Topic: Winegard Batwing TV - Wingman Aerial Booster (Read 1722 times)

RVOA · « **on:** October 12, 2009, 03:15:24 PM »

Has anyone purchased a Wingman upgrade for their std Winegard Batwing TV aerial ?

Quote

improve your Winegard Sensar batwing antenna's UHF performance with the Wingman. This lightweight, sleek add-on attaches with 4 simple snap-on screws to the Sensar head to increase db gain up to 100% on DTV channels.

Product Link

Im thinking of getting one as my 2006 Fleetwood Expedition didnt come with an internal TV booster and the signal isnt at its best.

Paul

RV Roamer · « **Reply #1 on:** October 12, 2009, 04:06:30 PM »

Paul,
If you have a Winegard antenna, it has a built-in booster. In your Expedition, I think the power for it comes from the video switch box and is on whenever you select the Antenna input.

The Wingman upgrade is supposed to help with UHF reception - it does nothing for VHF. Do you know which you are having problems with?

ArdraF · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2009, 05:47:32 PM »

I can tell you they're really easy to install. Takes just a few minutes.

ArdraF

RVOA · « **Reply #3 on:** October 13, 2009, 12:44:37 AM »

Thanks for replies guys.

The actual problem I have is as follows:-

All was working OK until I added (and removed) some equipment - plus we went to digital broadcasting at around the same time.

I installed a combined digital receiver/recorder and removed my sat receiver.

The signal didnt appear strong enough and there was a lot of freezing and picture break-up.

So, I purchased a TV booster device and that seemed to have sorted the problem.

EXCEPT - whenever I switch on the kettle the picture freezes (on the inbuilt digital receiver channel, on external receiver channel and on std TV).

I believe the kettle is on the same power circuit as the TV.

Someone has suggested that the power draw of the kettle is interfering with the new TV booster and thats the problem.

Hence the idea of trying the Batwing attachment.

Paul

Clay L · « **Reply #4 on:** October 13, 2009, 09:09:51 AM »

Regarding the Wingman, I installed one and at that location it increased the stations I could pick up from 2 to 10. It is directional and may need to be rotated to get the maximum number of stations.

John From Detroit · « **Reply #5 on:** October 13, 2009, 10:34:40 AM »

One of the more common errors when installing a digital converter is location

If you have 2 TV's there is a temptation to put the converter between the antenna and the switch/splitter

It can not go there, Unless it has DC-Pass through, and though I could add that to one, I don't know of any that come with it.

IT must go between the switch/splitter and the Television (one for each TV) else it disables the antenna pre-amp.

JerArdra · « **Reply #6 on:** November 01, 2009, 07:12:09 PM »

We keep our MH in a garage so the TV signal has to go through sheetrock and particle board sheathing. In the garage we cranked up the winegard antenna and tuned in the local thru-the-air HDTV stations. We received them okay BUT you could see that the picture was a bit degraded. The sound was fine. I then installed the new winegard clip-on antenna. It took only 5 minutes to clip it on.

The result was, we could clearly see that the picture was MUCH improved. Bottom line: It was worth the $30.

JerryF

Tom · « **Reply #7 on:** November 01, 2009, 07:47:02 PM »

Quote

we could clearly see that the picture was MUCH improved.

Jerry, I'm really confused; Since it's digital TV, I can understand how the signal might be improved, but don't understand how the picture would be improved

JNewkirk77 · « **Reply #8 on:** November 01, 2009, 07:58:04 PM »

Tom, I'm thinking he might mean the picture doesn't break up as much.

One thing I've learned about DTV is that VHF (channels 2-13) stations are going to give us problems like those that have been mentioned. VHF is very susceptible to interference from FM and such simple things as flipping a light switch; with analog TV, it wasn't a major problem, but with digital, it's a big deal.

I anticipate that the FCC will, at some point, move most stations back to UHF (14-51).

Tom · « **Reply #9 on:** November 01, 2009, 08:11:30 PM »

Quote from: JNewkirk77

... I'm thinking he might mean the picture doesn't break up as much.

Understood, but that wasn't what his message said, which is why I was confused. But it doesn't take much (to confuse me).

JNewkirk77 · « **Reply #10 on:** November 01, 2009, 08:32:18 PM »

Quote from: Tom on November 01, 2009, 08:11:30 PM

Understood, but that wasn't what his message said, which is why I was confused. But it doesn't take much (to confuse me).

I'm right there with ya, about 99% of the time ... I blame my kids!

Jim Godward · « **Reply #11 on:** November 01, 2009, 08:53:07 PM »

I just read an article on problems with the digital TV due to interference and they are huge. Many of your household devices can cause interference such as thermostats, like the kettle, fluorescent lights, LED lights etc. I won't even touch on the problem that the Hams may face as it is really sensitive to nearby transmitters especially if you are using an adapter box.

There will be a lot of gnashing of teeth about this in the future.

Tom · « **Reply #12 on:** November 01, 2009, 09:28:05 PM »

Jim,

Any interference is likely to cause no picture, or a breakup/pixelation of the picture.

Quote

I won't even touch on the problem that the Hams may face as it is really sensitive to nearby transmitters ....

Reminds me of the days when all it took was a diode to pick up a hilltop transmitter and cause some annoying, albeit minor, noise in an FM hifi system.

Jim Godward · « **Reply #13 on:** November 02, 2009, 01:05:44 AM »

Quote from: Tom on November 01, 2009, 09:28:05 PM

Jim,

Any interference is likely to cause no picture, or a breakup/pixelation of the picture.

Reminds me of the days when all it took was a diode to pick up a hilltop transmitter and cause some annoying, albeit minor, noise in an FM hifi system.

Tom,

It is that and more in the case of the digital TV receivers. It seems there has been a relaxation of tuning the input frequency band and many of the current receiver pass ALL RF. Not good!

BruceinFL · « **Reply #14 on:** November 02, 2009, 01:55:20 PM »

Mandatory digital TV is just another example of how the government can screw up a good deal.

JNewkirk77 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 02, 2009, 04:17:06 PM »

Quote from: BruceinFL on November 02, 2009, 01:55:20 PM

Mandatory digital TV is just another example of how the government can screw up a good deal.

I won't argue that point, but I do like the crystal-clear picture.

One other point that I neglected to make previously, for those of you folks who went with converter boxes (like I did), is this: If you're connecting the box through the TV's RF (antenna) jack, THROW AWAY THE JUNK CABLE THAT CAME WITH THE BOX. It belongs in a landfill, not hooked to your TV. Get the best coax cable you can (I used RG6). You will be amazed at the difference. I had a friend at the local cable company take several shorter (3' to 8') pieces of coax that I had lying around, and he put on the nice high-quality connectors that they use. It really helped a lot with the breakup in picture and sound.

Of course, if your TV has RCA-type A/V inputs, that will give you the best picture quality. Again, it is worth investing in the best cables you can get, which are not much more expensive than the cheap ones in the long run.

Mick & Pat · « **Reply #16 on:** November 02, 2009, 05:23:50 PM »

This is the item Paul is on about the Winegard Wingman $26.99 from Camping World.

>> Click here <<

We bought on whilst at Orlandos 1,000 Trails site to improve reception, yes we picked up more channel signals none of which worked, all we got was a message saying No or Signal strength low.

Now in the UK I'm none the wiser if it does give a better reception, where we are and on Digital Free View I can only get 4 BBC channels

I had little faith in the product when I saw that it attached to the main Bat wing aerial via four plastic rivet type fastenings so no actual metal to metal contact

Mick

Jack Nichols · « **Reply #17 on:** November 03, 2009, 12:59:43 PM »

The clip on adapter is a reflector that enhances the signal to the antenna, and as such it does not need a direct metal to metal contact to work. However, that increase in signal has to come from somewhere, and it comes from a narrower angle that the antenna will accept. Instead of a nice wide cone of acceptance, it amplifies (focuses) a narrow portion of it. Aiming is more critical.

I had a unique situation that pointed out the strength of the design. I was parked in a small town without a TV station, and the closest ones were 70 miles to the north and 45 miles to the south. I could not see any signal from either before putting on the add on director gadget, and was able to pull in digital signals after installing it. The direction you point the antenna is very critical, because of the narrower acceptance angle.

Radio engineers have been using this technique for years, and I picked it up working with HAM radio.

As mentioned it is very easy to install (you would have to modify it and really work at it to get it on wrong), works well using established antenna physics (not a "magic" black box no one can explain), is inexpensive and works. The main thing you give up with it is the antenna has to be more carefully aligned in the direction of the signal, and that is a one time deal until you move again.

BruceinFL · « **Reply #18 on:** November 03, 2009, 01:47:56 PM »

There has got to be a decent omnidirectional digital antenna somewhere. It's a PIA moving the Winegard antenna around for each station. Would rather accept a diminiished signal than move the antenna for non co-located transmission towers. Either that or someone invent an automatic antenna positioning system for each station's best signal.

JerArdra · « **Reply #19 on:** November 03, 2009, 03:03:11 PM »

Tom,

That day we tested the WingMan add on to the WineGard antenna we were looking at an HDTV signal that had 1080P resolution and for whatever reason it did improve the picture after the Winegard WingMan was installed. Now, here's the definitive technical explanation as I understand it. "It's magic" It was not pixelateing. The picture just looked better.

JerryF

John From Detroit · « **Reply #20 on:** November 04, 2009, 11:47:24 AM »

Quote from: Jack Nichols on November 03, 2009, 12:59:43 PM

The clip on adapter is a reflector that enhances the signal to the antenna,

Uh, Director, not reflector.. Rest of post is accurate

To the OP. What I am about to post depends a lot on your digital television receiver (Adapter or TV) Some of them (ACCESS HD for example) have a jack on the back, like a Phone Jack (RJ-45) and are compatable with a "Smart Antenna" such as the DX-Antenna

Two more problems with this is 1: I am not sure how much "Range" it has (The batwing may be better) and 2: You need one antenna per receiver

The Oringal problem is it has to be a "Smart Antenna" enabled receiver

Winegard does make a Omni directional antenna. I think it's called "Roadstar" it is the one that looks like a flying saucer.. However it's not got the range of the batwing wither and multi-path receiption can be a female canine in some places.

