4.9 GHz licensed in US?

Products PTP
1

I'm looking for a good low-jitter low-latency radio link on the 4.94-4.99 GHz US public safety band. The key application is (digitized) audio, so high throughput is not critical, but low loss is.  There aren't that many radios that bother with this band. But I see that the PMP 450i has gotten FCC approval. Nice, but the AP end is really expensive for use as a point to point link. PTP 450i looks like a much more reasonably priced PtP link, and the 23 dB integrated antenna is just about right. (We have a lot of very old PTP 400s and PTP 300s, so the P/S user community is familiar with the breed.) But I don't see the PTP 450i on the FCCs approval list. The spec sheet shows FCC ID as TBD.

So is FCC 4.9 GHz (Part 90Y) approval in the works for the PTP 450i or any other current (not old Canopy) Cambium radio besides the PMP 450i?

2

If your customers are familiar with the PTP 300 and PTP 400 then the PTP 650 might be a very good option for you.  The PTP 650 is the current high performance PTP solution and ideal for public safety applications as described.  The PTP 650 has the lowest latency and jitter, and highest spectral efficiency, available.  You can find additional information at http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/products/backhaul/ptp-650/

The PTP 450i has in fact been certified by the FCC.  We will post the grants shortly under http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/Regulatory-and-Homologation/bd-p/Regulatory for your reference.

Scott

3

I'm glad the 450i is homologated. I had tentatively determined that it was, based on the PMP 450i's documentation which showed that the two units were the same hardware, and presumably share the FCC ID QWP50450I .

The 650 is just an order of magnitude too expensive to take seriously. I'm sure the hand-polished wood (so shiny it looks like plastic) in a Rolls-Royce doesn't come cheap either, but it's not necessary.  I trust that a PTP 450i will still have jitter <10 ms., and good RF performance in the crowded urban environment, at least as good as the alternative we're looking at which is based on a Wi-Fi chip but doesn't have 5 or 10 MHz channel width options.