Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+mast\s+intrusion\s+into\s+tower\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+mast\s+intrusion\s+into\s+tower\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: alwilliams@olywa.net (Al Williams); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 01:08:25 -0800; Two recent postings have 8' of a 21' mast and 6' of a 12' mast inside the tower. Why so much, if the bottom end of the mast is bolted to a sturdy rotator and mounting plate? I am planning to put a 11; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00320.html (7,944 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: k1ttt@berkshire.net (David Robbins); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 13:00:23 +0000; several reasons: 1. jacking the antenna further up the mast than you can work standing on top of the tower is a real pain. 2. lowering an antenna jacked up on the mast to work on it and then putting; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00322.html (9,851 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: k1ky@bellsouth.net (Tom Delker); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 08:29:48 -0600; One of the reasons is to increase the safety factor when raising (and lowering) the mast as you put antennas on top of it and servicing. A good example of a poor installation is one that we took down; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00323.html (9,978 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 09:37:15 EST; Hi, Dan -- Good points. top Mostly. Temporary steps make the job doable but there is a fairly significant 'pucker factor' involved in climbing the mast. putting It's tedious but sometimes the only wa; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00324.html (10,430 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 09:38:58 EST; My suggestion is have 1/3 of the mast in the tower. Cheers, Steve K7LXC Tower Tech -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com Administrative requests; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00325.html (8,057 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: hasben@ix.netcom.com (Richard Hassell-Bennett); Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 21:54:09 -0600; AL. If you buy a single guy ring and one of our elevated rotors you can rotate 50ft of tower (20' below and 30' above the guys). for about the same cost !!!! Take a look at www.qth.com/k0xg Something; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00341.html (9,082 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 04:30:17 -0500; I own some of Richards hardware, it's on my 160 ft rotating 55G tower. It's nice stuff. I am thinking of adding a 200 ft 55G with the top 40 feet or so rotating (as soon as I finish my 160 meter ant; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00343.html (8,108 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] mast intrusion into tower (score: 1): Author: Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com (Michael Tope); Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 18:54:01 -0800; See my comments below: Mike, W4EF............... As long as a fairly tight sleeve or thrust bearing are used, the forces on the rotator even when its mounted close to the top should be almost purely; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-01/msg00348.html (13,500 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]