[HamWAN PSDR] Kirkand / Rose Hill Coverage
don.sayler at gmail.com
Thu May 7 11:48:42 PDT 2015
Sorry for the lack of clarity. My comment on the tower was for reference
only. We have not had to do anything on the tower in a long time, so I'm
not sure what we can and can't do. I'm going to look into that.
I'm going to go up to the site this weekend and look at the height of the
tank and the trees, and try to get some rough measurements. I know the
tower is 120 feet.
And it's certainly possible that hamWAN just won't work for us.
On Thursday, May 7, 2015, Tom Hayward <tom at tomh.us> wrote:
> I'm having trouble understanding the details here. You say that the top of
> the mast clears the water tower. Does that imply you want to mount a HamWAN
> dish to the top of the mast, or is that just a point of reference? It's
> usually not practical to mount a dish to the top of a mast due to the high
> wind load of the dish. The critical detail is whether you can see the
> horizon from the level on the tower you want to mount the dish. Trees will
> likely block the signal, and the water tower will definitely block the
> You mentioned that the City of Kirkland would want the i's dotted and the
> t's crossed. What does this mean specifically--what are you allowed to do
> on this tower?
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Don Sayler <don.sayler at gmail.com
>> The black tower in the image is actually a shadow. In the attached
>> image, I've circled the base of the tower and the top of the tower. The
>> top of the mast clears the water tank, but I don't how much off the top of
>> my head. And, there are a LOT of trees in the area.
>> Our soon-to-be-gone Clear service is only 1.5 M, and that has been
>> perfectly fine for IRLP and remote admin.
>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Tom Hayward <tom at tomh.us
>>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Don Sayler <don.sayler at gmail.com
>>>> Oh, the water tower obscures the horizon to the east, but west is
>>>> clear. And we probably have 70-80 feet available on the tower.
>>> That's no good. Here's the link prediction from my last message plotted
>>> in Google Earth. Looks like the water tower blocks the shot to Haystack. Is
>>> that tower location correct?
>>> I've attached the .kml so you can see it in 3d.
>>> Snohomish County DEM (north) and Capitol Park (southwest) are also
>>> options. They're predicted at about -70 dBm.
>>> By the way, the coverage map is digital (coverage or no coverage). A red
>>> pixel indicates coverage better than -70 dBm. Anything less than that we
>>> don't plot. Any shading you're seeing is just how it's displayed--it's not
>>> indicating a different signal level. A signal level of -70 dBm will give
>>> you "full speed" on the network. The modem can maintain a connection down
>>> to about -88 dBm, but it won't be as fast. The map is conservative in that
>>> nothing between -70 and -88 dBm is plotted. Also keep in mind that the map
>>> doesn't know what trees or water towers exist around your property. (It
>>> does some primitive land cover adjustments, but I've found binoculars or
>>> Google Earth to be more accurate.)
>>> PSDR mailing list
>> PSDR mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the PSDR