[TowerTalk] DX86 vs. HDX589

[Dave]

Sorry I pushed your button somewhere along the way.

I define "appears" as just that. They way something looks to me. Beauty in
the eyes of the beholder type of thing. I never made any claims as to the
trueness of my appearance claim, only that I liked the way she looked
captain. You may think the fact that she only has 4 teeth and drools when
she talks is a shortcoming :-)

A level wind is a device that via a guide mechanism, usually linked
mechanically to the drum, provides for even distribution of material on the
drum.

I don't see how remotely operating a remotely operable device invalidates
the warranty. Just what is the difference between me remotely pressing a
button and electronically pressing the remotely located button?

Both towers are advertised as being *remotely* operable. What good is
*remote* operation if I can only *remotely* lower my tower from my shack at
3:00am in the morning by sticking my head out the window with a searchlight
to make sure a cable doesn't snag?

The extra limit switches were there so that there are always limit switches
in the circuit even if one fails.

Obviously, you don't like the idea. I am sorry, but remote operation is what
I must have. If that means that I have to jump through hoops to make it
reliable, then I will, even if it means re-engineering the product. 

David W4DLB

At 08:56 PM 08/06/2000 EDT, K7LXC wrote:
>In a message dated 08/06/2000 4:37:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
>dave@dbtech.net writes:
>
>> >    What does "appears to be a bit more sturdy" mean? Both towers were 
>>  >designed by the same guy - Lou Tristao - so they are slightly different 
>>  >designs. The only way you could tell which one was "sturdier" is to get 
>the 
>>  >engineering calculations for each tower and compare them side-by-side. 
>> Unless 
>>  >you're an engineer, interpreting the calcs might be semi-useful and the 
>>  >differences subtle.
>>  
>>  "Appears" to me means a three cable pull-up system and strong tubing. Of
>>  course this is information from their literature and we all know how much
>>  salt to take along with marketing hype.
>>  
>    Okay, you still haven't cited anything - "appears" is just as ambiguous 
>as it was before. What are the leg material, OD and wall thickness 
>differences that make it "a bit more sturdy"? Specifics only, please. 
>
>>  >    I'm not sure what a 'three cable system' is. I know the US Tower has 
>>  >positive pull-down and I'm not sure about the Tri-Ex. Nonetheless they 
>each 
>>  >have to have the appropriate number of cables to run it up (and down). 
>They 
>>  >probably even use the same cable schemes.
>>  
>>  I know they claim to have a positive pull down, as well as a level-wind for
>>  their hoist drum.
>>  
>    Please let me know what a "level-wind" is. 
>
>>  >>  Regardless of which one I finally choose, the tower
>>  >>  will be purchased with the raising fixture, but without the remote 
>> control.
>>  >>  I see no need to spend a grand on a control box that can be easily
>>  >>  constructed. I also plan to fit the tower with an extra set of limit
>>  >>  switches in series with the provided ones (I want to be able to 
>operate 
>> the
>>  >>  tower automatically during bad weather with some peace of mind).
>>  >
>    ERRRRR! You just validated your factory warranty!
>    
>>  >    I'm not a big fan of remote controlling the raising and lowering of a 
>>  >motorized crank-up. I know personally of several calamities that have 
>>  >resulted from not being able to watch the tower as it was raised or 
>lowered.
>>  
>>  >Extra limit switches won't solve this problem. 
>>  
>>  That's too bad. I won't purchase a system that I can't trust to work as
>>  advertised.
>
>    They're advertised that they will fail during unattended raising or 
>lowering? I'll bet you a nickel that their literature stresses the opposite.
>
>>   The extra limit switches are just for the extra safety margin.
>
>    They'll protect you when the coax gets hung up or an antenna or wire 
>snags on the roof? 
>
>>  So are you saying that motorized towers fail on a too frequent basis or was
>>  there some issue with the respective installations? 
>
>    What I'm saying is that a crank-up is a complicated mechanical device and 
>should only be raised or lowered when the operator is actually observing it. 
>I've seen a number of failures, many caused by their owners, consisting of 
>the coax hanging up, something accidentally left in the tower causing one of 
>the section lifting cables to part or something else getting hung up. 
>
>    What I'm saying is that by following obvious safety procedures and the 
>instructions from the factory you will have a reliable, longterm 
>installation. The opposite is also true. 
>
>Cheers,  Steve   K7LXC
>Tower Tech
>
>


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sir, are you classified as human?
"Ah, negative. I am a meat popsicle"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com