Antenna explanation
Since the subject of HD antennas comes up here occasionally, I just couldn't resist posting this link: http://money.cnn.com/gallery/technology/innovation/2013/08/07/worst-tech-lies/5.html
Forum Discussion
We WERE discussing and making the point that there is no such thing as an HD antenna. If you choose to classify a UHF antenna as HD, that’s up to you, but totally it is incorrect in the real world. Additionally you seem to think that the stations now on VHF are “allowed to transmit there for awhile”. You need to pay more attention to what’s really going on, because it simply ain’t true. The transition has happened, and those who are now on VHF are going to stay there with VERY VERY few exceptions. There are LOTS of Full Power, Class-A , and LP digital transmitters on VHF, and they will stay (although LP is on the block).
HERE is the Seventh Report and Order published by the FCC and adopted in 2007, all 131 pages of it, listing every television transmitter in the US and it’s territories, and their assigned channels. This is, and will be in effect for many years to come. If you care to debate who is and isn’t on VHF, start on page 67 and get back to us.
As for antennas that are or are not “tuned”, what exactly does that mean anyway? If you are talking about optimizing the batwing? That is exactly what the Wingman was designed to do and it does it well. Antennas are antennas and you can only squeeze so much out of one before adding amplifiers. I WILL do the testing on this when I can, but if I were to point to a deficiency between a Jack and a Batwing I would look at the Batwing's pre-amp that has changed very little since the 1970’s.
Further you state that the Jack is “tuned for UHF” I doubt you have any proof of this, but IF true would severely impact all of those VHF listings that you claim are only temporary. The difference between the two as antennas (only), and taking all the electronics away is that the Jack probably performs poorly on VHF-Lo simply because it is missing the low-band element, something that makes the Batwing a Batwing. There are still a very few VHF-Lo transmitters out there, and when trying to see those, Batwing wins. Did the Batwing once suffer on UHF? Yes, but it was never not designed for UHF. There is a UHF element inside the Batwing hood and goes through a band splitter before hitting the head amp. The Wingman, and now Batwing with the Wingman built in just made it work really well. So tell me whats not ‘HD’ in your book about this antenna?
Like Tom I also am a TV guy and still (unfortunately ) working. As mentioned before I also did some pretty through testing of the Batwing with and without the Wingman before the transition, something Winegard hadn’t done and they posted a link from my post here on RV.net to their website. I don’t need to make any of this up because its all I do,
HERE is the Seventh Report and Order published by the FCC and adopted in 2007, all 131 pages of it, listing every television transmitter in the US and it’s territories, and their assigned channels. This is, and will be in effect for many years to come. If you care to debate who is and isn’t on VHF, start on page 67 and get back to us.
As for antennas that are or are not “tuned”, what exactly does that mean anyway? If you are talking about optimizing the batwing? That is exactly what the Wingman was designed to do and it does it well. Antennas are antennas and you can only squeeze so much out of one before adding amplifiers. I WILL do the testing on this when I can, but if I were to point to a deficiency between a Jack and a Batwing I would look at the Batwing's pre-amp that has changed very little since the 1970’s.
Further you state that the Jack is “tuned for UHF” I doubt you have any proof of this, but IF true would severely impact all of those VHF listings that you claim are only temporary. The difference between the two as antennas (only), and taking all the electronics away is that the Jack probably performs poorly on VHF-Lo simply because it is missing the low-band element, something that makes the Batwing a Batwing. There are still a very few VHF-Lo transmitters out there, and when trying to see those, Batwing wins. Did the Batwing once suffer on UHF? Yes, but it was never not designed for UHF. There is a UHF element inside the Batwing hood and goes through a band splitter before hitting the head amp. The Wingman, and now Batwing with the Wingman built in just made it work really well. So tell me whats not ‘HD’ in your book about this antenna?
Like Tom I also am a TV guy and still (unfortunately ) working. As mentioned before I also did some pretty through testing of the Batwing with and without the Wingman before the transition, something Winegard hadn’t done and they posted a link from my post here on RV.net to their website. I don’t need to make any of this up because its all I do,
