2019 edition: Are you using a mast mounted WiFi or cellular extender?

[svmobert]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Bump
I am about to order....
Has anyone knowledgeable looked at this product as it is both Cell boost (5g ready) and WiFi?
Tnx

As long as you realize it's just an antenna, not a booster of any kind... It has 5 connectors to connect to the routers, etc. You still need a WiFi extender device (and cables and adapters), plus a cellular modem/router with cables, and a GPS device with an antenna port.

Assuming you are aware of that, then it could be cool. I am a Poynting reseller now but I haven't tested any of the antennas yet. I have two of the OMNI 400 marine cellular antennas on order, one for a customer project and one for my own testing. So we will see how it works out. One of the founders of Redport also ordered one for his own testing and says the construction looks good but he hasn't actually connected it up yet.

[Pelagic]

Thanks for the input

[hellosailor]

"Gain (max) Port 1 & 2: 5.8 dBi" from their data sheet. That's probably one bar more signal strength than just your phone, if you're running a good short cable to it. And a lot of "stuff" all in one box. But if your looking for great performance, not just convenience?
Might want to keep looking.

It also sounds just too good to be true, in that it seems to cover every frequency on every possible band (i.e. all carriers) and usually there are at least SOME gaps or limits.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Sea-TechSystems

As long as you realize it's just an antenna, not a booster of any kind... It has 5 connectors to connect to the routers, etc. You still need a WiFi extender device (and cables and adapters), plus a cellular modem/router with cables, and a GPS device with an antenna port.

Assuming you are aware of that, then it could be cool. I am a Poynting reseller now but I haven't tested any of the antennas yet. I have two of the OMNI 400 marine cellular antennas on order, one for a customer project and one for my own testing. So we will see how it works out. One of the founders of Redport also ordered one for his own testing and says the construction looks good but he hasn't actually connected it up yet.

Following your input and hellosailors I put a hold on buying any Antennas and WiFi extender until I can plan out the complete installation.

My brief is basically maximum range for cellular via antenna connected to a Modem.

Secondly maximum range for WiFi if I have access to a fast Shipyard or Marina hotspot

I did buy the Huawei B525-63A modem already as it has the frequencies I need but nothing else so far

The OMNI 400 seems good and marine oriented but what do you carry in stock, that I should be comparing it to?

https://poynting.tech/product/omni-400/

For the Wifi optimizer, the Redport seems to be the best choice, but open to other opinions?

We just sent these questions to Poyntang after calling their technical department

Questions:


#1 Our location is in the Philippines, we were told to mention that as that would affect which distributor could supply us.

Most important to us is the performance, so please answer the questions based on that criteria first.


#2

The PDF file shows a splitter (14) for sharing the antenna feed to both a 4G Modem and a Wifi Extender. We're looking at using the Huawei B525-63A modem:
https://consumer.huawei.com/uk/smart-home/b525/specs/

and the Redport Optimizer a WiFi extender / VSat input (we would be using the 4G modem as the WAN / SAT Input, here's the specs on the Redport)
http://www.redportglobal.com/marine-...wi-fi-hotspot/
Is this the best Poynting antenna available for this combination? (ie is there a higher gain antenna available?)


#3
We want to get maximum elevation on the mast (distance above water line) for long distance 3G/4G/4.5G connections, how does cable length vs elevation conflict? (Tallest mast is 19 meters and would be approximately 20-25 meters to the Huawei B525-63A modem) we could have it at a max of 15 meters, but we're asking about options / performance here.


#4
The antenna's pdf file at
https://poynting.tech/wp-content/upl...ocument_V1.pdf
says it's available for a total cable length up to 15 meters, the sales rep I spoke said this could be assembled as one solid cable avoiding a point of failure / signal loss issues (for example if the original cable length is 2 meters, the connection would be inside the mast and very hard to service.) Just wanted to confirm this as well as in relation to the above questions.


#5

After speaking with a satellite / communications engineer friend he mentioned it would be more optimal if there was an RF switch for the antenna to be electrically connected to either the Huawei modem or the Redport Optimizer (since only one would be used at a time), the sales agent said she didn't think this was available directly from*Poynting, is there a recommended vendor for such an isolated RF Switch?

And last but not least:

#6 are there any boosters available from Poynting that could improve performance on this type of installation scenario?

[svmobert]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Following your input and hellosailors I put a hold on buying any Antennas and WiFi extender until I can plan out the complete installation.

My brief is basically maximum range for cellular via antenna connected to a Modem.

Secondly maximum range for WiFi if I have access to a fast Shipyard or Marina hotspot

I did buy the Huawei B525-63A modem already as it has the frequencies I need but nothing else so far

The OMNI 400 seems good and marine oriented but what do you carry in stock, that I should be comparing it to?

https://poynting.tech/product/omni-400/

For the Wifi optimizer, the Redport seems to be the best choice, but open to other opinions?

We just sent these questions to Poyntang after calling their technical department

Questions:


#1 Our location is in the Philippines, we were told to mention that as that would affect which distributor could supply us.

Most important to us is the performance, so please answer the questions based on that criteria first.


#2

The PDF file shows a splitter (14) for sharing the antenna feed to both a 4G Modem and a Wifi Extender. We're looking at using the Huawei B525-63A modem:
https://consumer.huawei.com/uk/smart-home/b525/specs/

and the Redport Optimizer a WiFi extender / VSat input (we would be using the 4G modem as the WAN / SAT Input, here's the specs on the Redport)
Satellite Wi-Fi Hotspot - RedPort Optimizer
Is this the best Poynting antenna available for this combination? (ie is there a higher gain antenna available?)


#3
We want to get maximum elevation on the mast (distance above water line) for long distance 3G/4G/4.5G connections, how does cable length vs elevation conflict? (Tallest mast is 19 meters and would be approximately 20-25 meters to the Huawei B525-63A modem) we could have it at a max of 15 meters, but we're asking about options / performance here.


#4
The antenna's pdf file at
https://poynting.tech/wp-content/upl...ocument_V1.pdf
says it's available for a total cable length up to 15 meters, the sales rep I spoke said this could be assembled as one solid cable avoiding a point of failure / signal loss issues (for example if the original cable length is 2 meters, the connection would be inside the mast and very hard to service.) Just wanted to confirm this as well as in relation to the above questions.


#5

After speaking with a satellite / communications engineer friend he mentioned it would be more optimal if there was an RF switch for the antenna to be electrically connected to either the Huawei modem or the Redport Optimizer (since only one would be used at a time), the sales agent said she didn't think this was available directly from*Poynting, is there a recommended vendor for such an isolated RF Switch?

And last but not least:

#6 are there any boosters available from Poynting that could improve performance on this type of installation scenario?

There's a lot here... I am intimately familiar with the Redport Optimizers (all versions) as well as the Wave WiFi MBR-500/550. Both have built-in cellular modem as an option and those modems are global frequencies..

I would not personally share a single antenna with cellular and wifi, plus any wifi extender (Redport Halo, Wave WiFi Rogue, Ubiquiti, etc) would do better with it's included antenna directly attached as most extenders have.

The problem with wifi is that at 2.4Ghz+ the signal loss from 20 meters of coax up the mast more than kills the gain you get from the antenna. So instead of an 8db gain WiFi antenna you have a -2db antenna.

Best to use a WiFi extender with a directly attached antenna, mount that somewhere relatively high outside (15-25ft above the water) and use ethernet to connect it to your onboard router.

As for cellular, generally cellular frequencies are lower than WiFi, and as such the signal loss is less per foot compared with WiFi over Coax. Plus cell towers are tall and have a high power output and big antennas. So signal gain is less important, but altitude of your own antenna is a good thing. So you can put cellular antenna at the masthead and run a coax down the mast. at 20 meters you will net out to close to 0db gain at the antenna but you will you will have clear line of sight to the cell tower for a long distance.

Since you have the Huawei router already, install a cellular antenna very high with really good coax, and plug it into the "main" LTE antenna connector on the Huawei. The get a good WiFi Extender, mount outside on a bimini, arch, etc and connect it to the WAN port on the Huawei. Voila!

