Low radar mast heights

G

Gludy

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 Aug 2001
Messages
7,171
Location
Brecon, Wales
www.sailingvideos4us.com
At Southampton when looking at 55 to 60 foot boats from mainstream manufacturers I could not belive how the radar was positioned to microwave the brains of even the sitting helsman on the flybridge!

When I pointed this out to the two nost popular leading manyfacturers, I just got acceptance - i.e. this is the boat, there is nothing we can do. They were not impolite, just honest.

Do Health and safety have anything to say about these boats?

How important is it to others? To me, I just do not like the thought of frying everyone on the flybridge. My current princess will fry you if you stand up but misses you sitting down.

Is there a code of practice here?

Should it be reported to Heath & Safety inspectorate - or do the manufactuers do it on purpose to produce zombies that accept their new designs?

A magazine article on this with examples of the offending boats would be very useful.

Paul<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by kimhollamby on 22/09/2002 14:00 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
Dont often agree but on this point your dead right. I dont usually have the radar on whilst up the fly bridge. But just occasionally I forget to turn it off when coming into harbour. First thing I notice is a head ache. Then my eyes go sort of cross eyed. Cant stand it for long before having to turn it off. It's one big reason why I would not like a newer boat.

<font color=red> No one can force me to come here-----------
----- I'm a Volunteer! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Haydn<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by kimhollamby on 22/09/2002 14:10 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
Not quite

It takes a substantial ship radar to microwave someone working on the scanner at close proximity. I've heard some stories that were not very nice, to say the least, regarding accidental power-up of naval radars when people are working on them.

Regarding leisure boats I checked this out as long as 15 years ago when radars were sometimes mounted low (in other words this is not a new situation) and the advice from experienced technicians was that transmission power and dissapation factors on leisure boats radars was such that you would have needed to put your head inside the radius of the rotating antenna for it to do any harm.

I'm typing on the world's worst internet hookup at present (hotel TV) and so I need to leave it there for now but whilst a higher position is preferable not least because of the boost it gives to range I suspect there have also been trade-offs made in terms of keeing the centre of gravity lower on boats and making radar arches more structurally sound compared to their sometimes wobbly 1980s versions. I'm talking with electronics manufacturers at the moment and will try and get back with some up-to-date comment within a week or so.

kim_hollamby@ipcmedia.com<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by kimhollamby on 22/09/2002 14:04 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
Re: Not quite

So why do I get a head ache when the radar is on just behind my head. Not prone to head aches any other time. Not saying that it's dangerous but I cant consentrate with the bloody thing on.

<font color=red> No one can force me to come here-----------
----- I'm a Volunteer! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Haydn
 
Re: Not quite

you get a head ache becuase the bit that spins round keeps hiting your bald patch !!!! /forums/images/icons/wink.gif /forums/images/icons/wink.gif say no more ...

Adrian

/forums/images/icons/smile.gif <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/kelisha>Kelisha Pics</A> /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
 
Re: Not quite

Oh thats the other problem with low radar arches. Smashes you in the mouth if you turn round without ducking/forums/images/icons/mad.gif

<font color=red> No one can force me to come here-----------
----- I'm a Volunteer! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Haydn
 
Re: Not quite

If I put radar up top on my boat and did a sharp turn the bl***dy thing would keel over and capsize. All these new fangled gadgets, radar, bow thrusters, twin engines, depth sounders, GPS, computer ploters --- just a damn excuse if you ask me for when you c*ck up. Blame the fridge for not being cold enough........ come on be men and admit it.....

I do - always - it's WIND. parp /forums/images/icons/blush.gif


Adrian

/forums/images/icons/smile.gif <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/kelisha>Kelisha Pics</A> /forums/images/icons/smile.gif<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by lanason on 22/09/2002 14:15 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
Re: Not quite

Perhaps radar technicians are not the best source of information on the effects of radiation on the human body.

This point is mirrored in the debate over effects of cellphones which are believed by some to cause brain damage.

Naturally the manufacturers dispute this but there is a body of evidence in support of the case.

As far as I know no definitive research has yet been published on which to make a positive conclusion one way or the other.

Until that happens it is perhaps good advice to assume the worst and keep out of the line of fire.
 
I believe the damage that could be caused would be Cateracts on the eyes. HOWEVER! to be harmed one would need to be consistently staring into the Scanner at a range of less than 3'. As the Scanner is rotating even if one were to be within 3' of it the radio waves would be flicking past you so quickly as to be harmless.
In Haydn's case I suspect the headaches are caused by:-
{i} Hangover
{ii} Wife Nagging
{iii} Falling off his wallet and banging his head
{iv} Any permutation of the above

ô¿ô
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.freeware.mcmail.com/435.htm>http://www.freeware.mcmail.com/435.htm</A>
 
Re: Not quite

Comments noted but that was some time ago and awarness of such things has changed a lot over the last ten years. It really is worthy of investigation and not just from the trade view but the medical view.


Paul
 
Re: Not quite

Sorry, to make absolutely clear when I said radar technicians I was talking about the guys that play with this stuff all day and therefore stand to get a far worse dose than the likes of you or I if there is a problem. And yes, to answer Gludy's point, certainly any reference to electronics manufacturers would be with regard to H & S/ medical situation. These guys all sell into the US market so they need to be heavily on top of the liability issues and I would be surprised if there haven't been assessments performed in recent times.

kim_hollamby@ipcmedia.com
 
When I was a Naval type engaged in the role of anti corrosion technician (slapping gallons of battleship grey everywhere) we used to take 'Rad Haz' (radar hazard) precautions i.e. making sure they stayed switched off. It was taken very seriously so there must be something in it (accepting that the average war canoe carries powerful equipment unlikely to be encountered on pleasure boats - but it applied to the lower power navigational radar as well as the 'bedstead' type appartatus that adorned the top of the ship)
 
Re: Not quite

Not all boats have low enough radar masts that microwave the head of the helsman. Its a good article subject and if done sensibly should not start a scare. The truth is that I do not know if there is a problem or not.



Paul
 
Re: Not quite

Hmmm

Don't think that really answers the point

"these guys" are specialists in radar, not in the physiological effects of radiation on the human body, and as such, I would contend are not qualified to make a valid judgement on those effects.

The fact that they are selling the stuff can only cast further further doubt on the validity of their opinion on the matter.

Personally I do not know whether it is harmful or not. I do know that I once killed a tree with rf power, and trees tend to be resilient, so in the absence of proof that it is harmless I maintain it is only sensible to keep out of close proximity to the scanner.

Also worth noting that vertical beamwidth is greater than horizontal.
 
Re: Not quite

I used to work on various Radar (that's what I trained on). The standard unit was 1 mega watt pulsed at around 20-30micro seconds from memory, on an MOD training place where HSE issues were treated VERY SERIOUSLY we were told that safe distance was around 4 feet. Interlocks were in place if you got closer than that. Most people I know that got hurt by radar were either hit by the scanner or got a shock off the EHT voltages.
In theory the most common complaint is sterility, I've never known a jaffa radar tech!

Jim
-----------
 
Hi, there!
As a new user (from germany, Guten Tag!) I was just browsing through the posts.
And remembered an article I read yesterday in the german magazine "Skipper".
It was about a new police boat (29ft) on the lake "Ammersee", fitted out with a Furuno 1932.

In the article they mentioned:
"... and there is a layer of copper sheet plate integrated in the pilothouse roof to protect the crew from the radar radiation."

I don't now if officers fried their brains in the past years, but nowadays they seem to appreciate a little bit of protection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top