Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Class\s+2\s+and\s+Class\s+7\s+Poles\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: "Bennett, Timothy D., MSG" <BennettT2@rucker.army.mil>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 09:56:44 -0500
Just have a quick question. What is the difference in the Class ratings of telephone poles (ie. Class 2 and Class 7) and what is the reference for these classes? Thanks, Tim _________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00336.html (7,585 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 14:10:16 -0400 (EDT)
According to -The American Elecricians' Handbook-, the standards are from ANSI, and the 10 classes are classified by the circumference at the top and at a point 6 feet from the butt. Class 2 is 25 in
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00337.html (8,726 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: Alan AB2OS <ab2os@att.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 14:28:29 -0400
How practical is it to use a 50' (or 60', if available) utility/telephone pole as a support for something like a 3-el. SteppIR? And how would the installed cost compare with a typical steel tower of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00338.html (8,230 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: "RICHARD BOYD" <ke3q@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 16:35:49 -0400
It's completely practical. Comparative cost depends on your ready availability of cheap or free poles versus cheap or free tower sections, and cheap or free installation. First, telephones poles are
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00340.html (15,093 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: "David L. Thompson" <thompson@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 17:06:53 -0400
The late 1950's and early 1960's ARRL Antenna books have a very good scheme for mounting a beam on a telephone pole. I used this design with several antennas from 1958 to 1970. There was also an arti
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00341.html (10,262 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: W0UN -- John Brosnahan <shr@swtexas.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 16:21:10 -0500
I have always loved poles since the days of operating from my DX Elmer's station (W0AIW/W0AR) which had a 90 ft pole with a 4L 20M quad. Big stuff for the 1950s and 1960s. But here is an issue that r
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00342.html (10,998 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: doc <kd4e@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 18:08:50 -0400
I have been told that anywhere lightning is common a wood pole is a very bad idea because the antenna(s) and cables provide the only path for discharge of energy whereas a steel tower siphons off the
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00345.html (18,210 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 18:50:26 -0400 (EDT)
My book also has information on building a power pole out of reinforced concrete. 73, doug Here in West Central Florida one has to worry about billions of voracious termites chewing down the post ove
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00346.html (8,664 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: "Chuck O'Neal" <cdoneal@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 18:52:46 -0400
Interesting. Years ago (25 or more) I did some antenna work for a friend who had pole mounted yagis. I found it far more tiresome to climb the pole and work on the antennas! After that experience, I
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00347.html (13,490 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: Alan AB2OS <ab2os@att.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 19:34:53 -0400
Everyone who responded has given me a lot to think about. I had not thought at all about the task of climbing the thing, and I can see that a coventional tower would be much simpler in that respect.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00351.html (10,175 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: W0UN -- John Brosnahan <shr@swtexas.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 18:43:01 -0500
Most important thing about climbing a wooden pole is to make sure it is stepped on both sides of the pole in the rotator area as well as the antenna area. Nothing worse than NOT having equal steps on
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00352.html (9,229 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: "Gene Smar" <ersmar@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 21:02:48 -0400
Alan: CHeck out the TT archives for the phrase wood pole. There were several discussions on this topic about three or so years ago. 73 de Gene Smar AD3F length. Weather Stations", and lot's more. Cal
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00353.html (10,535 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: Rob Frohne <frohro@wwc.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 21:42:07 -0700
Hi All, Interesting topic. A few years ago, I tried to obtain a 120' phone pole new, and all the guys I talked to said it had been years since they had seen one even close to that size. One of my men
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00360.html (10,946 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Class 2 and Class 7 Poles (score: 1)
Author: W0UN -- John Brosnahan <shr@swtexas.net>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 00:08:31 -0500
Interesting topic. A few years ago, I tried to obtain a 120' phone pole new, and all the guys I talked to said it had been years since they had seen one even close to that size. I have four of the 12
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-05/msg00361.html (11,112 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu