Ask Slashdot: Updating a Difficult Campground Wi-Fi Design? 237
MahlonS writes "I am a retired network hack wintering in my RV in a campground in southern GA. 3 years ago I reconfigured the Wi-Fi system to a marginal working ability; It's now ready for a serious upgrade, prompted by a new cable net connection replacing a weak DSL. 5 dual-radio HP Curve access points connect to a 6th via single or double radio hops (effectively a Wireless Distribution System) in heavily wooded space. Unidirectional antennas at the APs (the APs are in water resistant enclosures) are placed on poles above the RVs, about 15 feet above ground. Primary hops are about 300 feet to 3 of the APs, secondary hops about the same. Signal measurements indicate that there is adequate RF between the access points. In 2008, average user count averaged about 30 users; newer devices (smart phones, etc) will likely increase that number (winter population total is about 80 RVs). While the old design worked OK when lightly loaded, I suspect that the single DSL line generated so many packet resends that the APs were flooded. This is a quasi-State Park, so money is always an issue, but there is enough squawk from the user community that a modest budget might be approved. The main AP connects to an old Cisco router. Burying wire is frowned upon, due to shallow utilities, and campfire rings that float around the campsites — sometimes melting TV cables. Since I'm not up on current Wi-Fi tech, are there solutions out there that would make this system work much better?"
Openmesh (Score:4, Informative)
I'd look into some of the fairly inexpensive openmesh routers...they're great for extending networks (or running jasager).
http://www.open-mesh.com/ [open-mesh.com]
Too high (Score:5, Informative)
Lower your transmitters a little. Signals propagate horizontally (perpendicular from the antenna), this is why you need to have an AP on each floor in a house to get good signal. Not because you're on different floors so much as the signals just aren't going in the right directions.
I know you're trying to broadcast over the RVs, but going over them also means no signal is getting to them in this case.
Re:Too high (Score:4, Funny)
The wi-fis are too damn high! [i.qkme.me]
Re:Too high (Score:5, Interesting)
Too many outdoor deployments are radiating out their best coverage over everyone's heads. (You can also tilt the antenna a bit, but then you're essentially just painting stripes of coverage on the ground, which isn't ideal either.)
Re: (Score:3)
Lower your transmitters a little. Signals propagate horizontally (perpendicular from the antenna), this is why you need to have an AP on each floor in a house to get good signal. Not because you're on different floors so much as the signals just aren't going in the right directions.
I know you're trying to broadcast over the RVs, but going over them also means no signal is getting to them in this case.
He'd have to have seriously high gain antennas for 15 feet to be too high. I once set up a temporary Wifi network where the only accessible mounting locations were 45 feet off the ground (with 2 mounting locations about 50 feet apart), and people were going to be standing within a 150 foot radius of the Wifi nodes.
We used standard 7.5dB Omni's and got great coverage throughout the space even when standing directly under one of the Wifi antennas and 50 feet from the other one. We thought we'd have to tilt t
Re: (Score:2)
Not just this, but without external antennas the aluminium shells are going to block a good bit.
Re:Too high (Score:5, Informative)
Fiber (Score:2, Interesting)
It sounds like you're broadcasting from one access point to another, instead of from a wired connection to each access point.
Just run fiber to the access points. It's cheaper than you think, and forms a guaranteed, secure connection. Good for a mile, and it doesn't care about EM interference of any sort.
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Informative)
Why fiber and not cooper?
Lightning. Za Pow!
Never run a piece of copper from one building to another if you can at all avoid it.
Re: (Score:3)
There's this new technology that's been around since the 1800's. It's called running a ground wire. You're supposed to connect it to ANY conductive cable that spans the distance between buildings.
When it was first implemented in the 1800's, it was considered demonic, since the wrath of God was no longer taking out church steeples.
If you're doing this sort of stuff without following code, you shouldn't be doing it.
-----
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Informative)
All wire has resistance and inductance. A high current nearby lightning strike will induce voltage and current in nearby conductors. This is why you never stand near a metal fence in an electrical storm. The fence may be grounded at both ends, but in relation to the nearby ground the fence can be lethal. One of the biggest strikes I had to clean up was a radio station transmitter. The antenna was properly grounded. The local utilities were properly grounded. A nearby lightning strike blew out diodes in the power suppy and there was obvious arc marks between the utility ground and the utility neutral. On the other end of the wire at the AC panel, the neutral is bonded to ground and connected to the building ground. The final in the transmitter was fine. The power suppy took the hit with the high voltage differential between ground and ground due to the high current. On the wall, there was arc marks between the coax to the antenna and the upper ground ring in the room. There were several points of arcing between ground and ground. Two panels on the wall showed explosive discharge between the frame of the panel and the conduit between them, even with the ground wire in the conduit in the panels tying them together. Transformer action into the conduit created high current in the conduit. Conduit joints and box to conduit joints showed arc marks. A semiconductor anything in that area would have taken the hit. Just tying it to ground doesn't work for high energy pulse discharges.
Re: (Score:3)
There's this new technology that's been around since the 1800's. It's called running a ground wire. You're supposed to connect it to ANY conductive cable that spans the distance between buildings .... If you're doing this sort of stuff without following code, you shouldn't be doing it.
LOL you just described a stereotypical way to fail NEC, if you want to pass NEC for multi-building single phase, you have to run neutral and hot between buildings and have a bonded separate ground at each building. You don't "need" to run a ground between buildings and it becomes just another lightning pickup conductor in a storm, so you probably don't wanna. And there are some horrible dangerous ground loop phenomena explaining why you shouldn't.
The bld inspector, if he's any good, will give you a extrem
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Interesting)
True, didn't think of that. Anyone know what the price diffference is between something like Cat. 6 and fiber?
Darn near zero. Seriously. $1 to $3 foot indoors for both, outdoors is usually strictly quote basis.
Again your experience may vary but the other difference is cat5/6 usually is terminated for "free" as part of the deal and fiber is usually terminated for like $25 per connector (in other words $50 flat fee added cost for one complete working cable). Also some CPE needs weird connectors, so many contractors will pull the fiber and let you figure out your bizarre escon-fiber or whatever, if you aren't using something standard that they can terminate.
Some fiber places want to charge extra to OTDR verify, some even try to charge extra to give the results to you.
Get a couple bids.
Stereotypes: Electricians do a great job of grounding aerial leader line and pull so hard they damage both fiber and cat5 (cat5 isn't exactly the 0000 gauge entrance facility they're used to). Also electricians have no comprehension of EMI/RFI and will run cat5 wrapped around the dirtiest industrial power line and light units. Electricians are also stereotypically poor at terminating. Geniuses at pulling cable and fishing and whats best described as "stupid conduit tricks", not so good at termination.. The "LAN/WAN/server" guys generally cannot waterproof outdoors to save their life, assume it'll leak if they get involved. The vertical market cable contractors who do one thing and one thing only are not terribly mentally flexible and freak out if you want to do anything other than bog standard cubicle wiring. All stereotypes have an element of truth and might be useful to recall when negotiating your contracts.
Re:Fiber (Score:4, Informative)
Having pulled cable for a number of years I can tell you that you can pull on both fiber and copper until your eyes bulge from your skull, you aren't going to hurt it. I've seen 24-strand SMFO pulled taught by a truck driving at 10MPH with no damage to the cable (OTDR verified).
I know outside plant is infinitely tougher than inside. 20 years ago I shattered some escon by exceeding the min bend radius under a raised floor, got a talking to from the bosses boss, and this was literally dropping it in place and lightly one hand tugging for slack control. The OTDR showed the shatter right at the under floor turn so it was all me... Supposedly even just whipping escon could shatter it, donno about that.
Pull straight on single mode and you are correct you could probably hang from it quite easily. At least in the olden days, min bend radius was like 2 feet so take the same fiber and wrap it around your hand and try to hang from it and it'll shatter instantly.
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Informative)
Fiber can be purchased rather cheaply. It's really worth it for outside runs. As someone else said, lightning strikes.. Even the extra equipment required (transceivers, fiber ready switches, etc) can be purchased fairly cheaply on eBay.
I did it to replace a mess of copper and wireless between offices in a complex once. If I remember right, it was something like 600' of fiber for about $200. I did it in segments, so if someone were to damage one segment, it could be easily replaced. For their end points, I picked up a lot of 6 Cisco Catalyst 2924's with 4-port 100baseFX cards. I think the total price on switches was $300, and that let me replace all kinds of consumer-grade crap switches.
His problem with fire pits and the like can be reduced by laying the fiber along the edge of the roads, and burying at a sufficient depth. Hell, they run power and water to each campsite already. Parallel runs to existing infrastructure would be fine. Fiber doesn't have that nasty tendency to pick up inductive signals.
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Interesting)
My parents (who live in the suburbs of Atlanta), had lightning hit a tree along the fence at the back of the yard. As far as we can tell, the electricity traveled along about 100ft of fence to the powered gate and blew its way into the control panel (on a wooden post 6in from the gate). The cover on the panel was literally blown off (it ended up about 15ft away from the control panel). From there we believe that it went through the power lines (for the gate) back to the detached garage. In the garage it went from a phone into the phone lines that went back to the main house and were terminated in the low voltage panel. Somehow from there it got into the ethernet network and fried 2 hubs and an ethernet port on their desktop computer.
There is no way for me to know conclusively that this is what happened, but a lightning strike on a neighbors tree (it was on their side of the fence) 30 feet from the detached garage, and 50 feet from the house fried the controls for the gate, a phone in the garage, and 2 hubs and an ethernet port in the house (I think we discovered later that some old caller ID units also got fried, and we think it was probably that strike). No one died. There were no fires. CPR was also not necessary. Probably about $500 - $600 worth of damage.
