Stan,
I have had an HDBX 48 with the 56' section added for over 15 years.
The T2X is in the top of the 48' section. This tower has seen over SEVENTY
mph winds.
Frank,
Guess what is on top? A two element 40 meter and a KT34XA. Been up a long
time. These towers are a great deal better than folks allude. They are
inexpensive
and as long as they are put in with a large base, they work great, last
a long time, and hold up a lot of antennas.
Failures are not always the tower's fault and as far as the BX series, I
think we should look at the install really close. That's probably where
the CRAP was, Stan.
Bill, N5CMI
Forwarded message:
_________________________________________________________________
Message-ID: <33AEA798.7597@rust.net>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:43:04 -0700
From: "Floyd Soo, W8RO" <hires@rust.net>
Reply-To: hires@rust.net
Organization: HI-RES Communications, Inc.
To: Tower Talk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [Fwd: [TowerTalk] BX Series Towers]
Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
The BX Series towers were never intended to support large ham arrays!
--
Floyd Soo, W8RO
President, HI-RES Communications, Inc.
Net Manager and Board Member, Collins Collectors Association
QRP-L #392
hires@rust.net
http://www.rust.net/~hires
Received: from dayton.akorn.net (root@dayton.akorn.net [205.217.100.11])
by Fe3.rust.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA29628
for <hires@rust.net>; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:54:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from dayton.akorn.net (majordom@dayton.akorn.net [205.217.100.11])
by dayton.akorn.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id DAA11905;
Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:53:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by dayton.akorn.net (TLB v0.10a (1.23 tibbs 1997/01/09
00:29:32)); Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:52:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from kim.teleport.com (kim.teleport.com [192.108.254.26])
by dayton.akorn.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA11327
for <Towertalk@contesting.com>; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 03:52:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ip-pdx02-27.teleport.com (ip-pdx02-27.teleport.com
[206.163.123.60]) by kim.teleport.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA14337;
Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199706230752.AAA14337@kim.teleport.com>
X-Sender: w7ni@mail.teleport.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: "Charles H. Harpole" <harpole@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
From: w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths)
Subject: [TowerTalk] BX Series Towers
Cc: Towertalk@contesting.com
Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Sponsor: W4AN, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C
The BX is getting a little bit of a bad rap in general, and
>this error needs correction. de K4VUD
But that is only because the entire BX series is crap. This is, of course,
only my opinion, based, however, on seeing two of them fold over in the
center and thrash TH6DXXs into bits when hit by moderate winds. What kind
of a tower (except a crappy one) would have a maximum boom length spec of 10
feet? What on earth can you put on a BX tower (even an HBX tower) that
needs a T2X to turn it? What kind of a ham antenna has 30 square feet of
area and a boom of no more than 10 feet (other than a dish)?
Stan w7ni@teleport.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|