RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Barry]

I wonder if your govco has enough left after dubya has had his way to even 
commission a study for repair let alone an actual fix ?
 Digital either works or it don't , we all know that so why do some find it so 
hard to understand ?

To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: glaen...@verizon.net
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:02:32 -0600
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna  design

























Hey, I checked and found the problem
 
Here, the value of a '1' is really 
0.9985
 
and '0' = 0.0015
 
Digital' is not true digital at all, but the 
creators of the system said 'Close enough, those rubes in the flatlands of IL 
will never notice!'
 
Let's get 'da gubmint' involved in fixing this, I'm 
sure it can be corrected for only $ 150,000,000,000 or 
so...
 
Gary
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Barry 
  To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:57 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat 
  OT - an interesting antenna design
  

  
  Maybe your digital is less versatile than our here in Au ?
 I live 
  a long way from the tx site and experience little degredation with my nice 
  shiny new set top box and antenna .
 Or maybe your analogue setup 
  simply doesn't work well on the wrong frequencies ?


  

  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: 
  glaen...@verizon.net
Date: 
  Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:51:04 -0600
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT 
  - an interesting antenna design


  
  
  

  butBut...BUT...
   
  I thought The Almighty and Everlasting Digital 
  Signal (Praise Be To Its Bits Eternally, Ignore That Pixellating Behind 
  The Curtain ! ) was going to cure all the supposed ills of that nasty old 
  NTSC demon 
   
  Can it be that ONCE AGAIN, we were fed a crap 
  sandwich by the NATVB and the FCC ?
   
  PLEASE..tell me it ain't so !
   
  Pessimist About All Things Digital,
  Gary in IL
   
   
   
   
  
- 
Original Message - 
From: 
Chuck 
Kelsey 
To: 
Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 

    Sent: 
Friday, February 20, 2009 6:42 AM
Subject: 
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations 
may have 
anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a 
rotor and can 
get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see 
what he could get in 
digital. He can only get four, and three of those 
pixilate quite badly. 
Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is 
in the fringe of two 
markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I 
doubt translators will be 
implemented -- too much 
money.

Chuck

- Original Message - 
From: 
To: 
Sent: 
    Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 
Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

> At 2/19/2009 18:08, 
you wrote:
>>Along these same lines
>>
>>Has 
anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman 
panel
>>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? 
Double or single?
>>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>>
>>I'm 
about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY 
here
>>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their 
current V/U 
>>antenna
>>setups. (WTAE4) I have some 
people that I am helping get their converter
>>boxes hooked up and 
working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>>able get 
their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 

>>(They
>>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in 
my opinion.)
>
> The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - 
D51. Would be nice if they
> backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I 
think the channel #s on the map
> indicate the final 
assignment.
>
>>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and 
good UHF only preamp will help
>>the situation.
>
> I 
think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the 
problem
> isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in 
the air with
> the antenna. Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 
51, but then 
> you'd
> need another antenna for the other 
channels. Don't know if a parabolic
> would be broadband enough - 
depends on the type of feed & if the aperture
> (diameter) is 
large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
>
> 
Bob NO6B
>
>
>
> 

>
>
>
> 
Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>








Checked by AVG - www.av

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Chris Curtis]

As long as they send more "gubmint cheese" with them naughts and unns,
we-all in Missouri Ozarks will be just fine!

Chris
Kb0wlf



From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Glaenzer
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 7:03 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

Hey, I checked and found the problem
 
Here, the value of a '1' is really 0.9985
 
and '0' = 0.0015
 
Digital' is not true digital at all, but the creators of the system said
'Close enough, those rubes in the flatlands of IL will never notice!'
 
Let's get 'da gubmint' involved in fixing this, I'm sure it can be corrected
for only $ 150,000,000,000 or so...
 
Gary
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Barry 
To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:57 AM
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

Maybe your digital is less versatile than our here in Au ?
 I live a long way from the tx site and experience little degredation with
my nice shiny new set top box and antenna .
 Or maybe your analogue setup simply doesn't work well on the wrong
frequencies ?

To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: glaen...@verizon.net
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:51:04 -0600
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

butBut...BUT...
 
I thought The Almighty and Everlasting Digital Signal (Praise Be To Its Bits
Eternally, Ignore That Pixellating Behind The Curtain ! ) was going to cure
all the supposed ills of that nasty old NTSC demon 
 
Can it be that ONCE AGAIN, we were fed a crap sandwich by the NATVB and the
FCC ?
 
PLEASE..tell me it ain't so !
 
Pessimist About All Things Digital,
Gary in IL
 
 
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Chuck Kelsey 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations may have 
anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a rotor and can 
get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see what he could get in

digital. He can only get four, and three of those pixilate quite badly. 
Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is in the fringe of two 
markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I doubt translators will be 
implemented -- too much money.

Chuck

- Original Message - 
From: 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

> At 2/19/2009 18:08, you wrote:
>>Along these same lines
>>
>>Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
>>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
>>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>>
>>I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
>>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U 
>>antenna
>>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
>>boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>>able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 
>>(They
>>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)
>
> The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51. Would be nice if they
> backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think the channel #s on the map
> indicate the final assignment.
>
>>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
>>the situation.
>
> I think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem
> isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air with
> the antenna. Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but then 
> you'd
> need another antenna for the other channels. Don't know if a parabolic
> would be broadband enough - depends on the type of feed & if the aperture
> (diameter) is large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
>
> Bob NO6B
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>






Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09
18:45:00



Combine your email accounts here! Want to marry your mail? 



Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09
18:45:00




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.234 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1947 - Release Date: 02/11/09
18:11:00

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Chris Curtis]

-snip-
 
Pessimist About All Things Digital,
Gary in IL
 
-snip-


I HEAR THAT!
=]

Kill off my analog C-band for pizza dish channels stacked 20 to a
transponder.
Kill off my analog Motorola 550 flip phone [about 2 bath size soap bars] for
gurgling under water conversations.
Kill off my analog TVRO on the ic-7000 for what?
Kill off my open reel tape for CD-audio [well, that didn't hurt quite as
much]

Oooh, 100% digital quality picture and sound!
Yeah, compressed about a zillion times to cram as much junk into 1 "slot" as
possible.

=]

Chris
Kb0wlf

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Gary Glaenzer]

Hey, I checked and found the problem

Here, the value of a '1' is really 0.9985

and '0' = 0.0015

Digital' is not true digital at all, but the creators of the system said 'Close 
enough, those rubes in the flatlands of IL will never notice!'

Let's get 'da gubmint' involved in fixing this, I'm sure it can be corrected 
for only $ 150,000,000,000 or so...

Gary


  - Original Message - 
  From: Barry 
  To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:57 AM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


  Maybe your digital is less versatile than our here in Au ?
   I live a long way from the tx site and experience little degredation with my 
nice shiny new set top box and antenna .
   Or maybe your analogue setup simply doesn't work well on the wrong 
frequencies ?




--
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
  From: glaen...@verizon.net
  Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:51:04 -0600
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design




  butBut...BUT...

  I thought The Almighty and Everlasting Digital Signal (Praise Be To Its Bits 
Eternally, Ignore That Pixellating Behind The Curtain ! ) was going to cure all 
the supposed ills of that nasty old NTSC demon 

  Can it be that ONCE AGAIN, we were fed a crap sandwich by the NATVB and the 
FCC ?

  PLEASE..tell me it ain't so !

  Pessimist About All Things Digital,
  Gary in IL




- Original Message - 
From: Chuck Kelsey 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations may have 
anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a rotor and can 
get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see what he could get 
in 
digital. He can only get four, and three of those pixilate quite badly. 
Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is in the fringe of two 
markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I doubt translators will be 
implemented -- too much money.

