Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:01:06 -0700
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
To: TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] tower replacement wisdom
<I have the following limitations.
<1. I want to have minimal downtime - the tower has a COUPLE of HEAVILY –USED
<ham repeaters, a COMMERCIAL REPEATER, AND a WIRELESS ISP on it.
<2. The county would never issue a permit for a tower like this today... the
<property has a use permit for the tower, specified as "18 inch face" and a
<drawing of its approximate location on the property. So I need to somehow
<permit this work as "replacement in kind".
<4. I'd like to ensure that the tower can support the existing AND FUTURE
<MICROWAVE DISH loadS, and reduce the twist both for those AND the FIRE
<DETECTION CAMERAS I have up top... so maybe should go to star guying?
<So... I need to choose a tower that is roughly 18" face width (possibly
<just Rohn 55 again), and install it at (if I trust the foundation) or near
<the existing tower location, with presumably new guy anchors that must be
<near but not at the existing anchor locations (to minimize downtime), and
<do as much of the removal and installation as possible with a crane (or
<helicopter?). I also need to not break the bank, as this is really a hobby
<tower for me, where the commercial customers are mostly to pay the
<utilities and property taxes.
<Thoughts? Alternatives?
<Matthew Kaufman, KA6SQG
## You could make a case for a replacement HD TOWER. Cite... global
climate change,
worsening wx condx, etc.
## The existing tower is worn out, it needs to be replaced ... asap.
## The TWO ham repeaters are required for emergency use..... and
probably the
commercial repeater as well.
## The wireless ISP is required for internet users.... who rely heavily
on it.... being reliable..esp in any emergency.
## existing tower wont handle Microwave dish loads.
## Fire detection cameras are an ESSENTIAL emergency use device.
## Bare min should be the HD version of Rohn 55... which is a combo of Z
and X bracing.
## Ideally, Rohn 65 should be used. The extra few inches of face width
pales in comparison to the
170 ft height. You might get away without having to use star guys, if 65
used. Dunno abt the proposed
microwave dishes...and twist.
## The 170 FT height should be grandfathered. Replacing a worn out
tower..with a new, stronger tower
should be a non issue. You are providing an essential public service..and
then some.
## The commercial users might make a stink about the..down time...ditto
with wireless ISP.
## Its not 1971 anymore. Nobody uses C spec wind ratings. Its G
spec these days.
## Replacement tower needs to be beefed up, stronger. Dunno abt the
existing base, but I would be leery about the guy anchors. Original tower
was 150 ft.... not 170.
Jim VE7RF
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|