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.

61. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Steve Katz <stevek@jmr.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:09:39 -0800; I happen to like extendable towers and at my past several homes have only installed those, not any guyed towers. I don't like the "Hazer" stuff, too much trouble to disconnect and reconnect guys on t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00411.html (13,645 bytes)
62. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "J. Edward (Ed) Muns" <w0yk@msn.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:21:19 -0800; One comment that I hear consistently from owners of crank-up towers is that their spouses and neighbors find them much more objectionable when the tower is nested with the antennas closest to the gro; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00412.html (13,935 bytes)
63. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Kelly Johnson <n6kj.kelly@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:48:01 -0800; Lot's of cities require crankups for any tower over, let's say, 35 feet or whatever. They do this because *think* it is less visible. The truth of the matter is, as you say, that a retracted crankup; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00413.html (15,222 bytes)
64. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Steve Katz <stevek@jmr.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:53:52 -0800; Might be able to hit them with the old, "But tomorrow my tower will be extended again, and you'll still be ugly." That usually wins 'em over. -WB2WIK/6 Lot's of cities require crankups for any tower; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00414.html (16,392 bytes)
65. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 16:16:16 -0800; LOL (+rolling on floor). Which Dale Carnegie book did you find that one in, Steve ?? Mike, W4EF.................................................... _______________________________________________ See; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00416.html (8,791 bytes)
66. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "Robert Chudek" <k0rc@pclink.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:56:04 -0600; Ed, I concur... my wife had never seen the Mosley PRO-67b anywhere other than 90 feet in the air... and later in a crumpled heap after the tornado took my tower down... So when I bought a HyGain TH-1; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00421.html (10,050 bytes)
67. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "RJD" <nj9k@wi.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 04:15:57 -0000; Even though I had to kiss the "politicians" of the PLAN commission I still had no reservations about the "crankup tower" for my future. Several reasons being my age was crepting up to the 70 mark in; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00422.html (10,292 bytes)
68. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Ve6wz_Steve <ve6wz@shaw.ca>; Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:26:28 -0700; Well Steve, I don't "think" it's easier, I KNOW it's easier !! As for being "installed" properly, well maybe you've never built your own antenna. Installing a commercial antenna may be one thing, but; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00436.html (9,524 bytes)
69. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "Jason Creager" <jason@creager.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:05:41 -0800; One advantage to crank up towers is that they can be motorized and automated. Of course, I can't find it right now, but I remember reading about one ham who was also a home automation buff. He built; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00445.html (8,281 bytes)
70. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up Towers (score: 1): Author: "larryjspammenot@teleport.com" <larryj@teleport.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 20:23:15 -0800 (GMT-08:00); Win - the tower that was damaged in the 70MPH wind, what antenna(s), mast type/length, etc. did you have on it? It would be nice to know more about it, since some of us are looking at buying towers a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00446.html (10,135 bytes)
71. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Rick Tavan N6XI <rtavan@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 22:32:01 -0800; Your preferences are certainly reasonable, Steve, but I much prefer to climb my skinny little 50' guyed Rohn 25 than my nested HDX-672 (sic). The crankup has three demerits for climbing: The nested s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00449.html (9,925 bytes)
72. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank up towers (score: 1): Author: <jacobsen_5@msn.com>; Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 12:31:56 -0600; Peter sent: "Some imp of wickedness (and a desire to get on with the antenna work) led me to tell them that we were Cathode Followers - Low Mu, not the High Mu creed - and they went away apologising; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00467.html (8,673 bytes)
73. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank up towers (score: 1): Author: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>; Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 22:56:49 +0100 (CET); Inquiring minds want to know< Jake, ' Solid state' provides a living for the XYL and myself - she teaches people how to use her company's software to design 'bit freak' (i.e. digital) integrated circ; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00478.html (9,647 bytes)
74. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "J. Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:00:53 -0500; Hi Steve, Glad to see your sense of humor has not been blunted by age! I gave up worrying too much about all these senselessly intrusive regulatory items that unduly annoy Hams in order to give power; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-12/msg00522.html (19,214 bytes)
75. [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "Dan Hearn" <dhearn@air-pipe.com>; Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:32:33 -0700; I have noticed recently that a number of hams seem to have a fear of dealing with crank up towers. I have used a TX472 for more than 10 years located first near Dallas and now near Spokane. It is not; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00854.html (8,268 bytes)
76. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "JAMES HEADRICK" <W3CP@CHARTER.NET>; Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 19:06:43 -0000; Dan, Read your email and article on your club page with interest since I am going to install a US Tower TX-455 with a 3el Yagi Steppir on a 15 ft mast; this means the mast will stick up more than 10; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00011.html (10,323 bytes)
77. Re: [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: "Mike, K6BR" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 13:13:24 -0700; Jim, I have done this with my MA-40 tubular with 10 mast, 3 element Steppir and no rotator (rotator at the base) and it is definitely a seat of the pants experience definitely not to be done on a reg; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00013.html (11,463 bytes)
78. [TowerTalk] Crank Up towers (score: 1): Author: Bill Ogden <ogden@us.ibm.com>; Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 14:13:38 -0400; I have a 3el SteppIR on a UST 455 with a 10' mast -- about 6' sticking above the tower. I routinely lower the tower and crank it over without problems. (The standard winches provides good arm exercis; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-09/msg00098.html (8,871 bytes)
79. [TowerTalk] crank up towers (score: 1): Author: "Craig Clark" <jcclark@wildblue.net>; Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 10:24:11 -0500; 1: I left mine up all the time. Took it down for yearly antenna and wire maintainence. Also when a hurricane was coming close but that was the exception. 2: Grounded the base @ three points. 3: Was a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2008-12/msg00049.html (6,853 bytes)

Current List: 61 - 79
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]