Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As I've 
been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this is 
solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the roof 
which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally 
small.

Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just crap 
and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial installed on 
the roof?

Cheers

On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:18:05 UTC, "Endulini"  wrote:

> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As I've 
> been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this is 
> solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the roof 
> which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally 
> small.
> 
> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just crap 
> and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial installed on 
> the roof?

Which mast is the antenna aimed at? The official guidance told us to use
Bluebell Hill (west-ish from you) but we get a much better signal from 
Dover (south of south-west I guess). Of course, not knowing where you 
are in relation to hills, I can't be sure, but most of Thanet should be 
able to 'see' Dover).

(I'm in Herne Bay, a few miles west of you, and that's my experience. 
Note that there are two separate, spaced, masts in Dover and only one 
has all of the muxes)
-- 
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
   http://www.diybanter.com

Endulini wrote:

> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As I've
> been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this is
> solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the roof
> which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally
> small.
>
> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just crap
> and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial installed on
> the roof?
>
> Cheers

Then why dont you put a decent aerial system in? A loft aerial is
never going to compare with a roof ae, so at least that part of the
system is 2nd rate..


NT

On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
 wrote this:-

>Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
>reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As I've 
>been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this is 
>solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the roof 
>which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally 
>small.

Television signals can be very local. A large tree can affect them
and thus without seeing your roof any suggestions will be broad.

I would start by finding out which transmitter your aerial points at
and then use the information at
<http://www.aerialsandtv.com/atvschoiceofaerials.html#MajorTransmittersWhichAerial>
to see whether the aerial you currently have is suitable for
transmissions at the moment and more importantly post digital
switchover.

It may be that at the moment you would be better off with a wideband
aerial but after the switchover you don't need one. Are analogue
channels currently good, or are they bad too? Is only channel 5
analogue bad? If the analogue channels, except perhaps channel 5,
are good then some of the digital channels are probably being
transmitted out of band for your current aerial. If that is the case
they may be moved back in band at digital switchover and your
current aerial will be fine. You then need to decide whether to do
nothing or whether spending money is worthwhile.

The information on that site should allow you to get a fair way
along your quest.




-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Endulini wrote:
> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable. As I've 
> been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely
> convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the
> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems
> a decent size and not abnormally small.
>
> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just
> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial
> installed on the roof?
>
> Cheers

<Waves>

I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft, facing 
roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't know if it really 
has to as the booster was just there from the previous aerial so I re-used 
it. Excellent picture.

My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly lower than 
where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her aerial's in the loft 
too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal anywhere with a decent outdoor 
aerial.

Si

Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot wrote:
> Endulini wrote:
>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
>> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable. As I've 
>> been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely
>> convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the
>> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems
>> a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>
>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just
>> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial
>> installed on the roof?
>>
>> Cheers
> 
> <Waves>
> 
> I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft, facing 
> roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't know if it really 
> has to as the booster was just there from the previous aerial so I re-used 
> it. Excellent picture.
> 
> My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly lower than 
> where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her aerial's in the loft 
> too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal anywhere with a decent outdoor 
> aerial.
> 
> Si 
> 
> 
Ask your neighbours what their reception is like.

"Endulini"  wrote in message 
news:Tumdnd9n1d-FarPVnZ2dnUVZ8qTinZ2d@brightview.com...
> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As 
> I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that 
> this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on 
> the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not 
> abnormally small.
>
> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just crap 
> and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial installed 
> on the roof?
>
> Cheers
Any outdoor aerial will be far superior to an indoor one.

In article ,
   Endulini  wrote:
> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As
> I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced
> that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather
> than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size
> and not abnormally small.

> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just
> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial
> installed on the roof?

It's possible the digital muxes are outside the frequency range of the old
aerial. Indeed it's likely. So you may have to change to a wideband one.
And having it inside won't help matters.

-- 
*I don't suffer from insanity -- I'm a carrier

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"David Hansen"  wrote in message 
news:331u24p5kref5fi7m0u4tf6p6fcv8p1dto@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
>  wrote this:-
>
>>Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
>>reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As 
>>I've
>>been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this 
>>is
>>solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the roof
>>which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally
>>small.
>
> Television signals can be very local. A large tree can affect them
> and thus without seeing your roof any suggestions will be broad.
>
> I would start by finding out which transmitter your aerial points at
> and then use the information at
> <http://www.aerialsandtv.com/atvschoiceofaerials.html#MajorTransmittersWhichAerial>
> to see whether the aerial you currently have is suitable for
> transmissions at the moment and more importantly post digital
> switchover.
>
> It may be that at the moment you would be better off with a wideband
> aerial but after the switchover you don't need one. Are analogue
> channels currently good, or are they bad too? Is only channel 5
> analogue bad? If the analogue channels, except perhaps channel 5,
> are good then some of the digital channels are probably being
> transmitted out of band for your current aerial. If that is the case
> they may be moved back in band at digital switchover and your
> current aerial will be fine. You then need to decide whether to do
> nothing or whether spending money is worthwhile.
>
All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable 
except on digital.

robert wrote:
> Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot wrote:
>> Endulini wrote:
>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my
>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now
>>> unwatchable. As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not
>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in 
>>> the
>>> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it
>>> seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>
>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is
>>> just crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger
>>> aerial installed on the roof?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>
>> <Waves>
>>
>> I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft,
>> facing roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't
>> know if it really has to as the booster was just there from the
>> previous aerial so I re-used it. Excellent picture.
>>
>> My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly
>> lower than where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her
>> aerial's in the loft too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal
>> anywhere with a decent outdoor aerial.
>>
>> Si
>>
>>
> Ask your neighbours what their reception is like.

Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?

Si

In article <g0n7uo$4sj$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>robert wrote:
>> Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot wrote:
>>> Endulini wrote:
>>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my
>>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now
>>>> unwatchable. As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not
>>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in 
>>>> the
>>>> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it
>>>> seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is
>>>> just crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger
>>>> aerial installed on the roof?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> <Waves>
>>>
>>> I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft,
>>> facing roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't
>>> know if it really has to as the booster was just there from the
>>> previous aerial so I re-used it. Excellent picture.
>>>
>>> My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly
>>> lower than where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her
>>> aerial's in the loft too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal
>>> anywhere with a decent outdoor aerial.
>>>
>>> Si
>>>
>>>
>> Ask your neighbours what their reception is like.
>
>Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?
>
>Si 
>
>
Well its a good comparison to what your getting..

As a onetime manager of a TV shop I can tell you that the biggest
problems we ever had were with bloody loft aerials and lost many a
customer who didn't believe us. 

Then we made it a rule that no TV would be supplied on anything other
then an outside aerial most all of the usual problems disappeared and we
then developed a reputation for the place that did the best TV
piccys:))..

nothing quite like customers recommending you to others!..
-- 
Tony Sayer

On 2008-05-17 20:32:59 +0100, tony sayer  said:
> 
> As a onetime manager of a TV shop I can tell you that the biggest
> problems we ever had were with bloody loft aerials and lost many a
> customer who didn't believe us.
> 
> Then we made it a rule that no TV would be supplied on anything other
> then an outside aerial most all of the usual problems disappeared and we
> then developed a reputation for the place that did the best TV
> piccys:))..
> 
> nothing quite like customers recommending you to others!..

Was this your shop?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutcPUd_AVQ

In article ,
Bob Eager  wrote:
>
>(I'm in Herne Bay, a few miles west of you, and that's my experience. 
>Note that there are two separate, spaced, masts in Dover and only one 
>has all of the muxes)

Really? I thought they were all on the one big mast. The other masts are
MW radio and FM radio (on the cliff by the memorial - MW, the three
by the castle/A2 are FM) AFAIK.

http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TR274397
http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TR274398

Appear to be the same place just slightly different heights.


I can see that mast from the back of our house - no need for aerials at all
here :) All muxes perfect reception with nothing more than a bit of cable a
few foot long (probably slowly cooking me as well ;-))

Darren

tony sayer wrote:
> In article <g0n7uo$4sj$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
> Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>>
>> Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?
>>
>> Si
>>
>>
> Well its a good comparison to what your getting..
>

Wasn't me asking the question about reception though. Do try to keep up :)

Si.

