I was just wondering if there is a High Powered Wifi Repeater that will allow you to broadcast a Wifi Signal Much like a Repeater Antenna up on a tower?
And is there legalities against doing so?
And is there legalities against doing so?
High Power Wifi?
- Thread starter SKYNET156
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,352
there are power limits, they vary by band but you can look them up on the FCC site. there are illegal amps available, but expect any WISPs in your area to quickly turn you in should you use one.
also using repeaters in the same band will cut your thru put in half since they have to handshake both directions.
also using repeaters in the same band will cut your thru put in half since they have to handshake both directions.
If you have a ham radio license you can operate high power on the 802.11 band (channels 1-6 only) as they are also 2.4GHz ham freqs.
But it limits what you can use the connection for, no music, p*rn, business activity ect.
But it limits what you can use the connection for, no music, p*rn, business activity ect.
KJ6HCB
Member
Ah, finally a topic on this, hadnt seen much 
I have plans to do something similar - a local citywide personal WISP. Definitely in the planning stages, but I know HAMs have access to certain part of the 802.11 as mentioned above.
I have a tower site available about a half mile from a property I own with high speed wireless internet to it - I plan to setup a bi-directional link between that property and the tower site, and then broadcast the signal out into the city in a 90º area, about 6 miles total distance.
With up to 30 watt 802.11 amps available (over $5k each ) and high gain dB antennas, I think Ill be able to have a roof mounted 2.4 Ghz antenna on my roof of the vehicle along with a 10-15 watt amp in vehicle and at tower site and have wireless internet in the whole city.
Definitely in the early stages but I would like to do something similar.
I have plans to do something similar - a local citywide personal WISP. Definitely in the planning stages, but I know HAMs have access to certain part of the 802.11 as mentioned above.
I have a tower site available about a half mile from a property I own with high speed wireless internet to it - I plan to setup a bi-directional link between that property and the tower site, and then broadcast the signal out into the city in a 90º area, about 6 miles total distance.
With up to 30 watt 802.11 amps available (over $5k each ) and high gain dB antennas, I think Ill be able to have a roof mounted 2.4 Ghz antenna on my roof of the vehicle along with a 10-15 watt amp in vehicle and at tower site and have wireless internet in the whole city.
Definitely in the early stages but I would like to do something similar.
KJ6HCB your plan sounds like something that's not going to work like you want. Remember that WiFi traffic goes in both directions. You may be able to broadcast a WiFi signal to the whole city but the WiFi devices in that city will not be able to transmit back.
KJ6HCB
Member
Why not Jack? 802.11 amps in both the "receiving" vehicle in town, and at the towersite.
Obviously anyone without an amp in the city would be able to see the SSID (if I chose to broadcast it), but not be able to connect.
http://www.l-com.com/productfamily.aspx?id=6056
Obviously anyone without an amp in the city would be able to see the SSID (if I chose to broadcast it), but not be able to connect.
http://www.l-com.com/productfamily.aspx?id=6056
Your base or tower is going to broadcast with a MUCH stronger signal than the WiFi device (iPad, iPod, computer). So your receive amp at your tower is going to be dealing with a MUCH worse signal-to-noise level. Yes, your amps will give you a greater range but no where near the 6 miles you are talking about.
Now if you just want to have a 2.4 GHz transceiver at the tower and in your car then it should work. But it won't work with WiFi devices, their transmit power is just too low.
Now if you just want to have a 2.4 GHz transceiver at the tower and in your car then it should work. But it won't work with WiFi devices, their transmit power is just too low.
KJ6HCB
Member
Yes, the only intended purpose is to have high speed internet while inside the vehicle with the in car computer linked to amp/external antenna.
I could, however, route that incoming connection to an in-vehicle router which should in theory carry that signal and repeat it to the routers range from the vehicle.
I used to have this identical setup in my last Tahoe, with Verizon aircard providing the signal - I would just like to replace that system with my "own" Internet.
I could, however, route that incoming connection to an in-vehicle router which should in theory carry that signal and repeat it to the routers range from the vehicle.
I used to have this identical setup in my last Tahoe, with Verizon aircard providing the signal - I would just like to replace that system with my "own" Internet.
W2PMX
Member
But not back from the router to the tower, and wifi won't work unless you have two-way communication. That's why the way it's done is many low-power devices spread throughout the area. If the router/laptop can't transmit back to the base unit, it just won't work, regardless of how much power the base unit transmits with.
KJ6HCB
Member
Why couldnt it transmit back? The amps are bi-directional - one mounted at the transmitting tower site, one mounted in vehicle.
Ref-Jazzy
Member
Think about it this way. Your tower only knows how to scream and listen. The devices in your car/truck/bike etc only know how to listen and whisper.
If you were standing in the end zone of a foot ball field with a mega phone and i was on the opposite endzone. while you were yelling I could probably hear you. However if I only whispered back you would never hear me.
If you were standing in the end zone of a foot ball field with a mega phone and i was on the opposite endzone. while you were yelling I could probably hear you. However if I only whispered back you would never hear me.
KJ6HCB
Member
You seem to be missing the AMPLIFIER in my VEHICLE so BOTH the TOWER and VEHICLE can SCREAM and LISTEN.
OCO
Member
Speaking of screaming, you might peruse the SVWUX webpage's opinion about power output in the 2.4 GHz band.. You would be limited to less power than you think.. One other question - will it just be "TS" for any other WIFI users in this town while your blotting out the band with a private link? Seems a little questionable..
