I have been using a very small 5 element aerial for my analogue tv but have 
now changed to digital.I looked for a replacement and being distrustful of 
some of the plastic covered items such as Image sell I ordered what I 
thought would be the right thing an Antiference  RX12. When it arrived it 
was a bit of a classic since it is about a metre long and a bit unwieldly 
for a van. If I cut it down by a third will it make much difference to the 
signal? It would still be twice the size of the old one with 10 elements 
rather than 5.

Any thoughts.

Have you tried using the old one?

wrote in message 
news:finp64pi5gs6q2mlf6dotslfbhu5b7ecl5@4ax.com...
> Have you tried using the old one?
>
Yes of course ,, worked after a fashion but had blocking now and agin etc so 
assume a better aerial would alleviate. It is strange but it seems to me 
thay have degraded the analogue signal to get us to change over asap because 
often the analogue sig is rubbish yet the digi, even when there should be no 
coverage, is excellent.

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:00:56 +0100, "Capt T"  wrote:

>
> wrote in message 
>news:finp64pi5gs6q2mlf6dotslfbhu5b7ecl5@4ax.com...
>> Have you tried using the old one?
>>
>Yes of course ,, worked after a fashion but had blocking now and agin etc so 
>assume a better aerial would alleviate. It is strange but it seems to me 
>thay have degraded the analogue signal to get us to change over asap because 
>often the analogue sig is rubbish yet the digi, even when there should be no 
>coverage, is excellent. 
>

Agreed that is very much what I am finding.  
Cutting your new aerial may/may not work.  It is a receive aerial therefore
not as critical a transmit aerial but you could still be making an expensive
cut.

You could try a taller mast or a small pre-amp if a big aerial is not the
answer

"Capt T"  wrote in message 
news:486cd7ff$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> I have been using a very small 5 element aerial for my analogue tv but 
> have now changed to digital.I looked for a replacement and being 
> distrustful of some of the plastic covered items such as Image sell I 
> ordered what I thought would be the right thing an Antiference  RX12. When 
> it arrived it was a bit of a classic since it is about a metre long and a 
> bit unwieldly for a van. If I cut it down by a third will it make much 
> difference to the signal? It would still be twice the size of the old one 
> with 10 elements rather than 5.
>

Yes it will be less efficient.    But normal aerials will be better than the 
fancy looking caravan ones.
Best thing to do is to exchange it for a shorter normal one, if you can't 
and must shorten it then do that.
Remember digital is a less powerful transmitter than the analogue.
Get as much height as you can, but with digital you will find the different 
channels, can be 6, will come in best at differing heights thus in marginal 
areas you might have to compromise.


-- 
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

"Capt T"  wrote in message 
news:486ce9a4$1_2@mk-nntp-
. It is strange but it seems to me
> thay have degraded the analogue signal to get us to change over asap 
> because often the analogue sig is rubbish yet the digi, even when there 
> should be no coverage, is excellent.
I'm not aware of the analogue transmitters being cut in power in order to 
promote digital.
They of course do run at lower power when work is going on at the 
transmitter and aerials.  The analogue switch off as started and work ready 
for the digital takeover goes on. As well as work for extention of digital 
radio (DAB).

-- 
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

HI David

Not looked it up but in two pour coverage areas from Durris I am getting no
analogue at all, not even audio,  However by switching on the digibox I get
all channels available.

We still have breakthrough on our local 2m repeater from Durris so I do not
think it is in a low power mode.

I only needed it for Dr Who last weekend mind! .

On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:34:52 +0100, Dave@Nothere.com wrote:

>HI David
>
>Not looked it up but in two pour coverage areas from Durris I am getting no
>analogue at all, not even audio,  However by switching on the digibox I get
>all channels available.
>
>We still have breakthrough on our local 2m repeater from Durris so I do not
>think it is in a low power mode.
>
>I only needed it for Dr Who last weekend mind! .

Whoops should have checked my own digits!

