towertalk-request@contesting.com wrote:
> 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: 45G tops (K7LXC@aol.com)
> 2. Re: PVC buried in ground for coax & cables to tower from
> house (Dennis Ventler)
> 3. Light poles. (Its from Onion)
> 4. Re: Ultrabeam (Mike)
> 5. Re: Ultrabeam (WA3GIN)
> 6. Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!! (Bill Winkis)
> 7. Re: Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!! (Jim Hoge)
> 8. Re: Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!! (Jim Lux)
> 9. Re: Two questions (buried coax) (Jeff Stevens)
> 10. Re: 45G tops (Rob Frohne)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:13:43 EDT
> From: K7LXC@aol.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 45G tops
> To: towertalk@contesting.com, frohro@wallawalla.edu
> Message-ID: <ca3.2db72ce4.353a9337@aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
> In a message dated 4/16/2008 7:54:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:
>
>
>> Looking at a picture of the 45AG2, you should be sure your rotator will
>>
> fit
> through the Z bracing. Also, it seems that if that long mast sleeve isn't
> perfectly aligned, you're guaranteed to have a mast that is out of alignment
> and cause serious problems for your rotator. Finally, once installed, your
> antenna and particularly any truss system above it are going to be out of
> reach, since there's no way to stand on a 45AG2.
>
>
>
> All excellent points. I might also point out that the taper tops are not as
> strong as a flat plate top. I've seen 2 broken pointy tops - one was 25G and
> the other was 45G. There is just some smallish welded metal holding them
> together.
>
> And I saw a pointy top downtube that was welded out of plumb. Yes, a
> semi-fatal problem that wasn't caught on the ground.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve K7LXC
> TOWER TECH
>
>
>
>
>
>
> **************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
> listings at AOL Autos.
> (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:41:38 -0500
> From: Dennis Ventler <w9jdj@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] PVC buried in ground for coax & cables to
> tower from house
> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <BAY119-W53FC62E525ECD5360B99A3E5E70@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I agree with everyone that you won't be disappointed using 4" pvc.
> Eventually, you will add more coax and control wires. Make sure you block
> off each end from rodents. I didn't and after a few years, rodents had used
> the pvc for their winter home. When I pulled the coax out from not working,
> I found that mice had chewed through the jacket and wire during the winter
> due to their hunger. Also found several dead skeletons of mice as I removed
> the bad coax.
>
> Regards Denny W9JDJ
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get in touch in an instant. Get Windows Live Messenger now.
> http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_getintouch_042008
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:58:55 -0500
> From: "Its from Onion" <aredandgold@msn.com>
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Light poles.
> To: "towertalk" <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <BLU116-DAV138E2AF36A72D8CE49BC48BCE70@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I was actually a construction supervisor for the City of Birmingham in the
> Traffic Engineering dept.
> My responsibility was to install the type of poles you are thinking about.
> As you know, this type of install in well out of the price of the average ham
> unless he has
> access to a digger/derrick truck and some type of material handling trucks.
>
> A 50 foot pole, called "strain pole" will cost you 12-15 thousand dollars.
> Add freight, "LTL" less than load because your only wanting one. $ 1.75 / mile
> A dug hole 36"-60" inches round and 10-15 feet deep, no rock. no dirt hauled
> away. $1200.00 plus tool bits if damaged.
> Rebar cage fabed/formed and dropped in hole $250.00
> 15-18 yard of 5000 pound cement $1600.00
> 4 "J" bolts and nuts for foundation $75.00
> Crane truck to unload, lift and set said pole 3 hours at $125 /hr
> 3 men to work pole/truck/form and pipe 2 days/60 man hours @ $12.00/hr
> $750.00
>
> That is a nice round total of $20,000.00 dollars. Just a 50 foot pole.
> DOUBLE THIS for a 100 foot pole.
>
> Drawing here if you would like to see.
>
> http://www.dot.state.fl.us/specificationsoffice/qplnew/Drawings/S649-0201pdf<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/specificationsoffice/qplnew/Drawings/S649-0201.pdf>
>
> F. Lee George
> KE4VYN
> Construction Supervisor (retired)
> Traffic Engineering
> City of Birmingham
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:01:01 -0400
> From: Mike <nf4l@nf4l.com>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ultrabeam
> To: jim Jarvis <jimjarvis@optonline.net>
> Cc: towertalk@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <4809525D.5020402@nf4l.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> I *REALLY* want to see the 4el 6-80!! Not that I could afford the
> antenna, or the land it would shade.
