest any juicy public potluck they can find.

The signal strength is attenuated - but that's why you want the most
powerful equipment that fits the application, not the most anemic.

Not only attenuated, but reflected and distorted. Which is why the
correct approach is to cut a path (or follow an existing one, such as an
access road), or go above the treetops, or below the foliage (if the
forest density doesn't prevent that).

In contrast to the worthless childish sadistic posts of the trolls...

Here's a Fresnel Zones excerpt from Jeff Liebermann's posting recently:
o Where this is the kind of sharing Usenet is supposed to be about

*** *** *** *** ***
The purposefully helpful info below is from Jeff Liebermann (verbatim).
*** *** *** *** ***

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_zone>
If the system/signal is circular polarized, the Fresnel
zone will have no effect, because a deflected circular
polarized signal changes rotation upon deflection and the
result is to become virtually invisible to the receiver,
regardless of whether it arrives in phase or out of phase.
For example, a RHCP signal that hits a street, or a wall,
or anything else, then becomes a LHCP signal, and is
therefore invisible to the RHCP receiving antenna, regardless
of whether it arrives at the receiver in-phase or out-of-phase.

In other words, if you happen to be using circular (or at least
elliptical) polarization on your link, you can forget about the
Fresnel Zone. Most Wi-Fi hardware uses linear (vertical and
horizontal) polarization. With linear polarization, the problem is
that at various radii from the direct line of sight, the direct signal
cancels with a reflected wave, forming "rings" of high and low signal
levels. The rings with no signal or total cancellation are where the
reflected path is some multiple of 1/2 wavelength longer than the
incident path. This does NOT happen with circular polarization, where
the polarization changes "sense", where the polarization changed from
(for example) RHCP to LHCP when reflected. The receive antenna "sees"
both the incident RHCP wave, as well as the LHCP reflected wave.
However, since the receive antenna cannot hear the wrong "sense", it
only "sees" the incident RHCP wave and no cancellation occurs. So, if
you want to build a link that isn't ruined by Fresnel Zone effects,
think circular polarization.

Also, if your path goes from a mountain top, to ground level in a
valley, and you have to deal with a temperature inversion layer,
chances are good that when the inversion layer is particularly
noticeable and at some specific altitude, the signal will disappear
for a while when it decides to wander off along the inversion line.
You might be able to visually see the other end of the link, but can't
get a decent RF signal along the same path.

Also, please consider the effects of fade margin or system operating
margin. This is how much stronger the signal happens to be than some
reference level, usually somewhere near a minimum usable signal level
or BER (bit error rate). This fade margin statistically translates to
the amount of time per year your link will be down.
SOM Reliability Downtime
dB Percent per year
8 90 876 hrs
18 99 88 hrs
28 99.9 8.8 hrs
38 99.99 53 mins
48 99.999 5.3 mins
58 99.9999 32 secs
For wi-fi, I like 20dB as a good but arbitrary fade margin for
calculations.

Lastly, the various link calculations and data sheet specifications
tend to be for the BEST case situation. In other words, reality sucks
and your results will follow accordingly. Whatever happens along the
path, environment, or with the equipment, will ALWAYS increase losses
and decrease range. I can post (for find in the Usenet archives) how
I do a link calculation if anyone wants it.


Note: I had some surgery Monday, am recovering normally, but feeling
lousy. I need some time to recover. Please forgive me if I don't
reply to questions and comments immediately.

Bah Humbug(tm).
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 10/21/2019 1:21 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

The trolls can't actually add _any_ on-topic value to this thread topic.
o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch.

No, it is to call attention to your arrogant behavior.

Can the trolls do that? Nope. They're all childish & sadistic.
o They can't & won't ever post anything purposefully helpful.

In their entire lives! (They love their worthless chitchat.)
o And yet, if they disappeared, the world would be a better place.

Worthless trolls infest any juicy public potluck they can find.

The world would be a better place if you did not denigrate others. You
bring this on yourself. YOU CANNOT ignore it. As longs as you bring it
up, others will respond. You like the attention.

