[HamWAN PSDR] Report from Mike and Key Electronics Show and Fleamarket
Tom Hayward
tom at tomh.us
Sun Mar 6 21:06:05 PST 2016
Bob,
I noticed a couple of issues with your study. First, you assumed a 2 dBi
gain for the HamWAN sectors. This is quite pessimistic. You can use
published and measured data to calculate the gain much more accurately with
Radio Mobile. Bart measured 14 dBi peak gain from the Laird SAH58-120-16-WB
and Ubiquiti advertises 19 dBi peak gain for the Ubiquiti AM-5G19-120. I
have published .ant (Radio Mobile antenna pattern) files for each of these
antennas:
https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-download_wiki_attachment.php?attId=99&page=Laird%20SAH58-120-16-WB&download=y
http://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-download_wiki_attachment.php?attId=224&page=Ubiquiti%205G-19-120&download=y
Here are the sector antenna models in use at each of the HamWAN sites:
Capitol Park: Laird SAH58-120-16-WB
Snohomish County DEM: Laird SAH58-120-16-WB
Haystack: Ubiquiti AM-5G19-120
Baldi: Laird SAH58-120-16-WB
East Tiger: Ubiquiti AM-5G19-120
Gold: Ubiquiti AM-5G19-120
If you set up Systems in Radio Mobile for each of these, it will calculate
the gain at non-peak angles.
Also, the receiver threshold you used is too optimistic. This doesn't
influence your calculated rx level (the important number), but it will give
you a "green line" when signals are well below the noise floor. You can
find receiver thresholds published in the Mikrotik datasheets for the
various modems we use. The RB912 modem we recommend for MIMO stations has a
receive threshold of -96 dBm. This is another parameter in the System setup
in Radio Mobile.
http://i.mt.lv/routerboard/files/RB912-150924141406.pdf
Lastly, I noticed is you have Haystack at the wrong position. HamWAN's site
is not at Haystack Mountain, but on a nearby ridge. The position
is 47.808024°, -121.727227° (published at http://www.hamwan.org/t/Haystack
). If you use that position for your calculation I think you will be
pleasantly surprised.
If you share the latitude and longitude for the LWHC Bridle Trails site I
can run these calculations for you with the sites and systems I already
have plugged into Radio Mobile.
Tom KD7LXL
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Bob <ke7jl at comcast.net> wrote:
> Ed,
>
> Don Sayler, W7OXR and I did a study to determine the feasibility of using
> HamWAM to handle the IRLP link at the LWHC repeater at the Bridle Trails
> site. We used Radio Mobile to rule out Hay Stack and Baldi It did show
> “Green Lines” for Capitol Park and Pain Field. One of the club members had
> access to a drone and we got permission from the city to fly it near the
> tower and tower. We did several 360 video and different altitudes. At 120
> feet we were able to clear the trees on “Bridle Trails Ridge” and could see
> the ridge of Capitol Hill in Seattle. At about 90 feet we could no longer
> see Seattle. We came to the conclusion that Pain Field would be iffy at
> best and any misalignment due to winds or an earthquake would put if off
> line.
>
>
>
> Capitol Park to Bridle Trails
>
>
>
>
>
> Pain Field to Bridle Trails
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Haystack to Bridle Trails
>
>
>
> Baldi to Bridle Trails
>
>
>
>
>
> I do have a RouterBOARD Metal 5SHPN and dish antenna if you want to try
> getting into the network from your locations.
>
>
>
> Bob Morrisson KE7JL
>
> ke7jl at comcast.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces at hamwan.org] *On Behalf Of *Ed Morin
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 6, 2016 4:05 PM
> *To:* Puget Sound Data Ring
> *Subject:* Re: [HamWAN PSDR] Report from Mike and Key Electronics Show
> and Fleamarket
>
>
>
> Thanks Nigel. I can nose around about Cougar. Do you know what the
> issue(s) is(are)? There are several ham repeaters there of course.
