Wireless Joint

xdavidx wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:15 pm Customers are a nice thing for a business to have!


I bet.

So are these towers owned by the cellular companies? The rates they charge for antenna space must be pretty reasonable to not put you in the red?

How many wireless hops do you have to take to get from the fiber up to the first distribution node?

Yes, customers are good lol. I'm just making sure there is an actual customer base before I build out a network.

The towers typically aren't owned by cellular companies despite common believe. Most cell towers in the states are owned by two companies. Crown Castle and American Tower. The rates are not too expensive to make it prohibitive, if you have a customer base before you build out or you're just rich and like throwing money away.

Only one wireless hop is needed to get to the first tower that can serve customers. It's not uncommon though for WISPs to have 4-5+ hops between the tower you as a customer connect to, and their core network.

We probably should create another thread to discuss this, and not hi-jack this thread anymore

swwifty wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:27 pm We probably should create another thread to discuss this, and not hi-jack this thread anymore

Go for it! Interesting topic!

Great read along in this topic! Seeing the results this guy pulled sold me right away on these parabolic grid antennas. https://youtu.be/xzqkoPL9t9A

I'm ~7 miles from my tower and knew I'd need highest gain possible. Also since it covers 600-6k it's pretty much universal in the event I'd ever want to switch carriers or towers were upgraded/changed.

The biggest drawback is the price. Not many people are willing to drop 360 on two antennas.

Just got 2 of these(bolton technical ultragain 26) in the mail yesterday, assembled, and pole mounted. Pretty much trial and error as far as orientation and spacing of the 2 antennas go according to the Wilson antenna guy i spoke with. He said ppl don't normally buy 2. All he could really tell me about them is that they were extremely directional and they were pretty time consuming to hone in on the tower. Gonna take them out to my parents place and see if they'll reach a tower ~8 miles away to see if a setup like mine would be feasible for them.

There is a build of the WiFiX firmware that apparently has a login option where you can get the signal stats updated in near realtime instead of having to run the command manually in the misc modem screen. I think this would help you greatly in aiming the antennas. If you have a hand held signal meter, that would work too, but most people don't have those.

Need4Speed, let us know how that goes. I was thinking about buying two myself, when I move the cell tower is going to be about 7.5 miles out from my location and its a highway tower so they might be pointed only at the highway but shall see.

Testing at my parents place was a complete success. Mounted the antenna pole about chest high just because it was easier. Top antenna was around 15' from ground second probably about 10'. Base test was WG3526/EM7565 with stock antennas. Got basically dial up speeds. There were 2 trees(a big maple and dense evergreen) we were pushing through in the yard and were able to go from about -105dbm to -95dbm. Also picked up 3CA. Wasn't able to grab any ss of the of the at!Gstatus =( was trying to explain everything to my pops. He's fully on board with getting my exact setup so The Wireless Haven definitely has another customer! His tv tower(40') is taller than mine(33') so he'll have no problem clearing the trees. Only drawback is he'll need some more expensive lmr600 vs my lmr400 since he'll need a longer run of cable. I'm already pushing it with my 50' runs. Here's the speed tests. I'll begin my permanent install tomorrow at my house.

That's called SUCCESS! Congratulations! And good luck at your place.

What is the last screenshot from? The one where it was only 4.64 Mbps down. Your test server was different then too.

Regarding coax cable, another option is powering the devices outside in weatherproof enclosures and then running ethernet cable from there to a router/wireless access point inside the house. Saves on money for the fancy coax and reduces line losses.

When you see the downloads drop down to the low 20+Mbps vs the upload staying the same, that generally means the tower is congested. More people are downloading than uploading, so the downloads are affected, but the uploads aren't affected as much.

Would love to see the signal stats and hear more about your aiming adventures!

xdavidx wrote: ↑Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:08 pm That's called SUCCESS! Congratulations! And good luck at your place.

What is the last screenshot from? The one where it was only 4.64 Mbps down. Your test server was different then too.

Regarding coax cable, another option is powering the devices outside in weatherproof enclosures and then running ethernet cable from there to a router/wireless access point inside the house. Saves on money for the fancy coax and reduces line losses.

When you see the downloads drop down to the low 20+Mbps vs the upload staying the same, that generally means the tower is congested. More people are downloading than uploading, so the downloads are affected, but the uploads aren't affected as much.

Would love to see the signal stats and hear more about your aiming adventures!

Last screenshot is his current internet. Yes I noticed that it was a different server although i had Chicago favorited. I had them run speedtest on their direct wired computer too and the results were similar. I told him about the POE setup but he preferred to have everything indoors. We get some pretty nasty weather here. I do have a little more tweaking on my antenna mast before permanently installing... Gonna use my laser level to make sure both are perfectly lined up together. I'll post some pictures tomorrow of the setup.

This was an all day project! Just gotta tidy up some cables and bond my lighting arresters to the tower. I'll post up a more detailed tutorial on my setup sometime soon. I'll be doing this all again at my parents place soon I'm sure.

Here's my 4 gang junction box for lightning arresters, ethernet, and power. This took a while to build due to excessive ocd LoL Here's it installed. Came out just as I'd hoped. Now for the antennas themselves... Locking in on tower didn't take too long since i pretty much knew exactly where tower is thanks to Google earth. Was challenging trying to twist the pole on the tower while watching my phone hahaha Unhooked second antenna to confirm MIMO.
Speeds tanked!

Best i could get was -89-90 so I locked it in there. Now if I could find a way better way on bridging the wg3526 and my asus at other end of the house I'll be happy!
Atm I'm using Jims work around. http://wirelessjoint.com/viewtopic.php?t=49

It's a bummer because i loose the wifi capabilities of the wg3526 at the other end of the house where the asus can't reach.

Congrats on the good results!

Something weird happened when you disconnected the second antenna. That wasn't just losing MIMO. Might want to try it again to see if those results repeat.

You have 20 MHz total bandwidth. Are there possibly other towers you can reach? They might have more bandwidth.

Here's what it's pulling now... Here's with 2nd antenna unhooked I do have another tower that's farther away (11 miles) and LOS isn't as good. I guess I could give that one a shot.

That is a different tower than your earlier tests. Look at the CID. Could be same tower and different transmitters, but the band is different too. If it is jumping between towers and the bands are mutually exclusive, you can lock out the band(s) of the one you don't want. You could lock out band 66 in this case, since you are only getting 10 MHz on this tower. That assumes band 66 is all you get. You want to grab stats while doing a download to see all the bands for carrier aggregation. The both antenna stats looks like there may have been some transmitting going on. If so, then that tower isn't as good for you as your earlier tower.

The speed test is what you want for the MIMO test. It is interesting that the signal strength for the primary antenna went down 5 points when the second was disconnected. But if there was a big enough time gap, other variables could have come into play.

Glad you pointed out the cell id. I did some looking on cellmapper today. Couldn't find any towers until I zoomed way out. The tower I'm locked on is one that is 19.2 miles away! I'm blown away by the speed I'm getting this far away! Averaging 50-60/25-30. What's even crazier is that the cell is pointed east on the tower and I'm northwest of the tower. Time to climb the tower and do some re-aiming. Very glad to know i have almost 20 mile reach with these antennas. This opens up my tower choices a lot. Now to lock on the tower I was shooting for that's only 7 miles away.

That *is* a long way! lol

The online databases often have incorrect and missing information, so I wouldn't take too much stock in that. The locations, especially, are often very wrong. If you use google maps in satellite mode and find the tower there and get the coordinates from that, then you'll have the true location. Taking the router with smaller antennas to the tower is one way to really know what it can do. Parking a few blocks away is better than directly under.

What terrain is this in? Curious, since you can reach that far without too much attenuation from plants, apparently.

How did you manage to lock onto 2 different towers with those narrow beamwidth antennas. Did you change the aiming between or is one tower behind the other? I guess if you get far enough away from them, then that narrow beamwidth could still cover a wider physical area that encompasses towers to the side of each other.

Closer may not end up being better for speeds. The tower capabilities and congestion may play a bigger role, since you have the ability to get a good signal at a variety of distances. However, weather may lower the signal quality more at those longer distances, so you might want to test during rain before making any permanent mounting configurations. I'm guessing you can reaim at will, but just something to keep in mind.

Fun science experiment!

