[aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers?
Larry Cerney lcerney at viawest.netTue Dec 14 18:04:19 UTC 2004
- Previous message: [aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers?
- Next message: [aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gerry, et al; Here in Colorado, and more specifically Denver, we have digi's located on mountaintops. The closest digi to me is N0WBW-4 located on Thorodin Mt. at 10,415 feet. My location is at 5,560 feet. The difference is 4,855 feet. So, it looks to me and most other stations that the digi is sitting on a nearly 5,000-foot tower. I sure that this same situation is found in a lot of locations around the West, and other parts of the world as well. Who wouldn't want to put a digi on a mountaintop? Larry K0ANI "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." --Albert Einstein -----Original Message----- From: aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager n5jxs Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 8:39 AM To: TAPR APRS Mailing List Subject: Re: [aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers? We can wander off into a number of discussions here. I suspect there are more than 180 towers in the world over 2k feet. That's actual Height Above Ground at the tower base. So: What's the Height Above Average Terrain? That is, in my opinion, the height that should be advertised.
- Previous message: [aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers?
- Next message: [aprssig] bad PHG, or lots of big towers?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
