Go to Post My most distinct memory was watching Tom fix our robot's frame... by whacking it with the hammer. - Jaine Perotti [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-12-2013, 14:23
EricWilliams EricWilliams is offline
Registered User
FRC #2039 (Rockford Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 103
EricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of lightEricWilliams is a glorious beacon of light
Re: 3.6GHz 802.11y for Competitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnets View Post
1. 3.6GHz is a licensed channel, so first would have to pay.
2. The problems (excluding those of Einstein 2012) aren't caused by interfering signals.
3. If implemented properly, normal 802.11n should work fine, even with lots of other networks happening at the same time. Instead of making it more complicated to fix the problem, FIRST should resolve the current issue.
The fact that it's licensed is stated in the proposal. Many telecommunication technologies require an FCC license for use - the reason these bands/services are licensed is to protect the users from interfering signals. As that's the point of this proposal, I feel it's an acceptable cost.

From the FCC site (http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...&id=3650_3700), it appears the filing fee would be $60 + $150/Call Sign - at worst, this is less than $2000 (somewhere between $50 and $100 per team) These events cost money - the A/V budget alone for some events would most likely be mind boggling. I think that's a reasonable price to pay to ensure that the command & control network remains isolated and secure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magnets View Post
Overall, the 3.6GHz solution requires too much work (money, new radios...) in order for something that may not be the right solution, may make the situation worse, or could be resolved another way.
I don't agree, or at least don't find enough evidence to support that statement in your comment to summarily dismiss the idea.

As for going back to some type of custom hardware/radio: that completely undermines the biggest benefit of going away from the 900MHz radios - that teams can use standard COTS equipment for development/demo/practice/off-season events. I'm suggesting simply swapping out the bridge before you bring the robot out onto the field.
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:29.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi