Line of sight truly means line of sight with 60GHz. As a human standing in the way is enough to mess with the signal so would a flock of birds I guess.
Or better yet, oscillate along the path of the beam. And they would naturally have another flock to swap out when they tire plus another flock available as a hot swap in case something unexpected happens. :P
It also requires clear weather, so won't be enough to "wire" a village with reasonable expectation of service quality. At which point there is little reason to go with anything, but a passive optical network in a village.
It depends on what you mean by reasonable. In some places anything that faster than the non-existing 4G-connection they were promised 5 years ago will be reasonable.
These high frequency links might not be suited for bad weather or flock of birds, but they do enable low latency, high throughput most of the time. You can always downgrade to a lower frequency, much like how 5G operates, completely transparent for the clients.
People are not isolated from the rest of the world into specific areas, they know what broadband internet is like and this sets expectation of quality. I know of some organizations that use links on that frequency and not working in rainy, snowy or foggy weather always comes up, but they can deal with that, while consumers can't.
Comments
1.5KM makes 'wiring' a village possible from one relatively high structure, such as a church's bell tower.
Line of sight truly means line of sight with 60GHz. As a human standing in the way is enough to mess with the signal so would a flock of birds I guess.
Do flocks of birds regularly hover in one place for an extended period of time? Coming up with increasingly bizarre limitations here.
They could fly down the beam ;)
Or better yet, oscillate along the path of the beam. And they would naturally have another flock to swap out when they tire plus another flock available as a hot swap in case something unexpected happens. :P
A village that small and unwired, rural, third world, would be happy with that line of sight limitation.
I'm thinking this is primarily point to point, not suitable for showering an area in sweet bits.
It is likely MIMO, I don't see any obstacle why it couldn't do multiple spatial channels simultaneously.
It also requires clear weather, so won't be enough to "wire" a village with reasonable expectation of service quality. At which point there is little reason to go with anything, but a passive optical network in a village.
It depends on what you mean by reasonable. In some places anything that faster than the non-existing 4G-connection they were promised 5 years ago will be reasonable.
These high frequency links might not be suited for bad weather or flock of birds, but they do enable low latency, high throughput most of the time. You can always downgrade to a lower frequency, much like how 5G operates, completely transparent for the clients.
People are not isolated from the rest of the world into specific areas, they know what broadband internet is like and this sets expectation of quality. I know of some organizations that use links on that frequency and not working in rainy, snowy or foggy weather always comes up, but they can deal with that, while consumers can't.
In good weather...
Well for PTP have a fallback 2.4 Ghz with a pair of polarised Yaggi's and jack the power up.
What I mean by having a pair is have one channel vertically polarised and one channel horizontal double bandwidth