Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:45 AM - Re: AAE Antennas (TELEDYNMCS@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AAE Antennas |
In a message dated 1/27/2009 3:06:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
europa-list@matronics.com writes:
Most transponders have a peak power of up to 250 watts not two
Kilowatts.
Hey Tim,
You are correct here. I misread the spec's on the data sheet. Peak power, as
listed for my Garmin and for a Narco that I have in another aircraft is
indeed 250 watts as you state. I misread the specifications under the transmitter
portion, but didn't catch that they were speaking about peak ERP for a
particular type of antenna for these transponders. That's what I get for trying
to
discuss technical issues before my morning coffee.
Again, there are indeed a host of other things that are higher on the list
in terms of safety. I wholeheartedly agree. However, I maintain that
unnecessary RF exposure at this power level is not something to ignore. I have
two
friends who have sustained serious eye damage, one of which is legally blind,
because they did not heed the warnings when aiming antennas while attempting to
achieve moon bounce at similar power levels. This eye damage was sustained
from brief, but repeated encounters with the signal radiating from the back
lobe of an antenna where the signal level was some 60 dB down from the primary
lobe. Once your retinas are damaged, that it. I'm not trying to scare
anyone, I just want to make them aware of the potential danger of repeated, close
up exposure to this level of RF. From my experience most people are not aware
that retinas can be damaged from RF exposure. I'm very cautious around RF
because I work around it regularly and have for over 20 years. I've seen first
hand what it can do to people. To each his own, I suppose. BTW, the
childbearing comment was meant as a joke, but it is well established that repeated
exposure to RF does indeed reduce sperm count.
As I have said here numerous times before, if you place your antenna at
least two wave lengths away from your person you will reduce your exposure by
96%. Two wave lengths at 1090 Mhz is, as you say, about 22" or 60 cm.
Regards,
John Lawton
Whitwell, TN (TN89)
N245E - Flying
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
cemailfooterNO62)
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|