[BC] CTS viability

[Barry Mishkind]

At 10:10 AM 5/19/2005, Bruce Doerle wrote
>Barry,
>
>Come on now, the FCC is into RF, not lightning.

         ... and that may be changing, even now. <g>

>All the orgainzations listed in the interagency group have sizeable 
>property inventories that they must protect.  The FCC is a small fish with 
>very few standalone properties.

         ... but a large constituency with many sticks.

>  Except for the labs and the few remaining monitoring stations, the FCC 
> is generally clients in GSA leased faciltiites.

         I wasn't thinking of the FCC locations themselves.

>
>The interagency report really confirms the validity to using convention 
>lightning protection devices.  However, if you want detailed information 
>dispelling the elimination myths you might try reading the folowing:
>
>http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/magic.pdf
>
>http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/Uman_Rakov.pdf

         Does this play into Willie's comment that
         as the size of the charge (lightning) increases
         the observed phenomenon from the
         "little experiments" is no longer valid?

         I'm trying to get a quick grasp on this
         for everyone....