Ubiquiti NanoStation LOCOM5 Vs Ubiquiti NanoBeam Vs Ubiquiti LiteBeam Vs MikroTik Wireless Wire

• 

  Switchblade88 on 15/01/2020 - 14:27

  I've got a LOCOM2 as a client connecting to an Asus RT-AC68U inside over a similar distance. This was due to needing an ethernet point for a hardwired only device.

  In a separate location, I've got a LOCOM2 acting as an AP from about 50m to multiple clients (phones, iPads etc). In this case, all the clients have wifi capability and the beam width (60 degrees, I think) was ideal for the whole building needing coverage.

  Both use cases work great, and being able to switch between modes is fantastic for flexibility.

  I'd suggest a pair of LOCOM5's connected at unit 1 (you could have gotten away with 1 if the buildings were inline!). Ideally, you won't need any other hardware in units 2 and 3 as the LOCOM5's should be able to punch through the entire building. You might not even need to mount them externally; just plug them in and aim in the general direction of each unit.

  • 

    DoctorCalculon on 15/01/2020 - 15:25

    LOCOM5 at each of the three building units, or just a single LCOMO5 attached to the router with internet connection?

    • 

      Switchblade88 on 15/01/2020 - 15:44

      In your case, start with two LOCOM5s attached to the primary router. Point one to unit 2, and the other to unit 3. Set them both up as APs (the firmware uses funny terms for the different modes, I think it's labelled as 'station').

      This'll be the most flexible minimum investment to make, as if it's not sufficient then you have easy upgrade paths from here if the signal isn't adequate.

      • 

        DoctorCalculon on 15/01/2020 - 15:47

        I guess I can always try as you have suggested above, and if the signal strength attenuates due to the brick walls turn up the dBi all the way up.

        I think it's labelled as 'station'

        Station for AP mode instead of PtP or PtMP for bridge modes.

        • 

          Switchblade88 on 15/01/2020 - 17:28

          @DoctorCalculon: If it doesn't work well in AP mode, then I'd switch it to client mode and use it within units 2 & 3 connected to secondary wifi APs for devices to access. This makes each LOCOM5 into a virtual ethernet cable.

          Worst case - usually reserved for longer distances - would be a LOCOM5 at each end as a direct connection, and a secondary AP - but this seems unnecessary for the distances on your MSPaint diagram!

          • 

            DoctorCalculon on 15/01/2020 - 17:38

            @Switchblade88:

            This makes each LOCOM5 into a virtual ethernet cable.

            Agreed. This is what I was intending to do by having them mounted outside the buildings of unit 1 and 2. However, at a distance of 4 - 13 meters the power on them will need to be turned completely down so that they are not shouting at each other with lots reflections.

            My fear of having them inside is signal attenuation due to those damn brick walls.
            Do you think the LOCOM2 or the LOCOM5 units should be okay punching through multiple walls considering they are designed for longer distances (1km+)?

            • 

              Switchblade88 on 15/01/2020 - 18:12

              +1

              @DoctorCalculon:

              Do you think the LOCOM2 or the LOCOM5 units should be okay punching through multiple walls considering they are designed for longer distances (1km+)?

              Absolutely fine. Whilst not always the case with tech, in this case the signal's 'punching strength' is the same as its 'throwing distance'. In my second example (with the LOCOM2 as the AP) it's non line-of-sight, through two double-brick walls. The narrow beam really makes a difference compared to domestic unipolar APs.

              As I said, a LOCOM5 at each end will be absolute overkill. And I reckon having the two of them inside unit 1 should be enough even without mounting them outside.

              • 

                DoctorCalculon on 16/01/2020 - 02:15

                @Switchblade88: Just taking another close look at the data sheet for the UBNT NanoStation LOCO M Series:
                http://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/nanostationm/nsm_ds_web.pdf

                The beamwidth for the LOCOM2 is: 60° (H-pol) / 60° (V-pol) / 60° (Elevation)
                The beamwidth for the LOCOM5 is: 45° (H-pol) / 45° (V-pol) / 45° (Elevation)

                Another constraint is that the three building units are all double-story houses.
                Therefore, it may be best to use the LOCOM2 as this model has a wide beamwidth.

                What are your thoughts on this?

                • 

                  Switchblade88 on 17/01/2020 - 01:21

                  +1

                  @DoctorCalculon: Beam width probably isn't critical in your use case; it's not a hard edge so you still get plenty of reception outside this angle. Besides, a tighter beam will actually help with signal strength to reach the far sides of the other units!

                  Simple way to check is mentally drawing a 45 degree angle on your floor plans, and again on your elevations. Maths tells me that you'll have full vertical coverage at about 10m from your LOCOM5 if it's on the ground floor carpet in unit 1.

                  • 

                    DoctorCalculon on 17/01/2020 - 08:30

                    +1

                    @Switchblade88: You are right. +1
                    Both elevations will reach the second stories. However, the tighter beam form is probably more important for wall penetration and longer distance coverage.

• 

  stirlo on 15/01/2020 - 16:13

  "The distance between the two buildings is no longer than 4.5 meters, probably 13 meters at most as I will be placing the antennas on the garages of the two buildings."

  How are you so sure the AX6000 from your previous post won't work? This distance is tiny and any Wifi/RF solution is going recommend line of sight which won't work with the concrete walls you mentioned anyway.

  Regardless I can outline my situation which might assist. not wanting to pay full price for NBN100 I setup a point to point link between my house and a neighbor 5 doors down (~75m) using Ubiquiti LBE-5AC-gen2 which cost about $120 each. We both get full 100Mbps internet while sharing the cost and have had the system working 2.5 years through rain hail and shine without an outage.

• 

  DoctorCalculon on 15/01/2020 - 17:31

  How are you so sure the AX6000 from your previous post won't work?

  I have had to return the TP-Link Archer AX6000. Whilst I could connect to it from the second building opposite the one with the high speed NBN, the speed was terrible and there would be drop outs (i.e. not a stable connection thanks to the two brick walls in the way). I am looking at buying the ASUS RT-AX88U next, which has better range and speeds in comparison. I have not bought it yet.

  Regardless I can outline my situation which might assist. not wanting to pay full price for NBN100 I setup a point to point link between my house and a neighbor 5 doors down (~75m) using Ubiquiti LBE-5AC-gen2 which cost about $120 each.

  Almost the same situation as mine except the tiny distance between the two points.

  We both get full 100Mbps internet while sharing the cost and have had the system working 2.5 years through rain hail and shine without an outage

  I am guessing you have direct line of sight without any obstructions.

  • 

    stirlo on 16/01/2020 - 08:45

    +1

    The line of sight isn't perfect there are a couple of bushes/trees that are a little in the way but generally I can see other dish from the the first one. I never needed to do any tuning/optimisation, just turned them on and pointed them in the general direction of each other. I found a spec sheet ages ago that said they can go up to 20km so I figured that with such a tiny distance LoS probably isn't essential and so far that's been correct.