the 60W light bulb misconception

George Weston wrote:
> "Lenny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> http://nomasts.org.uk/index.php?opti...=50&Itemid=116
>>
>> A familiar piece of misinformation quoted by mobile phone operators is
>> that the emissions of a mobile phone mast are comparable to that of only a
>> 60W light bulb, and thus equally harmless.
>
> Well, I googled for the above "misinformation" and guess what I found - yep,
> the site you quote in your post.

Why do these groups websites never have a forum on them

--
Abo

---

› See More: the 60W light bulb misconception

"tony h" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Eeyore" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> Peter Parry wrote:
>>
>>> Amazing how none of these mysterious "clusters" of variegated
>>> ailments never occurred around them or in people working on them.
>>
>> Naval radars can apparently cook seagulls in flight.
>>
>> Graham
>>
>
> any evidence of this, or purely anecdotal?

I once worked with an ex-army type who said they would unhook the rotation
gear on their dish and cook wood pigeons from the trees when they fancied a
change to the army rations. They certainly have enough power to do it but I
am not sure you can stop the rotation on most radars which would have been
about when he was in the army.

[email protected] declared for all the world to hear...
> A familiar piece of misinformation quoted by mobile phone operators is
> that the emissions of a mobile phone mast are comparable to that of only a
> 60W light bulb

I've worked in the industry for nearly 9 years and I've never heard
that.
--
Regards
Jon

dylan35@say_no_to_lenny declared for all the world to hear...
> 10/10 for another cut & paste.

Did you notice the formatting change? Paragraphs 1 and 2 did not wrap in
my newsreader, but 3 did. Maybe it came from somewhere else?
--
Regards
Jon

Peter Parry wrote:

> On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 00:10:39 +0100, Eeyore
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> 10kW is way to low, even the AR1 found on every airfield ran 2 x
> >> 650kW transmitters at the same time. Pulse lengths varied from one
> >> microsecond for shorter range radars to 150 microseconds.
> >
> >These weren't microwave though. The previous poster mentioned waveguides, hence
> >microwave kit.
>
> The AR1 was about 3GHz, well into microwave (300MHz to 300GHz)
> territory.
>
> >> Most of the 3GHz radars ran about 500kW peak,
> >
> >Not in WW2 they didn't ! I got the figure of 10kW from E.G. Bowen's book 'Radar
> >Days'. That was the one out of the first batch of 12 made by GEC with 8 cavities
> >instead of 6 (there's a long story about that). The 6 cavity ones were apparently
> >only good for 6kW.
>
> That's just the magnetron output (and 6kW was true only for the very
> early models). Radars such as the WW2 type 54 based on Navy 277 ran
> 500kW Peak EIRP at 3GHz.
> --
> Peter Parry.
> http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

"Mortimer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "R. Mark Clayton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> And what's the incident power from the leakage of microwaves from a
>>> microwave oven if you are standing next to it? Is it true that this can
>>> often be higher than that from a wireless network when you are next to
>>> the router or the PC's wireless adaptor? Hence the interference that
>>> some microwave ovens cause to wireless networks, restricting the choice
>>> of available channels.
>>
>> Fairly low, but you will suffer damage from macro effects if you run a
>> magnetron exposed (e.g. interfere with oven interlock or climb up a big
>> transmitter).
>
> What frequency and power did WWII radar use? My grandpa used to tell me
> how you could put your hand over the end of the waveguide between the
> transmitter and the aerial (presumaby if you took the waveguide apart) and
> fell your hand get hot fairly quickly. Probably didn't do his hand (or any
> other part of his body!) much good.
>

There was a tale (and I think it was just a tale) that in the 1960's an
engineer claimed you could her the clicks on a big radar and so walked in
front of one at RAF Leuchars. After a short period he fell down [dead?].

Obviously this is the macro effect of absorbing a lot of energy, and similar
lethal results would ensue of you or your surface were rapidly heated in
some other way resulting in heat stroke or burns.

For large doses of uwave, I would presume that coagulation of the blood at
the absorption site, leading to circulating clots and embolism would be the
quickest way out, however where criminals have cooked live animals in uwave
ovens they sometimes survive, minus burnt appendages / tail.

