More dangerous electro-smog

On Wed, 24 May 2006 10:34:51 +0100, Lenny <[email protected]>
wrote:

>It looks like an adhominem attack to me.

Let's get this quite clear. I regard you as a racist, moronic
know-nothing who is determined to prove himself an utter twat by
quoting spurious pseudo-science that supports his bizarre and
technically wrong viewpoint.

If there is a danger from RF transmissions, scum like you are
destroying any chance that anyone will ever take genuine fears
seriously.

If you want to do your campaign any good, piss off and shut up.

This is ad hominem, it is a frank and honest assessment.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

---

› See More: More dangerous electro-smog

In article <[email protected]>, Peter Corlett
<[email protected]> writes
>tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>[...]
>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human habitation and
>> hundreds of feet up in the air with narrow horizon focused bean tilt
>> arrangements etc.
>
>Like, oh, Crystal Palace, hiding away in the uncharted wastelands of Zone 3,
>South London[0]. It's a minor fill-in transmitter at a mere 1MW each for the
>four main analogue TV channels, and also relaying various other FM, DAB,
>DTTV and amateur transmissions.
>

Notice the "generally" in the first part of that, and the fact that at
those sorts of ERP they are aimed very carefully at the distant horizon
..
You don't waste your "very expensive to produce" UHF output by chucking
it at the ground!....


Anyways Xtal palace has been there for a very long time now with no
adverse effects on the locals, but then again compare the filed strength
with a mobile close by, the what you'd expect to see at ground level in
that area. Quite a difference I'll think you'll find as well as
modulation mode, frequencies etc.....
--
Tony Sayer

In article <[email protected]>, Ivor Jones
<[email protected]> writes
>"tony sayer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] writes
>> > On Tue, 23 May 2006 14:13:06 +0100, Lenny
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > More dangerous electro-smog,
>> >
>> > So you are worrying about transmitters putting out a
>> > few milliwatts, maybe a tenth of a watt at most, and
>> > happily ignoring the 2,000,000 watt transmitters that
>> > are on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year to fill your
>> > tiny mind with TV pap.
>>
>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human
>> habitation and hundreds of feet up in the air with narrow
>> horizon focused bean tilt arrangements etc.
>
>http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/suttoncoldfield/index.asp
>
>Take a look at the last picture on this page.
>
>Ivor
>
>

Yep they built the houses round the mast, it was there first. Have a
read of "tales from a cold field" on the same site very entertaining and
well written!....
--
Tony Sayer

>Have a
>read of "tales from a cold field" on the same site very entertaining and
>well written!....

Yeah I spent about 2 hours reading (at a leisurely pace) that lot, one
Sunday afternoon a few weeks ago.

I'll never get that time back!

Some of it's entertaining though.



Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=fleetie

On Wed, 24 May 2006 23:08:13 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Peter Corlett
><[email protected]> writes
>>tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>[...]
>>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human habitation and
>>> hundreds of feet up in the air with narrow horizon focused bean tilt
>>> arrangements etc.
>>
>>Like, oh, Crystal Palace, hiding away in the uncharted wastelands of Zone 3,
>>South London[0]. It's a minor fill-in transmitter at a mere 1MW each for the
>>four main analogue TV channels, and also relaying various other FM, DAB,
>>DTTV and amateur transmissions.
>>
>
>Notice the "generally" in the first part of that, and the fact that at
>those sorts of ERP they are aimed very carefully at the distant horizon

Are you saying that only people on the "distant horizon" can receive
transmissions from the Crystal Palace transmitter? And does this apply
to all other transmitters?

--
Peter

please remove the invalid to reply

In article <[email protected]>, Peter
<[email protected]> writes
>On Wed, 24 May 2006 23:08:13 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Peter Corlett
>><[email protected]> writes
>>>tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human habitation and
>>>> hundreds of feet up in the air with narrow horizon focused bean tilt
>>>> arrangements etc.
>>>
>>>Like, oh, Crystal Palace, hiding away in the uncharted wastelands of Zone 3,
>>>South London[0]. It's a minor fill-in transmitter at a mere 1MW each for the
>>>four main analogue TV channels, and also relaying various other FM, DAB,
>>>DTTV and amateur transmissions.
>>>
>>
>>Notice the "generally" in the first part of that, and the fact that at
>>those sorts of ERP they are aimed very carefully at the distant horizon
>
>Are you saying that only people on the "distant horizon" can receive
>transmissions from the Crystal Palace transmitter? And does this apply
>to all other transmitters?
>

No the main output of the transmitter aerial is set so that the max
amount of power is aimed at the distant horizon. I've got an article on
it when I remember where it is. You obviously don't want to waste that
power in the immediate locality of the transmitter!....
--
Tony Sayer

On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:33:38 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
wrote:

>No the main output of the transmitter aerial is set so that the max
>amount of power is aimed at the distant horizon.

Much like mobile phone transmitters, then. Except that their max is
usually aimed about five miles away, not the horizon.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] writes
>On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:33:38 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>No the main output of the transmitter aerial is set so that the max
>>amount of power is aimed at the distant horizon.
>
>Much like mobile phone transmitters, then. Except that their max is
>usually aimed about five miles away, not the horizon.
>

Suggest you look at a typical mobile phone cell site and notice the down
tilt caused by angling the sector aerial down quite a bit. On broadcast
this is dome by phase shifting the feeds between the aerial arrays.