Jack Nichols · « **Reply #21 on:** November 04, 2009, 03:08:40 PM »

"Director" is the correct term, thank you John. Getting old is ...... not for sissies.

John From Detroit · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2009, 10:52:45 AM »

Well. to most folks.. I don't think it matters.. Since I am short on cash I tend to design my own ham antennas and .. Well,,, When you are starting with pencil paper and computer program.. THEN it's important

The rest of the post was very good though and that was the important part..

And as for getting old.... Still beats the other alternative far as I'm concerned.

SCVJeff · « **Reply #23 on:** November 08, 2009, 04:11:37 AM »

Quote from: John From Detroit on November 04, 2009, 11:47:24 AM

Uh, Director, not reflector.. Rest of post is accurate

To the OP. What I am about to post depends a lot on your digital television receiver (Adapter or TV) Some of them (ACCESS HD for example) have a jack on the back, like a Phone Jack (RJ-45) and are compatable with a "Smart Antenna" such as the DX-Antenna

Two more problems with this is 1: I am not sure how much "Range" it has (The batwing may be better) and 2: You need one antenna per receiver

The Oringal problem is it has to be a "Smart Antenna" enabled receiver

Winegard does make a Omni directional antenna. I think it's called "Roadstar" it is the one that looks like a flying saucer.. However it's not got the range of the batwing wither and multi-path receiption can be a female canine in some places.

You're right, the Batwing is definitely better than either of those antennas. The Smart Antenna is electronically steered dipoles with unity gain. While it's cool because it knows exactly where it found each station, it just doesn't come close to the batwing (got one).

Just can't beat the Batwing..

John From Detroit · « **Reply #24 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:45:30 AM »

Well.. Yes I can beat the batwing.. But not in any package I'd care to lug around in my RV.

When my dad "Semi-Retired" he moved to a smaller farm.. According to all the television station coverage maps television reception there was simply not possible

We put up a 100' tower with Channel Master's largest signal sucker on top of it. pre-amp in the antenna and a distribution system down below servicing every room in the house.. Some with multiple ports.

We could watch television from Detroit, (Over 100 miles) Lansing/Jackson, Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo (Gun Lake) South Bend Indiana and a whole bunch more with that high gain amplified and directional antenna.

but a 100' tower with that monster antenna (over 20 feet long) is a tad big to lug in an RV

JerArdra · « **Reply #25 on:** November 08, 2009, 04:39:54 PM »

John,

Nice Job. I didn'now that could be done.

JerryF

John From Detroit · « **Reply #26 on:** November 08, 2009, 06:58:23 PM »

Well.. I keep telling folks that "HEIGHT IS MIGHT" when it comes to VHF/UHF radio and television... I even give real life (I should know I was there) examples.

That's one of 'em.. the 100' tower got the antenna up where it could "See" the stations and the high gain antenna sucked 'em in. Worked great.

I tell another story with ham radio... Poor guy in Windsor (just across the river from Detroit) running around 40 or so watts effective radiated power could not reach a repeater I was hitting with a 1 watt hand held and a very poor antenna. perhaps 1/4 watt effective radiated power

The difference.....about 220 feet verticle... I was on the 12st floor of an office building, He was on a 30 foot tower.... Oh, I could see his house from where I was standing.

SCVJeff · « **Reply #27 on:** November 11, 2009, 08:43:55 PM »

Did the same at my dad's house, but I ended up with the adult-size Winegard Wedge and a deep frings pre-amp. I had to go the the wedge to lower the vertical beamwidth because the skip kept rolling in and stomping out the local stations. The wedge all but cured that..

BT Cruising · « **Reply #28 on:** November 17, 2009, 06:54:35 AM »

I have a Signal Commander [not Winegard] bat antenna on my Gulfstream BT Cruiser. Has anyone installed a Wingman on this mfgr's antenna to boost the signal? If so, results? Thanks in advance.

BT Cruising · « **Reply #29 on:** November 17, 2009, 09:19:57 AM »

A follow-up on my inquiry about the compatibility of the Winegard Wingman signal booster and the Signal Commander antenna: I was able to speak with a Winegard tech rep who informed me they "did not design the Wingman to fit the Signal Commander" [that's perhaps understandable] and the tech rep was clearly not interested in pursuing this subject [maybe they think I'll replace the Signal Commander with a Winegard antenna just so I can buy their Wingman?

]

Has anyone any experience with installing a Wingman on a Signal Commander? Any modifications needed?

News:

Author Topic: Winegard Batwing TV - Wingman Aerial Booster (Read 1722 times)