Antenna/Tower Ordinance

huddlehd at huddlehd at
Fri Oct 13 09:39:42 EDT 1995

This may not be directly a contest reflector subject but we need your 
help. Our local club is working with the city of Fort Walton Beach, 
Florida to develop a new ordinance covering amateur radio antennas and 
towers.  We have a very favorable relationship with the city planning 
and zoning office and believe that we can work together to develop an 
ordinance that will carry us on into the next century.

Our committee is very interested in any ideas and local ordinances 
that you feel are good.  Something that hams can live with for the 
next twenty or so years.  How does your city ordinance cover such 
topics as "good engineering practices" in relationship to tower 
installation?  What about wording covering guyed and unguyed towers?  
Include anything else that we can use.  So if your qth has a good 
ordinance we would very much appreciate your sending us a copy.  We 
will be glad to return the postage that anyone spends sending us a 
copy of a local ordinance.

DISTRIBUTION.  Send me a direct e-mail about ideas and let me know 
that you are sending me a copy of your local ordinance.

tnx & 73,

H.J. "Hud" Huddleston, KF4BU
925 Forest Avenue
Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547

huddlehd at

"An Opal is beautiful as a precious stone but not when a storm."

<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->

      /  /  /
    _/__/__/_    "Hud" Huddleston, KF4BU
    /  /| /       huddlehd at
   /  / |/        Ft. Walton Beach, FL    

>From Lau, Zack,  KH6CP" <zlau at  Fri Oct 13 14:51:00 1995
From: Lau, Zack,  KH6CP" <zlau at (Lau, Zack,  KH6CP)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 09:51:00 EDT
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <307E6E6E at>

Frank, W3LPL wrote:
>A similarly powerful motivator was the band-country boxes used in the
>ARRL DX Competition results, which allowed an operator with a modest
>station to get his results prominently listed in QST!
>Lets face it, contesting is fun (isn't that why we all do it, some after
>30 years or more?)!  Anything the sponsors, such as ARRL and CQ, can do to
>encourage more hams to take the plunge is bound to help.  Space in their
>magazines is best used to promote the contest and document the results 
>than detailing the arcane rules.  Surely serious competitors will not be
>handicapped by not having detailed rules printed in the magazine.

Why shouldn't microwave/millimetric  contesters get  space for the top
single band scores?  I think it takes a lot of work to make a good 47 or 241 

GHz station.  Single band boxes end at 1296 in June and 3456 in January.

Trivia question--when was the contest report  that includes
the first  145 GHz CONTEST contact?

I just submitted a proposal to help fix this problem--by adding
contests for 24 GHz and higher.  Of course, this will need page space
for  the results...  Is this a "dumbing down of QST"?  Why?

 If you see these bands as "old hat" why not share your expertise?
Even a list of active stations would be helpful.

Zack KH6CP/1
(I'll email a copy of my proposal to anyone interested--zlau at

>From Larry Tyree <tree at>  Fri Oct 13 15:20:33 1995
From: Larry Tyree <tree at> (Larry Tyree)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 07:20:33 -0700
Subject: Rules in QST
Message-ID: <199510131420.HAA28163 at>

Well, sure enough, when someone talks about taking our space away...
some of us start trying to take it away from others.  

I can just imagine the discussion on the station-news at

> Did you hear they were thinking of shrinking the station news section
> even more than they already have?
> We have suffered enough.  It is time for someone else to make the 
> sacrafice.  How about those darn contesters?  They don't read the 
> rules from one year to the next, and they are almost always the 
> same from year to year.  In fact, I went back and checked the ARRL
> 160 rules, and they haven't changed in 35 years.
> ... and the annual financial report that's printed with four images to 
> a page... THAT belongs on the League's BBS or Home Page where 
> interested parties can download a life-size version and the rest of us 
> can ignore it.

You might note that the last paragraph was stolen from a recent message
on this reflector...

So guys, I think we need to be more positive.  First off, do we have
facts, or is this just some rumor?  The solution seems to be to try 
and get enough space in tha magazine for everyone (isn't that the best

Finally, think about how absurd it is having the same rules published
over and over.  Maybe replacing them with a brief summary of them
(something sufficient for the average effort or part time effort from
a non contester) and some encouraging words that have more appeal than:

"The thirty-seventh annual ARRL 160 contest will be held on the weekend
of 3-4 December.  There are not rule changes from last year.  Here are
the complete rules:..."

Maybe something more like this would attract more new people:

Have you wanted to try 160 meters?  Have you had problems finding people
to work?  Well, the first weekend in December will be a good time for you
to try out your antenna again.  There will be lots of activity since the
thirty-sixth annual running of the ARRL 160 test will be going on.  

Simply exchange an RST and your STATE.  You might even be able to work
all states during the weekend just like 27 other stations did last 
year.  This is a CW only contest, so you don't need to worry about
waking up your family.

The contest starts at 2200Z on Friday and runs until 1500Z on Sunday.
If you want some log sheets and the complete rules, send an SASE to
ARRL 160 CONTEST here at the ARRL.  You can also find the complete
rules at the ARRL WebService at //http:/

Hope to see you on topband!


There, that takes a lot less space, but would sure do more to attract
new people than the complete rules.  

Yes, the complete rules need to be on the web, and this might actually
make them more accessable than putting them in the magazine.

