In a message dated 6/30/2002 1:49:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jljarvis@adelphia.net writes:
> It would be inappropriate--and probably negative in impact,
> for out of state hams to comment on a NY legislative matter.
>
> However, if this law does, indeed, specify a 95 foot limit, it's a
> gross mistake. Right now, PRB-1 allows an application for "the
> intended purpose." 95 feet is barely adequate for stacked antennas
> on 10 and 15. It is sub-optimal on 20. It is inadequate for a 40m yagi
> unless your intended purpose is domestic communications. It is inadequate
> for an 80 meter dipole, for international work, and it is inadequate for a
> 160 meter vertical, for pete's sake.
>
You must live in a different world. Most of the Ham community would be quite
pleased with HF antennas allowed up to 95 ft.
Bruce
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
|