RV Television Antenna Options

In HF ham radios, 3dBm is worth 1/2 an "S" in signal strength,and I believe a doubling of the amount of watts transmitted.

See "dBm as a power level" chart, and look up 1w vs 2w, vs 4w.

transmitting power


Of course, how good your propagation is of those watts vs antenna selection is important in ham radios, but in our case here, we are looking at efficiency in receiving the signal strength strong enough to saturate the TV's receiver to get full audio and picture strength on the screen. The stronger the signal, the better the chance you'll still get reception in cloud cover and during rain storms. Rain will dilute your TV signal strength considerably, causing all kinds of picture problems during heavy down pours.

I don't watch too much TV while out in the Travel Trailer, but it's very nice to put up my batwing in Quartzsite after a long day at the gem and mineral show, and pull in 4 or 5 stations 50 miles south of us that serve Yuma, from Plomosa Road. Last time I was there, everyone was telling me my antenna was aimed the wrong direction, they were all pointed north. I was pointed about 195 to 200 degrees, at some Yuma based stations from mountains on the other side of the Colorado River in CA and getting great reception on my little 1080p 22" Samsung LED TV, only pulling 19w off the battery. YMMV... Just sharing with you what worked for me that trip to "Q". I had a lot of disbelievers, until they came inside and saw what was on my TV.

I may have a cr*ppy little 21 ft travel trailer, but it has a good surplus telecom AGM battery, a great TV and a great antenna for pulling in TV signals.

SCVJeff wrote:
It's true that perception goes a long way over fact, and there are a few here that will still argue that Jack is a better antenna. But the numbers simply don't lie.. and as I've said for awhile, the severe lack of VHF performance is going to come back and bite the Jack big time as stations will start populating VHF again as the repack project starts taking shape.

FWIW- Winegard found that old post and put a link on their corporate website for quite awhile

SoundGuy wrote:
Jeff - you might want to provide a link to that old post so the disbelievers can see with their own eyes the difference between perception and reality. ;)

OK, so I found the link to your comparison test of the Winegard Sensar and King Jack antennas. :)

SCVJeff wrote:
It's true that perception goes a long way over fact, and there are a few here that will still argue that Jack is a better antenna. But the numbers simply don't lie.. and as I've said for awhile, the severe lack of VHF performance is going to come back and bite the Jack big time as stations will start populating VHF again as the repack project starts taking shape.

FWIW- Winegard found that old post and put a link on their corporate website for quite awhile

Jeff - you might want to provide a link to that old post so the disbelievers can see with their own eyes the difference between perception and reality. ;)

It's true that perception goes a long way over fact, and there are a few here that will still argue that Jack is a better antenna. But the numbers simply don't lie.. and as I've said for awhile, the severe lack of VHF performance is going to come back and bite the Jack big time as stations will start populating VHF again as the repack project starts taking shape.

FWIW- Winegard found that old post and put a link on their corporate website for quite awhile

You can also get a different number of "channels available" after aiming your antenna, depending on the TV set itself. I have tried it with two different TVs with the same antenna pointing the same way, and got more channels available with one TV than with the other. IAW their "tuners" are not all the same.

I will make this comment about Jack/Batwing tests...

GAIN: in an antenna comes from one of two things, Electronics or directionality.
(Beam Width)
Forgetting the electronics for the moment because, well it's easier, let us just assume King Controls is as good as Winegard in that area.. So now we are down to Beam Width.

Ok, in MOST markets all TV transmitters are going to be on or dang close to the highest spot of land around.. So Even though the studios and the "Station ID" may say (I will use Michigan as my example) Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo or Battle Creek... All the transmitters are at Gun Lake.

Now this is not always true (Not true in Detroit for example)

But in most of the country.. This is how it is done.

So a "Tight" beam antenna, has more gain, more gain means it sees farther Just like a Telescope

Opera glasses.. Not a whole lot of maginfication but you see the entire stage, Just a bit closer.

Field glasses.. Would bring that stage real close, but you'd only see half of it

A decent telescope,, You could count the pores on the Star's face.. What you coudl see of it that is, you'd have to re-aim to see it all.

And TV antennas work the same way.. IF all the stations are tightly grouped (Gun Lake) the Tight beam of the Batwing with wingman sees much farther than the JACK's wider beam.

But if you are in, say, Redford, MI.. One station is due north, another NNE another NE anther E, one I have no clue and a few more to the SOUTH.

Clearly that tight beam may need re-pointing as you change channels.

(That said all the "Detroit" Stations will be strong enough in S.Redford you don't even need to point)

SoundGuy wrote:

SoundGuy wrote:
However, as SCVJeff documented in his tests some time ago using lab grade equipment that perception about the Jack antenna is just that, a perception not supported by actual test results. Regardless, I have no doubt the myth will continue that the Jack TV antenna is "better" than a Sensar IV - the fact this just isn't true notwithstanding. :W

Lantley wrote:
I have no real dog in this fight, The average camper is not using lab grade test equipment. If the average camper perceives it is easier to use and gets more channels that is all that matters to them. That perception goes along way. Your average camper is not going to take the comparison any further. Their initial perception is their reality.

Nor do I have a dog in this fight, I could care less what OTA antenna anyone else may use. However, repeated claims here on the forums from those who continue to expound the virtues of the King Jack antenna, claiming it's "better" than the Winegard Sensar IV are simply untrue ... it's a myth based on "perception". :W

Since I travel around the country, I want the best perception I can get. :R

Rawben wrote:
Ken56 - when you mention you did the "Wingman add-on" is that the
Winegard SensarPro mentioned or somethig else?

We are replacing our entire roof on a 2000 Komfort and debating on putting the Winegard antenna back on. DH is leaning towards putting it back on.

The Wingman add on is technically a UHF DIRECTOR ARRAY

It is an arm, with 3 cross arms (Elements) that attaches to the Bottom of the existing "Batwing" head.. You may see 3 or 4 rubber "Feet" on the bottom of the head, you pull these out, and then position the Wingman and using plastic Push Pins provided lock it in place.. Might need a pair of pliers to pull the rubber feet off. that, and fingers, and a ladder is the total tool kit.


The Sensar Pro.. Is a replacement for the standard Wall Plate (Wall plate with 12 volt socket, switch, light, antenna connector) Duplicates all functions except 12 volt socket, adds several more May be put between box of many buttons and Antenna (I DID) I highly recommend both..

But they are two different devices.

SoundGuy wrote:
However, as SCVJeff documented in his tests some time ago using lab grade equipment that perception about the Jack antenna is just that, a perception not supported by actual test results. Regardless, I have no doubt the myth will continue that the Jack TV antenna is "better" than a Sensar IV - the fact this just isn't true notwithstanding. :W

Lantley wrote:
I have no real dog in this fight, The average camper is not using lab grade test equipment. If the average camper perceives it is easier to use and gets more channels that is all that matters to them. That perception goes along way. Your average camper is not going to take the comparison any further. Their initial perception is their reality.

Nor do I have a dog in this fight, I could care less what OTA antenna anyone else may use. However, repeated claims here on the forums from those who continue to expound the virtues of the King Jack antenna, claiming it's "better" than the Winegard Sensar IV are simply untrue ... it's a myth based on "perception". :W

For those with clearance issues for the Wingman add-on or Sensar IV replacement head, there are a couple of possible options. Trimming the end element off the Wingman to shorten it a bit is one option, although it will degrade the performance some. Still better than no Wingman though. Another option that's more labor intensive would be to remove the mounting screws for the Sensar base and rotate the entire assembly slightly until it clears the obstruction. Reseal and reinstall the screws and your good to go. The inside ceiling plate should also be rotated to match.