Safety of marine radar

[mickey]

What is the received wisdom about the health risks from radiation from marine radar mounted to a rib?

As we all know, there is concern over the radiation from a mobile phone, and from mobile phone masts. I am presuming that marine radar works at similar but not identical frequencies, and at 2 to 4kW, say, there is plenty of power to scramble bits of your brain. On bigger boats I guess there is the possibility of placing the radar sufficiently high that it does not irradiate one's boat at all, but on the A frame of a rib I'm not so sure.

[qcamel]

I have the same fears as you but have radar on my new Rib and feel that I will only turn it on if I need it and I guess when I need it then a few scrambled brain cells will be worth it. Scrambled head or run over in the fog is a no brainer if you excuse the pun...

[wavecrosschris]

As long as you are out of the direct beam of the scanner (so its above your head) i think you are ok with it on, the beam is very narrow obviously, as it is ommited from the rotating scanner, but at its highest strength. The stupid thing is, most of the radar arches on flybridge powerboats are designed so that when a radar is mounted, they line up directly with your head! People I know with them will not run with them powered up and guests on the flybridge for fear of frying them!!

If you go into most marinas and especially locks such as port solent on the south coast they all have signs requesting that your radar is turned off whilst there. I guess if you are exposed all day to the level of radiation that is emitted by radar then it probably would start to take effect. (not good if you work on a lock and have radar passing you all day at waist level! - probably end up with fried nutts ).

I hang around the other side of the kitchen even when the microwave is on! - I sure wouldn't risk a radar scanner at 5 foot away for 2hours (or longer if you're looking to cross the channel or something and you need it)

If you can't mount it a good 1-2 foot above your head at standing on a rib (so a good 7 or 8 feet above sea level), I wouldn't bother - the range and sea clutter would be so poor most of the time crashing around in a rib it would hardly be worth bothering with anyway - not to mention the damage it could do to your health! what i'm swinging at is, I think everyone knows someone who has been effected by some sort of cancer - I think the massive increase in the disease in the last 10 years is due to the amount of electrical devices, phones, antennas and radars that all give off some sort of radiation....It can't be good for us, but because we rely so much on the technology now, theres no going back (says me who is typing this on a wifi laptop with the antenna 10 inches away from my crotch )

[Charles]

Hey, I thought I would do a Codpiece trick and impart my unbelievable knowledge to you mere mortals: ps; thanks Google -

Radar systems detect the presence, direction, or range of aircraft, ships, or other moving objects. This is achieved by sending pulses of high-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF). Radar systems usually operate at radiofrequencies between 300 megahertz (MHz) and 15 gigahertz (GHz). Invented some 60 years ago, radar systems have been widely used for navigation, aviation, national defense, and weather forecasting. People who live or routinely work around radar have expressed concerns about long-term adverse effects of these systems on health, including cancer, reproductive malfunction, cataracts, and adverse effects for children. It is important to distinguish between perceived and real dangers that radar poses and to understand the rationale behind existing international standards and protective measures used today.
The power that radar systems emit varies from a few milliwatts (police traffic-control radar) to many kilowatts (large space tracking radars). However, a number of factors significantly reduce human exposure to RF generated by radar systems, often by a factor of at least 100:

• Radar systems send electromagnetic waves in pulses and not continuously. This makes the average power emitted much lower than the peak pulse power.
• Radars are directional and the RF energy they generate is contained in beams that are very narrow and resemble the beam of a spotlight. RF levels away from the main beam fall off rapidly. In most cases, these levels are thousands of times lower than in the main beam.
• Many radars have antennas which are continuously rotating or varying their elevation by a nodding motion, thus constantly changing the direction of the beam.
• Areas where dangerous human exposure may occur are normally inaccessible to unauthorized personnel.

[codprawn]

Seems I am NOT the only one to find Google useful

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6132856.stm

[Brian]

Dont you think that if RADARs were AT ALL a risk, the UK Health and Safety would have banned them long ago?

[codprawn]

It is down to the way they are USED - they haven't banned microwave ovens but that doesn't mean it's ok to stick your head in one when it's running!!!

[wavecrosschris]

Originally Posted by codprawn

It is down to the way they are USED - they haven't banned microwave ovens but that doesn't mean it's ok to stick your head in one when it's running!!!

...absolutley right - and the damage mobile phones can do has only been recognised as everyone has one and on a mass scale they have been able to monitor what damage can be done by them and the transmitters they place convinently on top of schools and hotels.

