been struggling with this for a long time, personal issues have kept this at a 'beta' stage for quite some time so I decided to just post this somewhat raw and hope that I get some constructive feedback in return which will (hopefully) mend the usuability of this thread in the long run.
In this case I was looking to improve on the throughput I was getting via some PtmP links by substituting some client's CPE510s (CL) primarily being served by CPE510s (STA) within a 30º horizontal beamwidth. Aiming for the CPE610 on the CL sides seemed like the logical thing to do and so I started off by ordering one piece to test how things would go in the beginning and take it from there in case I was satisfied with the results.
Having used the CPE610 in CL mode in two different installations so far all I can say is that I'm getting pretty mixed results - which don't really make much sense. Let me elaborate to draw a clearer picture.
The setup is such that the CPE510 (STA) is aiming midway at +/-15º to the positions being served by the CPE610s in CL mode. Having achieved the best aiming one could hope for and whereas the receiving SNR on the CPE610 does indeed improve by a factor of about 30%, as does the downstream throughput I'm really struggling to achieve anything even remotely close to parity with the CPE510 when it comes to upstream. Best-case scenario upstream is -30% in BOTH SNR and throughput which is a big letdown to say for sure. Knowing that the CPE610 incorporates a 6-8º horizontal beamwidth I'm beginning to think that the CPE510 horizontal inclination differential is to blame (the CPE610 pointing towards the CPE510 precisely - however the CPE510 being off by 15º at best)...However if that's the case then why is the CPE610 such a strong performer when it comes to downstream since the same logic applies (yet inverse the CPE610 being on the receiving end here)..
I'd really appreciate some comments on this since at this stage I'm a bit puzzled by the contrasting results..