Cost of Fixing Campground WiFi

[danemayer]

I'm sure we've all experienced lousy WiFi at most campgrounds we visit. And it's pretty rare to be able to stream any video. I just wanted to pass along some data that might explain why it's so hard for campgrounds to provide good WiFi service.

The cost of a new, high performance installation is astronomical.

The park we go to in Colorado is looking at a new installation to serve 371 sites. On a 4 year basis it's about $60,000 per year. Every year. The cost probably never goes down. And the initial cash outlay is around $87,000.

It's a pretty high bar to jump over.

 

[SNOKING]

Our Arizona park abandoned their in park phone system a few years ago, and I believe that they will abandon their failing WiFi system before fixing it. Seems fairly common occurrence across many parks now. They all seem to blame it on people streaming video BTW!!! And they claim to be a 5 star park!!!! We have around 800 sites, do you know how big and expensive a pipe it takes to provide Band Width for that many users? They are pushing people to just sign up for their own cable modem. And of course that rides out of the park on the same pipe(s)!

Chris

 

[danemayer]

One of the big problems is that most parks are still using access points that work on 2.4 GHz only, using the 802.11 B/G protocol. With so many of us bringing our MiFi and wireless routers, and other devices that also use 2.4 GHz, we're overloading the 11 WiFi channels with data collisions, creating a high error rate. Of channels 1-11, only 1, 6, and 11 are really effectively used.

I've noticed this many times at rallies. Upon arrival, the WiFi is working fine. As the park fills up, the WiFi stops working.

All of the inexpensive access points in the $100-500 price range have this problem. To fix it, you need to get 5 GHz access points that cost $700-1300 each.

And there are other problems that require expensive solutions. You need to spend a lot to support video streaming, or you need management software that allows bandwidth consumption to be managed.

- - - Updated - - -

For 800 sites with video streaming, they'd definitely need a Fiber Optic pipe, probably a minimum of 600 Mb/sec. Probably costs $50,000 per year.

 

[sjandbj]

One of the big problems is that most parks are still using access points that work on 2.4 GHz only, using the 802.11 B/G protocol. With so many of us bringing our MiFi and wireless routers, and other devices that also use 2.4 GHz, we're overloading the 11 WiFi channels with data collisions, creating a high error rate. Of channels 1-11, only 1, 6, and 11 are really effectively used.

I've noticed this many times at rallies. Upon arrival, the WiFi is working fine. As the park fills up, the WiFi stops working.



All of the inexpensive access points in the $100-500 price range have this problem. To fix it, you need to get 5 GHz access points that cost $700-1300 each.

And there are other problems that require expensive solutions. You need to spend a lot to support video streaming, or you need management software that allows bandwidth consumption to be managed.

- - - Updated - - -

For 800 sites with video streaming, they'd definitely need a Fiber Optic pipe, probably a minimum of 600 Mb/sec. Probably costs $50,000 per year.

Dan,
I can agree with the problems and cost to resolve the problem but the parks problem is no different than any hotel that I go to. They all have managed to work through the cost and now it is common that wifi is available for free or at a low cost. For some small camp grounds I can see that it would not be cost effective but for the larger sites that are charging as much as some smaller hotels they should upgrade there system to handle this. The problem is not going to go away.

Just my thoughts.

Steve

 

[danemayer]

Dan,
I can agree with the problems and cost to resolve the problem but the parks problem is no different than any hotel that I go to. They all have managed to work through the cost and now it is common that wifi is available for free or at a low cost. For some small camp grounds I can see that it would not be cost effective but for the larger sites that are charging as much as some smaller hotels they should upgrade there system to handle this. The problem is not going to go away.

Just my thoughts.

Steve

Steve,

I agree the problem is not going away. I've explained to our Board of Directors that as the demographics of owners and visitors changes, the demand for high performance internet is going to grow at an unbelievable rate. At the 2014 owners meeting with the Board, about 10% of the owners were willing to pay an additional $10/month in fees to get good internet. In 2015, it was more like 90%.

One of my favorite illustrations is a 77 year old owner who has a Comcast Internet connection at his chalet. He has moved to almost 100% video streaming from Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu. He almost never watches cable any more.

It's affordable when analyzed on a per site basis, but the upfront outlay and recurring costs are scary.

 

[Crumgater]

$60,000/year divided by 371 sites divided by 365 days a year = $0.44 per day wifi surcharge.
I'd pay that.

I'd even pay $1/day if it was high quality wifi with good streaming speeds...
I pay more than that now for my comcast service in the S&B.

 

[travelin2]

My son watches streamed movies and television shows over his internet connection more than cable.
The park we visit in Myrtle Beach, I noticed last fall, is adding additional towers with boosters and routers. Last fall they were still emphasizing no streaming of videos but that may change with the additional equipment.
We have 6 wireless devices between us so if any establishment promotes wifi, it better be adequate. Otherwise I would think lack thereof will lead to reduced occupancy and revenues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Westwind]

We stayed at Point South KOA in Yemessee, SC on our way home from snowbirding in Florida. They had on their website that they had installed commercial WIFI in the campground and I can attest that it was one of the best that I had ever used in a campground, every night we were there they had a full house and we were at the rear of the campground.
I wish I could give more info but I can't but I bet a phone call would provide the info.

