X-GM-THRID: 1203191435393843265 X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf X-Gmail-Received: 75685e4c80fc7a0cca23f3c8d13089d1180525a2 Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com Received: by 10.54.72.15 with SMTP id u15cs60236wra; Fri, 12 May 2006 23:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.213.13 with SMTP id l13mr1676104nfg; Fri, 12 May 2006 23:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id r33si2770087nfc.2006.05.12.23.09.03; Fri, 12 May 2006 23:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1FenHT-0004Tv-JO for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 13 May 2006 07:07:11 +0100 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1FenHS-0004Tm-Uk for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 13 May 2006 07:07:11 +0100 Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.17]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1FeomN-0004O4-HY for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 13 May 2006 08:43:15 +0100 Received: from fwd30.aul.t-online.de by mailout02.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1FenGQ-0005bx-05; Sat, 13 May 2006 08:06:06 +0200 Received: from oben (r16EFYZa8eABfAPI-yadysER0MI2o6EEtgMpLAVwbTunvLoUQm0A44@[84.178.215.140]) by fwd30.sul.t-online.de with smtp id 1FenGK-1RbC1g0; Sat, 13 May 2006 08:06:00 +0200 Message-ID: <001901c67653$a36583a0$ee9bfea9@oben> From: "dj9dw" To: References: <4464C6E3.23575.95B164@localhost> Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 08:08:21 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-ID: r16EFYZa8eABfAPI-yadysER0MI2o6EEtgMpLAVwbTunvLoUQm0A44 X-TOI-MSGID: 226b1d00-f92e-4cc0-9b6f-a3020f72ae9d X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-1.137 Subject: LF: Re: Rope? X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5698 Mike and group, Titanex sells several kinds of ropes; among those Kevlar. (Isn't it conductive?) Regards, Peter, dj9dw ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Dennison" To: Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 6:33 PM Subject: LF: Rope? > I am refurbishing one of my antenna supports. It is supported by a > large tree and is raised and lowered using blue polypropylene rope > (from B&Q). > > The rope shows signs of deterioration - presumably from UV - and I > wonder whether I would be better using white polyprop, or nylon, > rather than blue polyprop. > > Nylon is a lot more expensive - is it worthwhile? I understand than > nylon is stretchy - is this a problem? Does nylon have a similar > breaking strength - the antenna is lightweight but takes some wind- > load and in any case I don't want any accidents, so over-engineering > is the order of the day. > > Any advice from those more knowledgable / experienced than me? > > Mike, G3XDV > =========== > http://lf.apersonalguide.co.uk > >