North Dakota tower

[Dave Doherty]

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 
been.

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, 
too.

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.

-d

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:47 PM
To: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@BostonRadio.org>
Subject: Re: North Dakota  tower

>
> <<On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:35:57 -0500, Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com> 
> said:
>
>> 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".
>
> -GAWollman
>
>