We've an indoor Freeview aerial which TBH works better than I ever expected it to but has it's off days depending what is happening outside.
So I've bought a proper one. Cabling is such that I could mount it in the loft with a bit of a faff, or easier would be outside on top of a fairly rigid fence where with the bracket I could have it about 8 feet above ground, would the latter likely provide good enough results? It would have to be an improvement over the current one, surely?
Depends entirely on your distance from the transmitter and what, if any obstructions like massive oak trees are between you and said transmitter.
Your TV should have a system menu that shows the signal strength and quality for whatever location you choose.
The former can be under 50 and still give a perfect picture, so just experiment.
Bill will no doubt be along and say "mount it as high as possible", so up in the loft might be the best option, short of above the roof line.
On 13 Nov 2022, Andrew wrote
I'd agree with Bill -- I had great success with a loft-mounted aerial at our previous house, after having slightly dodgy reception from a ground-level indoor aerial.
(It helped that I had a clear sight-line to the Hannington transmitter from the roof of that house; I recall someone remarking that from that location, I could probably pick up a signal with cutlery.)
One for Bill
There are so many variables in this scenario that an accurate answer is impossible and depends entirely on factors beyond your knowledge to report here accurately enough. Trial and error is ultimately your friend here.
Certainly not. It isn't always the case that signal improves with height. All height does is overcome obstructions. There might not be an obstruction. There might be clear line-of-sight at all heights down to zero. There are no strange ground effects with UHF once the aerial is about 2m above the earth. Many times I've mounted aerials low down in order that the signal path will be UNDER dense foliage or in one case a railway bridge. Bill
Bill
Absolutely. Although someone like me who has a special organ that can see RF would know at a glance what would work and what wouldn't... Bill
Height isn't everything, but it is the biggest factor when comparing otherwise unknown scenarios. Getting it as high as practical is the place to start. A small tv lets you try it before fixing it.
Well, its pretty low. Things that might affect it are neighbours on the other side of the fence, Foliage growth in the summer etc. The first thing to do is find a good wall which will allow it to face the right way, then mount it there pointing the thing at the transmitter. From what you suggest, you must have a good signal at your location. So assuming you know what transmitter is the one your are using, and know the polarity of the signal it should be no issue, but please read Wiki articles on the best coax and how to prevent ingress of water at the insulator. Be prepared for most of local birds to sit on it and crap on it though!
Brian
You would need a bit more gain in the aerial for a loft mount, and in my experience without some kind of signal strength meter its hard to get the direction right. Also when it rains you do get a loss in the loft, depending on what sort of material and moss is on the roof. Brian
Well, back in the analogue days, Hannington was very good for coverage. I live in the catchment area of Crystal Palace and yet Hannington with a good high gain aerial on the roof had almost as good a signal.
You might also have a choice of transmitters to try as well. Some people try to get a main transmitter as they can carry the smaller stations in some cases. Brian
A building in the way can often be good if the wanted signal is from the other direction of course. It was amazing how much crud you get from an aerial on top of a chimney on the top of a hill. Brian
Its not so much a special organ, more a grasp of the topology of an area backed up by maps with elevation markers and also where the tall buildings and trees are. Down here in Tolworth, there are a whole lot of people who get better reception pointing their aerials at the huge Tolworth Tower than in the direction of the transmitter. Its all to do with reflections I'm told. Similarly people living close to the railway embankment can get flutter which makes some channels go blocky while it passes. Brian
It would but a loft one is better, A lot depends on your exact location.What you want is a clear line of sight to the transmitter without any trees or hills in the way. Unless you have that the aerial quality wont be the primary issue - multipath will
Isn't there a problem with the curvature of the Earth unless you are
*very* close?
Unnecessary height is bad. Bill
No. Don't need maps and all that. It's intuition. The special organ compares the site with all the ones it's seen in 45 years of vary varied installation work and somehow just seems to know. Bill
A loft one is LIKELY to be better. But I have removed loft aerials and replaced them with aerials mounted lower down on the side of the building and got vastly improved results. Loft aerials are always at a 6dB or much more disadvantage due to the screening of the roof. If there's clear LOS down to ground level a low aerial will work better than one in the loft. There's also the fact that a wall mounted aerial or one mounted anywhere lower than the building can benefit from the screening effect of the building. It's quite common to put the aerial on the back wall of the house if multipath or CCI is coming from the front direction.
Bill
No, it's insignificant at any reasonable distance because the tx is usually so high. Hills are much more of an issue.
Bill
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required