An inventory that is current, not historic
What is on the mast today, read from the day it was flown, rather than from a drawing that was accurate at handover.
The problem
Everything about a mast is known by climbing it.
The record lives in drawings that were right once. It drifts out of date the moment a contractor swaps a panel, and the only way to check it is to send someone up: a day, a crew and a permit. So nobody does it to answer a question. They do it when something has already gone wrong.
The drawing and the mast disagreeand the only person who knows which is right is halfway up it.
Two teams, one uncertain recordcoverage and structural loading both depend on what is up there, at what height, facing which way, and both are working from the same guess.
A climb gets quoted before anyone knows what it is forso the scope is written from the drawing, and the surprises turn up on the day.
What it changes
What it changes.
Every line has something behind it
Each reading links to the photograph it came from. That is the difference between a number and a claim, and it is what lets somebody outside your team check it.
A first look that narrows what a climb is for
Before anybody quotes for one. The engineer knows where to point, and the scope is written from what is actually there.
One record both teams can use
Heights, facings and tilts matter to coverage and to load. They stop being two separate uncertainties.
The readings
What was read, and how certain each one is.
Every figure on this page says what kind of figure it is. That is the whole of why it can be used.
94.1 mmast heightMeasured, to about one per cent either way.
0.14%lean at the top, as a share of heightA screening figure. It tells you whether to look harder. It does not replace a survey.
34panel antennas, across five mount levelsRead by software, then confirmed level by level by a person against close photographs.
3sectorsMeasured.
Honestly
What this is not.
A first look, not a sign-off
It narrows what a climb is for and tells a structural engineer where to point. It is not a structural assessment, and a screening figure is not a compliance one.
A person checked every level
The software assists; it does not conclude. Anyone promising a hands-off answer on a structure is selling something we could not get to work.
Where a surveyed figure exists, it wins
These are good enough to see with, compare with and plan with. They are not good enough to settle anything.
No saving is claimed, because none was measured
The obvious thing to put here is how many climbs this avoids. Nobody measured that, so there is no figure for it and we are not inventing one.
Captured by Airweb’s drone pilot network. The flying is theirs and the reading is ours. Their logo is their own, shown on a dark panel of ours so it is legible here.
Got a structure nobody can see all of?
Tell us what it is and what you need to know about it. We will say whether this would answer it, including when it would not.