Which end of roof tv antenna toward station

On 5/2/2009 7:00 AM cshenk spake thus:

I just did exactly this for one of my clients a couple days ago: I climbed on roof, grabbed antenna and moved it while she went inside and checked TV, came out and said "Better!" or "Worse!" until it was optimal. (Fortunately, she only watches one TV station for the most part, making it easy to adjust.)

I hate climbing on roofs, by the way.

Reply to
David Nebenzahl
Loading thread data ...

I've actually done that! Charlottesville VA, 105 Deerwood Drive.

Most of the times though we just opened a window and hollard out it.

Reply to
cshenk

"Bob M." wrote

Um, Bob, if he had that sort of fancy setup, he wouldnt be asking with direction to point it in ;-)

Reply to
cshenk

Height is not the case with satellite TV. Lower is better.

Up/down has no effect on reception, but having the dish at shoulder height makes aiming easier and removal of snow, leaves, and bird nests a cinch. For these reasons, lower is better.

Reply to
HeyBub

Um, cshenk, Bob didn't say he had that sort of fancy setup. He said "*get* an antenna rotator".

Reply to
1D10T

Not everyone can spare that kind of money every month, especially these days. And even if you can, a roof antenna as a backup is still a good idea. (not to mention Dish still doesn't offer local channels in all markets.)

-- aem sends...

Reply to
aemeijers

Then you must be misinterpreting what is going on. Height is never detrimental to an antenna unless line losses come into play.

Reply to
tnom

This in ONLy true when the antenna is only a few wavelength from the ground. At best with a perfectly reflecting ground plane, that doesn't exist, you may expect a 6db maximum gain at these additive reflection distances, however this perfect ground planer does not exist and height can easily give greater gains than 6db.

Reply to
tnom

Hi, Line loss on what? Hard coax, nitrogen charged waveguide have very low loss and SWR is near 1 to 1. Explain then why signal disappears when height is lowered. Noise level is more important than signal level when dealing with terrestrial signal.(-90db range)

Reply to
Tony Hwang

Standard TV coax is on subject. It does have losses that should be considered.

In theory (doesn't exist in this case) e fields can cancel or be additive at different heights.

Maybe you forgot that the subject is a TV antenna. No nitrogen charged wave guide. No hard coax. This is a TV antenna. A TV antenna is a multiple frequency antenna unlike the ones you seem to be referring to. A TV antenna does not have radial ground wires buried in the ground like broadcast antennas to enhance signal gain.

No sweet spot exist for multiple frequency antennas like TV antennas over normal ground. A TV antenna can not take advantage of ground reflections because there are no buried radials, and even if it had buried radials how can you find a sweet spot for the entire frequency range of the antenna? Raise and lower it when you change channels?

Reply to
tnom

Hi, One more and I am out. Is there a theory for TV antenna and another for microwave? On theory we use isopole or dipole in free space usinf reference dbi or dbd.

Reply to
Tony Hwang

"1D10T" wrote

LOL, ok, ya got me. Should have read better. I wonder what such run now in cost? Not relevant me but curiousity. We never had one as a kid.

Reply to
cshenk

Theory and reality are very different. In reality microwaves compared to vhf/uhf waves behave differently when hitting earth ground. In reality microwaves react differently when it comes to traveling around the curvature of the earth. In reality microwaves dissipate differently in air. In reality microwaves use different feed lines. In reality microwaves are a single frequency. In reality attributing theory or microwaves to explain a TV antennas behavior is not reality.

Reply to
tnom

I haven't looked into a rotator yet; not even sure if they're even available anymore. I just built this one:

formatting link
instructions in a youtube video:
formatting link
It does work quite well, but seems very directional. I made a second one and paralleled them; facing 45º apart. Much better, but I think I now need to mess with different heights. I'm in a remote area, with transmitters averaging 40 miles away. Getting 13 digital channels, but still need to get a consistent PBS feed.

Reply to
1D10T

harry k wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@s1g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

walkie talkies?

With all the cell phones these days...

And most landline cordlesses come with multiple phones.

Reply to
Red Green

Walkies don't use up your cell minutes.

Living in a trailer, my TV is right next to the antenna mast. I turn the TV around so it faces the window. then I can rotate the antenna and watch the screen at the same time.

If I wasn't Mormon, I could also drink a beer, fart, smoke a cigarette, and pee on the skirting at the same time. Redneck heaven!

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in news:gu152t $agp$ snipped-for-privacy@news.motzarella.org:

You poor bastard. You should gets a chek for dat. Ask anyone around where I am.

Reply to
Red Green

use the end that brings in the most channels.

Reply to
Jose

Do I qualify for MediFart?

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

replying to tnom, Tman wrote: Thanks for a simple answer

Reply to
Tman

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.