[LINK] Senator Coonan on 7:30 Report

[Richard Chirgwin]

George Bray wrote:
> Thanks for your write up Tom.
>
> Do any linkers have experience using 5.8Ghz equipment like this? My
> armchair knowledge of wireless says a 5.8Ghz signal won't go through
> hills and gives "worse than WiFi" 2.4Ghz results in wet weather.
I have one small experience. When at the ATUG regional conference in 
Canberra last month, the exhibition room was connected by YLess4U to a 
base station 19km away. I think it was using a 5.8GHz connection.

The service worked just fine. As you say, George, it doesn't go through 
hills, so the transceiver was mounted on a 5m pole. That isn't, however, 
that much of a hardship.

Topology is an issue, though. It's nice to have funding for technical 
infrastructure, but some of the infrastructure users will need won't be 
the technology. If someone's in a 'difficult' area, they might easily 
need multiple transceivers with big poles to achieve a path to the base 
station. I wonder if the civil infrastructure fits in the subsidies?

And no, I would not expect to be able to take the laptop to the farm 
shed in this scenario. So what? If a city user wants broadband in the 
shed, they have to build their own wired or wireless LAN to get it there.

RC
>
> Will they get 20km out of it?
>
> George, taking his laptop out to the farm shed. ~!  Connection Failed
> : Wavelength too short.
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>