«

The Other Guy wrote:
> EMB wrote:
>
>> Auckland City Council's rules are <10.5m high, at least 1m off the
>> boundary, and the structure is to be <1.1m wide.
>
>
> Great. Any idea what the requirements might be in Manukau City?

He he, not too high seeing there's that big lump of concrete available
for planes to land on nearby!

E. Scrooge wrote:
>>>When you were on the Helpdesk for Xtra the little phone in front of you
>>> was
>>>the main part of the job.

>>>hundreds of emails as well that Telecom get each day then well and good.
>>>

>>I mostly did email support.

> Sure you did...
> In between a lot of newsgroup activity.

of course...

Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
> John Fulton wrote:
>
>> The Other Guy wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Does anyone know how high I can make an antenna either on the roof
>>> or a free-standing tower, before I need to obtain permission from
>>> the local council? I expect there is probably some regional
>>> variation, but I'm just looking for a rough guide.
>>>
>>> My intent is to use this for wireless networking.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> The Other Guy
>>
>> You might run foul of the NZRFS before you run foul of the local
>> council. I am not sure what you need as a private citizen when it
>> comes to radio data transmission covering a substantial area. I am
>> sure there will be limitations upon the range of an 802.11x network!
>> and I suspect that you will run foul of that before you exceed a
>> height restriction!
>
> The legal broadcast strength of "personal devices" got rased recently
> didn't it?
> I know it changed her in Dunedin, so maybe it was just a local council
> limitation.
>
> either way, 802.11b/g can be made to go long(over 27kms) distance
> legally... and given the 500mw amp available from DSE, you could
> probably go even further.

Yeah, that's uni-directional dish to dish. Try 27kms omni and you'll run
into trouble, mind you you'd need a lot more power.


-KENT

Kent Smith wrote:
>>The legal broadcast strength of "personal devices" got rased recently
>>didn't it?
>>I know it changed her in Dunedin, so maybe it was just a local council
>>limitation.
>>either way, 802.11b/g can be made to go long(over 27kms) distance
>>legally... and given the 500mw amp available from DSE, you could
>>probably go even further.

> Yeah, that's uni-directional dish to dish. Try 27kms omni and you'll run
> into trouble, mind you you'd need a lot more power.

I'm just in the process of wifi'ing my car... sofar I have a 19dB omni,
a 500mw amp, and about 2km LOS without tuning it at all...

It's kinda handy to have net access wherever I go, I was thinking of
putting an AP in the car, and just leaving it parked in strategic places
for a free wifi hotspot... reletivly cheap, and no resource consent
needed... just a warrant and rego each year

Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> I'm just in the process of wifi'ing my car... sofar I have a 19dB omni,
> a 500mw amp, and about 2km LOS without tuning it at all...
>
> It's kinda handy to have net access wherever I go, I was thinking of
> putting an AP in the car, and just leaving it parked in strategic places
> for a free wifi hotspot... reletivly cheap, and no resource consent
> needed... just a warrant and rego each year

19dB omni? I assume you mean 19dBi, and I find *that* hard to believe in an omni
unless you are talking about a waveguide or sector antenna, and thats a little
bit large for a car.

Also, 500mW + 19dB is more then 4 watts isotropic power, therefore illegal. the
max you can run into a 19dBi antenna is a little over 40mW, since it has close
to 20dB gain, or 100x the power level.

Richard wrote:
>> I'm just in the process of wifi'ing my car... sofar I have a 19dB
>> omni, a 500mw amp, and about 2km LOS without tuning it at all...

> 19dB omni? I assume you mean 19dBi, and I find *that* hard to believe in
> an omni unless you are talking about a waveguide or sector antenna, and
> thats a little bit large for a car.

I mean I can connect to the car with a parabolic from 2km... sorry,
should have been a bit clearer.

> Also, 500mW + 19dB is more then 4 watts isotropic power, therefore
> illegal. the max you can run into a 19dBi antenna is a little over 40mW,
> since it has close to 20dB gain, or 100x the power level.

yeah it probably is illegal, I'm taking the amp out and using it at
home, it makes the battery go flat a hell of a lot quicker than without it.

I havent followed any specs, I just plugged it in, and tried it, and it
seems to work just fine(overly good really).

At home I have wrt54g running with "cracked" firmware and pumping out
257mW... I had to modify the casing on it though as it was getting too
hot, so hole and heatsink has done it sofar.

Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> At home I have wrt54g running with "cracked" firmware and pumping out
> 257mW... I had to modify the casing on it though as it was getting too
> hot, so hole and heatsink has done it sofar.

I recall some site or another testing it found that going past 80something on
the radio in those produced no more usefull power, as the added signal was just
in the sidelobes of the signal and not the carrier

Richard wrote:
>> At home I have wrt54g running with "cracked" firmware and pumping out
>> 257mW... I had to modify the casing on it though as it was getting too
>> hot, so hole and heatsink has done it sofar.

> I recall some site or another testing it found that going past
> 80something on the radio in those produced no more usefull power, as the
> added signal was just in the sidelobes of the signal and not the carrier

well that in itself could be usefull depending on the application,
although chosing an antenna for the job would do an even better job.

Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> Richard wrote:
>
>>> At home I have wrt54g running with "cracked" firmware and pumping out
>>> 257mW... I had to modify the casing on it though as it was getting
>>> too hot, so hole and heatsink has done it sofar.
>
>
>> I recall some site or another testing it found that going past
>> 80something on the radio in those produced no more usefull power, as
>> the added signal was just in the sidelobes of the signal and not the
>> carrier
>
>
> well that in itself could be usefull depending on the application,
> although chosing an antenna for the job would do an even better job.


Richards post may be referring to sidebands rather than sidelobes in the
antenna coverage pattern.
I'm using the Portless Networks EWRT firmware and it looks like the
highest option is 85mW.
But I'm very happy with it at that
What firmware is yours running ?

It seems like Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:22:13 +1300 was when "E. Scrooge"
<scrooge@*shot.co.nz (*sling)> said Blah blah blah...

>If I want action and answers then nothing beats the phone...

It's very hard to say I didn't get your phone call while talking to
the person, unlike email
--
Regards,
Waylon Kenning.

1st Year B.I.T. WelTec