| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over
the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? Thanks. -- Al, the usual |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On May 30, 5:28*pm, Usual Suspect wrote:
WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare- element type antennae on the mast. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? Thanks. -- Al, the usual I've had one on the roof since Dec 2004 in 90274 35 miles from Mt Wilson split 4 ways with no preamps. It's a fine little UHF antenna and while they say it can do upper VHF, I have serious doubts. I'll find out for certain in 2 weeks. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
"Usual Suspect" wrote in message obal.net... snip I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. You may encounter some undesired affects from joining antennas. If it works, fine, but if it doesn't, consider switching among the three at the TV set(s). The problem is that the prime signal will be "contaminated" by signal pickup from the other antenna(s). The degree of contamination may or not affect reception. Good luck. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
I've had one on the roof since Dec 2004 in 90274 35 miles from Mt
Wilson split 4 ways with no preamps. It's a fine little UHF antenna and while they say it can do upper VHF, I have serious doubts. I'll find out for certain in 2 weeks. G² Thanks, G, for answering the question *asked*. I appreciate it. :-) The issue re. rights may be interesting to some, but was not asked. (Man, the signal-to-noise ration on USENET is *so* low...) If you think of it, please post a follow-up in 2 weeks. Thanks. -- Al, the usual |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sat, 30 May 2009 21:32:58 -0400, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article .net, Usual Suspect wrote: I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I don't believe the local code has any say in the matter. But if you want to give up your rights... I believe what Elmo says is correct. Check out: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html which says, in part: The rule (47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000) has been in effect since October 1996, and it prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to-home satellite dishes that are less than one meter (39.37") in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cable antennas. The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal. In this ruling, the FCC pre-empted not only state and local government regulations but HOA CCR's and landlords' restrictions on renters. This came about because the broadcasters have a strong lobby, and they didn't want widespread limitations on receiving their over-the-air or satellite transmissions. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Your question was framed around an assertion that is not true.
As such, your question is moot. You, however, want an answer to a moot question? And when your false assertion is explained to you as being false, complete with details, you consider that "noise"? "How many baseballs can fit inside the soul of a poet?" I asked a question. I didn't ask Is my assertion correct? Assume it is (regardless FCC mandates). You (and others) decided to answer an unasked question. But let's not drag this on. I'd like to hear from anyone who has used this antenna or other like it. Thanks. -- Al, the usual |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On May 30, 8:28*pm, Usual Suspect wrote:
WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage.. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? Thanks. -- Al, the usual Hey OM This si just a rehash of another post awhile back in this here forum. But DTV will never go away so: I seen one on youtube, there are a tonne of them, but this, to the best of my recollection, one used: 1pc 1x2 2ft long board 5 steel wire coat hangers dry wall screws and a 75 ohm to 300 ohm balun to make a 4 bay bowtie antenna Ideally that's 6 db over, just a single bowtie. And an 8 bay bowtie would be 9db. I the real world it would be slightly less Capture area of stacked antennas is greater, so less UHF fading. Like when the wind blows trees branches around and when cars and trucks go by. But nothing like watching a pixelated picture. Unless you got a good memory in that set box. 73 OM de n8zu |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sat, 30 May 2009 17:28:18 -0700, Usual Suspect
wrote: WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 4dB isn't very much gain. Compare this with some other available antennas: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html Unfortunately, the SS-1000 and SS-1000 are not listed. Depending on the distance between your apartment and the antenna location, the +4dB antenna gain may not be sufficient to compensate for the coax loss. Are you in a weak signal or strong signal area? Is an antenna amplifier justified? If so, you might need 3 amplifiers for your 3 different directions. Also, a 4dB gain antenna will not have a very directional antenna pattern or be particularly directional. My guess(tm) is perhaps 120 degrees wide. There probably won't be much difference in signal strength if your 3 directions are within the beam width. I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. As others have mentioned, this is mostly incorrect. The problem is in the interpretation of the word "unreasonable", which might be interpreted in a variety of ways. Without details on your situation, I can't comment on this. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Mast? Welcome to "unreasonable". The FCC 47.1.4000 clause that limits antenna installation has nothing to say about the supporting structure. While the HOA may not be able to prevent you from installing an antenna, they most certainly will have something to say about the design and construction of the supporting structure. They may also demand that it be installed by a licensed and insured installer to protect themselves against subsequent litigation. I know you don't want to hear about all this, but methinks you should at least be warned before blundering onward. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? No recommendations. Antennas are sized and designed to solve specific problems. The design required in a strong signal area is quite different from one in a weak signal area, in an urban canyon, for an indoor installation, or if it is intended to be disguised or minimalized. It's also important to know the lowest VHF frequency or channel that the antenna is expected to operate as this has a huge effect on the physical size of the antenna. Without a clue as to your situation, it's impossible to offer an endorsement or alternative. If you find it inconvenient to disclose such details, I suggest you use: http://www.antennaweb.org to optimize your selection and proposed installation. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sat, 30 May 2009 17:28:18 -0700, Usual Suspect
