Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Rohn\s+Windload\?\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Rohn\s+Windload\?\?\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Rohn Windload?? (score: 1): Author: rthorne@arn.net (Richard Thorne); Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1998 20:21:14 -0500; OK, I'm picking up 240' of 55g tomorrow. Me and K5XM and W5ZO plan on putting up two towers. Lets assume for a moment they will both be 120' in height. According to the rohn catalog a 120' 55g tower; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-07/msg00192.html (7,773 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Rohn Windload?? (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 23:40:04 EDT; Actually the 23.1 sq.feet is TOTAL tower capacity. Doesn't really matter how it is distributed. See above comments. The tower capacity remains the same. You already got your answer. 23.1 sq.ft. is th; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-07/msg00198.html (7,918 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Rohn Windload?? (score: 1): Author: n3rr@erols.com (Bill Hider, N3RR); Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 11:31:24 +0100; Get yourself a licensed PE to analyze the situation and determine what the safe loading can be. Don't guess or allow yourself to be convinced by anyone on this reflector. Remember, it's your liabilit; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-07/msg00205.html (8,805 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]