All, I haven't seen anything on the reflector yet in regards to the newly signed into law aviation bill HR-636. H.R.636 - Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2016, which was signed
There is an "exclusion" ... any "covered" tower "adjacent" to a house is excluded. Couldn't find a definition for "adjacent" in the Bill. 73, Dick, W1KSZ _____________________________________________
Based on the definition below, the purpose appears to be deaingl with structures that are in otherwise unoccupied areas where aircraft might legally operate below 500 feet outside the immediate vicin
Author: Ed via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 13:29:35 -0700
I imagine this won't affect crank-up towers, correct? _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com h
I'm sure it will if you ever plan to crank it past 50'. They have a year to finalize their new regulation, so we shall see what our masters have decided for us. Matt W0MLD ___________________________
Author: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 18:55:08 -0400
There are many populated areas where aircraft flu just above the tops of the trees. I never managed to be up on thee tower when they were spraying/dusting for mosquitoes, Gypsie Moths, and other crit
Author: "James Gordon Beattie, Jr." <w2ttt@att.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 16:20:27 -0700
Hi Foljs, A couple of concerns... What is the definition of "adjacent"? This lets the FAA bureaucrats decide. Why is the FAA going below its traditional 200' or airport runway proximity rules? FAA ap
Tempest in a teapotl. If you live in a house on with towers nearby that are from 50 to 200 feet it is reasonable that you are in a developed area by most zoning standards. A question might exist if y
Author: "James Gordon Beattie, Jr." <w2ttt@att.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 16:25:28 -0700
Dick, The REGULATORS WILL DECIDE. There is no exclusion for crank up towers in the law...the the bureaucrats can do what they want. 73, Gordon Beattie, W2TTT 201.314.6964 Sent from AT&T Mail on Andr
I work for the FAA and I do not plan to Comply with this. Same thing regarding the drone registration non-sense. 73, Robb NØRU Woodland Park, CO. _______________________________________________ _____
an exclusion is an exclusion I'd think - if it has a home on it would mean its excluded independent of whether or not its in an undeveloped area of the county. At least I hope that is correct. It sou
It sounds more like trying to get cell towers in undeveloped areas marked and cataloged. I think the biggest question is what 'adjacent' means. And secondarily what is 'undeveloped'. It specifically
I don't think this will be a big deal, but the ARRL should definitely monitor the rulemaking process and file comments if necessary after the FAA issues it's NPRM. 73, Paul, N8HM ____________________
The problem that prompts this rule making is the towers that pop up in the middle of nowhere without warning. The ones that have killed people have been erected by cellular or wind surveyors so far.
Which is pretty much what I thought and surmised in my previous reply. See FAA rules Part 91 > Sec. 91.119 - Minimum safe altitudes: General. Specifically: (c) Over other than congested areas. An alt
In today's age of precision GPS mapping to a few feet (or less) and computer augmented displays, why wouldn't GPS location be sufficient? Looking ahead to thousands of drones delivering packages, I'd
I agree that this is pretty close for a period of time when 20M is both to be the best target. A half-wave or either is the standard solution. If you can do it, I would try 100 ft xd 50 ft, or 90 x 4
Waaay back in the early 50s when I was just getting started there was a Ham in central Kansas whose job was keeping oil wells pumping. He and his wife lived in a very small house right in the middle
Author: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:38:30 -0400
Sounds like his antenna may have been a Rhombic. They were very popular for those who had the room back then. Crop dusting aircraft would likely cut a wire antenna or phone line like it wasn't there,
Author: Patrick Greenlee <patrick_g@windstream.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 06:44:51 -0500
I have seen a few dusters up close ranging from an old Steerman to modern purpose built. The latter had an inclined sharpened blade positioned in front of the canopy to cut wires. I don't know how ef