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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Tower\s+foundations\s*$/: 32 ]

Total 32 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:54:20 -0800; Are you going to then just dig around it? you said the new base would be 4 ft deep and the old one is 3 ft.. So you're going to raise the top surface a foot, as opposed to digging under the block, or; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00246.html (12,382 bytes)
22. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: "Bob Maser" <bmaser@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:30:54 -0500; My neighbor who is in construction says all I have to do is dig around the existing block and drill some holes in the side and push some rebar into the holes. I'm planning on putting more rebar where; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00251.html (12,849 bytes)
23. [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:47:02 -0500; If you want a 60' self supporting tower, you should buy one and not use Rohn 65G. A 60' unguyed Rohn 65G is not very strong and it's somewhat shaky to climb Having to attach guy wires every time ther; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00255.html (7,489 bytes)
24. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: "Bob Maser" <bmaser@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:46:41 -0500; John, in all due respect, if you think that an unguyed 60 foot tower made from Rohn 65G is not very strong and shaky, I'd like to have what your drinking. Rohn claims that you can use 65 up to 60 fee; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00256.html (9,420 bytes)
25. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:00:14 EST; Rohn claims that you can use 65 up to 60 feet with 70mph winds with ±5 sqft of surface area, if you have the proper foundation. Actually, according to my Rohn book for 70 MPH and Rohn unguyed; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00257.html (9,094 bytes)
26. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:06:18 -0800; True enough.. Although disposing of that 2 ton block might be a bit of a challenge. That concrete breaker they're using on the freeway job would make short work of it. I saw them dropping pieces that; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00262.html (9,353 bytes)
27. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:10:25 -0800; It's a work of art, not trash. Specially constructed and aged in mother earth. Heck, it was probably carefully aligned with the magnetic or geographic poles, wasn't it? You can't just buy one of thes; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00263.html (9,480 bytes)
28. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Foundations (score: 1): Author: "Darryl Hazelgren" <darryl@hazelgren.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:12:29 -0700; Brent, give me a call at the cell number below. I'm in Lehi, Utah. And, forward pix of the tower... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Darryl Hazelgren, K7UT Utah DX Association, Past President www.udxa.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00268.html (9,629 bytes)
29. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:25:42 -0500; Well I guess the term shaky is my opinion based on experience with this tower. As K4XS said we all have our own pucker factor and climbing it with no wind is probably safe. My point was that this tow; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00280.html (10,632 bytes)
30. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:26:02 -0500; OK you're correct. My catalog says the following: The Rohn 65G is designed to provide excellent rigidity and strength in application up to 500 feet when guyed and up to 80 feet when self supporting.; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00283.html (11,934 bytes)
31. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: EL34GUY@aol.com; Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:04:58 EST; Just curious, Is the base size different for guyed/unguyed use? Just wondering. Never done a guyed tower before.. Mark W0NCL _______________________________________________ __________________________; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00284.html (7,860 bytes)
32. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower foundations (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:25:11 EST; Just curious, Is the base size different for guyed/unguyed use? Just wondering. Never done a guyed tower before.. Mark W0NCL _______________________________________________ Yes, bases for unguyed tow; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-02/msg00287.html (8,010 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 32
Page: [1] [2]