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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Aluminum\s+towers\s*$/: 54 ]

Total 54 documents matching your query.

21. [TowerTalk] Aluminum towers (score: 1): Author: wiley@interaccess.com (William Gode); Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 21:42:39 -0600; Did anyone mention Heights Tower's web site? <http://www.heightstowers.com> Check it out for some very interesting information, including full engineering specifications in accordance with the 1994 U; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00137.html (8,730 bytes)
22. [TowerTalk] Aluminum towers (score: 1): Author: ki5vz@flash.net (Rick Bowden); Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 11:48:57 +0000; -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com Sea; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-03/msg00205.html (10,012 bytes)
23. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: ac0x@qsl.net (Louis Sica, Jr.); Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:09:04 -0600; This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0004_01BE4B5E.A2ECF5C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks to all for their; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00540.html (10,094 bytes)
24. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:43:12 EST; top, No, it's not overkill if you want a reliable installation. You can go smaller. There are a variety of heights, windload capacities and prices. It all depends on what you need to do the job. The; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00543.html (8,000 bytes)
25. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV); Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:05:35 GMT; Hi Louis, Having been subject to wallet deprivation pain syndrome all my life, I painfully identify with the almost overwhelming urge to go with the low-cost solution. But here's my equally painful f; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00551.html (10,384 bytes)
26. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: N0OEL@aol.com (N0OEL@aol.com); Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 21:38:02 EST; Yes, I have had a Universal Tower up for 20 years. Only reason it has ever been lowered was to change antennas and to move to a new home. Trouble free. Always looks good. Be aware Alum is more expens; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00567.html (7,706 bytes)
27. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: w4byg@qsl.net (Ray LaRue); Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 22:02:07 -0500; I've had two Heights Aluminum towers for many years. They have served me beautifully. My 72 footer had a Moseley 40 meter S402 and a CL-36 on it. It went through some very sever winds several times a; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00568.html (7,562 bytes)
28. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: wa3gin@erols.com (Dave Jordan); Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 09:43:19 -0500; The Folks, The guy who could really to talk to this item is Drake Dimitry (Heights Towers Systems) but I heard a rumor he is being filtered from this relfector--is the rumor true? --must be a mistake; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-01/msg00578.html (8,768 bytes)
29. [TowerTalk] ALUMINUM TOWERS (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 23:09:58 -0600; See intersperced comments and observations below regarding Aluminum Towers de Tom N4KG On Wed, 07 Oct 1998 20:35:00 -0500 "d.dimitry" <d.dimitry@mci2000.com> writes: etc. towers side. material. winds; /archives//html/Towertalk/1998-10/msg00205.html (12,254 bytes)
30. [TowerTalk] Aluminum towers (score: 1): Author: Nick Pair <daweezil2003@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:35:24 -0700 (PDT); I'm pretty sure you can get stainless steel bolts at least to grade 5 that you could use. Just be sure to use some sort of thread compound like Locktite or equal to prevent seizing That sometimes occ; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-08/msg00794.html (6,862 bytes)
31. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum towers (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:54:59 EDT; I'm pretty sure you can get stainless steel bolts at least to grade 5 that you could use. Just be sure to use some sort of thread compound like Locktite or equal to prevent seizing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-08/msg00796.html (7,493 bytes)
32. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: Dennis W0JX <w0jx@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:24:43 -0700 (PDT); I've owned various aluminum towers (all Universals) since 1976 and currently have an 80 footer with TH6DX on top. I definitely recommend stainless steel bolts, washers, and nuts. I switched to these; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-08/msg00810.html (8,554 bytes)
33. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: Jerry Gardner <jerryw6uv@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 11:24:19 -0700; I plan to install a 50' tower and a tri-bander for 20/15/10 and was originally considering a U.S. Towers 55' crank-up model. While researching towers, I came across a company called Universal Towers; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00090.html (7,859 bytes)
34. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:04:08 -0400 (EDT); Jerry Aluminum towers tend to flex....not a bad thing. but, the flexing does cause the bolt holes to "egg" over time...resulting in a bigger and bigger hole, which causes more flexing and a bigger ho; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00093.html (8,534 bytes)
35. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: Richard Solomon <dickw1ksz@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:30:58 -0700; You might want to look at the Heights Tower Site. They make a Fold-Over kit that would make your life easier. That is, unless you want to put up a DB42 MonstIR !! 73, Dick, W1KSZ ____________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00094.html (10,672 bytes)
36. [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: jerry@hagrid.xm23.net; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 10:54:45 -0700 (PDT); I plan to install a 50' tower and a tri-bander for 20/15/10 and was originally considering a U.S. Towers 55' crank-up model. While researching towers, I came across a company called Universal Towers; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00095.html (8,289 bytes)
37. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: Jerry Gardner <jerryw6uv@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:08:45 -0700; Darn! I was hoping that everyone would either love or hate aluminium towers so I could make a definitive decision one way or the other. My biggest constraint is space. I live on 10 acres, but almost; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00100.html (8,092 bytes)
38. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: "KR7X" <kr7x@comcast.net>; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 16:02:46 -0700; Jerry: Where on the current Universal Tower web site did you find the 21sf at 110mph rating for the HD-21-50 rating? All they say there is if your antenna is xx SF go down the list that has the same; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00105.html (9,938 bytes)
39. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: n8de@thepoint.net; Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 19:03:44 -0400; At the present time, I have 5 Universal towers up ... with plans for 3 more in the next year or two. The 'wobble factor', as Bill said, can be a concern, but, IF the tower is assembled CORRECTLY, the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00106.html (13,139 bytes)
40. Re: [TowerTalk] Aluminum Towers (score: 1): Author: "Mario" <marionow@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:44:01 -0400; Jerry, The #21-50 would be 21 sq. ft for 80mph. The info is missing from the particular doc for #21-50 http://www.universaltowers.com/pdf/HD_models/02-model%23-hd-21-50.pdf You might look the #21-40; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-08/msg00107.html (11,435 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3]