Chuck

- Original Message - 
From: 
To: 
    Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
    Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

> At 2/19/2009 18:08, you wrote:
>>Along these same lines
>>
>>Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
>>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
>>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>>
>>I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
>>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U 
>>antenna
>>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
>>boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>>able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 
>>(They
>>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)
>
> The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51. Would be nice if they
> backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think the channel #s on the map
> indicate the final assignment.
>
>>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
>>the situation.
>
> I think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem
> isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air with
> the antenna. Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but then 
> you'd
> need another antenna for the other channels. Don't know if a parabolic
> would be broadband enough - depends on the type of feed & if the aperture
> (diameter) is large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
>
> Bob NO6B
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>









Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09 
18:45:00





--
  Combine your email accounts here! Want to marry your mail? 

  


--




  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09 
18:45:00

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Barry]

Maybe your digital is less versatile than our here in Au ?
 I live a long way from the tx site and experience little degredation with my 
nice shiny new set top box and antenna .
 Or maybe your analogue setup simply doesn't work well on the wrong frequencies 
?

To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
From: glaen...@verizon.net
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:51:04 -0600
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna  design

























butBut...BUT...
 
I thought The Almighty and Everlasting Digital 
Signal (Praise Be To Its Bits Eternally, Ignore That Pixellating Behind The 
Curtain ! ) was going to cure all the supposed ills of that nasty old NTSC 
demon 
 
Can it be that ONCE AGAIN, we were fed a crap 
sandwich by the NATVB and the FCC ?
 
PLEASE..tell me it ain't so !
 
Pessimist About All Things Digital,
Gary in IL
 
 
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Chuck 
  Kelsey 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:42 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat 
  OT - an interesting antenna design
  

  
  This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations may have 
  
anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a rotor and 
  can 
get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see what he could 
  get in 
digital. He can only get four, and three of those pixilate quite 
  badly. 
Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is in the fringe of 
  two 
markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I doubt translators 
  will be 
implemented -- too much money.

Chuck

- Original 
  Message - 
From: 
To: 
Sent: 
  Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] 
  Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

> At 2/19/2009 18:08, 
  you wrote:
>>Along these same lines
>>
>>Has 
  anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman 
  panel
>>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? 
  Double or single?
>>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>>
>>I'm 
  about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY 
  here
>>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their 
  current V/U 
>>antenna
>>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people 
  that I am helping get their converter
>>boxes hooked up and working. 
  They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>>able get their news 
  from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 
  
>>(They
>>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my 
  opinion.)
>
> The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51. 
  Would be nice if they
> backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think 
  the channel #s on the map
> indicate the final 
  assignment.
>
>>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good 
  UHF only preamp will help
>>the situation.
>
> I think 
  all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem
> 
  isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air 
  with
> the antenna. Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but 
  then 
> you'd
> need another antenna for the other channels. Don't 
  know if a parabolic
> would be broadband enough - depends on the type of 
  feed & if the aperture
> (diameter) is large enough to work 
  reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
>
> Bob 
  NO6B
>
>
>
> 
  
>
>
>
> 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>



  
  


  


Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus 
  Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09 
18:45:00



 

  














_
Want to marry your mail? Combine your email accounts here!
http://livelife.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=633386

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Gary Glaenzer]

butBut...BUT...

I thought The Almighty and Everlasting Digital Signal (Praise Be To Its Bits 
Eternally, Ignore That Pixellating Behind The Curtain ! ) was going to cure all 
the supposed ills of that nasty old NTSC demon 

Can it be that ONCE AGAIN, we were fed a crap sandwich by the NATVB and the FCC 
?

PLEASE..tell me it ain't so !

Pessimist About All Things Digital,
Gary in IL




  - Original Message - 
  From: Chuck Kelsey 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 6:42 AM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


  This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations may have 
  anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a rotor and can 
  get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see what he could get in 
  digital. He can only get four, and three of those pixilate quite badly. 
  Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is in the fringe of two 
  markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I doubt translators will be 
  implemented -- too much money.

