Poor reception at new address

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 15:07:20 +0000, Scott
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:34:17 -0000, "Graham." wrote:


[snip]

Oh, and there is no such thing as a digital aerial.

Of course there is. I've got one. Mine has the optional HD upgrade
which lets me get the HD channels as well :-)

Maybe one day you will fit your HD digital aerial with the 3D spectacles
attachment.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Count de Monet wrote:
On 19/02/2011 18:46, Count de Monet wrote:


I will post a picture of my aerial tomorrow




Martyn


http://usera.ImageCave.com/Barneyrubble/Aerial.jpg

The above is my current aerial pointing at the Waltham transmitter.

That is a cheap 18 element aerial. It is a grouped one, and an analysis
of the the pixels at the end of the boom shows a vague green bias
relative to the picture's average hue, suggesting that it is a Group
C/D, which would be right for the old Waltham channels. However,
comparison of the length of the dipole with certain known fixed
dimensions suggests that the aerial is a Group B, suitable for Sutton or
Emley.

Bill

"Count de Monet" wrote in message
...
On 19/02/2011 18:46, Count de Monet wrote:


I will post a picture of my aerial tomorrow




Martyn


http://usera.ImageCave.com/Barneyrubble/Aerial.jpg

The above is my current aerial pointing at the Waltham
transmitter.

According to this:

http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/postcodechecker/

Sutton Coldfield is the best transmitter for my postcode. Would
my current aerial be OK for SC or do I need a wide band aerial
for good digital reception?



You will get different local news from Sutton Coldfield, not
relevant to your area.



--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Oh, and there is no such thing as a digital aerial.

Of course there is. I've got one. Mine has the optional HD upgrade
which lets me get the HD channels as well :-)

Maybe one day you will fit your HD digital aerial with the 3D spectacles
attachment.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

No need, 3D TV aerials are availible
http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/aerialp...dern/028.shtml
but clearly the owner of this one still only has a mono radio reception.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Java Jive" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 12:58:56 -0000, Terry Casey
wrote:

Using the link that Woody posted:

http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/Audi...Calculator.php

and putting in your partial PostCode suggests Waltham.

Also, check the output of the page linked above against that of the
official postcode checker (there is a link to that at the bottom of
the above linked page)

Try it yourself but put in the full PostCode and select

... from the following description, I think he means 'Google Map', but
to see the path to the local transmitter(s), select ...

OS map.

To clarify, the Google map is for precise positioning of the marker,
and to help you find a convenient landmark towards which to point the
aerial. AFAIAA in most built-up areas in most developed countries,
the satellite layer on the Google map has sufficient resolution to
allow the (dish or) aerial receiver marker to be placed pretty much
exactly on an individual house. Certainly I can get mine exactly
(allowing for perspective distortion of the imagery). Remote parts of
the Highlands & Islands, Northern Ireland, etc may not have such
detailed imagery.

The OS map is for showing the path from the transmitter, or the
location of transmitters - the buttons below the navigator control
switch between these two display modes. When transmitters are
selected, the locations of those in the current list selected in the
calculator provide the source, so you can see all those found by 'Find
the likeliest' or 'Find the nearest', or all those in a region, or all
those in a transmitter group. The exception is the UK National List,
where the map would be far too cluttered if all 1130 or so
transmitters were to be displayed, so only the main transmitters are
displayed.

Drag the map around to keep your end in the middle as you zoom in. At maximum zoom, every
individual building will be visible. Drag the marker to your house and compare the
direction of the line with your aerial.

By choosing diferent transmitters from the list of suggestions and repeating the
exercise, you will be able to determine the three transmitters in use along your road.
Remember, as Bill has pointed out, that local obstructions are important and may be the
reason why adjacent houses use different transmitters. Your eyes are better for locating
these than the map!

Yes. Due to the relative heights of most transmitter and receiver
aerials, signals are usually descending towards the receiver, so the
parts of the path most likely to be obstructed are usually visible out
of the window.

I suspect Mr Fresnel would argue with you about how much affect this relatively
small angle has on reception after the first few miles.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Bill Wright" wrote in message ...
Count de Monet wrote:
On 19/02/2011 18:46, Count de Monet wrote:


I will post a picture of my aerial tomorrow




Martyn


http://usera.ImageCave.com/Barneyrubble/Aerial.jpg

The above is my current aerial pointing at the Waltham transmitter.

That is a cheap 18 element aerial. It is a grouped one, and an analysis of the the pixels at the end of the boom shows a vague
green bias relative to the picture's average hue, suggesting that it is a Group C/D, which would be right for the old Waltham
channels. However, comparison of the length of the dipole with certain known fixed dimensions suggests that the aerial is a Group
B, suitable for Sutton or Emley.

Bill

At this point if you were Holmes, you could utter a nice relevant pun to Watson...

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Graham." wrote in message
...

Oh, and there is no such thing as a digital aerial.

Of course there is. I've got one. Mine has the optional HD
upgrade
which lets me get the HD channels as well :-)

Maybe one day you will fit your HD digital aerial with the 3D
spectacles
attachment.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

No need, 3D TV aerials are availible
http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/aerialp...dern/028.shtml
but clearly the owner of this one still only has a mono radio
reception.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%


Mono as in DAB maybe?


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

On 19/02/2011 16:10, Count de Monet wrote:
I've just moved home

When I retuned my LG Freeview TV I do not get the full amount of
channels on digital. Most noticeably ITV1 CH4 and CH5 and others are
missing. My antenna is pointing at the East Midlands Transmitter.

A local aerial installer tells me that I need a 'Digital Aerial'

Is it true that a new aerial is always required for Freeview reception?


Thanks for all who replied with much useful information.

Count de Monet wrote:

Thanks for all who replied with much useful information.

You can always count on us, Count.

Bill

Java Jive wrote:
You seem to be forgetting that transmitter sites are chosen
deliberately to give suitable coverage, which implies that they are
chosen to minimise ground obstructions into the fresnel zone, which is
why most of them are at high elevations compared with the area they
are expected to cover.

'Minimise' is the word. Every coverage area has a fringe area.

Bill