wrote: but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. Seeing that you are forced into this, you will suffer by the same degree. In comparisons to others in the field, it is good by technical standards - for UHF (low VHF is just hopes and dreams). In comparisons to others in the field, it is mediocre by cost standards. So you suffer in cost and coverage (if you want VHF); and form factor is always going to reign. This should come as no surprise, certainly. Or can recommend a similar style antenna? To suffer equally? As you really lead with your chin ("local code" and hewing to not arguing that line) and don't offer any technical specifics (where you live, what stations, what directions, what distances, what bands, what frequencies, what height mast - in short nothing) you might fill a 16x16x4 inch box with low denomination bills, attach a cord and see how that works. If it doesn't, then send the cash filled box to Winegard and ask that they fill the box with an antenna in return for what they find inside. It may work equally well. Sorry for the lengthy answer that sums up to "maybe," short questions often require even more elaboration to upgrade to "perhaps." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
"Usual Suspect" wrote in message obal.net... WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? Thanks. -- Al, the usual Hi Al The gain of an antenna is related to its radiation pattern shape. When the signal ois divided between several antennas, the "gain" of the system is lowered. For instance, when the "gain" of the antenna is the result of its directuivity being restricted to 180 degrees azimuth, and the second (identical) antenna is mounted to cover the other 180 degrees, the "gain of the both" is 3 dB. lower than the gain of either antenna alone. If the "remote cities" produce signals that are weak enough that you are required to have antenna gain to receive them, you may need a switch that disconnects all but one antenna for channels from that city. Jerry KD6JDJ |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On May 31, 10:06*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2009 17:28:18 -0700, Usual Suspect wrote: WInegard makes an antenna-in-a-box, the SS-1000 which lists ~4 db gain over the UHF TV range: http://tinyurl.com/nqpzm2 4dB isn't very much gain. *Compare this with some other available antennas: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html Unfortunately, the SS-1000 and SS-1000 are not listed. Sure it is but it's called 'Square Shooter' Depending on the distance between your apartment and the antenna location, the +4dB antenna gain may not be sufficient to compensate for the coax loss. *Are you in a weak signal or strong signal area? Is an antenna amplifier justified? * If so, you might need 3 amplifiers for your 3 different directions. As I said, I use it 35 miles out from Mt Wilson (Los Angeles) and have it split 4 ways - no preamps. I do have Line Of Sight (just barely) Also, a 4dB gain antenna will not have a very directional antenna pattern or be particularly directional. *My guess(tm) is perhaps 120 degrees wide. *There probably won't be much difference in signal strength if your 3 directions are within the beam width. You're right, it isn't very directional but it has a reasonable front- to-back ratio. I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare- element type antennae on the mast. I don't like getting into 'contests' with the HOAs if I can avoid it. After all, we have to live with them. As others have mentioned, this is mostly incorrect. *The problem is in the interpretation of the word "unreasonable", which might be interpreted in a variety of ways. *Without details on your situation, I can't comment on this. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Mast? *Welcome to "unreasonable". *The FCC 47.1.4000 clause that limits antenna installation has nothing to say about the supporting structure. *While the HOA may not be able to prevent you from installing an antenna, they most certainly will have something to say about the design and construction of the supporting structure. *They may also demand that it be installed by a licensed and insured installer to protect themselves against subsequent litigation. *I know you don't want to hear about all this, but methinks you should at least be warned before blundering onward. Has anyone experience with the SS-1000? Or can recommend a similar style antenna? No recommendations. *Antennas are sized and designed to solve specific problems. *The design required in a strong signal area is quite different from one in a weak signal area, in an urban canyon, for an indoor installation, or if it is intended to be disguised or minimalized. *It's also important to know the lowest VHF frequency or channel that the antenna is expected to operate as this has a huge effect on the physical size of the antenna. *Without a clue as to your situation, it's impossible to offer an endorsement or alternative. *If you find it inconvenient to disclose such details, I suggest you use: http://www.antennaweb.org to optimize your selection and proposed installation. -- Jeff Liebermann * * All I can say is I've been using Winegard antennas since 1974 and have found them to be well built good performers and have never been disappointed with their products. Also, any friends who took my advice were never disappointed with either the antannas OR me. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Yes, but the original poster may not have such an ideal location.
