Quote:
Originally Posted by mdoverstreet
I got the TV Fool links corrected in the original post. Could y'all tell me what you think? Thanks.
|
Thank you for the new reports.
This is your report for 30 ft:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...90380b32be2982
This is a rabbitears.info report that I did for 30 ft:
https://www.rabbitears.info/searchma...tudy_id=181766
I don't have the exact coordinates for the location, so the report that I did could be a little off. If you give me the exact coordinates in a PM for privacy, I can redo my report. In hilly areas, a small change in location can make a big difference in a report.
Both reports agree on KEMV. That should be the easiest to receive. It will require a VHF-High antenna like the Stellar Labs 30-2476 and a preamp.
This is the terrain profile for KEMV. VHF signals can make it over rough terrin better than UHF signals.
The other possible channel will be more difficult to receive. The two reports don't agree. It will be either K26GS on UHF real channel 26 or K07XL on VHF-High real channel 7. They both have the same subchannels.
K26GS will require a high gain UHF antenna like the HDB91X and a preamp to even have a half a chance.
K07XL will require a second 30-2476 antenna and a preamp.
I don't see any other possible channels at 30 ft, but reports with weak 2Edge signals are known to be less accurate.
If your friend doesn't have cable TV in his area, he should consider satellite or FTA for TV reception.
I am willing to do an analysis at 150 ft, but only if I have the exact coordinates of the antenna and if he really will be able to get the antennas 150 ft above ground level.
https://www.rabbitears.info/searchma...tudy_id=181770
The terrain in that area is very hilly, so the actual location can make a big difference in the signals.
Quote:
|
Any hope for him? I don't much think there is. He was hoping to get some stuff from Little Rock, but that's pretty much not happening I don't think. Springfield, MO is not looking too good either.
|
I agree; doesn't look good.