"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...
We (hams) have a very good working relationship with the county. When
they built their new Law Enforcement Center the Emergency Operations
Center in it included a ham station. The mobile EOC van also has a
ham station built in. These are not just 2-meter FM mobiles either.

In addition, we are working on small, limited range portable repeaters
for voice, data, and video in conjunction with the EOC.

Some years back I served as the communications for one of the
evacuation centers when a train with some really nasty stuff, derailed
quite some distance away. That operation took a lot of hams as the
evacuation area was quite large. We were fortunate that the wind
pretty much favored us, but it changed enough that the shelter where I
was located had to be moved *in a hurry*. (I now carry a gas mask
in my kit) Moving a whole bunch of people who have just been awakened
at 2 AM, through a cloud of *stuff* that makes it difficult to breathe
and very limited visibility is an experience.

And therein lies the major difference. Whereas it is not a 'mandate' in the
true sense of the word, it has long been a standing relationship between
amateur radio ops and the local, state and federal authorities that hams
perform essential communications and other assistance during times of
emergency. (this is why, among other things, ham plates are not considered
vanity plates in most, if not all, states). And these towers and arrays are
important to the facilitation of those emergency communications.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:31:45 -0500, Dave Holford
wrote:



Frank Dresser wrote:

"A.Pismo Clam" wrote in message
...
Hello All!
snip

The thought occurs to me that in the "good old days" aircraft used to
have wire antennas, either strung around the airframe or trailing below
and behind.

Some still do


Modern, high speed, aircraft can't do this so they have various
solutions including HF probes and conformal antennas (I have seen
unpainted panels on some large military aircraft which were identified
as HF antennas) and it is not difficult to receive their signals over
distances of several thousand miles. I wonder why no one has, at least
as far as I am aware, attempted to adapt these solutions to Ham Radio?

The aircraft has a height above Terrain (HAT) advantage that few homes
are ever going to obtain. :-))


I have personal experience, some 40 years ago, with an HF antenna which
consisted of the top half of the tail (about a 15 to 20 foot square
metal surface) which was tuned by a remote ATU (Collins CU-351 ISTR) and
performed at least as well as a fixed wire over the range of 2.5 to 30
MHz. I had considered at one time covering one end of the house with
foil and trying the idea against ground, but for some reason I
encountered some opposition from another member of my household. I think
she figured 15 antennas was enough!

Then there is the problem of electrical wiring on the inside of the
wall too. :-))

The plane I'm building (335 MPH hot rod) is all advanced composite.
The plans call for the antennas to all be inside. Unfortunately the
VOR antenna is supposed to be in the horizontal stabilizer. They
changed the material so the horizontal stab is all carbon fiber.
Wellll...maybe it'd be good for deicing.

You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Dave
VE3HLU

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:27:04 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:


"Stinger" wrote in message
...
Homeowners associations are a good thing! They are basically an agreement
that you and your neighbors will follow some clearly defined rules for the
specific purpose of maintining optimum property values for everyone. In
other words, you won't have to worry about buying an expensive house and
having your next-door neighbor decide to use his yard to store a dozen
wrecked automobiles while he builds a hot-rod or runs a car-repair
business.
Common sense should tell anyone that their rights end when they start to
infringe on anyone else's, but sometimes you need it in writing. ;^)


Don't need a homeowner's association to prevent those kinds of violations.
Cities have ordinances against them. If someone violates the ordinance you
can file a complaint.

Receiving antennas are easily concealed. If you can find mine from the
street, you were born on Krypton. I think this is an overly-hyped
problem.

And as Dee says, these are the kinds of installations that are more
likely to cause interference.


Broadcasting antennas are another animal, though. For instance, nobody
wants to live next to some clown running a bunch of linear amps through a
CB
"base station." It will literally be "seen" on well-shielded cable
television connections, and is a nuisance. I think that's a lot of what

That is a fault of the cable or someone using the cable even if the
amps are illegal and covered by some rather strict laws.
..
All it takes is one poorly shielded device hooked to the cable near a
transmitter. The device can create harmonics and mixing products that
will wipe out a channel, or even the entier service to an area. A
good example would be an attic antenna next door to some one who
hooked their rabbit ears to their TV set with the cable still
connected. The lower antenna is closer to the set and more likely
to cause interference. It is also more likely to couple RF into the
house electrical wiring causing all sorts of problems due to RF in
radios, TVs, stereos, CD players and computers.

I once took out an entier city's cable system with a 2-meter HT as a
demonstration. (a very brief demonstration at the cable office).
Two days later you couldn't find a leak in the system any where in
town.
the
"external antenna" rules are meant to curb.

-- Stinger


Again such CB operation is illegal and they can be just as big or bigger a
nuisance with a mobile operation. Some of these guys have multikilowatt
amps in their vehicles.

Such association rules force the LEGALLY LICENSED operator to use low height
indoor and hidden antennas. Theses types of antennas are far more prone to
generate interference than something well up on a tower.

And it exposes the user to RF fields far greater than normal.
There is a reason I have my 2-meter antennas at 130 feet. Even there
I am limited to 380 watts into the antennas due to exposure limits.
At 30 feet I'd not even be able to stay with in limits using my 50
watt mobile on those antennas. Considering there is 228 feet of coax
from the rig to the antennas I could probably run a KW output and not
exceed the limits.

Actually...when it comes to exposure limits: My TH-5 is at 100 feet.
With 1500 watts into the antenna the RF limits for controlled access
are 6 feet above the ground at the base of the tower. I guess I
should paint a red strip around the tower at 6 feet. As that is slant
distance the height goes up rapidly as you move away from the base of
the tower

You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com.



Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Midwest Kid" wrote:

But if you were selling your home and I had a 1980 rusted Honda on blocks
plus a used beer keg as a 'bird bath', do you honestly think that everyone
that looked at your home wouldn't mind me as your neighbor?

Ah yes, the "but if he paints his house orange and puts a giant
unicorn on the front lawn, the resale value of the properties in the
area will drop!" nonsense. Let us suppose this would in fact occur.
The neighbours gang together and nail an invoice to his door, and this
is the "right" thing to do. What about the converse? Suppose someone
instead made their property into a gorgeous work of art that _raised_
the value of the neighbouring properties? Surely this means he can
issue invoices to all the neighbours he has "helped", right?

That is the whole point of covenants. Something that protects me
when I want to sell.

_YOU_ protect your own property. It is why it is yours and not
someone elses. These HOA's and similar entities are the analog of
labour unions for property owners. Complete idiocy, with _ALL_ of the
hideous bad effects of such things. Why have two bosses when one is
bad enough? The protection you refer to is as illusory as the
thousands of unionized workers who lose their jobs every year: "It's
in the contract. So sorry."

Oops!

If you change that link to tower.htm
( http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/Tower.htm ) it should link

I should type what I say...
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/tower.htm

Roger (K8RI)
You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com

WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check"
or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with
ours. Your starting to sound like your on the board of some HOA who
enjoys telling their neighbors what they can and cannot do on THEIR
property.

People that purchase a nice house for let's say 200,000+ are not going
to have some junk vehicle sitting in their yard, paint the house bright
pink, etc.. Most HOA's require you to hook up to (how is getting the
kick back)cable, they don't want even the 18" dishes. Well they finally
have lost out on that one. That's only the start.

Trespassers will be dealt with according to the law. That includes HOA
COPS.

Midwest Kid wrote:

wrote in message ...
Thank you.... .......

I am moving into a housing plan with such antenna restrictions. But
what housing plan doesn't have them. There is always someone trying to
tell some else how to live their lives, or knows what's best for you.

You people amaze me. If you don't like covenants, then don't move into the
neighborhood. The whole reason for the rules are to keep everything in
check. Something tells me that neither of you would wants someone putting
up some rusted out, 1970s RV and using it as a shed if the rules made that
'illegal'

wrote in message ...
WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check"
or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with
ours.

**** that. If I move into an CC&R addition, I expect people to follow the
rules. I would hope my neighbors would be smart enough to read important
real estate documents. I don't care if my home is $300K. If some ham puts
up a huge antenna and they make an exception, I will be documenting
everything. As soon as that ham puts up a 4-sale sign, my huge ugly tower
will go up. You wouldn't be against _my_ right to do this, right? If the
ham had the balls to even say something about it I would laugh. In other
words the ham would want his tower when it suits _him_, however if he takes
it down to sell the home and a neighbor puts one up...that's just not right.

wrote:
Midwest Kid wrote:

You people amaze me. If you don't like
covenants, then don't move into the
neighborhood. The reason for the rules
are to keep everything in check. (snip)

WHO are you to tell me or someone else
what you consider is "in check" or not? You
deal with your property and the rest of us
shall deal with ours. Your starting to sound
like your on the board of some HOA who
enjoys telling their neighbors what they can
and cannot do on THEIR property. (snip)


It does amaze me, Pappy, how many are so willing to accept, and even
defend, additional restrictions on people's lives and property in this
supposedly free country of ours. These homeowners associations, which are,
in effect, a new layer of government, don't act in a democratic manner and
neither respect, nor even clearly recognize, people's rights.

Instead, these homeowners associations remind me of the communist party
committees found in neighborhoods throughout the former Soviet Union before
it's collapse. Like these homeowners associations, those committees made
neighborhood rules and insured area residents complied with those rules. The
Soviet people gained freedoms after the fall of the Soviet Union and it's
many committees. The American people are losing freedoms as these homeowners
associations, and their CC&Rs, spread.

Some here have advocated just avoiding these homeowners associations, and
their CC&Rs, by moving elsewhere. While that may be a temporary fix (serves
their own self-interests at the moment), I'm sure many in the Soviet Union
thought the same when they first saw the spread of those communist party
committees. But, without open resistence by all, there was no place left to
avoid those committees within just a few years. I sincerely hope the same
cannot be said by young people about these homeowners associations in the
not so distant future. However, everything I've seen suggests that is a
clear possibility.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

wrote in message ...
WHO are you to tell me or someone else what you consider is "in check"
or not? You deal with your property and the rest of us shall deal with
ours.

**** that. If I move into an CC&R addition, I expect people to follow the
rules. I would hope my neighbors would be smart enough to read important
real estate documents. I don't care if my home is $300K. If some ham puts
up a huge antenna and they make an exception, I will be documenting
everything. As soon as that ham puts up a 4-sale sign, my huge ugly tower
will go up. You wouldn't be against _my_ right to do this, right? If the
ham had the balls to even say something about it I would laugh. In other
words the ham would want his tower when it suits _him_, however if he takes
it down to sell the home and a neighbor puts one up...that's just not right.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklins retort to the PHOA
Philadelphia HomeOwners Ass

They told old Ben to go fly a kite !!

From The Antenna In The Wilderness