There is usually some JT-65 activity on the usual frequency. (I forgot which one it is...somewhere around 1836.) When I operate Olivia 8/250 on 160 I'm usually just above the JT-65 frequency.  I live in an HOA and don't have a permanent 160 antenna that works very well at all (It's just a wire stapled under my eaves about 10 feet above ground with not much of a ground system under it.  At night I attach a top loading wire and big loading coil to my "flagpole" and am able to put out a better signal.  If you'd like a sked on 160, just e-mail me and I'll put up my "Lazy 7" arrangement after dark some evening.  My e-mail address is good on QRZ.com. 

I prefer Olivia 8/250 for 160 since it is considerably more robust than other digital modes.

My guess would be  - yes, you'll probably have to re-tune something if you add elevated radials.  I'm not sure how you could elevate them much anyway since, presumably, your 6-BTV is already ground mounted.  I think adding a few elevated radials will just mess things up! You sound like you have a fairly decent ground radial system already in place and the antenna should work reasonably well as it is.  If you want to improve things, add more radials of about the same length as you already have.  I think opinions are somewhat divided as to whether or not it makes sense to use radials that are longer than the height of the antenna.  If you can add another 30 or 35 radials similar to the ones you already have you will probably hit a point of diminishing returns. A 6-BTV in the clear with with 60 25 foot radials should enable you to work lots of DX on 40 and up.  It will be a little lame and narrow banded on 80 but will do a reasonable job over about 30 kHz on that band.

Actually tuning a Sherman tank is pretty easy.  The tank in question was in a public park. I understand that it was tuned by means of a tank circuit.   

How about a Lazy H if you have decent supports?

K0S sponsors an annual "Strange Antenna Challenge" event each year.  I entered several years back using a boat derrick mounted on a concrete seawall as an antenna.  I think one of the past entries was a Sherman tank.  Check it out for some weird stuff.

The "Twilight Zone"

The "Erogenous Zone"

The "Combat Zone"

Yes, the story is disturbing.  I'm also very disturbed by my failure to see what possible connection this story has to do with amateur radio. 

Try making a "Lazy 7".

If you're able to install a top loading wire for use on 80 it should be considerably more efficient that a base loading coil.  I live in an HOA where antennas are prohibited and make do with a 23 foot "flagpole" for 40 thru 10.  On 80 I use the flagpole for my vertical section.  It has a 20 foot piece of wire permanently attached at the top.  When I use the flagpole on 40 thru 10 I leave the 20 foot wire tightly wound around the pole 3 or 4 times.  Then at night, when I want to go on 80, I unwind the wire, attach an additional 28 foot piece of wire to it and slope the resulting 48 foot loading wire down to a point about 8 feet up into a tree approximately 46 feet away.  It works much better that way than it did with a big loading coil at the base of the flagpole alone.  When I want to go on 160 I insert a loading coil where the 20 foot wire meets the 28 foot wire and add some base loading.  It's certainly no pileup buster ion 160 but I've been able to use if for contacts out to about 1500 miles on that band.  The antenna is basically an Inverted L in which the far end is considerably lower that the vertical section.  I've named it the "Lazy 7" - because that's what it looks like.

If you don't have enough room for a full sized top loading wire, make it as long as practical and insert a loading coil in the top loading wire rather than at the base. 

I'd go with a decent Log Periodic rather than a Yagi for 5 bands.  Not quite as good as a Yagi in terms of gain and F/B but far less hassle in the long run in terms of maintenance, repair and hassle factor. I went with an 8 element Tennadyne T-8 for just these reasons 10 or 15 years ago and it served me quite well.  As an added bonus the T-8 worked quite well on 6 meters even though it wasn't supposed to! No traps to worry about burning out.  No motors to worry about repairing etc.  The necessity of tower work in a new England winter is definitely something I'd try to avoid.