TV Fool azimuth plot: http://i44.tinypic.com/2a4wghx.jpg Was considering 3 antennae with wide reception angles pointed generally at 45, 140, 310 deg. Only 3 are LOS (15, 18, 33) Pretty flat terrain, no tall structures nearby . Top of the mast: 14 ft. agl. Thanks. -- Al, the usual |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On May 31, 11:52*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2009 11:16:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On May 31, 10:06*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html Unfortunately, the SS-1000 and SS-1000 are not listed. Sure it is but it's called 'Square Shooter' Sorry, typo error. *I mean't the SS-1000 and SS-2000 (amplified). *It does list the "Sharp Shooter" which is a different indoor antenna. What's inside the SS-1000 and some really weird "gain" tests: http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/squareshot.htm It's antenna 'M', the Square Shooter As I said, I use it 35 miles out from Mt Wilson (Los Angeles) and have it split 4 ways - no preamps. I do have Line Of Sight (just barely) Yes, but the original poster may not have such an ideal location. And that is why I point out my line of sight condidtion at 35 miles Also, bad guess on the beamwidth. *It's 54 (channel 69) to 95 (channel 7) degrees. *Sorry. You're right, it isn't very directional but it has a reasonable front- to-back ratio. It varies with frequency. *It's only 2.6dB at channel 10. *See specs below. I don't expect it to be usable where I'm at for channels 7,9,11 and 13. I'll try it and if / when it fails, I'll tie in the VHF of the Winegard in the garage eaves. Hopefully its VHF performance will make the grade under the roof 'chaff'. If the wife would put up with the all channel garage antenna on the roof, it would certainly be fine BUT she doesn't want to look at it, hence the SS-1000 at least for the UHF. All I can say is I've been using Winegard antennas since 1974 and have found them to be well built good performers and have never been disappointed with their products. Also, any friends who took my advice were never disappointed with either the antannas OR me. I try to avoid shopping by brand. *Even the best manufacturers have their lemons and losers. *Right now, the advertising trend is to replace your existing antenna with an HD or Digital TV antenna, whatever that means. *Also, to make it look like a DBS dish, which is generally accepted by most HOA. Specs and details: * http://www.winegarddirect.com/pdf/spec_ss1000-ss2000.pdf http://www.winegarddirect.com/squareshooter-ss1000-ss2000/winegard-sq... http://www.winegarddirect.com/viewitem~p~ss-1000~d~Winegard-SS1000-Sq... I don't see much to complain about in the design and construction of this antenna. *However, whether it's suitable for the OP's location and application is unknown. -- Jeff Liebermann * * You won't find any new Sony at our house but you will find 4 Gigabyte motherboards with AMD processors, 3 old Technics receivers, 8 Advent speakers, Canon cameras and a lot of who knows what. When one of the brands falls short I'll re-evaluate but for now I'm happy. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
raypsi wrote in news:eedf031f-c023-4a15-abea-
: Hey OM This si just a rehash of another post awhile back in this here forum. But DTV will never go away so: I seen one on youtube, there are a tonne of them, but this, to the best of my recollection, one used: 1pc 1x2 2ft long board 5 steel wire coat hangers dry wall screws and a 75 ohm to 300 ohm balun to make a 4 bay bowtie antenna That one is all over the internet. It works OK, but you would get better results with copper wire, not steel coat hangers. It also looks ugly. For another idea, do a google for a Hoverman style antenna. Then there is mine... http://mysite.verizon.net/g_reeder/C...V_antenna.html |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sun, 31 May 2009 14:04:50 -0700, Usual Suspect
wrote: Yes, but the original poster may not have such an ideal location. TV Fool azimuth plot: http://i44.tinypic.com/2a4wghx.jpg Nice plot. Kinda looks like you'll need a rotator. The -3dB beamwidth varies from 54 to 95 degrees. At best, 3 antennas will cover 3*95 = 285 degrees. At worst, 3*54 = 162 degrees. Was considering 3 antennae with wide reception angles pointed generally at 45, 140, 310 deg. Only 3 are LOS (15, 18, 33) What are the ranges and approximate signal strengths? Looks like 18 and 33 can be covered with one antenna pointed at about 250 degrees. A second antenna at 45 degrees *MIGHT* catch the largest number of channels. However, there's no optimum location for a 3rd antenna to catch all the remaining stations. You'll probably have to pick and choose among the relatively strong ones and take what you can get. With a UHF only