I think he should worry about lightning strikes.
Re:Fiber (Score:5, Interesting)
I live in Florida. Actually, the greater Tampa area. The area is known as the lightning capital of the US. Some say world, but apparently NASA found that Rwanda currently beats us. In either case, we have to be very aware of lightning, and its dangers. Even in areas with less frequent lightning strikes, they should still be a concern.
I don't know of any homes or structures, mobile or otherwise, that have burned down because of a lightning strike. The only people that I've known of who have suffered health issues due to lightning were standing outside. You know, folks playing golf in a thunderstorm.
Over the years, I've had to repair and diagnose lightning strikes. I know electricity wants to go to ground, and if it were a chain link fence with steel posts, it should have gone to ground immediately. But after some of the things I've seen, it doesn't always.
The most convoluted trail I followed was an overhead coax cable, that lead to a video digitizer. The lightning jumped to the network card, over the ethernet cable, through the switch, out another cable, and to its victim. You could see the burn marks on the network card, video card, and motherboard. There were two network ports damaged. The overheard cable, and the first machine it passed through were fine. The people on the other end of the overhead cable stated they heard an explosion, and saw a shower of sparks from the camera it was attached to. Oddly enough, the camera was fine.
Pretty much, don't give more ways than necessary for lightning to get to anything else. Surge suppressors are nice, but for as many as I've seen destroyed, I know that they're just a nice decoration.
our setup (Score:5, Informative)
we've got 5 outdoor ruckus ap's spread across our park. (fairly cheap too)
http://www.ruckuswireless.com
they'll mesh with indoor wifi ap's if you don't want to run ethernet to each one individually.
the "smart antenna" design is actually pretty good. it supports dynamic beamforming, multiple signal paths etc. basically it just takes the path of least resistance, which helps a lot when dealing with a lot of walls/trees etc.
you can give them a call w/ any questions you might have.
Re: (Score:2)
2000 usd per access point from the look of the link.
Layers (Score:4, Informative)
Try to eliminate any double hops via short cable runs and/or smarter backbone placement.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I agree with the separate networks, i would go further and use different freq band to go to the netework.
If you can get get line of sight to the aps you could use a 5.8 signal to go from point a to b. ubiquity seems to have some cheap direction radio+antenna combinations.
Wire or overlay (Score:2)
From what I got your primary AP (1) connects to 3 secondaries (abc) and 2 more connect those (23). They are dual band are you repeating only over the 5ghz segment on a different ssid? Routing rather than bridging as people tend to just directly connect to these so limiting your broadcast domain is a must. 3 wires out to a b and c should do wonders, you might want to try power line networking for those wired connections since you will reuse your existing AC wiring, keep the 5ghz as a backup.
Re: (Score:2)
you might want to try power line networking for those wired connections since you will reuse your existing AC wiring, keep the 5ghz as a backup.
If power to the wireless access points all ends up at the same breakerbox, powerline networking would be the way to go in my book. Aaron Z
Marketing / Security (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a quasi-State Park, so money is always an issue, but there is enough squawk from the user community that a modest budget might be approved.
because they can pull money from the marketing budget first as a lure to get people to come as a checkbox feature, secondly because you can install $100 wifi webcams at the "cool places" (pool, lakeshore, whatever) so visitors from the UK feel comfortably spied upon and the promotional web page can have "click here to see the scenic lakeshore live!" buttons.
also they can pull a little money from the security budget, because the webcams can monitor boring yet important locations like the bar's cash register, the general store cash register, the service entrance, the equipment shed (the $20K nuclear propelled lawnmower, tanks of gas for the mower, etc)
Engenius APs (Score:3, Informative)
What's the equipment? (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand, if you think the DSL router's doing crazy stuff, maybe you should focus on making it not do that crazy stuff.
uBiquity (Score:4, Informative)
I don't think one vendor will supply everything that you need, but you definitely need to take a look at uBiquity. We've used their NanoBridges in studio-to-transmitter links several times and have been pleasantly surprised. The stuff is ridiculously cheap -- so cheap that we honestly wondered what could be wrong with it until we tried it. (Less than $160 for a pair of NanoBridges!)
Ubiquity's Website [ubnt.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Ubiquiti, with an "i", not a "y." Sorry.
Check out Ubiquiti... (Score:4, Informative)
Ubiquiti [ubnt.com] has some very cool products and customer support, you might want to look into their gear.
If you can get line of site from the remote sites back to the central site you should use 5Ghz for the backhaul, and 2.4Ghz for the client side radio. This will reduce your interference. Also, the backhaul should use _very_ directional antennas since the two endpoints are known. This will also prevent interference. It doesn't sound like any of your distances are enough to require a multi-wireless hop, although your sight lines may require it. Avoiding a double hop will increase performance.
