North Dakota tower
Mon Jan 4 16:02:28 EST 2010
AFAIK, the maximum permitted for new construction is 2049'. The
astronomical cost of such a structure would be out of reach for almost any
station in today's television economy, though - and it doesn't look that is
going to get a lot better anytime soon. So I'd guess, replacements aside,
that all the 2000'+ towers in the US that will ever be built probably have
There have been taller towers in Europe - one that was around 2,500', in
Poland as I recall, but as Garrett so directly put it, that one fell down,
I don't think there are any standing uniform guyed steel towers anywhere
that are much higher than 2063'. When they get that big, all it takes is
some ice, and maybe a breeze.
From: "Garrett Wollman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:47 PM
To: "Scott Fybush" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: North Dakota tower
> <<On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:35:57 -0500, Scott Fybush <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> I wonder - and should remember to ask some of the tower experts I know
>> when next I see them - what the maximum practical height would be for a
>> uniform cross-section guyed steel tower of the KVLY type.
> Don't be shocked if they tell you it's less than 2063'....
> The Warsaw tower was 2121' and it failed. The KXJB tower was 2060'
> and it failed. There's not much margin for error in these super-tall
> guyed structures.
>> I assume the only thing at all magical about 2,063 feet is that it's
>> the maximum the FAA will permit.
> Actually, the FAA won't even permit that tall, absent an "exceptional"
> reason. I think "exceptional" as currently interpreted boils down to
> "my old tower was 2060' and it just fell down".
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest