I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.

The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
persuade me to accept it.

Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
advice appreciated.

On 18/03/2024 20:06, Scott wrote:
> I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
> The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
> are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
> of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
> that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.
>
> The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
> group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
> said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
> is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
> persuade me to accept it.
>
> Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
> was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
> amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
> advice appreciated.

Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
vanishes altogether) and it's possible that future shrinkage schemes
will require moving some transmissions down into 'Group A' in old money
(21-37)

As for whether the aerial will provide enough un amplified signal to be
split is impossible to determine with the information provided. The
installer will need to measure the strength, and go from there.

On Tue 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 18/03/2024 20:06, Scott wrote:
>> I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
>> The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
>> are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
>> of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
>> that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.
>>
>> The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
>> group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
>> said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
>> is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
>> persuade me to accept it.
>>
>> Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
>> was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
>> amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
>> advice appreciated.
>
> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
> vanishes altogether) and it's possible that future shrinkage schemes
> will require moving some transmissions down into 'Group A' in old money
> (21-37)
>
> As for whether the aerial will provide enough un amplified signal to be
> split is impossible to determine with the information provided. The
> installer will need to measure the strength, and go from there.

Whilst I would in general agree with Mark, one other suggestion - a log
periodic. These are wideband with the gain generally rising as it gets
into the 40's, has a high front-to-back ratio so will help reduce
possible RFI or CCI, and they have a relatively low wind loading
compared against a typical wideband multibeam.

Our (part stainless steel) aerial of about 10-12 years vintage suddenly
packed up one morning about six months ago. Weather not good so went in
the loft and grabbed a spare Labgear wideband multibeam, connected it
up, and rested it on a roll of loft insulation. Worked a treat. About
six weeks ago we go a bit of pixelation (very wet at the time) so I dug
out a log periodic (the double element variety) and fixed that up on a
pole in the roof: worked even better.

We are 28 miles on a fractionally obstructed path from Emley, and the
aerial feeds a Proception* (Blakes of Sheffield) 4-port (metal encased)
amp with 9dB/port gain. I don't know where the OP resides in the land of
the Black Hill, but I hope this will help him make the right decision of
how to fix his issues.
*The Proception amp was used as it has a linear power supply so will not
have SMPS RFI. It also has an internal Airwave notch and a 4G low-pass
filter which seem to be very effective.

On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:

> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
> vanishes altogether).

Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?

--
Jeff

In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:

> > Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
> > vanishes altogether).

> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?

Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
decade.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 19/03/2024 21:30, charles wrote:
> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>
>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>> vanishes altogether).
>
>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>
> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
> decade.

That seems to tie in partly with a recent article at
<https://www.ibc.org/features/dtt-and-wireless-mics-win-out-at-wrc23/10647.article>:

"DTT Across Europe – a Mixed Picture

The debate over the future of DTT in the face of streaming, IPTV and
mobile video services continues to be had in Europe. Switzerland has
already shut its DTT network and Finland is considering following suit
but countries like the UK still have a large viewership for the
platform, particularly among the older generation. Consequently the UK
government has agreed licence renewals for DTT until at least 2034, with
the Broadcast 2040+ campaign, as its name suggests, looking to extend
that further."

So it's at least 2034, perhaps as long as 2040.

--
Jeff

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:16:18 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>On 19/03/2024 21:30, charles wrote:
>> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>
>>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>> vanishes altogether).
>>
>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>
>> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>> decade.
>
>That seems to tie in partly with a recent article at
><https://www.ibc.org/features/dtt-and-wireless-mics-win-out-at-wrc23/10647.article>:
>
>"DTT Across Europe – a Mixed Picture
>
>The debate over the future of DTT in the face of streaming, IPTV and
>mobile video services continues to be had in Europe. Switzerland has
>already shut its DTT network and Finland is considering following suit
>but countries like the UK still have a large viewership for the
>platform, particularly among the older generation. Consequently the UK
>government has agreed licence renewals for DTT until at least 2034, with
>the Broadcast 2040+ campaign, as its name suggests, looking to extend
>that further."
>
>So it's at least 2034, perhaps as long as 2040.

But this is the sunset date for DTT. I think the point Mark was making
was that the number of channels dedicated to broadcasting may be
reduced before then.

On 19/03/2024 22:23, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:16:18 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19/03/2024 21:30, charles wrote:
>>> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>>> vanishes altogether).
>>>
>>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>>
>>> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>> decade.
>>
>> That seems to tie in partly with a recent article at
>> <https://www.ibc.org/features/dtt-and-wireless-mics-win-out-at-wrc23/10647.article>:
>>
>> "DTT Across Europe – a Mixed Picture
>>
>> The debate over the future of DTT in the face of streaming, IPTV and
>> mobile video services continues to be had in Europe. Switzerland has
>> already shut its DTT network and Finland is considering following suit
>> but countries like the UK still have a large viewership for the
>> platform, particularly among the older generation. Consequently the UK
>> government has agreed licence renewals for DTT until at least 2034, with
>> the Broadcast 2040+ campaign, as its name suggests, looking to extend
>> that further."
>>
>> So it's at least 2034, perhaps as long as 2040.
>
> But this is the sunset date for DTT. I think the point Mark was making
> was that the number of channels dedicated to broadcasting may be
> reduced before then.

an obvious "quick win" is to have 3 national SFNs for SDN, ARQ A and ARQ B

Another is to end the simulcasting of HD and SD channels to release a
multiplex.

Another is do do aaway with the BBC and ITV regions to permit national
PSB channels so the PSB1, PSB2 and PSB3 become a SFN.

In article <5b4440fc35charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
<charles@candehope.me.uk> scribeth thus
>In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>
>> > Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>> > vanishes altogether).
>
>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>
>Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>decade.
>

It'll come by "Landline" AKA the Internet like sky is already doing..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On Tue 19/03/2024 23:58, tony sayer wrote:
> In article <5b4440fc35charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
> <charles@candehope.me.uk> scribeth thus
>> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>
>>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>> vanishes altogether).
>>
>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>
>> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>> decade.
>>
>
> It'll come by "Landline" AKA the Internet like sky is already doing..
>
>

I've just had a short stay in the local hospital which was rather
enlightening.
I was put on a newly refurbished ward (they are doing renewal work after
the discovery of the concrete problem) and said ward has no radios and
no TVs BUT it does have a very good FREE wifi - supposedly 72Mb but
Speedtest wouldn't show more than about 5Mb! - that was rock solid and
reliable. Got SWMBO to bring my tablet in and used that as TV -
brilliant! Phone coverage was a bit variable depending on provider (my
O2 was quite good but VF and EE were rubbish) but phone over wi-fi
worked as good as any landline, especially it seems on VF.
Is that the future.....?

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 23:08:44 +0000, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:

>On 19/03/2024 22:23, Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:16:18 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/03/2024 21:30, charles wrote:
>>>> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>>>> vanishes altogether).
>>>>
>>>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>>>
>>>> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>>> decade.
>>>
>>> That seems to tie in partly with a recent article at
>>> <https://www.ibc.org/features/dtt-and-wireless-mics-win-out-at-wrc23/10647.article>:
>>>
>>> "DTT Across Europe – a Mixed Picture
>>>
>>> The debate over the future of DTT in the face of streaming, IPTV and
>>> mobile video services continues to be had in Europe. Switzerland has
>>> already shut its DTT network and Finland is considering following suit
>>> but countries like the UK still have a large viewership for the
>>> platform, particularly among the older generation. Consequently the UK
>>> government has agreed licence renewals for DTT until at least 2034, with
>>> the Broadcast 2040+ campaign, as its name suggests, looking to extend
>>> that further."
>>>
>>> So it's at least 2034, perhaps as long as 2040.
>>
>> But this is the sunset date for DTT. I think the point Mark was making
>> was that the number of channels dedicated to broadcasting may be
>> reduced before then.
>
>an obvious "quick win" is to have 3 national SFNs for SDN, ARQ A and ARQ B
>
>Another is to end the simulcasting of HD and SD channels to release a
>multiplex.
>
>Another is do do aaway with the BBC and ITV regions to permit national
>PSB channels so the PSB1, PSB2 and PSB3 become a SFN.

I don't know how that would go down in the southern landmass of the UK
but here is Scotland it would go down spectacularly badly.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 23:58:03 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:

>In article <5b4440fc35charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
><charles@candehope.me.uk> scribeth thus
>>In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>
>>> > Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>> > vanishes altogether).
>>
>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>
>>Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>decade.
>>
>It'll come by "Landline" AKA the Internet like sky is already doing..

My original point as OP was that my so-called Smart TV cannot receive
STV or Channel four as live streams.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:46:38 +0000, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
wrote:

>On 18/03/2024 20:06, Scott wrote:
>> I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
>> The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
>> are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
>> of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
>> that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.
>>
>> The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
>> group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
>> said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
>> is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
>> persuade me to accept it.
>>
>> Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
>> was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
>> amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
>> advice appreciated.
>
>Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>vanishes altogether) and it's possible that future shrinkage schemes
>will require moving some transmissions down into 'Group A' in old money
>(21-37)
>
>As for whether the aerial will provide enough un amplified signal to be
>split is impossible to determine with the information provided. The
>installer will need to measure the strength, and go from there.

Thanks for that. I have an installer coming round on Monday. I wanted
a basic idea about options before he or she arrives. For completeness,
what do you think of log periodic (as suggested by Woody)?

On 19/03/2024 22:23, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:16:18 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19/03/2024 21:30, charles wrote:
>>> In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>>> vanishes altogether).
>>>
>>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>>
>>> Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>> decade.
>>
>> That seems to tie in partly with a recent article at
>> <https://www.ibc.org/features/dtt-and-wireless-mics-win-out-at-wrc23/10647.article>:
>>
>> "DTT Across Europe – a Mixed Picture
>>
>> The debate over the future of DTT in the face of streaming, IPTV and
>> mobile video services continues to be had in Europe. Switzerland has
>> already shut its DTT network and Finland is considering following suit
>> but countries like the UK still have a large viewership for the
>> platform, particularly among the older generation. Consequently the UK
>> government has agreed licence renewals for DTT until at least 2034, with
>> the Broadcast 2040+ campaign, as its name suggests, looking to extend
>> that further."
>>
>> So it's at least 2034, perhaps as long as 2040.
>
> But this is the sunset date for DTT. I think the point Mark was making
> was that the number of channels dedicated to broadcasting may be
> reduced before then.

Official info here:
<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/future-of-channels-such-as-itv2-and-dave-secured-as-freeview-licences-renewed-for-another-decade>

Of course, there will be at least a couple of general elections before
then, so things might change.

--
Jeff

On 20/03/2024 10:00, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:46:38 +0000, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2024 20:06, Scott wrote:
>>> I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
>>> The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
>>> are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
>>> of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
>>> that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.
>>>
>>> The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
>>> group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
>>> said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
>>> is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
>>> persuade me to accept it.
>>>
>>> Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
>>> was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
>>> amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
>>> advice appreciated.
>>
>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>> vanishes altogether) and it's possible that future shrinkage schemes
>> will require moving some transmissions down into 'Group A' in old money
>> (21-37)
>>
>> As for whether the aerial will provide enough un amplified signal to be
>> split is impossible to determine with the information provided. The
>> installer will need to measure the strength, and go from there.
>
> Thanks for that. I have an installer coming round on Monday. I wanted
> a basic idea about options before he or she arrives. For completeness,
> what do you think of log periodic (as suggested by Woody)?

I use a 28 element logP, this one

<https://cpc.farnell.com/blake-uk/bla-lp28t/28-element-log-periodic-aerial/dp/AP03351>

In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
(21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then Group
K is the way forward.....

On Wed 20/03/2024 13:38, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 10:00, Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:46:38 +0000, Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/03/2024 20:06, Scott wrote:
>>>> I have moved house and I need a new TV aerial as there is none here.
>>>> The transmitter is Blackhill . As far as I can see, channels in use
>>>> are 40-47 (ignoring local TV on channel 30, of no interest). To my way
>>>> of thinking, I should get a group B aerial (35-53) but I am reading
>>>> that group K (21-48) is the 'new wideband'.
>>>>
>>>> The person I spoke to at the installer did not seem to know what a
>>>> group B aerial was, but said the engineer would advise me. He also
>>>> said they could usually do the install on the same day. My expectation
>>>> is that they will turn up with a group K in the van and try to
>>>> persuade me to accept it.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a big difference now that wide band is not as wide as it once
>>>> was? Also, I am hoping to run two TVs off one aerial with no
>>>> amplifier. Does this make a difference to the choice of aerial? Any
>>>> advice appreciated.
>>>
>>> Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>> vanishes altogether) and it's possible that future shrinkage schemes
>>> will require moving some transmissions down into 'Group A' in old money
>>> (21-37)
>>>
>>> As for whether the aerial will provide enough un amplified signal to be
>>> split is impossible to determine with the information provided. The
>>> installer will need to measure the strength, and go from there.
>>
>> Thanks for that. I have an installer coming round on Monday. I wanted
>> a basic idea about options before he or she arrives. For completeness,
>> what do you think of log periodic (as suggested by Woody)?
>
> I use a 28 element logP, this one
>
> <https://cpc.farnell.com/blake-uk/bla-lp28t/28-element-log-periodic-aerial/dp/AP03351>
>
> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then Group
> K is the way forward.....
>
>

+1
I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.

On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:

>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
>> Group K is the way forward.....
>>
>>
>
> +1
> I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
>

I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works well.
19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW

The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:17:36 +0000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:
>
>>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
>>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
>>> Group K is the way forward.....
>>>
>>>
>>
>> +1
>> I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
>>
>
>I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
>occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works well.
>19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW
>
>The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
>can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
>being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
>installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.

If it's outside, does the advantage lie with Team Yagi or am I
misunderstanding this?

On Wed 20/03/2024 16:03, Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:17:36 +0000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:
>>
>>>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
>>>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
>>>> Group K is the way forward.....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>> I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
>>>
>>
>> I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
>> occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works well.
>> 19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW
>>
>> The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
>> can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
>> being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
>> installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.
>
> If it's outside, does the advantage lie with Team Yagi or am I
> misunderstanding this?

A LP will often if not always do a better job then many multibeams or
even straight yagis. They have advantages over more 'normal' aerials as
they have a better front/back ratio, are less sensitive to broadside
signals, and have a flatter gain characteristic, i.e. they are a better
wideband unit than almost any banded unit. Have a look at
https://tinyurl.com/326sehps
where they explain how all aerials work and (on this page) log periodics.

In article <e42mvip9mk67jp3ctojg4bp4qgbe5g018g@4ax.com>, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:17:36 +0000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> >On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:
> >
> >>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
> >>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
> >>> Group K is the way forward.....
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> +1 I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
> >>
> >
> >I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
> >occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works
> >well. 19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW
> >
> >The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
> >can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
> >being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
> >installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.

> If it's outside, does the advantage lie with Team Yagi or am I
> misunderstanding this?

It all depends. Logs are very good at rejecting unwanted signals from the
back, but have quite a wide front lobe. Yagis tend to have a narrow front
lobe but random ones at the back. How this affects digiatl signals, I
wouldn't be sure.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 20/03/2024 16:12, Woody wrote:
> On Wed 20/03/2024 16:03, Scott wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:17:36 +0000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
>>>>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
>>>>> Group K is the way forward.....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
>>> occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works
>>> well.
>>> 19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW
>>>
>>> The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
>>> can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
>>> being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
>>> installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.
>>
>> If it's outside, does the advantage lie with Team Yagi or am I
>> misunderstanding this?
>
> A LP will often if not always do a better job then many multibeams or
> even straight yagis. They have advantages over more 'normal' aerials as
> they have a better front/back ratio, are less sensitive to broadside
> signals, and have a flatter gain characteristic, i.e. they are a better
> wideband unit than almost any banded unit. Have a look at
> https://tinyurl.com/326sehps
> where they explain how all aerials work and (on this page) log periodics.
>

and if signals are marginal you could set up two log periodics as a
phased array using 2 identical lengths of co-ax feeding a T combiner.

Mark Carver wrote:

> I use a 28 element logP, this one
>
> <https://cpc.farnell.com/blake-uk/bla-lp28t/28-element-log-periodic-aerial/dp/AP03351>

After the demise of the steel bracket on my previous Blake LP, I picked
up that same one from screwstation, it didn't take me long to realise I
was no longer keen to shin-up onto the roof!

> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me).

Due to laziness, mine is sitting on top of a bookshelf upstairs, the
only thing I don't get, that the previous one did get, is the Nottingham
local mux which isn't intended to be available in Leicester anyway. But
my TVHeadend box also has satellite.

In article <qlclvitoplpgug9s536j3ku3tgqoovad17@4ax.com>, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> scribeth thus
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 23:58:03 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <5b4440fc35charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
>><charles@candehope.me.uk> scribeth thus
>>>In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>> > vanishes altogether).
>>>
>>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>>
>>>Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>>decade.
>>>
>>It'll come by "Landline" AKA the Internet like sky is already doing..
>
>My original point as OP was that my so-called Smart TV cannot receive
>STV or Channel four as live streams.

Prolly need to smarten up a bit;)...
--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

In article <utf1ti$1iqji$1@dont-email.me>, Woody
<harrogate3@ntlworld.com> scribeth thus
>On Wed 20/03/2024 16:03, Scott wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:17:36 +0000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/03/2024 13:51, Woody wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In the loft no less too, it does the job (for me). That's a Group T
>>>>> (21-60) but as discussed, now the UHF TV band stops at Ch 48, then
>>>>> Group K is the way forward.....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>> I used a BLA-LP56K from blake-uk.co.uk)and it works superbly inside.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I too have loft mounted Blake 28 element log periodic and apart from a
>>> occasional problem during VERY heavy rain storms it generality works well.
>>> 19 miles from the transmitter which transmits at 20kW
>>>
>>> The advantage with a log periodic in a loft is that it is compact and
>>> can fit in tight spaces between roof trusses. With the mounting pole
>>> being at one end of the boom and with no large reflector it can be
>>> installer higher up in a loft compared to some other aerial designs.
>>
>> If it's outside, does the advantage lie with Team Yagi or am I
>> misunderstanding this?
>
>A LP will often if not always do a better job then many multibeams or
>even straight yagis. They have advantages over more 'normal' aerials as
>they have a better front/back ratio, are less sensitive to broadside
>signals, and have a flatter gain characteristic, i.e. they are a better
>wideband unit than almost any banded unit. Have a look at
>https://tinyurl.com/326sehps
>where they explain how all aerials work and (on this page) log periodics.
>

In fact you'll find them widely used in repeater relay stations that
flat bandwidth is useful in such applications!..

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:43:04 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:

>In article <qlclvitoplpgug9s536j3ku3tgqoovad17@4ax.com>, Scott
><newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> scribeth thus
>>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 23:58:03 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <5b4440fc35charles@candehope.me.uk>, charles
>>><charles@candehope.me.uk> scribeth thus
>>>>In article <utcsoh$111dq$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/03/2024 08:46, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > Get a Group K, the UHF TV band is only going to get smaller (before it
>>>>> > vanishes altogether).
>>>>
>>>>> Is that a certainty, and, if so, when?
>>>>
>>>>Someone who I was talking to yesterday thought that the middle of the next
>>>>decade.
>>>>
>>>It'll come by "Landline" AKA the Internet like sky is already doing..
>>
>>My original point as OP was that my so-called Smart TV cannot receive
>>STV or Channel four as live streams.
>
>Prolly need to smarten up a bit;)...

This was my recommendation to customer service.