Full Freeview on the Hastings (East Sussex, England) transmitter

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Platinum

9:12 PM

Malcolm Wood: Looking at those trees on the slope, I suppose that rules out . Maybe you have already been along this road...

There seem to be quite a few houses on Sandcroft Road receiving from . The problem there is that the COMs are half to the PSBs, plus the COMs use a less robust (less error correction).

I suppose that you had a aerial installed for so as to receive TV (because two were out of group). I sympathise as it looks as though you are going to have to change it again (if indeed there is a possible solution) or may be your only option for additional free-to-air programmes.

I'm not an aerial installer, so I wouldn't like to gauge as to your chances of success.

However, yagi wideband aerials' levels are lower at Group A , of which Hastings uses exclusively now. See for examples:

Gain (curves), Again

Your aerial is stuck up above the -line, and you're probably going to tell me "it needs to be". You're also higher than others which is a pity.

As I say, I'm not sure of the likelihood of success, but in situations such as this, the only thing to think about is is there somewhere where the aerial could be mounted where it will get sufficient signal from the desired and where it will be shielded from the interferer?

Even if there is somewhere suitable, the spanner in the works may be objects around you reflecting the interfering signal towards your aerial, if it is strong enough.

Assuming that you have no local obstructions, then this plot suggests that you can see the top of the transmitter :

Terrain between ( m a.g.l.) and (antenna m a.g.l.) - Optimising UK DTT Freeview and Radio aerial location

The only possible fly in the ointment to mounting the aerial lower that I can see are the trees around the edge of the recreation ground behind you.

But if you can get line of sight, then that is good for a high-gain aerial, as it can be pointed at the beam. The higher the gain of an aerial, the smaller the acceptance angle is (although obviously they all up from all angles to varying degrees).

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Platinum

9:13 PM

Malcolm Wood: See Digital TV Transmitters and other parts of the ATV site for information.

Friday, 15 June 2012

Malcolm Wood
9:41 AM
Eastbourne

Thanks for the responses.

, your analysis of my situation is spot on. I think might be possible from the other end of my road but I am directly overshadowed by high tree covered Downland about 300m North.

I think I would have a direct line of site to from quite low down on my property, even below the line between my house and next door, so maybe trial and error with a group A high yagi is the way forward . Fortunately there is a gap in the line of trees in the recreation ground trees directly behind my house. So they may even screen me from whilst still allowing access to Hastings.

Thanks again for your.

Malcolm Wood's 5 posts

Transmitter engineering

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Owner

10:29 AM

- BBC TV Off Air; related from 02:16 on 13 Jun to 02:26 on 13 Jun HD Digital TV Off Air from 16:19 on 13 Jun [BBC]

Transmitter engineering's 139,754 posts

Transmitter engineering

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Owner

10:29 AM

- BBC TV Off Air; related from 02:16 on 13 Jun to 02:26 on 13 Jun HD Digital TV Off Air from 16:19 on 13 Jun [BBC]

Transmitter engineering's 139,754 posts

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Platinum

1:09 PM

Malcolm Wood: The wonders of modern technology!

I you get it sorted.

Maybe the guys at ATV could advise you as to what might be your best choice and any tips.

I did a plot using Megalithia with Eastbour South Tower and your location:

Terrain between ( m a.g.l.) and (antenna m a.g.l.) - Optimising UK DTT Freeview and Radio aerial location

Click the link below the plot to view a map of the line between the two points. Unfortunately the houses on your road appear not to screen the unwanted .

Obviously as you're on a slight inline it makes it a bit more rough. But it does suggest that you are a little above the height of the broadcast antennas.

There is a tenth to two tenths of a mile before the ground drops for which there appears to be clear line of sight beyond and up to the .

So you are relying on the clutter on that tenth to two tenths of a mile to block the unwanted signal.

Malcolm Wood
2:21 PM
Eastbourne

This sounds very Heath Robertson but..................Do you think it would be feasible to to position the in the aimed at and hide it from the direction of the using some earthed aluminium foil stuck to the inside of the ? Would I be sacrificing too much through the roof from Hastings?

Malcolm Wood's 5 posts

MF
7:35 PM

I do not know why we are talking about this type of solution, we should all be complaining to as to why they allowed the same frequencies to be used for different 17 miles apart. If they had used different for none of this would be relevant and nobody would be looking at having to spend extra money to retain services!!!
Poor planning should be changed immediately.

MF's 3 posts

Saturday, 16 June 2012

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Platinum

1:12 AM

Malcolm Wood: I'm not sure how effective that might be or whether it may have an adverse effect on the sensitivity and directivity of your . I'm not an RF engineer, so I can only but wonder:

- The interferer is at 90 degrees to the desired . Will putting foil on one side somehow unbalance the aerial and affect its directivity/sensitivity properties?

- The closer you put the foil to the aerial, the more affect it will have on it.

- The further away from the aerial you put the foil, the more the interfering signal will "get around" it and hence the larger the piece of foil will need to be to achieve the same effect.

In any case, choose whether you mount the aerial in the or on the back of the house, you may find that in certain weather conditions that isn't as good. I'm thinking that it's not so much that reception from might reduce in (although perhaps it might), but maybe the interfering signal might degrade reception more at times.

As I say, I'm not an expert in RF, so these are just my own musings. Perhaps one of the pros could chip in with some suggestions for Malcolm.

_{sentiment_very_satisfied}Platinum

1:20 AM

MF: I'm not sure what is to be gained by complaining.

There are other places where similar effects have manifested themselves after . Local relays usually degrade or make impossible the of the COM for those who do not use the relays (as the relays don't carry the COMs).

I imagine that it's been done in such a way as to minimise the number of people who end up loosing channels that they could get before.

There is also the fact that channels 31 to 37 and 61 to 68 have, or will soon be cleared. The former were or are to be auctioned for more Commercial multiplexes and the latter sold off to 4G mobile operators.

So the reduction in the number of available channels has played its part in creating situations where transmitters are co- in closer proximities where in days of old they would never have been.

It's the way things are done these days. The COMs do not have the extensive coverage that the PSBs do. All that's happened is a few people have lost access to them or have had it made difficult.

Others on here have reported this problem with ' COMs being wiped out by and have said that they will have to look at changing to . Unfortunately Malcolm isn't in a position to do likewise.