Thanks guys for your help.

The exact problem is that I use two flats in the same block - one for
living in, and one for work - on the same floor - but separated by a
long corridor. The WiFi signal gets half-way along the corridor and
then disappears. My phone socket and WiFi router (and printers) are
all is in the work flat. I'd like to use the PC in my living flat. But
there is no WiFi signal there.

But I've actually been beaten by not being able to attach the SMA
connectors to the coax - too fiddly!! £5 down the drain I guess.

I may have an alternative - that is to use a 80 ft. long extension
cable from my phone socket in my work flat to a modem in my living
flat. I can route the cable down the corridor above the false ceiling
panels. WiFi I can use when my PC is local to the router. Hmm - kind
of contradicts the use of WiFi but the signal is too weak anyway.
Incidentally I've tried tweaking the RF power output, but its set on
maximum anyway.

Unfortunately an intermediate Linksys Range Extender / Relay will not
work because I do not have a power supply for it in the corridor mid-
way between where the router and phone socket are and where the PC
will be used.

73s -

Chris B.

On Feb 11, 9:08 pm, "David G. Nagel" wrote:
Owen Duffy wrote:
"David G. Nagel" wrote in news:12suqifm1gfv596
@corp.supernews.com:

Before you invest to much more time and money in your project, no matter
how necessary it may be, you need to look at the signal loss generated
by the RG174 you are proposing to use. It is so extreme only very short
lengths should be used, 1" to 3'.

RG174 would be a very poor choice.

LMR195 (RG58 dimensions) is more likely to be the type of cable used for
small diameter, or larger LMR types for a long run like 40'.

The loss in 40' of LMR195 at 2400MHz is ~8dB, not a pretty picture. Losses
in a metre or three are practical.

Owen

Owen;

I just picked on RG 174 as an example. Your choice is not very much
better which only points out the problem with coax at high frequencies.
I think that the original writer has decided on his own to do something
else.

Dave- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi Chris

Dont feel bad about not being able to work on those SMAs. They are
difficult both because of their small size, and their gender changes from
application to application.
There is *no* way I would consider wireless if the CAT 5 is a valid choice
for interconnecting computers.

Jerry

"CJB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks guys for your help.

The exact problem is that I use two flats in the same block - one for
living in, and one for work - on the same floor - but separated by a
long corridor. The WiFi signal gets half-way along the corridor and
then disappears. My phone socket and WiFi router (and printers) are
all is in the work flat. I'd like to use the PC in my living flat. But
there is no WiFi signal there.

But I've actually been beaten by not being able to attach the SMA
connectors to the coax - too fiddly!! £5 down the drain I guess.

I may have an alternative - that is to use a 80 ft. long extension
cable from my phone socket in my work flat to a modem in my living
flat. I can route the cable down the corridor above the false ceiling
panels. WiFi I can use when my PC is local to the router. Hmm - kind
of contradicts the use of WiFi but the signal is too weak anyway.
Incidentally I've tried tweaking the RF power output, but its set on
maximum anyway.

Unfortunately an intermediate Linksys Range Extender / Relay will not
work because I do not have a power supply for it in the corridor mid-
way between where the router and phone socket are and where the PC
will be used.

73s -

Chris B.

On Feb 11, 9:08 pm, "David G. Nagel" wrote:
Owen Duffy wrote:
"David G. Nagel" wrote in news:12suqifm1gfv596
@corp.supernews.com:

Before you invest to much more time and money in your project, no
matter
how necessary it may be, you need to look at the signal loss generated
by the RG174 you are proposing to use. It is so extreme only very short
lengths should be used, 1" to 3'.

RG174 would be a very poor choice.

LMR195 (RG58 dimensions) is more likely to be the type of cable used for
small diameter, or larger LMR types for a long run like 40'.

The loss in 40' of LMR195 at 2400MHz is ~8dB, not a pretty picture.
Losses
in a metre or three are practical.

Owen

Owen;

I just picked on RG 174 as an example. Your choice is not very much
better which only points out the problem with coax at high frequencies.
I think that the original writer has decided on his own to do something
else.

Dave- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Just found a possible solution:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/o/ASIN/B000B...175332-7741501

CJB.

On 11 Feb 2007 15:19:11 -0800, "CJB" wrote:

Just found a possible solution:

Only if both flats can take the 5dB loss in the cable, AND the path
loss of 4.5 meters. Wireless routers are rated for quite a distance
in the clear, but apparently your brick puts the challenge to that.

Walk down the hall with your laptop running its adapter program
showing signal strength. How far can you go? If it isn't half way,
you don't stand a chance. If you can, then subtract 5dB (which means
roughly to the other flat's front door) and the signal should still be
substantial (or your throughput will plummet).

Run CAT5 between flats and buy another router.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Yes - I did try walking down the corridor with the laptop!! The
dropout rate was quite high. But I did get about halfway along before
the signal was lost!!

I did a Google on the web for 'Cat9 cable' and did find some mention.
Also for Cat5.

I'll see if the extension cable works. But might be resigned to a
repeater halfway along the corridor. I could hide this in the ceiling
panelling and power it with a cable from either flat!!

There is another solution - maybe - to attach a full size indoor
aerial to the laptop. It has a t.v. card in it!! Maybe that would
increase the strength of the input signal to the wireless card.

Chris B.

On Feb 11, 11:41 pm, Richard Clark wrote:
On 11 Feb 2007 15:19:11 -0800, "CJB" wrote:

Just found a possible solution:

Only if both flats can take the 5dB loss in the cable, AND the path
loss of 4.5 meters. Wireless routers are rated for quite a distance
in the clear, but apparently your brick puts the challenge to that.

Walk down the hall with your laptop running its adapter program
showing signal strength. How far can you go? If it isn't half way,
you don't stand a chance. If you can, then subtract 5dB (which means
roughly to the other flat's front door) and the signal should still be
substantial (or your throughput will plummet).

Run CAT5 between flats and buy another router.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Chris

You might want to test the data transfer speed while making your "distance
tests". I'd use CAT 5 whenever the cable connection can be allowed.

Jerry



"CJB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Yes - I did try walking down the corridor with the laptop!! The
dropout rate was quite high. But I did get about halfway along before
the signal was lost!!

I did a Google on the web for 'Cat9 cable' and did find some mention.
Also for Cat5.

I'll see if the extension cable works. But might be resigned to a
repeater halfway along the corridor. I could hide this in the ceiling
panelling and power it with a cable from either flat!!

There is another solution - maybe - to attach a full size indoor
aerial to the laptop. It has a t.v. card in it!! Maybe that would
increase the strength of the input signal to the wireless card.

Chris B.

On Feb 11, 11:41 pm, Richard Clark wrote:
On 11 Feb 2007 15:19:11 -0800, "CJB" wrote:

Just found a possible solution:

Only if both flats can take the 5dB loss in the cable, AND the path
loss of 4.5 meters. Wireless routers are rated for quite a distance
in the clear, but apparently your brick puts the challenge to that.

Walk down the hall with your laptop running its adapter program
showing signal strength. How far can you go? If it isn't half way,
you don't stand a chance. If you can, then subtract 5dB (which means
roughly to the other flat's front door) and the signal should still be
substantial (or your throughput will plummet).

Run CAT5 between flats and buy another router.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 12 Feb 2007 05:36:58 -0800, "CJB" wrote:

But I did get about halfway along before
the signal was lost!!

You don't stand a chance.

I did a Google on the web for 'Cat9 cable' and did find some mention.
Also for Cat5.

Cat5 is what you want, I used the wrong number.

There is another solution - maybe - to attach a full size indoor
aerial to the laptop.

The full sized aerial for wireless is what you see - a stub of roughly
3 inches or so.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC