The Jets' games are carried on channel 2 New York, which is 102 miles
as the crow flies from my house. Football packages on satellite TV
are beyond present financial condition. I only care about channel 2,
New York.

I thought all VHF television transmission will be discontinued as of
February 2009. Building a VHF antenna would seem to be a
wasted effort. You need to think how you can receive the
same station on UHF digital. There are plenty of UHF antennas
available; you may also need a low noise, mast-head, pre-amplifier
to get a good signal.

Regards,

Frank

"Frank" wrote in message
news:lNSwk.747$1x6.137@edtnps82...
The Jets' games are carried on channel 2 New York, which is 102 miles
as the crow flies from my house. Football packages on satellite TV
are beyond present financial condition. I only care about channel 2,
New York.

I thought all VHF television transmission will be discontinued as of
February 2009. Building a VHF antenna would seem to be a
wasted effort. You need to think how you can receive the
same station on UHF digital. There are plenty of UHF antennas
available; you may also need a low noise, mast-head, pre-amplifier
to get a good signal.

Regards,

Frank
WCBS, CH2 NY, will be on UHF channel 33 (digital) after 2/17/09. So, don't
waste your money on a ch 2 antenna.

Tam

In article lNSwk.747$1x6.137@edtnps82,
"Frank" wrote:

The Jets' games are carried on channel 2 New York, which is 102 miles
as the crow flies from my house. Football packages on satellite TV
are beyond present financial condition. I only care about channel 2,
New York.

I thought all VHF television transmission will be discontinued as of
February 2009. Building a VHF antenna would seem to be a
wasted effort. You need to think how you can receive the
same station on UHF digital. There are plenty of UHF antennas
available; you may also need a low noise, mast-head, pre-amplifier
to get a good signal.

Regards,

Frank

hmm I thought not all the channels will necessarily change meaning
some of the vhf stations will still be there just switching from analog
to digital?

i have received some tv stations from about 100m away from
nyc in the catskill region, perhaps the natural elevation helped

but in that same area of ct i have also received ch 2 using
regular antenna however receving the ny ch wasn't the problem
the closer local ch 2 was more of an issue so pic wasn't
perfect

i used a regular but large radioshack antenna and coax

Thank you all for replying. Sorry to take so long to get back here.
I momentarily put the project aside because, after missing the first
game, (I posted the first message about an hour before game time,
lol), the Jets will be carried on my cable stations for the next two
weeks. Add the bye week into that and I had a couple of weeks to get
this thing together-there was no super-immediate rush. But I am going
to build this in the next week or so.

As far as Channel 2 going to UHF in February, the Jets regular season
ends in December, so an antenna that is useful until February will
take of this season nicely. Any post season playoff games by the
Jets, (should they get into the playoffs), will be broadcast
nationally, so I won't need the antenna for that. I'll worry about
next season when it happens. However, don't be surprised if next
September you see a thread about building a UHF antenna for the new
Channel 2 New York.

I have high hopes for this project giving me some kind of watchable,
albeit possibly snowy signal. Here's why. Several years ago I
dangled a piece of twin lead from my second floor window to the ground
and got both the sound and an extremely, extremely snowy picture of
Channel 4 New York, (which carried the Jets at that time). The house
I lived in was a few miles farther inland than the one I lived in now,
and it was just a simple 12 foot piece of twin lead out the window,
but I got SOMETHING. Ths project will be on a pole, on a roof, on a
house closer to the water using an antenna scientifically optimized
for Channel 2, so I think the chances of getting something watchable
are very good. There must be something more at play here than just
"line-of-sight" from here to the Empire State Building, at least at
this frequency. Besides, friends driving down to New York tell me
that they pick up FM stations on their car radios about 20 miles down
the road from here. FM frequencies are a little bit higher,
(therefore more straight line), than Channel 2. Though the
requirements for FM reception and TV reception are not the same, it
still indicates that I am not too far out of range for this
frequency.

I have found an interesting project from the US Patent Office, so it
is between that and Sal's Yagi. I am leaning toward the Yagi, so I
will be back with more questions in the next day or two. Just a few
questions:

A) What is the gain of Sal's Yagi compared to a single dipole?

