[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Crank-up Horror => crankup use model

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Crank-up Horror => crankup use model
From: (J.P. Kleinhaus)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 15:20:15 -0400
Mike wrote:

> My new question is:
> --------------------
> How often do you RETRACT the crank up, and for what reason(s). (My permit
> conditions indicate that they should be cranked down "when not in use". Do
> others have this condition?)
> --------------------

The obvious answer to this question in my mind is a packet station connected
to the local network 24/7.  In this case, the station is *always* in use.
Of course, to the town, you stay connected to the local packet system to be
able to provide disaster communications etc.
> I would like to be able to:
>     1. have a tower which will feasibly handle the loading my design calls
> for.

Yup, fixed and guyed towers have more design capability.

>     2. side mount antennas.

Seen this done on numerous crankups, including several Ring Rotor installations.

>     3. not worry about being around to crank down the tower every time it's
> windy.


>     4. Not have to fill two 5X5X10 foot holes with cement.

Whoa there...instead you'd have to fill *eight* holes for two guyed
towers, with a total amount of concrete approaching that of two free-standing


>     1/4 the concrete

See above...

>     1/10 the cost

Probably more like 1/3 to 1/2 the cost, after concrete and guying hardware etc.
Been there, have the bills.

>     no hoist system to fail (as a practicing engineer, less to go wrong is
> always nice)

This is still the single best argument in my eyes.  However,I succesfully 
used the financial hardship argument when I litigated my tower permit with
my town.

J.P. Kleinhaus, W2XX  (fdba AA2DU)

As we say in the software business:  "You are hosed."  

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>