UHF TV in England...

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by Robert Grant

Sorry, I think you may be confused.

Not only will DTV transmitters continue to broadcast on the VHF-High band, there will be more transmitters on VHF - not only VHF-High (Band III), but also on VHF-Low (Band I and Band II) as well.

Soon, ALL US broadcast TV will be on channels 36 and below.

The spectrum auction paid TV stations to switch from UHF to VHF (low or high), switch from VHF high to VHF-Low (Including the legendary public TV station
WGBH), or give up their spectrum altogether (and even these have the option of remaining licensed TV stations, including must-carry status on cable and satellite providers, if they could find a transmitting station that would sell or donate some of its bits).

Locally, WTLW in Lima, Ohio, moved from channel 44 to channel 4.

I'm probably just thinking of this area! I don't see any of the DTV stations in the VHF region, either low or high.

[jr_tech]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

I'm probably just thinking of this area! I don't see any of the DTV stations in the VHF region, either low or high.

Wow, you are lucky, the VHF channels seem to be more difficult to receive in many areas. What is your general area?

jr

[dtvmcdonald]

We've had a channel 9 physical around here since the digital start.
Its not hard to get at all. Lots of people get it on a UHF double bowtie antenna.

High VHF would be really easy, even compared to UHF, to get if the FCC assigned just a bit higher power. Low vhf would need substantially more
power from the power line than analog, or more bays, to get reliably
digital.

[old_tv_nut]

Originally Posted by dtvmcdonald

We've had a channel 9 physical around here since the digital start.
Its not hard to get at all. Lots of people get it on a UHF double bowtie antenna.

High VHF would be really easy, even compared to UHF, to get if the FCC assigned just a bit higher power. Low vhf would need substantially more
power from the power line than analog, or more bays, to get reliably
digital.

I think "substantially more power from the power line than analog" is not quite right, since the assigned power of the digital signal was significantly less than an analog station on the same VHF channel. "Substantially more power than the current digital transmitter" is correct.

Hi VHF example: WLS-TV in Chicago, RF channel 7 for both analog (55 kW ERP) and digital (4.75 kW ERP).

Low VHF caps: analog 100kW; digital 10 kW or 45 kW depending on location. In general, the licensed digital power is adjusted downward to solve interference issues.

High VHF caps: analog 316 kW; digital 30 kW or 160 kW depending on location. In general, a particular station's licensed digital power is adjusted downward to solve interference issues.

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by jr_tech

Wow, you are lucky, the VHF channels seem to be more difficult to receive in many areas. What is your general area?

jr

My residence is 41 miles north of Milwaukee, WI. My workshop is 26 miles north, both a short distance from Lake Michigan.

[jr_tech]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

My residence is 41 miles north of Milwaukee, WI. My workshop is 26 miles north, both a short distance from Lake Michigan.

WIWN (68 virtual) is transmitted on ch5, and WMVS (10 virtial) is transmitted on ch8...are these out of range for you?

jr

[DavGoodlin]

Is the UHF in Great Britain grouped into "bands", band 1 being the channels 14-30, band 2 is chs. 31-40, etc?

It seems that a broadband UHF antenna like a simple bow-tie, so common in North America since the UHF band brought TV reception to smaller cities in 1952, is not the go-to UHF in the UK.

There seemed to be more Yagis, selected bands instead of the entire former spectrum.

I have tested over a dozen UHF-only antennas of several types, many vintage and some new ones. Often wondered if "tuning" them to the present spectrum of 470-614 Mhz would make them even better.

Looking at 50+ year old antennas still on houses, gives some clue to what works in that location. Many of those cute little imported antennas with built in rotators would do nothing in some of the locations I see upstate in wooded mountain areas, but the simple 4-bay was a miracle to many trying to pull in UHF and a Parabolic to those most desperate for reception.

Example: 4 and 8-bay bowtie arrays work better in scattered signal locations such as behind evergreen trees BUT a Yagi or corner reflector bowtie will still have the edge on a weak signal with no close-by obstructions.

[ppppenguin]

UHF in the UK is Band IV for channels 21 -37, Band V for channels 38-68. Antennae are grouped according to which set of channels your local transmitter uses. Wideband antennas are common but give less gain. Most antennas are some variant of a multi-element yagi. Log periodic antennas seem to be getting more popular. They give a flatter response and cleaner polar diagram than a yagi.