B) In sound, there is a rule for Sound Pressure Level which says
"double the distance, 6 dB down in decibels". In other words, If I
have a Sound Pressure Level of 100 dB at ten feet, if I move back to
twenty feet my SPL goes down to 94 decibels. Does a similar rule
apply to antenna reception, that if get good reception with a certain
antenna from 50 miles away, I need an antenna 6 dB more sensitive to
get similar reception from 100 miles away?




On Sep 9, 10:11*am, ml wrote:
In article lNSwk.747$1x6.137@edtnps82,





*"Frank" wrote:
The Jets' games are carried on channel 2 New York, which is 102 miles
as the crow flies from my house. *Football packages on satellite TV
are beyond present financial condition. *I only care about channel 2,
New York.

I thought all VHF television transmission will be discontinued as of
February 2009. *Building a VHF antenna would seem to be a
wasted effort. *You need to think how you can receive the
same station on UHF digital. *There are plenty of UHF antennas
available; you may also need a low noise, mast-head, pre-amplifier
to get a good signal.

Regards,

Frank

hmm I thought * not all the channels will necessarily change meaning *
some of the vhf *stations will still be there just switching from analog *
to digital?

i have *received * *some * tv stations * * from *about 100m away from
nyc *in the catskill region, perhaps the natural elevation *helped

but * in that same area of *ct * i have * also received ch 2 * using
regular *antenna *however * * *receving *the ny *ch wasn't *the problem *
the * closer * local *ch 2 * was *more of *an issue * *so pic wasn't
perfect

i used *a regular *but large *radioshack antenna *and coax

JoeSch wrote:
Thank you all for replying. Sorry to take so long to get back here.
I momentarily put the project aside because, after missing the first
game, (I posted the first message about an hour before game time,
lol), the Jets will be carried on my cable stations for the next two
weeks. Add the bye week into that and I had a couple of weeks to get
this thing together-there was no super-immediate rush. But I am going
to build this in the next week or so.

Since this is a ham radio antenna news group, I suggest that you look up
6 meter beam antennas. The 6 meter ham band is just below the US channel
2, so they would work fine for reception.

TV signals are horizontaly polarized, so make sure to orient
your antenna appropriately.

Since you are using it for recpetion only, no complicated matching
network is needed between the antenna and the feed line. 300 Ohm twinlead,
or a simple 300 Ohm to coax transformer will do nicely.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM

Line of sight is the conservative and baseline propagation mode. You can
more or less rely on that when the terrain is flat. There are Mathematical
models that are somewhat predictive. Variations in elevation play a great
part and living closer to water usually means you are lower in elevation.
When there are variations in elevation, things that reflect and things that
block the signal add to the complexity and the calculations usually go out
the window. Area knowledge of the various sites and their odd coverage
areas might more resemble an inkblot test. You may find an online coverage
map for Empire State Building as it is a major radio and TV site. This
might give you an idea:
http://www.tvfool.com/

For the VHF channels, weather also plays a great part. Thermal inversions
that result in a cold/warm layer of air can act as a reflector, often
doubling the range. I routinely talk to people 100+ miles away this way in
the Summer months, but by Winter, the path is gone and can't even hear them
anymore. You may have an advantage if your path goes over the water,
otherwise it will hurt to be lower in elevation.

Here is a plot for WCBS-TV
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...-TV%26type%3dA

"JB" wrote in message
news:nMRzk.252$Yw1.138@trnddc03...
Here is a plot for WCBS-TV
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...CBS-TV%26type%
3dA



Be optimistic. That plot is conservative and here's why:

I grew up on Long Island and we often got Philly stations on a simple attic
antenna. However, the plots for Philly stations do not show that can
happen.

"Sal"

"JoeSch" wrote in message
...
Thank you all for replying. Sorry to take so long to get back here.
I momentarily put the project aside because, after missing the first
game, (I posted the first message about an hour before game time,
lol), the Jets will be carried on my cable stations for the next two
weeks. Add the bye week into that and I had a couple of weeks to get
this thing together-there was no super-immediate rush. But I am going
to build this in the next week or so.