On Sat, 17 May 2008 21:07:37 UTC, D.M.Chapman@ukc.ac.uk (dmc) wrote:

> In article ,
> Bob Eager  wrote:
> >
> >(I'm in Herne Bay, a few miles west of you, and that's my experience. 
> >Note that there are two separate, spaced, masts in Dover and only one 
> >has all of the muxes)
> 
> Really? I thought they were all on the one big mast. The other masts are
> MW radio and FM radio (on the cliff by the memorial - MW, the three
> by the castle/A2 are FM) AFAIK.
> 
> http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TR274397
> http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TR274398
> 
> Appear to be the same place just slightly different heights.
> 
> 
> I can see that mast from the back of our house - no need for aerials at all
> here :) All muxes perfect reception with nothing more than a bit of cable a
> few foot long (probably slowly cooking me as well ;-))

Well, there used to be two! (but that was three, maybe more, years ago).
May have been a changeover thing, but they were on opposite sides of 
Dover..

-- 
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
   http://www.diybanter.com

tony sayer wrote:
> In article <g0n7uo$4sj$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
> Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>> robert wrote:
>>> Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot wrote:
>>>> Endulini wrote:
>>>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my
>>>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now
>>>>> unwatchable. As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not
>>>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in 
>>>>> the
>>>>> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it
>>>>> seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is
>>>>> just crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger
>>>>> aerial installed on the roof?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>> <Waves>
>>>>
>>>> I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft,
>>>> facing roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't
>>>> know if it really has to as the booster was just there from the
>>>> previous aerial so I re-used it. Excellent picture.
>>>>
>>>> My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly
>>>> lower than where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her
>>>> aerial's in the loft too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal
>>>> anywhere with a decent outdoor aerial.
>>>>
>>>> Si
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Ask your neighbours what their reception is like.
>> Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?
>>
>> Si 
>>
>>
> Well its a good comparison to what your getting..
> 	
Exactly, assuming that the "view" from your house is little different then:

If neighbours get no problems with reception - you know the problem is 
with your setup.

If they all have problems even with outside aerials - you know you are 
going to have to do something a lot better than them with the aerial. No 
point in repeating their mistakes.

On Sat, 17 May 2008 18:29:04 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
 wrote this:-

>All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable 
>except on digital. 

Then perhaps the aerial is misaligned, or you are in a poor spot for
reception. I would see if the aerial points in the same direction as
those on other houses and ask neighbours about reception.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

In article ,
   Endulini  wrote:
> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely
> unavailable except on digital.

Then you can't expect FreeView to work either.

Someone has done a crap installation. Obvious by having the aerial in the
loft anyway. It would take a pro little longer to fit an external aerial
than a loft one.

Are other aerials in the street external? Do they look larger than some?
This can give clue to the local reception conditions.

-- 
*What was the best thing before sliced bread?

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Endulini"  wrote in message

> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable
> except on digital.
>

The last owner didn't like anything unsightly cluttering the outside of the
house. :-)

Just get a new aerial put up on the roof and its guaranteed to boost the
signal considerably.

In article <ciRXj.5306$DZ6.174@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
   George  wrote:
> The last owner didn't like anything unsightly cluttering the outside of
> the house. :-)

More likely didn't have a ladder. Or be willing to climb one.

-- 
*Constipated People Don't Give A Crap*

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 18 May 2008 08:31:07 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

> In article ,
>    Endulini  wrote:
>> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely
>> unavailable except on digital.
> 
> Then you can't expect FreeView to work either.
> 
> Someone has done a crap installation. Obvious by having the aerial in the
> loft anyway. It would take a pro little longer to fit an external aerial
> than a loft one.
> 
> Are other aerials in the street external? Do they look larger than some?
> This can give clue to the local reception conditions.

In some areas, Stevenage for one, you're not allowed to use external
aerials.

Don.

On 17 May, 18:29, "Endulini"  wrote:
> "David Hansen"  wrote in message
>
> news:331u24p5kref5fi7m0u4tf6p6fcv8p1dto@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
> >  wrote this:-
>
>Snipped
> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable
> except on digital.-

You never have been able to get Channel 5 on analogue in Kent as it
interferers with french tv. Only the Hougham mast in Dover will give
you digital as the other is only a low power town repeater and at the
moment is only analogue.
Trevor Smith

In article <6664696a-815e-44cc-b4de-e3e3f9d7940b@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups
.com>, Trevor Smith  scribeth thus
>On 17 May, 18:29, "Endulini"  wrote:
>> "David Hansen"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:331u24p5kref5fi7m0u4tf6p6fcv8p1dto@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
>> >  wrote this:-
>>
>>Snipped
>> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable
>> except on digital.-
>
>You never have been able to get Channel 5 on analogue in Kent as it
>interferers with french tv. Only the Hougham mast in Dover will give
>you digital as the other is only a low power town repeater and at the
>moment is only analogue.
>Trevor Smith

Dover with its very directional panel aerials aimed away from le
French!..

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/dover.php
-- 
Tony Sayer

In article <2ntcf6fjwy9i$.fqskfox79zxs.dlg@40tude.net>, Cerberus .
 scribeth thus
>On Sun, 18 May 2008 08:31:07 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
>
>> In article ,
>>    Endulini  wrote:
>>> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely
>>> unavailable except on digital.
>> 
>> Then you can't expect FreeView to work either.
>> 
>> Someone has done a crap installation. Obvious by having the aerial in the
>> loft anyway. It would take a pro little longer to fit an external aerial
>> than a loft one.
>> 
>> Are other aerials in the street external? Do they look larger than some?
>> This can give clue to the local reception conditions.
>
>In some areas, Stevenage for one, you're not allowed to use external
>aerials.
>
>Don.

About time someone challenged that under EU law!..
-- 
Tony Sayer

On Sun, 18 May 2008 10:26:51 +0100, tony sayer wrote:

> In article <6664696a-815e-44cc-b4de-e3e3f9d7940b@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups
> .com>, Trevor Smith  scribeth thus
>>On 17 May, 18:29, "Endulini"  wrote:
>>> "David Hansen"  wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:331u24p5kref5fi7m0u4tf6p6fcv8p1dto@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
>>> >  wrote this:-
>>>
>>>Snipped
>>> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable
>>> except on digital.-
>>
>>You never have been able to get Channel 5 on analogue in Kent as it
>>interferers with french tv. Only the Hougham mast in Dover will give
>>you digital as the other is only a low power town repeater and at the
>>moment is only analogue.
>>Trevor Smith
> 
> Dover with its very directional panel aerials aimed away from le
> French!..
> 
> http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/dover.php

It should be directed at the French transmitting 'Allo 'Allo 24/7 :-) Oops
forgot, Murdoch's already doing that ;-)

Don.

In article <482f3e9e@qaanaaq>, Andy Hall <andyh@hall.nospam> scribeth
thus
>On 2008-05-17 20:32:59 +0100, tony sayer  said:
>> 
>> As a onetime manager of a TV shop I can tell you that the biggest
>> problems we ever had were with bloody loft aerials and lost many a
>> customer who didn't believe us.
>> 
>> Then we made it a rule that no TV would be supplied on anything other
>> then an outside aerial most all of the usual problems disappeared and we
>> then developed a reputation for the place that did the best TV
>> piccys:))..
>> 
>> nothing quite like customers recommending you to others!..
>
>Was this your shop?
>
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutcPUd_AVQ
>
>
>

LOL!, That was comparatively sane!...
-- 
Tony Sayer

In article <g0ni7a$nqk$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>tony sayer wrote:
>> In article <g0n7uo$4sj$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
>> Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>>>
>>> Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?
>>>
>>> Si
>>>
>>>
>> Well its a good comparison to what your getting..
>>
>
>Wasn't me asking the question about reception though. Do try to keep up :)
>
>Si. 
>
>
Well you know the wandom way those electrons wibble around;)...
-- 
Tony Sayer

In article , robert
<robert@invalid.invalid> scribeth thus
>tony sayer wrote:
>> In article <g0n7uo$4sj$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Mungo "Two Sheds"
>> Toadfoot  scribeth thus
>>> robert wrote:
>>>> Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot wrote:
>>>>> Endulini wrote:
>>>>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my
>>>>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now
>>>>>> unwatchable. As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not
>>>>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it
>>>>>> seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is
>>>>>> just crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger
>>>>>> aerial installed on the roof?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> <Waves>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in Ramsgate and we have a new "digital" aerial in the loft,
>>>>> facing roughly South. It runs through a booster, although I don't
>>>>> know if it really has to as the booster was just there from the
>>>>> previous aerial so I re-used it. Excellent picture.
>>>>>
>>>>> My niece lives near Ramsgate town though, which is significantly
>>>>> lower than where I am, and her reception isn't fantastic but her
>>>>> aerial's in the loft too. I'd imagine you should get a good signal
>>>>> anywhere with a decent outdoor aerial.
>>>>>
>>>>> Si
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ask your neighbours what their reception is like.
>>> Why would I care what the neighbours' tv reception is like?
>>>
>>> Si 
>>>
>>>
>> Well its a good comparison to what your getting..
>>      
>Exactly, assuming that the "view" from your house is little different then:
>
>If neighbours get no problems with reception - you know the problem is 
>with your setup.
>
>If they all have problems even with outside aerials - you know you are 
>going to have to do something a lot better than them with the aerial. No 
>point in repeating their mistakes.

You could always go Freesat?...
-- 
Tony Sayer

On Sun, 18 May 2008 09:50:07 +0100 someone who may be "Cerberus ."
 wrote this:-

>In some areas, Stevenage for one, you're not allowed to use external
>aerials.

Is this some imposition by the council?

As has been said, it should be challengeable in the courts.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Sun, 18 May 2008 13:08:47 +0100, David Hansen wrote:

> On Sun, 18 May 2008 09:50:07 +0100 someone who may be "Cerberus ."
>  wrote this:-
> 
>>In some areas, Stevenage for one, you're not allowed to use external
>>aerials.
> 
> Is this some imposition by the council?
> 
> As has been said, it should be challengeable in the courts.

I don't know the reasoning really. It could be something to do with being a
'New Town' I suppose. Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing aerials in
Welwyn Garden City or Milton Keynes either (only concrete cows).

Don.

On Sun, 18 May 2008 14:25:57 +0100 someone who may be "Cerberus ."
 wrote this:-

>I don't know the reasoning really. It could be something to do with being a
>'New Town' I suppose.

Quite possibly. However, if there is such a restriction then
communicating with the council's planning bods should quickly reveal
chapter and verse. It is only when that is known that it can be
challenged.



-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Endulini wrote:
> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As 
> I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced 
> that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather 
> than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size 
> and not abnormally small.
> 
> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just 
> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial 
> installed on the roof?
> 
> Cheers

I suggest you ask again in uk.tech.broadcast.

Andy

BTW: to those who say you can get nowhere without a roof aerial:  I'm 
sure my wife isn't the only one who objects to having "an 8ft long fish 
skeleton" on the roof..."

On 2008-05-18 19:48:43 +0100, Andy Champ  said:

> Endulini wrote:
>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV 
>> reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As 
>> I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced 
>> that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather 
>> than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size 
>> and not abnormally small.
>> 
>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just 
>> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial 
>> installed on the roof?
>> 
>> Cheers
> 
> I suggest you ask again in uk.tech.broadcast.
> 
> Andy
> 
> BTW: to those who say you can get nowhere without a roof aerial:  I'm 
> sure my wife isn't the only one who objects to having "an 8ft long fish 
> skeleton" on the roof..."

Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?

