Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Towertalk\]\s+CRANK\s+UP\s+TOWERS\s+\-\s+Not\s+a\s+panacea\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White, K4OJ)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 22:27:13 -0800
I think your fooling yourself... Having seen what Andrew did - NOTHING - no matter how low it is is any less likely to become airborne! I saw the sides of mobile homes wrapped around avocado trees...
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00252.html (13,076 bytes)

2. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 22:56:14 -0500
Jim, In hurricane winds, Andrew or not, a lowered and secured tower has to be less of a threat to damage than one extended to full height. The wind load is reduced, torque factors reduced, lever fact
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00256.html (15,597 bytes)

3. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: satcom@lava.net (Stuart Browne)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:09:39 -1000
In Hawaii where we have normal trade winds that blow between 5 to 30 my LM-470 with a F12 C4XL and a 6m 5 el telrex is nice and stable when fully cranked-up. When the winds get serious and start blow
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00258.html (14,721 bytes)

4. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White, K4OJ)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:21:32 -0800
I am waiting for the professionals to reply... I see you have never witnessed a foldover/nested tower collapse...something which can never happen with a fixed tower...period! Again I think you are re
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00260.html (17,906 bytes)

5. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:56:33 -0500
Yawn....... Bill KC9CS collapse...something Check again Jim.....fixed towers can't collapse.... period? http://www.eteamradio.com/klor_tower_collapse.htm http://www.cnn.com/US/9610/12/briefs.pm/tower
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00266.html (11,540 bytes)

6. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: steve@oakcom.com (Steve Maki)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:50:34 -0500
Things may be different in Florida, but I've noted that most crankups around here, after being up for 10 or 15 years, can't be folded over anymore because of tree growth. Many can't even be retracted
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00267.html (11,212 bytes)

7. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White, K4OJ)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 01:13:02 -0800
"Convince me a fall from a fixed tower is 'safer' than a step ladder." Oh I get it - that is what this is about - Fear of Falling! Now I understand where you are coming from....it has nothing to do w
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00269.html (10,691 bytes)

8. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: ny9h@arrl.net (Bill Steffey)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:34:45 -0600
"Meanwhile, several thousand listeners tuned in to WDCB 90.0 GM at Glenellyn, Illinois, were left with nothing but static for a after wind blew down a 310-foot antenna tower. A 50 ' back-up antenna w
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00270.html (10,643 bytes)

9. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: wa3gin@erols.com (David Jordan)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:46:35 -0500
Hi Bill, You're beating a dead horse and taking the fun out of this reflector. Clearly, you like fixed towers. SO, leave it at that! By the way Fl. is a severe weather location. In fact FL has more f
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00274.html (12,073 bytes)

10. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: w5kp@swbell.net (Jerry Kincade)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:51:42 -0800
I keep hearing this "ground level" phrase tossed around, and I'd like to hear from crankup owners exactly what brand and model towers they are able to work on at "ground level" *with antennas install
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00281.html (11,958 bytes)

11. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:27:37 -0500
Hi Jerry, The tilt over base of my tower puts the hinge at about 9 feet. The boom on my tri-band antenna is right at 18 feet....attached at the middle that means 9 feet either side. When tilted over
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00284.html (13,793 bytes)

12. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: ag0n@arrl.net (ag0n@arrl.net)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:46:05 -0700
That's one thing I did NOT say, but I know others did. If you have read my web page on putting up my HG54HD, you'll know I ran into the same thing you allude to. My wife and I managed to get the TH7D
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00288.html (11,634 bytes)

13. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: ag0n@arrl.net (ag0n@arrl.net)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:54:51 -0700
By the way, all of my statements about crankups have been regarding TILT over, NOT FOLD OVER. I have only one experience with a fold over tower and it spooked me! Not saying it can't be done right, b
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00290.html (10,150 bytes)

14. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:40:27 -0600
SNIP You obviously don't understand STATIC FORCES and BENDING MOMENTS. The weight of your antenna applied the the mast which is resting on the collar of your tower which then acts as a fulcrum, puts
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00292.html (7,446 bytes)

15. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: Bill Otten" <res0958z@verizon.net (Bill Otten)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:46:16 -0500
It's probably just semantics...my tower does have the hinge mounted on the Wonder Post at about 9 feet above ground. EZ Way Towers listed the towers as "crank up & down, tiltover" models. I'd like to
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00298.html (11,614 bytes)

16. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: w7ni@easystreet.com (Stan & Patricia Griffiths)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:51:12 -0800
I am sure Jim meant "collapse due to a crankup cable failure", aren't you? than Well, for one thing, I am ALWAYS tied to a fixed tower with safety equipment when I am working on it. This makes it VER
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00323.html (10,874 bytes)

17. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: w9jcc@juno.com (Frank C Travanty)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 20:02:34 -0800
Jerry, what you suggested below is pretty easy to do with a crank up tower (with some restrictions). I decided in 1968 to not be a climber and go with the crank up type of tower. What I'll describe i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00324.html (13,075 bytes)

18. [Towertalk] CRANK UP TOWERS - Not a panacea (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@arrl.net (Bill Coleman)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:46:46 -0500
I just as soon not fall off of either. There's a great quote from the Motorcycle Safety Foundation materials somewhere. "Q: How fast do you have to be going to receive a fatal injury from a motorcycl
/archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00445.html (7,567 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu