[TowerTalk] TOWER LIGHTS

[Lux, Jim]

On 6/3/21 9:45 PM, KD7JYK DM09 wrote:
> "Here it’s( was) 200 feet and over and they had to be an approved 
> type. Different blink pattern day/night."
>
> Don't rule out uneducated, and reactionary imbeciles, either... We had 
> a 199.9' tower put in the community.  Met all requirements.  Local 
> short term political attention whores (neighbors getting "elected" 
> into positions they think matter) insisted on a light, which was 
> pointless, since minimal craft level by federal law is 1,000'.  
> "Someone might hit it!"  Sure, and if they might hit that, they might 
> hit a power pole, or tree, but you don't want lights on those...  
> Putting on the light, made the tower roughly 202' high, which 
> ironically, requires a light! The light that wasn't required satisfied 
> the requirement of the light on the tower that didn't require one...  
> The guy that programmed the light pattern did.  It flashed very 
> slowly, "F--K YOU", which wasn't noticed for years.  I wouldn't have 
> even noticed myself, had I not gotten into QRSS CW at the time.  At 
> some point, the unobtrusive gray galvanized tower was painted a 
> brilliant red/white scheme, making it visible for miles.  You'd think 
> this was for safety, as you look down on it, in a bowl, from the hills 
> surrounding it, and between 5, and ten times the height of the tower, 
> where there are no craft in danger of hitting it....  Nope, I talked 
> with the crew.  "Every time someone says something stupid, or 
> annoying, we get told to make it more offensive!"
>
> Back to the primary issue...  What one says, thinks, et cetera, may 
> have nothing to do with anything.  Find someone in your country who 
> knows the rules, as they pertain to towers, lighting, craft, 
> what-have-you, here it's the Code Of Federal Regulations, and just 
> read it.  What is printed is law, anything else is opinion.  Make 
> certain to get the most RECENT printing, a two year old book doesn't 
> cut it, not here, anyway.  Years were wasted fighting for a light on a 
> tower that by law, and as far as all agencies concerned with safety, 
> and enforcement were concerned, FCC, and FAA, didn't need one anyway.
>
> I'd start with, "Why?", then as they attempt to answer, they may find 
> one isn't needed.  Alternately, maybe it is, but the answer should 
> provide valid information.  Get it in writing, from a valid source, 
> words from the counter help are worthless in the end, the person 
> making a fuzz now, may be cleaning toilets at a fast food joint in a 
> week. From experience, however, I'd find out on my own first.  They 
> average person you may deal with, may hope you know less than they do, 
> and it never does one good to go in blind, or uninformed.
>
> Best of luck, please keep us advised!
>
> Kurt



It's the Authority Having Jurisdiction thing - The code might say X, but 
the guy or gal with the pen in their hand makes the decision.

FWIW FAR on min altitudes:
1000 ft above highest point within 2000 ft in congested areas of city or 
town OR an crowd of people  (e.g. Woodstock)

500 ft in rural

0 in sparsely populated/over water as long as you're 500 ft from people 
or significant people-stuff (structures, cars, boats, trains)


As for challenging the AHJ - that's very situationally dependent. You 
don't want to win the battle and lose the war.  The standard joke is 
that a police officer can find at least 3 things to cite you for, 
driving a brand new vehicle (with license and tags) on the open road.  
Whether or not that's true - beating the AHJ (or HOA board or...) once 
might lead to a succession of future questions and the net might be more 
time consuming than just doing it.

It's sort of like in business - Sometimes it's easier to do the stupid 
thing in the requirements than to spend the time and effort on a 
waiver.  If the AHJ says, I'd like an owl on top with a green beak, you 
paint the beak of the thing green, install it, and be done.