bcbuie
join:2005-07-20
| Experience with Tranzeo WiMax 3.65GHZ?
I would appreciate a report of anyone's experience out there with the new Tranzeo WiMax 3.65Ghz gear (Pico Station and Subscriber Units).
We are thinking of upgrading our network and using this gear. We have a relatively small network, about 70 subscriber radios total, and we use a combination of Trango 5.8 and WaveIP 900 (for people we can't reach the Trango with). I figure the 3.65Ghz "pseudo license" will alleviate a lot of our noise issues and give us a a best of both worlds between the 5.8 and the 900. We cover about 200 square miles from one very high tower (we do have one "repeater/mini-POP" site in a neighborhood). Currently we have (2) 120 degree Trango sectors (plus another AP on a repeater site using an omni) and the WaveIP is on a MTI high-gain horizontal Omni.
We don't have any illusions of replacing ALL of our 900mhz gear (because let's face it, there are just some areas that only 900mhz DSS can reach), but we do think this would be a solid upgrade to our Trango 5.8 gear and would allow us to replace more of our 900 gear and reach more new customers with faster service. It also gives us a bit of future proofing and a better plan for the future (in my mind), and doesn't necessarily lock us into one vendor.
Would like feedback on:
1) Are the radios as sensitive as the specs suggest (should be able to be more sensitive given the theoretically better noise floor)?
2) What kind of bandwidth do you get at various signals and at what channel width? I'm hoping these radios will maintain good connections down into the mid -80's (although not optimal).
3) Has the low power of the pico base station (15db) been an issue at all? What kind of sector antennas are you using and how many AP's are you colocating?
4) After how many subscriber units does the AP start to bog down?
5) What is the install experience like with their subscriber units? Are you getting any NLOS at all? What configuration do you use mostly (17dbi integrated, 20dbi integrated, external antenna)?
6) Any luck at all with the indoor units? If so, at what range?
7) Opinions on the AirSync system?
8) Any luck with interoperability (Tranzeo AP with other brand SU's and vice versa)?
9) Anything else I forgot 
Thanks for any info anyone can provide.
Regards,
Ben Buie
Gosuto Wireless |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC | I suggest you read the other topic about Tranzeo that's going right now.
It shows quite simply how much (Or how little) they live up to their promised specs. |
|
bcbuie
join:2005-07-20
| Thanks, yeah, I know I've seen some heated discussions about them. However, I think it would be hard to find a manufacturer with no pissed off customers.
I was hoping to find some people with real-world experience with this specific gear.
Unfortunately there isn't a whole lot out there in the realm of affordable WiMax 3.65. At $1,700 per AP and around $250 per SU at quantity 1 (and really good deals on starter kits), it is hard not to be tempted. Probably going to at least get a starter kit and play around with the gear, but would really like to hear user experiences.
Thanks,
Ben |
|
webformix
join:2009-01-25
Bend, OR
1 edit | reply to bcbuie
Hmmm... I know someone from this forum has tried out Tranzeo's WiMAX gear, and posted some notes on it to this forum, however I cannot find it in a search. Last I heard he was trying to sell his starter kit I believe.
I can answer a few of the questions... while I don't use the Tranzeo gear, I'm pretty familiar with WiMAX in general.
2. You can get 3 bits per hertz from 802.16d WiMAX @ 64QAM3/4. So for a 5mhz channel width, you'd get roughly 15mbps net throughput. Most companies support 3.5, 5, 7mhz channel widths. The Tranzeo however only mentions supporting 64QAM2/3, so that reduces net bit rate down to around 2.75 bpHz.
4. While I don't know what kind of processing power Tranzeo's AP uses, you'll probably run out of aggregate bandwidth before you run into CPU issues. This will determine what over-subscription ratio you use, and what speed connections you'll sell, and thus how many subs you'll want to put on per AP.
5. We find that the 3.65ghz band is a little worse in terms of non-LOS then 2.4ghz, but a little better then 5ghz.
6. Stay away from indoor units. The limited power, along with the narrower frequency will make non-LOS connections difficult if not impossible. Also, manufactures should not be using an omni-directional antenna for indoor client units... this is just bad design and will lead to self-interference issues.
8. The 802.16d standard is now defunct, along with the fact that the 3.65ghz band is not an officially supported WiMAX profile. You will probably never see any support 3rd party clients, or interoperability. EDIT: I noticed on their website they claim "Interoperable with Redline Communications and other 802.16d compliant base stations".
9. I don't see any mention of GPS timing for this platform. This would be a huge red flag for me. While you don't need to use GPS right away, you want a platform that will support this later down the road if you want to run sectors on adjacent channels, or for frequency re-use. |
|
penypinch
Premium
join:2007-09-07
Henning, MN
| reply to bcbuie
Before you decide on Tranzeo take a long hard look at Ubiquiti
They have great equipment and the support is great as well
We are rolling out 3GHz Lic band and are using the UBNT XR3 for this project.
Look carefully and decide cautiously
--
Mitch
support@abetterwireless.com |
|
webformix
join:2009-01-25
Bend, OR | Why on earth would you want to use the XR3 if you have access to licensed spectrum? This seems like the worst possible product to use in terms of spectral efficiency, over-all pricing, and diversity for 3'rd party client equipment options. |
|
cmaenginsb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-19
Palmdale, CA | reply to webformix
Actually Redline's 802.16d client is Tranzeo last I checked.
--
CCNA, Comtrain Certified Tower Climber |
|
Nowireneeded
join:2004-02-11
Montoursville, PA
| reply to webformix
Webformix, pretty good download. A few more additions:
802.16D is dead but platforms are available for 3650 E. Obviously you won't have roaming etc unless the FCC changes the rules but it could possibly lead to a Wimax profile IF vendors come together to build it. The sad truth of the matter is most vendors want to lock you into their specific product without interoperability. Many are dissing E in 3650 and telling their customers there is no advantage blah blah......the truth of the matter is there is ZERO chipset vendors supporting D and all dollars are following E which means you'll never see sub $100 CPE on a D platform where sub $100 CPE already exists in E. Second, low end 3650 gear will have very limited advanced antenna designs while the better gear will have options of dual and quad diversity for much better performance. Lastly, VoIP performance on a real Wimax platform is way better as well. |
|
Nowireneeded
join:2004-02-11
Montoursville, PA
| reply to webformix
I agree. Why chase your tail with low end products? Being in this industry for 12 years it amazes me that so many still think these low end and roll you own systems actually save you money in the long run. Spend a little more upfront on quality gear and it will save you over time with much less headaches and your customers will be happier. |
|
bcbuie
join:2005-07-20
| reply to Nowireneeded
Yeah, but what does a 3.65Ghz 802.16e base station cost?
I don't know if we can reach enough subscribers to make such a solution pay off.
The 3.65Ghz 802.16d gear looks really good on paper, and the Tranzeo stuff is priced right ($1,700 AP, $250 SU), just wish I could find someone to post here with real-world experience with it. Tranzeo says ABC Communications in BC has deployed this gear in large quantities, and they say there are 190 of these AP's deployed in the USA.
I guess I should just buy the gear, test it, and post my results here
In the meantime, anyone who has some real-world hands-on experience with this gear (or any 3.65Ghz 802.11d gear), let me know. Also, thanks to everyone for the information posted so far, always appreciated.
Ben |
|
thewisperer
Premium
join:2008-01-16
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to bcbuie
might be a little of topic but I am also looking for a more in depth
report on Aperto and other non licensed (and licensed ) wimax gear for a new large deployment. Aperto might be a little more expensive but its pay me now or pay me later. Sending someone out these days costs a lot more than the initial difference in the price of the cpe.
As you mentionned Bcbuie I would want someone`s hands on experience. Surely no manufacturers are perfect and I know of large scale users with deep pockets who still backhaul with Tranzeo. |
|
slipstream1
Premium
join:2005-11-15
Jacksonville, TX | reply to bcbuie
I am looking at the Harris-Stratex 3.65 WIMAX option. The preliminary base station option is around $20,000 for a complete cluster, but the outdoor CPE is in the $250.00 price range for single quantities. |
|
Nowireneeded
join:2004-02-11
Montoursville, PA
| reply to bcbuie
Here's a great primer on the Alvarion BreezeMAX system I posted before. There is now a new economical version called the BreezeMAX Extreme that just started shipping:
»shows.implex.tv/Qwikcast/Root/te···ght2.htm |
|
bcbuie
join:2005-07-20 | Have a ballpark price on Breezemax Extreme 3650 AP and SU's? |
|
bcbuie
join:2005-07-20
| reply to Nowireneeded
That video was pretty slick - I especially like that DriveMax kit and that rig they had setup - a little better than what we have pieced together
I was impressed by the sensitivity and the bandwidth at the various signal strengths. The demonstration of how the diversity improved the uplink was also impressive.
However, one thing that was misleading - the Radio-Mobile like cross-sections showing the link path, I don't believe they factored in the antenna height AGL. I doubt those shots looked that horrible when the antenna height was factored in.
Still, it piqued my interest, and now I'm very interested in what that BreezeMax Extreme 3650 gear costs (although I assume it will be high, Alvarion has always been pricey). I realize the gear in that video was the regular BreezeMax 3650 line, but I imagine there isn't a huge difference in performance except for max sector/AP density (really not a huge factor for us).
By the way, John Galt sent me some links to some very interesting Tranzeo news - seems they make not only make SU's for Redline's 802.16d 3650 line, but also for Aperto. Just signed some $5M deal with Aperto to produce SU's for them. He also sent me a link to a press release about a large WISP doing an Aperto/Tranzeo rollout. You can just do a search on dailywireless.org for Tranzeo and see most of these releases. Anyway, sounds like their 3650 802.11d SU's must be pretty solid, now if I can just find some info on their Pico AP's. However, quite frankly, doesn't sound like there is much to lose, if the AP is adequate in the short term there is definitely an upgrade path on the AP side while still keeping the same SU's. That is reassuring.
Still, now you people have me thinking 802.11e, damn you
I'm sure when I get my first quote I'll be over that really fast . . .
Ben |
|
bcbuie
join:2005-07-20
| reply to bcbuie
Of course, assuming the 802.16e stuff isn't too ridiculously expensive, there is another factor - additional revenue streams from mobile clients. At the very least the mobile angle gives us a value add over wireline competitors.
Mobile clients could be a big deal here now that I think about it (an enormous lake is inside our coverage area).
Dangit dangit dangit, I can already feel money burning a hole in my pocket |
|
Nowireneeded
join:2004-02-11
Montoursville, PA | There is a problem with mobility in the states with 3650...it's a no-no. Alvarion and others are petitioning the FCC to change that so a wisp can at least get enough power to do self install. |
|
junctionvin
@junct.com | reply to bcbuie
Pretty sure Tranzeo also makes Aperto's CPE's. An Aperto rep told me this. |
|
JakeMoch
@vip.net
| reply to bcbuie
I am part of British Columbia's ABC Communications deployment of this Tranzeo Pico 3.5 and 3.6 gear on a relatively large scale.
We started deploying Pico Basestations and SUs from the beta stages of the 3.5 product. The 3.6 and 3.5 radios are virtually the same units with the same controllers and we deployed our first 3.6 and a handful of SUs a few weeks ago because we ran out of spectrum in the 3.5 range in one area(3.5 is a licensed band here in Canada and we have more of these deployed around the province since we would rather use our licensed band first where possible). We were quite happy with our initial results of the 3.6 though since they are almost identical to the 3.5 radios already out for over a year and it gives us healthy expansion capabilities in complicated and diverse rural areas.
It would be rather lengthy to report all our opinions on the above questions but I will try to detail as much as I can.