Andy Hall wrote:
> On 2008-05-18 19:48:43 +0100, Andy Champ  said:
> 
>> Endulini wrote:
>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my 
>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now 
>>> unwatchable.  As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not 
>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is 
>>> in the attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but 
>>> it seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>
>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just 
>>> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial 
>>> installed on the roof?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>
>> I suggest you ask again in uk.tech.broadcast.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> BTW: to those who say you can get nowhere without a roof aerial:  I'm 
>> sure my wife isn't the only one who objects to having "an 8ft long 
>> fish skeleton" on the roof..."
> 
> Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?
> 

Further, the newer aerials are likely to be mounted on larger poles than 
used to be common (2 inch) and be much larger than used to be required. 
For us, we would need a 12 foot pole on the back or front of the house. 
Huge, intrusive (visible while sunbathing without a doubt) and probably 
noisy in any significant wind. Of course, this is not universal. For us 
the local transmitter (less than one mile away) cannot be received and 
does not transmit Freeview.

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

In article , Rod
 scribeth thus
>Andy Hall wrote:
>> On 2008-05-18 19:48:43 +0100, Andy Champ  said:
>> 
>>> Endulini wrote:
>>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my 
>>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now 
>>>> unwatchable.  As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not 
>>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is 
>>>> in the attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but 
>>>> it seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just 
>>>> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial 
>>>> installed on the roof?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> I suggest you ask again in uk.tech.broadcast.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> BTW: to those who say you can get nowhere without a roof aerial:  I'm 
>>> sure my wife isn't the only one who objects to having "an 8ft long 
>>> fish skeleton" on the roof..."
>> 
>> Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?
>> 
>
>Further, the newer aerials are likely to be mounted on larger poles than 
>used to be common (2 inch) and be much larger than used to be required. 
>For us, we would need a 12 foot pole on the back or front of the house. 
>Huge, intrusive (visible while sunbathing without a doubt) and probably 
>noisy in any significant wind. Of course, this is not universal. For us 
>the local transmitter (less than one mile away) cannot be received and 
>does not transmit Freeview.
>

Go Freesat then:)..
-- 
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
> In article , Rod
>  scribeth thus
>> Andy Hall wrote:
>>> On 2008-05-18 19:48:43 +0100, Andy Champ  said:
>>>
>>>> Endulini wrote:
>>>>> Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my 
>>>>> TV reception has become with a few Freeview channels now 
>>>>> unwatchable.  As I've been in a few properties previous so I'm not 
>>>>> entirely convinced that this is solely an aerial issue. The aerial is 
>>>>> in the attic rather than on the roof which I guess doesn't help but 
>>>>> it seems a decent size and not abnormally small.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone whether the reception in this area of the country is just 
>>>>> crap and is there much I can do short of getting a new bigger aerial 
>>>>> installed on the roof?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>> I suggest you ask again in uk.tech.broadcast.
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>>
>>>> BTW: to those who say you can get nowhere without a roof aerial:  I'm 
>>>> sure my wife isn't the only one who objects to having "an 8ft long 
>>>> fish skeleton" on the roof..."
>>> Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?
>>>
>> Further, the newer aerials are likely to be mounted on larger poles than 
>> used to be common (2 inch) and be much larger than used to be required. 
>> For us, we would need a 12 foot pole on the back or front of the house. 
>> Huge, intrusive (visible while sunbathing without a doubt) and probably 
>> noisy in any significant wind. Of course, this is not universal. For us 
>> the local transmitter (less than one mile away) cannot be received and 
>> does not transmit Freeview.
>>
> 
> Go Freesat then:)..

Virgin. For now...

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

Cerberus . wrote:
> I don't know the reasoning really. It could be something to do with being a
> 'New Town' I suppose. Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing aerials in
> Welwyn Garden City or Milton Keynes either (only concrete cows).

MK was supposed to be fully cabled from the outset. AIUI because the 
cable was pretty crap/expensive so many people installed sat dishes and 
the council didn't object at the time, the council are in effect barred 
from taking action against anyone with a dish now

Owain

On Mon, 19 May 2008 00:51:08 +0100, Owain wrote:

> Cerberus . wrote:
>> I don't know the reasoning really. It could be something to do with being a
>> 'New Town' I suppose. Come to think of it, I don't recall seeing aerials in
>> Welwyn Garden City or Milton Keynes either (only concrete cows).
> 
> MK was supposed to be fully cabled from the outset. AIUI because the 
> cable was pretty crap/expensive so many people installed sat dishes and 
> the council didn't object at the time, the council are in effect barred 
> from taking action against anyone with a dish now
> 
> Owain

I don't know what the situation is nowadays in Stevenage, but when I lived 
there some twenty-odd years ago the Council enforced the 'no aeriel' policy 
strictly. In fact the ban was written into tenancy agreements & into the 
deeds of our house.

It wasn't a great hardship in fact because of the communal aeriels we were 
able to pick up regional channels such as Thames, LWT, Anglia etc which 
tho' limited gave a "better" choice of programs than we would have had 
otherwise.

Don..

Don.

On Mon, 19 May 2008 08:00:39 +0100 someone who may be "Cerberus ."
 wrote this:-

>I don't know what the situation is nowadays in Stevenage, but when I lived 
>there some twenty-odd years ago the Council enforced the 'no aeriel' policy 
>strictly.

They presumably don't have a 'no satellite dishes' policy and if
that is the case I don't see how they could bar anything else that
receives television (or radio) transmissions. 

>It wasn't a great hardship in fact because of the communal aeriels we were 
>able to pick up regional channels such as Thames, LWT, Anglia etc which 
>tho' limited gave a "better" choice of programs than we would have had 
>otherwise.

These days do they have communal satellite dishes so people can get
the whole range of regional programmes I wonder? It can sometimes be
useful to get more information on a story by watching say BBC1 East
Midlands. A satellite receiver can be purchased for less than £40
from Maplin, no doubt cheaper elsewhere.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote in


<snip>

> It can sometimes be useful to get more information
> on a story by watching say BBC1 East Midlands.

You were doing so well up to that point...


-- 
PeterMcC
Nottingham

Andy Hall wrote:
> 
> Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?
> 

Neither.  It just shows when you walk up to the house.

Since our communal aerial system died today, the resistance level has 
dropped somewhat...  so I think I'll get a decent one, see if it works 
in the loft, and if not... pole on the chimney it is.

Andy

On 2008-05-19 21:34:53 +0100, Andy Champ  said:

> Andy Hall wrote:
>> 
>> Does she live on the roof or do her sunbathing there?
>> 
> 
> Neither.  It just shows when you walk up to the house.
> 
> Since our communal aerial system died today, the resistance level has 
> dropped somewhat...  so I think I'll get a decent one, see if it works 
> in the loft, and if not... pole on the chimney it is.
> 
> Andy

Hmm...

I wouldn't want to do a communal anything....

"Endulini"  wrote in message 
news:47SdnUyysr1TiLLVnZ2dnUVZ8vOdnZ2d@brightview.com...
>
> "David Hansen"  wrote in message 
> news:331u24p5kref5fi7m0u4tf6p6fcv8p1dto@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 16:18:05 +0100 someone who may be "Endulini"
>>  wrote this:-
>>
>>>Having recently moved to Thanet in Kent I've noticed how rubbish my TV
>>>reception has become with a few Freeview channels now unwatchable.  As 
>>>I've
>>>been in a few properties previous so I'm not entirely convinced that this 
>>>is
>>>solely an aerial issue. The aerial is in the attic rather than on the 
>>>roof
>>>which I guess doesn't help but it seems a decent size and not abnormally
>>>small.
>>
>> Television signals can be very local. A large tree can affect them
>> and thus without seeing your roof any suggestions will be broad.
>>
>> I would start by finding out which transmitter your aerial points at
>> and then use the information at
>> <http://www.aerialsandtv.com/atvschoiceofaerials.html#MajorTransmittersWhichAerial>
>> to see whether the aerial you currently have is suitable for
>> transmissions at the moment and more importantly post digital
>> switchover.
>>
>> It may be that at the moment you would be better off with a wideband
>> aerial but after the switchover you don't need one. Are analogue
>> channels currently good, or are they bad too? Is only channel 5
>> analogue bad? If the analogue channels, except perhaps channel 5,
>> are good then some of the digital channels are probably being
>> transmitted out of band for your current aerial. If that is the case
>> they may be moved back in band at digital switchover and your
>> current aerial will be fine. You then need to decide whether to do
>> nothing or whether spending money is worthwhile.
>>
> All the analogue signals are poor and Channel 5 is completely unavailable 
> except on digital.

Dover's crap for us too.

tim