|To:||Bill Fuqua <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com|
|Subject:||Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 11, Issue 56|
|From:||Pete Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:08:56 -0500|
At 12:01 PM 11/20/03 -0500, Bill Fuqua wrote:
What is so great about nonmetallic towers?
I note that in the installation instruction book they mention that "proper precautions" must be taken against lightning to avoid severe damage to the antennas or the tower. Sounds like confirmation of this concern.
I'm also not sure whether a tower made of this stuff would appear to be a conductor in the field of the antennas or not. I do recall that when carbon-carbon was first considered for aircraft components one concern that had to be worked through was whether the debris in the event of a crash would cause disruption to nearby electrical circuits through conductive fallout. I think the US also has some bombs that are designed to kill electrical distribution systems through scattering conductive carbon fibers across switch and transformer yards.
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 11, Issue 56, Daly, Greg TQO|
|Next by Date:||Re: [TowerTalk] Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 11, Issue 56, kb9cry|
|Previous by Thread:||[TowerTalk] Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 11, Issue 56, Bill Fuqua|
|Next by Thread:||RE: [TowerTalk] Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 11, Issue 56, Daly, Greg TQO|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|