"Eeyore" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Mortimer wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" wrote
>>
>> It was (I think) Chain Home: Danby Beacon in the North York Moors,
>> anyway.
>
> http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=5...&t=k&z=18&om=1
>
> You can only make out the roads that were left behind now.

Yes. I went up there when I was on holiday in the area and found the site,
identified by a noticeboard beside the road. There's virtually nothing
identifiable now, just a few cracked concrete slabs hidden among the
heather, than may have been the floor of a building with a basement below
it.

I wish I'd listened more closely to the stories he told me about the work
they did. I remember him telling me about the time he went into Whitby on
his day off and phoned my grandma from a phone box and was rather alarmed to
hear the talkback from the radar station to the central plotting site when
he picked up the phone due to a crossed line!

"Dave Higton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> "Gizmo." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Lenny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> You take ****wittery to the extreme.
>>
>>
>> > typical values of which, in the case of GSM, range from about 40 to
>> > 60.
>> > If we use an optimistic figure of 30
>> 40 to 60 ... figure of 30 ... what ? Turnips? carrots? dog ****?
>
> If no unit is specified, we have to take it that it's a simple
> factor.
>
> If we're going to point out what an idiot Lenny is, we have to
> get it right ourselves.

Which given the context and application detailed in Looneys' OP, can't be
the case.

"R. Mark Clayton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Eeyore" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> Peter Parry wrote:
>>
>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>
>>> >> 10kW is way to low, even the AR1 found on every airfield ran 2 x
>>> >> 650kW transmitters at the same time. Pulse lengths varied from one
>>> >> microsecond for shorter range radars to 150 microseconds.
>>> >
>>> >These weren't microwave though. The previous poster mentioned
>>> >waveguides, hence
>>> >microwave kit.
>>>
>>> The AR1 was about 3GHz, well into microwave (300MHz to 300GHz)
>>> territory.
>>
>> Not WW2.
>
> H2S ran at 3GHz initially (1942/3) and upped to nearer 18GHz (2/12/1945)

Ah! H2S. I remembering him mentioning that name. He also talked about a
modification to the system which was fitted to allow the bearing of the
incoming planes to be determined by mixing between two orthogonal aerial
arrays, adjusted using a "goniometer" (as a little boy, I thought this was a
very funny word!) for minimum (or was it maximum) signal strength.

"R. Mark Clayton" wrote:

> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Peter Parry wrote:
> >> Eeyore wrote:
> >>
> >> >> 10kW is way to low, even the AR1 found on every airfield ran 2 x
> >> >> 650kW transmitters at the same time. Pulse lengths varied from one
> >> >> microsecond for shorter range radars to 150 microseconds.
> >> >
> >> >These weren't microwave though. The previous poster mentioned
> >> >waveguides, hence microwave kit.
> >>
> >> The AR1 was about 3GHz, well into microwave (300MHz to 300GHz)
> >> territory.
> >
> > Not WW2.
>
> H2S ran at 3GHz initially (1942/3) and upped to nearer 18GHz (2/12/1945)

"R. Mark Clayton" wrote:

> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Peter Parry wrote:
> >> Eeyore wrote:
> >>
> >> >> 10kW is way to low, even the AR1 found on every airfield ran 2 x
> >> >> 650kW transmitters at the same time. Pulse lengths varied from one
> >> >> microsecond for shorter range radars to 150 microseconds.
> >> >
> >> >These weren't microwave though. The previous poster mentioned
> >> >waveguides, hence microwave kit.
> >>
> >> The AR1 was about 3GHz, well into microwave (300MHz to 300GHz)
> >> territory.
> >
> > Not WW2.
>
> H2S ran at 3GHz initially (1942/3) and upped to nearer 18GHz (2/12/1945)

I know.

I simply said AR1 wasn't there in WW2.

Microwaves are normally taken to begin at 1GHz btw not 300MHz as you stated
above. 300MHz would be UHF.

Graham

On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:08:58 +0100, Eeyore
<[email protected]> wrote:


>Peter Parry wrote:

>> That's just the magnetron output
>
>As it should be.
>
>
>> (and 6kW was true only for the very
>> early models). Radars such as the WW2 type 54 based on Navy 277 ran
>> 500kW Peak EIRP at 3GHz.
>
>You should know very well that EIRP includes 'antenna gain' compared to
>onmidirectional radiation. In short that's not a valid figure to use.