antenna, stations 2-13 are problematic (or impossible). If you're going to run multiple antennas, you'll probably need an antenna switch, 3 tower mounted amplifiers, and 3 coax cable runs. If you try to combine then with a power splitter, you'll get interaction between antennas and an ugly and unpredictable pattern. With an indoor antenna of any sorts, which ones can you receive (including the weak ones)? With only 4dBi of antenna gain, I don't think you'll be able to dig the ones you can't receive out of the noise. Pretty flat terrain, no tall structures nearby . Top of the mast: 14 ft. agl. They let you have a 14 ft mast and you're worried about the antenna police? Might as well go for broke. Install a real yagi antenna, tower mounted amplifier, and rotator. For the tower amp, I recommend a Channel Master 7777. http://www.channelmasterintl.com/amplifiers.html For an antenna, whatever you can find. The bigger and uglier the anenna, the better it works. See specs at: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html If you're not sure, buy just one antenna, hang it out the window on a broom stick, and see what it does. If you're close, continue with your proposed ideas. If it looks hopeless, give up before you burn any more money. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Rich Griffiths wrote:
Check out: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html ... In this ruling, the FCC pre-empted not only state and local government regulations but HOA CCR's and landlords' restrictions on renters. This came about because the broadcasters have a strong lobby, and they didn't want widespread limitations on receiving their over-the-air or satellite transmissions. I would suggest it came about because cable operators have a strong lobby and wanted to be deregulated. The FCC was reluctant to do so as long as many apartment- and condo-dwellers had no choice but to subscribe to cable. By ensuring these people have access to OTA TV you ensure (at least in theory) that if deregulated cable rates get too high, one can switch to OTA or satellite. ========================================= Either way, Elmo is indeed correct. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View, TN EM66 |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
"Gordon" wrote in message ... raypsi wrote in news:eedf031f-c023-4a15-abea- : Then there is mine... http://mysite.verizon.net/g_reeder/C...V_antenna.html Hi, Gordon, I recall when you introduced your neat handiwork to the group. I meant to ask a question: Did you ever try connecting each of the antennas' twin lead to its own separate balun and combine the 75-ohm sides of the baluns into a single coax? A passive splitter, connected backwards, performs this function nicely. I ask because, as you have your antenna wired (two antennas in parallel to a single balun) looks like an impedance mismatch; the balun wants a 300-ohm connection to the two screws and two 300-ohm antennas at the same time would be 150-ohms. I think you previously said you are not a techie, so forgive me if I'm using terms you don't know. Not being one to argue with success, if you tried it and it wasn't any better, then more power to you. Rock on! "Sal" PS: For my fellow techies: Yes, I realize the 300-ohm figure for a bowtie is nominal and the actual impedance will differ from that figure. Paralleling the two antennas could be superior. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
"Sal M. Onella" wrote in
: "Gordon" wrote in message ... raypsi wrote in news:eedf031f-c023-4a15-abea- : Then there is mine... http://mysite.verizon.net/g_reeder/C...V_antenna.html Hi, Gordon, I recall when you introduced your neat handiwork to the group. I meant to ask a question: Did you ever try connecting each of the antennas' twin lead to its own separate balun and combine the 75-ohm sides of the baluns into a single coax? A passive splitter, connected backwards, performs this function nicely. No, I didn't think to try that. I could give it a shot, I have all the necessary parts. I am concerned about loss, and thought that the extra hardware would introduce too much extra loss. I ask because, as you have your antenna wired (two antennas in parallel to a single balun) looks like an impedance mismatch; the balun wants a 300-ohm connection to the two screws and two 300-ohm antennas at the same time would be 150-ohms. I think you previously said you are not a techie, so forgive me if I'm using terms you don't know. I'm following you. Hmmm... Yes. I can see how there could be a mismatch. But I thought that only applied to simple things like resistance in DC and AC circuits. RF is not one of my forte`s. Anyway, I was trying to mimic the Channelmaster two and 4 bay bowtie designs, that seem to have a 300 ohm feed. Maybe someone could explain that. Not being one to argue with success, if you tried it and it wasn't any better, then more power to you. Rock on! Well, I got an improvement, probably in spite of myself. The setup gives better signal strength, and is less suseptable to interfearence (people walking aroung the room) than just a single bowtie. "Sal" PS: For my fellow techies: Yes, I realize the 300-ohm figure for a bowtie is nominal and the actual impedance will differ from that figure. Paralleling the two antennas could be superior. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Gordon wrote:
Well, I got an improvement, probably in spite of myself. The setup gives better signal strength, and is less suseptable to interfearence (people walking aroung the room) than just a single bowtie. A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gordon wrote: Well, I got an improvement, probably in spite of myself. The setup gives better signal strength, and is less suseptable to interfearence (people walking aroung the room) than just a single bowtie. A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? If its bad enough it will wreck the reception. But the latest processors can tolerate multipath that is only 1 db down. They are getting better as they try to debug HDTV for mobile reception. -Bill |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Jun 1, 4:49*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Gordon wrote: Well, I got an improvement, probably in spite of myself. *The setup gives better signal strength, and is less suseptable to interfearence (people walking aroung the room) than just a single bowtie. A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com It puts 'ripples' into the passband. The ripples happen because of phase cancelations. The ATI HDTV Wonder cards can handle variations to around 8-10 dB. After that it just freezes up. Near the bottom of the page in the link there is an example of the ATSC spectrum. Add random dips into it. http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/what_is_ATSC.html G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:49:20 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? Your worst nightmare. From 10 years ago: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/aug1999/nf90826b.htm (Note the sales predictions, which were totally wrong). All DTV chipsets now have ghost elimination circuitry, which does a good job of reducing multipath problems. There's a spec for it but I'm too lazy to look. Here's the patent: http://www.google.com/patents?id=XNp3AAAAEBAJ&dq=7038732 with references to others in citations. I won't pretend to understand how it works. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
OTARD rules "Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. As others have mentioned, this is mostly incorrect. The problem is in the interpretation of the word "unreasonable", which might be interpreted in a variety of ways. Without details on your situation, I can't comment on this. The FCC website has quite a bit of info on interpretation (from various regulatory and legal actions) of what is and isn't unreasonable. Paint color: reasonable, restrictions on location: unreasonable, restrictions on form of antenna: unreasonable. I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. Mast? Welcome to "unreasonable". The FCC 47.1.4000 clause that limits antenna installation has nothing to say about the supporting structure. While the HOA may not be able to prevent you from installing an antenna, they most certainly will have something to say about the design and construction of the supporting structure. They may also demand that it be installed by a licensed and insured installer to protect themselves against subsequent litigation. I know you don't want to hear about all this, but methinks you should at least be warned before blundering onward. Hah.. go look at the case of Stanley and Vera Holliday.. 5 masts 30 ft high, multiple dishes and antenans... http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Ord...9/da992132.txt an analysis at http://dirt.umkc.edu//dd99/DD991025.htm |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:49:20 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: Gordon wrote: Well, I got an improvement, probably in spite of myself. The setup gives better signal strength, and is less suseptable to interfearence (people walking aroung the room) than just a single bowtie. A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? In countries using COFDM (DVB-T), the symbol time is about 1000 us (8k) or 250 us (2k), so in the worst case with minimal guard intervals, you can still use mismatched coaxial cables longer than 1 km without problems :-). With ATSC 8VSB it depends how well the equalizer is capable of detecting the characteristics of the radio and coaxial path with a known signal pattern. Paul OH3LWR |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article .net, Usual Suspect wrote: I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I don't believe the local code has any say in the matter. But if you want to give up your rights... This is true to a point. Local codes no problem, BUT in HOA territory these rules do not necessarily apply. In most cases the HOAs have modified their rules. The small direct satellite lobby started the trend. Allowing these dishes they really had to include other TV antennas. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote:
