The only advantage of europe is that they have more range on their 2ghz stuff, the rest of the freq spectrum, man are they screwed - if a frequency vibrates anal lips, it will be banned in Europe, in the US, that a free massage ( dont ask me what they are just made it up…could be ear lobes )
However the food and beer is better and cheaper (unless you live in Denmark) and the alcohol, cannot find bad wine etc…
What did your research find… I would hazard a guess that dual band antennas need four connectors, so the best you can hope for is single band sector antennas.
The HGO-antenna-OUT has 3.3db gain at 2.4ghz and approximately 6db at 5ghz compared to this with just under than 7db. If you would benefit from a 120 directionality, then this is fine.
I’m surprised there aren’t higher gain 120 degree antennas for dual band.
There are such antennas, but they don’t come cheap, are large and (some of them) look ugly.
Antenna gain is generally proportional to antenna size and antenna size for given gain is generally proportional to wavelength. Which in essence means that at certain gain antenna for 2.4GHz has to be 2-times larger (in both directions, perpendicular to main lobe direction) than antenna with similar gain but for 5GHz. And that, at the same time, means that most wide-band antennas have higher gain (and narrower beam) for higher frequency end and proportionally lower gain (and wider beam) for lower frequency end of supported frequency band. This is specially true for “dish-like” antennas, some other (extremely ugly looking) antennas fare a bit better (e.g. yagi or log-periodic antennas) but those tend to be physically bigger (and have lower WAF).
Most probably those dual antenna ports are used for MIMO … and for each MIMO leg (in WiFi they are called chains) one needs a separate antenna. Some antennas are dual-port (or MIMO) and actually include two antennas in the same housing. For 2x2 MIMO the easiest way to make best use of it is to use two antennas and tilt them at 90° angle … all antennas are polarized and using them at 90° angle this means two independent polarization planes. Another possibility to make MIMO work is to spatially separate antennas (by a few wavelengths at minimum). When using higer-rank of MIMO (e.g. 4x4), one has to use combination of both approaches (polarization only offers two planes).
Another possibility is that those antenna ports are there for different frequency bands (which then means 1x1 MIMO for each).
Anyone here from MT that can clarify if the two ports are MIMO or bands?
And, if MIMO, is the design such that only certain, end-fed dipole antennas (i.e., verticals; but in either horizontal or vertical polarization) would work?
MIMO radios don’t imply antenna layout. It’s about making MIMO legs, transmitted over RF, distinguishable between each other as good as possible. Separate antenna ports ensure that ideally, the rest is up to antennas (and environment).
They exist, but I think there isn’t enough demand for them to keep making them (people want more gain, not to be hampered by dual-band designs).
This is one I found at one of my distributors. Based on the “802.11n” description, they’ve been around for decades but haven’t been updated and aren’t in stock anywhere.
Here’s one that Ubiquiti makes:
Yep, but I think OP is already beyond the WAP, a Netmetal Ax (+antenna(s)) is going to cost much more.
What is not clear (to me) is how wide the area to be covered is, the Mantbox ax 15 s is still pretty much directional, 120° or so, so maybe two will be needed to cover a wider area.
Having to choose personally I would prefer a “all in one” device such as the Mantbox as in the long period the cable connections from AP to antenna are more likely to oxidize/loose insulation/whatever.
)