Extend an aerial?

[calzor suzay]

I have an RT-68U as a slave in a mesh, for logistical reasons it sits in the corner of the house (brick built 1960s) and produces a great signal across the downstairs and most of the garden.
Problem is I have a WiFI birdbox which is about 12' away exactly out of the corner of the house and the signal suffers as a consequence, ping times are rubbish etc. Therefor the streaming ability suffers and I lose all the action much to my 4 years disappointment.
If I move the router temporarily to the window, wires everywhere, balanced on 'stuff' and can't close the curtain etc it perks right up.

Can I buy one of these kenable WiFi Antenna EXTENSION Cable/Lead Wireless RP SMA 0.3m 30cm SHORT [0.3 metres]: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo @ 2.5m long and extend one of aerials to the window?

 

[drinkingbird]

The antennae are a system, so moving a single one like that will cause your overall signal to suffer. It may work to get that camera working but your other wireless will have issues. You could extend all 3 but at that point a small window mounted AP or repeater near the window would make more sense. It *might" work ok, but it would be pure luck if it did.

You'd have better luck looking at the antenna in the birdbox, if you can re-aim it, add a reflector behind it, etc. Or on the 68U try different antenna configurations, while the "W" is the recommended setup, having one parallel to the floor, one straight up, and one at 45 degrees may make a difference. Turning the router different angles can help too.

Your brick house likely has chicken wire behind the brick which acts as a faraday cage and blocks nearly all RF, leaving only your windows to pass signal (which also will attenuate the signal quite a bit. So basically you need to try and get as much signal to go through the window as possible.

 

[BreakingDad]

If I move the router temporarily to the window, wires everywhere, balanced on 'stuff' and can't close the curtain etc it perks right up.

Sorry that made me laugh, sounds like the kind of thing I would try. Even back in my cb radio days, sticking a car aerial out the window to speak to my mate on the other side of town.

 

[Morris]

Are you aware that the microwave used to be called a radar range? That is because the microwave signals such as the 2.4 Ghz band cooked birds near the antenna.

 

[Tech9]

The antennae are a system

Antennae:

Antennas:

 

[drinkingbird]

Are you aware that the microwave used to be called a radar range? That is because the microwave signals such as the 2.4 Ghz band cooked birds near the antenna.

Those were much more powerful and typically run in the 10GHZ+ range. Personally I do believe that all these RF signals are definitely affecting us and wildlife, but I'm far more concerned about the 5G mmwave, satellites, etc running at much higher freqencies. But a 100mw (if that) wifi is not going to cook a bird in its lifetime.

 

[drinkingbird]

Antennae:

View attachment 40365

Antennas:

View attachment 40366

You put way too much effort into that. I've always used the first, and know many others who do also. Others always use the second. Was there any bit of confusion which I was referring to? I guess if I was an RF engineer instead of network engineer I may be more picky about it, but I'm not.

 

[Tech9]

Was there any bit of confusion which I was referring to?

I just want to make sure you don't hurt any animals.

 

[drinkingbird]

I just want to make sure you don't hurt any animals.

Well OP is already killing birds with RF radiation apparently so too late for that.

 

[calzor suzay]

This isn't the one I have but find it highly unlikely the RSPB would sell a WiFi bird box if they weren't safe...
RSPB WiFi camera nest box system - Garden bird nest boxes - save nature while you shop

 

[BreakingDad]

Are you aware that the microwave used to be called a radar range? That is because the microwave signals such as the 2.4 Ghz band cooked birds near the antenna.

I wondered why I keep finding roast chickens outside.

 

[Morris]

Those were much more powerful and typically run in the 10GHZ+ range. Personally I do believe that all these RF signals are definitely affecting us and wildlife, but I'm far more concerned about the 5G mmwave, satellites, etc running at much higher freqencies. But a 100mw (if that) wifi is not going to cook a bird in its lifetime.

Connect your laptop on the 2.5 GHz band next to your microwave and then see what happens to pings :-}

 

[drinkingbird]

Connect your laptop on the 2.5 GHz band next to your microwave and then see what happens to pings :-}

Right, the microwave is 1100 watts, the wifi in the birdhouse is probably like 0.1 watt.

They're getting cooked a lot more by the 5G mmWave antenna nearby, the various satellites, heck even high voltage power lines will give you cancer over time.

The phenomena you're referring to was many decades ago and extremely high powered, concentrated signals. They've revised things to be safer, though if they crank up the power and focus it to try and find something small or with radar avoidance it could definitely still burn or kill a human or bird that is very close to it. Legend has it soldiers in WWII even got cancer from hanging out near the antenna to stay warm. What they didn't realize was it wasn't that the antenna was putting off heat, it was that it was cooking them slowly.

If the same bird lived there for 50 years, I'd say its chances would be increased for health issues, but don't think it will cause any effects over their expected lifetime, not even on the eggs. Now humans on the other hand, we're screwed. Nobody wants to acknowledge why cancer rates have skyrocketed in the same timeframe that wireless signals have. Now they're letting Verizon put 30ghz antennas (used the preferred spelling that time) on every pole.

Long story short, birds are fine, we probably aren't.

 

[Morris]

Right, the microwave is 1100 watts, the wifi in the birdhouse is probably like 0.1 watt.

They're getting cooked a lot more by the 5G mmWave antenna nearby, the various satellites, heck even high voltage power lines will give you cancer over time.

The phenomena you're referring to was many decades ago and extremely high powered, concentrated signals. They've revised things to be safer, though if they crank up the power and focus it to try and find something small or with radar avoidance it could definitely still burn or kill a human or bird that is very close to it. Legend has it soldiers in WWII even got cancer from hanging out near the antenna to stay warm. What they didn't realize was it wasn't that the antenna was putting off heat, it was that it was cooking them slowly.

If the same bird lived there for 50 years, I'd say its chances would be increased for health issues, but don't think it will cause any effects over their expected lifetime, not even on the eggs. Now humans on the other hand, we're screwed. Nobody wants to acknowledge why cancer rates have skyrocketed in the same timeframe that wireless signals have. Now they're letting Verizon put 30ghz antennas (used the preferred spelling that time) on every pole.

Long story short, birds are fine, we probably aren't.

I recall the early safety guides that were included with Cisco WAPs. Never get closer than 7 1/2 inches from the antenna when the device is on. Were is the antenna in a laptop? How about your phone and how close is it to your brain? Oh well, who needs to be safe. Just get in a car and hope nobody decides to make a mistake

 

[drinkingbird]

I recall the early safety guides that were included with Cisco WAPs. Never get closer than 7 1/2 inches from the antenna when the device is on. Were is the antenna in a laptop? How about your phone and how close is it to your brain? Oh well, who needs to be safe. Just get in a car and hope nobody decides to make a mistake

I'm not disagreeing with you, quite the opposite. All this RF radiation is not good for anyone. Just saying it isn't going to cook an animal over the course of a year.

Plenty of scientific evidence as to the ill effects of long term RF exposure. Never mind your brain, keeping you phone in your pocket decreases fertility (and I'd be willing to bet increases birth defects).

But it isn't going anywhere, just getting worse every day.

The 7.9" spec isn't Cisco, that's an ANSI thing that applies to all RF systems under a certain wattage (1 maybe?). According to the spec, your phone should never be less than 7.9" from you, ha. You'll find that buried in literature for many RF devices to cover their butts.

 

[Morris]

I'm not disagreeing with you, quite the opposite. All this RF radiation is not good for anyone. Just saying it isn't going to cook an animal over the course of a year.

Plenty of scientific evidence as to the ill effects of long term RF exposure. Never mind your brain, keeping you phone in your pocket decreases fertility (and I'd be willing to bet increases birth defects).

But it isn't going anywhere, just getting worse every day.

The 7.9" spec isn't Cisco, that's an ANSI thing that applies to all RF systems under a certain wattage (1 maybe?). According to the spec, your phone should never be less than 7.9" from you, ha. You'll find that buried in literature for many RF devices to cover their butts.

Yep, and Bill Clinton signed an executive order that frees electric utilities from the harm there transformers do. Otherwise large sections of the electric grid would need to be moved

 

[thiggins]

ok folks. Thread has gone way off-topic. Closing.