My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

john west wrote:

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

It might help a bit (I think you should have a little nose-up anyway)
but the leaves are going to better at blocking signal than causing any
"lensing" of the signal at such a short range ... you're going to keep
having the problem as the tree grows year by year, getting the aerial up
higher would be a better solution.

john west wrote

My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree,

Nope.

or do transmission signals not work like this?

No they dont. The only viable approach is to
move the aerial so it isn't point thru the trees.

Or kill the neighbours tree.

A better aerial might work still pointing thru the tree.

You get very variable results even with good aerials through p foliage so
its far better to move the aerial or keep the tree pruned.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
john west wrote

My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree,

Nope.

or do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don?Tt. The only viable approach is to
move the aerial so it isn't point thru the trees.

Or kill the neighbours tree.

A better aerial might work still pointing thru the tree.

Brian-Gaff wrote

You get very variable results even with good aerials through p foliage so
its far better to move the aerial or keep the tree pruned.

That's why I listed that one last and said 'might'

Rod Speed wrote
john west wrote

My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree,

Nope.

or do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don?Tt. The only viable approach is to
move the aerial so it isn't point thru the trees.

Or kill the neighbours tree.

A better aerial might work still pointing thru the tree.

Rod Speed wrote:

A better aerial might work still pointing thru the tree.

Only if the problem isn't severe.

Tree screening is very uneven and often moving the aerial up down or
sideways half a yard will make a tremendous improvement.

See
http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/articles/whatsat-trees.pdf

Bill

Bill Wright wrote
Rod Speed wrote

A better aerial might work still pointing thru the tree.

Only if the problem isn't severe.

That's what I meant. I should have said that less cryptically
given that you and Brian have commented on it.

Tree screening is very uneven and often moving the aerial up down
or sideways half a yard will make a tremendous improvement.

And if the current aerial is very poor, a decent one might be adequate.

See
http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/articles/whatsat-trees.pdf

In article , john west
scribeth thus
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don't. Best bet is to either;

Get your aerial above the tree.

Or,

Reduce the height of the tee

It might be more practical to move the aerial into your loft space if
you have one. Can you say where you are at all and or what the serving
transmitter is?....
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote in news
In article , john west
scribeth thus
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don't. Best bet is to either;

Get your aerial above the tree.

Or,

Reduce the height of the tee

It might be more practical to move the aerial into your loft space if
you have one. Can you say where you are at all and or what the serving
transmitter is?....

Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

DerbyBorn wrote:
Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

That seems to me a little too firm given the OP said the aerial is wall
mounted. The loft might then put it higher where the loss from roofing
materials is less than the loss from the leaves etc. Or it may allow a
position to one side of the tree. And it may also be easier (and more
acceptable to anyone with an aesthetic veto) to fit in the loft an
aerial with higher gain.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article ,
Robin wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote:
Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

That seems to me a little too firm given the OP said the aerial is wall
mounted. The loft might then put it higher where the loss from roofing
materials is less than the loss from the leaves etc. Or it may allow a
position to one side of the tree. And it may also be easier (and more
acceptable to anyone with an aesthetic veto) to fit in the loft an
aerial with higher gain.

The higher gain of an aerial would be insignificnat in comparison with
losses through roofing materials. A small mast head amp might well be
needed. But if the aerial in wall mounted, I'd suggest a longer pole. A
good T&K bracket and a 2" pole could give another 10ft in height.

--
Please note new email address:

On 08/08/2015 10:16, charles wrote:
In article ,
Robin wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote:
Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

That seems to me a little too firm given the OP said the aerial is wall
mounted. The loft might then put it higher where the loss from roofing
materials is less than the loss from the leaves etc. Or it may allow a
position to one side of the tree. And it may also be easier (and more
acceptable to anyone with an aesthetic veto) to fit in the loft an
aerial with higher gain.

The higher gain of an aerial would be insignificnat in comparison with
losses through roofing materials. A small mast head amp might well be
needed. But if the aerial in wall mounted, I'd suggest a longer pole. A
good T&K bracket and a 2" pole could give another 10ft in height.


http://www.aerialsandtv.com/aerials.html#ElementCount

I've got a loft aerial.

10 "element", 8 flat directors, dipole, reflector plate. It's wedged as
far up to the apex as it will go.

There was engineering a few weeks ago, reduced signal on the HD
multiplex, I lost all HD channels. I tried a "48 element" wideband high
gain aerial, 10 "X" directors, a flat director, dipole and 8 bar
reflector. Due to it's length and size of reflector it was about 1ft
lower in loft than the short aerial. I lost more channels. Taking the
upper 1/2 of the reflector off improved it a bit but not a lot.

Just had to suffer channel loss until the signal was back to full strength.

In article 2,
DerbyBorn scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote in news
In article , john west
scribeth thus
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don't. Best bet is to either;

Get your aerial above the tree.

Or,

Reduce the height of the tee

It might be more practical to move the aerial into your loft space if
you have one. Can you say where you are at all and or what the serving
transmitter is?....

Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

Right...

That may or may not be a problem. Some roofing materials are better
than others and as Charles points red roof tiles are probably the worst
of the lot.

However a lot depends on frequency. Signals at the lower end of the band
such as channels 21 to 30 odd are less affected than signals at the top
end of the band are. The aerial itself and cable can make a big
difference as well and that can include the location of the aerial in
the loft relative to the tree/s consider also that there might be extra
height to be had.

Hence the question of where the serving transmitter is so we can get an
idea of the frequencies in use and the likely strength of same.

I have seen an instance where an outside aerial gave grainy and badly
ghosted pictures on analogue, but at the very same location a Loft
aerial has since that time given flawless results on digital TV!.

