Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Disturbing\s+tower\s+picture\s+in\s+QST\s*$/: 19 ]

Total 19 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:32:11 -0400
In the October 2004 QST, on page 52, there's a rather disturbing picture. It shows three hams on a tower. Ostensibly, they are installing a 2m antenna at a hospital as part of an Eagle Scout project.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00273.html (8,330 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:42:59 -0700
It's well known that the editing of QST, particularly images, doesn't really take into account such things as safety. Check out the pictures of the HV power supply last year. Clip leads, DMMs not rat
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00277.html (9,927 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Michael Urich <ka5cvh@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 06:07:22 -0500
hehehehe, I think I have the trump card to this discussion. If you think that's bad follow what some of the rovers do for the V/UHF contests. I've seen too many pictures <some of them are on my just
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00285.html (8,183 bytes)

4. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Keith Dutson" <kjdutson@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:49:48 -0500
I saw that photo and was also awe-struck with the apparent lack of concern for tower climbing safety. Keith NM5G --Original Message-- From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:towertalk-bounces@
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00299.html (9,704 bytes)

5. [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:30:33 -0400
In the October 2004 QST, on page 52, there's a rather disturbing picture. It shows three hams on a tower. Ostensibly, they are installing a 2m antenna at a hospital as part of an Eagle Scout project.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00301.html (9,502 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:14:44 -0400
I received a reply from Steve Ford, WB8IMY, who is the editor of QST. He assured me that all three gentlemen were wearing climbing belts, although they are not visible in the picture. On Oct 12, 2004
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00304.html (10,789 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Blake Bowers <bbowers@townsqr.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:14:59 -0500
I received a reply from Steve Ford, WB8IMY, who is the editor of QST. He assured me that all three gentlemen were wearing climbing belts, although they are not visible in the picture. Belts? Not harn
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00306.html (8,863 bytes)

8. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Markhasin, Vitaly" <Vitaly.Markhasin@UE-1.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:31:19 -0600
The bottom one definitely DOES NOT. They should wear full harnesses and HARD HATS. 73! Vitaly (VE6JO) I received a reply from Steve Ford, WB8IMY, who is the editor of QST. He assured me that all thre
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00309.html (11,813 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "J.Hector Garcia M" <Hector@telecom1.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:41:51 -0700
they only want to be on the photo , they don't care much abouth details like safesty, they never have an accident. Remember Superman. -- Original Message -- From: "Blake Bowers" <bbowers@townsqr.com>
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00311.html (9,599 bytes)

10. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:58:47 -0700
At 10:31 AM 10/13/2004 -0600, Markhasin, Vitaly wrote: The bottom one definitely DOES NOT. They should wear full harnesses and HARD HATS. 73! Vitaly (VE6JO) --Original Message-- From: Bill Coleman [m
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00312.html (10,198 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Tower (K8RI)" <tower@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:11:37 -0400
Michael Urich wrote: On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:42:59 -0700, Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net> wrote: It's well known that the editing of QST, particularly images, doesn't really take into account such thin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00313.html (12,509 bytes)

12. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:51:47 -0400
I would be willing to bet that it's a little stub tower, and that the bottom guy is standing on the roof, but none of them is wearing anything like a proper harness. Steve should relook at the pictur
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00316.html (11,156 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "K7VS Van" <wa7fab@cdsnet.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:49:52 -0700
Why don't you fellows just shred that copy of QST. Enuf!!! Thank you. the HARD Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA. _______
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00318.html (12,581 bytes)

14. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Chaggaris" <jimc@pwrone.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 14:01:03 -0500
I feel the same way for this topic and the barrel connector topic....enuf 73's Jim KJ9A James E. Chaggaris President PowerOne Corporation 1211 W. 22nd St. Suite 802 Oak Brook, IL 60523 Phn: 630-586-9
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00319.html (13,705 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Chuck Gooden" <cgooden@insightbb.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:29:09 -0500
When I get home I will see if I can find the issue and page number. _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stat
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00320.html (11,312 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:01:45 -0400
I received a reply from Steve Ford, WB8IMY, who is the editor of QST. He assured me that all three gentlemen were wearing climbing belts, although they are not visible in the picture. On Oct 12, 2004
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00329.html (11,700 bytes)

17. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: Lee Wical <leewical@lava.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:31:33 -1000
COULD THIS BE THE FIRST TIME ARRL PERSONNEL HAVE LIED TO US? At 06:58 AM 10/13/2004, Jim Lux wrote: At 10:31 AM 10/13/2004 -0600, Markhasin, Vitaly wrote: The bottom one definitely DOES NOT. They sho
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00332.html (11,311 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mb.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 05:24:46 -0500
I wonder how many critics of this picture have actually seen the picture and how much of this thread has been fuelled by nothing more than hearsay or hatred of the ARRL. It's a tiny little thing, 1 c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00333.html (14,001 bytes)

19. RE: [TowerTalk] Disturbing tower picture in QST (score: 1)
Author: "Noel" <yaesurig@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:55:21 -0600
I find the critique blown way out of proportion as seems to be a common occurrence with many threads on this reflector. But some people just have more time on their hands and don't mind spending lots
/archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00341.html (11,567 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu