Local range installed Starlink and would like to extend wifi to other buildings/locations. 140 yards from Starlink router to where maybe an AP can be set up?; 106 yards from that AP point to another building, and 90 yards from that AP point to a campsite..
Any assistance will be appreciated. Not very knowledgeable in outdoor wifi.

Have been looking at the outdoor wifi stuff at Ubiquiti store but it is a bit confusing to me.

I have a photo of the layout I can email if that will help.

PC

quote:

installed Starlink and would like to extend wifi to other buildings/locations. 140 yards from Starlink router to where maybe an AP can be set up?; 106 yards from that AP point to another building, and 90 yards from that AP point to a campsite..
Any assistance will be appreciated. Not very knowledgeable in outdoor wifi.

Is the line of sight clear or obstructed? I am of limited use but I know the above question will matter.

Honestly, this is also a good problem to use Grok for... it can help you understand the issues at play.

Also, is it possible to run a wire to each of the various locations the signal is needed at? It would greatly help if so. Those distances are pretty big. A mesh network with a node at each location, with each node connected by ethernet would work well, I think. But if the wire isn't an option, things will get more complicated.

Keep in mind that the maximum length of the "wire" (CAT5, CAT6 copper) is 100M (328'), including patch cables on each end. That includes zig zags, ups and downs. Will it work if longer? Depends how much longer, and depends on other factors (quality of components, electronics, etc.). Fiber would be a better option but increases cost and complexity.

Another important consideration is the availability of power at each location where an access point is needed. I agree that fiber cable runs will give the best assurance of reliability at the distances quoted in the OP. Also, the effect of a lightning strike on or near a copper run should not be underestimated.

Rather than trying to design a local network to get the required coverage, a better alternative may be to install multiple StarLink terminals under the same StarLink account.

Email the photo of the layout including where power is available.

At those distances you may be more looking at the wireless bridge units from Ubiquiti instead of outdoor Wi-Fi. At 500 bucks per endpoint they could certainly be cheaper than getting someone to pull some fiber. That said, I’d consider them if I was already running a Ubiquiti site because they will require some local management. I am at home, but no outbuildings to do bridging with.

https://store.ui.com/us/en/cat...oducts/ubb?s=us&l=en

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Email the photo of the layout including where power is available.

Email and photo sent.

PC

I could post the picture in this thread for everyone to see.

What's the goal? What are you expecting the WiFi network to do? I ask because what I'm suggesting below would not be good for gaming and probably OK for a couple of people doing video conferencing. Part of that depends on what class of Starlink they have. It looks like a large facility and I don't believe a regular Starlink account will provide good service to more than somewhere between 5 and 10 users.

Looking at the picture, you've got 240 yards between the building with the Starlink and another building they want internet. There's electricity at what looks like the long rifle range benches in between those two buildings.

First, I'd move the Starlink to that spot because of it's a much more central location to everything including the camping area.

Then, I'd one pair of wireless bridges between that area and each building (two pairs, one for each building).

I'd setup up a WAP in that central area to cover the range benches.

Lastly, the campground. I'm sure there are outdoor WAPs that can reach the campground area.

I use a wireless bridge that consists of two parabolic dishes pointed at each other from one house to another at our property in Michigan. Using just one dish, I was connecting 400' away with my iPhone getting our full 100mbps internet connection both down and up.

The downside of wireless bridges is they are simplex communicators, data transmission/reception only happens one direction at a time. It's like using a walkie talkie: the listener has to wait for the talker to finish before the roles are reversed. It won't be an issue if Starlink is 50mbps as the bridge connections should be at least 200mbps. Our wireless bridge in MI is connected at 300mbps and works fine with our 100mbps fiber. However, we're going to bump that to 500mbps while we are there this summer and the house on the other side of the bridge won't see that at all.

The other option is skipping the wireless bridges and running fiber optic cable instead. I'd definitely do this if they are thinking about installing security cameras. Each building and the range area would have to have switches with SPF+ ports and the Starlink could stay where it is. It doesn't look like you have any paving or other obstructions to worry about, so burying a cable looks about as simple as it gets. I don't know enough to guess at the cost.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: trapper189,

The answer IMO really depends if you have power in the out buildings. If not this is a mess. IF SO this is Really easy. Router at Starlink site to wireless brigde to each of the other buildings, then a small hub and an AP at each of those. I'm guessing the campsite does not have power, but if its got a good line of site you may be able to get a good connection to a decent AP. I use engenius for this and get better then the 90y to my last AP.
Slightly off topic but to address issue noted by trapper189 the wireless bridges I use quote 1200mbps as throughput, that will not be a gate on the system, starlink will.

What do you guys think about a wireless bridge using point-to-point microwave?

