Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] UST et al

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] UST et al
From: WarrenWolff@aol.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 12:02:21 EDT
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
 
In a message dated 6/6/2006 8:02:23 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:

Send  TowerTalk mailing list submissions to
towertalk@contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide  Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
or, via email, send  a message with subject or body 'help' to
towertalk-request@contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the  list at
towertalk-owner@contesting.com

When replying,  please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of  TowerTalk digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re:  Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US Tower
(K7LXC@aol.com)
2.  MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi (Jim  Idelson)
3. Re: Action against US Tower? (Jack -  K4WSB)
4. Re: Action against US Tower? (Blake  Bowers)
5. Re: Action against US Tower? (Richard M.  Gillingham)
6. Re: Action against US Tower?  (Bill)
7. Tower restring (HFDXJUNKIE@aol.com)
8. Re: Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US Tower
(Julio  Peralta)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message:  1
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:16:57 EDT
From: K7LXC@aol.com
Subject: Re:  [TowerTalk] Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower
To: towertalk@contesting.com, DrD@2020.com
Message-ID:  <4a9.1496b1e.31b6da49@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="US-ASCII"


In a message dated 6/5/2006 9:02:43 A.M. Pacific  Daylight Time,  
towertalk-request@contesting.com  writes:

>  I just purchased and have brought home US Tower,  model  HDX-572MDPL, 72' 
Heavy
Duty tower from the estate of a  SK.    

>  It has a motor drive whose design includes  a postive  pulldown feature.  

>  The tower contains  4 sections, was  installed in 1999 and has had little  
use.

>  Where I need help:  

>  US  Tower recommends replacing the cable every 2-3 years,  which may be  an
overkill but is definitely erring on the side of  safety.   Since my tower is 
7
years old I'd like to start out with  fresh  cabling. 

The UST recommendation is known as a  "weasel  clause"; that is, if 
something happens to your tower and you  hadn't changed  the cables, they can 
weasel 
out of any liability.  Tower manufacturers are  insurance-driven enterprises 
so 
it's no  surprise they are reluctant to  provide any helpful information.  

The other gotcha is that there isn't anyone  around  who can do the cable 
change anyway. I spent a couple of days at the   factory to learn how to do 
it 
and what I found out is that it's an  involved  and semi-complicated 
endeavor. 
It's not something I would  try myself. 

I'll bet you a nickel that you don't have to  do  anything other than lube 
the cables and you'll be good to go. The  actual  circumstances that would 
require cable replacement are: 1)  Excessive broken  strands. Industry 
standards 
allow you to have six  broken strands before  replacement is necessary. 2) 
Excessive rust -  not surface rust but real  cancerous into the strands rust. 
3)  
Damaged cable. This would be kinks or flat  spots in the cable. I  doubt that 
your 
cables meet any of the above criteria.  

OTOH  you should lubricate the cables annually at  a minimum. Champion Radio  
Products sells PreLube 6 which is recommended by the  wire rope  
manufacturers. 

You should exercise the tower a couple of  times a  month by running it up 
and down. You should also park it at  different heights  rather than just at 
the limit switches all the  time. The cables can take a  permanent set by 
sitting on the pulleys  at the same spot for years.  By doing these 3 things, 
you 
will  prolong the service life of your  cables.

BTW I have  never personally seen a ham tower that  the cables were so bad 
that  they had to be replaced. Some were pretty grungy  but didn't meet the  
aforementioned criteria. 

Lube it and enjoy it and  don't worry about  replacing the cables.

Cheers,
Steve   K7LXC
TOWER TECH -
Professional tower services for hams
Cell:  206-890-4188






------------------------------

Message:  2
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:20:38 -0400
From: Jim Idelson  <k1ir@designet.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk]  MATV-Quality FM  Broadcast Yagi
To: TowerTalk Post <towertalk@contesting.com>
Cc:  Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Message-ID:  <QldQSjFCTSY/TiRWLiogMjM3MTg0Nzcz@DESIGNET-M200>
Content-Type:  text/plain

Hi Jim,

If you want to do this the brute force way,  choose Option A. For the easy 
way, skip immediately to Option B!

Option  A: I suggest you run some numbers to see if what you are trying to do 
is  realistic. Are there any off-periods for the LP station? Put up an omni  
antenna and measure the difference in signal strengths of the two stations.  
This difference plus 2-3db is your target. In order to get acceptable  
reception of the remote station, you will need to use antenna patterns, and  
nulling 
strategies to get its strength just a few db better than the LP  station. For 
many receivers, capture will occur with as little as a couple of  db difference.

Option B: http://www.kcsm.org/fm_listen.html

Good  luck!

Jim

[TowerTalk] MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi
from  [Jim Brown] [Permanent Link][Original] 
To:  "Tower Talk List"  <towertalk@contesting.com> 
Subject:  [TowerTalk] MATV-Quality  FM Broadcast Yagi 
From:  "Jim Brown"  <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com> 
Date:  Mon, 05 Jun 2006 18:06:11  -0700 
List-post:  <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com> 
I have  a tough reception condition at my new QTH -- a LPFM is 1.5 
miles away and  on the same channel as San Francisco's great jazz 
station (KCSM). Luckily  they are about 160 degrees away in azimuth, 
so I may have a chance if it  throw a serious antenna at it (and maybe 
even a cancelling antenna to null  the LPFM. I'm having a hard time 
finding good choices though -- the two  best bets seem to be a 10 
element Winegard and a 13-element model (12 ft  boom) from Antenna 
Performance Specialties. Both cover the entire FM band,  but I care 
only about the bottom 4 MHz, so I'd gladly buy a narrow band  antenna 
that is tweaked for a bit more gain and F/B. And F/B is far more  
important than an extra few dB of gain. 
Any ideas?  Other  options? Is there an MATV product that might be 
narrow band?  Has  anyone used the APS product or know anything about 
them? 
Please email  me off list, since this is a bit off topic. 
Thanks,
Jim Brown  K9YC




Jim Idelson K1IR
email    k1ir at  designet.com
web     http://www.k1ir.com


------------------------------

Message:  3
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 09:33:06 -0400
From: Jack - K4WSB  <K4WSB@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?
To: TOWERTALK@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<5.1.0.14.2.20060606092156.035269e0@ipostoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

If a company offers a  product without documentation and you decide to buy 
it...
how can they be  liable for an action you took?
Actually as I think about it...in today's  society one is not responsible 
for one's actions... it's ALWAYS someone  else's fault.



At 08:12 AM 6/6/2006 -0500, Blake Bowers  wrote:
>What specific documentation are you looking for,  other
>than the PE drawings they have?
>
>Of course, expect  their pricing to go up as the amount
>of documentation they produce go  up.
>
>Have you considered Rohn?
>----- Original Message  -----
>From: "Rick Tavan N6XI" <rtavan@gmail.com>
>To:  <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:49  PM
>Subject: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?
>
>
> > Has anyone considered taking legal action  to force US Tower to document
> > their products?  Their  attitude on documentation is despicable.

Jack Hartley
K4WSB
ARRL  - QCWA - OOTC
DXCC Honor  Roll



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date:  Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:36:21 -0500
From: "Blake Bowers"  <bbowers@townsqr.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?
To: "Jack - K4WSB" <K4WSB@arrl.net>
Cc:  TOWERTALK@contesting.com
Message-ID:  <01fa01c6896e$33a4e410$0201a8c0@blake>
Content-Type: text/plain;  format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

Pretty much my thoughts.  You know what  you
are buying.  If you want that documentation, then
buy a product  that has that!


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack -  K4WSB" <K4WSB@arrl.net>
To: <TOWERTALK@contesting.com>
Sent:  Tuesday, June 06, 2006 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?


> If a company offers a product without documentation and  you decide to buy 
> it...
> how can they be liable for an action  you took?
> Actually as I think about it...in today's society one is not  responsible
> for one's actions... it's ALWAYS someone else's  fault.
>
>
>
> At 08:12 AM 6/6/2006 -0500, Blake  Bowers wrote:
>>What specific documentation are you looking for,  other
>>than the PE drawings they have?
>>
>>Of  course, expect their pricing to go up as the amount
>>of  documentation they produce go up.
>>
>>Have you considered  Rohn?





------------------------------

Message:  5
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:38:11 -0400
From: "Richard M. Gillingham"  <rmoodyg@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?
To: <TOWERTALK@contesting.com>, "Jack - K4WSB"  <K4WSB@arrl.net>
Message-ID:  <000b01c6896e$74b143e0$6400a8c0@shack>
Content-Type: text/plain;  format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original



> If a company offers a product without  documentation and you decide to buy 
> it...
> how can they be  liable for an action you took?

EXACTLY!

> Actually as I think  about it...in today's society one is not responsible
> for one's  actions... it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.

Thanks in part to the  Trial Lawyers Ass'n.

Why would someone want to assume responsibility  for one's actions when one 
may sue the pants off someone else with deeper  pockets?

Gil, W1RG  



------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Tue,  6 Jun 2006 06:58:52 -0700
From: "Bill" <w7vp@comcast.net>
Subject:  Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
To: "JC Smith"  <jc-smith@comcast.net>,    "'Rick Tavan N6XI'"
<rtavan@gmail.com>,  <towertalk@contesting.com>
Message-ID:  <020901c68971$58593970$6901a8c0@attorneyg97r4a>
Content-Type:  text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

You are very right JC, although they are probably  more damned if they don't. 
As a manufacturer they are subject to court  developed law called 
"manufacturer's strict liability."  Under that  law they are held liable for 
any "defect" in the product whether or not  there was any negligence.  Thus 
an injured victim (or his family)  only needs to prove that there was a 
"defect," and that it was responsible  for the injury or death of the victim. 
A defect can be either a  manufacturing defect, a design defect or a "failure 
to warn" defect.   It is this latter category that will bite US Tower if they 
have not  provided sufficient detail on the use of their product.  Most  
insurance companies will impose strict conditions on a manufacturer for  the 
warnings that are required.  If the data provided by US Tower is  not 
complete as suggested that might suggest that US Tower is either not  insured 
for product liability or is insured by a company that is not using  customary 
practices to limit liability.  I have negotiated some of  these insurance 
conditions in the aviation business and believe me they  are strict (and 
expensive too).  I have also defended some of these  product cases and it is 
a tough position for a company that has not  properly developed its 
disclosure  policies.

73
Bill
W7VP
----- Original Message ----- 
From:  "JC Smith" <jc-smith@comcast.net>
To: "'Rick Tavan N6XI'"  <rtavan@gmail.com>; <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday,  June 05, 2006 8:36 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?


>I think they are sort of dammed if they do and dammed if  they don't. 
>That's
> the nature of our civil court system these  days.  I wouldn't want to be a
> crank-up tower manufacturer,  especially in CA.
>
> I agree with the fellow who said "if the  cable aint broke, don't fix it." 
> I
> have a 20+ year-old UST  with the original cable and it still goes up and
> down just fine.   The cable is discolored, but not rusty and all the 
> strands
>  are intact.
>
> 73 - JC, k0hps@amsat.org
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:  towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
>  [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Rick Tavan N6XI
>  Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 5:50 PM
> To:  towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Action against US  Tower?
>
> Has anyone considered taking legal action to force US  Tower to document
> their products?  Their attitude on  documentation is despicable. Actually, 
> I
> think they are  shooting themselves in the foot. They should incur greater
> liability  by refusing to document the products than they would if they
> published  decent documentation full of prudent warnings. They actively 
>  sell
> this stuff to us, so they have to expect us to install it, use  it, 
> maintain
> it and try to repair it. I feel sorry for  whoever turns out to be the 
> first
> fatal victim of withheld  documentation. The resulting lawsuit may break 
> the
> logjam but  it could also break UST.
>
> /Rick N6XI
>  _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing  list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>  _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing  list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk  



------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Tue,  6 Jun 2006 10:11:57 EDT
From: HFDXJUNKIE@aol.com
Subject: [TowerTalk]  Tower restring
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID:  <49a.1df5823.31b6e72d@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="US-ASCII"

I am not sure why everyone needs these so call  diagrams to replace cable,  
take off the old ones..measure replace.  Not too hard of a job, esp if the 
tower  
is on the ground !!!!! Doing  it while the tower is standing is a little  
trickier. If you do not  have the mechanical skill to do it, better call in a 
pro  
and spend  the 2 bucks. I often wonder how many people get seriously hurt and 
  
killed everyday from being CHEAP on any project not just towers. Yeah I  know 
all  about it, spend a few grand on towers and antennas now you  have no 
money 
to pay  a pro for some help you can't really handle..oh  well, so life goes.

Pete NA2P


------------------------------

Message: 8
Date:  Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:00:02 -0400
From: "Julio Peralta"  <jperalta@tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Help Needed  Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower
To:  <K7LXC@aol.com>, <towertalk@contesting.com>,  <DrD@2020.com>
Message-ID:  <002901c68979$e7174d70$6401a8c0@RADIOROOM>
Content-Type:  text/plain;    charset="US-ASCII"

I've had to do 3 re-cabling  jobs. One a 72' UST where one of the cables
was so bad it broke. One a 89'  UST where the cables had more than
surface rust and had more than the 6  strands broken rule of thumb. One a
105' Triex that belonged to a cell  phone company that was worse than the
89 footer and was just before  breaking. 

It's not easy but if you take your time you can work your  way through
it. I will mention that not all the cables can be pulled  through by
attaching them to the just removed cable due to the fact that  the Nico
press (sp?) clamps won't pass through the sheaves so they must  be
removed. The other thing I've learned is that the tension on the  pull
down cable must be set with some weight on the top section of the  tower.

Steve would you agree with this?

Julio,  W4HY

-----Original Message-----
From:  towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com]  On Behalf Of K7LXC@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:17 AM
To:  towertalk@contesting.com; DrD@2020.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Help Needed  Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower



In a message dated  6/5/2006 9:02:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,   
towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:

>  I just  purchased and have brought home US Tower, model  HDX-572MDPL, 
>  72'
Heavy
Duty tower from the estate of a SK.     

>  It has a motor drive whose design includes a postive   pulldown 
> feature.

>  The tower contains 4 sections,  was  installed in 1999 and has had 
>  little
use.

>  Where I need help:

>  US Tower  recommends replacing the cable every 2-3 years,  which may 
> be  an
overkill but is definitely erring on the side of  safety.   Since my
tower is 7 years old I'd like to start out with  fresh  cabling. 

The UST recommendation is known as a  "weasel  clause"; that is, if 
something happens to your tower and you  hadn't changed  the cables, they
can weasel 
out of any liability.  Tower manufacturers are  insurance-driven
enterprises so 
it's no  surprise they are reluctant to  provide any helpful  information.


The other gotcha is that there isn't  anyone  around who can do the
cable 
change anyway. I spent a  couple of days at the  factory to learn how to
do it 
and what I  found out is that it's an involved  and semi-complicated
endeavor.  
It's not something I would try myself. 

I'll bet you  a nickel that you don't have to do  anything other than
lube 
the  cables and you'll be good to go. The actual  circumstances that
would  
require cable replacement are: 1) Excessive broken  strands.  Industry
standards 
allow you to have six broken strands before   replacement is necessary.
2) 
Excessive rust - not surface rust but  real  cancerous into the strands
rust. 3) 
Damaged cable. This  would be kinks or flat  spots in the cable. I doubt
that your  
cables meet any of the above criteria.  

OTOH you should  lubricate the cables annually at  a minimum. Champion
Radio  
Products sells PreLube 6 which is recommended by the  wire  rope
manufacturers. 

You should exercise the tower a  couple of times a  month by running
it up 
and down. You should  also park it at different heights  rather than just
at 
the limit  switches all the time. The cables can take a  permanent set  by

sitting on the pulleys at the same spot for years.  By doing  these 3
things, you 
will prolong the service life of your   cables.

BTW I have never personally seen a ham tower  that  the cables were
so bad 
that they had to be replaced. Some  were pretty grungy  but didn't meet
the 
aforementioned criteria.  

Lube it and enjoy it and don't worry about   replacing the cables.

Cheers,
Steve    K7LXC
TOWER TECH  -
Professional tower services for hams
Cell:  206-890-4188




_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk  mailing  list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk




------------------------------

_______________________________________________
TowerTalk  mailing  list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


End  of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 42, Issue  12
*****************************************



What a headache.  As your age advances, the tolerance for  headaches 
diminishes.  Hence, it is AN Wireless for me. A few more bucks  solves the 
problem.
 
Warren; W7WY
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [TowerTalk] UST et al, WarrenWolff <=