Well I'm definitely making improvements. There's no information on the cell id I'm connected to on cellmapper but I believe it's definitely the same tower I'm aiming for since the first 4 numbers coincide, my first tweak on the mast jumped speeds way up...
Unfortunately I wasn't able to get the exact at!gstatus? On this first tweak to the mast of course i got a phone call so after climbing down was on the phone but did quick speed test and it was jaw dropping. It had to have been band 2. That's the fastest bandwidth available in my area i believe(15mhz). Must have had 3CA to be able to pull that kind of dl. So after getting off the phone i was able to get back to business tweaking for the best signal. Dumb me should've left it alone after getting that kind of dl speed but the chase for best possible got the best of me. Speeds got better but imo the live network status is somewhat flawed. It'll tell you the best dbm but that's not necessarily the best for speeds as i tweaked my mast to the best possible dbm, the speed was worse. So I'll need to go up the tower to do some more testing based on just speed tests. Also I'm not able to grab b2, it keeps giving me b66 on the unknown cell id. I'm deathly afraid of tweaking the router to band locking in any way especially when things are just working at this point. After locking down the mast and calling it a night I've been monitoring the debugging info I'm noticing b2 occasionally pop up under 3CA from just 2CA(both b66). So i definitely have some more tweaking to get dialed in. Here's the final lock in stats for tonight... I did a speed test via my ethernet on pc then pulled stats via my phone to see 3CA stats. I can't pull up any information on that 55157777 cell. The one I'm trying to grab is 55157770 that has b2.

Here's the speed test ran on laptop via ethernet during stat capture. Still unsure how to lock in Chicago as favorable server as its never been available to favorite.
Terrain in my area is pretty flat. Open corn fields all around with little foliage. Here's the Google earth comparison of the 2 towers. Definitely confirmed that the big old grid antennas are doing thier job. A few pics from the top of my tv tower pointing toward lte tower.

HA! So you don't *know* which tower the 166 Mbps came from. That is damn fast, and at such a distance. But it does make me think of searching for Walter in On Golden Pond: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_h8C_rCbgU You know he's out there somewhere now!

Your uploads are suffering with only 5MHz available, but the downloads sure lover that tower. It must be a very underutilized tower. 6:36 PM isn't the hottest time of the night usually (at least around here), but it also isn't the slowest time.

As for a band coming and going, the towers can do that based on congestion, on purpose. Just didn't want you driving yourself crazy with aiming. It *is* possible aiming is the reason too, but your signal stats are very good, so good chance it is the tower doing it. And there isn't much you can do about that, other than block the other bands. One way to get a better idea if it is the tower doing this is to run the at!gstatus? command, during a speed test, between 3 and 4 AM. Or maybe in farm country, 2 and 3 AM would work better. The idea is to run it when most people are sleeping. If it consistently gives you the extra band then, but doesn't during waking hours, then it is probably the tower taking it away in an effort to share resources among consumers.

Not sure how your tower mast is set up, but if if you mark a line on whatever is clamping the mast, to use as your zero, and then draw a line on the mast each time you get a spot you want to keep (that lines up with the zero), then you can get back to it easy enough.

The speed can jump around based on congestion. The RSRP won't. So you *should* get the best average speed when you have it set to the best RSRP (for a given CID). What is theoretically possible is for your antennas to be hearing two towers and getting some interference from the one you aren't connected to. If so, then aiming to the side of your target tower that is on the other side from the interfering tower, could, in theory, lower your RSRP, but increase your speeds. I'd bet more on congestion, however.

You definitely don't want to go off just one speed test or even 10 in a short period of time. If you find multiple towers with good speeds, you could mark them off on the mast (at lowest RSRP) and then set it at one of them and use this tool to automate running the speed tests every N minutes for a day: https://testmy.net/auto Of course, if you are *using* the connection (phones, computers, etc. connected to it, especially if Windows is doing Windows Updates), that will skew the results. Best would be just a single computer with firewall set to not allow outbound connections except for the speedtest.net app. Or Linux, if you have that available.

Anyway, you'll get an idea of what times of day are best and how much the speed varies at certain times of day, what your top speed is, your minimum speed and your average. Then you can try one of the other towers too. However, to be 100% sure you know what the tests are testing, you'd want to run the at!gstatus? command periodically to make sure you aren't jumping CIDs. That would invalidate the tests somewhat. On the other hand, if you have two towers (or CIDS on the same tower) that close together and *if* they both get great speeds, then you have redundancy built into the system in case one tower goes dark.

Your primary and secondary antenna signal strengths for a given carrier are off by more than a little bit. Either the antennas aren't aimed in the same exact direction (which would be magnified at these distances and with that narrow beamwidth) or the lower one is hitting some obstacles or reflections off metal roofs are affecting it more than the top one. Moving it up closer to the top one may improve the situation.

**CORRECTION: I looked at the RSRP values wrong the first time. The primary antenna is worse than the secondary. So either they aren't in sync for aiming and the lower antenna is pointed better, or you have the top antenna plugged into the secondary antenna port on the router and the bottom antenna plugged into the primary antenna port on the router. More info in my next post on this.

Having said all that, I'm just talking about if you really want to eek out the last Mbps for fun. You are getting signal strengths and speeds that most people only dream about, especially at those distances.

