True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

Thanks

Bob

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

Im using this one for last year or so.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ab=accessories

no complaints. survived some good storms too.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (in the
U.S.).

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Thanks D. - got a bit better search results using 7 & 51 in the seach
rather then 7 & 69

"D. Stussy" wrote in message
...
" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (in the
U.S.).

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will be the
unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

"Bob" wrote in message
...

" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

Im using this one for last year or so.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ab=accessories

no complaints. survived some good storms too.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

I don't know your situation, but many folks can get away with using rabbit
ears. It works, or it doesn't. Barring a serious distance problem, a
proper antenna may not be needed.

If an antenna made exactly for DTV is cheap, then fine. However, I suspect
you may pay extra for an antenna with limited bandwidth over a close out
sale on an old fashioned 2 through 82 antenna.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On Jul 15, 3:43*pm, "Cubit" wrote:
I don't know your situation, but many folks can get away with using
rabbit
ears. *It works, or it doesn't. *Barring a serious distance
problem, a
proper antenna may not be needed.

I disagree on the rabbit ears. If you can do an outdoor antenna it's
preferable for many reasons like less multipath and stronger signal.

If an antenna made exactly for DTV is cheap, then fine. *However, I
suspect
you may pay extra for an antenna with limited bandwidth over a
close out
sale on an old fashioned 2 through 82 antenna.

If you don't mind the size of the antenna. The Winegard 7694 is only
35" wide vs 110" for the 7082. There is no such ting as an antenna
"made exactly for DTV". Antennas cover a range of frequencies thet may
include analog or digital TV. Flatness of response and directionality
are the important issues and are equally important for analog or
digital.

G²

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

w4nng wrote:
Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will be the
unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

I plan on not using those anymore at that time. ;) other wise works
good for analog, digital TV and radio.



"Bob" wrote in message
...
" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?
Im using this one for last year or so.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ab=accessories

no complaints. survived some good storms too.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Dear Bob W4NNG: I have been using a Winegard HD-1080. Reflectors behind
two, parallel, broadside UHF fan dipoles that each have an extension to help
with 7-13. I an using it with 12 and a bunch of UHF channels and it does
behave as expected. I would not call it "high-gain," but good enough in
this flat area.

73, Mac N8TT


--
J. McLaughlin; Michigan, USA
Home:
" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

Thanks

Bob

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

"J. Mc Laughlin" wrote:

Dear Bob W4NNG: I have been using a Winegard HD-1080. Reflectors behind
two, parallel, broadside UHF fan dipoles that each have an extension to help
with 7-13. I an using it with 12 and a bunch of UHF channels and it does
behave as expected. I would not call it "high-gain," but good enough in
this flat area.

73, Mac N8TT

This is probably the antenna I will buy soon!

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In article ,
w4nng wrote:
Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will be the
unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

Channels 2-6 are still allocated to TV, even after 2/09. Only channels
52-69 go away.

Granted, not many major stations are sticking with low-vhf but there
are a few. One of the more notable is WNAZ, the NBC affiliate in
Phoenix which intends to keep using channel 2.

You can check to see what type of antenna you'll need at
www.tvfool.com
You can select either the current stations, or post cutover. For
antenna purposes you want to look at "real channel". Some lucky
markets will be pure UHF after cutover, greatly simplifying their
antenna needs.
--
Jim Prescott - Computing and Networking Group
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, University of Rochester, NY

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In article ,
D. Stussy wrote:
"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)

Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html
--
Jim Prescott - Computing and Networking Group
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, University of Rochester, NY

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

"Jim Prescott" wrote in message
...
In article ,
D. Stussy wrote:
"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)

Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html

Are you certain? I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and NONE of
our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego market
too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but even
XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). None of them have even filed construction
permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
allocations (UHF). If there were to be a place where something were to
remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets) would
have such occur.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On Jul 16, 7:20*pm, "D. Stussy" wrote:
"Jim Prescott" wrote in message

Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). *Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). *To
be sure about what you will need go towww.tvfool.comand see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html

Are you certain? *I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and NONE of
our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego market
too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but even
XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). *None of them have even filed construction
permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
allocations (UHF). *If there were to be a place where something were to
remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets) would
have such occur.

Yes, VHF 2 to 6 will be in use after the analog shutdown. There are
currently 40 full power stations set to operate on low VHF after
02/17/09. The low VHF channels for digital signals are more sensitive
to electrical impulse noise and interference. Few stations in the
major urban cities have opted to use low VHF for digital TV because
they are most prone to interference there. The largest market station
that is currently slated to be on low VHF is WPVI-DT ABC 6 in
Philadelphia which will flash cut from UHF 64 to VHF 6 next February.

In a crowded spectrum market such as LA, what may happen is that some
low power (LP) stations will eventually be forced to go to low VHF
because they can't find any viable upper VHF or UHF channels to be on.
But the LPs that do that are going to be stations that really don't
care about OTA reception, but want a broadcast station so they can get
on the local cable systems - religious stations mostly if I had to
guess.

Over 50 stations submitted petitions in June to the FCC asking for a
different post-transition channel assignment because their current
post-trans channel allotment presents problems for them. A few of
these are stations currently alloted to be on low VHF and asked for a
upper VHF or UHF channel, so when the dust settles next year (and
there will be a LOT of dust), we may have fewer than 40 low VHF full
power stations, but they will be there. Many cities will not have any
low VHF digital stations, but will have at least 1 upper VHF station.
Hence the need for antenna for upper VHF and UHF.

BTW, low power stations will be allowed to operate on UHF 52 to 59 if
they have no alternate good channel assignment, but they also have to
have permission from who ever brought the channel frequency to operate
there. The last part will likely limit any LP stations in the UHF 52
to 59 range to rural or remote areas, but a LP station in Denver
recently filed for a digital UHF 52 channel post-transition.

Alan F

PS Verizon messed up my usenet access when they dropped alt.* groups.
Thanks a lot, Verizon and the NY AG.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On 16 Jul 2008 19:00:50 -0400, Jim Prescott wrote:

In article ,
D. Stussy wrote:
"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)

Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html
San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose area
2, 4, 5 are very good and popular stations in the low VHF band

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:53:46 -0700, "D. Stussy" wrote:

" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?

"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (in the
U.S.).

After February 2009, some DTV stations still will be on lower VHF (Channels 2
through 6. See
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-07-138A2.pdf
Look up your city in this URL; you may find that you need a Low VHF antenna
also. For example, in Las Vegas (near where I live) NTSC Channel 3 will be on
Channel 2 broadcasting DTV.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On Jul 16, 11:36*pm, Steve Urbach
wrote:

San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose area
2, 4, 5 are very good and popular stations in the low VHF band

All active analog stations with a digital signal are broadcasting
that digital signal on a different channel. The ATSC tuners maps them
to the displayed channel number. Some 500 stations will flash cut
their digital signal back to their analog channel next February after
the analog shutdown, but the vast majority of the low VHF analog
stations will have their physical be on UHF or upper VHF.

In the San Francisco market,
KTVU-DT Fox 2 is currently on UHF 56, will move to UHF 44 next year.
KRON-DT MyN 4 is currently on UHF 57, will move to UHF 38 next year.
KPIX-DT CBS 5 is currently on UHF 29 and will stay there next year.
KGO-DT ABC 7 is currently on UHF 24, will flash cut to VHF 7 next
year.
KNTV-DT NBC 11 is on UHF 12 and will stay there next year.

The San Francisco market has perhaps the most complicated transition
of any city in the US next February and in the months afterwords,
Stations will be putting up new antennas on the Sutro Tower, taking
old ones off, moving to channels currently occupied by other analog
stations. Many stations will be using their backup reduced coverage
antennas in the daytime when the tower is being worked on.

Alan F

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Bob wrote:
w4nng wrote:
Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will
be the unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

I plan on not using those anymore at that time. ;) other wise works
good for analog, digital TV and radio.

oops guess i wuz wrong I see a couple in my potenetial area on DTV
channel 6. May be a good thing to have the full antenna after all. :)

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-07-138A2.pdf

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

"J. Mc Laughlin" wrote:

I have been using a Winegard HD-1080

How big is it? Compact?

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Jim Prescott wrote:
| In article ,
| w4nng wrote:
|Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will be the
|unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6
|
| Channels 2-6 are still allocated to TV, even after 2/09. Only channels
| 52-69 go away.
|
| Granted, not many major stations are sticking with low-vhf but there
| are a few. One of the more notable is WNAZ, the NBC affiliate in
| Phoenix which intends to keep using channel 2.

Usuaully its the stations the FCC did a screw-job on. They already had
low-band analog and were given either a low-band transition or a depricated
UHF transition in 52-69.

Congress should have mandated that the FCC find space on high VHF or UHF for
all stations that wanted it, with an emphasis on making a market have all on
UHF where possible, and where not possible, put many on high VHF so that not
a single station is alone there.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv D. Stussy wrote:
| "Jim Prescott" wrote in message
| ...
| In article ,
| D. Stussy wrote:
| "Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)
|
| Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
| 2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
| receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
| be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
| real channels will be used in your area after transition.
|
| http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html
|
| Are you certain? I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and NONE of
| our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego market
| too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but even
| XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). None of them have even filed construction
| permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
| allocations (UHF). If there were to be a place where something were to
| remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets) would
| have such occur.

See if you can find an available channel for WDTV, then (ironic callsign).

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv D. Stussy wrote:

| Are you certain? I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and NONE of
| our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego market
| too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but even
| XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). None of them have even filed construction
| permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
| allocations (UHF). If there were to be a place where something were to
| remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets) would
| have such occur.

Most markets in the USA have to deal with issues from stations in all directions
around those cities. Los Angeles doesn't have to deal with stations to the west.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv wrote:

| PS Verizon messed up my usenet access when they dropped alt.* groups.
| Thanks a lot, Verizon and the NY AG.

I trust that you are calling them every single day to tell them that it is
absolute stupidity to remove newgroups that have no child porn as part of a
compaign they claim to be against child porn.

And then you switch to using the NUMBER ONE source of Usenet spam as your
alternative? Just pray that the spammers don't start doing "followup spam"
via Google groups to try to get past the blocking that allows followups to
bypass filters (e.g. I'll figure out how to block it all if spammers do that
before Google cleans house, and will be quite willing to tell everyone else
how to do it).

You could, instead, switch to one of the paid Usenet providers, and just
treat it as Verizon raised your billing price again.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv G-squared wrote:

| If you don't mind the size of the antenna. The Winegard 7694 is only
| 35" wide vs 110" for the 7082. There is no such ting as an antenna
| "made exactly for DTV". Antennas cover a range of frequencies thet may
| include analog or digital TV. Flatness of response and directionality
| are the important issues and are equally important for analog or
| digital.

However, antennas could be made for "post-transition channel allocations".
E.g. the UHF antennas tuned for 14-51, and dual-banders for 7-51. And DTV
benefits more from more directional antennas, so even those will end up
with sales people labelling them as "DTV".

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Bob wrote:
Bob wrote:
w4nng wrote:
Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will
be the unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

I plan on not using those anymore at that time. ;) other wise works
good for analog, digital TV and radio.

oops guess i wuz wrong I see a couple in my potenetial area on DTV
channel 6. May be a good thing to have the full antenna after all. :)

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-07-138A2.pdf



FOUND ANOTHER ON DTV 4 CBS. dude don't be leaving out channels by
getting the wrong antenna. could be sporting events from different
cities and states you'll be missing out on if you don't get low vhf.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

w4nng wrote:
Bob that antenna appears to be a standard ant w/ what in Feb 09, will be the
unnecessary large elements for ch 2 - 6

"Bob" wrote in message
...
" w4nng" wrote in message
...
Besides Wineguard's HD769 series, anyone know of other Ch 7 thru 69 DTV
hi-gain outdoor antennas?
Im using this one for last year or so.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ab=accessories

no complaints. survived some good storms too.




That is NOT a safe bet, depending on your local stations. Two of our
local stations will be reverting BACK to VHF at that time. They are on
UHF now. So before telling someone that they will not need the "longer
elements" (VHF), it would behoove them to check and see just what their
local conditions will dictate.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

D. Stussy wrote:
"Jim Prescott" wrote in message
...
In article ,
D. Stussy wrote:
"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)
Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html

Are you certain? I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and NONE of
our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego market
too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but even
XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). None of them have even filed construction
permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
allocations (UHF). If there were to be a place where something were to
remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets) would
have such occur.


Our local ABC affiliate WOI is reverting from UHF to VHF channel 5 in
Feb 2009. It's nuts, but that's what they are doing. Nother station is
going from UHF channel 31 to VHF channel 8...so it is NOT unheard of and
those who blindly go UHF only in an antenna without knowing what EXACTLY
their locals are going to do may find another antenna purchase in their
future.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

wrote in message
...
(snip)
Usuaully its the stations the FCC did a screw-job on.
They already had
low-band analog and were given either a low-band
transition or a depricated
UHF transition in 52-69.

Congress should have mandated that the FCC find space on
high VHF or UHF for
all stations that wanted it, with an emphasis on making a
market have all on
UHF where possible, and where not possible, put many on
high VHF so that not
a single station is alone there.

Phil,

Some stations wanted to remain on the low VHF channels for
power and propagation reasons. Some broadcasters in the
Midwest with large coverage areas get a lower electric bill
on those channels even though the threat of interference is
higher. Interference is a bigger problem in metropolitan
areas than it is in the flat rural corn fields of the U.S.
bread basket.

David

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

On Jul 17, 2:10*pm, "David" wrote:
wrote in message

...

(snip)
Usuaully its the stations the FCC did a screw-job on.
They already had
low-band analog and were given either a low-band
transition or a depricated
UHF transition in 52-69.

Congress should have mandated that the FCC find space on
high VHF or UHF for
all stations that wanted it, with an emphasis on making a
market have all on
UHF where possible, and where not possible, put many on
high VHF so that not
a single station is alone there.

Phil,

Some stations wanted to remain on the low VHF channels for
power and propagation reasons. Some broadcasters in the
Midwest with large coverage areas get a lower electric bill
on those channels even though the threat of interference is
higher. Interference is a bigger problem in metropolitan
areas than it is in the flat rural corn fields of the U.S.
bread basket.

David

I used to work at a low band VHF station that was running 56 kW ERP.
The actual transmitter output was 8kW visual and 2.3 kW aural. When I
bellyached that KABC 7 in LA would be running only 13kW DT, Alan
Figgatt pointed out that DTV doesn't require as much power as analog
and 13 kW should be good here. The point is that from a power
standpoint, VHF-lo vs VHF-hi wouldn't be all that big a deal. The
station gear and A/C would be a much bigger load than the actual
transmitter. Compare that to analog UHF where 55 kW visual and 10kW
aural is common. THOSE folks will see a big savings but compared to
the power load when all the studio lights are on for a production or
newcast, even 65 kW is a big part but not the biggest. HVAC can be a
bigger load issue - particularly with VHF-hi where 13kW ERP may only
need a few kW of acutal transmitter output.

I hope I don't hear how the DTV breaks up a lot during lightning
strikes. I know that on VHF-lo analog you get LOTS of 'sparklies'
during lightning storms.

G²

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Dear "me" Not big at all. It is intended for high VHF and UHF. I have
it mounted on a tube that is supported in turn by the top section of a
tower, which became surplus after a rotator change. The whole assembly is
in a second story room with the main computer and can be rotated by hand.

It is deceptive to put numbers on the size. The reflector consists of five
doublets each with a tip-to-top length of 26.5 inches and a total height of
a little over 16 inches. The twin "driven" elements are spaced about 6.6
inches in front of the reflectors (obviously the reflectors are only
effective for UHF). The tip-to-tip length of the driven elements is about
34.5 inches (giving a predicted 0.5 WL resonance towards the bottom of the
higher VHF TV band). Each driven element is coaxial with a fan dipole that
should have a resonance somewhere in the UHF band. Thus one expects a small
gain with a small F/B in the higher VHF band and fair gain with good F/B in
the UHF band.

I hope that this is of some assistance. I regret that you believe you must
be anonymous.

Regards, Mac N8TT

--
J. McLaughlin; Michigan, USA
Home:
wrote in message
...
"J. Mc Laughlin" wrote:

I have been using a Winegard HD-1080

How big is it? Compact?

