Does the ePMP 400C require antenna? We have 2 to link over a small 20m range but they do not connect. When setup in the office they did.
Our Cambium distributor recommended these as an available product but didn’t state the need for antenna.
Yes, the “c” stands for connectorized, so you will need an antenna.
For such a short distance, it is enough to do as in our picture.
Make four pieces of cable with an RP-SMA connector.
Cut so that the total height with the connector is a few cm.
Remove the outer insulation and wire shield to a length of 15 mm.
Best Regards
Thanks for confirming.
Without having to knock up something myself, would something like this be sufficient?
https://www.wifi-antennas.co.uk/5dbi-2-4-5ghz-alfa-dual-band-omni-antenna-rp-sma
Two on each 400c
A paperclip will be enough for bench testing. For 20m, a pair of wifi replacement antennas would work well and dispite the frequency difference they wont harm the radios.
LoL. Did the distributor sell F400c without antenna?
1 Like
AndriiAndrii_KhmelnytskyiCambium
LoL. Did the distributor sell F400c without antenna?
I don’t get it… since when did any “c” radio come with an antenna (Ok F110 was a connectorized radio and antenna/reflector kit but that’s it).
Edit: Ok I get it, they may have recommended F400c (connectorized radio that does not come with an antenna) instead of F425 (conectorized radio ? that does come with antenna).
1 Like
You sure they didn’t recommend ePMP Force 425 ? That one comes with an antenna ( though I have never bought one so I don’t know if it is like the old F110 where you get a connectorized radio (F400c) and an antenna/reflector or if it is more like the F200 and F300-25).
I’m sure.
Originally we were going to use a Siklu product but there were supply issues.
So a new Distributor to us recommended the F400c
Should have done a little bit more research but we were on a deadline and expected them to come up with something suitable based on our requirements 
As close at the radios are going to be those ducks or really almost anything would work. At 20m (meters not miles right ?) a cheap set of Mikrotik 60Ghz radios would probably have been a good solution (less likely to have issues with interference like 5Ghz, especially 5Ghz with an Omni antenna).
Force 425’s are more akin to a 300-25 – a radio/antenna combination solution. The dish and radio need to be assembled, so I guess they are ‘kinda’ separate inside the box, but it is a dedicated wave guide horn type of assembly. So NO, not connectorized like the Force110. They are a complete radio/antenna solution once assembled.
The Distributor dropped the ball on the advice. The Force 400 series really moves the bits… but they should have sold you some antenna. Of course, at 20 meters, anything will do fine. A couple WiFi stick antennas should be fine. Or small panel antennas… pretty much anything should link fine. If you get the modulations to DS11, you’ll move a LOT of data.
Below is an example… chunking along with 965 Mbit.
3 Likes
That’s a really nice throughput chart!!!
Any chance we can create a case study around it?
Thats awesome! Stock taking too long to get to us in Africa.
Channels? In ePTP mode right?
1 Like
Yes, the 965 Mbit is in 80 Mhz mode.
Yes, currently, the Force425 and Force400c only have the ePTP mode… there are no TDD or PtMP modes quite yet. But the Force400/425 are for PTP links only with the current firmware.
We find the Force400 series to be about 150% the speed of the Force300’s. So Force300 topped out in fairly perfect conditions at nearly 300Mbit aggregate in 40Mhz mode, and nearly 600 Mbit aggregate in 80Mhz mode. With the 400/4000 series, if you can get modulations to MCS11 we get about 450 Mbit (40 Mhz) and 900 Mbit (80 Mhz) – so they really move the bits.
But as with most things Cambium, there are kinda ‘fatal flaws’. They would be great and much more useful if they had a 60 Mhz mode.
They would also be great if changing the slightest thing in the config didn’t entirely drop the whole link. Heck, change the GUI from Miles to KM (which is 100% just a cosmetic display setting) and that better knock all traffic off the link for a few minutes downtime. Meanwhile, every other product we have can do MUCH more complex things, such as change channels seamlessly, without missing a single ping.
Anyway – the point is that they really move the bits for sure. Get the modulations dialed in to MCS11 and they HAUL A$$.
1 Like
Yes, the 965 Mbit is in 80 Mhz mode.
Yes, currently, the Force425 and Force400c only have the ePTP mode… there are no TDD or PtMP modes quite yet.
ePTP mode is insanely efficient. I’d just like TDD to get QOS over the links.
We find the Force400 series to be about 150% the speed of the Force300’s. So Force300 topped out in fairly perfect conditions at nearly 300Mbit aggregate in 40Mhz mode, and nearly 600 Mbit aggregate in 80Mhz mode. With the 400/4000 series, if you can get modulations to MCS11 we get about 450 Mbit (40 Mhz) and 900 Mbit (80 Mhz) – so they really move the bits.
Thats pretty awesome. I can’t get a hold of any yet because of AX chip shortages, but link planner gives a good indication of performance on the F400 equipment. Throw in an Ultrahorn and distance will become much less of an issue for the higher modulations.
But as with most things Cambium, there are kinda ‘fatal flaws’. They would be great and much more useful if they hade a 60 Mhz mode. They would also be great if changing the slightest thing in the config didn’t entirely drop the whole link. Heck, change the GUI from Miles to KM (which is 100% just a cosmetic display setting) and that better knock all traffic off the link for a few minutes downtime.
I doubt there will ever be a 60ghz failover on any ePMP equipment. Far better to have 5ghz for 60ghz. 5ghz doesn’t have the same distance limitations as the 60ghz. Maybe cnWave with 5ghz failover. F400 came to market quite quickly vs other generations, and we’re talking about real world performance, and IMO the use of the F400 should be remain acute.
Meanwhile, every other product we have can do MUCH more complex things, such as change channels seamlessly, without missing a single ping.
Yeah, but unlikely at the same price point. This can be done with FPGA based kit… But I do agree that without this sort of radio level mechanism you’d end up ruling out versatile QOS and DPI. If DPI works as it should in subsequent releases, its going to open up the market for tailored applications and products.
PM me the kit you’re referring to 
… Don’t say UBNT or you’ll be laughed out the building.
As mentioned, the Force 400/425 are currently only for PTP links… no MultiPoint use yet. Thus they don’t need any QOS in PTP mode. But yes, hopefully they release a 400 series SM soon which can be used on our existing 3000 AP’s, and we can start populating them with AX clients.
I was actually talking about a 60 Mhz WIDTH mode. I realize that’s just about as unlikely. But the competitive products have much more options of channel widths other than just 20, 40, 80 Mhz. Having 20,30,40,50,60,80,100 makes some of the competitive products attractive if that’s what the local spectrum allows. If Cambium even just had a 60 Mhz wide mode, that would go a LONG way.
All I’m talking about is NOT having to tear down the entire link, for the simplest of changes in the GUI. Changing the display from KM to MILES really doesn’t require knocking everyone offline now, does it? We can’t make the simplest changes without disrupting the whole link… and that includes the PTP550 (dual radio). My point was (if @Cambium_Anyone is listening??) that these are fatal flaws. How are you supposed to tweak channels on a PTP550 or a Force400c backhaul? Can’t make ANY change, not EVEN cosmetic changes in the GUI, without knocking everyone offline for several minutes.
Really? Can’t point out a necessary feature, without being laughed out of the building. Nice.
But yes, virtually everything else we use (yes, including the AF5xHD) can change channels without losing link. This is a feature that even now defunct products such StarOS and many other products had 15 years ago in a $50 radio… it’s not a matter of price point, it’s a matter of Cambium realizing how critical that is for the front line WISPs, and Cambium making it happen.
I’m not a UBNT fanboy at all - we don’t use any 5Ghz UBNT PtMP gear anywhere… but that doesn’t mean we can’t look at their gear and their GUI and their features, and implement what’s needed. And yes, on the UBNT AF5xHD PTP products, you can change channels and it can be seamless.
Apologies to Andrew Manning… this has strayed from your question about antennas. Yes… you need an antenna on a 400c, and if you can get the modulations to MCS11 solidly, you’ll really love the speed of the 400’s. 
1 Like
@ninedd Thanks for your thoughts on the subject. Good to get some other perspectives. Re UBNT… I obviously speak for myself. I have a ton of experience with their products, as well as Mikrotik, and IMHO, UBNT metaphorically speaking, charge a fee for access to their sandbox…
Apologies to Andrew for hijacking this thread! 
. I’ve had really good experience with RF Elements Ultrahorn antennas.
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.