Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+Self\-supporting\s+tower\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+Self\-supporting\s+tower\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] Self-supporting tower (score: 1): Author: thaxton@ptgroup.com (thaxton@ptgroup.com); Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 09:18:23 -0700; I have just about finished putting together a new 50ft. AN Wireless tower. This is a very well made tower. It should withstand the winds we get up here in Northern Colorado with no problem. It is all; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-08/msg00061.html (7,037 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Self-supporting Tower (score: 1): Author: "Tom Martin" <tmartin@chartermi.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:18:47 -0500; I have been following this thread with a vested interest. I have a 72 foot Heights tower located in the only place on the city lot where the XYL would allow it to be erected. It is in the back of the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00370.html (9,414 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Self-supporting Tower (score: 1): Author: "Jerry K3BZ" <k3bz@arrl.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:39:14 -0400; I sure hope you are not at the mike when that tower comes down onto the power lines. Your has to be one of the riskiest installations I've ever seen described on TowerTalk. How did you ever get appro; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00371.html (10,559 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Self-supporting Tower (score: 1): Author: Blake Bowers <bbowers@townsqr.com>; Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:01:27 -0500; Not sure from the description if it is a self supporter, nor if there is anything above the 72 foot level, but.... 72 feet high, 75 feet from the power lines. Figuring the arc of the fall, he is clos; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-04/msg00373.html (9,418 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]