>
>
>
> As for locations. These are the fire station addresses and GPS
> coordinates that one of our other members put together:
>
>
>
> Station Address
> City Zip
> Lat/Long
>
> 11 - HQ 8450 161ST AVE NE
> REDMOND 98052-3848 47.677913, -122.124938
>
> 12 4211 148TH AVE NE
> BELLEVUE 98007-3119 47.648426, -122.143646
>
> 13 8701 208TH AVE NE
> REDMOND 98053 47.680206, -122.063499
>
> 14 5021 264TH AVE NE
> REDMOND 98053-2718 47.651962, -121.987793
>
> 16 6502 185TH AVE NE REDMOND
> 98052-5039 47.664105, -122.093651
>
> 17 16917 NE 116TH ST
> REDMOND 98052-2246 47.703403, -122.114135
>
> 18 22710 NE ALDERCREST DR REDMOND
> 98053-5845 47.692245, -122.03717
>
>
>
> My thinking is to have a "core network" of links between stations 12, 13,
> and 17. Of all the stations, 13 seemed to be the most promising. Station
> 12 is practically next door to Microsoft's main campus and the noise level
> is huge there, but it potentially has great shots to several other stations
> which makes it attractive to having in the core. Station 17 has become
> somewhat of a "hub" station for ARES -- at least we continue moving in that
> direction; trees could be an issue there. One or two of the other stations
> might have coverage potential, but it's all showing even more spotty on the
> map than these others. (Of course if we were able to access a node on
> Cougar, everything changes for the better...)
>
>
>
> In terms of height, there are a number of factors that may limit us, BUT
> the fire stations have "hose towers" (for hanging hoses to dry after use)
> which are pretty tall. I think 20 - 30 feet might be doable. The lower
> the better from a "political" point of view, the higher the better from a
> "technical" point of view. ;-)
>
>
>
> Any thoughts would be appreciated.
>
>
>
> (I have been using the ubnt.com/airlink site for doing some of this
> analysis as well as some other tools. A recent test we did seemed to
> confirm its validity although it was a bit optimistic -- that is, leaning
> more towards the "theoretical" which isn't surprising.)
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Nigel Vander Houwen <nigel at nigelvh.com>
> wrote:
>
> Howdy Ed,
>
>
>
> RE #1: Do you have the GPS coordinates and how high the antennas would end
> up being? If so, we can look at the models and see what they look like.
>
>
>
> RE #2: We have gear on East Tiger, but Cougar is pretty much out. Cougar
> would be a nice site to add, but us, and several others on our behalf, have
> never been able to get site owner buy in. If you’re able to push that
> forward, we’d be happy to work with you on that.
>
>
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2016, at 15:43, Ed Morin <edmorin.jr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I replied to Dan who encouraged me to post to the list, so here I am. :-)
>
>
>
> I am part of the City of Redmond ARES group and we are working towards
> implementing a HamWAN link to a city network we hope to put together. We
> were allocated a /24 network and our intentions are to (eventually)
> multi-home for redundancy as well as provide AP's locally (for ham use).
>
>
>
> Anyway, I was intrigued by two things Dan noted in his post which he
> thought others on the list might have some ideas they could share.
>
>
>
> 1. The Redmond area -- particularly where our fire stations are -- is very
> spotty in terms of coverage as it appears on the homepage coverage map. We
> would love it if somebody could help in determining what our "real" chances
> are for getting HamWAN links at a few of our fire stations. I have studied
> the coverage map on the homepage, but I assume it's not "perfect" when
> coverage is showing "spotty" (particularly in the Redmond area). We're
> looking to get an end-user "setup" to use for "surveying" with, but do not
> have that yet since it would be out of our own pockets until we can
> demonstrate a proof-of-concept to the city (after which we could likely get
> reimbursed). My present thinking is that fire stations 13 and 17 are
> possible candidates although (if memory serves) there are two others that
> may have a shot at it as well. So, any ideas on how we could work to nail
> that down would be great. If somebody has a "portable" unit, maybe we
> could just try it sometime to see if a signal is visible...
>
>
>
> 2. Putting a core node on Tiger Mt. might be potentially very helpful to
> us. A node on Cougar Mt. might be even more so; have any of you looked
> into that possibility? It appears to have better Eastside coverage than
> Tiger and a better "view" of Redmond up the Sammamish valley. This might
> be attractive to the Microsoft / MicroHams crowd...
>
>
>
> Again, any thoughts you have on this would be appreciated...
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> -Ed
>
> (WB7UBD)
>
>
>
>
>
> -Ed
>
> (WB7UBD)
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160306/824e7724/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 65437 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160306/824e7724/attachment-0004.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 68184 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160306/824e7724/attachment-0005.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 68533 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160306/824e7724/attachment-0006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 68327 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20160306/824e7724/attachment-0007.jpg>
More information about the PSDR
mailing list