You'll also want some intelligent QoS on both the WiFi and cable modem side. You don't want one user to be able to make the experience really bad for all the other users. For instance, if you had a 20Mbps cable modem you might want to limit any one IP/MAC to 5Mbps, or so. WRED or similar can also be your friend. Make sure there is a good local DNS server, as well
Re: (Score:2)
At the risk of posting essentially a dupe - Not in dense tree coverage, he doesn't.
5GHz works great in opens spaces, but degrades horribly without line of sight. In this case, lower frequency will work much, much better.
I'll second Ubiquiti (no, I don't work for them, but they have good cheap gear), but go with their 900MHz gear for the backhaul.
Test, and isolate. (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds like you don't exactly know where your problems are, so how can you solve them?
My advice would be to do some serious analysis of what's going on in your network. Hook up an ethernet sniffer to your internet connection and see what's going wrong. You suspect it's a lot of retransmissions do to the DSL, well find out if that's true. Consider buying a cheap spectrum analyzer (wi-spy can be had for under $100). Track when you get problems, and where. Throwing money and equipment at the problem is more likely to waste money and equipment than solve the problem. Since you're retired, it sounds like you're more short on money and equipment than you are on time to analyse and diagnose the problem.
Once you actually know what the problem is, then you can go out to the wireless community and ask for a solution. K You're seeing a lot of very, very different solutions here because people are guessing what the underlying problem is, largely based on what's worked for them. Obviously you can't follow all of them, but which one should you try? Knowledge is power, and ignorance is folly.
Time slicing backhaul (Score:2)
Sounds like what you really need here is to separate your "backhaul" form the APs. Sinc
Re: (Score:2)
In some places, an RV park is little more than a parking lot with a power pedestal, a water spigot, and a place to plop your sewage hose.
And some hotels are little more than a filthy bed with a window that opens up to an alley where hobos sleep and you share a bathroom. There is a shitty variety of everything.....what's your point?
RV-ing is definitely not camping, unless one is a boondocker, and has a rig capable of boondocking (the ideal is a truck camper or a nimble tent camper that the Aussies use behind their 4x4 vehicles. Second to that would be a "toy hauler" because those models tend to have larger water and waste water tanks, as well as a built in gasoline tank and generator [1].
So you think a tent camper is best, but a gigantic thing with a bunch of presumably unused space in the back is the second best? And you think that toy haulers have larger fresh/gray/black tanks than a non-toy hauling travel trailer? I can see why you posted AC.
900MHz FTW. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Except microwaves kill 2.4ghz not 900 mhz
Then do it right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop being lazy and run freaking wire between the locations. you already have power there so you can run wire. you can use phone wire which is cheap and use ADSL modems for the links, again cheap.
Honestly there is no magical wireless setup that will handle the load, you have to run wire if you want to avoid performance issues.
Re: (Score:2)
I was going to post links to the modems at Blackbox but discovered that single mode 2 pair fiber for outdoor is CHEAPER than buying copper CAT3.
Run fiber. It's far FAR cheaper and you never have to upgrade. and termination is brain dead easy and cheap now. I can terminate 24 fiber ends in less than 1 hour at lower than $3.00 an end, plus tools needed is less than $350.00.
Fiber is the answer unless you have dry pairs of copper in place. Then you can do it cheap by buying old smartjacks and routers to get
stronger signals may mean fewer hops (Score:2)
You might try outdoor grade signal boosters. I've had some decent luck with them. There's no substitute for power. That might reduce the number of hops, improving latency and cutting down on retries.
Re: (Score:2)
I first read that as "cutting down on retirees". Chainsaw campsite fantasy, back down in your hole!
Split into two networks... (Score:2)
One for distrobution of service, the other for devices connecting.
I.E. each "point" will have 2 AP's, one which consumers directly connect to, the other which just communicates with other AP's on the site....
Quasi State Park? (Score:4, Interesting)
What's a "quasi-State Park"? Obligatory "Georgia is a quasi-state" joke.
What is that area really? Does Georgia allow people to live on public lands, even allow/provide utilities (however shallowly buried the wires) including cable TV and now wireless Internet? Do they make you move somewhere else to summer, after you winter in S Georgia? How often do you have to move? Do they charge you anything, like property taxes? Do you receive US Mail to your local address?
The setup sounds wonderful. Or maybe we're talking about the (maybe not so) ex Communist country Georgia.
Snark aside, my questions are serious. And it does sound wonderful.
Re: (Score:2)
So the public, which "owns" the park, loses. While the state "wins" by shafting the public. Of course the only winners are private companies. Alaska, Republican paradise.
Mobile Home or Trailer? (Score:2)
OK, so Slashdot is answering your WiFi questions. How about telling us whether you get a better home out of a mobile home (integrated motor and driving seats, etc) or out of a trailer that you rent a car to haul the few times a year you actually move.
Re: (Score:2)
All depends on you. A class "A" rig with a "toad" (towed behind car) is good for a lot of people who fulltime because hooking and unhooking is easier. However, a 1 ton pickup with a fifth wheel is also a nice solution, especially if the RV will be parked for longer periods of time (fewer things to maintain on a trailer than a motorcoach).