I'd also seriously look into a tilt over tower rather than a crank up.  Tilt overs are considerably safer and allow you to work on your antenna while standing flat on the ground.  I believe Rohn tilt-overs have recently become available again.  I also recommend Phillystran as a guying material.  More expensive at first but cheaper in the long run. It won't distort your antenna pattern and doesn't need to be broken up with insulators as is the case with steel cable.  Of course it also doesn't rust.  It's very light and easy to work with.  You would need to construct the lower portions of your guys with steel as the Phillystran is subject to abrasion and fire.

Try to keep the line away from nearby objects and in the clear.  Make it as straight as possible.  Make any bends as gradual as possible - avoid sharp bends.  Try to have it at right angles to the antenna.  Keep it up out of the way so people don't walk into it.  Install drip wires/loops where it enters the house.  Try to keep it from swinging in the wind.

I suspect you'll be wasting your time with the PRB-1 argument.  I also presume you should be "grandfathered" in at no additional cost with your existing vertical since it was in existence prior to the latest ordinance.  Paying $500 just to take a chance on putting a Hy-Tower right next to your house sounds like a bad bet to me - especially in view of (1) the cost of the permit application and antenna (2) the fact that your radial system will only cover 180 degrees rather than 360 and (3) the immediate proximity of the house is likely to screw up the antenna and may produce unsafe levels of radiation inside the house.  What do you realistically expect to gain if you are able to put the Hy-Tower right next to the house over your existing vertical? 

Nominations are now being accepted for the whiner of the year award.  The DX Forum has been chosen to host this year's gala event because it seems to attract more world class whiners than any other forum on eHam.net. It was really a tough choice to hold it either here or on the Antenna Restrictions Forum since both forums seemed to be truly blessed with a great surplus of chronic complainers   

Many of our most talented whiners would surely have been on the honor roll a long time ago were it not for the incompetence, spitefulness and general attempts at sabotage on the part of their fellow amateurs.  In proposing a nominee careful consideration should be given to the nominee's demonstrated sense of righteous indignation, self importance and feelings of entitlement.  Self absorption and the absence of a sense of humor should also be noted among the defining characteristics of a world class whiner. Carefully consider both the number of whining posts as well as their severity in your decision about who you wish to nominate. 

Of course we all have a pretty good idea as to who the top few nominees should be but my unbiased sense of fairness precludes me from mentioning any names or callsigns.  Even though they may not make the DXCC honor roll, the Whiner Award may be within their grasp.

My I have the envelope please...

The Zero 5 vertical should work better than the Hustler on 80, 40 and perhaps 30 meters but the Hustler will probably work better on 15 and 10 meters.  The 43 foot vertical should produce lots of high angle radiation on 17 thru 10 meters which won't be very useful for DXing on those bands.  On 20 meters the Zero 5 should have a lobe at low angles and another at high angles so it's hard to say which antenna will be more useful on that band.  You're probably going to need a remote autotuner for use with the Zero 5. The Hustler has got to be a lot cheaper than the buying a Zero 5 along with the requisite autotuner.  Bandwidth on the Hustler will be small on 80 (about 30 khz).  The stock Hustler doesn't cover 17 and 12 meters.  If you use a remote autotuner with the Hustler  I suspect it will be a more effective DX antenna on 17 thru 10 meters than the Zero 5 since the traps on the Hustler limit the length of antenna that actually comes into play on 17 thru 10 meters. Of course the Hustler uses traps which can fail and the Zero 5 has no traps to fail.  I've owned a number of Hustler verticals but never experienced a trap failure but my experience might not be typical.  Both antennas require decent radial systems to perform well.  I don't know if others will agree with my analysis or not.  If 80 thru 30 meters are definitely your favorite bands...go with the Zero 5.  If 10 and 15 are your favorites go with the  Hustler.  If money is the major issue, go with the Hustler.  It sounds simple, but you asked a pretty tough question!

We don't draw the line.  The FCC draws the line even though they seem to have run out of chalk.  BTW, please don't encourage the frequency police to identify themselves.  They manage to screw up things bad enough already!

Many people feel the same way when DX contests hog the bands for an entire weekend also reducing  the possability of intelligent communications.