[Towertalk] Re: Prop pitch motor bearings
jsschuster
jsschuster@snet.net
Sun, 12 May 2002 09:39:02 +0000
Try contacting M Square...the antenna company. I noticed in Visalia that they are selling overhauled prop pitch motors and they might be able to help. 73 JACK W1WEF
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-admin@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: Distance to tower (n4kg@juno.com)
> 2. Re: Distance to tower (Bill Hider (N3RR))
> 3. Re: Distance to tower (n4kg@juno.com)
> 4. Re: Seeking input for new antenna. (n4kg@juno.com)
> 5. Re: Distance to tower (n4kg@juno.com)
> 6. Re: Distance to tower (Barry Schieferstein)
> 7. Re: Rotator (Major Ron)
> 8. Re: Building Permit or Not (Bill Coleman)
> 9. Re: Seeking input for new antenna. (Carl Smidt)
> 10. Seeking input for new antenna. (Barockteer@aol.com)
> 11. Re: Building Permit or Not (Fred Hopengarten)
> 12. StepperIR (Gerald Smith)
> 13. C.A.T.S./Rotor Doctor RD1800 (Frank W8H0)
> 14. Re: C.A.T.S./Rotor Doctor RD1800 (Jim White)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> To: TOWERTALK@CONTESTING.COM, ford@cmgate.com
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 04:42:11 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
> From: n4kg@juno.com
>
> Here's my idea for a single 160 ft tower:
>
> First, ROTATE the TOWER.
>
> Second, use fiberglass guy rod at 40, 80, 120, 160 ft.
>
> Antennas:
>
> 160 ft 2L40 plus 80M rotary dipole (at right angles)
>
> 120 ft BIG Tribander or 5 Bander
>
> 80 ft 2L40 (plus dipole for 30, or 2L30)
>
> 40 ft Tribander or 5 Bander
>
> Rationale:
>
> Stacked 2L40's at 160 / 80 ft provides as much gain as a 3L40
> on a 48 ft boom with much smaller booms. 80M dipoles play
> very well at 160 ft.
>
> 120 ft for high bands provides good low angle coverage AND
> the second lobe is placed at the upper end of the range of
> angles by the ionosphere.
>
> 40 ft for high bands is a GREAT Daytime height for the high
> bands and it fills in the NULLS of the higher high band antenna.
>
> A second tower (40 to 60 ft) with another tribander or 5 bander is
> useful.
>
> Above analysis assumes LEVEL Terrain.
>
> Tom N4KG
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2002 "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com> writes:
> > My antenna was destroyed last weekend. Bummer. Oh well, time to
> > rebuild.
> >
> > I'm thinking about 160' of Rohn 45. A 40 - 10 meter yagi will sit
> > at the top.>
> > Here's my problem. The ideal location is in a field on the west end
> > of the
> > property. Feedlines will be > 400' to shack #1 and over 600' to
> > shack 2.
> > Open lines are awfully bulky and would have to be strung over
> > driveways,
> > etc.
> >
> > Is this manageable with coax? Am I looking at preamps and hardline
> > as the
> > only option?
> >
> > I'm looking for ideas.
> >
> > Ford-N0FP
> > ford@cmgate.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Towertalk mailing list
> > Towertalk@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> From: "Bill Hider \(N3RR\)" <n3rr@erols.com>
> To: <TOWERTALK@contesting.com>, <ford@cmgate.com>, <n4kg@juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 12:46:29 -0400
>
> Recognizing this is the "TOWER" reflector, nevertheless, the purpose/use of
> the antenna system on the tower
> must be paramount in importance, and in fact, determining the design.
>
> For single op, all-band contesters, N4KG's offering is not optimal. Having
> all antennas rotate together
> would slow-down a single-op, all-band contester.
>
> For single-band contests, this rotating tower works well.
>
> Food for thought.
>
> Bill, N3RR
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <n4kg@juno.com>
> To: <TOWERTALK@contesting.com>; <ford@cmgate.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 6:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
>
> > Here's my idea for a single 160 ft tower:
> >
> > First, ROTATE the TOWER.
> >
> > Second, use fiberglass guy rod at 40, 80, 120, 160 ft.