 

[travelin2]

We see Tengo internet hookups regularly. All we have ever used is the free connection offered by the park. Maybe others have experience with the paid version.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MCTalley]

In related news, we had AT&T replace our MiFi unit due to terribly slow speeds (down and up) while we were in Florida this January. In one case, I did a speedtest on my laptop while it was running off our MiFi with 4 bars of 4G LTE. I was getting around 2-3 Mbps down and up. I switched to using my iPhone as a hotspot (same carrier, AT&T, in the same general vicinity as our MiFi unit) and rates jumped to 20-30 Mbps down and up.

When our replacement MiFi had similar performance, it finally occurred to me that the problem was worse in crowded campgrounds. Our particular MiFi unit supports running on 2.4 GHz and/or 5 GHz. I switched it to 5GHz and speeds increased dramatically. Sadly it isn't very stable running split 5/2.4 (or even all 5), so I've switched it back to 2.4 and use my phone (which I'm sure is probably sharing the 5 GHz radio) when I need faster speeds.

 

[danemayer]

$60,000/year divided by 371 sites divided by 365 days a year = $0.44 per day wifi surcharge.
I'd pay that.

I'd even pay $1/day if it was high quality wifi with good streaming speeds...
I pay more than that now for my comcast service in the S&B.

If it were your park, you might also consider # of days in the camping season, average occupancy rate in the park, and percentage of visitors willing to pay.

 

[Westwind]

I've used both TengoNet and Camplink, neither get high marks on my score card. Someone told me it's the connection out of the campground that causes the bog down, a regular connection that you put a house on won't work for a campground.

 

[donr827]

The reason we camp has changed over the past 10 years or so. Instead of joy of the family sitting around outside and talking we now split up. The kids want to watch videos and the adults are spending time doing emails and searching the net.
Don

 

[Bones]

When we camp I will use my phone and extend it's signal. If I don't have service I go "Oh well" Sit and read a magazine outside if it is nice.

 

[travelin2]

When we camp I will use my phone and extend it's signal. If I don't have service I go "Oh well" Sit and read a magazine outside if it is nice.

That's us. We stay at many spots that have NO cellular service anyway. Although we like our devices, the DW downloads our local newspaper and all of her periodicals to read while away from home, a spot with wifi/cellular coverage is not a top priority for us. But if the park advertises "wifi at every site" then doesn't work-arrgh!!!
As it is, our cabin in northern PA has limited cellular coverage. You can make a phone call if you're outside but don't move or turn around and forget data streaming .
Lots of other things to do anyway!!!

 

[hogan]

If it were your park, you might also consider # of days in the camping season, average occupancy rate in the park, and percentage of visitors willing to pay.

Dan, at our campground in Florida, we have tried to maintain a viable network on the cheap with mixed results. We only have 96 sites but the spread from end to end is significant. Luckily we have a member who is tech savvy (almost said Nerd) and he has been very beneficial. The congestion brought on by the density of mifi's almost all operating on 6 seems to be part of the problem. Streaming folks are also screaming folks; and we don't have a flow management system yet. What do you suggest?
Hogan

 

[danemayer]

Dan, at our campground in Florida, we have tried to maintain a viable network on the cheap with mixed results. We only have 96 sites but the spread from end to end is significant. Luckily we have a member who is tech savvy (almost said Nerd) and he has been very beneficial. The congestion brought on by the density of mifi's almost all operating on 6 seems to be part of the problem. Streaming folks are also screaming folks; and we don't have a flow management system yet. What do you suggest?
Hogan

Hogan,

Fixing WiFi is not only expensive, but includes a number of elements. We did quite a bit of research into problems with our old installation, and finding solutions. I've attached a problem/solution chart.

In a different order:

1. Sufficient incoming bandwidth from ISP
2. A controller or router than can assign enough IP addresses for multiple users at each site.
3. Point-to-point wireless (or wired) connections between incoming data pipe and each access point.
4. Full duplex, high-performance "backhaul" between incoming data pipe and each access point.
5. Access point that can manage a large number of concurrent users.
6. Access point that uses latest 802.11 AC protocol, moving majority of users to 5 GHz high-bandwidth, wider channels, with more available channels. Backward compatible to 2.4 GHz.
7. Bandwidth shaping to control how much data a user can consume in a given time period
8. Control of IPV6 traffic so video streaming is subject to bandwidth shaping controls.

Your tech-savvy person will either recognize what these things mean, or will be able to research each point to understand.

 

[hogan]

Thank you Dan. Will take advantage of your sharing.
Hogan

 

[bnm]

I'd suggest Meraki, mainly the MR72. Outside and rugged, we have these scattered throughout our shops. Yes, they are 1300 with a 5 year license, you have to renew every 5 years, about 300 for the recurring 5. On the higher end of expensive, but you get amazing online management tools. We allow 256kbps per device for audio streams and 512kbps for video per device. It allows persons to surf the Web while people can still stream. Also block websites at the access point, never getting back hauled to the router. They also auto channel themselves to least congested channels, both 2.4 and 5. One other thing we do is air marshal. It will auto scan for wireless devices and based on your rules, it will allow it to operate or flood it with packets that it can't operate.

You can operate each one with poe and data, or as a repeater using one of the bands as the repeater and the other as the broadcast.

I'm a business consumer, just love this topic and this product. My management time has gone to zero with these.

If you can afford, an independent site survey will go a long way.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[Bones]

The use of any type of device that intentionally interferes with the operation of another device is against the law. View here. FCC