[TowerTalk] Crankup Danger

[Les Kalmus]

I block my UST 89 ft. tower when it's down where I want and then lower 
it a tad more to make sure it's on the blocks.
I make sure the uphaul cable is a tiny bit slack. Then there's little 
chance of slippage.

I also am always connected at two points while climbing. Slow but safe.

Les W2LK

On 8/1/2013 3:10 PM, Dick Dievendorff wrote:
> When I had a crankup, "lowered" was still supported by the same single steel
> cable as when all the way up, at least for my US Towers 89 footer.
>
> Bringing it down was to a point where a limit switch stopped the motor.  But
> it was not "bottomed out" when fully nested. This is good, because the
> tension on the steel cable wasn't changing dramatically in the fully
> retracted position.
>
> If the steel cable should part or slip significantly with your fingers or
> toes between sections, the result could be injurious.  Many suggest blocking
> the thing off with big wood or metal pieces inserted between sections, and
> usually we don't test the ability of the blocks to support the load without
> slip.  It could be risky taking the tension off the cable and then apply
> tension again it when your task is complete.  I'm not sure I'd trust a
> relatively untested block any more than the steel cable.
>
> I confess that I didn't usually bother, but I was always uncomfortable
> climbing my nested crankup and felt much better when I was standing at the
> top of the 20' or so nested tower.  If you try to climb with your toes just
> touching the outer section, it's not often enough "grip".   I guess I could
> have leaned a tall ladder against it and climbed that, it might have been
> safer.
>
> I feel much more comfortable climbing my newer guyed Rohn 55, even though
> I'm climbing much higher. I've also learned the joys of "full body arrest
> harness" rather than the old single Klein belt with one belt that I used to
> climb with. It's slower and more fatiguing to constantly clip and unclip the
> two shock lanyards as I climb and descend.  But I'm now always tied off,
> which reduces my chance of a fall should I make a mistake or I suddenly lose
> function.
>
> Tower climbing is hazardous.  You make various choices to reduce risk.
> Appropriate fall arrest gear is one choice, guyed versus crankup is another.
>
> 73 de Dick, K6KR
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Patrick Greenlee
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 11:45 AM
> To: towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Crankup Danger
>
> Wouldn't you ordinarily lower a crank-up tower before climbing? If it were a
> tilt over as well wouldn't you tilt it over instead of climbing it?
>
> Patrick AF5CK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 1:22 PM
> To: towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Crankup Danger
>
> Well, if the tower should telescope while you are on it, the shearing off of
> fingers and the front of your feet might be considered an undesirable
> possibility.
> If you are on an upper section when the collapse occurs, you might get by
> with just some foot damage and being thrown to the ground as the section you
> are on drops into the next one down...
> Your plan is much like the old EZWay towers.  There's a book for the two
> section 40 footer on BAMA.      http://bama.edebris.com/manuals/ezway/rbs40
> WL
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>