The Idaho legislature will probabally pass this bill today or early next week, it will require all guyed radio and wind towers over 50 feet to be painted and lighted in the state. Power lines and towers for the military are the only exception. Every radio shop in the state will scream at the price, because they have one year to paint and light existing towers. Temporary towers also must be marked and lighted. Now we need to get the oter 49 states to follow suit.

http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legisl ... 0511E1.pdf

I did it.

They shouldn't scream as I have worked hard researching to keep it below $4k per tower if it is on the ground.
For reference the FAA's average figure cost on a plane crash is $3.15 million dollars and one of the Idaho Guard Apache's is $14 million and has two crew members.

We don't need 49. You can long ago count out Wyoming, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

If you want FACTS, PM me. I've been working on it and researching it for over three years as I was nearly killed by almost striking one in 2006.

Too many future uses for little sticks to snag our 17 legitimate uses for airspace below 200' in Idaho to not do something about it. Radio station's have found the loophole, RTK towers now popping up at 105', etc., etc.

Oh, also on the hook right now for below 200' legislation; Missouri (happening now), Mississippi, (just happened), Kansas (in progress I believe), and possibly Washington (Just into Oregon being the site of the first fatality from an unmarked met tower by an experimental aircraft with two on board).

On December 15, 2003, approximately 1416 Pacific standard time an Erickson SHA Glasair TD homebuilt
aircraft, N434SW, registered to/operated by and being flown by an airline transport rated pilot was
destroyed during collision with a pole/wires and subsequent ground impact during an unknown phase
of operation approximately one nautical mile north of Vansycle, Oregon. The pilot and passenger
both sustained fatal injuries. Visual meteorological conditions existed and no flight plan had
been filed. The flight, which was personal, originated from Yakima, Washington, approximately
1345, and its destination was reported to be Walla Walla, Washington (refer to Chart I).
An ear witness reported hearing an explosive sound and noted smoke in the direction of the sound.
Upon investigating the location he found the aircraft heavily fragmented at the ground impact site.
The aircraft was a single engine, homebuilt, composite, two-place plane with side-by-side seating
(refer to Attachment G-I). Records maintained by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) showed
the pilot/owner was issued a certificate of registration for the aircraft on July 31, 2000.
The pilot had been issued an airline transport certificate with a multi-engine land rating on May
31, 1985, including commercial privileges in aircraft single-engine land. Additionally, he held
type ratings in the Boeing 737, Beech 1900 and Swearingen SA-227 aircraft. A single flight log in
the pilot's name was reviewed and the total flight time between the first flight logged
(10/06/1966) and the last flight logged (12/11/2003) was approximately 11,212 hours. According to
records maintained by the FAA he reported a total of 16,150 hours of flight experience as of the
medical examination conducted on April 23, 2003, at which time he was issued a third class medical.
The medical contained a limitation that the pilot must wear corrective lenses. It was not known
whether he was in compliance with this requirement at the time of the accident. Toxicological
evaluation of samples from the pilot was reported as negative (refer to attached report). Post
mortem examination of the pilot was conducted by R. Stefancik, M.D., at Munselle Rhodes Funeral
Home, Milton-Freewater, Oregon, on December 17, 2003.
An inspector assigned to the FAA's Hillsboro Flight Standards District Office conducted the on site
examination. The accident site was located within an area of wind turbines and an anemometer pole
measuring 50 meters in height was observed to have the top portion separated and lying on the
ground near wing fragments, with the aircraft approximately 1,000 feet further east-northeast and
the occupants thrown clear (refer to Chart II and photographs 1 through 6). A post crash fire
consumed most of the aircraft. There were no known eyewitnesses to the accident.
The power company managing the wind turbine farm reported that Met tower number 132 stopped
reporting wind information from its top anemometer approximately 1416 (refer to Attachment PC-I).
The latitude and longitude of the tower was reported as 45 degrees 58.237 minutes North and 118
degrees 43.529 minutes West respectively. The FAA inspector reported the latitude and longitude of
the ground impact site as 45 degrees 58.228 minutes North and 118 degrees 43.296 minutes West

^^^^ You fellas working on passing this are actually and in reality "Saving lives"!!

lc


Is AOPA weighing in on this???
Ought to if they are not!

Later entry: I just called AOPA to see if they were supporting this. They were evidently unaware of its existence. I encouraged them to push for this legislation to be passed in the other states. Of course they sounded very favorable. Hopefully local pilot efforts with AOPA's help will get this passed in more states.

Lowfliyin G3- if you did it, congradulations, I agree it needed to be done. $4.000 to light and mark a new tower is probabally an accurate figue (I just stack them up, I don't get involved in prices), but a lot of companies are going to get upset about painting and lighting existing towers in a year and I expect them to scream very loudly. Also a lot of towers are at solar-powered sites and will have to add panels and batteries to keep the lights on. As for me now, this will have no efect because the state has mostly free-standing towers that are short, fat, ugly, and have lots of dishes mounted on them.

Oh, I'm sure someone will be screaming. I'm just screaming louder about being killed.
Here's what I know about our primary issue/offender, met tower's.
Most of the are claimed to be "temporary" in nature and only erect in one spot for a year to two years. If that is true then a majority of them up right now are either coming down or are already slated to come down in the next twelve months anyhow and the work can be performed as the move is made. If that isn't the case then they lied to me. On top of that fact it is highly unlikely that a tower in a northern icy environment would go much more than twelve months without the need to be tipped for maintenance or instrument changing anyhow, even if it isn't being moved, so the work can also be performed at that time too. This according to a couple of met tower erection companies.
As far as other, more permanent guyed structures that have been erected unmarked, 365 days should still be plenty of time to gather up the resources of contractors to get out there and get it done. They may have to start making phone calls on day 13, yes, but that will still leave 352 days to do so. Most of what we are asking can be performed by a crew of three in a day and a piece. The paint will probably take the most time but if I had a bucket of white, a bucket of orange, two rollers, some masking tape, and I moved my ass I could probably have one done in couple of hours on the ground. I just don't see too many that don't fit the bill for that description, maybe three or four out of 50. For those in the air, yes, more complex no doubt.
As far as the light goes all they'll need to do is throw all of that old crap away and dish out $550.00 (with mount) for one of these; http://www.carmanah.com/aviation/produc ... king-light
They are the model I used to create the bill. Cheap, self contained, will fill the spec for NVG's, 5 year life on the battery pack, and seven days of sunless autonomy (flashing at night only). Real easy to take care of overall.
It'll ruffle some feathers for sure but if it saves a life or two or three then it is worth it. I think that four fatalities, and a stack of "almost" stories is enough.

Thanks for doing this G3!

I almost got killed by one of those things when I was flying just east of Boise a few years back. Those met towers are just about impossible to see.

Another on the stack of "almost", you're welcome whee. You know what's up, you play in our country.

I mustered a great group of working stakeholders over the past three years, we managed to get awesome support from two wonderful sponsors that truly cared about our safety (Joe Palmer and Gayle Batt), Senator Winder who is a pilot himself agreed to take it from Gayle to the Senate, and the Idaho Aviation Association even got behind us right at the end too from a GA/search and rescue perspective, which I believe helped.
There is no reason for most of you to belong to the Idaho Agricultural Aviation Association but if you needed another reason to send in dues to the Idaho Aviation Association it would be Bill Miller, the IAA governmental affairs officer. He and Jim Davies (current President) show of support for this bill really shows that the IAA is truly passionate about anything aviation safety related in Idaho and are willing to roll up their sleeves to pitch in when it is needed.
If you think that this bill may have saved your life out playing at some time in the future you might send them a couple bucks for membership, they really are working every day to help GA in Idaho.
http://idahoaviation.com/

I had a close call myself about 4 years ago on the ridge west of cinnabar mountain, but I never did find out why the tower was put up there. It showed up as a bare tower with nothing on on it, stayed for about 2 years, then dissapeared.

G3, thanks again for your efforts and continuing efforts of this issue! $4K per tower to mark and light is a small price to pay for the safety of others. Plus, it's will put some contractors and business's to work for a year or two retrofitting these towers.

Not sure if this was covered in the other MET Tower thread. But who assumes liability if a plane accidentally hits a tower? The tower owner and/or property owner which the tower in erected on? Just curious