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 10/21/2019 1:35 PM, Elder Jones wrote:

It seems that recently said:


PerhSps they would if you STFU about them/ Maybe it is self inflicted.

Jeeez. You dont realize you are the trolls that should stfu you idiots.

If Arlen stops his silly stuff I'd stop too. He has to show his
superiority. Just as you had to reply. See how it works.

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

Feeding trolls is much akin to mud-wrestling with a pig.

The pig enjoys it.

 

[Troll]

On 10/21/2019 1:21 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

The trolls can't actually add_any_ on-topic value to this thread topic.
o They post merely for their own amusement. Just watch.

And you're off-topic and cross-posting to multiple groups.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:59:08 -0400, Troll wrote:

> And you're off-topic and cross-posting to multiple groups.

The useful takeaway is that we can extend our WiFi range by miles.
o Where fixing WiFi range is something people do all the time using this
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg>

If you have no need to ever extend you WiFi range, so that you can paint
your pool or so that you can use your electronics far from the house, then
this thread is the wrong topic for you to post on.

For example, simply plugging this into your laptop, vastly extends range:
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>

Which group(s) do you think fixing/setting up WiFi is inappropriate on?

If you feel this thread is not for one of these groups, tell us why:
<http://tinyurl.com/alt-internet-wireless>
<http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair>
<http://tinyurl.com/sci-electronics-repair>

It will be interesting to hear your factual adult rationale.
--
It's likely the group(s) with all the childish trolls, is it not?

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:49:58 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

> Because it's a Powerbeam.

Hi Dan Purgert,

The useful takeaway is that we can fix our WiFi range by miles.

Facts:
o On the outside, it's called a "nanobeam"
<https://i.postimg.cc/905nFgxX/nanobeamnanobridge.jpg>
o On the inside, it's called a "powerbeam"
<https://i.postimg.cc/Dzq9Bsjs/pb-m2-400-nanobeam.jpg>
o And, the dish is steel.
<https://i.postimg.cc/pLXCzFxC/powerbeam-nanobeam.jpg>

Assessment:
o Moving forward, I'll call it a "powerbeam"
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>

In that photo above, you can use just the horn to extend your range by
bridging your laptop Ethernet to WiFi, without much fuss as it's light
plastic.

Essentially, you set up the router software & then you can plug that
powerbeam horn into any Ethernet ready laptop or desktop to vastly extend
the WiFi range. Except for price, this beats a USB dongle (IMHO), where
it's certainly no more costly than adding a repeater would be.

You can use the laptop with both horn & dish, but it's gonna be bigger.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg

The useful takeaway is that we can extend our WiFi range by miles.

At one time, the 400mm (and 620mm) diameter dish radios were known as
"Nanobeam". As I recall, they were intended to replace the Nanobridge
lineup; and retained the "Nano-" prefix, to stick with the other
"All-in-one" radios that also have the "Nano-" prefix (i.e. the
Nanostation and Nanostation Loco).

However, They were renamed to "Powerbeam" due to people getting confused
between the naming schemes:

NBE-M5-400 "Nanobeam" with a 400mm ~25 dBi antenna
vs.
NBE-M5-1* "Nanobeam" with a ~200mm 16 or 19 dBi antenna.

Yes, there are obviously used units with the wrong stickers (such as a
"Nanobeam-M2-400"), because they were made / sold before the rename
occurred -- but as you pointed out, they internally refer to themselves
by the correct name ("Powerbeam").

Therefore, the unit you keep referring to as a "Nanobeam" is, in fact, a
"Powerbeam".

Perhaps you're familiar with "The artist formerly known as Prince"?

I have no problem naming the device formerly known as a nanobeam as a "powerbeam".
o I was never one to quibble about such semantic things anyway

It's the trolls who can only quibble about such things that cloud the
otherwise adult technical valuable conversations on Usenet.

Back to JP Gilliver's question and to pjp's question
o I think any of the suggested Ubiquiti WiFi devices will work.

