Jump to content

Old Clear gear


mhammett

Recommended Posts

Some of their backhaul radios may be retained by Sprint.

 

You should also know that most designs they use run in licensed bands.  As such, it is not legal to sell them to someone who is not FCC licensed.  Additionally, even if you could purchase them, it would be a combination of illegal and irresponsible to attempt to install/operate them without registration and approval with the FCC.  Improper installation could cause serious interference issues, and they ARE pretty good at tracking that stuff down, especially when you're interfering with either a telecom's equipment or somebody's high dollar corporate radio WAN links.

 

You might look into a product called Air Fiber from Ubiquiti.  Most of those models can operate in unlicensed bands, are designed to be easier to set up, and are moderately inexpensive.  A couple of thousand dollars can have you a 2000-5000 meter gigabit link if you have line of sight.

 

Dragonwave makes a few unlicensed products as well, though their hardware tends to be more carrier-centric and more complicated to install.  I would consider their hardware to be more robust and reliable, though it is more expensive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

O P is an ISP, and is quite knowledgeable about FCC requirements.

Didn't know that.

 

The OP wants the backhaul gear, not the endpoint gear. That means he wants the microwave P2P transmission gear.

I did understand that. I was talking about the microwave backhaul hardware.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know where to purchase the gear new as I have a whole list of vendors. I'm expecting that pulling thousands or tens of thousands of predominantly Dragonwave radios that I could make good use of. Most of their existing links will not sustain TDD-LTE as Sprint is implementing it. I'm actually soon implementing a Dragonwave network for a client.

 

Licensing and coordination is pretty easy, you just need to do it.

 

I know several 2.5 GHz license holders that would love to get their WiMax gear, whenever it is pulled.

 

I beta test Ubiquiti hardware, so I'm familiar with their offering.

 

I am also aware that you were not aware of my credentials when I posted.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

Licensing and coordination is pretty easy, you just need to do it.

 

...

 

FCC is easy, just paperwork and waiting.

 

Problem is that there are too many people who would "play" with this hardware without knowing (or often without caring about) the potential implications. They might not know what we do, being both in the telecommunications industry, but still know enough to make it work (or at least cause enough trouble attempting to do so).

 

I read some of ARRL's copies of FCC enforcement actions. It's really quite amusing to see the amount of havoc one can cause with a simple MF, HF, or VHF rig at a couple hundred Watts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Really a shame that Dish wasn't able to get in on this in some fashion, at least in terms of the customers. 4M people would have been in a nice infusion. IMO if Dish wants to grow, they need to acquire a lot of their base, and there isn't much base left to go after that isn't already in control by the big 3.  Growing organically is going to be extremely challenging for them.  They need new branding and lots of marketing.
    • T‑Mobile Shatters World Record for 5G Uplink Speed https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/t-mobile-shatters-for-5g-uplink-speed The biggest news in this is that T-Mobile only recently got access to n258 after swapping their n260 for it with AT&T and they wasted no time deploying it at SoFi Stadium. Hopefully that means we're gonna start seeing a lot more mmWave deployments in stadiums soon. *fingers crossed*
    • Would anyone else be curious in helping me compile a list of quirks for various devices/modems/chipsets for SCP? I've noticed that Mediatek chipsets seem to report more information than Qualcomm. I bought a cheap Moto G 5G 2024 and notice that it displays the LTE downlink bandwidth, and the NSA information of T-Mobile, something that my S22+, which is also Qualcomm, won't do. I'm hoping that we can convince either Google or OEMs to fix their reporting on various devices. So far across all Qualcomm devices I've tested: - NR neighbor cells don't report - NR downlink or uplink bandwidth doesn't report (NR doesn't appear with CA as a result, only showing LTE) - NR signal levels randomly stop updating for various period of time before continuing to update (affects CellMapper more) - LTE CA levels randomly report and don't always update quickly when CA changes   On the S22: - LTE Timing Advance (TA) doesn't work and always reports 0, reported issue to Samsung and waiting to hear back   On the Samsung Galaxy S series (USA - Qualcomm Snapdragon): - LTE downlink or uplink bandwidth isn't reported - T-Mobile NR NSA doesn't report band information, AT&T & Verizon work OK (n5 & n77 tested)
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...