[TowerTalk] UST et al
WarrenWolff at aol.com
WarrenWolff at aol.com
Tue Jun 6 12:02:21 EDT 2006
In a message dated 6/6/2006 8:02:23 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
towertalk-request at contesting.com writes:
Send TowerTalk mailing list submissions to
towertalk at 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 at contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
towertalk-owner at 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: Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US Tower
(K7LXC at aol.com)
2. MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi (Jim Idelson)
3. Re: Action against US Tower? (Jack - K4WSB)
4. Re: Action against US Tower? (Blake Bowers)
5. Re: Action against US Tower? (Richard M. Gillingham)
6. Re: Action against US Tower? (Bill)
7. Tower restring (HFDXJUNKIE at aol.com)
8. Re: Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US Tower
(Julio Peralta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:16:57 EDT
From: K7LXC at aol.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower
To: towertalk at contesting.com, DrD at 2020.com
Message-ID: <4a9.1496b1e.31b6da49 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 6/5/2006 9:02:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
towertalk-request at contesting.com writes:
> I just purchased and have brought home US Tower, model HDX-572MDPL, 72'
Heavy
Duty tower from the estate of a SK.
> It has a motor drive whose design includes a postive pulldown feature.
> The tower contains 4 sections, was installed in 1999 and has had little
use.
> Where I need help:
> US Tower recommends replacing the cable every 2-3 years, which may be an
overkill but is definitely erring on the side of safety. Since my tower is
7
years old I'd like to start out with fresh cabling.
The UST recommendation is known as a "weasel clause"; that is, if
something happens to your tower and you hadn't changed the cables, they can
weasel
out of any liability. Tower manufacturers are insurance-driven enterprises
so
it's no surprise they are reluctant to provide any helpful information.
The other gotcha is that there isn't anyone around who can do the cable
change anyway. I spent a couple of days at the factory to learn how to do
it
and what I found out is that it's an involved and semi-complicated
endeavor.
It's not something I would try myself.
I'll bet you a nickel that you don't have to do anything other than lube
the cables and you'll be good to go. The actual circumstances that would
require cable replacement are: 1) Excessive broken strands. Industry
standards
allow you to have six broken strands before replacement is necessary. 2)
Excessive rust - not surface rust but real cancerous into the strands rust.
3)
Damaged cable. This would be kinks or flat spots in the cable. I doubt that
your
cables meet any of the above criteria.
OTOH you should lubricate the cables annually at a minimum. Champion Radio
Products sells PreLube 6 which is recommended by the wire rope
manufacturers.
You should exercise the tower a couple of times a month by running it up
and down. You should also park it at different heights rather than just at
the limit switches all the time. The cables can take a permanent set by
sitting on the pulleys at the same spot for years. By doing these 3 things,
you
will prolong the service life of your cables.
BTW I have never personally seen a ham tower that the cables were so bad
that they had to be replaced. Some were pretty grungy but didn't meet the
aforementioned criteria.
Lube it and enjoy it and don't worry about replacing the cables.
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
TOWER TECH -
Professional tower services for hams
Cell: 206-890-4188
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:20:38 -0400
From: Jim Idelson <k1ir at designet.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi
To: TowerTalk Post <towertalk at contesting.com>
Cc: Jim Brown <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>
Message-ID: <QldQSjFCTSY/TiRWLiogMjM3MTg0Nzcz at DESIGNET-M200>
Content-Type: text/plain
Hi Jim,
If you want to do this the brute force way, choose Option A. For the easy
way, skip immediately to Option B!
Option A: I suggest you run some numbers to see if what you are trying to do
is realistic. Are there any off-periods for the LP station? Put up an omni
antenna and measure the difference in signal strengths of the two stations.
This difference plus 2-3db is your target. In order to get acceptable
reception of the remote station, you will need to use antenna patterns, and nulling
strategies to get its strength just a few db better than the LP station. For
many receivers, capture will occur with as little as a couple of db difference.
Option B: http://www.kcsm.org/fm_listen.html
Good luck!
Jim
[TowerTalk] MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi
from [Jim Brown] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: "Tower Talk List" <towertalk at contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] MATV-Quality FM Broadcast Yagi
From: "Jim Brown" <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 18:06:11 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk at contesting.com>
I have a tough reception condition at my new QTH -- a LPFM is 1.5
miles away and on the same channel as San Francisco's great jazz
station (KCSM). Luckily they are about 160 degrees away in azimuth,
so I may have a chance if it throw a serious antenna at it (and maybe
even a cancelling antenna to null the LPFM. I'm having a hard time
finding good choices though -- the two best bets seem to be a 10
element Winegard and a 13-element model (12 ft boom) from Antenna
Performance Specialties. Both cover the entire FM band, but I care
only about the bottom 4 MHz, so I'd gladly buy a narrow band antenna
that is tweaked for a bit more gain and F/B. And F/B is far more
important than an extra few dB of gain.
Any ideas? Other options? Is there an MATV product that might be
narrow band? Has anyone used the APS product or know anything about
them?
Please email me off list, since this is a bit off topic.
Thanks,
Jim Brown K9YC
Jim Idelson K1IR
email k1ir at designet.com
web http://www.k1ir.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 09:33:06 -0400
From: Jack - K4WSB <K4WSB at arrl.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
To: TOWERTALK at contesting.com
Message-ID:
<5.1.0.14.2.20060606092156.035269e0 at ipostoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
If a company offers a product without documentation and you decide to buy
it...
how can they be liable for an action you took?
Actually as I think about it...in today's society one is not responsible
for one's actions... it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.
At 08:12 AM 6/6/2006 -0500, Blake Bowers wrote:
>What specific documentation are you looking for, other
>than the PE drawings they have?
>
>Of course, expect their pricing to go up as the amount
>of documentation they produce go up.
>
>Have you considered Rohn?
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Rick Tavan N6XI" <rtavan at gmail.com>
>To: <towertalk at contesting.com>
>Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:49 PM
>Subject: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
>
>
> > Has anyone considered taking legal action to force US Tower to document
> > their products? Their attitude on documentation is despicable.
Jack Hartley
K4WSB
ARRL - QCWA - OOTC
DXCC Honor Roll
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 08:36:21 -0500
From: "Blake Bowers" <bbowers at townsqr.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
To: "Jack - K4WSB" <K4WSB at arrl.net>
Cc: TOWERTALK at contesting.com
Message-ID: <01fa01c6896e$33a4e410$0201a8c0 at blake>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Pretty much my thoughts. You know what you
are buying. If you want that documentation, then
buy a product that has that!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack - K4WSB" <K4WSB at arrl.net>
To: <TOWERTALK at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
> If a company offers a product without documentation and you decide to buy
> it...
> how can they be liable for an action you took?
> Actually as I think about it...in today's society one is not responsible
> for one's actions... it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.
>
>
>
> At 08:12 AM 6/6/2006 -0500, Blake Bowers wrote:
>>What specific documentation are you looking for, other
>>than the PE drawings they have?
>>
>>Of course, expect their pricing to go up as the amount
>>of documentation they produce go up.
>>
>>Have you considered Rohn?
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 09:38:11 -0400
From: "Richard M. Gillingham" <rmoodyg at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
To: <TOWERTALK at contesting.com>, "Jack - K4WSB" <K4WSB at arrl.net>
Message-ID: <000b01c6896e$74b143e0$6400a8c0 at shack>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
> If a company offers a product without documentation and you decide to buy
> it...
> how can they be liable for an action you took?
EXACTLY!
> Actually as I think about it...in today's society one is not responsible
> for one's actions... it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.
Thanks in part to the Trial Lawyers Ass'n.
Why would someone want to assume responsibility for one's actions when one
may sue the pants off someone else with deeper pockets?
Gil, W1RG
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:58:52 -0700
From: "Bill" <w7vp at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
To: "JC Smith" <jc-smith at comcast.net>, "'Rick Tavan N6XI'"
<rtavan at gmail.com>, <towertalk at contesting.com>
Message-ID: <020901c68971$58593970$6901a8c0 at attorneyg97r4a>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
You are very right JC, although they are probably more damned if they don't.
As a manufacturer they are subject to court developed law called
"manufacturer's strict liability." Under that law they are held liable for
any "defect" in the product whether or not there was any negligence. Thus
an injured victim (or his family) only needs to prove that there was a
"defect," and that it was responsible for the injury or death of the victim.
A defect can be either a manufacturing defect, a design defect or a "failure
to warn" defect. It is this latter category that will bite US Tower if they
have not provided sufficient detail on the use of their product. Most
insurance companies will impose strict conditions on a manufacturer for the
warnings that are required. If the data provided by US Tower is not
complete as suggested that might suggest that US Tower is either not insured
for product liability or is insured by a company that is not using customary
practices to limit liability. I have negotiated some of these insurance
conditions in the aviation business and believe me they are strict (and
expensive too). I have also defended some of these product cases and it is
a tough position for a company that has not properly developed its
disclosure policies.
73
Bill
W7VP
----- Original Message -----
From: "JC Smith" <jc-smith at comcast.net>
To: "'Rick Tavan N6XI'" <rtavan at gmail.com>; <towertalk at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 8:36 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
>I think they are sort of dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.
>That's
> the nature of our civil court system these days. I wouldn't want to be a
> crank-up tower manufacturer, especially in CA.
>
> I agree with the fellow who said "if the cable aint broke, don't fix it."
> I
> have a 20+ year-old UST with the original cable and it still goes up and
> down just fine. The cable is discolored, but not rusty and all the
> strands
> are intact.
>
> 73 - JC, k0hps at amsat.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Rick Tavan N6XI
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 5:50 PM
> To: towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Action against US Tower?
