[opendtv] Re: Louisiana governor blasts faulty wireless networks
- From: "John Willkie" <JohnWillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:00:51 -0700
Al;
Having paid just a little bit of attention to the falling of towers over the
decades, and having talked to more than a few tower riggers, I note the few
broadcast towers that fell this time. Clear Channel lost stations in New
Orleans, but it had to do with the tx sites being under water, not the state
of their towers.
Broadcast towers that fall during hurricanes -- a rare occurrence -- usually
are towers still under construction, or old, unmaintained towers, or were
badly and cheaply designed in the first place. And, there are a very few
exceptions. And, I should note that most radio stations and virtually all
tv stations have more than one tower, when one factors in studio sites,
relay points, ect.
I paid close attention -- from a safe distance away -- about the
communications situation in New Orleans. Cellular and Blackberry were
jammed on Monday and Tuesday. On Tuesday, cellular started going down, as
batteries failed. It's inaccurate -- from all I've heard, even the FCC
proceeding last week -- that cell service went down under the hurricane
(with some exceptions) due to tower failure.
I also note that late last week, the government officially denied that any
FEMA employee took down or off the air any public service transmission
facility. The demons of Louis Farrakan be damned ...
John Willkie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allen Le Roy Limberg" <allimberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 5:23 AM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Louisiana governor blasts faulty wireless networks
> I merely report what happens in a strong hurricane. The towers blow down.
> Their was cellphone failure in New Orleans just as there was here in
> Florida. If you had relatives in the areas hot by Katrina or Rita, you
> would have run into this.
>
> I did not mean to imply that small towers were any stronger or weaker than
> big towers. However, because of the larger area that be served from a
high
> tower, you are more likely to be able to get signal into a devastated area
> from a nearby area that the strongest part of the storm passed by.
>
> When a hurricane hits modern civilization quits for at least a couple
weeks.
>
> Al
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Willkie" <JohnWillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 11:28 PM
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: Louisiana governor blasts faulty wireless networks
>
>
> > Bob (and to a lesser extent) Al;
> >
> > I strongly suspect that neither of you has ever designed an antenna
> system,
> > and have no idea of what actually goes into it.
> >
> > It is PLAINLY WRONG that small towers are more likely to fall than big
> > towers. It is equally wrong -- and manifestly uninformed -- to say that
> > small towers are more (or less) likely to fail than big towers.
> >
> > When one designs a tower structure, one first takes in the immediate
use,
> > and -- since it's much more expensive to build a tower than to add
another
> > antenna to a properly designed one -- any future or even possible future
> > uses. Broadcasters have found that big towers can pay for them selves
> > (almost) in some areas if there are enough other users interested in
> leasing
> > tower space.
> >
> > Then, after you figure out the maximum top weight, you factor in the
> weight
> > of the cables and hardware that connect the cables securely to the
tower.
> > Then, you figure out the cross-sections that the tower presents to the
> wind
> > from all directions.
> >
> > In intemperate zones (which rarely have hurricanes), one also adds in
the
> > maximum accumulation of ice that could be seen on the tower in the
> > worst-case situation. If necessary, you redo the weight/wind
calculations
> > because de-icing equipment adds weight, cables and hardware.
> >
> > All these calculations -- and the budget, tells you what type of tower
> > (self-supportting or guyed) you can erect, and how much it will cost.
> >
> > Small towers can be made sturdy easier than can large towers.
> >
> > Note that few to none small cellular towers failed.
> >
> > What's the difference is that people interested in communicating in
> > worst-case situations (broadcasters and cellular companies qualify)
build
> > their towers according to that need. If you are a small-time chump who
> > lives off the last politician's bung-hole that you licked, who needs to
> > worry about engineering concens -- it's not like anybody's life depended
> on
> > your political hack work.
> >
> > I could go on about tower construction -- angular momentum, guying
> patterns,
> > etc., but I'm only an expert on this subject in comparison to other
> > "commenters."
> >
> > John Willkie
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bob Miller" <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 10:58 AM
> > Subject: [opendtv] Re: Louisiana governor blasts faulty wireless
networks
> >
> >
> > > Cop radios failed because small towers didn't survive. OK but that
does
> > > not translate to small towers are just as vulnerable as 1000 footers.
> > >
> > > If you wanted to build a system that would survive hurricanes small
> > > towers with solid state transmitters could be built.
> > >
> > > Or we could use flying balloons at 65,000 ft. I doubt if they would be
> > > affected at all by hurricanes.
> > >
> > > http://www.sanswire.com/stratellites.htm
> > >
> > > Bob Miller
> > >
> > > Allen Le Roy Limberg wrote:
> > >
> > > >Small towers don't survive hurricane winds. Why do you think cop
radio
> > > >fails?
> > > >
> > > >Al Limberg
> > > >
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: "Craig Birkmaier" <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:50 AM
> > > >Subject: [opendtv] Re: Louisiana governor blasts faulty wireless
> networks
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>At 4:20 PM -0700 9/10/05, John Willkie wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>WWL said last week they had enough fuel at their transmitter site
to
> > last
> > > >>>for another month or so. That would be about two days of power for
a
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >COFDM
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>>transmitter of equal power.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>Fortunately, a network of COFDM cells could do the job with about
> > > >>1/10th the power, relative to one big 8-VSB stick.
> > > >>
> > > >>Regards
> > > >>Craig
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> > >
> > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> > FreeLists.org
> > >
> > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> > unsubscribe in the subject line.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> >
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> > ---
> > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
