[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Happy news for a change

To: Richards <>,
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Happy news for a change
From: Chris Wendling <>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:51:27 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <">>
Just curious as to why 55 ft was chosen.  Seems like 65ft (about 1 wavelength 
on 20m)

which would allow a good low angle radiation pattern on 14Mhz, would be
better for hams.  I wonder if they thought about reasonable ham
requirements for emergency communications, etc. when they picked that


--- On Tue, 8/12/08, Richards <> wrote:
From: Richards <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Happy news for a change
Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 11:19 AM

Greetings TowerTalkians =

Good news and bad news:

       The Good News...  my city allows towers and
        antennas, and there are NO PERMITS and

       The Bad News is there is a limit of 55 feet.

Fortunately, that suits my plans and my budget,   so I do not
have to fight City Hall to get permission go higher.
At least not yet...

So... up to a height of 55 feet, it is, essentially, unregulated.
Cool, eh?   Can ya dig it?    Unbelievable.

         [I figure you guys might understand my glee...picture me
           giggling a dirty-old-man-kind-of-laugh under my breath all
           day like I know a dirty little secret no else knows... ;-)

===========  Richards  -- K8JHR ================


TowerTalk mailing list

TowerTalk mailing list

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