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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Crank\s+Up\s+towers\s*$/: 79 ]

Total 79 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: Sherman@mscomputer.com (Sherman Leifer); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:57:04 -0500; I have been a Ham for over 47 years and have lived in many different places. I have had many crank up towers from various manufacturers over these years. During this time I have had three towers, whe; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00210.html (9,335 bytes)
2. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: w2rds@arrl.net (Rick Stoneking); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:39:12 -0500; I do not have any direct experience with this but I do not that some towers have a mechanism to provide support of the tower in the extended position other than relying on the cable. And I know that; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00211.html (12,204 bytes)
3. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: tbeltran@earthlink.net (Thomas Beltran); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:46:56 -0800; Well your post is timely for me. I have a very old TriEx that I plan on putting up. One person suggested that before I do, the cable should be replaced. What kind of cable should I use? One end is sw; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00212.html (8,784 bytes)
4. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: ag0n@arrl.net (ag0n@arrl.net); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:23:03 -0700; Uh....how about also taking info from people who have NOT had a problem, so that viewers of your info can also see that a properly maintained system doesn't normally have that problem? It's too easy; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00214.html (8,187 bytes)
5. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:41:23 -0500; I was thinking the same thing that in a "parked" situation, you would want a supplemental support for the weight of the tower and antenna load which can be pretty substantial to be contantly putting; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00215.html (13,917 bytes)
6. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: k4rv@mindspring.com (Sain'T Tom); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:17:59 -0600; I agree. I have had great success with 2 steel crank up towers for many years. Both are still going strong and one is beside a salt water bay. I'll take my crank up, cranked down, over any guyed towe; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00217.html (9,322 bytes)
7. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: k6rb@baymoon.com (K6RB); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:03:16 -0800; I have an old Tri-Ex tower (W-51) that was put up in August 1984 and on which I have changed the cables only once - a month ago! It survived about half a dozen storms of 80 mph peak winds, and the ca; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00218.html (12,430 bytes)
8. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White, K4OJ); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:03:22 -0800; I got to disagree with you on this one K4RV... No way is having a crank down and or tiltover better - I would go with the guyed tower over and over again - ESPECIALLY AFTER SEEING WHAT ANDREW DID! If; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00219.html (11,275 bytes)
9. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: k4rv@mindspring.com (Sain'T Tom); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:25:04 -0600; Sorry, Jim, My experiences with Opal and Erin are just the opposite. Could be due to several differences in construction, brand, etc. I still will take my crank ups, cranked down, over anybody's guye; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00220.html (12,527 bytes)
10. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: diale@mindspring.com (Ed Dial); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:23:44 -0700; When you say "proper maintenance", are you including replacing the cable at scheduled intervals? I'm curious if anyone is doing that. BTW, I have a US Tower 50' trailor/portable tower that has been i; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00221.html (10,276 bytes)
11. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: w9ac@arrl.net (Paul Christensen); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:30:12 -0500; Isn't a major point in owning a crank-up tower that the operator completely or at least partially nests the tower when not actively operating? -Paul, W9AC; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00222.html (8,699 bytes)
12. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:35:10 -0500; Well...to quantify....maybe. What needs done and when is a hard thing to put your finger on. A heavy salt air environment may require a more aggressive maintenance schedule than other enviroments. I; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00223.html (12,234 bytes)
13. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: k4rv@mindspring.com (Sain'T Tom); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:07:01 -0600; Jim, K4OJ, For the very reason that when Opal and Erin hit my place on the Gulf Coast head on and several guyed towers around here came down, but my crank up (cranked down but not tilted over) surviv; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00225.html (8,656 bytes)
14. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: n3rr@erols.com (Bill Hider (N3RR)); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 13:35:29 -0500; YES, WE ARE! I am replacing my cables at 12 year intervals, just as the rust begins to show. Tower now is 17 years old. HG-52SS. On its 2nd set of cables. Bill, N3RR www.erols.com/n3rr at the know wi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00226.html (11,557 bytes)
15. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: n3rr@erols.com (Bill Hider (N3RR)); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 13:36:19 -0500; I never nest my tower, except for antenna or other maintenance. Bill, N3RR www.erols.com/n3rr the DID! completely or at least partially nests the tower when not actively; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00227.html (9,563 bytes)
16. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: wy6k@yahoo.com (WYsixK); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:01:53 -0800 (PST); I vote for Crank up towers. The danger of climbing tall fixed towers seems a lot higher to me than the danger of 1) climbing a retracted Crank up tower once the sections have been truly locked in pla; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00228.html (9,911 bytes)
17. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:46:43 -0500; I also have a crank up/tilt-over from EZ-Way Towers. It is the Model RBX-50 which extends to 52 feet (with a 10ft. galvanized mast) and supports a 40 sq ft. wind load if guyed at 110 mph. ( I'm dubio; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00230.html (11,711 bytes)
18. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: w7ni@easystreet.com (Stan & Patricia Griffiths); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:36:11 -0800; Hi Sherman, Gathering all of this very interesting crankup tower data is a "double edged sword". Yes, it would really help the prospective buyer to do a better and safer job in selecting and putting; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00231.html (11,479 bytes)
19. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:56:01 -0500; Yes! One of the benefits to having the crank-up /tilt-over tower IS the capability of removing it from harm's way during severe weather. Being a Florida resident (besides being a resident in the Ligh; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00232.html (10,771 bytes)
20. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 15:04:46 -0500; Good point... it's also worth noting that Sherm has an interest in the new TowerDepot line of self-supporting towers. Because such a report could have competitive significance, this is at least worth; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00234.html (9,886 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]