Read poor above

"David"  wrote in message 
news:J46bk.178529$NN3.171071@newsfe08.ams2...
>
>
> "Capt T"  wrote in message 
> news:486ce9a4$1_2@mk-nntp-
> . It is strange but it seems to me
>> thay have degraded the analogue signal to get us to change over asap 
>> because often the analogue sig is rubbish yet the digi, even when there 
>> should be no coverage, is excellent.
> I'm not aware of the analogue transmitters being cut in power in order to 
> promote digital.
> They of course do run at lower power when work is going on at the 
> transmitter and aerials.  The analogue switch off as started and work 
> ready for the digital takeover goes on. As well as work for extention of 
> digital radio (DAB).
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> David
>



Its not the analogue system that is having its power reduced,
the digital signal is the one that actually is not yet running at full power 
until the big switch over.
So in theory when it all  goes digital then the signal should get stronger 
still
GGJ

"Capt T"  wrote in message 
news:486cd7ff$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> I have been using a very small 5 element aerial for my analogue tv but 
> have now changed to digital.I looked for a replacement and being 
> distrustful of some of the plastic covered items such as Image sell I 
> ordered what I thought would be the right thing an Antiference  RX12. When 
> it arrived it was a bit of a classic since it is about a metre long and a 
> bit unwieldly for a van. If I cut it down by a third will it make much 
> difference to the signal? It would still be twice the size of the old one 
> with 10 elements rather than 5.
>

I see in another group you have recieved a response from Bill Wright, he is 
a highly respected chap in aerials and you will not go far wrong in taking 
his advise.

-- 
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

>
> I see in another group you have recieved a response from Bill Wright, he 
> is a highly respected chap in aerials and you will not go far wrong in 
> taking his advise.
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> David
>
Yes just seen that..should have asked that group before buying ..Doh!
>

"Capt T"  wrote in message
news:486d2d25$1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> >
>> I see in another group you have recieved a response from Bill Wright, he
>> is a highly respected chap in aerials and you will not go far wrong in
>> taking his advise.
>>
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> David
>>
> Yes just seen that..should have asked that group before buying ..Doh!

Not sure how much the receiving set is to do with things. My 15 yr old TV
with a set top box and decent aerial couldn't pick up anything like a decent
signal; in the van parked beside our house (You can actually see the
transmitter when cleaning the upstairs windows although 20 miles or so
away.. obviously I saw to it that the van aerial was not obstructed by the
house)

My new Avtex picks up a good signal using the bog standard Status.

Smiler

In message , Smiler 
 writes
>
>"Capt T"  wrote in message
>news:486d2d25$1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>> >
>>> I see in another group you have recieved a response from Bill Wright, he
>>> is a highly respected chap in aerials and you will not go far wrong in
>>> taking his advise.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> David
>>>
>> Yes just seen that..should have asked that group before buying ..Doh!
>
>Not sure how much the receiving set is to do with things. My 15 yr old TV
>with a set top box and decent aerial couldn't pick up anything like a decent
>signal; in the van parked beside our house (You can actually see the
>transmitter when cleaning the upstairs windows although 20 miles or so
>away.. obviously I saw to it that the van aerial was not obstructed by the
>house)
>
>My new Avtex picks up a good signal using the bog standard Status.
>
>Smiler
>
>
>
The receiving of digital is done by the set top box. Could it be you had 
been away on site and hadn't re-scanned the channels on returning home?
-- 
hugh
Reply to address is valid at the time of posting

"hugh"  wrote in message 
news:mUz7d5G68nbIFAG+@raefell.demon.co.uk...
> In message , Smiler 
>  writes
>>
>>"Capt T"  wrote in message
>>news:486d2d25$1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>> >
>>>> I see in another group you have recieved a response from Bill Wright, 
>>>> he
>>>> is a highly respected chap in aerials and you will not go far wrong in
>>>> taking his advise.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>> Yes just seen that..should have asked that group before buying ..Doh!
>>
>>Not sure how much the receiving set is to do with things. My 15 yr old TV
>>with a set top box and decent aerial couldn't pick up anything like a 
>>decent
>>signal; in the van parked beside our house (You can actually see the
>>transmitter when cleaning the upstairs windows although 20 miles or so
>>away.. obviously I saw to it that the van aerial was not obstructed by the
>>house)
>>
>>My new Avtex picks up a good signal using the bog standard Status.
>>
>>Smiler
>>
>>
>>
> The receiving of digital is done by the set top box. Could it be you had 
> been away on site and hadn't re-scanned the channels on returning home?
> -- 
> hugh
> Reply to address is valid at the time of posting

You're quite correct Hugh
I was just making a point that the quality of the "receiver" has something 
to do with it.
In fact the set top box was taken from the house where there is an excellent 
signal (large chimney aerial) to the caravan and a retune was carried out as 
it seemed so poor there was  no improvement.  In brief, the tuner on my ASDA 
durabrand set top box does not perform as well as the tuner in the Avtex. It 
might have been better if I had just stated that initially,

Smiler