A LOS kilometer is puny for WiFi with these things, is it not?

Since we're trying to repair his Internet signal, we need to know of pjp
a. What country
b. What wind conditions

If he purchases a "5AC" device, there is no question about "setup".
They cannot do 802.11 wifi, at all, end of discussion.

Let's clarify a few things for the general observer of this thread on that.

1. Since we're discussing TWIN devices, this "5AC" idea is feasible.
2. However, the distances are puny where 802.11 LOS will work just fine.
3. Plus, "5AC" generally costs more, where it's not needed (IMHO).
4. And the setup requires, at least "slightly" more knowledge.
5. Worse, WiFi re-use, which I do all the time Dan, is not possible.

Bear in mind, once you have one of these devices, you find uses for them!
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg>

Simply because, at WiFi they are as powerful as you can possibly get.
--
The useful takeaway is that you can extend your WiFi range by miles.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 21:18:12 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

Don't forget that I can still only shout so loud. Amplifying a garbled
signal doesn't make it any more understandable. Note that this can be
somewhat alleviated by being in comparatively "rf quiet" areas. I don't
happen to be in one of those .

Dan,

Clearly you and Jeff and Johann know far more than most here, including me,
so here's a basic set of related questions which, I think, the answer to
will edify MANY people on this ng!

WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THIS SETUP AT THE FAR CORNER OF A PROPERTY?
o Either just the PowerBeam horn (set up legally) plugged into the laptop:
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>
Or, the entire PowerBeam (set up legally) plugged into a laptop RJ45:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>
Pointing to, oh, say, this bullet & planar antenna set up near the house:
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>

Assuming, of course, clear LOS, low to no interference, etc. stuff.
o I haven't tested the range, but it works fine for hundreds of feet, Dan.

Do you think it could go much longer LOS, Dan?

The second question is more apropos for JP Gilliver's "cantenna" query:
WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THAT SETUP TO A TYPICAL HOME SOHO ROUTER?

The answer to both those questions, would be of use to many I think:
a. How far can the PowerBeam connect to a Bullet (& 15dBi) planar antenna
b. How far can that same PowerBeam connect to a typical WiFi home router?

--
The answer to those questions, I posit, will astound some people.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 22:40:06 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

As I said, it wouldn't have occurred to me, in a fixed point-to-point
situation as described, to do other than use a high gain aerial at
_both_ ends. And I get the impression that pjp is in a _very_ quiet
area!

Hi JP Gilliver,
I did NOT run the math (I generally just test stuff out in practice),
but I wanted to mention something when you noted the "cantenna" stuff we
all played with many years ago (yes, me too, before I knew what I know
now).

If anyone is contemplating extending the range of their Wi-Fi router, one
of the _easiest_ ways to get up to the legal limit allowed by the FCC, is
simply to plug this spare $100 PowerBeam horn into the back of the router.
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg>

Voila! Instant range.
o In seconds, you now have a powerful omni access point at your router

Way better than any "cantenna" will ever be
o Simply by plugging in the horn to the back of your router

It doesn't even need to be a "WiFi router" in fact
o It could just be a switch!

It's really that easy to vastly extend the range of your home WiFi.

The point is that, after having futzed with all those "cantenna" ideas, and
after having bought plenty of those consumer-grade WiFi extenders over the
years, my advice is to simply plug one of those horns into your router.

Or, you can plug the horn into the laptop.
o Or, both.

I don't know what range is possible under ideal conditions
o But I've asked Dan Purgert to purposefully helpfully suggest what he
thinks is possible under those two (actually three) conditions:

a. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the router RJ45 (legal setup)
b. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the laptop RJ45 (legal setup)
c. The PowerBeam horn plugged into both the router & the laptop

Whatever range under ideal conditions that Dan Purgert assesses
o I would say are easily doable by ANYONE on this newsgroup who needs it

I suspect the Wi-Fi range under ideal conditions will be measured in miles
o But I will defer to Dan Purgert's greater knowledge in that area

--
You will likely be astounded at what range you obtain with this setup.