Congrats on an awesome setup! And thanks for sharing the details and the pictures.

Grabbed a quick look before heading out the door this morning. It's finally giving me "walter" this is the cell id I've been trying for. So I'm guessing that it's only going to give it to me when there's no congestion. I'm definitely pleased with the results. Huge upgrade compared to the 6mbps/2 my old isp gave me at almost double the price. If it can produce consistent results switching between the two cells I think I'll just leave it be. Definitely don't want to over tweak and loose these results. I'll have to monitor over the next few days.

You caught Walter!!!

Interesting that Walter's signal strength is worse than the other CID. The strengths of the primary CIDs may be close enough that it is a toss of the dice which one you get. It doesn't use secondaries for deciding that. It is also possible that it is taking away the other CID's primary to give it to other people. You would then be left with its secondary vs Walter's primary and Walter's primary has a stronger signal, so you get it. That does make perfect sense, since the other CID's primary is B12. I get B12 taken away here during peak times, although it is a secondary carrier for me. It is probably giving B12 to other users who it thinks are farther away. You are treated as if you are close to the tower, since your signal strength is so good. B12's lower frequency travels farther, so it reserves it for outlying users who can't get the higher frequencies.

It is interesting that you are able to get those speeds with the poor signal strengths of the two B66 carriers. They probably aren't operating optimally at that strength, but still give you a bit of a boost over the 15 MHz of the primary band.

Also, I realized that I looked at your RSRP values wrong in my previous post. Your primary antenna is worse than the secondary. So that most likely means either a poor connection in the cable, or the antennas aren't aimed in sync. That could be left to right aiming or up and down. If you are able to get them in sync (or fix the cable connection), your speeds should increase for Walter. It may not affect the other CID speeds as much, since they are super strong regardless.

It is possible that you have the top antenna plugged into the secondary antenna port on your router too. And the bottom antenna, if it is the primary, may be hitting some trees or roof reflections. Swapping the ports on the router should bump up your upload speeds a little bit, since only the primary is used for uploads.

At first glance, I'd think Walter and the other one are on different towers, due to signal strengths. However, given the CID numbers only vary by the last digit, they are probably on the same tower. You may be near the sector boundary, so you are able to get both CIDs. There is enough overlap for you to get Walter's primary carrier strong enough to make it switch to that CID, but the secondaries are pointing away more for Walter, hence the poorer strengths for those carriers. B66 (Walter secondaries) would normally be stronger than B2 (Walter primary and non-Walter primary when B12 is taken away), since B66 is a lower frequency. It makes sense in the case of Walter vs non-Walter, if Walter is pointing away from you more. It doesn't make a lot of sense for Walter primary vs Walter secondary carriers. Maybe they have the transmitters for B66 aimed down more than for B2 on Walter. Or there are some reflections going on and you are bouncing your antennas off the ground the way they are aimed (up/down aiming), which would introduce more variables.

If you take the router to the tower, or even a phone on AT&T to the tower, you'll find out if both CIDs are on the tower and which direction they point, by hitting it from different sides.

Yes, you have a good system, with 2 good CIDs. The only downside to the non-Walter CID is the weak upload from the 5MHz primary. The only downside to Walter is his poorer second and third carrier signal strengths. Those could become a problem in rain and snow. You would still have a solid 15MHz of bandwidth on Walter even if the B66 carriers drop off, however.

Also, regarding speedtest, I forgot to reply that you have to scroll way down in the list to find the speedtest server sometimes to mark it as a favorite.

You aren't using an amplifier with these, right? Just the antennas?

LoL! CID is officially dubbed Walter!

Yes just antennas, no amplifier. The way I synced the antennas on the mast was placing the mount brackets flat on the floor then clamp them down. I definitely have the top antenna hooked to primary on router. This was confirmed when I unhooked secondary to test MIMO. Guess I could try swapping them and see if there's any improvement. Can't hurt anything.

Before I put the knot on the mast clamps I used a level to make sure it was straight.

I have yet to test if decreasing the space between them will help. Atm they're 28" apart from the edges of the grids. Feed hornes are ~5.5' apart. I also have the feed horns adjusted all the way in(slot 4) which is supposed to be +1-2dbi gain on 1700-6500mhz.

I'm slowly getting more comfortable making adjustments... At first I was afraid to mess with anything but the more I tinker with it the better it gets. So far each adjustment has made speed improvements so I think I'm heading down the right path.