As far as Channel 2 going to UHF in February, the Jets regular season
ends in December, so an antenna that is useful until February will
take of this season nicely. Any post season playoff games by the
Jets, (should they get into the playoffs), will be broadcast
nationally, so I won't need the antenna for that. I'll worry about
next season when it happens. However, don't be surprised if next
September you see a thread about building a UHF antenna for the new
Channel 2 New York.

I have high hopes for this project giving me some kind of watchable,
albeit possibly snowy signal. Here's why. Several years ago I
dangled a piece of twin lead from my second floor window to the ground
and got both the sound and an extremely, extremely snowy picture of
Channel 4 New York, (which carried the Jets at that time). The house
I lived in was a few miles farther inland than the one I lived in now,
and it was just a simple 12 foot piece of twin lead out the window,
but I got SOMETHING. Ths project will be on a pole, on a roof, on a
house closer to the water using an antenna scientifically optimized
for Channel 2, so I think the chances of getting something watchable
are very good. There must be something more at play here than just
"line-of-sight" from here to the Empire State Building, at least at
this frequency. Besides, friends driving down to New York tell me
that they pick up FM stations on their car radios about 20 miles down
the road from here. FM frequencies are a little bit higher,
(therefore more straight line), than Channel 2. Though the
requirements for FM reception and TV reception are not the same, it
still indicates that I am not too far out of range for this
frequency.

I have found an interesting project from the US Patent Office, so it
is between that and Sal's Yagi. I am leaning toward the Yagi, so I
will be back with more questions in the next day or two. Just a few
questions:

A) What is the gain of Sal's Yagi compared to a single dipole?

SAL ADDS: YOU'LL GET GAIN OF SIX TO EIGHT DB (NOT SHOUTING. USING CAPS
TO OFFSET, SINCE THE STUPID PROGRAM DIDN'T MAKE THE RIGHT MARKS.)

B) In sound, there is a rule for Sound Pressure Level which says
"double the distance, 6 dB down in decibels". In other words, If I
have a Sound Pressure Level of 100 dB at ten feet, if I move back to
twenty feet my SPL goes down to 94 decibels. Does a similar rule
apply to antenna reception, that if get good reception with a certain
antenna from 50 miles away, I need an antenna 6 dB more sensitive to
get similar reception from 100 miles away?

IT'S WORSE THAN THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, SINCE THE SIGNAL DOESN'T BEND MUCH
AROUND THE EARTH'S CURVATURE. IT WOULD BE TRUE FOR DISTANCES OF 5 AND 10
MILES, RESPECTIVELY, SINCE THE EARTH'S CURVATURE DOESN'T COME INTO PLAY AT
THOSE DISTANCES. (YOUR SOURCE IS ABOUT 1200 FT UP IN THE AIR.)

A PHENOMENON CALLED "DUCTING" WILL SOMETIMES TRUMP THE EARTH'S CURVATURE.
TV SIGNALS CAN GET TRAPPED IN ATMOSPHERIC LAYERS AND BE RETURNED TO EARTH
MUCH STRONGER THAN THE THEORY PREDICTS. DUCTS ARE MORE COMMON IN WARM AIR,
SO FOOTBALL SEASON IN THE NORTHEAST IS NOT THE TIME TO BE HOPING FOR
DUCTING.

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WCBS-2 IS ALREADY SENDING OUT ITS DIGITAL SIGNAL IN
ADVANCE OF NEXT FEBRUARY -- MOST STATIONS ARE DOING SO. WCBS IS ON CHANNEL
56 NOW AND WILL DROP TO 33 ON TRANSITION DAY. SEE
http://rabbitears.info/market.php

IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT A BIG UHF ANTENNA WOULD WORK FOR YOU. IT WORKS FOR
ME, HERE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, BUT MY DISTANT TRANSMITTERS ARE ON A 6,000
FT MOUNTAINTOP, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE FOR ME.

"SAL"

dittos

"Sal M. Onella" wrote in message
news

"JoeSch" wrote in message
...
Thank you all for replying. Sorry to take so long to get back here.
I momentarily put the project aside because, after missing the first
game, (I posted the first message about an hour before game time,
lol), the Jets will be carried on my cable stations for the next two
weeks. Add the bye week into that and I had a couple of weeks to get
this thing together-there was no super-immediate rush. But I am going
to build this in the next week or so.

