AIR-ANT3213 vs. std. rubber ducks?

[kenjohnson]

We were looking for a little boost on our AP1200's inside some of our academic buildings and were wondering if AIR-ANT3213 or possibly AIR-ANT1728 might be acceptable replacements? To be honest I have a hard time reading the vertical radiation pattern - it looks like it might be narrower in reach on one side of the antenna - this makes sense for the 3213 but on a round antenna like the 1728 is there really a narrower covereage to one side of the antenna than another?

All things being equal - for relative non-experts are there likely to be hitches to at least trying these in our environment?

Also - I know the 1728 is ceiling mount - is the 3213 only wall-mount?

Thanks!

- Ken Johnson

Mgr. Network Services

LeTourneau University

----------------------------

CIPTUG

http://www.ciptug.org

[kmarrero]

The 3213 has a narrower vertical span than the 1728 by eight degrees. The span starts at one point on the antenna and then progressively gets bigger at a 30 degree angle for the 3213 and a 38 degree angle for the 1728. The best analogy would be that of your shower head. The water starts out in a small pattern but the farther away the water gets from the shower head, the wider the spread of water gets. Both antennas have a 360 degree horizontal span which of course means it covers a full circle around the antenna. There is really no hitch to testing out these antennas in your environment. The 3213 is really a pillar mount not a wall mount antenna due to its 360 degree coverage. Most wall mount antennas are only 160 degree max due to the interference the wall may cause. I am sure you have seen this website before but just in case, here it is again.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps469/products_data_sheet09186a0080092285.html