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

"Hasan Schiers" wrote in message
...
D. Stussy wrote:
"Jim Prescott" wrote in message
...
In article ,
D. Stussy wrote:
"Ch 7 thru 69 DTV"? Only 7-51 is authorized after the transition (US)
Channels 2-51 are all allocated to DTV (except for 37). Channels
2-6 aren't as popular so many people won't need an antenna that can
receive them; some people can even get by with UHF only (14-51). To
be sure about what you will need go to www.tvfool.com and see what
real channels will be used in your area after transition.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvantennas.html

Are you certain? I'm in Los Angeles, the #2 market of the U.S., and
NONE of
our existing stations in Southern California (including the San Diego
market
too) are keeping their allocations on 2-5 (6 is assigned to Mexico, but
even
XETV (FOX) is moving to UHF). None of them have even filed construction
permits for that range - but have actually filed permits for other
allocations (UHF). If there were to be a place where something were to
remain in 2-6, I'd think that the top 10 (out of the ~200 TV markets)
would
have such occur.


Our local ABC affiliate WOI is reverting from UHF to VHF channel 5 in
Feb 2009. It's nuts, but that's what they are doing. Nother station is
going from UHF channel 31 to VHF channel 8...so it is NOT unheard of and
those who blindly go UHF only in an antenna without knowing what EXACTLY
their locals are going to do may find another antenna purchase in their
future.

You are aware that channel 8 is NOT in the 2-6 segment (VHF-low), so that is
irrevelant.

Channels 2-4 = 54-72Mhz.
5-6 = 76-88MHz.
7-13 = 174-216Mhz.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

wrote in message
...
On Jul 16, 11:36 pm, Steve Urbach wrote:
San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose area
2, 4, 5 are very good and popular stations in the low VHF band

All active analog stations with a digital signal are broadcasting
that digital signal on a different channel. The ATSC tuners maps them
to the displayed channel number. Some 500 stations will flash cut
their digital signal back to their analog channel next February after
the analog shutdown, but the vast majority of the low VHF analog
stations will have their physical be on UHF or upper VHF.

In the San Francisco market,
KTVU-DT Fox 2 is currently on UHF 56, will move to UHF 44 next year.
KRON-DT MyN 4 is currently on UHF 57, will move to UHF 38 next year.
KPIX-DT CBS 5 is currently on UHF 29 and will stay there next year.
KGO-DT ABC 7 is currently on UHF 24, will flash cut to VHF 7 next
year.
KNTV-DT NBC 11 is on UHF 12 and will stay there next year.
....


Which, for the clueless, means NO DTV on 2-6, which is exactly what I said.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

D. Stussy wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Jul 16, 11:36 pm, Steve Urbach wrote:

San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose area
2, 4, 5 are very good and popular stations in the low VHF band


All active analog stations with a digital signal are broadcasting
that digital signal on a different channel. The ATSC tuners maps them
to the displayed channel number. Some 500 stations will flash cut
their digital signal back to their analog channel next February after
the analog shutdown, but the vast majority of the low VHF analog
stations will have their physical be on UHF or upper VHF.

In the San Francisco market,
KTVU-DT Fox 2 is currently on UHF 56, will move to UHF 44 next year.
KRON-DT MyN 4 is currently on UHF 57, will move to UHF 38 next year.
KPIX-DT CBS 5 is currently on UHF 29 and will stay there next year.
KGO-DT ABC 7 is currently on UHF 24, will flash cut to VHF 7 next
year.
KNTV-DT NBC 11 is on UHF 12 and will stay there next year.
...


Which, for the clueless, means NO DTV on 2-6, which is exactly what I said.


Hi Stussy. Well I see that HDTV arrangements are just as chaotic in the
us as they are in NZ. Even now many in the trade are still "guessing".
We have allocated 6 UHF channels for HDTV but since NZ is a very hilly
country this gives only patchy coverage out to about 50Km with a lot of
dead spots. At least we are keeping SDTV running for a few years yet on
VHF and UHF.
Where I live about 55Km from Auckland we can't get solid HDTV reception
and they aren't using satellite HDTV for free to air Tv for a while, so
we will have to wait despite having a suitable RX.
Let's hope they sort themselves out soon everywhere, though I fear that
things have been allowed to become too disorganised.
Cliff Wright ZL1BDA

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

D. Stussy wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Jul 16, 11:36 pm, Steve Urbach wrote:
San Francisco,Oakland,San Jose area
2, 4, 5 are very good and popular stations in the low VHF band

All active analog stations with a digital signal are broadcasting
that digital signal on a different channel. The ATSC tuners maps them
to the displayed channel number. Some 500 stations will flash cut
their digital signal back to their analog channel next February after
the analog shutdown, but the vast majority of the low VHF analog
stations will have their physical be on UHF or upper VHF.

In the San Francisco market,
KTVU-DT Fox 2 is currently on UHF 56, will move to UHF 44 next year.
KRON-DT MyN 4 is currently on UHF 57, will move to UHF 38 next year.
KPIX-DT CBS 5 is currently on UHF 29 and will stay there next year.
KGO-DT ABC 7 is currently on UHF 24, will flash cut to VHF 7 next
year.
KNTV-DT NBC 11 is on UHF 12 and will stay there next year.
...


Which, for the clueless, means NO DTV on 2-6, which is exactly what I said.


[adding qualifier] in Frisco, for now.
there is and will be DTV on 2-6 in other areas.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Hasan Schiers wrote:
wrote:
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv G-squared wrote:

| If you don't mind the size of the antenna. The Winegard 7694 is only
| 35" wide vs 110" for the 7082. There is no such ting as an antenna
| "made exactly for DTV". Antennas cover a range of frequencies thet may
| include analog or digital TV. Flatness of response and directionality
| are the important issues and are equally important for analog or
| digital.

However, antennas could be made for "post-transition channel
allocations".
E.g. the UHF antennas tuned for 14-51, and dual-banders for 7-51. And
DTV
benefits more from more directional antennas, so even those will end up
with sales people labelling them as "DTV".


Which will do no good here at all. Post transition our local ABC
affiliate is going to VHF channel 5.

There is no substitute for the long tried and tested combo vhf/uhf
antenna in our area.

I see only 1 ABC affiliate going to VHF 5 post-transition and that is
WOI-DT ABC 5 in Des Moines moving from UHF 59 to VHF 5. Is that your
local ABC affiliate? The FCC database shows WOI-DT with a low STA
(Special Temporary Authority) power of 500 Watts on UHF 59 which is a
very weak power if correct.

The good news to some extent is that WOI-DT was granted their request
to run at an increased power of 8.2 kW (up from 3.91 kW) for the
post-transition VHF 5 allotment which is a good power level for digital
low VHF. In Des Moines, IA, there should be a number of open channels to
broadcast on UHF if WIO wanted to.

Alan F

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Alan F wrote:
| wrote:
| In alt.tv.tech.hdtv wrote:
|
| | PS Verizon messed up my usenet access when they dropped alt.* groups.
| | Thanks a lot, Verizon and the NY AG.
|
| I trust that you are calling them every single day to tell them that it is
| absolute stupidity to remove newgroups that have no child porn as part of a
| compaign they claim to be against child porn.
|
| And then you switch to using the NUMBER ONE source of Usenet spam as your
| alternative? Just pray that the spammers don't start doing "followup spam"
| via Google groups to try to get past the blocking that allows followups to
| bypass filters (e.g. I'll figure out how to block it all if spammers do that
| before Google cleans house, and will be quite willing to tell everyone else
| how to do it).
|
| You could, instead, switch to one of the paid Usenet providers, and just
| treat it as Verizon raised your billing price again.
|
| I used google groups as a temporary measure to post because my posts
| were not getting through via the 2 newsgroups services I was trying.
| We'll see if it now all works...

It seems giganews is working for you.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Alan F wrote:
Hasan Schiers wrote:
wrote:
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv G-squared wrote:

| If you don't mind the size of the antenna. The Winegard 7694 is only
| 35" wide vs 110" for the 7082. There is no such ting as an antenna
| "made exactly for DTV". Antennas cover a range of frequencies thet may
| include analog or digital TV. Flatness of response and directionality
| are the important issues and are equally important for analog or
| digital.

However, antennas could be made for "post-transition channel
allocations".
E.g. the UHF antennas tuned for 14-51, and dual-banders for 7-51.
And DTV
benefits more from more directional antennas, so even those will end up
with sales people labelling them as "DTV".


Which will do no good here at all. Post transition our local ABC
affiliate is going to VHF channel 5.

There is no substitute for the long tried and tested combo vhf/uhf
antenna in our area.

I see only 1 ABC affiliate going to VHF 5 post-transition and that is
WOI-DT ABC 5 in Des Moines moving from UHF 59 to VHF 5. Is that your
local ABC affiliate? The FCC database shows WOI-DT with a low STA
(Special Temporary Authority) power of 500 Watts on UHF 59 which is a
very weak power if correct.

The good news to some extent is that WOI-DT was granted their request
to run at an increased power of 8.2 kW (up from 3.91 kW) for the
post-transition VHF 5 allotment which is a good power level for digital
low VHF. In Des Moines, IA, there should be a number of open channels to
broadcast on UHF if WIO wanted to.

Alan F



Yes, that is the station and they have applied for a further increase in
power to around 13 kW, but I don't know if it has been granted. So, we
do have a low band vhf station that will "appear" in Feb 2009. I am at a
total loss to explain why they made this decision...it is likely to
reduce their footprint significantly. Channel 8-1 is doing the same
thing, moving from RF Ch 31 to RF Ch 8, at the same time.

Ch 5 analog has been famous for years here for having a rotten signal.
When they went digital to 5-1 on UHF, they skyrocketed and have been
solid....now they are going back and probably in the toilet again. Thank
God ABC lost Monday Night Football.

True Outdoor HDTV yagi's
 

Hasan Schiers wrote:
Alan F wrote:
Hasan Schiers wrote:
Which will do no good here at all. Post transition our local ABC
affiliate is going to VHF channel 5.

There is no substitute for the long tried and tested combo vhf/uhf
antenna in our area.

I see only 1 ABC affiliate going to VHF 5 post-transition and that is
WOI-DT ABC 5 in Des Moines moving from UHF 59 to VHF 5. Is that your
local ABC affiliate? The FCC database shows WOI-DT with a low STA
(Special Temporary Authority) power of 500 Watts on UHF 59 which is a
very weak power if correct.

The good news to some extent is that WOI-DT was granted their request
to run at an increased power of 8.2 kW (up from 3.91 kW) for the
post-transition VHF 5 allotment which is a good power level for digital
low VHF. In Des Moines, IA, there should be a number of open channels to
broadcast on UHF if WIO wanted to.

Alan F


Yes, that is the station and they have applied for a further increase in
power to around 13 kW, but I don't know if it has been granted. So, we
do have a low band vhf station that will "appear" in Feb 2009. I am at a
total loss to explain why they made this decision...it is likely to
reduce their footprint significantly. Channel 8-1 is doing the same
thing, moving from RF Ch 31 to RF Ch 8, at the same time.

Ch 5 analog has been famous for years here for having a rotten signal.
When they went digital to 5-1 on UHF, they skyrocketed and have been
solid....now they are going back and probably in the toilet again. Thank
God ABC lost Monday Night Football.

WOI-DT applied for a 11.5 kW ERP on VHF 5 in June, but the FCC has not
granted or rejected the application yet. The only real reason I can see
for going to low-VHF for where they are is to save money by re-using the
VHF 5 antenna & transmitter and for the lower operating costs of low
VHF. Their UHF 59 digital signal is out of core, so they have to give
that up. If they have interference problems for analog on VHF 5, that
won't go away for digital VHF 5.

You have 3 stations in Des Moines do a digital flash cut to their
upper VHF analog channel. Upper VHF at 174 to 216 MHz (compared to low
VHF at 54 to 88 MHz) is considered a good band for digital broadcasting.

KCCI-DT CBS 8 will move from 31 to VHF 8 at 23 kW ERP.
KDIN-DT PBS 11 will move from UHF 50 to 11 at 19.8 kW, but plans to
operate on UHF 50 for a while after the analog shutdown for VHF 11
antenna work
(http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/f...bit_id=618292).
WHO-DT NBC 13 will move from UHF 19 to VHF 13 at 29 kW ERP.

All 3 of them will have respectable power levels for digital upper
VHF. I also see that KDMI-DT My Network 56(?) will take over KCCI's RF
31 antenna and transmitter. Good luck with WOI-DT reception after they
switch.

Alan F