EIRP is the figure to use if Lenny's hypothesis - that there is harm
caused by non-thermal effects - is to be considered. His claim (or
at least that of the mast loonies) is that everything from ingrowing
toenails to hair falling out is caused by some as yet unrevealed RF
DNA damage mechanism which is caused by peak and pulsing emissions,
not average power. If that is so you would expect to see areas of
increased health effects both around radar sites and airfields and
also in the people who spent a lifetime servicing them.

There is no indication of any such areas of ill health and radar
technicians survive as long as any other retired servicemen. The
counter from the mastistas was initially the rather improbable one
that humans are only and specifically sensitive to the output of
mobile phones.

Now of course they have lumped DECT Phones and WiFi in the pot and
apart from the lack of credible evidence to support their hypothesis
it difficult to see why the human form should be uniquely susceptible
to WiFi at 2.4GHz and a few mW EIRP but not to a sodding great radar
going 24 hours a day at 3GHz and a few MW EIRP.

>For heating effect you can only count the actual average microwave output power. That
>was tens of watts.

Certainly for most WW2 radars, but by the end of the war power had
gone up quite a bit and in the 50's & 60's all sorts of things
started to appear.

The Type 85 didn't just produce prodigious peak powers but kW of
average power - and not a Magnetron in sight - it used Klystrons
(albeit very very big ones - not many valves are man sized!).

Quite a few later radars produced average powers >20kW. The infamous
Cobra Mist (FPS95) 6-40MHz Over the Horizon Radar at Orfordness was
designed for 10MW peak/600kW average power and although it never
achieved this it did produce sparks from ships rigging miles away
during high power testing.

The Pave Paw "pyramid" at Fylingdales stuffed out 175kW average power
per face on 433 MHz (it had a very long pulse length of up to 16
milliseconds) which explains why the car park some miles away was
always full of sightseers who couldn't get back into their cars as
their 433MHz key locks were losing the rather unequal battle with the
radar.


--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

"Mortimer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "R. Mark Clayton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Eeyore" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter Parry wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> 10kW is way to low, even the AR1 found on every airfield ran 2 x
>>>> >> 650kW transmitters at the same time. Pulse lengths varied from one
>>>> >> microsecond for shorter range radars to 150 microseconds.
>>>> >
>>>> >These weren't microwave though. The previous poster mentioned
>>>> >waveguides, hence
>>>> >microwave kit.
>>>>
>>>> The AR1 was about 3GHz, well into microwave (300MHz to 300GHz)
>>>> territory.
>>>
>>> Not WW2.
>>
>> H2S ran at 3GHz initially (1942/3) and upped to nearer 18GHz (2/12/1945)
>
> Ah! H2S. I remembering him mentioning that name. He also talked about a
> modification to the system which was fitted to allow the bearing of the
> incoming planes to be determined by mixing between two orthogonal aerial
> arrays, adjusted using a "goniometer" (as a little boy, I thought this was
> a very funny word!) for minimum (or was it maximum) signal strength.
>

The goniometer was a feature of the early Chain Holme system. It would give
an approximate bearing of the incoming planes by balancing the incoming
signals. More accurate DF is possible by rotating the crossed antenna
(looking for a minimum in one plane and a maximum in the other). The delay
gave a more accurate range. The size and spread of the return signal (seen
on a screen) would give some information on the size and number of aircraft.
Rough height was calculated using different aerials at different heights on
the mast (depending on distance planes would be over the horizon for lower
antenna). Reports from two or more stations would be combined to give more
accurate data and a fix.



Later H2S had an oscilloscope display which rotated in sync with the
transceiver dish with pulsed transmission (like modern radars). It was
carried on bombers.

Indeed, just because there is a 60W bulb shining doesn't mean that there is
anyone home...

--
Nigel Wade

While the OP is clearly deranged, I've got to admit that this has turned
into one of the more interesting and informative threads I've read for a
long
time, even if totally OT for uk.telecom.broadband!