> >
> > Antennas:
> >
> > 160 ft 2L40 plus 80M rotary dipole (at right angles)
> >
> > 120 ft BIG Tribander or 5 Bander
> >
> > 80 ft 2L40 (plus dipole for 30, or 2L30)
> >
> > 40 ft Tribander or 5 Bander
> >
> > Rationale:
> >
> > Stacked 2L40's at 160 / 80 ft provides as much gain as a 3L40
> > on a 48 ft boom with much smaller booms. 80M dipoles play
> > very well at 160 ft.
> >
> > 120 ft for high bands provides good low angle coverage AND
> > the second lobe is placed at the upper end of the range of
> > angles by the ionosphere.
> >
> > 40 ft for high bands is a GREAT Daytime height for the high
> > bands and it fills in the NULLS of the higher high band antenna.
> >
> > A second tower (40 to 60 ft) with another tribander or 5 bander is
> > useful.
> >
> > Above analysis assumes LEVEL Terrain.
> >
> > Tom N4KG
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 9 May 2002 "Ford Peterson" <ford@cmgate.com> writes:
> > > My antenna was destroyed last weekend. Bummer. Oh well, time to
> > > rebuild.
> > >
> > > I'm thinking about 160' of Rohn 45. A 40 - 10 meter yagi will sit
> > > at the top.>
> > > Here's my problem. The ideal location is in a field on the west end
> > > of the
> > > property. Feedlines will be > 400' to shack #1 and over 600' to
> > > shack 2.
> > > Open lines are awfully bulky and would have to be strung over
> > > driveways,
> > > etc.
> > >
> > > Is this manageable with coax? Am I looking at preamps and hardline
> > > as the
> > > only option?
> > >
> > > I'm looking for ideas.
> > >
> > > Ford-N0FP
> > > ford@cmgate.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Towertalk mailing list
> > > Towertalk@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Towertalk mailing list
> > Towertalk@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #####
> #####
> #####
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> To: TOWERTALK@CONTESTING.COM
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:01:16 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
> From: n4kg@juno.com
>
> I use 3/4 inch 75 ohm CATV hardline for all my runs over 200 ft.
> Loss is ~0.3+ dB / 100 ft at 28 MHz which comes to ~2 dB
> for 600 ft on 10M, about the same as 200 ft of RG213 !
> My most RELIABLE connections have been simple splices,
> center conductor soldered to center conductor and flexible
> coax braid hose clamped to the jacket of the hardline, using
> a ground lug soldered to the braid. Stick the end UP and put
> a plastic bottle over it, bottom open, for WX protection. Black
> tape protectes the plastic bottle from UV deterioration.
>
> On 10M, you need to match each end to avoid large impedance
> transformations. For the the lower bands, I simply make the lines
> a multiple of 1/2 WL.
>
> Tom N4KG
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> To: TOWERTALK@CONTESTING.COM, cfwb@cox.net
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 10:53:53 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Seeking input for new antenna.
> From: n4kg@juno.com
>
> Yes, the XR5 is 2L per band. Actually a very good simple design.
> You can line reflectors up by band with little destructive interaction.
> the problem is with directors. That's where traps or close spaced
> sleeved elements come into play.
>
> The XR7 is a good 18 ft boom design with full size reflectors for
> 15 and 20 (10M not needed due to directivity of the LP DE Cell).
> The trapped director gets away from interaction problems. The
> 28 ft boom X9 had less than 1 dB more gain so doesn't seem worth
> the hastle. Another featureof the X7 is it's robust construction.
> Nice cost effective antenna. Power should not be an issue with
> the DE but as you mentioned, but the balun may be a concern.
> Ask CC or see if someone is interested in performing a destructive
> test :-).
>
> I expect the XR5 is comparable to a good LP on the 5 high bands.
> LP's are another good alternative. Probably takes a longer boom
> to realize better gain and of course that means higher windload.
>
> The SteppIR-3 looks very interesting. The boom is a little short
> on 20M (1 dB down from a 24 ft boom) but a good compromise
> for the 5 bands and of course the parasitics can be optimized
> for each band. Should be a solid performer. The jury is out
> on durability. Probably the most bang for windload.
>
> The 5 Band Quads seem to be pretty good, especially if you
> use separate feedlines. See W4RNL's website for good designs.
> This may be the most cost effective solution. Make sure you
> use strong spreaders that can handle ICE loading. (There
> goes the cost :-)
>
> ALL good choices. It comes down to personal preferences
> and secondary tradeoffs (price, windload, construction, etc.)
>
> Let us know what you decide.
>
> 73 / GL, Tom N4KG
>
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 11:32:34 -0400 "Carl -K8AV" <cfwb@cox.net> writes:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Thank you for your input. It appears in reading the
> > spec's for
> > the XR-5, that it has 10 elements but only operates with "2 full
> > size for each
> > band". If this is true it concerns me. My friend Tedd, KB8NW, has
> > the X7 that
> > I helped put up about a year ago. He loves it however he has made
> > many
> > contacts on 12/17 but is afraid to use other than 100 watts as the
> > SWR is a
> > little high. Maybe it's a balun concern...
> >
> > I have had many good reports on the 3 el SteppIR. I guess with the
> > 3
> > elements, adjustable, it does a great job on the 12/17 bands.
> > Yesterday I
> > went to a friends house that has one. I was impressed by the
> > quality of how
> > the control box was made. He loves his! I'm concerned about "down
> > the road"
> > problems with all the electronics and moving parts...
> >
> > Thanks again for your input Tom. Have a good weekend & 73,
> > Carl
> > ************************************************
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <n4kg@juno.com>
> > To: <cfwb@cox.net>
> > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 6:07 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Seeking input for new antenna.
> >
> >
> > > I believe all 5 of the listed antennas to be of good design.
> > > The XR5 and SteppIR-3 should have more gain on 12 /17.
> > > Although CC does not advertise the X7 as a WARC antenna,
> > > I know people who use it there with good results. Makes
> > > sense, since the DE is a 4 element Log Cell. You might
> > > need a tuner on the WARC bands. I would recommend
> > > the C3E over the C3 (additional 10M reflector).
> > >
> > > Tom N4KG
> > >
> > > On Thu, 9 May 2002 "Carl -K8AV" <cfwb@cox.net> writes:
> > >
> > > > So I have been looking at:
> > > >
> > > > Force 12 XR-5
> > > >
> > > > Force 12 C-3
> > > >
> > > > Force 12 C-19XR
> > > >
> > > > Cushcraft X7
> > > >
> > > > Fluidmotion SteppIR 3 element yagi (I'm thinking this might do
> > > > well!)
> > > >
> > > > Any input appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance for your time and 73,
> > > > Carl -K8AV-
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> > > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> > > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
>
> > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
> >
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> To: TOWERTALK@CONTESTING.COM
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:14:03 -0600
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
> From: n4kg@juno.com
>
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 "Bill Hider \(N3RR\)" <n3rr@erols.com> writes:
>
> > For single op, all-band contesters, N4KG's (single 160 ft tower)
> > offering is not optimal. Having all antennas rotate together
> > would slow-down a single-op, all-band contester.
> >
>
> My offering was in response to the guy who expressed interest in
> a SINGLE 160 ft Tower. I contend that it is a VERY EFFECTIVE
> solution for DXing. More antennas on separate towers is very
> useful for contesting as I noted in my original post. I have 7 towers
> and 20 antennas for contesting. This allows me to have an antenna
> on every continent for rapid direction change through antenna switching.
>
> Tom N4KG
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> From: "Barry Schieferstein" <BarryS@core.com>
> To: <TOWERTALK@contesting.com>, <n4kg@juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Distance to tower
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:34:13 -0400
>
> I have 7 towers
> >and 20 antennas for contesting. This allows me to have an antenna
> >on every continent for rapid direction change through antenna switching.
> >
> >Tom N4KG
> >
>
> Can I come play! Hi Hi
>
> Barry KW8W
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: "Major Ron" <majrabsr@rconnect.com>
> To: "Warren McKenzie" <w_mckenzie@msn.com>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Rotator
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 17:58:54 -0000
>
> Hi Warren,
>
> If you are interested, I set up a Microsoft Excel spread-sheet to figure the
> 'K-factor' for the Yaesu 800 & 1000 rotators. Send me an E-mail, if
> interested, and I'll send it to you as an attachment. It's pretty basic, but
> sure helps to stay within the allowable limits.
>
> 73,
> Ron, KA9ALC
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Warren McKenzie" <w_mckenzie@msn.com>
> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: May 09, 2002 23:31
> Subject: [Towertalk] Rotator
>
> > It looks like Hy-Gain is having some supply problems as they are being
> > absorbed so I am looking at alternative rotators. The Yaesu G-1000 DXA
> > has been suggested. Does anyone have experience with this rotator. Any
> > comments and advice would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Warren
> > KD7QGA
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/alternative
> > text/plain (text body -- kept)
> > text/html
> > ---
> > _______________________________________________
> > Towertalk mailing list
> > Towertalk@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Building Permit or Not
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 14:39:37 -0400
> From: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
> To: "Alan KI7WO" <ki7wo@juno.com>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
>
> On 5/7/02 16:55, Alan KI7WO at ki7wo@juno.com wrote:
>
> >Do I ask for a Building Permit from the City (big hassle with Special Use
> >permit and Zoning Variance)?? or just put it up and wait to see who
> >screams first.
>
> Although it often is the common rule that it is easier to ask for
> forgiveness than permission, here are a few things to consider.
>
> If you don't properly document your structure with the local government,
> it would make a very simple court case to get you to take it down -- if
> your neighbors were sufficiently annoyed.
>
> Also, how will your home-owners insurance react to the presense of the
> structure. Not having proper governmental documentation allows them an
> out as well -- or they might be able to cancel your insurance outright,
> if a large claim arose from damage due to your tower.
>
> >Have already talked to all the neighbors within 200 feet of the property
> >lines and they all say they have no problem with the idea. Just can't
> >decide if it is worth all the paper work.
>
> Get it in writing.
>
> >Anyone with thoughts on the subject. Missouri is one of those States
> >that has not signed off yet on the PRB-1.
>
> My advice is to see what is actually required. In my county, only a
> simple permit and two inspections were required for towers less than 50
> feet. An annoyance, but not a big deal.
>
> Check with your insurance agent, too. You might want to be round-about on
> the details. Ask about putting another structure on your lot, and what
> would happen if it damaged the house.
>
> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
> Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
> -- Wilbur Wright, 1901
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> From: "Carl Smidt" <smidtca@sprint.ca>
> To: <K7LXC@aol.com>, <cfwb@cox.net>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Seeking input for new antenna.
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:59:48 -0300
>
> When are you going to test the SteppIR Steve?
>
> 73, Carl VE9OV
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <K7LXC@aol.com>
> To: <cfwb@cox.net>; <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 10:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Seeking input for new antenna.
>
> > In a message dated 5/9/02 6:41:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, cfwb@cox.net
> > writes:
> >
> > > So I have been looking at:
> > >
> > > Force 12 XR-5
> > >
> > > Force 12 C-3
> > >
> > > Force 12 C-19XR
> > >
> > > Cushcraft X7
> > >
> > > Fluidmotion SteppIR 3 element yagi (I'm thinking this might do well!)
> > >
> > > Any input appreciated.
> >
> > A couple of those antennas or their cousins were evaluated in our
> > on-the-air tribander comparison test, available from <A
> > HREF="http://www.championradio.com">www.championradio.com</A>
> >
> > You not only get the results but also the WHOLE story including the
> > testing protocol. It's a pretty good read that'll give you a good
> perspective
> > of tribander performance. You'll see that you can use the F12 net gain
> > figures for comparison purposes unlike other manufacturers.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steve K7LXC
> > Champion Radio Products
> > _______________________________________________
> > Towertalk mailing list
> > Towertalk@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> >
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:16:38 -0400
> From: Barockteer@aol.com
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [Towertalk] Seeking input for new antenna.
>
> Let's not forget the KT-34 and KT36XA, now resurrected by M2.
>
> ..or perhaps we should leave this choice as a well-kept secret!
>
> I've had a KT36XA up for a year now; the mechanical issues are completely solved compared to the KLM design.
>
> Performance is excellent; the 'Tribander Report' notwithstanding (I think they had one with the bad traps on 15).
>
> If the SteppIR can hold up mechanically, it's a really cool concept. I wonder if they're working on a 4-element version? I bet it would be insensitive to rain static, as the elements are inside the fiberglass tubing...
>
> 73,
>
> Tony, K1KP
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:02:01 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] Building Permit or Not
> From: Fred Hopengarten <k1vr@juno.com>
>
> > >Anyone with thoughts on the subject. Missouri is one of those States
> > >that has not signed off yet on the PRB-1.
>
> K1VR: Wrong. Missouri is still, when last I looked, in the Union. PRB-1
> has been incorporated into Federal law, which is the supreme law of the
> land. See 47 CFR 97.15(b).
>
> What you meant by this casual statement was that MO has not yet passed
> its own version of PRB-1. This does not, however, mean that 47 CFR
> 97.15(b) does not apply in MO. Or, put affirmatively, 47 CFR 97.15(b)
> applies in MO.
>
> Fred Hopengarten K1VR hopengarten@post.harvard.edu
> Six Willarch Road * Lincoln, MA 01773-5105
> 781/259-0088 *eFax 419/858-2421
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 17:52:12 -0400
> From: Gerald Smith <w6ter@worldnet.att.net>
> Reply-To: w6ter@worldnet.att.net
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [Towertalk] StepperIR
>
> I had the opportunity to work with Danny, K7SS, last evening. Although
> more work needs to be done, here are some of the observations.
>
> 1) The front to side is very light
> 2) Reversing the antenna (to the 180 position) is dramatically different
> than rotating the antenna 180 degrees
>
> Gerry, W6TER
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 20:55:58 -0400
> To: TowerTalk <TowerTalk@contesting.com>
> From: Frank W8H0 <fnorton@chartermi.net>
> Subject: [Towertalk] C.A.T.S./Rotor Doctor RD1800
>
> Hello All,
>
> I just received my rotator that I ordered back in January. I can't
> overstate how it was worth the wait! Craig seems to have designed a real
> gem here. It is extreme.y precise in both its start and stop of rotation.
>
> I have no business relationship with C.A.T,S,/RotorDoctor other than that
> of a satisfied customer for the past few years. I started by having
> repairs done, then by purchasing a rebuilt Ham IV with a Digital Control,
> and a Ham IV analog that had been rebuilt. All of these perform
> magnificently. That is why when I heard about the RD-1800 and it's
> capabilities....I was certain it would be the rotator to turn my stack of
> Optibeam OB 16-3, and HyGain 40 meter 2 element beam.
>
> If you are considering turning a fairly heavy load of antennas, and want to
> do so with precision....please take a look at the RD-1800 rotator. I
> think you will be quite satisfied.
>
> Here is the URL<http://www.rotordoc.com> for the rotator. And here is the
> page for the Optibeam in this country
> <http://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/optibeammain.htm#top%20of%20page>
>
> Thanks for your time. Good luck with your tower projects this spring!
>
> 73 de Frank W8HO
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> From: "Jim White" <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com>
> To: "TowerTalk" <TowerTalk@contesting.com>,
> "Frank W8H0" <fnorton@chartermi.net>
> Subject: Re: [Towertalk] C.A.T.S./Rotor Doctor RD1800
> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 22:43:37 -0400
>
> Thanks Frank - bee ndieing to hear more about this one - I also have no
> interest in the Rotor Doctor other than being a very satisfied customer for
> years and years....next time I need a big one I think I know what I am going
> to opt for - anyone wanna buy a Tailtwister?
>
> K4OJ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank W8H0" <fnorton@chartermi.net>
> To: "TowerTalk" <TowerTalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:55 PM
> Subject: [Towertalk] C.A.T.S./Rotor Doctor RD1800
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I just received my rotator that I ordered back in January. I can't
> > overstate how it was worth the wait! Craig seems to have designed a real
> > gem here. It is extreme.y precise in both its start and stop of rotation.
> >
> > I have no business relationship with C.A.T,S,/RotorDoctor other than that
> > of a satisfied customer for the past few years. I started by having
> > repairs done, then by purchasing a rebuilt Ham IV with a Digital Control,
> > and a Ham IV analog that had been rebuilt. All of these perform
> > magnificently. That is why when I heard about the RD-1800 and it's
> > capabilities....I was certain it would be the rotator to turn my stack of
> > Optibeam OB 16-3, and HyGain 40 meter 2 element beam.
> >
> > If you are considering turning a fairly heavy load of antennas, and want
> to
> > do so with precision....please take a look at the RD-1800 rotator. I
> > think you will be quite satisfied.
> >
> > Here is the URL<http://www.rotordoc.com> for the rotator. And here is the
> > page for the Optibeam in this country
> > <http://www.arraysolutions.com/Products/optibeammain.htm#top%20of%20page>
> >
> > Thanks for your time. Good luck with your tower projects this spring!
> >
> > 73 de Frank W8HO
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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