- we use these radios in smaller rural areas since the basestations are limited to 31 SUs per basestation. However in many areas this is more than enough for our needs ... if we require more we usually will deploy Alvarian gear (with the much higher prices for both the Basestations and the SUs!)
- throughput to the Tranzeo Pico radios is bang on what you provision at the controller level... we deploy several service pipes with the radios and if I provision an SU for 1.1 MB down and 386 up, I get exactly that (I was surprised at how exact the service pipes were delivered) ... you can specify the range from 0-3 MB down and 0 to 1 up (specs say that the up is only 1MB up max, but our throughput testing showed nearly a 3 full in most test cases) ... the SUs won't double for large pipe backhauls though but would suffice where your pipe is a 3MB adsl feed since it would deliver everything the adsl had to give you. A six MB adsl feed is more than enough to feed all 31 SUs if QoS control is utilized
- software/firmware upgrades have come a long ways and the newest controller software has very nice QoS capabilities (now version 3.2) Once you setup your linux controller, you don't have to touch it it seems ... the windows airconsole does it all for you and the GUI is very intuitive and simple to use.
- the 3.65 basestation we just deployed has excellent latency to the radios(30 ms over 4 hops). Full sized frames are handled almost identically to small frames in latency ping tests.
- load variance to throughput varies very little from 2 subscriber to 30 subscribers if the pipe is sufficient and some QoS is enabled ... the basestation does not bog down since the bulk of the processes are handled by an external linux or windows controller (in our case we use a Debian Linux controller) ... setup and configuration of the SUs to the pBS is a breeze!
- we deploy several different models of APs ... it's hard to compare units outside of cost variances ... while an Alvarian basestation can be loaded much higher, it is extremely difficult to justify putting one into a small rural community where you will never have more than 30 SUs associated to it ... cost effectiveness is Tranzeo's highest selling point in my opinion (a fraction of the cost of many other wireless solutions with still a very nice product)... our residential customers don't notice the difference between their service delivery from an Alvarian radio to a Pico.
- Tranzeo's and Proximetry's (software partner) support is unmatchable ... during difficult growing pains we had techs available at all hours of the night to get solutions to unexpected issues. Kuddos to Tranzeo and Proximetry are due for their excellent support.
- we have only purchased the 15db SU units so far but our cell ranges are all under 17 kilometers at the current time ... full service pipes are possible to those 15 kilometers away if LOS is not an issue. In many cases we are in tree'd canopy areas and while they don't burn through trees as well as 900Mhz units, I think they are on par with 2.4 units through the same canopies of trees. Our throughput tests show very little difference 3.5 gear at 13 kilometers (Alvarian vs Tranzeo).
- we had some difficulty with Fresnel zone reflections and interference over large bodies of water with the Pico, but discovered if we used a narrower sector antenna, the reflections were not as disruptive ... in one case I split the antenna to 2-20x20 antennas and get a virtual 120 degree coverage 6 kilometers over water with very little loss of modulation to the 3db loss of the split. The 90 degree sector antenna I had originally installed did not like the reflections off the water at some points during the intense heat of summer.
My comparitive opinion of the Pico at the point is very favorable (and Tranzeo seems to make marked improvements on a regular basis - it just gets better and better it seems) ... for it's affordable cost, it is difficult to dismiss in our competitive market place. With almost 2000 wireless clients in the various bands around the province (900, 2.4, 3.5, 3.6, 5.4, 5.8, 60 etc) we get very few complaints from our Pico customers ... we have yet to experience a failed Pico unit as well (touch wood).
- problem 2.4 networks using Tranzeo gear can be easily converted to 3.6 networks (same mounts and POEs/powersupplies) ... our field techs can swap out 20 radios in an 8 hour day without needing anyone to be home to gain access to inside hardware. Many of our areas are suffering so badly from 2.4 interference and we have found Tranzeo's Pico product an affordable solution to this problem.
All in all, I really like this Tranzeo product! |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp | Thanks Jake for the lengthy and descriptive post...! |
|
