You are here

Toronto joins the Golden Horseshoe MESH

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
VE3OY
VE3OY's picture
Toronto joins the Golden Horseshoe MESH

Greetings all!

It's time to bring the Toronto (GTA) area into the Golden Horseshoe MESH.
After doing a lot of reading and looking at maps of current nodes (both BBHN and AREDN),
I decided to bite the bullet and purchase a couple of NanoStation M2's.

One is already configured and on the air at 43.703809, -79.422269 facing west at 130 feet AGL.
It is configured to operate on channel -2 @ 10 Mhz width.
This is in the heart of mid-town Toronto, on top of an apartment building.
At some point in the future, there will be another M2 node facing east and perhaps an omni later.
The main purpose of erecting these nodes is to "fill in the gap" between east and west.

Already I can hear the Brampton node VE3PRC, but not very well.



It's pushing the M2 to it's limits trying to span a 27km distance.
I suspect that a NanoBridge or AirGrid is in the near furture, to make the link work properly.
In the meantime, I'd like to hear from any of the other node operators about setting up a tunnel.

That's all for now ... more to come ... stay tuned!
73 de Matt
VE3OY
 

KG6JEI
Congratulations on getting

Congratulations on getting your node up!

Just a note, the AirGrid is a single chain device (like the bullet) so the NanoBridge or a Rocket+Dish would be the direction I would go if your looking to increase the link quality.

The dual chain helps increase link speed and increase signal quality.

I've heard a number of reports over the years of a NanoStation M2 outperforming the AirGrid even though it has less antenna gain because of the second receiver onboard the unit allows pulling the signal out better.

You may even want to arrange for the link to be on a different band if possible if your going to have a 2nd radio feeding the local area you really do not want two radios right next to each other on the same RF channel as they can interfere with each other (local transmitter on side A covers up the receiver on side B, lots of discussion on the forums about this to give you more info as to the issues.) It will still 'work' with two radios on the same channel at the same site, it just may not work as well as having isolation.

K5DLQ
K5DLQ's picture
you might also test with 5Mhz

you might also test with 5Mhz channel to squeeze out a bit more performance on the Nanostation.

VE3OY
VE3OY's picture
Excellent advice!

I appreciate any help, especially from those with experience.

Right now I'm in the "proof of concept" phase.
Once I have a line of communication opened up with some of the other local node operators,  I'll know more.
It's possible I may choose to make the link on 5GHz, so that I can offer an omni on 2.4 for local users.
Time will tell ... and so will my HAM budget.  wink

Here is an oddity!
Just as a test, I rotated the M2 so that it was horizontal.
I'm aware that these antennas are dual polarity.
I found that the LQ and NLQ levels increased noticeably!
I don't know if this is because of freznel zones, line of sight, or antenna polarity.
Whatever the answer, it allowed for a connection to the distant node.
Anyone have a comment or idea??
 

KG6JEI
I would be concerned about a

I would be concerned about a loss of weather proofing integrity having a NanoStation on its side.

There are no seals on the unit, any water that gets in past the cap could end up right on the PCB.

If the signal improved when rotating my first thought would be that something else in aiming changed (compass heading or elevation, this also includes the beam path differences by rotating since the coverage is not exactly the same on the two antennas )

AE6XE
AE6XE's picture
Lower receive noise level

The verticle beamwidth is a lot less than the horizontal on a NS. By rotating the device, it now limits the sources of other noise and coverage area on the ground. It would be expected to increase throughput rates. Compare TxMbps for better measure of the impact.

Joe AE6XE

VE3OY
VE3OY's picture
Vertical vs horizontal

Interesting thoughts guys ... thank you.
I failed to mention that the M2 is inside out of the elements, on a window mount.
This is temporary while testing/planning.  At some point the hardware will be moved up to the roof.

Currently, I'm operating the M2 in a horizontal position which has allowed for a stable link.



Not bad for 27 kilometers!

I'm re-thinking the link though.
I seems to me that a better method of creating a robust mesh would be to erect a backhaul link on 5 GHz,
and erect a 2.4 GHz omni for closer-in general access.

Thoughts??

 

K5DLQ
K5DLQ's picture
agree.  backhaul of 5G or 3G

agree.  backhaul of 5G or 3G would work nicely

VE3CWU
Hi Matt, good to have you on

Hi Matt, good to have you on board.  You, Ian and myself need to get together over a Timmies ASAP to discuss some forward planning,

73, Bob VE3CWU

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer