On Tuesday, 28 March 2023 at 21:20:28 UTC+1, Brian Gregory wrote:
> On 24/03/2023 21:23, NY wrote:
> > "wrights...@aol.com" <wrights...@f2s.com> wrote in message
> > news:64457424-7a0e-4b3f...@googlegroups.com...
> >> On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 19:06:49 UTC, Dickie mint wrote:
> >>> On 22/03/2023 00:41, wrights...@aol.com wrote:
> >>> > Don't assume that an outdoor aerial will work OK if you are behind
> >>> > trees.
> >>> > Bill
> >>> They are some distance away and others in the street have outdoor
> >>> aerials.
> >>
> >> Like I said, 'don't assume'. Most likely it'll be OK but sometimes,
> >> against every prior indication that there won't be a problem, it
> >> turns out that there is. Trees are buggers like that.
> >
> > I imagine (but don't assume!) that trees are at their most "buggerly"
> > when they are well-saturated with rainwater which is sufficiently
> > conductive to turn the whole tree into a grounded object, with
> > predicable effects on signal strength. Is that the case in practice:
> > that periods of poor reception involving trees tend to correspond with
> > the after-effects of heavy and prolonged rain?
> Not sure, but it makes sense.
>
> The trees behind my father's home, in the direction of the Hannington
> transmitter seem to cause more problems in the Summer when they have
> leaves on them.
>
> --
> Brian Gregory (in England).
Yes that usually happens. And leaf size is an issue.
Bill

On Wednesday, 29 March 2023 at 08:03:21 UTC+1, Mark Carver wrote:

> At our last house we had trees in line (of Hannington) too, summer was
> worse. I actually moved the aerial down, and used the path under the
> tree canopy. That worked fine. It was LOS too, could make out the red
> mast lights at night from the aerial.
I was able to do that when the one tree was in the middle of a large lawn, and the lower branches had been trimmed to allow the sit-on mower to get close to the trunk.
Bill

On Thu 30/03/2023 19:14, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 28 March 2023 at 21:20:28 UTC+1, Brian Gregory wrote:
>> On 24/03/2023 21:23, NY wrote:
>>> "wrights...@aol.com" <wrights...@f2s.com> wrote in message
>>> news:64457424-7a0e-4b3f...@googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 19:06:49 UTC, Dickie mint wrote:
>>>>> On 22/03/2023 00:41, wrights...@aol.com wrote:
>>>>>> Don't assume that an outdoor aerial will work OK if you are behind
>>>>>> trees.
>>>>>> Bill
>>>>> They are some distance away and others in the street have outdoor
>>>>> aerials.
>>>>
>>>> Like I said, 'don't assume'. Most likely it'll be OK but sometimes,
>>>> against every prior indication that there won't be a problem, it
>>>> turns out that there is. Trees are buggers like that.
>>>
>>> I imagine (but don't assume!) that trees are at their most "buggerly"
>>> when they are well-saturated with rainwater which is sufficiently
>>> conductive to turn the whole tree into a grounded object, with
>>> predicable effects on signal strength. Is that the case in practice:
>>> that periods of poor reception involving trees tend to correspond with
>>> the after-effects of heavy and prolonged rain?
>> Not sure, but it makes sense.
>>
>> The trees behind my father's home, in the direction of the Hannington
>> transmitter seem to cause more problems in the Summer when they have
>> leaves on them.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Gregory (in England).
> Yes that usually happens. And leaf size is an issue.
> Bill

......and if its been raining!

On 29/03/2023 14:54, Mark Carver wrote:

Never seen another transmitter here in sunny Solihull! Definately SC.

I should add it's both the Humax Freeveiw PVR and LG TV. As I have seen
the HD channel some while ago I suspect either the aerial amp or, being
paranoid, some new kit Brum airport (2 miles away as the crow flies)
are using!