[BC] Lightning Prevention?????

[George Nicholas]

Larry- I've been a Lightning Master customer for a number of years and I
believe they work quite well. They are pliable enough that the tower
climbers don't seem to mind them either.

Just my 0.02

gn
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry Bloomfield" <Larry at Tech-Notes.TV>
To: "Broadcast Radio Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: [BC] Lightning Prevention?????


>
> Bruce:
>
> I respectfully suggest you visit: http://www.lightningmaster.com/.  They
> have a white paper on this very subject and many confirmations of the
> technology.  I also suggest you check out the articles I did for
> Broadcast Guide in their January 04 edition.
> http://www.tech-notes.tv/Sponsors/RadioGuide-J-F04.pdf is a link to the
> PDF copy of this article.  I would be more than happy to answer any
> questions off line.
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Larry Bloomfield, KA6UTC
> Bloomfield Enterprises, LLC
> 1980 25th St., Florence, OR  97439-9717
> (541) 902-2424 - Home/Office
> WWW.Tech-Notes.TV  -- See you on the Road Show.
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Doerle wrote:
>
> >Fellow broadcasters,
> >
> >Last week there was a brief debate on the merits of Charge Dissipation
Devices (ie lightning prevention or avoidance systems).  The debate started
in response to a message from Mr. Dana Whitehair of KUT, University of
Texas.  Mr. Whitehair's message, mine, and others are shown below this
initial paragraph grouping.
> >
> >Of course, this raised some hairs on the manufacturer's of these products
and number of messages took place in public and behind the scenes.  The end
product of these messages attacked me and eluded to testimonials as evidence
that their products work.  Most engineers and scientist know that CTS and
ESE products do not work; they have not been endorsed by any professional
scientific, regulatory, or standards body.  The manufacturers offer no
scientific proof of their theories and claim their products performance by
using testimonials as evidence that the product works.  However, there is a
significant fault in this logic.  The testimonials are from unknowing
persons who lack the knowledge to understand this questionable, unproven
technology.
> >
> >My issue in this message is to open a debate on the merits of CTS
(protection / avoidance) technology.  Lightning is an issue that most
broadcast must deal with and how you deal with it will determine the safety
and reliability issues of your broadcast site.  I do not believe that the
claims made by CTS vendors is clearly understood in our broadcast community,
and I would like to open this issue up for discussion.  I invite all
interest parties to participate.  I encourage you to read the messages below
to understand with who you are dealing.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>>whiteshark at mail.utexas.edu 05/03/05 11:39 AM >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >
> >Greetings once again from Austin!
> >
> >Did somebody say "lightning?"
> >
> >Anyone have any experience or insight - or both -regarding current
> >lightning "dissipation" systems vs. lightning "avoidance" systems?
> >
> >The "crown of thorns" that once adorned our tower has lost a serious
> >number of its thorns. I've been looking at replacing it, but have
> >been contacted by Lightning Experts, Inc. about installing their
> >"avoidance"-based system instead of the old dissipation system.
> >
> >Any opinions? Experience? Ranting? Raving?
> >
> >Thanks in advance, y'all!
> >
> >DEW
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
http://www.radiolists.net/
>