Here's a youtube video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm29Fb2wLBg

JP

I don't get this comment? The first part of the video is discussing wireless bridges and I'm not watching it all to see if they get into licensed microwave. Wireless bridges are what is being suggested. There is no need to discuss licensed microwave in the this context.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
I don't get this comment? The first part of the video is discussing wireless bridges and I'm not watching it all to see if they get into licensed microwave. Wireless bridges are what is being suggested. There is no need to discuss licensed microwave in the this context.

I'm not suggesting he use licensed microwave. 5 ghz or even 2.4 ghz would probably work just fine.

JP

language issue I guess. In my technical universe one does not typically refer to the wireless bands as microwave. In any case the OP needs a couple of wireless bridges, some AP's, and a couple of misc. parts and cables and all this can be running in a few hours.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
language issue I guess. In my technical universe one does not typically refer to the wireless bands as microwave.

No worries! This is not in my wheelhouse either. In my business, I deal with point-to-point hops of
30-50 miles with licensed freqs. But technically, S and C bands, which encompass 2.4 and 5.0 Ghz, are considered microwave emissions.

JP

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
The answer IMO really depends if you have power in the out buildings. If not this is a mess. IF SO this is Really easy. Router at Starlink site to wireless brigde to each of the other buildings, then a small hub and an AP at each of those. I'm guessing the campsite does not have power, but if its got a good line of site you may be able to get a good connection to a decent AP. I use engenius for this and get better then the 90y to my last AP.
Slightly off topic but to address issue noted by trapper189 the wireless bridges I use quote 1200mbps as throughput, that will not be a gate on the system, starlink will.

The picture shows unobstructed LOS between everything and his email mentioned electricity available at the buildings I suggested wireless bridges be used. No power at the campsites.

If he gives me permission, I'll post the picture.

How far away will the wireless bridges you use maintain a 1200mbps connection? Mine are installed in less than ideal conditions with trees between them, but we only had a 6mbps DSL connection up until the last week we were up there last summer.

I think in this case there is a cheaper, simpler solution than wireless bridges.

There's a standard called Power over Ethernet (PoE). Basically it supplies DC power over the same wires in the ethernet cable that are used for data transmission. For example, you can get PoE wifi access points that are powered by the same ethernet cable that carries the data (no separate power supply).

So, you put an ethernet switch that can supply PoE in the building with the Starlink dish, with both the Starlink dish and the PoE ethernet switch plugged in to AC power.

Then you run 100m ethernet cables towards where you want access points. If the 100m cable reaches where you want an access point, great, plug the access point into the ethernet cable, it's powered by the ethernet cable, doesn't matter if there's AC power near the access point on not.

If the 100m cable doesn't get you there, you plug in a PoE ethernet repeater. That's basically a tiny 2-port ethernet switch that's powered by the PoE (and still passes PoE on down the line). Then you can plug in another 100m ethernet cable to the repeater and keep going towards where you want the access point.

You can get PoE ethernet repeaters that are rated for exterior use or direct burial, and if 200m isn't enough, many of them are rated for several to be chained together for longer distances.

If you go this route, you do have to be a little careful, because there are several different PoE standards and you need to make sure all the equipment uses compatible standards.

Based on my experience there is no chance that running ethernet cable makes any sense unless you have existing conduit runs already available. Or easy access to overhead facilities. Burying cables (at least to code) is a pretty big project (and this is from someone who actually owns a trencher).
And in any case at this point I would probably run fiber rather than repeaters if I was doing this.
trapper189 I can't actually help you. I have short unobstructed runs. I had assumed that the runs in the OP description were also unobstructed. I don't have any practical experience but I have it in my mind that trees are death for range especially with these directional antennas.

What would the benefit of burying 240 yards of Ethernet wire and a couple PoE Ethernet repeaters be fiber optic cable? You don’t have to worry about lightning with fiber optic cable like you do with Ethernet wire.

quote:

trapper189 I can't actually help you. I have short unobstructed runs. I had assumed that the runs in the OP description were also unobstructed.

The OP’s site is completely unobstructed. I’m sorry if I wrote something that led anyone to believe otherwise.

It’s 140 yards from the Starlink building to the rifle range building, then another 106 yards to the next building almost in a straight line from the Starlink building.

The solution really depends on what they expect to be doing. If it’s just sharing the Starlink internet then I’d do what I posted above. The wireless bridge equipment I have was only $150. I bought to mess around with and see how it works. I haven’t had a chance to test its limits.

You can seriously get anything you need in this space for speed. Example I know (https://mikrotik.com/product/wireless_wire_nray).
In your situation I have no idea about trees in other parts of the spectrum, I was curious and I looked at a couple of research papers and its a pretty tough problem.