I have received a good many replies to my original Question regarding TX-438
Yaesu800s .It is a used tower.I think I could get away with it but I would be
pushing the envelope.Thanks to all who replied Martin N1KGP
towertalk-request@contesting.com wrote: Send TowerTalk mailing list
submissions to
towertalk@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
towertalk-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
towertalk-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TowerTalk digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Insulator/RTV (Roger (K8RI))
2. Ask the What? (Doug Renwick)
3. Re: Ask the experts - rooftop installs and more
(Cedrick "Fred" Johnson - WT2P)
4. Re: Ask the What? (Jim Brown)
5. US Towers TX472 question (Dale LaFrance)
6. Restoring a tristao cz454 tower (hcawthra@sbcglobal.net)
7. Re: Ask the What? (Tom Osborne)
8. Rooftop antennas (Barry Kirkwood)
9. Re: Ask the What? (wa5zup)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 23:34:59 -0400
From: "Roger (K8RI)"
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Insulator/RTV
To: "Blake M" ,
Message-ID: <002901c7c1da$261fd480$6400a8c0@shop32>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> I've found that most RTV's peel off easily because the acetic acid has
> corroded whatever it's in contact with.
Not all RTVs use acetic acid. Silastic Brand RTV (TM) has both the regular
and elecronic grades. In addition they also have different grades of
adhesive (which definately do not pull off easily)
>
> Look for a "sensor safe" type, like Permatex Ultrablack 598B.
>
Be *very* careful with "black" RTVs. Some use carbon black for pigment and
are not something you want in contact with conductors where you have RF
and/or high voltage.
Roger (K8RI)
> http://tinyurl.com/gbhzc
>
> No affiliation....
>
> 73,
> Blake N4GI
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Howard W3CQH
>
> Al,
>
> You might want to consider using 1 of the GE RTV products to reseal the
> unit. Most of the RTV's will peel off very easily after scoring it with a
> sharp object, i.e.: knife blade, etc.
>
> Check which of the products likes the environment.
>
> My $0.02 - 73's Howard W3CQH
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:54:25 -0600
From: Doug Renwick
Subject: [TowerTalk] Ask the What?
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Cc: w1ksz@earthlink.net, 'Jim Brown'
Message-ID: <000001c7c1dc$d9772ae0$ec6da58e@doug4>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
TT ADMIN
PS - What's the old saying? Better to be a fool in silence than open
your
mouth and let everyone know that you are?
Jim Brown you owe all an apology for your rant! Arrogant, condescending
remarks do not contribute anything positive to this list. You have
displayed your ignorance. You base some of your statements on a single
test ... you should know better. Test results have to be reproducible.
That is the tests need to be repeated by another group of qualified
testers. If the second set of tests agrees with the first then there is
a high probability that the results are close to the true unknown value.
Otherwise to me the first test is just an indication, not an absolute,
and nothing more.
Steve and Ward did a lot of work ... I don't sense anyone saying
otherwise. Try to remember that we are human and ALL humans can make
mistakes and tests can be wrong. Test results have to be reproducible.
What you have overlooked is that Dick is satisfied with his Mosley ...
it works well for him. So what is YOUR problem with Dick's
satisfaction?
Doug/VA5DX
This "Mosley Bashing" has finally hit my button !!
I have a PRO-57A and am very satisfied with it. It
is my understanding that subsequent models were
"improved". I have not seen any published data from
verifiable sources except those peddling their
"comparisons" which I don't intend to pay for.
Not every ham has the real estate to put up Mono-
Banders on Sky-Needles, so, as it is in life, one
must make compromises. But I cannot accept that the
PRO-57A is that bad, not without proof.
73, Dick, W1KSZ
And YOU have hit mine!!!
Do you have a clue about how much work it takes to obtain ACCURATE
data on the performance of an antenna? To measure the gain, you
must build the antenna, get it up in the air on a substantial
tower and rotor in some test range where there is nothing to
seriously distort the data, make sure that it is properly tuned,
drive it with a transmitter, and MEASURE the field strength at
some distance that is representative of its far field pattern. To
measure the pattern, you must repeat those measurements every 5-10
degrees. 4-5 guys could easily work a full day to do that if the
transmitting and receiving towers were already there and nothing
went wrong. It could easily take twice that time if Mr Murphy came
to call.
To measure another antenna, you must take the first one down, put
the new one up, and repeat that process. And, of course, you must
have purchased or borrowed the antenna in the first place. And
even if it was borrowed or donated, you still must spend the time
and money to unpack, handle, repack, and return it.
Those "peddling their comparisons" have HUNDREDS of man hours and
a significant dollar investment in those measurements, and YOU are
either too stupid or too cheap to contribute to their work. You
clearly don't deserve to benefit from it.
73,
Jim Brown K9YC
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/891 - Release Date:
08/07/2007 6:32 PM
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:00:19 -0400
From: "Cedrick \"Fred\" Johnson - WT2P"
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ask the experts - rooftop installs and more
To: "towertalk@contesting.com"
Message-ID: <4691B2D3.202@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
thank you.. I had forgotten about Glen Martin... this would be perfect!
even have the rt-8900 non penetrating flat roof base.... that will win
points with my landlord
73,
wt2p
Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote:
> Note that Glen Martin has rooftop towers, and a nonpenetrating mount.
>
> http://www.glenmartin.com/catalog/page14.html
> http://www.glenmartin.com/catalog/page155.html
>
> A Steppir on one of those on a reasaonably tall building would work
> pretty well.
>
> The ground plane for a vertical would be a fair amount of hassle on
> top of a building, I think
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:10:40 -0700
From: "Jim Brown"
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ask the What?
To: "towertalk@contesting.com"
Message-ID: <20070709041044.58F0557CC2@gw1.nlenet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:54:25 -0600, Doug Renwick wrote:
>Jim Brown you owe all an apology for your rant!
I stand by my post. Anyone who doesn't like what I write is
welcome to delete it. I am one of those who has done a lot of work
(years worth), and shared it. I've also published my test setup in
detail, so that anyone who wished to confirm it can do so. I know
what real research is. I haven't seen the work that Steve and his
collaborators have done, but I suspect it's pretty good, and I
suspect that it is documented. I don't use beam antennas, so the
topic is not of direct interest to me. But if it was, and if
someone else did serious measurements and published them, I'd buy
and study them all.
I don't owe anyone an apology. Cheap is cheap. Head in sand is
head in sand. I don't support "bashing" of one product over
another without technical backup, nor do I support mindless
defense of a product solely on the basis that a person made the
decision to buy it.
I finished my EE in 1964. I've been studying something nearly
every day since. Some of it in EE, some of it in very different
fields. When you stop, it's time for someone to throw dirt on you.
FWIW -- in the past four hours, I've received a half dozen emails
appreciating my comments from others who I know to be actively
doing real research.
73,
Jim Brown K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 04:12:02 +0000
From: "Dale LaFrance"
Subject: [TowerTalk] US Towers TX472 question
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hello all, I would like to know what would be a good offer to make on an
excellent condition US Towers TX472 Self-Supporting tower with with
tilt-over fixture and 4 Coaxal stand-off arms. This tower is up now, but
nested, and looks in new (excellent) condition, has been up for less than
five years. I would be doing all the work on taking the tower down and just
wanted to get an idea of what I should offer for the tower. Thanks
_________________________________________________________________
http://liveearth.msn.com
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 21:18:47 -0700
From:
Subject: [TowerTalk] Restoring a tristao cz454 tower
To:
Message-ID: <20070709042031.A938A31A193@dayton.contesting.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello, Been following the info about the cz454, I have one and pulled out my
instruction/manual. The cz454 and the cz454fs [free standing ] are the same
tower with different bases. CZ454 2'6"x2'6"x2' light wt one piece mounting
plate using 3-8 bolts in the concrete., also house bracket or guyed at the
top of first section. The free standing base is 3' x 3' x 5'6" using 1" x
36" bolts. I could fax a copy of this info to who ever needs it. I built a
base like US Towers use. Howard KA6IOB
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:26:33 -0700
From: "Tom Osborne"
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ask the What?
To: "Towertalk"
Message-ID: <003001c7c1e1$5564a4d0$eec8fea9@Tom>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
reply-type=original
Anyone remember what the original question was in this thread?
Tom W7WHY
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 09:58:12 +0000
From: "Barry Kirkwood"
Subject: [TowerTalk] Rooftop antennas
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<6af59d090707090258w58802b7ap7195014b543498e0@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Have no experience with high rooftop antenna mounting, but someone on the
reflector might kindly do a little terrain modelling for you.
My hunch is that a short mast on the roof supporting a beam would do the
trick, especially if close to the parapet in the most favoured direction.
For the lower bands, indeed all bands, I would first try a horizontal
loop around the perimeter of the roof. Since interference could be a
problem, would try feeding with binocular coax. With a simple balun the
built in antenna tuner in most transceivers should do the trick, typically
such loops have moderate feed impedances.
cheers and 73
Baz ZL1DD
--
Barry Kirkwood ZL1DD
barrykirkwood@gmail.com
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 06:16:15 -0600
From: "wa5zup"
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ask the What?
To: "'Towertalk'"
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Darn good question!
First time tower erector. I have a TX-438 crank up with a Yaesu G-800S
rotor. I would like to put a Mosley Pro 67-C Any suggestions Would be
greatly appreciated.
You think he got the answer he was looking for!!
He did not say if this was new stuff or used. Which might have made a
difference.
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom Osborne
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 10:27 PM
To: Towertalk
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Ask the What?
Anyone remember what the original question was in this thread?
Tom W7WHY
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
End of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 55, Issue 50
*****************************************
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|