plk Premium Member join:2002-04-20 united state
1 recommendation |
plk
Premium Member
2014-Nov-17 8:03 pm
1500 ft tv tower |
|
|
TheMG Premium Member join:2007-09-04 Canada MikroTik RB450G Cisco DPC3008 Cisco SPA112
|
TheMG
Premium Member
2014-Nov-17 8:22 pm
I'd love to have one of those in my backyard (for amateur radio purposes of course).
I wish I had a backyard.
Anyways, the company I work for is switching all our towers to LED lighting. Hiring riggers to replace light bulbs all the time gets expensive pretty fast when you consider the many hundreds of towers.
It's actually amazing how bright those new LED lighting systems can be. The white LED strobes are in some cases way brighter than the xenon flash strobes they replace! |
|
SmokChsrWho let the magic smoke out? Premium Member join:2006-03-17 Saint Augustine, FL |
SmokChsr
Premium Member
2014-Nov-18 2:10 am
Darn it, mine is only 1200' tall. I just don't have the legs to get 1200' up it. I poop out at about 300'. I'd really need to exercise my legs & arms for a few weeks before I climb if I want to get any higher. (yes I do have & use all the proper safety gear) |
|
leibold MVM join:2002-07-09 Sunnyvale, CA Netgear CG3000DCR ZyXEL P-663HN-51
|
to TheMG
said by TheMG:I wish I had a backyard. I have a very small backyard, but it is about 5000 feet from runway 32R (Moffet Federal Airfield, NASA Ames Research Center). Even if you ignore the overhead powerlines, what do you think my chances are for a tower permit at that location ? Never mind, I couldn't afford a tower anyway. However with all the high-rise construction going on around me I wish I could put some antennas on a tower. |
|
John Galt6Forward, March Premium Member join:2004-09-30 Happy Camp |
Localities can require that appropriate setbacks be made for tower installs for safety reasons. The setbacks are typically 1.5 times the tower height. These requirements do not violate PRB-1 so they are a fact of life. |
|
TheMG Premium Member join:2007-09-04 Canada MikroTik RB450G Cisco DPC3008 Cisco SPA112
|
to leibold
said by leibold:Even if you ignore the overhead powerlines, what do you think my chances are for a tower permit at that location ? That depends on a number of factors, you'd have to read up on the FAA regulations regarding towers and structures, they're usually quite specific. But, generally speaking, the AHJ's bylaws in a residential area are probably going to be more restrictive than the FAA regs. Even if you take the nearby airport out of the equation I'm pretty sure they're not going to let you put a substantially tall tower on your residential property. Even a 100' tower might be pushing it unless you own an acreage or other similarly large property. |
|
leibold MVM join:2002-07-09 Sunnyvale, CA Netgear CG3000DCR ZyXEL P-663HN-51
|
said by TheMG:you'd have to read up on the FAA regulations regarding towers and structures, they're usually quite specific. I did. Outside of the visual approach zone but still within the non-precision instrument approach zone the default height limits would be 150ft above airport elevation or 250ft above sea level. Since the home is still within the visual approach zone the actual limit would need to be determined geometrically. It doesn't really matter since there are several other reasons (such as the overhead power distribution lines, lack of sufficient setbacks, ...) why I couldn't even put a flag pole, let alone a tower, in my tiny backyard. |
|
|
to plk
So..... How much would that guy have been paid to the job? Whatever it is, it wouldn't be enough for me to do it!!
|
|
mr weather Premium Member join:2002-02-27 Mississauga, ON |
Surprisingly not as much as you'd think. I'm not sure about the broadcast industry but in the cellphone business the climbers and riggers are independent contractors who are underpaid for the danger they subject themselves to. |
|
John Galt6Forward, March Premium Member join:2004-09-30 Happy Camp |
And they die at an alarming rate... |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
to leibold
What about one of those 40 foot all in one verticals that mount on the ground? |
|
|
to plk
said by plk:1500 ft tv tower Great job for a base jumper. Climb tower, Change lamp, step off. Just do not forget the paracommander. |
|
1 recommendation |
to leibold
Assuming you are 5000 feet from the nearest edge of a runway you could go to 49.9 feet without having to register with TOWAIR. You would be able to get more height but may be required to paint and light the tower. |
|
TheMG Premium Member join:2007-09-04 Canada MikroTik RB450G Cisco DPC3008 Cisco SPA112
|
to Mr Matt
said by Mr Matt:Great job for a base jumper. Climb tower, Change lamp, step off. Just do not forget the paracommander. Just be careful not to get caught up in the guy wires... |
|
dandeman MVM join:2001-12-05 Chapel Hill, NC |
Base jumpers die on these towers.. Happened on one of the towers in our area.. |
|
KearnstdSpace Elf Premium Member join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ |
to plk
The comment about heights and the FAA reminded me of something interesting. The tower on the Castle in the WDW Magic Kingdom is something like 149ft tall because at 150ft they would have had to cap it with a blinker. And not wanting an FAA mandated blinker in the fantasy land they made it one foot shorter. |
|
1 recommendation |
to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy:What about one of those 40 foot all in one verticals that mount on the ground? I have a 43' vertical on the roof of my kitchen (verticals and their "ground" wires work 10 times better when not sitting on the ground). It has an autotuner at the feedpoint under my eave. I also have a GAP Titan DX on a 10' pole in the backyard, total height 35'. They both work well, for digital QRP anyway. |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
to plk
The highest I have been was on a 75 tilt over tower and I was not happy on how that thing swayed with the guy wires. |
|
Nanaki (banned)aka novaflare. pull punches? Na join:2002-01-24 Akron, OH |
to John Galt6
My uncle was a rigger he was up a 500 footer changing bulbs and had gotten permission to just drop the old ones. He dropped them at what he thought was the furthest swing in each direction at the top. That was the last one he ever climbed. The bulbs busted on the ground some 50+ feet from the base. He said knowing just how far that thing moves up top was enough to make him re think his line of work in a big way lol. He had done the job for 15 years been up as high as 800 to 1k feet but knowing how far they move up top was just the end of it for him |
|
leibold MVM join:2002-07-09 Sunnyvale, CA Netgear CG3000DCR ZyXEL P-663HN-51
|
I think I understand your uncle.
