Guys on self-supporting towers

[Bob Morris K2RK]

Paul Beckmann wrote:
> 
> Steve raised an interesting question about it being BAD to guy self-supporting
> towers. Consider this, however: is it not true that Rohn 25/45/55 tower
> sections can be used both in self-supporting (as I am planning) or in guyed
> configurations?? This seems to be NOT a bad thing. But.... the foundations
> are different and the wind area capacities are different...
> 
>   Another thing: I heard that Universal (aluminum, high flex structures)
> were never supposed to be guyed.
> 
>   I know nothing about crank-ups (and maybe nothing about the subjects
> mentioned above!)
> 
>   Merry Christmas to all!
> 
> --Paul Beckmann wa0rse@amsat.org
> 
> --
> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems:                 K7LXC@contesting.com
> Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P

Remember seeing a chart an old Rohn book, giving specs on self-support
for 25/45/55, but can't find anything in semi-current ones. ???
My original post was to start the discussion, hoping for all of us to
hear from an expert. My guess is to put'm up the way they were designed.
If it's free-standing, it's designed to flex and put the stress and
movement different from a guyed system....

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 K7LXC@contesting.com
Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P