If you like getting away from it all, a truck camper (some truck campers like the Chalet ones have multiple slideouts, and can give more usable inside space than travel t
Re: (Score:2)
So why not use a big trailer, without including in it the parts necessary for driving it, and just rent a truck for when you infrequently move it? Why haul around and store onsite two vehicles that will be used for such a small fraction of the time? Tow behind it a tiny car, like a 2-seater electric, and rent a small trailer for any occasional hauling (eg. firewood or major shopping). Some people might need the vehicle part more often, but it seems to me that "mobile homes" spend the large majority of the t
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of people actually do this, especially in areas that are booming, but housing is unavailable, like the oil boom in North Dakota right now.
They buy a high end fifth wheel, have it towed and put in place, extend the slide-outs, and use it as a home while their job is going on.
Ubiquiti Networks - hands-down, IMO (Score:4, Informative)
Look at ubiquiti's stuff. M5 Wireless bridges out to to the AP's and UniFi [normal or long-range] for the clients.
www.ubnt.com
Nanostation M5 [5Ghz]: http://ubnt.com/nanostationm [ubnt.com]
UniFi: http://ubnt.com/unifi [ubnt.com]
Not as slick as Ruckus or some other stuff, but incredibly cheap. [Bridges are about $200 for a pair - and super solid, massive through-put. UniFi is about $70 per AP.]
You also get the ability to help pay for the system via UniFi. [Paypal subs, no admin reqd. Vouchers for "free" use etc.] That's all included for "free" in their system.
Plus you can use Pico's for outdoor use. Already weather-proof.
[I've not run the Pico's - so check it out in the forum: http://www.ubnt.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=48 [ubnt.com] - you should be able to get your answers there.]
It's really some of the best bang-for-the-buck for non super-high-density WiFi use around, IMO>
-Greg
Do Like The WISP Do (Score:2, Interesting)
I work with a local WISP and they use Mikrotik products running on all three bands (900MHz, 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz) and they provide networks for many campgrounds and parks along with coverage for over 11 counties. Using 5 radios with omni antennas and doing a WDS mesh or relay you could blanket the whole park for less than you think. Ubiquiti radios are okay but they don't offer the management and configuration options like Mikrotik products.
Wireless and trees (Score:2)
Wireless and woods don't mix. Obviously, the only technological and economically viable solution is to cut down the trees, sell the lumber, and use a single AP with a nice powerful omnidirectional antenna.
But seriously, its quite astounding that no one seems to be working on this very real problem, wireless and woods (or wireless with obstructions). I guess the neato factor of wireless, that it works at all, is blinding everyone to the fact that it doesn't work when something is in the way. Someone really
Re: (Score:2)
You could drive 50 miles in any direction from my house and not find 4G. We just got 3G six months ago and only on AT&T.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely, any snowbird that can afford an RV can afford a 4G connection?
I don't think the OP's question was "how can I encourage everybody at the RV park to get a 4G connection for $80/month each." It was "how can I upgrade the RV park's WiFi network to improve the coverage everybody already gets in the park."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I live in the western US and I know of plenty of places without even vz coverage.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people take their retirement money and buy an RV and live cheaply and travel around in their old age.
There's nothing CHEAP about an RV.
Re: (Score:2)
An RV is a pothole in the road, into which you throw money.
Typical Slashdot Snobbery (Score:3, Funny)
Ah, getting back to nature and disconnecting.
Ah, posting on Slashdot instead of reading a book.
Re:Typical RV park (Score:5, Insightful)
Gives you something to do when it rains. Been there, done that. Not just directly, but indirectly, now a days you internet search for the closest stir fry place or whatever. Oh look we ran out of propane and the onsite general store sells one pound cans for $10 a piece and walmart 2 miles away sells them for $2 and we could pick up some more food at the community grocery store.. road trip!
Much as its nice to momentarily disconnect and go on a walk in a park, sometimes on vacation its nice to momentarily reconnect.
My parents mostly used it to upload pictures. "see, he caught a fish" that type of thing.
Read the summary (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not there to get back to nature and disconnect. He's WINTERING there. - a place that he's already configured once for WiFi three years ago and now he wants to upgrade everything.
Re:Typical RV park (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think "communing with nature" is the point. I think cheap accommodation is. People like to be able to travel around the country in a moving "house." I once met, for instance, a guy who drove around the US for a year with his wife, with a camper hitched to the back of a small pickup, in order to see the country and, among other things, decide where they'd want eventually to settle down. I get the impression that many retirees, likewise, buy campers and go touring. It seems like a reasonable enough thing to do. I'd be curious to know what would be cheaper: that, or traveling in a fuel-efficient sedan and staying at Motel 8s.