  Chuck

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  To: 
  Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

  > At 2/19/2009 18:08, you wrote:
  >>Along these same lines
  >>
  >>Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
  >>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
  >>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
  >>
  >>I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
  >>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U 
  >>antenna
  >>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
  >>boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
  >>able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 
  >>(They
  >>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)
  >
  > The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51. Would be nice if they
  > backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think the channel #s on the map
  > indicate the final assignment.
  >
  >>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
  >>the situation.
  >
  > I think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem
  > isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air with
  > the antenna. Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but then 
  > you'd
  > need another antenna for the other channels. Don't know if a parabolic
  > would be broadband enough - depends on the type of feed & if the aperture
  > (diameter) is large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
  >
  > Bob NO6B
  >
  >
  >
  > 
  >
  >
  >
  > Yahoo! Groups Links
  >
  >
  >



  


--




  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.1/1961 - Release Date: 02/19/09 
18:45:00

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Chuck Kelsey]

This is going to be a bigger problem than many stations may have 
anticipated. A friend of mine has an all-channel antenna on a rotor and can 
get 20 analog stations. He purchased a converter to see what he could get in 
digital. He can only get four, and three of those pixilate quite badly. 
Almost everything has gone to UHF here. My area is in the fringe of two 
markets. UHF doesn't work as well in the hills. I doubt translators will be 
implemented -- too much money.

Chuck



- Original Message - 
From: 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


> At 2/19/2009 18:08, you wrote:
>>Along these same lines
>>
>>Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
>>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
>>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>>
>>I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
>>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U 
>>antenna
>>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
>>boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>>able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. 
>>(They
>>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)
>
> The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51.  Would be nice if they
> backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think the channel #s on the map
> indicate the final assignment.
>
>>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
>>the situation.
>
> I think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem
> isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air with
> the antenna.  Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but then 
> you'd
> need another antenna for the other channels.  Don't know if a parabolic
> would be broadband enough - depends on the type of feed & if the aperture
> (diameter) is large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.
>
> Bob NO6B
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[no6b]

At 2/19/2009 18:08, you wrote:
>Along these same lines
>
>Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
>antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
>http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>
>I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
>can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U antenna
>setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
>boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
>able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. (They
>DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)

The center of the map says it all IMO: A4 - D51.  Would be nice if they 
backfilled ch. 4 after the cutover, but I think the channel #s on the map 
indicate the final assignment.

>I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
>the situation.

I think all you can do is go for max. gain @ ch. 51 & hope the problem 
isn't multipath; if it is you're SOL unless you go WAY up in the air with 
the antenna.  Stacked Yagis might get the job done @ ch. 51, but then you'd 
need another antenna for the other channels.  Don't know if a parabolic 
would be broadband enough - depends on the type of feed & if the aperture 
(diameter) is large enough to work reasonably at the lowest DTV channel.

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Chuck Kelsey]

Parabolics used to be the thing for UHF years ago. I remember my Dad having 
one in the late 60's

http://www.rocketroberts.com/cm4251/cm4251.htm

Chuck
WB2EDV


- Original Message - 
From: "DCFluX" 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


>I like the 4 bow tie style antenna, some people call them fly
> swatters, About $40. and I use a Channel Master Spartan 3 mast mounted
> pre-amp.
>
> Also I have seen retired TVRO parabolic dishes used for UHF TV
> reception at a translator sight that was 80 miles from the 100 watt
> transmitters that fed them. Use a single bow tie for the feed.
>
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[DCFluX]

I like the 4 bow tie style antenna, some people call them fly
swatters, About $40. and I use a Channel Master Spartan 3 mast mounted
pre-amp.

Also I have seen retired TVRO parabolic dishes used for UHF TV
reception at a translator sight that was 80 miles from the 100 watt
transmitters that fed them. Use a single bow tie for the feed.

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Scott Zimmerman
 wrote:
> Along these same lines
>
> Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel
> antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
> http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html
>
> I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here
> can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U antenna
> setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter
> boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be
> able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. (They
> DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)
>
> I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help
> the situation. I can get MOST of the other Pittsburgh DTV stations, but
> WATE's signal just doesn't make it. If you look at their coverage map they
> are loosing QUITE a bit of territory.
> http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/maps/images/callsigns/WTAE.gif
>
> Sure would be nice to get it. Just looking for ideas and comments.
>
> Scott
>
> Scott Zimmerman
> Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
> 474 Barnett Rd
> Boswell, PA 15531
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Bon & Hal]

Thanks for the FCC link--change the station name and you will get the coverage 
map for the station.

'73

KA9MXW


  - Original Message - 
  From: Scott Zimmerman 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 9:08 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


  Along these same lines

  Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel 
  antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
  http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html

  I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here 
  can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U antenna 
  setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter 
  boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be 
  able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. (They 
  DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)

  I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help 
  the situation. I can get MOST of the other Pittsburgh DTV stations, but 
  WATE's signal just doesn't make it. If you look at their coverage map they 
  are loosing QUITE a bit of territory.
  http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/maps/images/callsigns/WTAE.gif

  Sure would be nice to get it. Just looking for ideas and comments.

  Scott

  Scott Zimmerman
  Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
  474 Barnett Rd
  Boswell, PA 15531


  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Scott Zimmerman]

Along these same lines

Has anyone on this list built / put into practice a Gray-Hoverman panel 
antenna? How do they perform? Is it worth building one? Double or single?
http://www.casano.com/projects/hoverman/index.html

I'm about 70 miles from my target DTV market. (Pittsburgh, PA) NOBODY here 
can seem to get the Pittsburgh ABC affiliate with their current V/U antenna 
setups. (WTAE4) I have some people that I am helping get their converter 
boxes hooked up and working. They are VERY disappointed that they won't be 
able get their news from channel 4 once DTV has gone into full effect. (They 
DO have one of the areas BEST news teams - in my opinion.)

I'm wondering if a dedicated UHF panel and good UHF only preamp will help 
the situation. I can get MOST of the other Pittsburgh DTV stations, but 
WATE's signal just doesn't make it. If you look at their coverage map they 
are loosing QUITE a bit of territory.
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/maps/images/callsigns/WTAE.gif

Sure would be nice to get it. Just looking for ideas and comments.

Scott

Scott Zimmerman
Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
474 Barnett Rd
Boswell, PA 15531

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Mike Naruta AA8K]

Try:   Conical Antenna   or   Bi-Conical Antenna




Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey & Rochelle wrote:
> 
> 
> Wow,
>  
> What an interesting artical. A lot of information on the early days of 
> TV in the US.
> I was however interested in the Cone Dipole antenna they had display in 
> a couple of the photos. I did a quick search for cone dipole on google 
> but came back with no results. Would be interested in sourcing 
> information on this antenna and maybe it's construction.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Chuck Kelsey]

I believe that the cone dipole was the predecessor for today's bow-tie design.

Chuck
WB2EDV



  - Original Message - 
  From: Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey & Rochelle 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:06 AM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


  Wow,

  What an interesting artical. A lot of information on the early days of TV in 
the US.
  I was however interested in the Cone Dipole antenna they had display in a 
couple of the photos. I did a quick search for cone dipole on google but came 
back with no results. Would be interested in sourcing information on this 
antenna and maybe it's construction.
  Will try another indepth search and see what comes to light.
  If anyone has any information could they pass it to me directly, save causing 
issues on the group as it is OT.

  Thanks Kevin, ZL1KFM.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Gmail - Kevin, Natalia, Stacey & Rochelle]

Wow,

What an interesting artical. A lot of information on the early days of TV in 
the US.
I was however interested in the Cone Dipole antenna they had display in a 
couple of the photos. I did a quick search for cone dipole on google but came 
back with no results. Would be interested in sourcing information on this 
antenna and maybe it's construction.
Will try another indepth search and see what comes to light.
If anyone has any information could they pass it to me directly, save causing 
issues on the group as it is OT.