KJ6HCB
Member
Im aware of the legal power outputs - this is all "in theory" discussion of course.
There are amps readily for sale up to 25W in the 2.4Ghz band....
Also ways to not transmit a SSID so it would be somewhat invisible.
All in theory.
"Transmit power
Part 15 sets a hard limit on transmitter power within the 2400-2483.5 MHz and 5725-5850 MHz bands: 1 Watt. Amateur radio operators are not allowed to exceed this, except in certain cases:
To aid in the mitigation of an emergency
Overlap on licensed bands
In the 2400-2483.5 MHz band, amateur radio has been licensed a small chunk for use with amateur television (2390-2450 MHz). This roughly corresponds to channels 1 thru 5 of the 802.11 specification. On these channels, amateur radio operators can exceed the 1 Watt of transmitter power by using external amplifiers connected between their equipment and antenna. However, on all other channels in that range, they must abide by the 1 Watt restriction defined under Part 15.
The one place where amateur radio operators really win big is antenna gain. There is no gain limit on the antenna used by an amateur radio operator -- that is, there is no power reduction if the antenna gain exceeds the limits defined in Part 15. "
There are amps readily for sale up to 25W in the 2.4Ghz band....
Also ways to not transmit a SSID so it would be somewhat invisible.
All in theory.
"Transmit power
Part 15 sets a hard limit on transmitter power within the 2400-2483.5 MHz and 5725-5850 MHz bands: 1 Watt. Amateur radio operators are not allowed to exceed this, except in certain cases:
To aid in the mitigation of an emergency
Overlap on licensed bands
In the 2400-2483.5 MHz band, amateur radio has been licensed a small chunk for use with amateur television (2390-2450 MHz). This roughly corresponds to channels 1 thru 5 of the 802.11 specification. On these channels, amateur radio operators can exceed the 1 Watt of transmitter power by using external amplifiers connected between their equipment and antenna. However, on all other channels in that range, they must abide by the 1 Watt restriction defined under Part 15.
The one place where amateur radio operators really win big is antenna gain. There is no gain limit on the antenna used by an amateur radio operator -- that is, there is no power reduction if the antenna gain exceeds the limits defined in Part 15. "
Last edited:
Ref-Jazzy
Member
Best of luck to you, However, it wont quite work as well as you like and like the last fellow said. it will end up being TS for any one else wanting to use the band. Which I feel is against our best practices has hams. You wouldn't like some chap coming in and shutting you out of a band because they had more power than you.
While I applaud you for the very base principal of trying to create a abnormally large private data network, I also think you that you will be disappointed with the results, at least in your vehicle.
A local PD here tried that on 2.4 (installed numerous sites all over the City) and found that they got more bandwidth from Verizon's then current 1xRTT than their own 2.4 network (unless they were parked right at one of their sites). They also used 1W amps in the cars with external antennas. One of the problems was the absolute hash of noise in that part of the spectrum from Wi-Fi, cordless phones, wireless mics, wireless video and a host of other cheap unlicensed consumer products.
A local PD here tried that on 2.4 (installed numerous sites all over the City) and found that they got more bandwidth from Verizon's then current 1xRTT than their own 2.4 network (unless they were parked right at one of their sites). They also used 1W amps in the cars with external antennas. One of the problems was the absolute hash of noise in that part of the spectrum from Wi-Fi, cordless phones, wireless mics, wireless video and a host of other cheap unlicensed consumer products.
In the last few weeks I have seen both sprint and T-mobile hot spots routinely get 12mbps down and 4-6 upload speeds around the south denver metro area, and as far as the op's idea--it won't work for all the reasons mentioned.
About 5 years ago I used to mess around with a high gain yagi on 2.4 with a 10' piece of 9913 with a N connector on the antenna end and a reverse SMA pigtail that would mate with the wireless card and I could see over 100 open wireless connections, but those days are over now because people have smartened up
I don't even use wireless anymore--the whole place has a 10-100-1000 ethernet jack in every room.Ref-Jazzy
Member
I used to do a lot of war driving. I had a pretty rad rig. I had a 12 db antenna on my laptop and a gps receiver. I could drive around and see networks from a few blocks away. The program would keep track of signal strength and keep track of where each network was via gps, So I could open the info google earth and see where i found them. I had a map of my neighborhood and the surrounding areas wifi networks. I could see which ones were open and which were locked down. It was a good time, but alas my wifi adapter i had for the laptop vanished off the face of the earth.
KJ6HCB
Member
An Orinoco Gold with NetStumbler I bet?
I should mess around with war driving, I havent in a longgg time haha
I should mess around with war driving, I havent in a longgg time haha
Ref-Jazzy
Member
It was a usb dongle with a removable antenna. and i used a program called kismet, it is way more advanced than netstumbler. Kismet is a passive packet sniffer. Not only could i see the network but i could see the traffic as well. Made a blog entry? I can read it. Looking at porn? I can see it too. Looking up butt scratchers I see that too.
It was a pretty rad program. I never used it for bad, it was mostly grey hat stuff. Also some 'black' hat with a friend. I would crack his wep sniff some traffic and then email it to him. while connected to his network. He walked over to my house with a piece of paper with my wep key on it and just laughed.
good times good times.
It was a pretty rad program. I never used it for bad, it was mostly grey hat stuff. Also some 'black' hat with a friend. I would crack his wep sniff some traffic and then email it to him. while connected to his network. He walked over to my house with a piece of paper with my wep key on it and just laughed.
good times good times.
- Status
