Freeview ariel??

lolie

So a family member is looking to try and improve his freeview signal from Brougher.
I've told him his best bet is to put up a dish and get a freesat but he's wants to try and keep receiving all the channels (saorview & freeview) from the ariel on to the tv without any boxes if possible.
It's mainly to try and watch dave, quest and yesterday channels.
Looking at the ariel pictured which is about 15ish years old can anyone here tell is it a wideband ariel and not a group a which he'd be better off with?
Also the dipole at the back of it looks bent which prob wouldn't help. Pictures of the ariel.

Oscarziggy

lolie wrote: »

So a family member is looking to try and improve his freeview signal from Brougher.
I've told him his best bet is to put up a dish and get a freesat but he's wants to try and keep receiving all the channels (saorview & freeview) from the ariel on to the tv without any boxes if possible.
It's mainly to try and watch dave, quest and yesterday channels.
Looking at the ariel pictured which is about 15ish years old can anyone here tell is it a wideband ariel and not a group a which he'd be better off with?
Also the dipole at the back of it looks bent which prob wouldn't help. Pictures of the ariel.

lolie.
Now that is some aerial

---

I've used the correct spelling of aerial as there is a poster here who will jump down your throat with sarcastic comments that Ariel is a washing powder.
Being curious, what was the analogue reception like with that aerial ---- if such a large one was needed was the reception a problem in the analogue days.?
Regards

Thurston?

lolie wrote: »

So a family member is looking to try and improve his freeview signal from Brougher ...

... It's mainly to try and watch dave, quest and yesterday channels.
Looking at the ariel pictured which is about 15ish years old can anyone here tell is it a wideband ariel and not a group a which he'd be better off with?
Also the dipole at the back of it looks bent which prob wouldn't help.

Dave, Quest, & Yesterday are some of the commercial channels, which are generally carried at half the power of the public service channels from the same transmitter, but in the case of Brougher it's one-tenth the power (2kW v. 20kW). Also they share frequencies with the PSBs from Divis (Belfast, 100kW), so will probably be subject to interference from there.

That is a Hirschmann aerial, very likely a group A, & the dipole on those aerials has been mentioned as a weak point by installers here before.

A grouped aerial is best in poor signal areas, & should be alright in terms of bandwidth for the next 5 years or so anyway, & possibly afterwards, depending how the currently ongoing frequency plan for the 2nd round of clearences at the top of the UHF TV band works out.

lolie

Oscarziggy wrote: »

lolie.
Now that is some aerial

---

I've used the correct spelling of aerial as there is a poster here who will jump down your throat with sarcastic comments that Ariel is a washing powder.
Being curious, what was the analogue reception like with that aerial ---- if such a large one was needed was the reception a problem in the analogue days.?
Regards

Ha crap didn't notice that, spelt it aerial, bloody autocorrect.
Coverage was ok i think with analogue, wasn't the best but watchable.
There are other people nearby that pick up the weak muxes and very seldom suffer breakup with them.

lolie

Thurston? wrote: »

Dave, Quest, & Yesterday are some of the commercial channels, which are generally carried at half the power of the public service channels from the same transmitter, but in the case of Brougher it's one-tenth the power (2kW v. 20kW). Also they share frequencies with the PSBs from Divis (Belfast, 100kW), so will probably be subject to interference from there.

That is a Hirschmann aerial, very likely a group A, & the dipole on those aerials has been mentioned as a weak point by installers here before.

A grouped aerial is best in poor signal areas, & should be alright in terms of bandwidth for the next 5 years or so anyway, & possibly afterwards, depending how the currently ongoing frequency plan for the 2nd round of clearences at the top of the UHF TV band works out.

Cheers, I'd know all of the above from reading this forum the last few years.
I've another friend in a very poor signal area who had me head wrecked about trying to get his freeview channels after the switchover.
My query about the aerial was is it a group or wideband to see would it be worth telling him to change it.
To me the elements look short which made me think it was a wideband from looking at the picture below.

Group top and wideband bottom.

Thurston?

I've attached a Hirschmann catalogue from 2007, that gives the end-to-end lengths of the 3 FESA 817 models then available (p.7), with the group A version being 64cm longer than the wideband - 2.72m v. 2.08m.

For receiving from Brougher, which always had all its analogue & Freeview in group A, there would have been no reason to use the wideband, unless the grouped was unavailable & the installer was dead set on this particular aerial make & model.

lolie

Thurston? wrote: »

I've attached a Hirschmann catalogue from 2007, that gives the end-to-end lengths of the 3 FESA 817 models then available (p.7), with the group A version being 64cm longer than the wideband - 2.72m v. 2.08m.

For receiving from Brougher, which always had all its analogue & Freeview in group A, there would have been no reason to use the wideband, unless the grouped was unavailable & the installer was dead set on this particular aerial make & model.

