Hi If the antenna is no higher than your house, it's no more likely to get hit than the house. If it's higher than the house by a few feet, the increase in hit probability is vanishingly small. Provided the antenna is grounded as well as your house power (as in *very* poorly) it's no more a hazard than any other conductor in your home. Run it down to ground level and through a proper protector and it's less of a hazard than the rest of the conductors in the house.
Food for thought: do you have metal downspouts on the gutters? A metal lining in the chimney? Metal heating ducts ? Any bets on how they are grounded... Bob On Apr 11, 2012, at 5:34 PM, Tom Knox wrote: > > This is a great discussion. I have been trying to decide the best compromise > between optimal reception and safety. Here in Boulder afternoon thunder > stormers are often a daily occurrence. > I cannot afford to learn from my mistakes on this one. > Thomas Knox > > > >> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:37:06 +0200 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Best location for a GPS antenna...? >> >> On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:06:06 +0200 >> "Andrea Baldoni" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:19:40AM -0400, Bob Bownes wrote: >>> >>>> I do like the optical isolation suggestion. While less than optimal, >>>> perhaps the easiest solution is not to put the isolation between the t'bolt >>>> and the antenna, but to put the isolation between the t'bolt and the >>>> distribution amplifier. >>> >>> By the way, would it be possible to retransmit the GPS signal to isolate it? >>> >>> I mean, rx external antenna -> preamp -> tx directional internal antenna -> >>> big >>> air gap -> rx directional internal antenna -> receiver. >>> The preamp would not be so power hungry as the full thunderbolt and maybe >>> it could be powered via a magnetic link (or a little solar panel with a >>> lamp illuminating it). >> >> Yes it would be. What you basically would need is to have a LNA, >> a bandpass filter and something that converts the voltage into >> light with very little noise. I think it would be easiest to down >> mix it first to 100MHz or so, then modulate a laser diode. In the >> house you'd have to mix it up to 1.5GHz again, of course. >> >> I have no clue whether that is feasible from the noise this whole >> circuitry will add or whether it would add so much noise that the >> receiver would have no chance... >> >> Attila Kinali >> -- >> Why does it take years to find the answers to >> the questions one should have asked long ago? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >> and follow the instructions there. > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