Suggest also you revise the five miles;!........
--
Tony Sayer

In article <[email protected]>,
tony sayer <[email protected]> writes:
> In article <[email protected]>, Peter Corlett
> <[email protected]> writes
>>tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>[...]
>>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human habitation...
>>
>>Like, oh, Crystal Palace, hiding away in the uncharted wastelands of Zone 3,
>>South London[0]. It's a minor fill-in transmitter at a mere 1MW each for the
>>four main analogue TV channels, and also relaying various other FM, DAB,
>>DTTV and amateur transmissions.
....
> Anyways Xtal palace has been there for a very long time now with no
> adverse effects on the locals,

Careful with statements like that - you'll have the anti-RF brigade
claiming that it has fatal effects on the elderly. All the then
old age pensioners who were within range of the Crystal palace
transmitter when it started broadcasting have subsequently died.

--
Tim Clark

"tony sayer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] writes
>>On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:33:38 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>No the main output of the transmitter aerial is set so that the max
>>>amount of power is aimed at the distant horizon.
>>
>>Much like mobile phone transmitters, then. Except that their max is
>>usually aimed about five miles away, not the horizon.

It will depend on the cell. Micro cells and urban macro cells will have the
transmission slightly down to reduce spill over into neighbouring cells (so
a phone will pick up on the nearest transmitter), and co-channel
interference in the next cell out.

>>
>
> Suggest you look at a typical mobile phone cell site and notice the down
> tilt caused by angling the sector aerial down quite a bit. On broadcast
> this is dome by phase shifting the feeds between the aerial arrays.
>
> Suggest also you revise the five miles;!........
> --
> Tony Sayer
>

For broadcast UHF / VHF transmitters maximum range is the usual
consideration, so the transmission will be planar. Well sited transmitters
(Winter Hill in the NW, Blackhill in central Scotland) can be received from
very far away.

In article <[email protected]>, R. Mark Clayton
<[email protected]> writes
>
>"tony sayer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] writes
>>>On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:33:38 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>No the main output of the transmitter aerial is set so that the max
>>>>amount of power is aimed at the distant horizon.
>>>
>>>Much like mobile phone transmitters, then. Except that their max is
>>>usually aimed about five miles away, not the horizon.
>
>It will depend on the cell. Micro cells and urban macro cells will have the
>transmission slightly down to reduce spill over into neighbouring cells (so
>a phone will pick up on the nearest transmitter), and co-channel
>interference in the next cell out.
>
>>>
>>
>> Suggest you look at a typical mobile phone cell site and notice the down
>> tilt caused by angling the sector aerial down quite a bit. On broadcast
>> this is dome by phase shifting the feeds between the aerial arrays.
>>
>> Suggest also you revise the five miles;!........
>> --
>> Tony Sayer
>>
>
>For broadcast UHF / VHF transmitters maximum range is the usual
>consideration, so the transmission will be planar. Well sited transmitters
>(Winter Hill in the NW, Blackhill in central Scotland) can be received from
>very far away.
>
>
Yes don't they. Once upon a time we had a Two-way mobile radio system on
Winter hill, used by one of the cable install contractors around the mid
nineties. Irish firm, and one of them took his van back to the old
county once complete with radio and discovered that he could talk to his
mates in Manchester from around the higher bits near Dublin!.

Thing was that reception was very poor in Oldham, due the aerials being
"wrong side" of the cylindrical mast structure!...
--
Tony Sayer

In article <[email protected]>, Tim Clark
<[email protected]> writes
>In article <[email protected]>,
> tony sayer <[email protected]> writes:
>> In article <[email protected]>, Peter Corlett
>> <[email protected]> writes
>>>tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>> Bearing in mind that are generally far away from human habitation...
>>>
>>>Like, oh, Crystal Palace, hiding away in the uncharted wastelands of Zone 3,
>>>South London[0]. It's a minor fill-in transmitter at a mere 1MW each for the
>>>four main analogue TV channels, and also relaying various other FM, DAB,
>>>DTTV and amateur transmissions.
>...
>> Anyways Xtal palace has been there for a very long time now with no
>> adverse effects on the locals,
>
>Careful with statements like that - you'll have the anti-RF brigade
>claiming that it has fatal effects on the elderly. All the then
>old age pensioners who were within range of the Crystal palace
>transmitter when it started broadcasting have subsequently died.
>

You've been watching too much Dr Who;-)
--
Tony Sayer

On Sat, 27 May 2006 22:42:52 +0100, tony sayer <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Suggest you look at a typical mobile phone cell site and notice the down
>tilt caused by angling the sector aerial down quite a bit

Suggest you stop trying to teach your granny to suck eggs.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

On Sat, 27 May 2006 23:28:28 GMT, "Tim Clark"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Careful with statements like that - you'll have the anti-RF brigade
>claiming that it has fatal effects on the elderly. All the then
>old age pensioners who were within range of the Crystal palace
>transmitter when it started broadcasting have subsequently died.

In all seriousness, this is a perfectly valid point.

So far, not only has no-one ever come up with evidence that mobile
phone RF has any effect on people (beneficial or otherwise) but they
have also failed to suggest any plausible way that it could have
effect.

However, if there is a health risk, it seems entirely likely that TV
transmissions would have the same effect.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

On Sun, 28 May 2006 20:41:41 +0100, hairydog wrote:

> So far, not only has no-one ever come up with evidence that mobile phone
> RF has any effect on people (beneficial or otherwise) but they have also
> failed to suggest any plausible way that it could have effect.

Fine, ignore peer reviewed research if you want.

> However, if there is a health risk, it seems entirely likely that TV
> transmissions would have the same effect.

And that is your peer reviewed and expert opinion is it?
Why don't you submit it and your reasoning to the same journals that
publish evidence contrary to yours?