> 73
> Mike NF4L
>
> jim Jarvis wrote:
>
>> Looks for all the world like a contravention of the SteppIR patent,
>> although I haven't
>> researched it to be sure. There appear to be some mechanical
>> improvements over
>> the Mertel brothers' design, but an awful lot is simply a copy.
>>
>> There is flattery, and then there is thievery. The question is
>> whether there's enough
>> money at stake for the Mertels to challenge this ripoff.
>>
>> Curiously, I still have my engineering notebook from 1975, signed
>> and witnessed,
>> which describes this antenna. The moving elements were the easy
>> part. Control was
>> the economic block. It was the availability of PIC controllers
>> which made it
>> feasible as a commercial product.
>>
>> I suppose if one could go to the trouble of creating a replica of a
>> dead sea scroll, or
>> the shroud of Turin, one could create an engineering notebook
>> documenting prior
>> design and protection under italian law. Or, maybe it really exists.
>>
>> One certainty: At EU1600, I'm not buying one!
>>
>> N2EA
>>
>>
>> Jim Jarvis, MBA
>> President-Executive Coach
>> The Morse Group, LLC
>>
>> People-Process-Strategy
>> Achieving Results in a Changing World
>> www.themorsegroup.biz
>> coach@themorsegroup.biz
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:37:21 -0400
> From: "WA3GIN" <wa3gin@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ultrabeam
> To: "Mike" <nf4l@nf4l.com>, "jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@optonline.net>
> Cc: towertalk@contesting.com
> Message-ID:
> <001e01c8a1c6$52ff51c0$6600a8c0@DTS2003WIRELESSNETWORKDEMO>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> What caught my eye was the way they mounted the trust bearing on the
> crank-up mast. Looks like three solid rods that connect the rotor mount
> plate to the thrust bearing plate....taking the side moment stress off the
> rotor housing. That has always been a concern for mast users who didn't
> want to rotor the entire tower from the base fixture. Pretty novel
> implementation.
>
> 73,
> dave
> wa3gin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike" <nf4l@nf4l.com>
> To: "jim Jarvis" <jimjarvis@optonline.net>
> Cc: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 10:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ultrabeam
>
>
>
>> I *REALLY* want to see the 4el 6-80!! Not that I could afford the
>> antenna, or the land it would shade.
>> 73
>> Mike NF4L
>>
>> jim Jarvis wrote:
>>
>>> Looks for all the world like a contravention of the SteppIR patent,
>>> although I haven't
>>> researched it to be sure. There appear to be some mechanical
>>> improvements over
>>> the Mertel brothers' design, but an awful lot is simply a copy.
>>>
>>> There is flattery, and then there is thievery. The question is
>>> whether there's enough
>>> money at stake for the Mertels to challenge this ripoff.
>>>
>>> Curiously, I still have my engineering notebook from 1975, signed
>>> and witnessed,
>>> which describes this antenna. The moving elements were the easy
>>> part. Control was
>>> the economic block. It was the availability of PIC controllers
>>> which made it
>>> feasible as a commercial product.
>>>
>>> I suppose if one could go to the trouble of creating a replica of a
>>> dead sea scroll, or
>>> the shroud of Turin, one could create an engineering notebook
>>> documenting prior
>>> design and protection under italian law. Or, maybe it really exists.
>>>
>>> One certainty: At EU1600, I'm not buying one!
>>>
>>> N2EA
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim Jarvis, MBA
>>> President-Executive Coach
>>> The Morse Group, LLC
>>>
>>> People-Process-Strategy
>>> Achieving Results in a Changing World
>>> www.themorsegroup.biz
>>> coach@themorsegroup.biz
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: 6
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:27:36 -0400
> From: "Bill Winkis" <kc4pe@bellsouth.net>
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!!
> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <000601c8a18a$42418c90$0401a8c0@poweruni219fcf>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Having discussed the liability/lawsuit problem or protection for the tower
> owner, here is the way it ended up ... after my Lawyer/Insurance Agent and
> Underwriter got involved.
