I think he's talking about mounting radios directly on the tower legs,
using the radio's mount built in elevation adjustment, rather than a
standoff mount which is normally needed on a tapering self supporting tower.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> humm?  are you suggesting mating two different model towers?
>
> Jaime Solorza
> Wireless Systems Architect
> 915-861-1390
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
>
>> Somone pointed out to me that the top sections of an SSV are ALMOST
>> straight, not quite.  Close enough for government work though.
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Daniel White
>> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 3:40 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Un-guyed tower
>>
>> What about Rohn 55, 65, etc.  You can even get creative and use the top
>> 50ft of a self supporter where it is straight so the legs are much further
>> apart. I like those towers.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Daniel White
>> afmu...@gmail.com
>> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>> Skype: danieldwhite
>> Social: LinkedIn: Twitter
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jay Weekley
>>> Sent: Monday, January 4, 2016 10:53 AM
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Un-guyed tower
>>>
>>> Yeah, I forgot about needing to be bracketed to a building to get over
>>> 20 feet.  Back to the drawing board.
>>>
>>> Bill Prince wrote:
>>> > Depends on the wind loading. If you have anything more than a skinny
>>> > omni on 25G, I would guy anything above 20'. IOW, no more than 20 feet
>>> > un-guyed. 45G; probably 30'.
>>> >
>>> > bp
>>> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>> >
>>> > On 1/4/2016 7:36 AM, Jay Weekley wrote:
>>> >> Just for clarification, what are the maximum heights, if any, for
>>> >> un-guyed Rohn 25 and 45 style tower sections?  The rumor I've heard
>>> >> is 40 feet. Is this true?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to