Re: (Score:2)
A double room is $80-100 a night. I'm very certain there's a point (factoring in the cost of the RV) where you do way better. I mean, say an RV is $80,000 - that's 100 nights in a motel. People have certainly taken RV trips for much longer than 100 days. And even when you factor in the maintenance costs (cars, usually around $3 -$20 a day) and fuel, RVs will probably still come out on top in the long run.
Re: (Score:2)
A double room is $80-100 a night. I'm very certain there's a point (factoring in the cost of the RV) where you do way better. I mean, say an RV is $80,000 - that's 100 nights in a motel. People have certainly taken RV trips for much longer than 100 days. And even when you factor in the maintenance costs (cars, usually around $3 -$20 a day) and fuel, RVs will probably still come out on top in the long run.
$80000 / $80 a night = 1000 nights, not 100 However, that number does drop when you factor in the resale value of the RV.
Re: (Score:2)
1000 nights isn't at all unreasonable over the life of the RV. My retired parents have been RVing full time for close to ten years. That's over 3000 nights. Most RV parks (the ones old people would want to stay in, anyways) charge a fee to stay, nowhere near as much as a motel, but still something.
Re: (Score:3)
You're right, thanks. I've been up for way, way too long and messed up something trivially simple.
It kinda makes the whole NASA satellite debacle look a little more sympathetic to me now. The dude probably just needed some coffee...
Re: (Score:3)
RV+fuel cost of $80,812 + park cost of (30*5*365) $54,750 = $135,562
car+fuel cost of $32,564 + motel cost of (65*5*365) $118,625 = $151,189
For our fictional ballpark numbers, that makes the RV solution about $15k cheaper.
Re:Typical RV park (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Doc Ruby must be a worker drone who hates to see people enjoy life. Come on, Doc, I've worked for 40 years now. I've served my country in the military. I've paid my taxes faithfully, if grudgingly. I've voted, I've led boy scouts and girl scouts, I've raised a family.
If I were to buy a bike, and hit the dusty trail tomorrow, if I were to head down to Daytona to hang with the motorcycle crowds for a few months or years, you would accuse me of being a bum?
Sounds to me like you need to try living for yours
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, neither pay property taxes, but the apartment rent is higher than the property taxes it's used to pay. This is a "quasi state park". State parks in NY [nxtbook.com] charge for camping less than 25% of what I pay here in property taxes. And far less than what my old apartments' rent included for its share of the building's property taxes.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, not all "campgrounds" are for roughing it.
There are plenty of people who's second home has wheels. For those who aren't familiar with the word "snowbird", it's where people from the northern US and Canada head down to the southern US states and Mexico during the winters. If you have the luxury of leaving your house for half the year, it lets you live in the areas with nicer climates year round.
I'd rather be in Florida all winter, where you'll never see a
Re: (Score:2)
What type of transit bus? New look?
Re:Typical RV park (Score:4, Interesting)
1982 GMC RTS-04 [goo.gl].
I picked it for a few reasons. The biggest was the additional interior space. The cabin is larger than the MCI's. It doesn't have subfloor storage, as built at the factory, but it does have dead space in each section that measures about 5'x8'x2'. It just needs a floor and supports fabricated, and exterior doors built.
It's about 3' shorter vertically than the MCI's, which will help get down most streets without hitting tree limbs. Pretty much, if a school bus or UPS/FedEx truck can drive the road, so can I.
I also wanted a vehicle with a strong diesel motor. These come with a few options. Mine has a DD 6v92TA (552ci, turbocharged and supercharged), with an Allison 3 speed automatic transmission. Most of the city buses come with gearing that doesn't allow for a top sped over 60mph. It cost a few bucks, but I had it regeared for highway use.
Last time I moved it, I was driving down the interstate perfectly happily, with my car in tow on a flat trailer. (I had a trailer hitch welded on). I was perfectly happy cruising at 75mph in the right lane. Well, until one car decided the speed limit must be 45, and stayed parked in the right lane doing that. When I had a safe chance to pass, I did. The overall vehicle length was 65' because of the trailer, so I had to be very careful changing lanes. I passed 85mph when passing, and I could still accelerate. I only wanted to get around him, and back to my cruising at the speedlimit. Even with the car in tow, it felt like driving an average full size passenger van. Acceleration, braking, and handling were all there. Actually, I've driven full size vans that didn't handle as well. :)
Knowing I *can* do over 85 is nice. I don't really *want* to go fast in it though. It's pretty much an aerodynamic brick. Slightly sexier curves, but that doesn't help much.
At the moment, I have about $4,500 invested total. I bought it on eBay for cheap, did some mechanical things, and a bit of interior work. I have to finish the interior, and infrastructure work (power, water, sewer, LP). Some lifestyle things have changed, so I have to redraw the floorplan before continuing. I no longer have the wife, two kids, and two dogs. Now, I have a girlfriend, no kids, 4 cats, and the possibility of a half dozen or so friends wanting to go on weekend trips. :)
Re: (Score:3)
Use the perimeter fence with directional antennae pointed in. If your facility is so huge that the perimeter can't reach the center no matter how fancy the AP and antennae, that's why you have fiber runs to the usually centrally located main buildings. The pool has a fence ringed with antennae pointing outward. The stereotypical bar/restaurant/general store at the center is ringed with antennae pointed out. The stereotypical office / front gate at the entrance is ringed with antennae.