I hope we can overcome our initial defensive knee jerk reactions and
see if we can come up with creative solutions that both help relieve
the pressure to reduce the space for boring contest announcements
AND increase the appeal of the contests to the non contesters.

Tree N6TR
tree at
Boring, Oregon 97009

"I know what Boring is...  I live there!"

>From Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj at  Fri Oct 13 16:28:15 1995
From: Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj at (Chad Kurszewski)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:28:15 -0500
Subject: Beam Interaction - Update
Message-ID: <9510131028.ZM17311 at WE9V>

Well, there seemed to be enough interest about the follies of adding
a 402CD interlaced between a 3/3 stack on the same tower.  As I previously
reported, there were some bad interactions on the 402cd in the form of
bad SWR when the 402cd was 180 degrees off of the stack, and improved
immensly (SWR) when 90 degrees from the stack.

Thanks to KM9P for the 402CD model, I was able to model this interaction
using AO.

You will be quite surprised as to the results.  Many of you were completely
shocked as to the choice of putting a secondary antenna on the same tower
as the primary antenna and thought the stack performance would be
severely degraded (I did too).

Here are the results.

402CD at 120'
Homebrew 3/3 at 82/164'
Gain in dBd.  TOA=Take off angle

                                 402CD                     Stack
                         SWR   Gain  F/B  TOA       Gain    F/B  TOA
Modeled independantly    1.11  6.35  6.41  16       13.06  14.62  14
402CD 90 deg from stack  1.10  6.33  6.40  16       13.08  14.82  14
402CD 180deg from stack  2.03  7.52  7.24  14       12.56  20.62  14

Check out the gain and F/B improvement on the 402cd at 180deg, along
with the 0.5dB loss in the stack but 6dB F/B improvement.

Some things that don't show up in the numbers:

The stack with the 402cd at 180 deg has a large, broad lobe at 70
deg elevation.  It is 14dB down from the main lobe.  The stack alone
has a narrow lobe at 42 deg, -15dB.

Other than that, there is no degradation of the stack!!!

Not the results that I (or others) expected.  Great news.

Chad Kurszewski, WE9V                   e-mail:  Chad_Kurszewski at
Sultans of Shwing       Loud is Cool....yeah, heh, heh, heh, LOUD IS COOL!!!
The Official Sultans Web Site:

>From Robles Rodriguez, Pablo" <S927153 at  Fri Oct 13 05:38:26 1995
From: Robles Rodriguez, Pablo" <S927153 at (Robles Rodriguez, Pablo)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 12:38:26 +800
Subject: DX-REFLECTOR ??
Message-ID: <17D9AD10A68 at>


                                        73 es GL!

>From six at (Frank E. van Dijk)  Fri Oct 13 18:03:57 1995
From: six at (Frank E. van Dijk) (Frank E. van Dijk)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 18:03:57 +0100
Subject: PACC contest 1996
Message-ID: <199510131703.SAA23701 at>



February 10 and 11, 1996; 1200Z - 1200Z

160, 80, 40, 20, 15 and 10 meters
 SSB QSOs on 160 are not allowed

CW and SSB

Entry classes
single operator; multi operator; SWL 

RS(T)+serial number, start from 001
Dutch stations transmit their Province abbreviation:
GR, FR, DR, OV, GD, UT, NH, ZH, FL, ZL, NB, LB (12)

QSO Points
each QSO with a PA/PB/PI station yields one point
a station may be worked only once per band, regardless
of the mode

1 multiplier per Province, per band. Maximum 6*12=72

Final score
the total of all QSO points on all bands, multiplied by the
total of all multiplier points on all bands (a la CQ WW)

each different Dutch station per band counts for 1 point
complete exchange of both Dutch and foreign station must
be logged

separate sheet per band, submit score calculation
multipliers should appear only when new
please sign log for observation of the contest rules
mail log no later than March 31st, 1996 to:
                            Frank E. van Dijk PA3BFM
                            Middellaan 24
                            3721 PH  Bilthoven
                            Netherlands, Europe

a contest certificate will be awarded to the high scorers in each 
country in each entry class. No fee.
The PACC Award can be obtained for working 100 different PA/PB/PI stations
in the PACC Contest, without submitting QSLs. Send application together with
contest log and USD 5,- fee to contest organizer.
Condensed version: work different Dutch stations on each of the bands 
10-160 meters (No WARC) in CW or SSB. Transmit RS(T) plus serial 
number. Dutch stations transmit their Province abbreviation: GR, FR, DR,
OV, GD, UT, NH, ZH, FL, ZL, NB, LB (total 12) which count as multiplier
per band. Scoring: each different Dutch station per band yields 1 point.
Final score: total band QSO points multiplied by total band multipliers.

>From H. L. Serra" <hlserra at  Wed Oct 11 19:48:16 1995
From: H. L. Serra" <hlserra at (H. L. Serra)
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 11:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: FAA Approval for Tower/Antennas
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9510111119.A2889-0100000 at>

Has anyone had experience with the FAA to obtain approval for a 
contest tower/antenna combination to be erected near an airport?
Please reply directly if you have dealt with FAA. Specific location is 
San Diego, CA, but the FAA district office is located in LA.
73, Larry N6AZE

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list