I want to pass this on to the group. Do listen to those who advocate
"short" towers as a necessity. I sent the following to Tom N4KG. Repeating
it here may open some minds. It sure did for me, which is why I thanked
Tom. 73 bob de w9ge
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 07:26:22 -0500 "Finger, Bob" <Bob.Finger@DynCorp.com>
writes:
> N4KG de W9GE
>
> Hi Tom: Just a note to say thank you. I appreciate your continued
> admonition on towertalk to have a low tri-bander.
>
> I've been inactive for many years and am now shopping for the
> retirement
> qth, where tower(s) and beams will again be growing on my little
> piece of
> ground. Going to land on Marylands Eastern Shore where it is very
> flat and
> never too far from water. As a dx'r and not a contester I have been
> thinking
> that higher is always better, and you guys that contest seriously
> have very
> different needs than I. Well, last night I sat down with YT for
> several
> hours (for the first time I might add) and what a revelation that
> was. YT
> analysis confirms what you have been saying all along! Please keep
> preaching. Some of us are just a bit slow to absorb the data. I'll
> insure
> space for a short tower or short mount on the big one. Downside is
> it also
> showed the deficiencies I am going to encounter with a 75 foot
> height limit.
> Guess we cannot have everything! Thanks again and good dx. 73 bob
> de w9ge
________________________________________________________________
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
|