300, everyone is saying WNGS is going to be tropo only for the GTA. I'm proceeding with the GH10n3 tophat build anyway - I can always find another home for it.

How about this baby for WNGS, 14-15 dbi gain! http://imageevent.com/holl_ands/yagis/12elyagi

VHF capability vs gain figures? Gain factors are not the silver bullet!, but VHF capability will soon become very important in Southern Ontario.

If the contour of WNGS is not currently set-up to be reaching into your area, then I'd doubt that simply adding antenna gain alone will help much unless there's some propogation in your favour. Reliable 24/7 reception of WNGS won't happen until they've expanded their coverage contour area with increased ERP & increased directionality of their broadcasting contour. Obviously you'll need a VHF capable antenna for a few stations by next August, so when that time comes, WNGS may at that time have some restrictions lifted and the signal will then become more wide spread into some Southern Ontario regions.

The nikml optimized GH10n3 tophat design looks like a hopefull for Southern Ontario reception, but it may not really pay off until we are post transition. If you do build one of these antennas, be prepared for disappointment prior to the analog shutdown next August.

THis CM4221HD antenna whats the reflectors spacing from the whiskers and how long are the reflectors. can some one give me a measurement or 2 so i can look at something ;)

does anyone have a NEC file on the CM4221HD or post me a link on the forums here to it.

thank you
I have had the 4bay bow 9-5x9 with a nice gain and swr in modeling VHF hi but with complete rebuild of the reflector section

If i had the reflector sizes and spaceing and whiskers and runners measurements for this CM4221HD maybe theres a ad on or 2 ? maybe one never knows

If the contour of WNGS is not currently set-up to be reaching into your area, then I'd doubt that simply adding antenna gain alone will help much unless there's some propogation in your favour. Reliable 24/7 reception of WNGS won't happen until they've expanded their coverage contour area with increased ERP & increased directionality of their broadcasting contour.

WNGS 7 (67.1) Ind 83.1 2Edge 15.3
WPXJ-DT 23 (51.1) ION 83.7 1Edge 9.8

If I point my UHF antenna right at WPXJ I will receive it ALL the time. It does get iffy when I'm 20 degrees off. WNGS is actually 5dB STRONGER in my tvfool report, and I believe tvfool takes the contour into account. Why is it that everyone is saying WNGS will be tropo only? Wouldn't a good dedicated VHF antenna pointed right at it have a decent shot? There's probably a good reason - I just don't know what that reason is.

This is just my opinion, no scientific proof, but the US is still having problems with the lower ERP restrictions of the VHF spectrum.

You are comparing UHF with VHF tvfool predictions. My thought is the calculated theory of VHF coverage expectations at low ERP levels remains unfounded. I think there will be many issues in the future with the limited ERP levels of VHF being an insufficient means to deliver reliable distant digital signal paths. Definately, I would think that a specific 7RF antenna would be the best shot, but as far as the signal strength goes, if it ain't reliably there, it's simply ain't going to be reliable no matter what you point at it.

This is just my opinion, no scientific proof, but the US is still having problems with the lower ERP restrictions of the VHF spectrum.

You are comparing UHF with VHF tvfool predictions. My thought is the calculated theory of VHF coverage expectations at low ERP levels remains unfounded. I think there will be many issues in the future with the limited ERP levels of VHF being an insufficient means to deliver reliable distant digital signal paths. Definately, I would think that a specific 7RF antenna would be the best shot, but as far as the signal strength goes, if it ain't reliably there, it's simply ain't going to be reliable no matter what you point at it.
Explaining what otacanuck said from a different perspective: the TVFool prediction for the received signal strength in the air may be correct. What is at dispute is what the real noise floor (and thus the real Noise Margin) is for VHF high.

TVFool, I believe, considers the Noise floor to be composed solely by thermal noise. In fact, it may turn out that that is too low, and that for VHF high, we need to account for local electrical noise, FM broadcast second harmonics, and other contributors that do not affect UHF. Raising the noise floor above -106 dBm will reduce the NM by the same amount. (The increased degradation caused for indoor reception of VHF High is of no consequence here, since TVFool numbers are for outdoor reception only. You have to manually apply correction factors for indoor or attic reception, or in fact even outdoor reception if there are local obstacles.)

So in other words, you can't necessarily compare VHF NMs with UHF NMs in TVFool. Yet.

VHF Man-Made Noise varies 10-40 dB ABOVE the Thermal Noise Floor assumed in FCC calculations,
and is very location dependent (industrial areas are the worst).

Another issue is the alledged higher loss for VHF trying to propagate into buildings and attics.
Unfortunately, although I have seen many UHF indoor loss tests....NOTHING recent for VHF....

aside from the predicted noise margins, wouldn't the UHF only antenna user also have to account for the gain (or lack thereof) and swr loss when using a UHF only antenna when looking at their tvfool? What with all the 4 Bays, Hoverman's out there, etc. Even if they are in the reliable coverage area they'd be less likely to have reliable reception, all the time. After all, VHF broadcasters are assuming the user is using a VHF antenna when doing the planning, running the predictions and what not...
Just sayin'.

aside from the predicted noise margins, wouldn't the UHF only antenna user also have to account for the gain (or lack thereof) and swr loss when using a UHF only antenna when looking at their tvfool
Yes, thats what Net Gain vs Raw Gain shows. A UHF only antenna for VHF typically has Net Gain in the negative hundreds, even though it may have a small positive Raw Gain.

To use a UHF antenna for VHF, you need to have something like NARODs for the GH, or a 28" to 40" wide reflector for the bowties.

Like agent Mulder "I want to believe", but, WNGS doesn't sound good :(

In addition to the helpful posts above, this "real world testing" post is pretty revealing;

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showpost.php?p=1165066&postcount=332

"If NBC, ION and the weaker Buffalo stations are booming in you'll see some activity on WNGS, but the signal is still too weak for most conditions."

I'll still try when I get around to it & post results, probably around the time the leaves are gone.