# Wing Aerial - Will it do digital?



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

After the sucess of my "Can I use the heating on the move" post, I now have another one to get you all thinking!

The wing thing type aerial on the roof that you wind up has quite a poor picture at the moment. Im going to replace the coax on it, as apparently that can rot. Also going to look for the fuse for the booster (any idea's anyone?), as that doesn't seem to work either.

Once I've got it all working, will it do digital tv?


----------



## 103049 (Feb 19, 2007)

Snelly

I have a Status on the 656 and that does digital OK

Dave

656


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Tawny said:


> Snelly
> 
> I have a Status on the 656 and that does digital OK
> 
> ...


I was wondering about the fitted american aerial Dave.


----------



## artona (Jan 19, 2006)

HI

What actually makes an aerial digital or analogue.

stew


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

artona said:


> HI
> 
> What actually makes an aerial digital or analogue.
> 
> stew


No idea Stew... I prefer Satellite, but intending on making do for now. I feel the RV is going to be a labour of love for quite a while, sapping money from me to get the perfect finish for us.


----------



## 103049 (Feb 19, 2007)

Shane

If the Aerial is as originally fitted to your RV, I would doubt it as Digital was not out then. I would also guess that the wavelength of the aerial would be incorrect for digital. However, I may be talking rubbish. :lol: 


Dave

656


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Tawny said:


> Shane
> 
> If the Aerial is as originally fitted to your RV, I would doubt it as Digital was not out then. I would also guess that the wavelength of the aerial would be incorrect for digital. However, I may be talking rubbish. :lol:
> 
> ...


I can see its going to be one of those things I won't find out until I try it, unless someone else has tried it already. I get the feeling I may pick up some of the mux's, but not all because of the bandwidth.


----------



## G2EWS (May 1, 2006)

If memory serves me correct from all the digital bumpf, you can use any TV aerial for digital!

That was the major selling point, ie you did not have to change anything, just plug your set top box in and go.

Regards

Chris


----------



## 101600 (Oct 30, 2006)

Q. What makes the aerial digital compatible??? 

A. Digital (DVB-T) broadcasts at higher RF frequencys so a higher gain aerial is required to pick up the signal, Most DVB-T aerials use high quality co-axial cable and components. I have no idea ho the high gain works in the actual aerial but i sure you could google it.

I would think most aerials with a boster on are compatible in a MH/RV as they try are designed to pick up weak signals.

The best way to test is go a strongv signal area and try it.


----------



## LC1962 (Oct 6, 2005)

Hi Shane

We have a Batwing on top of our C class and use a freeview box - gives a great picture!

Without the box the antenna is carp in poor signal areas.

As for the difference between digital and analogue....I haven't a clue , I still work in feet and inches :roll:


----------



## 98452 (Apr 2, 2006)

Shane for now I have used the sat style wiring and just changed the connectors. I have a flying saucer style aerial that working OK although I would be interested to watch you fit a crank up dish sometime as thats the way we want to go :wink:


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Thats reassuring Linda.

While your on, the last owner has stuck rubber to the bottom of the aerial to stop it rattling... is there supposed to be some sort of rubber stops that go on the underneath of it to stop it rattling against the roof when its wound down?


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

RR said:


> Shane for now I have used the sat style wiring and just changed the connectors. I have a flying saucer style aerial that working OK although I would be interested to watch you fit a crank up dish sometime as thats the way we want to go :wink:


If you can get to Newark, there's about 2 or 3 people fitting them over that weekend!

I can't afford to buy one at the moment, but will do eventually.


----------



## damondunc (Feb 14, 2006)

If you are referring to the Winegard ariel then you can get digital with a freeview box as that is what we have

Chris
( i am posting as i have sent Duncan out to slave away oop north )


----------



## 98452 (Apr 2, 2006)

Snelly said:


> If you can get to Newark, there's about 2 or 3 people fitting them over that weekend!
> 
> I can't afford to buy one at the moment, but will do eventually.


Thanks for that Shane and we want to get there but got a house move on the cards so 50/50 at the moment.


