Weather radar and health
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather radar and health
Anyone out there know anything about the potential health risks caused by the operation of your weather radar. Are modern radars more healthy than old ones? Is there a trend about the type of health risks . Indeed, has a study ever been carried out or is this an area that industry would rather not investigate? Any opinions, especially if backed up by research would be most welcome.
I would suggest that as you're sat behind the antenna (presuming your refererring to possible harm to pilots?), then I would suggest the risk is minimal. There are safe ranges promulgated by manufacturers for use on the ground.
Modern weather radars are very low power items - they rely on extremely sensitive receivers to provide long range cover.
Here's a little experiment you might try - call up the electrics page on your aircraft next time you fly. Note the current being drawn from the gens. Now switch the radar from STBY to ON and see the change in current drawn - you may not even be able to detect it. Try switching from OFF to STBY as well, just to satisfy yourself. Now monitor the same page as you select a landing light on - you'll almost certainly see the increase in current resulting from that. Not exactly science, but it gives an indication that we're not talking about huge power here.
In short, no cover-up, no conspiracy - sleep tight :-)
Modern weather radars are very low power items - they rely on extremely sensitive receivers to provide long range cover.
Here's a little experiment you might try - call up the electrics page on your aircraft next time you fly. Note the current being drawn from the gens. Now switch the radar from STBY to ON and see the change in current drawn - you may not even be able to detect it. Try switching from OFF to STBY as well, just to satisfy yourself. Now monitor the same page as you select a landing light on - you'll almost certainly see the increase in current resulting from that. Not exactly science, but it gives an indication that we're not talking about huge power here.
In short, no cover-up, no conspiracy - sleep tight :-)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Modern WX radars have a very short hazard range. Our supplier (Collins) said once that it was 2 m. This applies for array radars with digital circuitry. There are still a lot of old fashioned radars around, in old DC-9s, 737 and Russian planes. They produced the rays in a tube, consuming lots of energy. It was basically an x-ray machine.
Still I wouldn't believe the numbers, since the very same people would also say that hand phones are not dangereous...
There is still no proof or disproof of all these things.
There is also a wide spread misconception about radar rays and their influence on biological tissue: Unlike radioactice rays, they are not "stored" in the tissue. It all depends how much you receive this very moment. If it's too much, you might encounter cell decay. It's basically a microwave oven. If it's too long, it's cooked.
Dani
Still I wouldn't believe the numbers, since the very same people would also say that hand phones are not dangereous...
There is still no proof or disproof of all these things.There is also a wide spread misconception about radar rays and their influence on biological tissue: Unlike radioactice rays, they are not "stored" in the tissue. It all depends how much you receive this very moment. If it's too much, you might encounter cell decay. It's basically a microwave oven. If it's too long, it's cooked.
Dani
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Golden Rivett is correct, not a particular problem with airbourne weather radar, at least what you find on more modern aircraft.
However, should you feel the need to stand in front of an old DEW line radar, it would be a different story...
However, should you feel the need to stand in front of an old DEW line radar, it would be a different story...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ???
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
once at our operator we had a captain throwing a fit about how the wx radar was mistakenly left on a crj900 while he was doing a walk around check of the aircraft. He was worried about the possible health problem's and radiation he might have recieved while standing in front of the antenna. this prompted him to check the books and he found that it's not harmful unless you stand closer than 60cm from the antenna.
Interesting: the Flight Manual for my current type says avoid using the RADAR if people will be within 50 ft and within the 120 degree arc. I must delve deeper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: down-route
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
InSoMnIaC, we had a similar thing with an old skipper and an ATR. The old boy had a real go at the idiot in the right-hand seat for not turning the radar off (following the previous flight) before the skipper's walk-round.
From a purely practical viewpoint, I think type of aircraft comes into it as well. On turbo-props and regional jets the antenna is at chest or head level when walking past the nose. Whereas on a B747 or B777 it's a few feet above you and even then it might not be pointing directly at you - even if you're very close to the aircraft. As a result, I would imagine there's less risk with a 747/777 aircraft than with a TP or RJ.
From a purely practical viewpoint, I think type of aircraft comes into it as well. On turbo-props and regional jets the antenna is at chest or head level when walking past the nose. Whereas on a B747 or B777 it's a few feet above you and even then it might not be pointing directly at you - even if you're very close to the aircraft. As a result, I would imagine there's less risk with a 747/777 aircraft than with a TP or RJ.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I'm the one about to do the walk-round I always check for myself that it is switched off beforehand. Then I know for sure that it is off (unless my FO doesn't like me and switches it on again after I have left the flight deck!).
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest side lobe of a radar is backwards so apart from direct irradiation, the flight crew are actually sat in the worst place. Good news though is that modern wx radars do not produce that much power.
In the old days sitting behind an Air Intercept radar was considered to carry some risk but not as much as hitting the ground or another aircraft at 1,000 knots.
In the old days sitting behind an Air Intercept radar was considered to carry some risk but not as much as hitting the ground or another aircraft at 1,000 knots.
Beacon Outbound
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: "Home is were the answer machine is"
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
View from the Health Physics Society on wx radar
http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q315.html
Not associated with them, just posting the link.
Not associated with them, just posting the link.
About the Health Physics Society
The Health Physics Society is a scientific and professional organization whose members specialize in occupational and environmental radiation safety.
The Health Physics Society is a scientific and professional organization whose members specialize in occupational and environmental radiation safety.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The old Wx radars use a magnetron for power, on the order of 60,000 watts peak power - in pulses. That is about 700 watts average power, same as a full size microwave oven, which also uses a magnetron. You may worry about your Wx radar on a walkaround, but how about the microwave oven in the lounge that was made by semi-slave labor to questionable compliance with industry standards?
The solid state radars, beginning in about 1980, typically are less than 150 watts peak power - less than one watt average power, so you will be hit in the head by the swinging antenna before you are close enough to be exposed to significant radiation.
Even with Wx radar power, you would have to be running it facing a steel wall to have enough power mirrored into the cockpit to matter. Wx radar will not penetrate metal. Sidelobes in modern flat plate antennas and radomes are almost nonexistent, and with the advent of forward looking windshear systems, their sidelobes have been suppressed to zilch.
While you nervous nellies are fixating on the Wx radar, largely because of its name, do you put the TCAS and DMEs in standby while on the ground? They are typically in the realm of 500 watts peak power, and a decent walkaround will get you up close to them.
One way to know if your Wx radar in your DC-x or old Boeing or A300B4 is magnetron or solid state is to note warmup time. If not already in standby, a magetron takes up to a minute or more to warm up and begin transmitting.
GB
The solid state radars, beginning in about 1980, typically are less than 150 watts peak power - less than one watt average power, so you will be hit in the head by the swinging antenna before you are close enough to be exposed to significant radiation.
Even with Wx radar power, you would have to be running it facing a steel wall to have enough power mirrored into the cockpit to matter. Wx radar will not penetrate metal. Sidelobes in modern flat plate antennas and radomes are almost nonexistent, and with the advent of forward looking windshear systems, their sidelobes have been suppressed to zilch.
While you nervous nellies are fixating on the Wx radar, largely because of its name, do you put the TCAS and DMEs in standby while on the ground? They are typically in the realm of 500 watts peak power, and a decent walkaround will get you up close to them.
One way to know if your Wx radar in your DC-x or old Boeing or A300B4 is magnetron or solid state is to note warmup time. If not already in standby, a magetron takes up to a minute or more to warm up and begin transmitting.
GB