As far as Channel 2 going to UHF in February, the Jets regular season
ends in December, so an antenna that is useful until February will
take of this season nicely. Any post season playoff games by the
Jets, (should they get into the playoffs), will be broadcast
nationally, so I won't need the antenna for that. I'll worry about
next season when it happens. However, don't be surprised if next
September you see a thread about building a UHF antenna for the new
Channel 2 New York.

I have high hopes for this project giving me some kind of watchable,
albeit possibly snowy signal. Here's why. Several years ago I
dangled a piece of twin lead from my second floor window to the ground
and got both the sound and an extremely, extremely snowy picture of
Channel 4 New York, (which carried the Jets at that time). The house
I lived in was a few miles farther inland than the one I lived in now,
and it was just a simple 12 foot piece of twin lead out the window,
but I got SOMETHING. Ths project will be on a pole, on a roof, on a
house closer to the water using an antenna scientifically optimized
for Channel 2, so I think the chances of getting something watchable
are very good. There must be something more at play here than just
"line-of-sight" from here to the Empire State Building, at least at
this frequency. Besides, friends driving down to New York tell me
that they pick up FM stations on their car radios about 20 miles down
the road from here. FM frequencies are a little bit higher,
(therefore more straight line), than Channel 2. Though the
requirements for FM reception and TV reception are not the same, it
still indicates that I am not too far out of range for this
frequency.

I have found an interesting project from the US Patent Office, so it
is between that and Sal's Yagi. I am leaning toward the Yagi, so I
will be back with more questions in the next day or two. Just a few
questions:

A) What is the gain of Sal's Yagi compared to a single dipole?

SAL ADDS: YOU'LL GET GAIN OF SIX TO EIGHT DB (NOT SHOUTING. USING CAPS
TO OFFSET, SINCE THE STUPID PROGRAM DIDN'T MAKE THE RIGHT MARKS.)

B) In sound, there is a rule for Sound Pressure Level which says
"double the distance, 6 dB down in decibels". In other words, If I
have a Sound Pressure Level of 100 dB at ten feet, if I move back to
twenty feet my SPL goes down to 94 decibels. Does a similar rule
apply to antenna reception, that if get good reception with a certain
antenna from 50 miles away, I need an antenna 6 dB more sensitive to
get similar reception from 100 miles away?

IT'S WORSE THAN THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, SINCE THE SIGNAL DOESN'T BEND MUCH
AROUND THE EARTH'S CURVATURE. IT WOULD BE TRUE FOR DISTANCES OF 5 AND 10
MILES, RESPECTIVELY, SINCE THE EARTH'S CURVATURE DOESN'T COME INTO PLAY AT
THOSE DISTANCES. (YOUR SOURCE IS ABOUT 1200 FT UP IN THE AIR.)

A PHENOMENON CALLED "DUCTING" WILL SOMETIMES TRUMP THE EARTH'S CURVATURE.
TV SIGNALS CAN GET TRAPPED IN ATMOSPHERIC LAYERS AND BE RETURNED TO EARTH
MUCH STRONGER THAN THE THEORY PREDICTS. DUCTS ARE MORE COMMON IN WARM
AIR,
SO FOOTBALL SEASON IN THE NORTHEAST IS NOT THE TIME TO BE HOPING FOR
DUCTING.

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WCBS-2 IS ALREADY SENDING OUT ITS DIGITAL SIGNAL IN
ADVANCE OF NEXT FEBRUARY -- MOST STATIONS ARE DOING SO. WCBS IS ON
CHANNEL
56 NOW AND WILL DROP TO 33 ON TRANSITION DAY. SEE
http://rabbitears.info/market.php

IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT A BIG UHF ANTENNA WOULD WORK FOR YOU. IT WORKS FOR
ME, HERE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, BUT MY DISTANT TRANSMITTERS ARE ON A
6,000
FT MOUNTAINTOP, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE FOR ME.

"SAL"