----------



## LC1962 (Oct 6, 2005)

Snelly said:


> Thats reassuring Linda.
> 
> While your on, the last owner has stuck rubber to the bottom of the aerial to stop it rattling... is there supposed to be some sort of rubber stops that go on the underneath of it to stop it rattling against the roof when its wound down?


According to the manual, you should apply sealing compound under the base....sounds like the previous owner went a bit OTT...

If he's stuck rubber to the head then that's a DIY job because, as far as I'm aware, they don't come with rubber stops, its not necessary.

If you want a copy of the manual on PDF I can email it to you.

Cheers
Linda


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

LC1962 said:


> Snelly said:
> 
> 
> > Thats reassuring Linda.
> ...


yes its very much DIY job... rubber and tie wraps!

PDF doc would be very appreciated, thanks.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

damondunc said:


> If you are referring to the Winegard ariel then you can get digital with a freeview box as that is what we have
> 
> Chris
> ( i am posting as i have sent Duncan out to slave away oop north )


Thats reassuring Chris, thanks.


----------



## LC1962 (Oct 6, 2005)

Email on its way Shane


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

LC1962 said:


> Email on its way Shane


Got it, thank you Linda!


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

roboughton said:


> Q. What makes the aerial digital compatible???
> 
> A. Digital (DVB-T) broadcasts at higher RF frequencys so a higher gain aerial is required to pick up the signal, Most DVB-T aerials use high quality co-axial cable and components. I have no idea ho the high gain works in the actual aerial but i sure you could google it.
> 
> ...


Afraid I have to disagree with you to a certain extent or perhaps should I say more information is needed. It is definitely nothing to do with the digital frequencies being at a higher frequency because this is strictly not so. Digital signals are transmitted in the same band of frequencies as the analogue ones and like analague it all depends in the area you are as to what frequencies you need to receive. In the mobile world you are never in a fixed area and therefore to receive analogue or digital you need a wideband aerial i.e. one that will receive any of the frequencies in the band with equal gain. Herin lies the problem, wide band aerials have lower gains than ones design to pick up set frequencies and digital signals are transmitted at lower power than the analogue, at least for the time being.

So your existing mobile wideband analogue aerial should also be capable of picking up digital signals, it is just that it depends where you are and some set ups might be better than others. Whilst it is true that it is better to use high quality coax for digital reception with as few joints as possible, on such short down leads as encountered in motorhomes/caravans, keeping your analogue coax is unlikely to make much difference. It is more important that there are no severe bends in the coax and good joints are made.

peedee


----------



## safariboy (May 1, 2005)

On the original analogue system the part of the radio spectrum used was divided up into three bands. Each region had transmissions only in one band so you used an aerial (A,BorC) for your local group of transmitters. When Ch.5 started this was not in the original group and you could need another aerial. Digital made it even worse and few, if any, regions have their frequencies together. The result is that if you were a distance from your transmitter you needed an all band aerial. If you were close it often does not matter. Motorhomes etc. always used all band aerials anyway for obvious reasons but they are more expensive and not quite so effective. So it is common to add an amplifier and amplify up the signal. This has the disadvantage that you also amplify the rubbish as well and digital receivers can find that a problem. The aerial is designed to receive in the direction it is pointing and not in other directions. Single band aerials were good at that multiband often less so.
I have found that an amplifier often makes digital worse because of that.
If you go to menu on the freeview box you should find technical information and signal strength. You may not need a particularly big signal but the missed bits should be low (usually 0).


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

RR said:


> I have a flying saucer style aerial that working OK although I would be interested to watch you fit a crank up dish sometime as thats the way we want to go :wink:


It myabe when they eventually do switch off the analogue and then increase the transmitted power of the digital transmission the status omni flying saucer might be the most convenient one to use? (No fiddling with an aerial to get a picture, just switch on and tune in)

peedee


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

The point is......will there be any programmes on that will be worth watching. Or any channels worth tuning in to. Is the quality of modern television programming worth the expense of a sophisticated mobile system.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Spacerunner said:


> The point is......will there be any programmes on that will be worth watching. Or any channels worth tuning in to. Is the quality of modern television programming worth the expense of a sophisticated mobile system.


It is when you have terrible weather and three bored kids.


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

Touche


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

roboughton said:


> Q. What makes the aerial digital compatible???
> 
> A. Digital (DVB-T) broadcasts at higher RF frequencys so a higher gain aerial is required to pick up the signal, Most DVB-T aerials use high quality co-axial cable and components. I have no idea ho the high gain works in the actual aerial but i sure you could google it.
> 
> ...


Are you sure? From the technical on screen details when my freeview set is acquiring new channels the digital signal is embedded in the analog signal.

However what I am not so sure of is whether an american antenna covers the same frequency range as the UK terrestial system.

The digital signal causes one problem in that as the signal level falls the system does not degrade gracefully. On an analog the picture just gradually gets noisier/more grainy but doesn't suffer the sort of break ups as viewed on a digital set. In bad atmospheric conditions analog is often more watchable and I tend to switch between the two at home. The better the antenna the better this will be, also cheap boosters boost noise as well as signal and can make breakup worse not better.

If you are replacing coax don't bother with low loss over such a short length, the partially air spaced nature of low loss often causes problems when the cable is taken through sharp bends.

Regards Frank

EDIT Sorry I somehow missed that Safariboy and PeeDee had already answered in almost the same way


----------



## safariboy (May 1, 2005)

You ask about TV standards in USA and UK. USA is more diverse but analogue is mostly on VHF (I suspect because it is more suitable for larger distances) and digital on UHF Ch. 14 - 69 UK uses Ch. 21-68 which is 471.25MHz to 847.25MHz. so I would expect a USA aerial to work in UK. You will know it is VHF because it will be about 3 metres long.
Each station does not have its own frequency on digital. Each channel is shared by about half a dozen stations. 
I don't think that omni-directional aerials will ever be the answer because they do not reject unwanted signals, however if you are in a strong signal area they will work well. I never seem to have a site with a strong signal! (except Chedder C&CC where the signal nearly melted the aerial.)


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

safariboy said:


> I don't think that omni-directional aerials will ever be the answer because they do not reject unwanted signals, however if you are in a strong signal area they will work well. I never seem to have a site with a strong signal! (except Chedder C&CC where the signal nearly melted the aerial.)


Not so safariboy, I think you will find that with digital decoding the degree of rejection is very high and ghosting, which is what I think your are refering to, is a thing of the past. If you are refering to rejection of other frequencies then that is a function of the receiver not the aerial.

peedee


----------



## safariboy (May 1, 2005)

I agree that with digital it is more complicated but I was not thinking of ghosting but interference preventing the packets being decoded correctly. This is indicated by the screen freezing or large blocks of one colour. The important point not that the signal is large (it can be amplified) but that any errors are resolved this means that directionality is still important.


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

I used to have a natty antenna/amplifier combination which I considered moving into my first van. Because I live the wrong side of a hill for the local relay site I have to use a main station from 40 miles away. I had a small log periodic broadband antenna (all groups) which when connected in my loft was hopeless. I also had a small amplifier which broadly tuned both VHF and UHF channels (it was that old!) but had seperate inputs, screwdriver adjustment for tuning, and seperate tuner/amps, it multiplexed the output on to one coax. On UHF it gave about 5dB gain at the set frequency the channel either side only about 4dB and by 5 channels further away was back to zero further away still there was negative gain. Ok this isn't very sharp tuning but its as good as the UHF stages of many TVs of the time. Unfortunately it depended for its power on a DC sent up the coax and my portable didn't have that facility.

That log periodic was used on its own in the then van for many years until it fell apart.

When working on Lighthouses I was able to buy a flat plane slot antenna with 17dB gain compared with a dipole (no amplifier), at about the right frequency that was the bees knees but was the devil to point in the right direction looking as it did like one large segment of a chocolate bar and having no obvious axis to sight along. So no good for mobile applications.

