VK Logger Ham Radio Forum Archive

Do you not think that this case and the other famous case in VK3 are used by councils around the country as a guide?

Lou VK3ALB, What was the "other famous case"?

Jim
VK3OX

"VK2MUS"The important part of this story is that people believe that they will be harmed by emissions coming from a ham radio tower - surely it is up to us and the WIA to over come this belief by providing information and education to the public based on science and fact not simply that the council regs say we can put a tower up next to your kids bedrooms
John ""

Agreed it is if there is a problem , I have no issues with a very large 6m beam , a huge mag loop and several vertical well into the sky , several neighbors have claimed interference but my log proves it's a local 11m guy which was resolved easily
for peace I have to tolerate a filthy plasma and bite my lip , and as long as the electric winch up is down during day light it's all sweetness and light .

My guess is that a lot of people take the view that if an antenna is big, ugly (to them) and easy to see then it must be dangerous!

Does this have to be a "tower"? Why not a ground-mounted HF vertical? Or if there are trees, wire antennas sited to blend in. VHF/UHF might be more of a challenge but a multi-band vertical could be mounted somewhere inconspicuous.

I moved from a QTH where I had a 16m tower and big beams to a small city block with neighbors close by. Although I have permission for a 10m mast I have chosen to go to 8m, and reduce the visual clutter by not putting up an HF beam and using small VHF/UHF antennas. Obviously this is not as good a station as I had before but I am on the air on all bands 160m - 23cm and having lots of fun and without any complaints.

I also agree that education is a key factor. Perhaps the WIA needs to come up with an education package in easy to understand language that could be used in such a situation.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

I also agree that education is a key factor. Perhaps the WIA needs to come up with an education package in easy to understand language that could be used in such a situation.

There are those among the general populace, that just will not move from their preconceived (ill) ideas, no matter what you show them.

VK3OX wrote:

Do you not think that this case and the other famous case in VK3 are used by councils around the country as a guide?

Lou VK3ALB, What was the "other famous case"?

Jim
VK3OX

Hi Jim

try here also search for Maciszewski v Casey either in the logger forums or Google.

VK3KCX wrote:

VK3ART wrote:A tower that magically grows in the dark, that doesn't have a Permit and falls ( say in a storm ) doing damage ( or injury ) to your property or your neighbours, may leave you without Insurance protection !
Russ VK3ART

Oh, don't be such a wet blanket Russ, when used within their ratings these things are a great way to circumvent oppressive local bureaucracy. Anybody can just pop down to Kenards or some other hire place, tow one of these home and be have an effective antenna system for contest weekend.

Bye the way, insurance is not "protection" it is more like a false sense of security, try making a big claim some day.

- David VK3KCX

Just being factual David. Put up a TOWER without the required Permits, you are on your own if it falls. Insurers DO pay when you meet the rules. I deal with them all the time.
Russ VK3ART Local Government Risk & Insurance Manager ( Ex Maroondah City ) !

Just a question Russ

In this area we don't need a permit for a tower or mast under 10m. If that falls over and causes damage will the insurer pay?

73

Wayne VK4WDM

Wayne,

If you stand it up without proper engineering in most cases you would be on your own. The amount of investigation by an insurer is proportional to the amount of loss they may incur. Damage a fence and most likely they will pay the claim and not even send an assessor - If it lands on a child and a Ferrari get ready for a visit from the teams from CSI,NCIS and Criminal Minds

Our council will waive the planning permit for masts to 8m but once they understand the scope of the project will only allow the mast to go ahead once a set of comps is provided for the structure and a building building permit is issued.

Insurance is a whole other issue as outlined above.

VK4WDM wrote:Just a question Russ

In this area we don't need a permit for a tower or mast under 10m. If that falls over and causes damage will the insurer pay?

73

Wayne VK4WDM

Trent has answered that question well. Permit height or not, must be structurally sound.
Russ VK3ART

""Just a question Russ

In this area we don't need a permit for a tower or mast under 10m. If that falls over and causes damage will the insurer pay?

73

Wayne VK4WDM""

Here the wording is such that good engineering principles as defined in the applicable rules should be used ( available from thier web site or engineering dept ) above 10m a permit is needed . Common sence is a major player in avoiding trouble ?

Is it normal to submit applications for pipe masts used to support the ends of wire antennas? I'm looking at lodging a BA for my 10m tilt-over mast to support a yagi or 2, but I also plan on putting up pipe masts on the block boundaries for my dipoles- didn't see any point in including them in a BA when the load they are carrying is bugger all...



Richard
VK2AAH

Richard,

In NSW, you can erect a flagpole up to 6m in height without a permit (with restrictions in Heritage areas), but only one (but there's no mention of the size of the flag you can fly). So, no need to mention in a DA. Check your local council's website, flagpoles usually get a mention. Some council's were specifying 5m max. height for flagpoles, but the Exempt and Complying conditions SEPP specifies 6m, IIRC.

You mention ". . . masts", meaning plural. I'd recommend you occasionally hoist a flag on your supplementary mast/s. Or, fly the flag on each supplementary mast in rotation (one at a time).

Keep in good cheer with your neighbours, especially when the sporadic-E is running!

Thanks Roger, sounds like a plan.

Richard

Neighbor disputes over antennas, height restrictions, building permits and engineering required on even simple masts, insurance issues, compliance with EMR regulations, etc, etc.

I am sure all this complexity is one of the reasons why AR is no longer attractive to most people as a hobby, especially the young (or their parents) and older people who can't afford the hassle and expense of setting up a station in today's world.

73

Wayne VK4WDM

VK4WDM wrote:I am sure all this complexity is one of the reasons why AR is no longer attractive to most people as a hobby, especially the young (or their parents) and older people who can't afford the hassle and expense of setting up a station in today's world.

I'm more on the glass half full side.

Licence conditions are easier and there's been an online information explosion.

Amateur gear was many times dearer (relative to wages) 30 - 40 years ago than now.

A general coverage HF/VHF/UHF receiver has gone from several thousand dollars to a cheap dongle and converter.

Even homebrewing (which hams have been forecasting the death of for about 70 years) is cheaper than it was.

A complete single band HF voice transceiver kit costs under $100. It's light enough to take portable - so no home station required.

But if you wanted to have something at home a squid pole gives a 9m height for under $50 and is good enough to support a thin wire.

And as a temporary structure it won't have any council issues.

Sure, a kilowatt station with multiple beams and radialled verticals is not cheap but neither is it necessary nor a realistic starting point. And opportunities with digital modes has made such stations less necessary for worldwide communication than they were.