You'd probably be ok with a radar mounted close to your head on your rib the few times you'd ever use it, but then again you might not. infact you're probably more susceptible to other peoples radars, such as the wacking great ones they have ontop of the cliffs above port solent - however having your own not mounted far enough away from you undoubtly adds risk though.

[codprawn]

Actually a small radar close to you is far worse than a massive dish on the top of a hill. The signal strength drops off by the inverse square law - basically it means an electric blanket is worse than having your house under a pylon!!!

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by wavecrosschris

mobile infact you're probably more susceptible to other peoples radars, such as the wacking great ones they have ontop of the cliffs above port solent - however having your own not mounted far enough away from you undoubtly adds risk though.

So thats what screws up my IPOD whilst I'm on the M27. I thought it was just all those power cables. Guess thats one unhealthy place to live. Might be a time for wrapping your head in tin foil if you luive there.

[codprawn]

Got to admit this is more than a little worrying....

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11...ystery_solved/

Don't think my old Landie would have been hurt though!!!

[Stoo]

Originally Posted by wavecrosschris

...(says me who is typing this on a wifi laptop with the antenna 10 inches away from my crotch )

Ya, that's as close as I can get mine too...

[BogMonster]

Originally Posted by codprawn

Actually a small radar close to you is far worse than a massive dish on the top of a hill. The signal strength drops off by the inverse square law - basically it means an electric blanket is worse than having your house under a pylon!!!

There was a discussion on that here when the first mobile phone network was installed last year because one of the masts was a couple of hundred yards from a kids playground and the mummies started bickering.

The figures that came out were that you were safe from the masts used (which may be lower power than UK ones) at a distance 18 inches from the aerial, on a permanent basis! This is due to the signal strength decline Codprawn mentions. So actually mobile masts shouldn't be too dangerous unless you carry one round in a rucksack

[wavecrosschris]

lol, have you never noticed that green glow, often mistaken for the flats at port solent as you pass on the M27? - thats actually radioactive waves from the radars bouncing of them flats and making them glow green!

[mickey]

Looking at Garmin's website, I see that they advertise a 25 degree vertical beamwidth for their 2kW radar. Stuck atop any normal A frame and I reckon you're going to be in the way of the beam as it circuits the rib. So not much comfort there.

On the other hand, I suspect, but do not know, that to achieve adequate range marine radar will operate at a lower frequency (therefore longer wavelength) than mobile phones. I'm hoping this means they are less dangerous.

I say all this because having once been in fog without radar I would rather not repeat the experience!

[codprawn]

Mobile phones about 2ghz - s band radar about 2ghz but x band is 9ghz - over 4 times higher.....

[mickey]

... which would probably make the rf frequency for radar less safe rather than more safe (higher frequency is absorbed more by the human body, I think).

So the only comfort for users of radar on ribs may be the distance that they are from the radar. Assuming a mobile phone 1 cm from the brain at an average power of 1/2W, I reckon that this is equivalent to being a couple of foot from a 2kW marine radar (although I appreciate that the calculation is really coarse).

Any closer than a couple of feet (or any more powerful than 2kW), and the risks seem worse than using a mobile phone. At say 6 feet the risks are roughly one tenth.

[Manos]

Now I got confused

I bought a JRC 1000 Mark II Radar a few weeks ago. The output is 1.5W

I was told by friends that are involved with radar installations and I believe that they know a lot more about radars than I do that is safer than using a mobile phone. I this correct? Reading Charles' post I think that they are correct. But I'm asking for verification.

Also to say that the radar will be mounted on a pole 20cm hight on top of the A-frame. The beam from the radar is 7 cms wide.

Any info appreciated

[codprawn]

Originally Posted by Manos

Now I got confused

I bought a JRC 1000 Mark II Radar a few weeks ago. The output is 1.5W

I was told by friends that are involved with radar installations and I believe that they know a lot more about radars than I do that is safer than using a mobile phone. I this correct? Reading Charles' post I think that they are correct. But I'm asking for verification.

Also to say that the radar will be mounted on a pole 20cm hight on top of the A-frame. The beam from the radar is 7 cms wide.

Any info appreciated

The output is 1.5KW

As with all such things the inverse square law applies - for example you get more exposure to electricity from an electric blanket than you do having your house under a large pylon.

With a mobile phone it is clamped to your head whereas most radar scanners are a few feet away - obviously their power is much greater though - KW rather than a tiny amount of power from your phone.

Remember a radar scanner is exactly the same as a microwave oven - would you stand in front of it with the door open when it's switched on???

[Manos]

I'm not saying I'll stand in the front of it while is in operation and also I only needed for the occasional night crossing. Not much else.

Wow you made me worried ow cod