Netonix Forums

What do you guys think about the new AFX units?

I think I can put the 2.4Ghz units to work, when tilting sectors down the noise floor is mediocre at most of my sites, but at ~0 it's a bit better. AF5X is quite good in noise for me so I'm thinking that it can overcome the noise level in 2.4Ghz and using a 2' dish w/ armor, could actually be quite good.

I'm not sure if/when I'd be able to put the 3Ghz units to use (in US). Can't register any new 3.65 sites and I don't know that I have any interest in replacing existing 3.65 links w/ AF3X.

I haven't done a ton of research on 3Ghz otherwise, but from what I've read 3.5Ghz is only for PTMP.

Well I have 4 of the AF-3X in my possession and once I get some longer sma cables I plan to replace 2 of my existing RocketM365 backhaul links.

sbyrd wrote:Well I have 4 of the AF-3X in my possession and once I get some longer sma cables I plan to replace 2 of my existing RocketM365 backhaul links.

Same here but I am putting mine in the NEW RF Armor Rocket cover designed for the AFX

Pics??

The new box will change out easily with existing boxes without needing to take the dish down.

Just open the cover, remove the Rocket, remove 4 nuts, slid off old box, then slide on NEW box.

DONE
CLICK IMAGES BELOW TO VIEW FULL SIZE

rebelwireless wrote:What do you guys think about the new AFX units?

AF5X is quite good in noise for me so I'm thinking that it can overcome the noise level in 2.4Ghz and using a 2' dish w/ armor, could actually be quite good.

In my experience the AF5x is maybe better at noise rejection than the 11n Rockets (doubtful), but are more sensitive to noise than the AC w/Prism. In noisier environments I've experienced reductions in throughput by switching PtP AC to AF. The only way to recover lost throughput with AF is to move to a less noisy UNII-1, which can't yet be done with the FCC/IC AC units. Only then are the gains realized. Even replacing a 2 mile PtP Nanobridge link with AF w/ the new 23dB dishes saw reduced gains until moving to UNII-1 and relocating one end of the link to avoid a tree that had grown up. In UNII-3 they couldn't manage anything better than 2x negotiation (briefly) and were very erratic, usually negotiating less. The Nano's could move up to 80Mbps with the same channel width and same original physical location (with tree) and were rock solid -- limited by the Fast Eth interface. Once moved to the quieter UNII-1 and new physical location the AF negotiated at 6x, surpassing the Nano.

Bottom line is the AF is a sensitive piece of equipment and it needs a good environment to operate well.

sirhc wrote:The new box will change out easily with existing boxes without needing to take the dish down.

Just open the cover, remove the Rocket, remove 4 nuts, slid off old box, then slide on NEW box.

DONE

How much and when? My issue as of now is I have to take down the existing dish and replace it with a regular one and then tranfer the RF armor radome to the new dish because of the rocket shields (I now have stacks of them in the office). I have both the older and newer versions and as of now I was going to instead of replacing the dish just get longer SMA cables and mount the AF directly to the tower standoff. These new covers would be an option now as well.

Sirhc - any thoughts about overheating of the AF-X? I have heard comments both ways on the UBNT forum saying its OK and will not over heat and others saying it is a bad idea.

It will not overheat!

Now if I was putting them up in Death Valley or on a rooftop in Vegas in direct sunlight I would take the time to paint them white otherwise no issues.

That answers that then. Now when will they be available through resellers for purchase?

I have run my first AF-5X pair covered by RF armor shields for several months now. And it has been summer here. The box is daily in direct sunlight. No problem at all....