Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Tower\s+safety\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Tower Safety (score: 1)
Author: David Siddall <hhamwv@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:49:09 -0500
Below is a link to an excellent talk about tower safety recently presented by K1IR, Jim Idelson. Jim presents what a HAM needs to know and provides a clear explanation of today's safety equipment, wh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00078.html (6,999 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower Safety (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 09:35:11 -0500
Thanks for forwarding this Dave and kudos to K1IR (Jim) for doing the talk and making it available. While the discussion in the later portion about the right way to take down a tower was really good,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00082.html (8,809 bytes)

3. [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: James Cain <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 19:32:24 +0000
I did pretty serious tower work for more than 20 years and quit at age 44. By the time I had got suited up in that equipment in the K1IR video it would have been too dark to get any work done. And wh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00085.html (7,110 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Wayne Kline <w3ea@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:14:17 +0000
The event TEAR is there for your protecting. Just as a fall arrest lanyard. Its a shock deterent. Your car if any airbag is deployed you have to replace ALL the Safety belts ! I remember see a NTSB v
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00086.html (9,262 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 19:18:48 -0500
You got lucky. I prefer not to rely on luck, and it doesnt take much time to get properly suited up at all. As for replacing the climbing apparatus, I wouldnt trust it if it arrested a serious fall.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00087.html (8,360 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: "Doug Renwick" <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 23:18:39 -0600
This subject has been covered many times before. I say If you can't free climb then you shouldn't climb at all. I get plenty of criticisms for stating that. Let me explain. If you are not physically,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00088.html (9,411 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 06:46:10 -0500
I think that issue is that the discussion Jim had did not get to the true root cause analysis in all cases. HE did speak about temporary guying below the work on a tower and doing the "off the tower"
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00089.html (10,553 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: K8MR via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 13:22:26 +0000 (UTC)
It's not just an issue of physical fitness in free climbing. There is also a distraction issue: one reflexive swat at a suddenly appearing wasp ought not be fatal. 73  - Jim   K8MR --Original Message
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00090.html (10,004 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 10:14:21 -0700
That's a pretty ridiculous position.  It's not a case of fitness ... it's a case of whether or not you are protected against an accident. 1.  Any quality control expert anywhere in the world will tel
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00091.html (11,130 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 16:13:43 -0500
Ed, I think you are applying your analysis from the wrong perspective. In the W0AIH case, if Paul had been 100% attached to the tower, his winch cable could have failed and he would have survived (th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00092.html (13,211 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 16:33:33 -0500
Oh, and I forgot to mention, in relation to the NH case, that Jim's most critical point is that *Guyed towers must always be properly guyed - even during construction and removal - ALWAYS* Had this t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00093.html (14,174 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 17:44:21 -0500
I have not heard the exact circumstances of W0AIHs accident. What was quickly published was his fall arrest system failed. He was clearly using a harness. If some has the details, I think we would al
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00095.html (14,492 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: K8MR via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 00:43:38 +0000 (UTC)
My understanding is that rather than climbing the tower, Paul was being hauled up by a winch. The pulley at the top of the tower failed, resulting in the fatal fall. Man lifts are heavily regulated b
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00098.html (11,933 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: "Doug Renwick" <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 20:26:53 -0600
Here are the full details, quote: Note: a fall arrest harness would not have saved Paul's life in these circumstances. "I don't know that Paul had been working on this tower recently, but he apparent
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00099.html (13,228 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: K9MA <k9ma@sdellington.us>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 20:45:31 -0600
As I understand it, Paul had a "single point failure". When the pulley failed, there was no backup. The main idea of fall protection is to eliminate single point failures, the idea being that multipl
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00100.html (14,091 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 06:34:06 -0500
Jim, Thank you very much for these details. They are very important for people using man lifts to climb towers. Clearly, you cant man lift and not be connected to the lift. And you cant be connected
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00101.html (13,804 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Jim George <n3bb@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 05:50:24 -0600
With all due respect, the discussion on climbing w/out the OSHA-approved climbing harness (Personal Protection Equipment) and/or taking any sort of risk by free climbing or being unattached at times
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00102.html (14,803 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 06:58:49 -0500
Jim, Also with all due respect, these are all very serious issues that have nothing to do with body harnesses and free climbing. Failure analysis deals with the direct cause. Issue one - dont be on a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00103.html (15,761 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 12:58:40 -0500
I completely agree that failure analysis is key to reducing/eliminating accidents ("Air Disasters" on Smithsonian Channels, which focuses on the NTSB analysis of airplane accidents, is one of my favo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00104.html (19,754 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety (score: 1)
Author: "Rich Assarabowski" <konecc@snet.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:36:27 -0500
I agree 100% with Dick WC1M's assessment below of tower climbing gear and the issues. There are two issues involving tower climbing that have been particularly troublesome to me: 1) Getting around ob
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-11/msg00113.html (12,305 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu