Using 3.65ghz For Wireless Surveillance?

John Honovich
Mar 10, 2013

While 2.4Ghz and 5.8Ghz are the most well known bands for wireless systems used in surveillance, another band exists (at least in the US) that some say can and should be used for surveillance - the 3.65Ghz band. I am curious if anyone is making use out of it?

Here's an excellent survey article on 3.65Ghz and a key extract:

"The 3.65 GHz band is licensed on non-exclusive basis; hence, it is referred to often as semi or lightly licensed. Operators obtain a license from the FCC and register their systems parameters and coordinates in a database (a license can be obtained for nominal fee of $260 for 10 years). Operators have the responsibility to minimize the potential of interference to deployed systems. The process to resolve interference is left to the operators themselves. The FCC requires that all systems implement a contention based protocol (CBP) which would stop transmission if the system detects transmissions from other systems."

Biggest benefit is less risk of contention. However, there are evidently some geographical restrictions typically in urban US areas where Fixed Satellite Services (FSS) space-to-earth operations have been grandfathered in.

Anyway, I am hoping others can share experiences of why they did or did not use this band for surveillance.

Duncan Miller
Mar 10, 2013

Cost is a big reason why we chose not to use 3.65GHz band. In Canada the licensing cost is based on the populatioin in the area you are using it in. You would have to have quite a few wireless links to make it worth while. I don't remember off had what the cost was but it wasn't cheap and it would make more sense to license the public security band 4.9ghz if you are able to. We eneded up just using 5ghz for a hand full of sites and have had no issues.

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions