________________________________
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> From: k1...@yahoo.com
> Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 12:32:57 +0000
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is
> not suppose to take place on this forum!
possibly not , if it is then it will be moderated I guess
>
>
>
> Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner,
> or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio
> installs that are done properly and well maintained.
>
>
>
> Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a
> disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason
> or another.
relevance ?
>
>
>
> The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what
> criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be
> installed.
what ever it is the facts remain legality and commonsense prevail ?
You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was
already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some
tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and
the culprit may lie there.
>
>
>
> Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is
> uncalled for!
the target is legality as I read it not the hams specifically
>
>
>
> Have a great day!
ditto
>
>
>
> Louis Upton - K1STX
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Looking to change your car this year? Find car news, reviews and more
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801459%2Fpi%5F1004813%2Fai%5F859641&_t=762955845&_r=tig_OCT07&_m=EXT
