No subject

chan: 10 (193.25MHz)
Beamwidth at Half Power Points: 93 deg
Front-to-back ration: 2.6dB

chan: 14 (471.25MHz)
Beamwidth at Half Power Points: 68 deg
Front-to-back ration: 20dB

chan: 32 (579.25MHz)
Beamwidth at Half Power Points: 67 deg
Front-to-back ration: 16dB

chan: 56 (723.25MHz)
Beamwidth at Half Power Points: 58 deg
Front-to-back ration: 12/5dB

chan: 69 (805.75MHz)
Beamwidth at Half Power Points: 54 deg
Front-to-back ration: 12dB

Here's the general spec:

Avg. beamwidth ................................................ 61°
Avg. VSWR across band ............................... 1.3:1
Avg. Front to back .........................................13 db
Avg. gain across band 470-806 ................... 4.5 db
Maximum Width Housing ................. 16" x 16" x 4"
Preamp gain (SS-2000)
300,000 μV Total Input
S/N ratio ...................................................... 2.8 db
VHF ................................................... 12 dB avg.
UHF ................................................... 12 dB avg.
> But in the real world "field factors" usually outweigh the  
> theoretical performance issues, and I suspect a pragmatic approach  
> will work as well as a "scientific" one. I'd just try aiming in the  
> middle of the azimuth range, if you're anything close to line-of- 
> sight you should be OK on most if not all channels. You might also  
> want to try just aiming for the best signal on the most distant  
> channel (KTLN?) and see what you have on the others.
>   
That's way too far, I believe. I doubt that I could get that. Never
could before.