The biggest risk to that repaired tower in my mind is not the neighbor's
kid, but the increased chance of collapse in a windstorm (and loosing
use of antenna and possibly part of house until all is fixed), and more
so, an increased risk to the climber, usually one's own self.
These repairs can hide deterioration that would be obvious otherwise,
and when straightened, who knows what cracks are visible (in a
theoretical way) on the INSIDE of the tube.
It's too easy, relatively, to replace the bent section, and restore to
as-new.
Go for the crane.
73
-----------------
Guy Olinger
Apex, NC, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "alsopb" <alsopb@gloryroad.net>
To: "Bob Otto" <N8NGA@one.net>
Cc: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [TowerTalk] HB towers
>
> I guess it depends upon the level of risk you are willing to accept.
>
> A quick calc yields a probability of 2 in 100 million. I'm willing to
> accept that risk. It is much lower than taking the kid to school by
> car and far below getting cancer by smoking one cigarette.
>
> Pr =(prob of it falling) * (probability of kid standing on neighbors
> property when I told them not to) * (probability of a piece of
> hardware hitting while standing there) * (probability of being
> killed).
>
> I assumed:
> prob of failure after an engineered split repair = 1 in 50
> prob of kid standing there = 2 min/week =.0002
> prob of getting hit by hardware while standing there = 1:50 =.02
> probability of getting killed from hit = .2
>
> total probability of getting killed = 1.6E-8
>
> Obviously, it isn't zero. Therefore one should prohibit the tower
> from being erected in the first place. Right?
>
> Note: There is another way of assuring the kid doesn't get killed.
> If the kid is well trained and he doesn't go where you tell him not to
> the probability is also zero. I much prefer that approach to
> legislating away all towers.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
>
> Bob Otto wrote:
> >
> > Hello alsopb,
> >
> > At the risk of over discussing this topic, I'd ask you to think
about
> > the answer to just two questions........
> >
> > You said:
> >
> > "Personally, I'd have no problem living next to a guy with a tower
> > having a splint on its leg--especially if there were some
engineering
> > used to determine what's adequate."
> >
> > Do you think asking the members of TT what they think is an
> > appropriate method of splinting constitutes "some engineering"?? If
> > the tower fell on your child, would you think that "engineering"
> > was enough?
> >
> > The point that I think several have tried to make is "don't
experiment
> > and improvise -- get serious engineering help or better yet, replace
> > the tower section". This is one case that isn't about
experimenting,
> > it's about doing the right thing.
> >
> > 73 from.......
> >
> > Bob Otto
> > N8NGA@one.net
> > Cincinnati, Ohio
> >
> > Time Written:
> > 9:42:02 PM
> > Attachments:
> > <none>
> >
> > **********************************************
> > DXCC 10M ** DX is !! ** WAS 10M
> > There is a very fine line between
> > "HOBBY" and "MENTAL ILLNESS"
> > **********************************************
> > When trouble arises and things look really bad,
> > there is always one individual who perceives a
> > solution and is willing to take command.
> > VERY OFTEN THAT PERSON IS CRAZY!
> > **********************************************
> > Friday, March 09, 2001, 4:58:55 PM, you wrote:
> >
> > a> Bob,
> >
> > a> And who exactly determines what will cause harm to other people
and
> > a> what statistical probability will they define which constitutes
> > a> "unacceptable risk"?
> >
> > a> The first atomic pile was constructed and went critical under the
> > a> bleachers of a football field. It was safe because the people
doing
> > a> it had the smarts to do it in a safe way. The physics hasn't
changed.
> >
> > a> The problem is society has changed. People without
> > a> engineering/scientific background are want to live in a world of
zero
> > a> risk. They simply don't understand that such a thing is
impossible.
> > a> Those passing the laws and regulations for the most part are not
> > a> setting levels based upon statistical risk but rather based upon
> > a> politics. Whatever makes the masses FEEL good is the determining
> > a> factor.
> >
> > a> Perhaps a "mandatory psychiatric treatment law for chicken
littles"
> > a> would have a more positive effect on society than more
restriction of
> > a> others personal freedoms.
> >
> > a> Personally, I'd have no problem living next to a guy with a tower
> > a> having a splint on its leg--especially if there were some
engineering
> > a> used to determine what's adequate. If I were concerned, I'd
just
> > a> make sure that my kids and property were out of the fall radius.
I'd
> > a> be willing to bet the probability of some of the 100' pine trees
> > a> falling on my roof would be higher. I'm not worried about that
> > a> either.
> >
> > a> 73 de Brian/K3KO
> >
> > a> Bob Otto wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hello alsopb,
> > >>
> > >> Interesting point, but not entirely fair. While it is
acceptable, and
> > >> encouraged, for HAMs to experiment, it is NOT acceptable to
experiment
> > >> in a way that could cause harm to other people. Would you have
wanted
> > >> that first steam engine to be tested/experimented with right next
to
> > >> your children's bedroom??
> >
> > a> --
> > a> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> > a> Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> > a> Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > a> Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
> >
> > --
> > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> > Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> > Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
|