That looks like the aerial alright so it must be a group a so.
Looks like it's a case of checking the cables and the amp.
Would the bent dipole (if that's what it is) at the back cause much problems with the signal do you think?

Thurston?

lolie wrote: »

... Looks like it's a case of checking the cables and the amp.
Would the bent dipole (if that's what it is) at the back cause much problems with the signal do you think?

Yeah, the dipole looks pretty out of shape, maybe even broken on 1 side?

Oscarziggy

Yes something wrong with the dipole by the looks of it .
How high off the ground is the aerial ---- is that a photo of the pole attached to a chimney ?

A new aerial would be my first thought as you say that one is 15 years oldish.
Sorry I can't comment about the best choice of grouped or wideband.

You say that reception on analogue was " not the best but watchable".
You don't get that with digital ---- it's either there or it ain't ---- but I'm sure you know that .


I can't see a mast head amp so take it there is something near the TV --- is the power supply to that working ok and has that amp been there since the aerial was installed?


Good luck .....
Regards

lolie

Oscarziggy wrote: »

Yes something wrong with the dipole by the looks of it .
How high off the ground is the aerial ---- is that a photo of the pole attached to a chimney ?

A new aerial would be my first thought as you say that one is 15 years oldish.
Sorry I can't comment about the best choice of grouped or wideband.

You say that reception on analogue was " not the best but watchable".
You don't get that with digital ---- it's either there or it ain't ---- but I'm sure you know that .


I can't see a mast head amp so take it there is something near the TV --- is the power supply to that working ok and has that amp been there since the aerial was installed?


Good luck
Regards

The pole is attached to a bungalow gable, the aerial is about 25ft and looks in good nick with nothing blocking it near hand.
The amp is up there since the aerial was installed so probably getting on a bit, it's just below the picture.
After doing a bit of Googling(thanks Thurston for the name) it seems the dipole is the one weak part of it.
I'll see about checking cable, amp and connections some day.
If that makes no difference then it's probably not worthwhile seeing about installing a new aerial unless the weaker muxes ever increase their output.
Thanks for the replies guys.

muincav

lolie wrote: »

The pole is attached to a bungalow gable, the aerial is about 25ft and looks in good nick with nothing blocking it near hand.
The amp is up there since the aerial was installed so probably getting on a bit, it's just below the picture.
After doing a bit of Googling(thanks Thurston for the name) it seems the dipole is the one weak part of it.
I'll see about checking cable, amp and connections some day.
If that makes no difference then it's probably not worthwhile seeing about installing a new aerial unless the weaker muxes ever increase their output.
Thanks for the replies guys.

I had all the Freeview channels a few years back coming in perfect but then I had to move my Aerial from the chimney to the gable about 6ft awy and about 3-4ft lower and I lost a lot of the weaker mux channels such as Quest and Yesterday, sometimes Quest +1 comes in better but not too often, If I could put the aerial back on the chimney I would but circumstances are stopping me at present and Im hoping some of the weaker mux's will increase their output as ITV 4 is better now too....Im in Cavan area too.

The Cush

muincav wrote: »

Im hoping some of the weaker mux's will increase their output as ITV 4 is better now too....Im in Cavan area too.

ITV4 is better because it moved to one of the higher power PSB muxes at the end of August - http://www.a516digital.com/2015/08/itv-changes-on-freeview-25th-august-2015.html

http://www.cai.org.uk/downloadables/finish/5-general-documents/559-freeview-dtt-multiplexes-2-october-2015

Brougher Mountain - https://ukfree.tv/transmitters/tv/Brougher_Mountain
Divis - https://ukfree.tv/transmitters/tv/Divis

lolie

So i'm gonna replace the cable from the amp down on this aerial as i don't think it was replaced when the newer aerial was put up and it looks well worn and faded now.
Anyone recommend good high quality outdoor cable for the job?

The Cush

lolie wrote: »

Anyone recommend good high quality outdoor cable for the job?

Any of these satellite grade CT100 cables - http://www.cai.org.uk/information/benchmarking-scheme/cai-benchmarked-cables

UrbanFret

He needs to put a dish up. The signal from brougher is getting weaker all the time. Throw in the windmills all over the mountains in west cavan and your in trouble.

lolie

UrbanFret wrote: »

He needs to put a dish up. The signal from brougher is getting weaker all the time. Throw in the windmills all over the mountains in west cavan and your in trouble.

That's not good if the windmills are affecting tv signals.
Who says the signal from brougher are getting weaker?

UrbanFret

lolie wrote: »

That's not good if the windmills are affecting tv signals.
Who says the signal from brougher are getting weaker?

Im only going by what is happening in my own area over the last few years . lots of people losing the bbcs and itvs etc where once a small aerial would have done.

Thurston?

Castlebar transmitter shares channels 22 & 25 with Brougher, & it's a pretty high site, so could cause problems surprisingly far away.