In article m, Radioguy wrote: I don't believe the local code has any say in the matter. But if you want to give up your rights... This is true to a point. Local codes no problem, BUT in HOA territory these rules do not necessarily apply. In most cases the HOAs have modified their rules. The FCC is the entity here, not local communities. And neither HOA nor local communities can override FCC in this matter. You SHOULD know better, Elmo. There are some restrictions an HOA can place on a homeowner, but they are few. Here is a link to the FCC site: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html -- -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ -------------------- Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Radioguy wrote:
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: In article .net, Usual Suspect wrote: I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I don't believe the local code has any say in the matter. But if you want to give up your rights... This is true to a point. Local codes no problem, BUT in HOA territory these rules do not necessarily apply. In most cases the HOAs have modified their rules. The small direct satellite lobby started the trend. Allowing these dishes they really had to include other TV antennas. the FCC premption (aka OTARD rules) is the key thing here.. The HOA can't really do anything if it fits in the FCC guidelines.. dishes 1 meter, OTA TV any size. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Jun 2, 3:23*pm, Jim Lux wrote:
trend. *Allowing these dishes they really had to include other TV antennas. * the FCC premption (aka OTARD rules) is the key thing here.. The HOA can't really do anything if it fits in the FCC guidelines.. dishes 1 meter, OTA TV any size. Nice thing about the Winegard SquareShooter is it resembles a dish though my neighbors might think I don't have a clue how to aim it. It's opposite where all the little dishes are aimed. They would have laughed if they had seen the spectrum analyzer on the driveway next to the car. I was on the roof with binoculars to see the screen. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Sal M. Onella wrote:
"Usual Suspect" wrote in message obal.net... snip I do like the panel style for the reason that I can arrange 3 around a common mast, aimed at remote cities, and join the outputs for increased coverage. You may encounter some undesired affects from joining antennas. If it works, fine, but if it doesn't, consider switching among the three at the TV set(s). The problem is that the prime signal will be "contaminated" by signal pickup from the other antenna(s). The degree of contamination may or not affect reception. Good luck. It will suffer phase distortion. In the good old days we called that "ghosting", now it will be signal drop outs! -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo ;-P |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article .net, Usual Suspect wrote: I must say at the outset that I am hesitant to buy an antenna based on its form-factor, but I'm forced by the local code to not display bare-element type antennae on the mast. I don't believe the local code has any say in the matter. But if you want to give up your rights... When I lived in Miami; there was a subdivision in Miami Lakes that had banned TV antennas (before the FCC ruling). A homeowner had constructed some form of "artwork" with a TV antenna in front of his house. It was positioned toward the sky, unusable, but unmistakably a TV antenna! -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo ;-P |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? Just as a point of interest (to me at least) I grew up within 3 blocks of an airport, it was a several times a day occurance to have the picture flutter as an airplane flew by. Mike |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On May 31, 7:31*am, Usual Suspect wrote:
I've had one on the roof since Dec 2004 in 90274 35 miles from Mt Wilson split 4 ways with no preamps. It's a fine little UHF antenna and while they say it can do upper VHF, I have serious doubts. I'll find out for certain in 2 weeks. G² Thanks, G, for answering the question *asked*. I appreciate it. :-) The issue re. rights may be interesting to some, but was not asked. (Man, the signal-to-noise ration on USENET is *so* low...) If you think of it, please post a follow-up in 2 weeks. Thanks. -- Al, the usual Well, it's the 'big day' and while we have an excellent antenna at work, I didn't think the little 'SquareShooter' would be adequate for VHF-hi (channels 7-13) DTV. I brought home the spectrum analyzer to check out the signal before I tried a re-scan. So far 2 of the 4 VHF- hi have completed the change over. KABC-7 and KCAL-9 are in their new homes. The spectrum analyzer showed better than 20dB carrier to noise which should be OK. I then connected to the computer tuner and it works very well. I must say I am totally surprised about that as the analog stations 7-13 were SO weak as to not even SEE a locked umage from analog. As it is, it appears to be as good as the UHF DTV. If Fox 11 and KCOP-13 are as good as 7 and 9 I won't need to change a thing. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
wrote in message ... So far 2 of the 4 VHF- hi have completed the change over. KABC-7 and KCAL-9 are in their new homes. The spectrum analyzer showed better than 20dB carrier to noise which should be OK. I then connected to the computer tuner and it works very well. I must say I am totally surprised about that as the analog stations 7-13 were SO weak as to not even SEE a locked umage from analog. As it is, it appears to be as good as the UHF DTV. If Fox 11 and KCOP-13 are as good as 7 and 9 I won't need to change a thing. ======================================= I got KABC but, so far, no KCAL. I'm in San Diego, so my situation will be variable, depending on the ducting. I think I've lost KCBS, since they moved to KCAL's old channel, 43, which has a local LPTV station sitting on it. I still have some more antenna tricks to try. KCAL on 43 was always very "iffy." I've also lost KCET; There's a Mexican station (full power) on 28. KOCE generally good. |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
|
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Jun 13, 1:08*am, wrote:
At 12:30am 6-13-09 KWHY-22 analog was still on the air but all that's left are a few low power analogs - as they told us. G² Dummy me, I just remembered KWHY is one of the LA nightlight stations that will stay on another month with an infomercial on how to get your TV converted. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:08:24 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
Oh well, some more cable along with a UHF/ VHF splitter (combiner) and that big Winegard in the garage will hopefully cure it. By this little snippet of what was intended as an aside may, in fact, be your solution for VHF. Given your predicament of "code" (arbitrary or otherwise), you can put the cable to work. The solution is called a "Franklin Antenna." It would be disguised as an antenna cable (or telephone cable, or power line, or other innocuous wire) that trails up (to something innocuous), but never connects (who is going to look? and if they did, it could always be a dummy connection). A Franklin antenna is a stacked, gain antenna that is very colinear (hence the cable motif). These are most often described on the Web for home wi-fi or bluetooth applications, but with scaling you can bring them back down into the TV VHF band. A quick search gives: http://www.para.org.ph/membersarticl...s%20-%2021.pdf which on page 11 gives a pictorial representation (I can't say I vouch for the entire paper, but it is representative of the topic). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:10:24 -0700, Richard Clark
wrote: (...) The solution is called a "Franklin Antenna." It would be disguised as an antenna cable (or telephone cable, or power line, or other innocuous wire) that trails up (to something innocuous), but never connects (who is going to look? and if they did, it could always be a dummy connection). A Franklin antenna is a stacked, gain antenna that is very colinear (hence the cable motif). These are most often described on the Web for home wi-fi or bluetooth applications, but with scaling you can bring them back down into the TV VHF band. A quick search gives: http://www.para.org.ph/membersarticl...s%20-%2021.pdf which on page 11 gives a pictorial representation (I can't say I vouch for the entire paper, but it is representative of the topic). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC The only problem is that a Franklin antenna is usually vertically polarized. TV is horizontal.... well some station have a vertically polarized component, but it's mostly horizontal. http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/68820 The Franklin antenna is not very wide band, covering perhaps a few UHF channels, but certainly not the entire UHF TV band. Topic drift: Franklin or AMOS antennas for Wi-Fi. NEC2 deck is under the "main" page and is easily scaled for your favorite TV channel. http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/AMOS-7/index.html http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/AMOS-5/index.html I don't have photos of the "disguise" TV antenna I installed on top of a 175ft redwood tree. It was vertically polarized, crammed into a PVC pipe, and filled with urethane foam (fence post compound). 20dB gain wide band GaAsFET amp at the base. It was painted brown, to match the tree trunk. Performance was a disaster. There wasn't enough gain so most stations were noisy. With an omnidirectinal pattern, it did a superior job of converting reflections from the surrounding mountains, into obnoxious and irritating ghosts. 4 tries, and no luck. The plan was to install a pully near the top of the tree, and use a rope to raise and lower verious experiments. Unfortunately, I used a rope that did not do well in the sun. After about a year of trial and error, the rope crumbled. The pully is still in the tree and can probably be used again. As for other disguise antennas, I've done some tinkering characterizing various road signs for operation as antennas. The aluminum sign is a tolerable radiator, but the galvanized steel support is a problem. I've also seen all manner of urethane sculptures, designed to resemble a tree, cactus, building materials, lamps, boulders, etc, each with an antenna behind or inside. Also fiberglass panels for hiding antennas in the sidewalk. I've also crammed wi-fi repeaters inside a plastic owl. I've disguised a wi-fi antenna by making it look like a giant bird nest. If the neighbors asked, I told the owner to tell them it was a Roc nest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roc_(mythology) For HF, I've loaded into the rain gutters, installed chicken wire under the carpeting for a ground, and strung wires between telephone poles. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Jun 13, 10:10*am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:08:24 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh well, some more cable along with a UHF/ VHF splitter (combiner) and that big Winegard in the garage will hopefully cure it. By this little snippet of what was intended as an aside may, in fact, be your solution for VHF. *Given your predicament of "code" (arbitrary or otherwise), you can put the cable to work. The solution is called a "Franklin Antenna." *It would be disguised as an antenna cable (or telephone cable, or power line, or other innocuous wire) that trails up (to something innocuous), but never connects (who is going to look? *and if they did, it could always be a dummy connection). A Franklin antenna is a stacked, gain antenna that is very colinear (hence the cable motif). *These are most often described on the Web for home wi-fi or bluetooth applications, but with scaling you can bring them back down into the TV VHF band. *A quick search gives:http://www.para.org.ph/membersarticl...velopment%20of %20Coll... which on page 11 gives a pictorial representation (I can't say I vouch for the entire paper, but it is representative of the topic). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC I hung the spectrum analyzer on the Winegard all channel antenna in the rafters of the garage. The VHF channels are strong and free of response 'bumps' (meaning no serious multipath) and the UHF may be better than the squareshooter on the roof. Tomorrow I shoot a hole in the stucco wall to get the new RG-6 coax (crazy guy at Torrance Electronics sold me 100 ft for $9) pulled in to the splitter to feed the computers and STB. It looks like it will be good. G² |
"Panel" style UHF DTV antenna?
On Jun 9, 11:21*pm, "amdx" wrote:
A mismatch can cause ghosting in an analog TV. What does ghosting do to a digital TV signal? * Just as a point of interest (to me at least) I grew up within 3 blocks of an airport, it was a several times a day occurance to have the picture flutter as an airplane flew by. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Mike It was identifying the reflection of radio signals from a flying aircraft that led to the development and use of radar. Radar was major factor in the successful defence of Britain (Britain 1940) against German bombing (The Blitz) early in WWII (1939-1945). Although it was initially very crude, (It was called Radio-location or RDF, Radio Direction Finding) at the time. Unfortunately the first war time US use of radar was misinterpreted when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour in Dec 1941! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com