>
>
> 1. - If you Pay/Hire anybody to work on your tower/antenna's ... they must be
> bonded...
>
>
>
> 2. - If someone/volunteer agrees to help you and climbs/works on the
> tower/antenna, he does so at his own risk and provides his own protection
> equipment.
>
>
>
> 3. - If someone/volunteer were to get hurt while working on your
> tower/antenna and entered into a lawsuit against you ... They must prove
> negligence on your part.
>
>
>
> I then took out a 2 million dollar Personal Umbrella Liability insurance to
> back up my existing home owners insurance, who insures the towers, home etc.
>
>
>
> -Bill
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jim Hoge <knowkode@sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!!
> To: Bill Winkis <kc4pe@bellsouth.net>, towertalk@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <338492.60948.qm@web81003.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Bill,
>
> Unfortunately, we live in a litigious society where no one is responsible
> for their own actions, we are all victims. That said, I am running into the
> insurance/ bonding issue with greater frequency.
>
> To the group, what is the easiest path to becoming insured and or bonded?
> From what I understand, bonding is typically per job and underwritten as a
> performance bond. I am grossly ignorant in these matters and it's probably
> time I took a good look at financially protecting myself as a climber.
>
> 73 es climb safely,
> Jim W5QM
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:05:07 -0700
> From: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Climber Protection - Insurance..!!
> To: Jim Hoge <knowkode@sbcglobal.net>
> Cc: towertalk@contesting.com, Bill Winkis <kc4pe@bellsouth.net>
> Message-ID: <48096F73.8060108@earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Jim Hoge wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> Unfortunately, we live in a litigious society where no one is
>> responsible for their own actions, we are all victims. That said, I
>> am running into the insurance/ bonding issue with greater frequency.
>>
>>
>> To the group, what is the easiest path to becoming insured and or
>> bonded? From what I understand, bonding is typically per job and
>> underwritten as a performance bond. I am grossly ignorant in these
>> matters and it's probably time I took a good look at financially
>> protecting myself as a climber.
>>
>
> You talk to your homeowner's insurance agent.. they usually know about
> the stuff (especially if they also insure small businesses) or can refer
> you to someone who handles the appropriate lines.
>
> Bonding is usually, as you say, a performance or surety bond. It
> basically guarantees that you'll finish the job, and that if you don't,
> the buyer gets their money back (even if you spent it all on materials
> and subcontracts). A surety bond is similar, for folks who handle
> valuable property (e.g. cash, jewelry, etc.) or who are in a position
> where there is risk of financial loss (a book-keeper, for instance). It
> basically insures against them stealing or losing the cash.
>
> Liability insurance is what you're probably looking for.. if you
> accidentally damage something, etc. The actual probability of you being
> responsible for a loss is fairly small (unless you're careless<grin>)..
> What the insurance also pays for is a lawyer to respond when you get
> named, along with everyone else potentially involved, when "something
> goes wrong". A lot of times, it's just needing someone to write a
> convincing letter that says, "my client is not responsible, and here's
> why".. getting you removed from the wideranging list of (potential)
> defendants.
>
> There's also what's called (variously) Errors& Omission (E&O) insurance
> or "professional liability" which is a bit different. This is insurance
> against a professional making a mistake. For instance, if I screw up a
> calculation or report for a client, and "something goes wrong" (oops,
> that should have been AWG 2/0 wire, not AWG20), my E&O insurance is
> covering it.
>
> On the other hand, if I'm out soldering some wires for a client
> (probably illegal in CA now, since I'm not a licensed electrician, just
> a P.E.) and I start a fire and burn down the house.. that's regular
> liability insurance.
>
>
> Like all insurance, there's all kinds of inclusions and exclusions,
> limits on certain types of damage, etc.
>
> And, there's a huge difference in insurance rates for things one does as
> a business or job and things one does as a private individual. It goes
> to "exposure".. if you climb one tower a year as a private individual,
> the probability of you having something bad happen is MUCH less than if
> you do it 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year.
>
> Once insured, then there's the whole thing of "named insureds" and
> "insurance certificates".. the former essentially adds someone
> (temporarily) to your insurance.. the latter says that you have
> insurance.. Here's the difference..
>
> Say I want to have a party at a park.. the city might require you to
> have an insurance certificate AND post a bond. The former just says
> that you have personal (or business) liability insurance, so if
> something goes wrong, you'll have the means to pay for the damages. The
> bond is like a security deposit.. if you vandalize the picnic tables,
> they take it out of your bond. (A bond is where instead of you putting
> up the full amount of cash, and getting it back at the end, you pay
> someone else to put up the cash, and you pay them a fraction, which you
> don't get back at the end... think bail and bail bonds...)
>
> On the other hand, say you want to rent a crane. The rental yard might
> ask you for a "named insured" certificate. If you drop the crane on
> someone, and they sue the rental yard, they can collect on YOUR
> insurance. (more to the point, your insurance will pay for their lawyer
> to defend the claim). without the "named insured", if someone sued the
> rental yard, the rental yard would have to sue you, and then your
> regular old liability insurance pays the rental yard, who pays the
> plaintiff..meanwhile the rental yard is out the cash to pay for their
> lawyer. (which, inevitably, the rental contract says you're going to pay
> for anyway...)
>
>
> An hour sitting down with a small business insurance broker will be a
> highly educational experience, especially if you go in with some
> questions about how it all works. Everyone has to start somewhere,
> typically knowing nothing, and that's what they do.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:57:49 -0700
> From: Jeff Stevens <jeff@mossycup.com>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Two questions (buried coax)
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <1208581069.3483.193.camel@varroa.int.mossycup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 17:43 -0400, Bill Ogden wrote:
>
>
>> 2. Spend some time determining where the low point(s) are and provide holes
>> and drainage area under these points. No matter what you do, water will be
>> present in the pipe; some from condensation.
>>
>
> What is recommended in a climate where it rains 9 months out of the year
> on a site that is very close to being classified as a wetland area?
>
> The soil here is sopping wet most of the year and no amount of gravel
> under a run of buried conduit is going to help with drainage.
>
> What does water infiltration into the conduit do to the coax?
>
> -Jeff
> KE7FRJ
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:21:25 -0700
> From: Rob Frohne <rob.frohne@wallawalla.edu>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 45G tops
> To: <K7LXC@aol.com>
> Cc: frohro@wallawalla.edu, towertalk@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <1208575285.7544.7.camel@frohro-d600.wls.wwc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Thanks Gentlemen:
>
> You have all convinced me. To a man, everyone says go with the flat
> top. One of my buddies at work, an ME with a lot of experience, said he
> was pretty sure there would be very little difference in the strength of
> the two, and your notes below sealed it for me. I really like the other
> advantages of the flat top section. I'm going with it (which is a
> change of plans). I'm glad I asked.
>
> 73 & thanks,
>
> Rob, KL7NA
> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 20:13 -0400, K7LXC@aol.com wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 4/16/2008 7:54:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
>> towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:
>>
>>
>>> Looking at a picture of the 45AG2, you should be sure your rotator will
>>>
>> fit
>> through the Z bracing. Also, it seems that if that long mast sleeve isn't
>> perfectly aligned, you're guaranteed to have a mast that is out of alignment
>> and cause serious problems for your rotator. Finally, once installed, your
>> antenna and particularly any truss system above it are going to be out of
>> reach, since there's no way to stand on a 45AG2.
>>
>>
>>
>> All excellent points. I might also point out that the taper tops are not as
>> strong as a flat plate top. I've seen 2 broken pointy tops - one was 25G
>> and
>> the other was 45G. There is just some smallish welded metal holding them
>> together.
>>
>> And I saw a pointy top downtube that was welded out of plumb. Yes, a
>> semi-fatal problem that wasn't caught on the ground.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Steve K7LXC
>> TOWER TECH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
>> listings at AOL Autos.
>> (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 64, Issue 60
> *****************************************
>
>
>
If you want to same some money, use 4" DB (direct burial) duct also pvc
but a bunch cheaper and all standard fittings will fit it as well. For
example 2" db duct, last I checked was under $0.40 a foot, go to your
local electrical supply house, and check it out. where I work we don't
sell 4" db much but we sell 100s of thousands of feet of 2" to our
contractors. You can fill the end(s) with duct seal to keep the critters
out, duct seal is a modeling clay type of product and can be bought in
1lb blocks.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|