I agree the co-channel and adjacent channel interference on digital should be less but the sums tell us that the signal strength will be reduced below that of conventional analog FM signals and this in itself might leave to picture breakup. Hence the need to crank up the power on some transmitters as the digital only roll out commences. (Hey I forgot I knew all that stuff  )


Regards Frank


----------



## olley (May 1, 2005)

Hi Shane same as chris, just fitted a digibox and it works fine, I must have the amplifier turned on though, otherwise digital or analogue its crap.

Olley


----------



## peedee (May 10, 2005)

safariboy said:


> I agree that with digital it is more complicated but I was not thinking of ghosting but interference preventing the packets being decoded correctly. This is indicated by the screen freezing or large blocks of one colour. The important point not that the signal is large (it can be amplified) but that any errors are resolved this means that directionality is still important.


Ah I see where you are coming from, interference on the same frequency is a hazard with analogue too although agree it should not be so disasterous as on tdigital and a directional aerial MAY help to relieve the problem. However I think as with the analogue system the risks of interference on the same frequency are very small.

peedee


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Been to rv today. Found coax had no continuity, so replaced it. Now got 12v up to the top. Still no difference in the picture though, still pants. Can only assume the head itself is broken.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Final answer...

Yes the Winnegard aerial will do digital.

This weekend I've been able to recieve most digital freeview channels in quite a dodgy area for freeview.


----------



## tonka (Apr 24, 2006)

roboughton said:


> Q. What makes the aerial digital compatible???
> 
> A. Digital (DVB-T) broadcasts at higher RF frequencys so a higher gain aerial is required to pick up the signal,


Sorry not true... Digital pictures are transmitted in exactly the frequency band as analogue. 
At present the Digital signals are on much lower power to avoid interference with the current Analogue. So it is true that a higher gain aerial "may" be needed but not always, it's a try it first and see approach before paying for an upgrade. When analogue goes off and digital takes over they will turn up the power. Rumors are that you'll get it on wet string..
In some areas of the UK the Digital transmissions take up a slightly larger bandwith than current aerials fitted and new ones may be needed to receiver all channels. 
Most aerials sold for the leisure market are wideband and cover the full UK band channels 21 - 69.. So in theory all are compatible but signal strength and the aerials gain is more the issue..
Good quality coax and connections do help, as with any high frequency signals.


----------



## LC1962 (Oct 6, 2005)

Snelly said:


> Final answer...
> 
> Yes the Winnegard aerial will do digital.
> 
> This weekend I've been able to recieve most digital freeview channels in quite a dodgy area for freeview.


Told you so


----------



## Snelly (Aug 20, 2005)

Picture still doesn't alter when I turn on the booster and it is getting voltage all the way up to the head... so can only presume head is broken.


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

Snelly said:


> Picture still doesn't alter when I turn on the booster and it is getting voltage all the way up to the head... so can only presume head is broken.


Well Shane it won't necessarily show on a digital derived picture if you are in a strong signal area and there is an adequate signal. I think you said in a previous post that the you are getting a picture now.

That is the beauty of digital same picture quality over a wide band of signal strengths. Of course its also its downfall complete breakup if it goes below that level.

Caveat: some boosters don't allow any signal through when switched off.

Try it in a weak area.

Regards Frank


----------



## 89338 (May 20, 2005)

Snelly

It should work fine. I have the same as you with a digi set top box works great if your in an area where you can receive it. amplifier does have to be on. Fited sat system as well now .

Hope you get it to work.


Regards


Lampie


----------



## blackbirdbiker (Mar 12, 2007)

Digital DVB,
There is no difference between digital and anolouge fequencies, analouge transmition use vestigal sideband supression which takes up a large chunk of bandwidth, digital will take up a hell of a lot less bandwidth, they are both within the channels of 21-68 around 400mhz- 800mhz.
Both need a good signal, in a low analoue signal the agc circut will produce a snowy picture..this can never be seen on digital.
So low signal means no picture for digital reception.

Keith


----------

