Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [WestMichiganHams] Emergency Antenna Platform System

Expand Messages
  • Tim Deater
    Course tossing an antenna up in a tree on private property would incur the same liability issues. We just need wireless antennas... lol ... corporations and
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 18, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      Course tossing an antenna up in a tree on private property would incur the same liability issues. 

      We just need wireless antennas...  lol

      On Jul 18, 2013 12:10 PM, "Mark" <k8mhz@...> wrote:
      >
      >  
      >
      > That is a great invention!
      >
      >  
      >
      > But, remember that light posts are usually owned by either utilities or corporations and getting permission from them to put a robot on one of their posts may be tricky.  They will be thinking of the liability aspects, like what if the robot lost it’s grip and fell on or injured someone?  Or what if the antenna got electrically energized and hurt someone?
      >
      >  
      >
      > For every silver lining, there usually is a cloud….or something like that.
      >
      >  
      >
      > J
      >
      >  
      >
      > 73
      >
      >  
      >
      > Mark K8MHZ
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Hank Greeb
      > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 9:40 AM
      > To: westmichiganhams@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Emergency Antenna Platform System
      >
      >  
      >
      >  
      >
      > From a friend in SW Ohio - might work for an upcoming next field day?
      >
      > When one looks at this one says, "Duh! Why didn't we think of that years
      > ago?" Looks to me plain old Mechanical/Electrical Engineering project.
      > But it took a few High School folks who didn't know any better than
      > to tackle the problem to make it work!
      >
      > ===================
      >
      > WN8U from Milford ARC sent this link to me...I found it fascinating. Any
      > robotics enthusiasts in the local groups?
      >
      > http://wc2fd.com/index.php?title=Emergency_Antenna_Platform_System -73-
      >
      >

    • Richards
      ... ______________________________________________ I agree ! While I don t claim to know much about the risk of loss or legal liability liability in such cases
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 18, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On 7/18/2013 12:19 PM, Tim Deater wrote:
        >
        >
        > Course tossing an antenna up in a tree on private property would incur
        > the same liability issues.
        >
        > We just need wireless antennas... lol

        ______________________________________________


        I agree !

        While I don't claim to know much about the
        risk of loss or legal liability liability in
        such cases ... I think this is a fairly low
        risk item - certainly lower risk than many
        temporary masts or towers and other temporary
        antenna installations I have seen.

        I think it is more likely the utility pole used
        will be a light pole, as used in the demo video,
        owned by a church, school, or shopping center,
        than an actually utility pole owned by a utility
        company, and permission may, therefore, be much
        easier to obtain than from an off site utility
        company.

        Moreover, I doubt this "nut" would fall too far
        from the "tree" if it were to fall, and it should
        be a fairly easy matter to keep people from
        standing directly under it during operations.
        Beyond that, a dipole is a dipole and if it let
        go, it would be same as falling from some other
        temporary support, as Tim suggests.

        So, while not offering a legal opinion by someone
        who really knows anything about this sort of thing,
        although I once assisted another lawyer obtain a
        seven figure Judgment against a tower manufacturer
        for product liability... I consider this is a fairly
        low risk item.

        BUT IT IS ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO ANALYZE AND DISCUSS
        THIS SORT OF THING - because it can only lead to
        better, safer and more sensible implementation.
        I wish more hams would pose such issues and ask
        this sort of question before embarking on any
        temporary mast or tower project.

        This is just MY take, after all... your mileage may vary.

        But, again, this is a very important consideration too rarely explored
        in such matters.

        --------------- K8JHR --------------------
      • n8xxham
        In case of emergency, I ve found it best to do what is needed first, and beg for forgiveness later if someone second guesses one s actions. Note that the
        Message 3 of 7 , Jul 19, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          In case of emergency, I've found it best to do what is needed first, and beg for forgiveness later if someone "second guesses" one's actions.

          Note that the light pole in the video was a "yard light" type pole, on a parking lot, "probably" not owned by a municipality or other governmental agency. Since it was to be demonstrated widely, "probably" the trustee of the club station involve sought written permission for the demo.

          But, if I were in a situation where all the power was down, I had one of the robotic pole climbers and other stuff for a needed antenna for my repeater and/or a HF wire, I'd "just do it".

          One can be hemmed in by fear of whatever "might happen" to such a point which nothing can be done.

          72/73 de n8xx Hg
          QRP >99.44% of the time

          --- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <k8mhz@...> wrote:
          >
          > That is a great invention!
          >
          > But, remember that light posts are usually owned by either
          > utilities or corporations and getting permission from them to put
          > a robot on one of their posts may be tricky. They will be thinking
          > of the liability aspects, like what if the robot lost it's grip and
          > fell on or injured someone? Or what if the antenna got
          > electrically energized and hurt someone?
          >
          > For every silver lining, there usually is a cloud….or something
          > like that.
          >
          > :-)
          >
          > 73
          >
          > Mark K8MHZ
          >
          >
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Hank Greeb
          > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 9:40 AM
          > To: westmichiganhams@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Emergency Antenna Platform System
          >
          >
          > From a friend in SW Ohio - might work for an upcoming next field
          > day?
          >
          > When one looks at this one says, "Duh! Why didn't we think of that
          > years ago?" Looks to me plain old Mechanical/Electrical Engineering
          > project. But it took a few High School folks who didn't know any
          > better than to tackle the problem to make it work!
        • Richards
          ... That is a risky plan in a highly litigious society. probably the trustee of the club station involve sought written permission for the demo. I agree.
          Message 4 of 7 , Jul 19, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On 7/19/2013 11:21 AM, n8xxham wrote:
            > In case of emergency, I've found it best to do what is needed first, and beg for forgiveness later if someone "second guesses" one's actions.


            That is a risky plan in a highly litigious society.




            "probably" the trustee of the club station involve sought written
            permission for the demo.



            I agree. Mark's point applies in case of an
            actual emergency deployment where advance
            arrangements and permission unlikely.





            > But, if I were in a situation where all the power was down, I had one of the robotic pole climbers and other stuff for a needed antenna for my repeater and/or a HF wire, I'd "just do it".



            Understood. And most often you will be OK for
            acting first and asking questions later - but
            not always. I think it wise to consider the
            issues raised by Mark's post and be very careful
            so as to minimize risk and potential liability.
            In an emergency, one does what one must, but one
            must be very careful to avoid liability even in
            an emergency.



            > One can be hemmed in by fear of whatever "might happen" to such a point which nothing can be done.



            Yes. But acting without regard to an obvious
            and known risk may be foolish. One must carefully
            balance the need to provide emergency communications
            against the need to avoid doing so in a dangerous
            manner. Mark is wise to identify dangerous and
            risky aspects of this sort of operation. One cannot
            always avoid the risk of loss and liability to
            others simply by acting in good faith and pointing
            to the emergency nature of the operation.


            As with so many things, one will be judged on
            the reasonableness of his actions, and the
            extent of emergency will be but one factor in
            the assessment of what is reasonable under the
            circumstances.

            I may disagree with Mark on the extent of
            exposure to liability... but I strongly agree on
            the need for a careful assessment of the risk
            of loss and extent of liability in such cases.
            He raises a very important question that would
            apply to any similar operation. You may not
            be able to escape liability for a mishap by
            saying you were acting in good faith during
            an emergency.



            Just MY take.
            ===================== K8JHR ========================
          • Mark
            Jim, Thanks for your support! FWIW, I may look at safety a bit closer than others. I spent years working as a construction electrician. Part of our training
            Message 5 of 7 , Jul 20, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Jim,

              Thanks for your support!

              FWIW, I may look at safety a bit closer than others. I spent years working
              as a construction electrician. Part of our training was taking OSHA 10 and
              OSHA 30 classes. Trust me, once OSHA presents their very graphic videos to
              you, you will never again look at 'accidents' the same.

              I also may have a more cautious take on being sued. At least once a month
              in martial arts class we are instructed on how to not get sued for
              protecting ourselves. We are told that pretty much, if you are an adult
              martial artist and you kick the snot out of someone that has attacked you,
              you WILL go to court and have to defend your actions. So, today, if you are
              attacked you may have to defend yourself twice. Once on the street and then
              again in court.

              Was it like that 37 years ago when I first walked into a karate dojo? Not
              even close. We did get instruction on legal issues, but it was mostly on
              issues like excessive force. And it wasn't dwelled upon all that much. In
              Tae Kwon Do, I don't even remember the subject being brought up.

              I also had the good fortune over the years to work with engineers of all
              sorts. The first time I saw the robot climb the pole all I could think of
              was 'what could possibly go wrong?' and who was going to get smacked when
              the thing let loose of it's hold.

              Has anyone bothered to take a look at weapons laws in Michigan? Did you
              know that slingshots are illegal in Michigan? Yes, even the kind we use for
              putting up antennas. There are no exceptions, ALL slingshots are illegal in
              Michigan.

              Here is the law:

              750.224 Weapons; manufacture, sale, or possession as felony; violation as
              felony; penalty; exceptions; "muffler" or "silencer" defined.
              Sec. 224.
              (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of
              the following:
              (a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot
              automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single
              function of the trigger.
              (b) A muffler or silencer.
              (c) A bomb or bombshell.
              (d) A blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag,
              or bludgeon.
              (e) A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed to
              render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection,
              release, or emission of a gas or other substance.
              (2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony, punishable
              by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than
              $2,500.00, or both.
              (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:
              (a) A self-defense spray or foam device as defined in section 224d.
              (b) A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions of war by
              virtue of a contract with a department of the government of the United
              States.
              (c) A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States
              or the secretary's delegate to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun,
              or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in
              subsection (1).
              (4) As used in this chapter, "muffler" or "silencer" means 1 or more of the
              following:
              (a) A device for muffling, silencing, or deadening the report of a firearm.
              (b) A combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in
              assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer.
              (c) A part, designed or redesigned, and intended only for use in assembling
              or fabricating a muffler or silencer.

              History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.224 ;-- Am.
              1959, Act 175, Eff. Mar. 19, 1960 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 564, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29,
              1978 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 346, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 321, Eff.
              Mar. 28, 1991 ;-- Am. 1991, Act 33, Imd. Eff. June 10, 1991 ;-- Am. 2006,
              Act 401, Eff. Dec. 28, 2006
              Constitutionality: The Michigan supreme court held that the statute was not
              unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendant in People v Lynch, 410
              Mich 343; 301 NW2d 796 (1981).
              Former Law: See section 3 of Act 372 of 1927, being CL 1929, § 16751; and
              Act 206 of 1929.

              (c) 2009 Legislative Council, State of Michigan

              Now, it may be argued that the actual word is 'slungshot' which of course is
              a typo. Nonetheless, there is no exception for using any of the above to
              put up antennas.

              Notice that 'nunchucks' aren't part of the list? Many people think they are
              illegal to possess, which they are not here in Michigan. Only four states
              have laws against them.

              I really like all the hams I know and that are part of this forum. I don't
              want any of them to get sued and I surely don't want any of them to get
              hurt.

              If a retired lawyer is giving you advice, I would strongly consider taking
              it. I am sure he has the same goal in mind as I did when I made the
              original post, that goal being keeping people from getting sued or injured.

              We want ham radio to bring us fun and happiness, not stress and injury.

              73

              Mark K8MHZ








              -----Original Message-----
              From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Richards
              Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 7:55 PM
              To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Emergency Antenna Platform System


              On 7/19/2013 11:21 AM, n8xxham wrote:
              > In case of emergency, I've found it best to do what is needed first, and
              beg for forgiveness later if someone "second guesses" one's actions.


              That is a risky plan in a highly litigious society.




              "probably" the trustee of the club station involve sought written
              permission for the demo.



              I agree. Mark's point applies in case of an
              actual emergency deployment where advance
              arrangements and permission unlikely.





              > But, if I were in a situation where all the power was down, I had one of
              the robotic pole climbers and other stuff for a needed antenna for my
              repeater and/or a HF wire, I'd "just do it".



              Understood. And most often you will be OK for
              acting first and asking questions later - but
              not always. I think it wise to consider the
              issues raised by Mark's post and be very careful
              so as to minimize risk and potential liability.
              In an emergency, one does what one must, but one
              must be very careful to avoid liability even in
              an emergency.



              > One can be hemmed in by fear of whatever "might happen" to such a point
              which nothing can be done.



              Yes. But acting without regard to an obvious
              and known risk may be foolish. One must carefully
              balance the need to provide emergency communications
              against the need to avoid doing so in a dangerous
              manner. Mark is wise to identify dangerous and
              risky aspects of this sort of operation. One cannot
              always avoid the risk of loss and liability to
              others simply by acting in good faith and pointing
              to the emergency nature of the operation.


              As with so many things, one will be judged on
              the reasonableness of his actions, and the
              extent of emergency will be but one factor in
              the assessment of what is reasonable under the
              circumstances.

              I may disagree with Mark on the extent of
              exposure to liability... but I strongly agree on
              the need for a careful assessment of the risk
              of loss and extent of liability in such cases.
              He raises a very important question that would
              apply to any similar operation. You may not
              be able to escape liability for a mishap by
              saying you were acting in good faith during
              an emergency.



              Just MY take.
              ===================== K8JHR ========================


              ------------------------------------

              Yahoo! Groups Links
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.