>
> Has anyone considered taking legal action to force US Tower to document
> their products? Their attitude on documentation is despicable. Actually,
> I
> think they are shooting themselves in the foot. They should incur greater
> liability by refusing to document the products than they would if they
> published decent documentation full of prudent warnings. They actively
> sell
> this stuff to us, so they have to expect us to install it, use it,
> maintain
> it and try to repair it. I feel sorry for whoever turns out to be the
> first
> fatal victim of withheld documentation. The resulting lawsuit may break
> the
> logjam but it could also break UST.
>
> /Rick N6XI
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 10:11:57 EDT
From: HFDXJUNKIE at aol.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Tower restring
To: towertalk at contesting.com
Message-ID: <49a.1df5823.31b6e72d at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I am not sure why everyone needs these so call diagrams to replace cable,
take off the old ones..measure replace. Not too hard of a job, esp if the
tower
is on the ground !!!!! Doing it while the tower is standing is a little
trickier. If you do not have the mechanical skill to do it, better call in a
pro
and spend the 2 bucks. I often wonder how many people get seriously hurt and
killed everyday from being CHEAP on any project not just towers. Yeah I know
all about it, spend a few grand on towers and antennas now you have no
money
to pay a pro for some help you can't really handle..oh well, so life goes.
Pete NA2P
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 11:00:02 -0400
From: "Julio Peralta" <jperalta at tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower
To: <K7LXC at aol.com>, <towertalk at contesting.com>, <DrD at 2020.com>
Message-ID: <002901c68979$e7174d70$6401a8c0 at RADIOROOM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I've had to do 3 re-cabling jobs. One a 72' UST where one of the cables
was so bad it broke. One a 89' UST where the cables had more than
surface rust and had more than the 6 strands broken rule of thumb. One a
105' Triex that belonged to a cell phone company that was worse than the
89 footer and was just before breaking.
It's not easy but if you take your time you can work your way through
it. I will mention that not all the cables can be pulled through by
attaching them to the just removed cable due to the fact that the Nico
press (sp?) clamps won't pass through the sheaves so they must be
removed. The other thing I've learned is that the tension on the pull
down cable must be set with some weight on the top section of the tower.
Steve would you agree with this?
Julio, W4HY
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of K7LXC at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 9:17 AM
To: towertalk at contesting.com; DrD at 2020.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Help Needed Replacing Crank-Up Cable on US
Tower
In a message dated 6/5/2006 9:02:43 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
towertalk-request at contesting.com writes:
> I just purchased and have brought home US Tower, model HDX-572MDPL,
> 72'
Heavy
Duty tower from the estate of a SK.
> It has a motor drive whose design includes a postive pulldown
> feature.
> The tower contains 4 sections, was installed in 1999 and has had
> little
use.
> Where I need help:
> US Tower recommends replacing the cable every 2-3 years, which may
> be an
overkill but is definitely erring on the side of safety. Since my
tower is 7 years old I'd like to start out with fresh cabling.
The UST recommendation is known as a "weasel clause"; that is, if
something happens to your tower and you hadn't changed the cables, they
can weasel
out of any liability. Tower manufacturers are insurance-driven
enterprises so
it's no surprise they are reluctant to provide any helpful information.
The other gotcha is that there isn't anyone around who can do the
cable
change anyway. I spent a couple of days at the factory to learn how to
do it
and what I found out is that it's an involved and semi-complicated
endeavor.
It's not something I would try myself.
I'll bet you a nickel that you don't have to do anything other than
lube
the cables and you'll be good to go. The actual circumstances that
would
require cable replacement are: 1) Excessive broken strands. Industry
standards
allow you to have six broken strands before replacement is necessary.
2)
Excessive rust - not surface rust but real cancerous into the strands
rust. 3)
Damaged cable. This would be kinks or flat spots in the cable. I doubt
that your
cables meet any of the above criteria.
OTOH you should lubricate the cables annually at a minimum. Champion
Radio
Products sells PreLube 6 which is recommended by the wire rope
manufacturers.
You should exercise the tower a couple of times a month by running
it up
and down. You should also park it at different heights rather than just
at
the limit switches all the time. The cables can take a permanent set by
sitting on the pulleys at the same spot for years. By doing these 3
things, you
will prolong the service life of your cables.
BTW I have never personally seen a ham tower that the cables were
so bad
that they had to be replaced. Some were pretty grungy but didn't meet
the
aforementioned criteria.
Lube it and enjoy it and don't worry about replacing the cables.
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
TOWER TECH -
Professional tower services for hams
Cell: 206-890-4188
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
End of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 42, Issue 12
*****************************************
What a headache. As your age advances, the tolerance for headaches
diminishes. Hence, it is AN Wireless for me. A few more bucks solves the problem.
Warren; W7WY
More information about the TowerTalk
mailing list