[jkindredpdx]

I answered the survey incorrectly as cellular booster only... My setup is pretty simple... I had the Wilson cellular booster at my mountain cabin where it was a failure due to the deep canyon and trees that blocked any signal to boost. I moved the cell antennae to my boat for times I am away from marinas and it seems to help. I mounted it on my aft solar panel rack and I use the hotspot feature of my iPhone for WiFi. I had a WiFi booster on the boat for use in the marina, but I took that to the mountain where it allows me to sit with my computer at the fire pit away from the cabin. Both tools are helpful, but you need a signal to boost. For places where I am outside cell phone coverage, I have a Garmin Explorer which allows me to send text messages or post my progress online via satellite.

[El Rubio]

Hey Guys, I have been lurking and reading this thread and have noticed several misunderstandings regarding mainly cellular comms, antennas, and boosters. I don't want to come across as pontificating, but I may be able to shed some light on specific things brought up here. I am an RF engineer with 30 years experience primarily in the wireless cellular industry.



First, someone described MIMO as a way to improve signal quality, but that's not exactly true. MIMO is for multiple data streams to increase data transfer rates. For MIMO to work, the device has to be capable and the carrier has to have it enabled as well. LTE devices have a category designation that defines what it is capable of, MIMO, carrier aggregation, etc. All devices aren't capable of all features and all features aren't always enabled.





Someone said that cable length would eat up any advantage gained by an outside antenna, or that antenna height didn't matter because cell towers were tall. Well, antenna placement can be a huge difference maker, bigger than the so-called gain of the antennas.I recall doing some testing in the early90's measuring the RSSI of a StarTac type device on the carseat vs on the dash of the car. The dash saw an average improved RSSI of 17dB. Cellular, WiFi, and even VHF, are all line of site, so height is a very big deal. Towers are tall with big antennas, but mobile devices are often in your pocket or on the carseat, very low power, and not ideal antennas. If the tower can't receive your signal, it doesn't matter how well you get the signal from it.



"3G tombstoned" Not sure if that implies already ended, or soon to be. 3G, at least in the US, is used for voice communications mostly for devices incapable of voice over LTE calls, like the iPhone 5. There's still a lot of iPhone 5's out there that are LTE data ready, but not VoLTE. 3G spectrum is regularly carved for LTE conversion and most operators carry a single channel now.

Trying to get extended data transmissions becomes an issue when the time delay to send and receive is extensive. You tie up the channel while your device waits for its packets and then while the cell site waits for your transmissions, etc. There is a point where either your low power device cannot send a good enough signal to be received at the tower, or the time delay is too great. Either can keep you from connecting at all.



Oh, almost forgot. For you cell phone booster users. Please make sure you install these things properly. Read the manual and know when the red lights are blinking, something is usually wrong. These devices cause severe network issues mostly due to poor installation. They are all prone to oscillating, or feeding back and producing interference on the cellular network. Picture a microphone in front of a speaker at a concert - SQUEAL! Keep the two antennas as far apart as possible and not in the same horizontal plane.



Good luck with your stuff.

[hellosailor]

Rubio, "tombstoned" is used as a term in the computer/tech industries to mean that all support for something IS going to end. While the date may be vague, and usually goes through several changes, it typically means someone is saying "Yeah, we support this, but don't bet on it being supported or working at all after ____" the tombstone date.

The US cellular industry is kinda infamous for making statements about "carved in rock" and then a couple of years later saying "Ignore that". At this point I think AT&T has dropped 2G support--it was scheduled to end last or this year--and TMobile has announced that 2G (which was their only really compatible service with many phones) would be dropped as well.

The simple math is that the carriers dream of putting LTE and 5G blades in the cell sites, and there's only limited room in each site. If they can only fit 100 blades...the old ones get pulled to make room for the new ones. Unless the new LTE and 5G blades can also support 3G...it will be dropped as well. I think AT&T has said 3G will no longer be supported by them after 2020.

But that's from the folks who are trying to sell "5Ge" as 5G. Who sell 3G with an enhanced backbone as "4G". And make no attempt to let customers know "4G LTE" ain't the old 4G, or the international LTE.

Of course the elephant in the room with 5G is that deploying it will apparently require an antenna site every 100 meters, from sea to shining sea. A simple exercise in logistics and accounting, haha.

[El Rubio]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Rubio, "tombstoned" is used as a term in the computer/tech industries to mean that all support for something IS going to end. While the date may be vague, and usually goes through several changes, it typically means someone is saying "Yeah, we support this, but don't bet on it being supported or working at all after ____" the tombstone date.

Yeah, I kinda thought that is what you meant. It isn't that common in the wireless industry though.

Originally Posted by hellosailor

The US cellular industry is kinda infamous for making statements about "carved in rock" and then a couple of years later saying "Ignore that". At this point I think AT&T has dropped 2G support--it was scheduled to end last or this year--and TMobile has announced that 2G (which was their only really compatible service with many phones) would be dropped as well.

The wireless industry rarely says exactly when they will 'tombstone' a service. It is usually based upon how many users are still out there using those networks. As new devices, faster data rates, etc come online, people generally flock to those. Eventually, there are very few users on the old network. For example, the carrier may state that they expect to shut down the last 3G networks in 2020, they will not give a specific date until it is within a predetermined percentage. there are other reasons too. 3G is very expensive to maintain compared to LTE. It requires large rooms of rack after rack of switching equipment as well as trunks and other connections to the outside world. Carriers were required by FCC to maintain analog 1G long after it was obsolete and rarely used.

Originally Posted by hellosailor

The simple math is that the carriers dream of putting LTE and 5G blades in the cell sites, and there's only limited room in each site. If they can only fit 100 blades...the old ones get pulled to make room for the new ones. Unless the new LTE and 5G blades can also support 3G...it will be dropped as well. I think AT&T has said 3G will no longer be supported by them after 2020.

But that's from the folks who are trying to sell "5Ge" as 5G. Who sell 3G with an enhanced backbone as "4G". And make no attempt to let customers know "4G LTE" ain't the old 4G, or the international LTE.

More of that networking terminology. "Blades" is not a term used in wireless, especially not at cell sites to describe the hardware. I don't want to beat you up over it though, because we have a mostly unique set of terms and acronyms. Anyway, the blade analogy isn't correct at all. We wish it were that simple, -replace a 'blade' to change technology. There aren't any limitations such as you describe. RF bandwidth ( the number of frequencies we use) is the only real limitation. There are no hardware limitations. If we need more 'blades' , we add more racks to install them.


I've read a little about the "5Ge" thing and I haven't seen anything advertising or trying to fool anyone into thinking it is full 5G service. What I saw called it "5G evolution" and described it as a step towards 5G. It can appear to be deceiving, but it is an improvement. It's getting back to those features within the latest LTE releases, like MIMO, carrier aggregation, etc, that may or may not be enabled or supported by some devices.


Now, the 3G=4G thing is not as you say. Again, 'backbone' may mean something to you, but is not referred to in the wireless industry. The reason, AT&T and T-Mo advertised their 3G as 4G is because they use a different 3G technology called UMTS. It utilizes a 5MHz wide carrier and is often referred to as W-CDMA. Sprint and Vz took a different route to 3G utilizing CDMA 2000 / EVDO protocol. It consists of 1.25MHz wide RF channels. UMTS networks blend with LTE much better and was a better 3G platform to move from as was 2g GSM to UMTS. UMTS theoretically, met 4G standards and that is why it was advertised that way. So, while it may be splitting hairs to say ATT's 3G is 4G, it is far superior to EVDO. If your describing the over the air performance as "backbone", then yeah, ATT's 4G (UMTS) is enhanced backbone, but that's what matters.



It also became apparent that EVDO couldn't compare to UMTS performance and this pushed Sprint and Vz to roll out their 4G networks sooner. Vz went with LTE, and Sprint jumped on WiMax. They wasted a lot of money and lost subscribers to the others that were building out LTE. They eventually came around to LTE. T-Mo and ATT were able to roll out their networks a little slower and cheaper.

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Of course the elephant in the room with 5G is that deploying it will apparently require an antenna site every 100 meters, from sea to shining sea. A simple exercise in logistics and accounting, haha.

This isn't the problem you think it it is. That many sites aren't needed and where they are, the carriers are already building that network out on 4G. They're called small cells and are commonly deployed at busy intersections to cover mainly just the intersection. It is mostly for capacity.