said by 88615298: said by Davesworld:
My main concern is the antenna size for the longer VHF wavelength.
When people speculated about using the lower VHF for cellular I envisioned a cell phone with a 32" whip.
I should note that many of the OTA broadcasters moved their DVB back down to VHF after the transition. In my area, at least the upper VHF, channel 9 to 13 is used for DVB in addition to several on UHF. When I first started watching OTA DVB, I only needed a UHF antenna. There's no such thing as an HD antenna or digital antenna as most probably know.
VHF for digital is prone to interference. Espeically low-VHF which is why so few use it. Those that do are trying to get on UHF. hi-VHF isn't much better. Hi-VHF can get interfence from 2nd harmonics so if you have some strong FM stations in your area that can effect hi-VHF channels.
We do have some strong FM stations here. All our TV and FM towers are all over the place in the Puget Sound Area. Interesting though is that the second harmonic you stated would indeed fall somehwere in high VHF from a given frequency in the 20mhz FM band. I know when we're talking millions of watts of FM transmitter power a second harmonic can indeed be strong as well. I actually liked it when all DVB here was UHF.