In summary, if its
Re: (Score:2)
My parents do a lot of RVing, too, and I've joined them on trips, and I'm not sure I've ever seen any RV park with a "perimeter fence" around it. Especially not in a forested area like the OP describes. Also, he discounted the possibility of fiber runs, because he can't run cables underground and hanging cables get damaged. As for mounting APs on structures, I assume that's what he's doing now.
Re: (Score:2)
He mentioned this. He says there are already TV cables strung tree-to-tree, and the problem is that they occasionally get melted by heat from the various fire pits around the property. It seems to me he could still investigate using cables as much as possible, though...
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I got a solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Your opinion is valid. It's also subjective and irrelevant. And GP's post was rightly modded down for the same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Opinions don't deserve to be modded down just because they are opinions. If that is the standard, your opinion on opinions deserves to be modded down.
As for wifi in RV parks -- I'm not an RVer, nor do I desire to become one. However, people who go to RV parks aren't likely trying to connect with nature. They are more likely trying to "get away" much like people who use hotels do, except t
Re: (Score:2)
No, it was downvoted because it didn't answer the question, and therefore was irrelevant.
And yes, my comments in this thread deserve to be downvoted.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a wide spectrum of RV-ing out there. You can hit a RV park which essentially is just a parking lot with hookups. Or, you can go to a BLM dispersed camping site that is 100 miles away from anything and is only accessible by a 4x4 pickup with a camper on it, or a Jeep with an Australian made tent trailer.
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly gave you the impression that I'm a woman?
Re: (Score:2)
And how did you arrive to such conclusions?
Re:I got a solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Putting wi-fi in a campground is contrary to its purpose. I don't care if the asker and the editors failed to notice this. I don't care if that rains on someone's little parade. It's a dumb idea. Whatever you're doing there, it isn't camping. It's using the Internet outside. That's my genuine opinion, and not only is it as valid as the asker's, it's more valid because it's more consistent with what a campground is for. Some ball-less soul-less sack of shit will mod me down anyway because he hasn't the guts to argue against me, but that's okay.
Except that a lot of people in RVs full time. That means their RV is their primary, and only, home. As such, they need access to their bank accounts, friends, relatives, news. For most people who full time, a campground with wifi is essential, at least once in a while.
My sister lives aboard a sailboat. Full time, all over the world. Wifi is huge for her. Without wifi, we do't know if she's alive or not. We have an RV; we don't fulltime but after 9 days it's nice to do laundry and catch up on world news.
We also backpack and spend a lot of time in the wilderness, so I'll stack my "camping creds" against yours any day. When was the last time you were in the wilderness, with a 2 day hike-out to the nearest trailhead? Are you spending your thanksgiving next to your computer, or in the high desert 20 miles from the nearest town?
Re: (Score:2)
Then they aren't camping, are they Sparky? They're in a mobile home. What I said wouldn't apply to them.
OK, if you say so. Last time I checked, a mobile home and an RV are two different things, but I guess not. Hmmmm.
As for the cell phone tethering, that might work for some but not for others. Last I checked, cell phone coverage wasn't universal; it certainly isn't for me. And I pay for a campground so I'm not exactly "depending on random strangers"; I'm paying for a service.
Re: (Score:2)
depending on random strangers
You mean like 4G network operators? I guess you must roll your own mobile broadband service.
Getting back to seriousness, most RV campgrounds cost money to stay at, and the money you pay pays for services like Wifi, kinda like the money you pay to Verizon for your 4G. This sounds a lot like what the OP was talking about.
Good luck with your radical self-reliance, though. I hope you have time to weave your own clothes while you're growing your own food and designing your own computers.
Re: (Score:2)
Putting wi-fi in a campground is contrary to its purpose. I don't care if the asker and the editors failed to notice this. I don't care if that rains on someone's little parade. It's a dumb idea. Whatever you're doing there, it isn't camping. It's using the Internet outside.
Not everybody at a camp ground is trying to disconnect. Some do it because it's cheaper than a hotel.
Some ball-less soul-less sack of shit will mod me down anyway because he hasn't the guts to argue against me, but that's okay.
Don't take it personally, he could just as easily be modding your post down because you're wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh you can mod it down because he didn't go along with the premise and you just can't stand that ... but it's the fucking truth. Whoever modded this down is a pansy girlie-man with no functional testicles as evidenced by his inability to deal with a contrary opinion.
Evidently you can't stand the moderator's opinion that the parent is off-topic (personally I think it got off lightly). Is your resultant rant irony or rank hypocrisy?
