"baron" wrote in message
...
Inscribed thus:

On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:29:31 -0500, 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?

Thanks a lot.
I have to say you are going about this the wrong way. You are
choosing to mount the antenna in the attic because it's easier. An
indoor mount also has the advantage of reducing exposure to the
weather. While this is easier, it has several major disadvantages.
You have already mentioned one - difficulty in orienting it properly.
There is another - signal attenuation, particularly at higher
frequencies.

Have you considered the possibility you are focusing on convenience
and ignoring performance?

As far as antenna range, my parents lived over 60 miles from the
transmitter and received good signal levels with an antenna that was
mounted less than 15 feet above ground level.

PlainBill

With all due respect to Bill, what works in one place doesn't always
work in another.

An example, Rhonda Valley. Two identical Tv's antenna and cables but a
common chimney stack. Really good signal reception on one side of the
stack and next to none on the other. Antenna less than 6 ot 7 feet
apart at the same hight.

Solution split the feed from the high signal antenna and feed both sets
from the single antenna. Which also had the effect of reducing the
signal improving the picture on both Tv's.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

I too have seen this. I clearly remember installing an early CTV in a
village that had generally poor UHF reception. Several members of the same
family all lived in this tiny village, and all rented CTVs from the company
that I worked for. One of the sons moved into a cottage in the same row as
one of his brothers, who had good enough signals to receive colour without
any preamping. We turned up at the same time as the antenna rigger, and then
spent most of the rest of the day there, trying to get useable signals, just
100 feet from his brother. I remember watching the rigger (with my heart in
my mouth - winter, frosty, slippy!) walking back and forth along the roof
ridge, holding a bloody great pole with a phased pair of long Yagis on the
top, trying to see if there was any point where we could get an acceptable
signal from any transmitter, with a view to then moving back to the chimney,
to see if we could figure a way to get the same signal from there.

As I recall, we ended up with something like a 15ft pole, with a double
chimney lashing kit, and a phased pair of long Yagis *and* a preamp. House
same height as his brother's one, no visible obstructions or hills as far as
the eye could see across open countryside. Sometimes, there's just no rhyme
or reason to TV reception.

As to receivable distance for an antenna, this depends a lot on the
frequency involved. At UHF, there is little 'bending' effect of the basic
radiated signal, so reception can be considered as pretty much 'line of
sight'. There are effects that can extend this, but nothing that you could
rely on. However, at VHF, wavefront tilt becomes more significant, and the
signal will try to follow the curvature of the earth more or less, due to
the wavefront 'digging in' and being 'pulled over'. This can give a
significantly greater 'range' to a signal. When I was a kid, we used to
watch really strong TV signals from a transmitter some sixty miles away. The
antenna was a double 4 ele with a shared loop 'dipole' and delta match. This
was a very common antenna type in my neck of the woods, at the time

Arfa