[rescue] Poor Man's WiFi extender
Sheldon T. Hall
shel at cmhcsys.com
Mon Oct 25 12:30:53 CDT 2004
Lionel Peterson writes ...
> The cable runs required for a meaningful amount of diversity
> would most likely ruin any chance at getting a meaningful
> signal to the antennas (using one network device)
A-yup. Although I'd only have to compensate for the bridge on most ships,
the larger cruise ships, and the aircraft carriers, are tall enough to block
the signal for most of the length of the ship.
> why not
> deploy two APs with Cat 5 strung between them? Of course, to
> ensure signal continuuity, you'd have to do a bit of
> math/charting... imagine a boat in the middle of the inlet(?)
> of average size, then draw lines originating at your office
> on one side of the inlet, with one crossing through front of
> the ship, the other through the rear of the ship, and
> continuing the lines to your side of the coast (this will
> measure the "shadow" cast by the ship when it eclipses your office.
That might exceed the legal length of Cat5 for 10BaseT.
Puget sound is about 8 miles wide where we are. An aircraft carrier is
about 1,000 feet long, and the channel they use is about in the middle of
My trig's pretty weak, but that sounds like a 2,000 foot spread on my end.
If I owned 2,000 feet of water-view property here, I'd just buy the phone
company and tell 'em to move their OC-3 to a more convenient location, like
> > Alternatively, buying a cheap 30' tower for your antenna from Radio
> > Shack or whatever might fix the problem completely.
I do have a 40-foot mast here, and we've run a WAP up it to good effect.
However, I've got decent DSL now ....
More information about the rescue