Re: Topband: “FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016” to affect towers and masts over 50' in height.

I get why they want to do this, but it would certainly be silly up here in the northeast. Our trees are taller than 50' so shorter towers would just make the woods blink. 73, Sean WA1TE On Sun, Jul 17, 2016, 16:08 Donald Chester wrote: > It looks like this one was sneaked in

Topband: “FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016” to affect towers and masts over 50' in height.

It looks like this one was sneaked in over us, but it has the potential of severely affecting amateur radio towers and antennas. I have seen no mention of this from ARRL, and the news just appeared a couple of days ago in discussions on QRZ.com and the Tower Talk reflector. New rules would

Topband: 160m arrival angles

BIll (AA7XT), There's some (but not much) measured data at HF of arriving elevation angles (for example, Wilkins et al, Epstein et al, Utlaut et al, Wilkins again et al, and Hallborg et al). But I've never seen any measurements at MF. The only paper that comes close (at least that I'm aware of)

Topband: 160m propagation arrival angles, any real data out there?

Is there any good science on 160m propagation arrival angles? I've Googled this but don't find much. IONCAP data doesn't go that low. 73 BIll AA7XT Glade Park CO DM59pa _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband