Follow-up (OTA Antenna - trying to get smarter)

Just wanted to thank the group and provide a follow-up from my prior
inquiries.

Finally got down to my parents in Delaware and installed a Zenith
DTT900 ($27 after taxes; $40 rebate) on their existing OTA system.
Current OTA has been in place roughly 7-9 years, with probably coax
that's twice that age.

Initial result was ... 26 channels on OTA (counting "dot 2, dot 3"
subchannels, such as weather), despite the external antenna's rotor
being out of whack, so this was with the system pointed northwest
towards Philadelphia (TVfool/Antennaweb: ~78 miles).

The next morning 4 or 5 channels were out (were below signal strength
threshold), but I'm told that they came back in in the evening. The
bottom line is that reception on all channels is significantly clearer
than before, and overall, they have noticeably more channel choices.

Thanks for all of the advice. Now I don't have to worry too much
about all of the "what if there's zero reception?" scenarios.


-hh

-hh wrote:
Just wanted to thank the group and provide a follow-up from my prior
inquiries.

Finally got down to my parents in Delaware and installed a Zenith
DTT900 ($27 after taxes; $40 rebate) on their existing OTA system.
Current OTA has been in place roughly 7-9 years, with probably coax
that's twice that age.

Initial result was ... 26 channels on OTA (counting "dot 2, dot 3"
subchannels, such as weather), despite the external antenna's rotor
being out of whack, so this was with the system pointed northwest
towards Philadelphia (TVfool/Antennaweb: ~78 miles).

The next morning 4 or 5 channels were out (were below signal strength
threshold), but I'm told that they came back in in the evening. The
bottom line is that reception on all channels is significantly clearer
than before, and overall, they have noticeably more channel choices.

Thanks for all of the advice. Now I don't have to worry too much
about all of the "what if there's zero reception?" scenarios.


-hh

If your parents have a old coaxial cable, you should consider
replacing it. Especially if it is RG-59 which has higher loss per foot
for upper UHF channels than RG-6. If there are cracks in the outer shell
of the cable or exposed connector joints, if moisture/water has gotten
into the cable, it acts as an attenuator, knocking down the signal
strength. You might want to look at replacing the cable run and checking
the antenna connections for any signs of serious corrosion. That may
solve the dropping out in the day problem for marginal stations.

The Philadelphia market has several digital stations that currently
have noticeably reduced coverage compared to their analog. WHYY-DT PBS
12 is running at a rather weak power on UHF 50; it will switch to VHF 12
next February after the analog shutdown. WTXF-DT Fox 29 has a UHF 42
side-mounted antenna 60 meters lower than the analog antenna on top of
the tower. After next February, WTXF will remove the analog antenna and
put up a new one for UHF 42 on top of the tower which will greatly
improved long range reception. WPVI-DT ABC 6 is the question mark as it
will move from UHF 64 to low VHF 6 which is prone to interference, but
on the other hand, low VHF is better for long range reception.

Still, your parent's results show that digital broadcasting can
noticeably improve the programming, even though a lot of the
sub-channels are the weather channels.

Alan F

Alan F wrote:

* If your parents have a old coaxial cable, you should consider
replacing it. Especially if it is RG-59 which has higher loss per foot
for upper UHF channels than RG-6. If there are cracks in the outer shell
of the cable or exposed connector joints, if moisture/water has gotten
into the cable, it acts as an attenuator, knocking down the signal
strength. You might want to look at replacing the cable run and checking
the antenna connections for any signs of serious corrosion. That may
solve the dropping out in the day problem for marginal stations.

Agreed & understood.

This visit was merely a quick and dirty "do I have an impending crisis
as of Feb 2009?" test.

That they got reasonable reception simply means that things like a
coax upgrade aren't a high priority that absolutely must be done
before 2/09...and which would have then fallen into the "must make
time to get back down there and get it done before winter" type of
project. And since it does now work, I have the luxury of waiting
until the summer heat is over before needing to stick my head up into
hot attic crawl spaces that probably have a few {yellowjacket / wasp /
hornet} nests in them.

Since their new digital capability is equal/better than what they were
getting under analog, performing coax upgrades are a nice-to-have on a
time-available


* Still, your parent's results show that digital broadcasting can
noticeably improve the programming, even though a lot of the
sub-channels are the weather channels.

Given how frugal they are (and on fixed retirement income), the
ability to avoid a new $50/month bill for satellite TV is a good
thing :-)


-hh