I sure hope there's no connection issues under my butyl rubber tape, that stuff was a major PIA to put on due to the mounting bracket u bolts. If there is a connection issue i should be able to swap primary and secondary to see it. I really cranked those n fittings down before taping. I'll have to double check my junction box fittings. It's possible after the install one came loose as I fed excess coax back into the attic. The Never-ending chase for more speed!

Can you provide a mapping table of CID and distance to the tower and max speed achieved up and down? That would make it easier to see how far you are going for a given speed. With your ultra flat, and mostly clear, terrain, and these high gain antennas, the distance isn't as big of a factor as it is for most people. Seems like your biggest obstacle is the curvature of the earth!

Another tool that is helpful is on ubiquiti's website: https://link.ui.com

Using that tool, you can map things out like this and see the terrain for each link:


In your case, that curve of the earth at the bottom of the screen may start intersecting with the fresnel zone of the radios. It is free to create an account and then you can save your maps and reload them later.

I am guessing, at that distance, any minor variations in the mounts or the antennas themselves will be magnified and can result in RSRP differences. If you swap them at the router, then if the problem is aiming of the top antenna or anything in the cabling between the antennas and the router, you'll get better upload speeds. But swapping won't tell you if it is a cable issue or aiming issue between the antennas and the router. If the problem is the connector inside the router, to the modem, then it shouldn't change things *if* the antennas are *exactly* in sync (pointing-wise) and you swap the connectors on the outside of the router. So if the primary is still weaker than the secondary after swapping at the router, I'd check the connectors on the modem inside the router.

Another thing you can do is twist the mast a *tiny* bit to the left and then a tiny bit to the right. If you can get the primary antenna to have a stronger signal strength than the secondary, then you know it is pointing issues and not wiring issues.

You did a great job on the taping. It would be a shame to have to redo that!

I am trying to visualize that mount and how it is used to aim up and down. You put the bolt through other holes to adjust the up/down angle? Can you only adjust one way, since you are already at the last hole?

Here's what I got playing with that ubiquiti tool.

Very slick tool! Checked that tower thats 19.23mi away. Like how it shows curvature of the earth. I'll open up the router and check out the connections tomorrow. Shockingly I got better ping times(25ms) on the tower further away vs the one closer(45ms). I pulled up the tower heights off of antenna search.

The mounts are adjustable in 2 ways as far as angle. The single slotted holes or the open curved slot. Looking at these charts it almost looks like I may actually benefit from angling them up a few degrees.

FYI the EM7565 has a firmware bug that shows the main signal stats on B66 to be weaker than they really are. I noticed that in a couple of your screenshots. It's not an actual problem.

swwifty wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:25 am FYI the EM7565 has a firmware bug that shows the main signal stats on B66 to be weaker than they really are. I noticed that in a couple of your screenshots. It's not an actual problem.

Thanks! I'm 100% positive about my connections being tight. Gonna crack open the router today and just double check that they're fully clipped on the modem pins. I do recall reading that some had issues with them popping off. I'm pretty sure this isn't the case here but opening up the router just to double check is a breeze and will confirm. I think my next tweak will be to close the distance between the two and see if I can get any improvement. I'm just nervous that it's gonna be extremely difficult to get them back in sync once I loosen up a mount.

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:51 am Thanks! I'm 100% positive about my connections being tight. Gonna crack open the router today and just double check that they're fully clipped on the modem pins. I do recall reading that some had issues with them popping off. I'm pretty sure this isn't the case here but opening up the router just to double check is a breeze and will confirm. I think my next tweak will be to close the distance between the two and see if I can get any improvement. I'm just nervous that it's gonna be extremely difficult to get them back in sync once I loosen up a mount.

honestly, with the speeds you are showing I wouldn't bother. I did alot of experimentation and found very little difference.

The only thing I'd be worried about is big signal differences between the two antennas. This is a sign of multipath, and can severely degrade the performance of the link, but it doesn't seem you have any issues with your setup.

Thanks. I'm getting very consistent speeds with the current setup. I'll average 50-60dl/25-30up during congestion times and when it's not congested it'll give me the faster band 2 that pulls 100-130dl/35-40up. It's operating in QMI since that's how it came. You think switching to MBIM would help any? I'm probably just fine as is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it! LoL

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:23 am Thanks. I'm getting very consistent speeds with the current setup. I'll average 50-60dl/25-30up during congestion times and when it's not congested it'll give me the faster band 2 that pulls 100-130dl/35-40up. It's operating in QMI since that's how it came. You think switching to MBIM would help any? I'm probably just fine as is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it! LoL

I wouldn't bother. I did notice with Verizon that when I changed between QMI and MBIM modes I got connected to different bands. You could try that to see what happens, but your connection already sounds really good for LTE.

swwifty wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:25 am FYI the EM7565 has a firmware bug that shows the main signal stats on B66 to be weaker than they really are. I noticed that in a couple of your screenshots. It's not an actual problem.

Wow, that's a crazy, specific bug. Do you have a link to a source on this bug from the Sierra website, or was it in some release notes?

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:23 am Thanks. I'm getting very consistent speeds with the current setup. I'll average 50-60dl/25-30up during congestion times and when it's not congested it'll give me the faster band 2 that pulls 100-130dl/35-40up. It's operating in QMI since that's how it came. You think switching to MBIM would help any? I'm probably just fine as is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it! LoL

We've found that MBIM will increase latency (other threads on here), so you might see that side effect.

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:51 am I think my next tweak will be to close the distance between the two and see if I can get any improvement. I'm just nervous that it's gonna be extremely difficult to get them back in sync once I loosen up a mount.

If there is the bug that swwifty mentioned, then that makes it much more difficult to know what is truly going on. For your closer tower, you are probably clearing all obstacles. For the one further away, you might be clipping some stuff. When you start hitting obstacles, the lower antenna is going to suffer more than the upper, generally. That's the thought behind moving them closer together.

However, without knowing the true signals stats for the primary antenna, you are just hunting in the dark. The only way I can think of to do it there is to swap the cables at the router, on the outside of the router. You don't need to open the router and swap at the modem. And repeatedly disconnecting and connecting at the modem could weaken the internal cable ends. In theory, if it is only the primary antenna that is affected on band 66, then you would be swapping the primary and secondary and could get the true RSRP value from the lower antenna first and then get the true value from the upper antenna after the swap. You could then compare those two to see which one is better. By running the signal stats multiple times and rerunning after swapping back, you can know if there is enough natural variation to invalidate this specific measurement too.

xdavidx wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:05 pm Wow, that's a crazy, specific bug. Do you have a link to a source on this bug from the Sierra website, or was it in some release notes?

It's on their site with the firmware release notes (you have to have a login to see this information).

I took a screenshot of the bug info see below:
When I upgraded the EM7565 I had to this version it resolved the issue.

Wait just a minute! B66 problems or not, you do have a primary antenna vs secondary antenna issue.

You posted these stats for the non-Walter CID:
'

Assuming the B66 bug doesn't also affect all the other bands, you still have an issue between the primary antenna and the secondary antenna. You've got a little less than a 2 fold reduction in strength on B12, an almost 10 fold reduction on B2, and an almost 4 fold reduction on B4, with every 3 points being a doubling of strength.

Swapping the cables at the outside of the router first would tell you if it is something to do with the modem connections or not. If it doesn't make the primary be stronger than the secondary, then it is probably the modem connections. If it does make the primary become stronger, then it is either a connection issue somewhere between the antennas and the router connections or it is an aiming thing.

Twisting the mast (marking it first so you can get back to zero) to see if you can get the primary stronger than the secondary antenna would be the next logical step. If you can't get it stronger, then I would suspect connections. If you can get it stronger, then I would suspect aiming.

By doing the above, you don't have to disconnect the lower antenna until you are pretty sure what is going on. I definitely hear you about disconnecting it and risking affecting the in-sync aiming of them. Would be a shame to do it if it isn't needed.

And if it is an aiming issue, it could still technically be a left to right aiming (most common), but could also be an up down aiming, so keep that in the back if your head.

swwifty wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:17 pm It's on their site with the firmware release notes (you have to have a login to see this information).

I took a screenshot of the bug info see below:

Screen Shot 2019-08-21 at 3.16.00 PM.png

When I upgraded the EM7565 I had to this version it resolved the issue.

Does it say it is specific to B66 somewhere? It also says SCC1. It doesn't show SCC2 as being a problem in the notes?

Well, either way, I guess it would be a good idea to upgrade the firmware you are on, @Need4Speed, to take that variable out of the equation.

xdavidx wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:31 pm Does it say it is specific to B66 somewhere? It also says SCC1. It doesn't show SCC2 as being a problem in the notes?

Well, either way, I guess it would be a good idea to upgrade the firmware you are on, @Need4Speed, to take that variable out of the equation.

Yeah it doesn't, I recall seeing it on a forum somewhere, but can't find it now.

All I know is updating to the latest firmware fixed that issue, but then caused another issue of band names being all jacked up lol.

swwifty wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:54 pm Yeah it doesn't, I recall seeing it on a forum somewhere, but can't find it now.

All I know is updating to the latest firmware fixed that issue, but then caused another issue of band names being all jacked up lol.

Good old quality control! Was that on Verizon where the band names were messed up, or AT&T?

xdavidx wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:10 pm Good old quality control! Was that on Verizon where the band names were messed up, or AT&T?

I saw it on both unfortunately.

Well I popped open the router and checked connections. They were good. Booted up modem and it gave me b2 with same as before signals so I did a quick speed. Uggghhh I sooo wish it would leave me on this cell. As soon as I switched over to grab screen shot of signal stats it switched right back to b66.

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:09 pm As soon as I switched over to grab screen shot of signal stats it switched right back to b66.

That Walter is a slippery fish!

Damn good speeds when you can catch him though!

Just lock the modem to the bands you need. You can create a custom band index on the modem to lock to the various bands you want.

B2(15mhz) with b66(10mhz)on 2nd and 3rd CA is what gives me the really high speed. Seems it only gives me this cell in mid afternoon or early morning when the network is not congested. When it switches cells on me it's just b66 alone. Speeds average 70/25 on just b66. I might play around with the band locking and try b2 all by it self. Wish there was a way to lock primary band to b2 only but still have b66 for CA. I'll definitely have to read how to lock the bands thoroughly. Just so afraid of messing up a setup working really good.

Need4Speed wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 12:39 pm B2(15mhz) with b66(10mhz)on 2nd and 3rd CA is what gives me the really high speed. Seems it only gives me this cell in mid afternoon or early morning when the network is not congested. When it switches cells on me it's just b66 alone. Speeds average 70/25 on just b66. I might play around with the band locking and try b2 all by it self. Wish there was a way to lock primary band to b2 only but still have b66 for CA. I'll definitely have to read how to lock the bands thoroughly. Just so afraid of messing up a setup working really good.

you can create a custom band lock to band 2 and b66. Beforewarned that B66 is actually also B4 in the Sierra modems, so I believe you need to create a custom band lock for band 2 and band 4, and you should be good.

That being said, it'll likely swap between the two cells still because the other cell is b66, so you might want to experiment with just locking to band 2 and see what your speeds/signal look like.

Doesn't that cost about as much as a used cradlepoint AER2100?

Hello all, I just found this long thread about the wide band parabolic grid. I work at the design and fabrication shop and lab where it originated and can answer any questions. How can I help?

AntennaRaul wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:50 pm Hello all, I just found this long thread about the wide band parabolic grid. I work at the design and fabrication shop and lab where it originated and can answer any questions. How can I help?

Hello Raul,
I've installed 2 of these at my own home and 2 at my parents place, both identical setups except for the length of the lmr400. When I ordered them from signalboosters.com I asked for information about them and they had a rep from Wilson antenna call me back. He really didn't tell me much I didn't already know. So far I absolutely love the performance from the antennas so hats off for amazing results! I'm connected to a tower 7 miles from the tower with full signal(-75 to -80). I've driven to the tower and got -76 with my phone. My parents are connected to the same tower as I am but are 10 miles from the tower. They get -85 to-90. Furthest I've been able to reach was a tower 19.2 miles away with -90 signal which is unbelievable!

Only real question I have is about the spacing between the two grids. I currently have them 28" from the edge of one grid to edge of the other. Mount brackets are about 5' apart. So far I have not had any issues so have just had the mindset "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Hi Need4Speed, Looks like a nice install. You can normally use a parabolic antenna almost edge to edge. However this one I suggest 12" edge to edge. The reflector grid is actually undersized at the lower bands 600 to around 900 Mhz. The wavelengths there are large and the feed horns might start "seeing" each other. However less so if in a cross-pol set up like you have. The cross pol set up will have wavelengths off by 90 degrees and enjoy a good bit of attenuation between them.
Excuse my lateness to reply as I had not seen any activity on this thread lately

These antennas get so much distance that latency at the high mileage comes into play and may slow data down, depending on the carrier signal equipment, modem quality and brand. I dont know those details as Im only working with antennas.

2nd reply.... If you need to squeeze the last drop of dBi gain on this or any tower mounted antenna, try putting the radio right below them in a waterproof box. Run the ethernet cable or power wire to the modem and save all that cable loss (and expense)

coldknob wrote: ↑Mon Jul 08, 2019 10:00 am Sorry to be so late to this party but I believe I have found the ultimate "need for speed" solution.
Time won't allow me to go into all of the details of my journey, but needless to say I have amassed quite a collection of antennas, amplifiers, cables etc.

My home is in the mountains, closest towers 6 mi. away. Predominately band 12, 5mhz. but 2 towers with band 2, 15mhz which provide much better speeds. Trouble is I couldn't pick up the band 2 signal at all.

Fast forward several months and I settled on a parabolic grid wifi antenna which gave me consistent speeds of 25 down on band 2 and effectively blocked the band 12 signal. A few months of tinkering with the cables, antenna placement, etc. got my top speed up to 45 down, 15 up which is more than I need.

However, I always wondered what I could get if I had a mimo setup but 2 grid antennas at 45 degree angles is a larger footprint than I wanted and I was satisfied...until I came across the existence of a mimo feed horn that replaces the one on your present antenna. Found a Chinese supplier on eBay and 1 month and $55 later got it and bolted it on.
MVIMG_20190708_101435541.jpg
The results were pretty amazing. 70 down 25 up consistently, 85+ down frequently. This is from a tower more than 7 miles away. $40 for 2.4mhz parabolic grid antenna, $55 for 1710-2710mhz feed horn = 24X2 gain for less than $100.

Is this already -45/+45 when the grid is straight?

It might be, some of the international manufacturers will offset by 65 degrees or 45 degrees or? Youd have to ask the manufacturer directly.

The ones from thewirelesshaven.com are set +45/-45 inside the enclosure. Mount straight up and square.

Didneywhorl wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 11:39 am It might be, some of the international manufacturers will offset by 65 degrees or 45 degrees or? Youd have to ask the manufacturer directly.

The ones from thewirelesshaven.com are set +45/-45 inside the enclosure. Mount straight up and square.

Do you have the link to the thewirelesshaven.com ones? I do not seem to find it and wish I knew they had.

https://thewirelesshaven.com/shop/antennas/wifi-a ... o-antenna/

I use one of these, and another one that has just type N connectors mounted to the case for each antenna

Didneywhorl wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 10:59 pm https://thewirelesshaven.com/shop/antennas/wifi-a ... o-antenna/

I use one of these, and another one that has just type N connectors mounted to the case for each antenna

Completely different thing. The thread is about parabolic grid antenna and the question was about the MIMO field horn. I had quoted @coldknob post to that effect. I wanted to know if the MIMO fieldhorn is already -45/+45 and therefore the antenna grid do not need to be rotated to those angles.

My fault, overlooked detail, lost the context.

No worries...I cannot find any spec info on those field horns so hoping someone with one can verify this.

Thank you.

Try the facebook group, lots of active people there

AntennaRaul wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:50 pm Hello all, I just found this long thread about the wide band parabolic grid. I work at the design and fabrication shop and lab where it originated and can answer any questions. How can I help?

I'm looking for "projected area" wind load specifications for this model, the Bolton Technical HighGain 26.

I'm designing an LTE broadband tower and need projected area to properly size the tower according to the instructions here: https://www.universaltowers.com/towers.

The only information I could find online WRT wind loading is on the signalbooster website:
Rated Wind Velocity (mph/kph): 130 / 209
Wind Load @ Rated Velo (M/K): 150 / 68

But I don't know how these numbers would translate into "projected area". Any ideas?

Does anyone have a picture of the Ultragain 26 horn disassembled? I'm willing to bet this is just a printed ldpa with a parabolic grid.

Edited for clarity

LateParrot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 9:40 am Does anyone have a picture of the horn disassembled? I'm willing to bet this is just a printed ldpa with a parabolic grid.

What does that mean? Like it's an LDPA antenna that uses the grid to scavenge signal? Do you know a lot about these antennas? I'm always trying to learn more. Esplain it at me if you have time. Please.

It is a dipole. Nothing printed.

I gotta look into how these work

Didneywhorl wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:22 am What does that mean? Like it's an LDPA antenna that uses the grid to scavenge signal? Do you know a lot about these antennas? I'm always trying to learn more. Esplain it at me if you have time. Please.

That's my guess, and I've seen LPDAs on PCBs. I'm new to this myself.

OptimusPrime wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:31 am It is a dipole. Nothing printed.

I don't think a regular dipole would have wideband properties and my calculations for a similar LPDA put it at a similar size of the horn.

Here's a paper I've been reading describing a similar antenna but for 1-19ghz
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d426/0 ... 42f933.pdf

Sorry, you may be right. I was looking at the ones I have which is just a dipole.
https://www.tp-link.com/us/business-net ... -ant2424b/

Forgot this thread was about a different type horn. I did buy a different horn but have not yet put it on.


The Wireless Havened Parabolic Grid&Dish Mimo Antenna Feed Horn 1710-2700 N Connect No Grid
https://www.aliexpress.com/i/4000078079545.html