Coyote Blog

21 Comments

1. Fraizer:

   If that gives you the shakes, try This:
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INbKYq0G9nU

   May 16, 2016, 11:25 am

2. Andrew_M_Garland:

   Those little bulbs are the hardest to change.

   May 17, 2016, 12:08 am

3. Dan Wendlick:

   To paraphrase another website, if all you see is a white male with an two-year degree earning more than a woman with an MSW...

   May 17, 2016, 9:10 am

4. morganovich:

   strong case for spending the extra cash on an LED bulb.

   May 17, 2016, 11:55 am

5. SamWah:

   I would never go up there. I have learned that Gravity is NOT my friend.

   May 17, 2016, 1:15 pm

6. Shane:

   If that was me I would forget something important that I needed.

   May 17, 2016, 10:03 pm

7. Bloke in North Dorset:

   Pedantic point, that's a mast and not a tower. Masts have guys and towers are free standing.

   May 17, 2016, 11:28 pm

8. bwbeeman:

   Wow! The sheer danger of climbing the antenna mast on top of the 1500 foot tower is chilling. I hope tower climbers make lots of money. From my experience of having worked at a broadcast station while in college, tower climbers are a bit crazy.

   May 18, 2016, 2:40 pm

9. bwbeeman:

   Blake: At least in the USA, there are two general categories of towers. Guyed and self-supported. I would suppose that on an ancient sailing ship, the masts are guyed, possibly indicating the origin of your observation.

   May 18, 2016, 2:41 pm

10. jdgalt:

    They're also absorbing risky amounts of EM radiation, at least if the station is on the air while they're up there. (I've never been one to believe in "danger" from your cell phone, it's emitting less than a watt and you're probably getting hundreds of watts from your computer screen. But any radio or TV station that uses an aerial that big is almost certainly pumping out at least 20,000 and maybe as much as 200,000 Watts, and you're a foot or two away. The energy drops off by inverse square of the distance, somewhat modified by antenna configuration.)

    May 18, 2016, 5:10 pm

11. jdgalt:

    The ARRL uses those definitions, but I don't see why everybody needs to.

    May 18, 2016, 5:13 pm

12. jdgalt:

    So you'd be able to climb it twice? ;-b

    May 18, 2016, 5:16 pm

13. obloodyhell:

    I can't say not having done it -- but though I certainly have an issue with heights, I think those cables he's using would keep me satisfied.

    How the heck you use them going DOWN is a bit curious to me...

    May 18, 2016, 8:03 pm

14. obloodyhell:

    Of course this one has a guy, you can see him on the screen... :-D

    May 18, 2016, 8:13 pm

15. obloodyhell:

    Was thinking this myself...

    May 18, 2016, 8:14 pm

16. obloodyhell:

    This has nothing on that Russian guy that does this shit without attachment gear, then hangs off things by his fingertips

    May 18, 2016, 8:15 pm

17. bwbeeman:

    jd: It is dangerous, and that's why the station transmitter is turned off when there are workmen on the tower. The antenna seen in the video looks like a UHF TV broadcast antenna, and at that frequency, it would be like putting the worker in to a microwave oven.

    May 18, 2016, 9:44 pm

18. Bloke in North Dorset:

    As I said, I was being a pedant. In the English language common usage trumps pedantry.

    May 18, 2016, 11:02 pm

19. Jon Moen:

    Where is this?

    May 19, 2016, 5:45 pm

20. patrick k:

    He should learn how to paraglide.

    May 21, 2016, 6:32 am

21. John White:

    I watched this many times and I feel vertigo just watching it. I like it at 6:15 when he scratches his leg. Standing on one leg, holding on with one hand, and the safety line is hooked over a simple bar with a flange to stop it sliding off.

    June 2, 2016, 6:19 am