In article , mm wrote:
Does it matter if the tv antenna points one way, or 180^ the other?

You guys, especially Dave, have convinced me that I need a better (and
thus bigger) antenna more than I need an amplified antenna. Does it
matter if I point an antenna with several elements of different
lengths to the station, or if I point it the exact opposite direction?
In my attic, it would be more convenient to do the latter. (I'm too
old and at least now, too fat to go on the roof.)


Also, I thought 50 miles was the longest range on level ground for a
transmitting tower of typical height and an antenna on the roof of a
two-story house.

So what about a claim that a Wineguard antenna has a range of 75 to 80
miles????
http://estore.websitepros.com/112973...00U/Detail.bok
This antenna is rated for low-band VHF and I don't need that, I've
learned, but it's the mileage claim I am asking about.

Even this one says: Up to 60 mile VHF range; 45 mile UHF range Don't
they get that by mounting it on a 100 foot tower or something?
http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ductId=3739594
And isn't the info obsolete because digital transmitters are working
at lower power than analog did?


You certainly don't need VHF low, but do you really need VHF high ?
I only have one station here on ch 13.

You could also use two separate antennas with a combiner.
Concentrate on the UHF.

Milages is highly dependant on height and terrain.
Height means nothing if there is a mountain in between.
Its surprsing though, there are some big hills around here, and people
got by from 30 mi away with hilly terrain on the old TV's.
Getting rid of shadows on the old TV was the main problem.
Digital has no shadows but must have a minimum signal to decode.

greg