[TowerTalk] Rohn 25

[Malcolm Ringel]

Al: Not an expert by any means, but, having had (and still have one) a 
couple of crank-up tilt-overs (and never a problem ...even though never 
cranked down for storms, etc) I think it has , at least in large part, to do 
with weight distribution. The nesting aspect of the sections calls for 
largest at the base and smaller as you ascend...also, there is usually a 
several foot overlap at the section junctions, making for greater strength 
at those points. Finally, I believe that c-u/t-o towers usually have more 
concrete in their larger base cavities.
I await the sting of the arrows of those who actually can explain it....H I
73
Malcolm Ringel
ARS K3KZ
St. Michaels, MD
_______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Al Williams" <alwilliams at olywa.net>
To: "towertalk" <towertalk at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn 25


>
>
>> I had 70' of Rohn 45 up, unguyed, at one time, and it was scary.  I
> got it
>> guyed right away.  Rohn 25 would be scarier.  73 - Rich, KE3Q
>>
> What in the design and construction of crankup towers allows them to be
> free standing
> whereas the others requiring guying?   Intuitively, it would seem that
> just the opposite
> would be true;  or could be made true with a change small change in the
> design?
>
> k7puc
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless 
> Weather Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with 
> any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>