Thanks Kevin, ZL1KFM.

 
Get Skype and call me for free.


  - Original Message - 
  From: Mike Morris WA6ILQ 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 3:32 PM
  Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design


  One of the major TV stations here in Los Angeles is KTLA, on channel 5.
  Klaus Landsberg, a ham (but call sign unknown) was the first chief
  engineer, and designed the station back in the 1940s.

  I recently found a writeup of the early days, and page 2 shows the
  early antenna design. Klaus came up with a very interesting way
  to get a wide bandwidth:

  Look at the bottom of page 2 of this file:
  <http://web.mac.com/zcleve/KlausTribute/KLStories_files/Silva-RoseParade.pdf>

  Another image of the aural antenna is the second image from the bottom here:
  <http://www.earlytelevision.org/w6xyz.html>
  The bottom paragraph of text is incorrect. The hoop antenna is mounted above
  the platform visible in the bottom image.

  Other info here:
  <http://web.mac.com/zcleve/KlausTribute/KlausHome.html>
  and
  <http://web.mac.com/zcleve/KlausTribute/KLStories.html>
  The Stan Chambers writeup is especially interesting.

  For those that are unaware of it, Stan has been continuously
  employed by KTLA since 1947 - that's over 60 years at the
  same station. He's over 80 years old and still goes out on
  field news assignments.Can anybody in broadcasting top that?
  He's seen it all - from the early spinning disk experiments to seeing
  Klaus Landsberg - a ham - invent the studio to transmitter link to the
  first flying remote (the "Telecopter" in 1958) to today's HD cameras
  that fit in your hand.
  ( <http://www.tech-notes.tv/Archive/tech_notes_139.pdf> starting on
  page 11 )
  His 1947 live reports from a electroplating plant explosion become
  the world's first on-the-spot news coverage. His 1949 on-scene
  continuous 27½-hour report of the attempt to rescue 3-year-old
  Kathy Fiscus from an abandoned 14 inch well demonstrated how
  TV could show live news - until then TV was just evening
  entertainment.
  (his grandson, Jaime Chambers, became a reporter at KTLA in
  2003, and has two children of his own)

  Mike


  

sparc_nz
Description: Binary data

[Repeater-Builder] Somewhat OT - an interesting antenna design

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

One of the major TV stations here in Los Angeles is KTLA, on channel 5.
Klaus Landsberg, a ham (but call sign unknown)  was the first chief
engineer, and designed the station back in the 1940s.

I recently found a writeup of the early days, and page 2 shows the
early antenna design.  Klaus came up with a very interesting way
to get a wide bandwidth:

Look at the bottom of page 2 of this file:


Another image of the aural antenna is the second image from the bottom here:

The bottom paragraph of text is incorrect. The hoop antenna is mounted above
the platform visible in the bottom image.

Other info here:

and

The Stan Chambers writeup is especially interesting.

For those that are unaware of it, Stan has been continuously
employed by KTLA since 1947 - that's over 60 years at the
same station. He's over 80 years old and still goes out on
field news assignments.Can anybody in broadcasting top that?
He's seen it all - from the early spinning disk experiments to seeing
Klaus Landsberg - a ham - invent the studio to transmitter link to the
first flying remote (the "Telecopter" in 1958) to today's HD cameras
that fit in your hand.
(  starting on
page 11 )
His 1947 live reports from a electroplating plant explosion become
the world's first on-the-spot news coverage. His 1949 on-scene
continuous 27½-hour report of the attempt to rescue 3-year-old
Kathy Fiscus from an abandoned 14 inch well demonstrated how
TV could show live news - until then TV was just evening
entertainment.
(his grandson, Jaime Chambers, became a reporter at KTLA in
2003, and has two children of his own)

Mike