Putting wi-fi in a campground is contrary to its purpose.
You mean providing network access where wires are expensive or otherwise inconvenient? Wi-fi sounds ideal.
Some ball-less soul-less sack of shit will mod me down anyway because he hasn't the guts to argue against me, but that's okay.
You got a -1, stop whinging and deal with it like everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
Get off your High Horse.
Campgrounds serve a number of different purposes to different people. And the degree to which one wants to "get back to nature" depend on the individual. Wi-Fi is certainly well within the modern concept of a campground.
And why, if you're all into the get-back-to-nature thing to the degree that you seem to be pontificating, why are you at a campground at all? I mean with all those modern conveniences like, you know, hot showers and fulshable shitters? And what about that pay phone?
By
Re: (Score:3)
What you're saying is that I don't deserve Internet access because I I don't live the way you want me to.
Get over yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Were you born an asshole, or just well trained?
Re:Wireless N would help (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.open-mesh.com/ [open-mesh.com] .11G mesh, $60 for a router and another $20 for the outdoor enclosure.
The single band series is
The dual band does N, $100 for a router and $40 for the enclosure.
Either way you get mesh networking that's really damn simple to configure and has a public and a private network. Public can be open or encrypted, supports individual bandwidth limits, and has a splash page feature for logins or selling airtime. Private network is encrypted and unrestricted.
Love mesh networking. No cables, network topography isn't set in stone, you just toss another router into the mix wherever needed and you can cover wherever you want.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.open-mesh.com/ [open-mesh.com] .11G mesh, $60 for a router and another $20 for the outdoor enclosure.
The single band series is
Mesh is great in urban environments where property rights restrict you from crossing roads and other people's land.
But mesh really makes very little sense in this environment. Its a fairly obscure technology, and getting it fixed and keeping it running may be problematic when the campsite geek's RV pulls out for the season.
Look, they have power to all of these router anyway. Why not STRING the cable or use WIFI over Powerline to feed the routers?
Putting in ground-burial cat5e [cat-5-cable-company.com] is not that hard and poses no
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, this. I've installed two OpenMesh networks (and one non-Open Mesh network in a forest that used to be all WiFi but we went partially VDSL).
Running VDSL (or fiber) would be best, but if campfires are going to melt them, then an meshed WiFi is your best bet.
OpenMesh is especially useful because it's "cloud" based - you make an account with them, the AP's all check in with their server to see whose network they belong to, and then they auto-configure everything. Since you're only wintering there, you ca
Re: (Score:2)
This immediately comes to mind, though admittedly I'm not good with wireless. My concern with this idea is will it fit your budget.
>
Depending on tree cover, 802.11n may not buy him much. 5Ghz gets attenuated by tree cover more than 2.4Ghz, and staying 2.4hz bonded channels reduces bandwidth for his backhauls.
May also want to swap out the router, depending on how old it is.
He said his ethernet conncetion is DSL -- it would have to be a seriously old router that can't keep up with typical DSL speeds. I've got a 12 year old Cisco 2514 that would be fine for DSL routing.
Power Over Ethernet (Score:3)
Combine that with Power Over Ethernet to run the APs, and the whole shebang is totally wireless!
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, you have provided very little information about the terrain.
RV camping in GA == WalMart parking lot.
It isn't really camping unless one of your neighbors gets dragged out of his tent by a grizzly occasionally.
Re: (Score:2)
Does Meraki's equipment work installed outside, in a campsite? Or would it have to be installed inside the trailers? How about booster mesh points between trailers too distant for a single hop to work?
Re: (Score:2)
Meraki has outdoor access points available, but I think they cost more. Several RV parks here in British Columbia switched to Meraki this summer and have dramatically improved their reliability over their previous systems (purely anecdotal...other than knowing they went to Meraki, I don't know what else they changed or how much "better" it is, I just noticed I could connect consistently and with usable bandwidth, unlike before when it was hit-or-miss).
Re: (Score:2)
So Meraki is basically WiFi equipment you rent and that's managed remotely by the Meraki company across the Internet?
Re:Xirrus WiFi - worth a look (Score:2)
I'll second the Xirrus arrays as being a good option. We use them in a school environment - so very different to what you require - but they do have several features which may be of use to you... The arrays all come with multiple radios (4, 8, 16 etc) and some of these can be configured to 'back haul' your data with a directional antenna while the other radios in the array provide a multi-directional network for your clients..
The outdoor enclosures also look really good - temp controlled and a rugged d
Re: (Score:2)
Wireless-N is probably not a necessity since it's bandwidth is probably much larger than your pipe to the outside world. There is some benefit to having the "last-mile" to the end user to be the bottleneck. so that one person can't gobble up all your cablemodem's bandwidth. Or you need to setup QOS or throttling to ensure a fair distribution of bandwidth. I guarantee at least a few of the RV'ers will try running NetFlix movies, at which point you're back to square one with people complaining that the in