Yes of course an extended height aerial outside is the "correct"
engineering way to go about this, but the OP may not be able to do that
or may not want to do that.

I few pix posted somewhere would be worth a thousand speculative words
if the OP can do that...

--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:

Yes of course an extended height aerial outside is the "correct"
engineering way to go about this, but the OP may not be able to do that
or may not want to do that.

You can get some weird effects if the aerial is looking over trees.
Vertical aerial movement will pass through maxima and minima.

Bill

DerbyBorn wrote:

Loft would be worse as it would then be faced with the signal being
degraded through the roofing materials.

That effect might be dwarfed by other factors. Many a time I've moved an
aerial into the loft in order that it will not be obstructed by
something outside.

See

http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/article...sat-201007.pdf

Bill

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , john west
scribeth thus
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

No they don't. Best bet is to either;

Get your aerial above the tree.

Or,

Reduce the height of the tee

It might be more practical to move the aerial into your loft space if
you have one.

[Snip]

But not if you have Red concrete roof tiles

--
Please note new email address:

But not if you have Red concrete roof tiles

That reminded me off http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/article...sat-201007.pdf
which has many "dos and don'ts" based on Bill's extensive knowledge -
including knowledge of ways to fall off/through things
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article ,
Robin wrote:
But not if you have Red concrete roof tiles

That reminded me off http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/article...sat-201007.pdf
which has many "dos and don'ts" based on Bill's extensive knowledge -
including knowledge of ways to fall off/through things

The trouble with red tiles which I mentioned is the thcolour comed from
iron oxide (rust) and they can create a very good screen at tv frequenices.
Red clay tiles aren't such a problem.

--
Please note new email address:

Robin wrote:
But not if you have Red concrete roof tiles

That reminded me off http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/article...sat-201007.pdf
which has many "dos and don'ts" based on Bill's extensive knowledge -
including knowledge of ways to fall off/through things

Yes, I agree. That Bill Wright knows everything about aerials.

Fred

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
But not if you have Red concrete roof tiles

That reminded me off http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/article...sat-201007.pdf
which has many "dos and don'ts" based on Bill's extensive knowledge -
including knowledge of ways to fall off/through things

Yes, I agree. That Bill Wright knows everything about aerials.

No he doesn't. He doesn't know what sort of aerial I have.

On 08/08/2015 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

My only connection with: http://www.aerialsandtv.com/fmanddabradio.html
is as a very satisfied customer (and they are 150 miles from where I
live!) I suggest that you have a look at their website as it will tell
you all you need to know.

Peter

They do not go around corners unless they have something to reflect from.

Seriously, can you not just trim the tree?


If the aerial is quite old then the down-lead may well now be on the way out
and letting moisture in through the sleeving or at the aerial connections
box, so might be time to get it installed somewhere moor out in the open.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"john west" wrote in message
...
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or do
transmission signals not work like this?

On 08/08/2015 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

Bill will be here soon with the answer.

--
F

www.vulcantothesky.org - 2015, the last year to see a Vulcan fly

F wrote:

Bill will be here soon with the answer.

And then, as if by magic. . .

Bill

john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?

In practice, and ignoring any theoretical stuff, no it won't work at all.

Bill

On 08/08/15 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.


Freesat.


--
Adrian C

"Adrian Caspersz" wrote in message
...
On 08/08/15 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.


Freesat.


Adrian C

you are buggered ...'till winter ....

In article , Jimbo ...
writes

"Adrian Caspersz" wrote in message
...
On 08/08/15 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.


Freesat.


Adrian C

you are buggered ...'till winter ....


Copper nails
--
bert

In article ,
Adrian Caspersz wrote:
On 08/08/15 08:15, john west wrote:
My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.


Freesat.

but that's not straight up.

--
Please note new email address:

Jonno wrote:
john west scribbled


My freeview reception from my wall mounted aerial on the rear wall was
fine until a neighbours tree grew all of its leaves.

The aerial height is just a bit below the topmost height of the tree.

Would it help if i *tilted* the aerial *up* to point over the tree, or
do transmission signals not work like this?


Bin it and install a freesat dish with a nice box. It'll work out
cheaper than a new aerial and you'll get more channels.


Can it feed 15 TV points?

Capitol wrote:

Jonno wrote:

install a freesat dish with a nice box. It'll work out
cheaper than a new aerial and you'll get more channels.

Can it feed 15 TV points?

Not by itself, but ...

http://www.satellitesuperstore.com/emp-centauri_multiswitches.htm#5in

Andy Burns wrote:
Capitol wrote:

Jonno wrote:

install a freesat dish with a nice box. It'll work out
cheaper than a new aerial and you'll get more channels.

Can it feed 15 TV points?

Not by itself, but ...

http://www.satellitesuperstore.com/emp-centauri_multiswitches.htm#5in

So it's now not just a freesat dish with *a* nice box but a freesat dish
with quatro LNB plus multiswitch plus *N* boxes (where N is the number
of TVs/PVRs/PCs etc currently fed from the aerial)? And all without any
idea whether there is a suitable site
for a dish without eg trees between it and the satellite?

I think it'd be easier and cheaper to at least try first a wander about
with an aerial in the loft (after reading Bill's advice on how [not] to
do it of course!).
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

Robin wrote:

all without any idea

Same as most others, my suggestion was to get the aerial up higher ...

Andy Burns wrote:
Robin wrote:

all without any idea

Same as most others, my suggestion was to get the aerial up higher ...

Although I don't think anyone who did so has mentioned that it might be
worth checking first what type of tree it is. Eg if it's growing at 1
to 2 feet a year raising the aerial could become interesting.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid