Re: Recommended antenna for Buffalo WBR2-G54

There is SO much noise from crap wifi gear in seattle.. you can see 
packets all the way down to 2.25 ghz.

Trying to be clean RF wise is good.  But those freqs are already lost.

I say, have the power as low as you need to establish communication, and 
use a directional antenna whenever you can.

Also, getting cards & APs with better sensitivity will work better than 
cranking your power up anyway.

But as for splatter into HAM bands? meh, whatever, it's a lost cause 
around 2 gig, as you've got crap cellphones creaping up from 1.9 and crap 
wifi gear creaping down from 2.401... no really, take a look at the noise 
floor these days, it's complete crap.  Best solution for hams is to use 
directional antennas & more power to overcome the floor, but we already 
have to do that.

Cheers,
-3ric Johanson
KD7QKL


On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Kevin Purcell wrote:

>
> I'm less worried about the technical regs that the unwanted third
> (and higher) order IMD you get out of the PA when you overdrive it
> splattering across the band. Just because you can turn the knob up to
> 11 doesn't mean it's a good idea (and unless you can verify you are
> not splattering with a spectrum analyzer it isn't a good idea).
>
> In addition to splattering across adjacent WiFi channels that
> splatter will raise the noise floor for hams using the band at the
> bottom end - particularly for narrow band work (ham sats in
> particular). These guys are operating in weak signal mode very close
> to the noise floor. Remember (unless you are IDing as a ham) this is
> Part 15 (no interference to other services!).
>
> The other side of this argument is a decent directional antenna is it
> works both ways: the extra few dB helps the path in both TX and RX
> which is probably what you want as this is an access point not a
> beacon. No point being an "alligator" (all mouth and no ears) as the
> CBers used to say.
>
> Kevin
> N7WIM
>
> On Dec 3, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Gary wrote:
>
>>
>> otoh, FH and DSS gear may be limited to 100 mW. I see a lot of 300 mW
>> gear, though. Hrm...
>>
>> On 12/3/08, Kevin Purcell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Gary wrote:
>>>
>>>> How about installing DD-WRT on it? That way you can boost the output
>>>> power without investing in any antenna hardware -- then if you
>>>> add an
>>>> antenna it'll be even better.
>>>
>>> Better in the sense that it will splatter all over the band
>>> (including the amateur part of the band down at channel 1). They keep
>>> the power down to meet FCC spurious signal requirements.
>>>
>>> Keep the power as low as you can manage. There is only a finite
>>> amount of frequency space so keeping your cell as small as possible
>>> helps.
>>>
>>> Using an better (directive) antenna is a much cleaner solution.
>>>
>>> 73 DE N7WIM
>>> --
>>> Kevin Purcell
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>
> --
> Kevin Purcell
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the SeattleWireless Talk list, hosted by Google Groups
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/swn-talk?hl=en

For more about the SeattleWireless.NET project, see http://seattlewireless.net/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---