In a former line of work I would often be on tall buildings installing communications systems (data, phone, alarms, etc.). Sometimes these buildings were still under construction which meant that there was no outer shell yet and you had a great scenic view (floor to ceiling).
I can tell from personal experience that it is one thing being on top of a tall structure and looking into the distance (which doesn't give you any hint of the motion the structure is performing) and a totally different thing turning around the corner (same floor of the same 40+ story building) and looking at the next door skyscraper (separated only by a narrow alley).
Because each building swings at its own rhythm the fact that those buildings are not standing still suddenly becomes undeniably obvious when you have a close point of reference!
It made me feel very uncomfortable and I was safely inside a massive building. I'm pretty sure tower climbing would not be a suitable occupation for me. |
|
TheMG Premium Member join:2007-09-04 Canada MikroTik RB450G Cisco DPC3008 Cisco SPA112
|
TheMG
Premium Member
2014-Dec-1 7:05 pm
Yeah it's incredible how much structures which appear solid actually sway. Many years ago I lived on the top floor of a 17 floor apartment building (which is really not that tall relatively speaking). Concrete and steel construction. On windy days the light fixture in the dining room would noticeably swing back and forth about an inch from the swaying of the building. No it wasn't wind blowing in through an open window, this would occur even with all the windows closed. |
|
Domane Premium Member join:2013-04-18
1 recommendation |
Domane to plk
Premium Member
2014-Dec-2 12:17 am
to plk
When I was in High School in 1962 it was just analog OTTV, the three networks and few independents. I lived in the East Bay of Contra Costa County. In the same year, 1962 the put up in Walnut California the then staggering new frontier TV antenna that was 1500 feet high. It caused a dramatic jump in sales of the device that you attached to your roof antenna that rotated the antenna 360 degrees. So we could get more channels. Some from the direction of San Francisco and some from the direction of Walnut Grove in Sacramento County. (Years later other towers were located in that flat area, a couple of which were about 2000 feet.) |
|
1 recommendation |
to leibold
said by leibold:Because each building swings at its own rhythm the fact that those buildings are not standing still suddenly becomes undeniably obvious when you have a close point of reference! My grandfather was an architect, and designed many of the Woolworth stores across the country. One of his favorite sayings about tall structures was, "If it doesn't bend, it will break". Kinda puts it in perspective! |
|
ke4pym Premium Member join:2004-07-24 Charlotte, NC |
ke4pym to plk
Premium Member
2014-Dec-5 11:19 am
to plk
Shoo.
If I had a 1500' tower in the back yard the FAA would be really upset. Planes landing at CLT flying smack over my house are at ~2600 feet. |
|
JJV Premium Member join:2001-04-25 Seattle, WA
1 recommendation |
JJV to plk
Premium Member
2014-Dec-5 10:33 pm
to plk
|
|
|
I can't even watch that whole video...... My stomach hurts too much after the first 3 minutes!
|
|
TheMG Premium Member join:2007-09-04 Canada MikroTik RB450G Cisco DPC3008 Cisco SPA112
1 edit |
TheMG
Premium Member
2014-Dec-8 4:42 pm
That video (second one) certainly does not set a good example, and shows some of the negative norms that results in many deaths.
Climbers get too confident, find that the fall arrest equipment slows them down, so they do lots of this free-climbing. Well, all it takes is one small slip and you're done.
At my work when we hire climbers to do work on our towers, if they refuse to make proper use of fall arrest equipment, we kick them off the job site. No free-climbing allowed. |
|
SmokChsrWho let the magic smoke out? Premium Member join:2006-03-17 Saint Augustine, FL |
SmokChsr
Premium Member
2014-Dec-9 6:12 am
The First video in this thread was a response to the second video. It intended to show that the second video (which was posted prior) was showing unsafe and unapproved climbing methods. OSHA regs do require 100% tie off. |
|
|
to John Galt6
said by John Galt6:Localities can require that appropriate setbacks be made for tower installs for safety reasons. The setbacks are typically 1.5 times the tower height. These requirements do not violate PRB-1 so they are a fact of life. That's not really the case. In fact, setbacks are usually less than the tower height. A tower doesn't fall straight down, it collapses on the way down. As for violating PRB-1, that is debatable. I know at least one ham who challenged an unreasonable setback rule and won. Remember they need to make reasonable accommodation. Requiring ridiculous setback rules, 50 copies of wet sealed plans, insurance and other things may violate PRB-1. I do agree that PRB-1 needs to be strengthened though. |
|
|
to TheMG
Ya its just nuts..... You really have to have no regard for your own life, nor the consequences of what happens to your family when you take yourself out to have such disregard for safety.
And---- The first video didn't bother me at all! He was doing things very safe I would say.
|
|