Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

How harmful is Wx radar?

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

How harmful is Wx radar?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd August 2009 | 15:24
  #21 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 92
From: south of Cirencester, north of Lyneham
Graybeard,

Perhaps not 'modern', but years ago I worked on one that used a Travelling Wave Tube with 275kV on the collector, was 13 feet long, water cooled, and lived in a concrete pit lined with lead. Even with a .001% duty cycle, there was 5kW of RF, which would cook you!

When I did my radhaz course back in the '90s, we did an exercise on a 2MW S band radar of using a 'ball on a stick' to run along the waveguide looking for leaky joints. I found it was just as effective and quicker to run your hand along feeling for the spot where it was warm. A procedure heartily disapproved of officially by the lecturer!

Surprisingly, in pacemakers, where the battery power limits you to no more than 1mW out of the transmitter, you have to have some sort of small radome around the antenna to ensure you meet everybodies requirements on SAR. There we are talking generally of transmissions of a few seconds a month or less. becasue of battery life.
radeng is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 15:41
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 10
From: France
Graybeard,

Can you elucidate on that 150mW average power for a radar with something in the order of 200 mi range?
Sounds like a misplaced decimal point somewhere.

CJ
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 20:46
  #23 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 92
From: south of Cirencester, north of Lyneham
ChristiaanJ,

Remember that we are talking of a 10kW ERP pulse, with 20dB receiver antenna gain - and in all probability, antenna gain is nearer 30dB. So a perfect reflection at 200 miles would be around the -83dBm level into the receiver, even though the average power is very low. Given the signal processing gain available, it doesn't seem too unreasonable.
radeng is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 21:15
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Oxford, UK
Perhaps not 'modern', but years ago I worked on one that used a Travelling Wave Tube with 275kV on the collector, was 13 feet long, water cooled, and lived in a concrete pit lined with lead. Even with a .001% duty cycle, there was 5kW of RF, which would cook you!

When I did my radhaz course back in the '90s, we did an exercise on a 2MW S band radar
Try this one Type 85 air defence search radar 12 S Band trasmitters through one head each of 4.5 - 8 MW.
egbt is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 22:56
  #25 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 80
From: Bedford, UK
one opinion

http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation...076/403798.pdf

The following rules apply to the operation of aircraft radar equipment
while on the ground. In this context, "operation" means transmitting in
the "WX, TRB, TERR", position and does not include STBY, TEST, etc.
(1) Aircraft radar equipment shall not be operated while the aircraft is
being refueled.
(2) Aircraft radar equipment shall not be operated when another
aircraft, fuel truck, or other fueling equipment is within 50 feet
ahead or to either side of the nose.
(3) Aircraft radar equipment shall not be operated "nose on" to
another aircraft.
Note: Modem aircraft weather radar units typically transmit
about 70-80 watts of RF energy versus 50,000-75,000 watts
on older radars. The radar units in our aircraft fleet are
modern units, they do not pose a risk to humans, and they
comply with FAA Advisory Circular 20-68B. However,
despite safety to humans, it is prudent to comply with the
above restrictions to prevent possible damage to aircraft
equipment.
Mr Optimistic is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 23:24
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 10
From: France
Originally Posted by egbt
Type 85 air defence search radar, 12 S Band trasmitters through one head each of 4.5 - 8 MW.
Thanks, I'll be reading that in detail, seriously (always been a radar freak).
Does not sound like something I would have gone and stood in front of.

But at this moment I'm just trying to gather a bit of data again in the context of this particular thread.... which seems to ignore just about everything... peak power versus average power of the transmitter, antenna gain, the fact whether the antenna is scanning or not, beam width, you name it.

Unfortunately the internet seems to have very little coherent data.

CJ
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd August 2009 | 23:31
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 236
Likes: 1
From: belgium
There is a saying among our engineers that standing for too long in a beam will cause you to have female children only. And in fact, 9 at 10 of them in my company have daughters, so maybe some truth in there? I'd rather believe you will not get any children at all
Piper19 is offline  
Reply
Old 4th August 2009 | 00:57
  #28 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 9
From: Switzerland, Singapore
slightly off topic. But you might be right. There is serious science trying to understand if it is possible to influence the gender of babies. There is one study that says that fathers with a sitting profession are more likely to have female babies, although not statistically significant. It might have a connection with the temperature of the father's sperm. Radar radiation might also induce higher temperatures.

As I said in an earlier post: microwave radiation doesn't work as radioactivity, so it doesn't primarly destroy the DNA, it just increases temperature in the affected tissue.

Dani
Dani is offline  
Reply
Old 6th August 2009 | 14:27
  #29 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 92
From: south of Cirencester, north of Lyneham
Way back when the world was young and the fields full of daisies and real beer was 1/3d a pint and even Watneys Red Barrel was palatable (yes it was - but they soon changed that!), radeng was an apprentice at Marconi in Chelmsford. It was noticeable and well known there that all the engineers working on high power transmitters always had daughters.
radeng is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 09:59
  #30 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
From: Asia
How many watts does an A320 radar utilize?
MD83FO is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 10:02
  #31 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 111
From: Somewhere over the rainbow
Don’t know but they are completely safe. You can stand right in front of the radome with Radar on and it’s less dangerous as standing in front of a microwave.
pineteam is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 10:19
  #32 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,459
Likes: 136
From: Commuting not home
Originally Posted by MD83FO
How many watts does an A320 radar utilize?
According to the Aircraft Radio Station Licence


.
.
.
.
.
wait for it...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
just a little
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
110 W
160 W

two models that I got my hands on.


FlightDetent is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 12:09
  #33 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 39
From: Wanderlust
it’s less dangerous as standing in front of a microwave.
Microwave doesn't transmit anything at you or outside, the radar beam will be directed at you if standing in front. So the comparison is incorrect. Radars have definitely become safer but if they don't cause any harm at all then why do the modern Aircraft still prevent you from using radar in dispersal?
vilas is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 13:02
  #34 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 111
From: Somewhere over the rainbow
Hello Vilas,

I think this recommendations is just to be on the safe side as if we are not 100% sure it’s safe, then we must implement safety rules such as no cellphone during taxi and take off and landing. We all know this is horse !!!! but they still forbid us to use our phone.

For the weather radar, I know so cause I sent an Email to the manufacturer and they confirmed me it was not hazardous at all to humans.

Here’s the reply:

Hi Gregory,


Sorry for my slow reply. I recently retired from Rockwell Collins and now work contract for them. So I am not regularly checking my email. In the past, with very old weather radars, it was common practice to turn off the radar whenever there was no significant weather because you quickly wore out the magnetron. Today's digital radars no longer use magnetrons and have a very long life. So we recommend having the radar on from push back to taxi in. With that said, over time there will be wear and tear on the gears and bearings in the pedestal. And although Rockwell Collins has a very low failure rate for these components, they are a mechanical system and are subject to failure. So some airlines elect to keep the radar off during operations to reduce the mechanical wear and tear.

And I think this was mentioned in the Cathay video, but the radar is a very minuscule radiation hazard... less than standing in front of a micorwave oven. So it is safe to turn it on during taxi.

Sincerely,

Steve

pineteam is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 16:46
  #35 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 57
Likes: 9
From: UK
Some blurb from Rockwell Collins on their Multiscan Radar (150W by the way)
“The American National Standards Institute has specified a maximum level of 10mw/cm^2 for personal exposure of 6 minutes or longer to radar antenna electromagnetic radiation. The exposure time is limited to the amount of time within the antenna pattern during each sweep.......Microwave ovens represent a more public safety concern and their leakage standard has been set at 4mw/cm^2. The WXR-2100 power density is half or less than that of the microwave oven standard.”

Which backs up what Pineteam is saying. Now I’m not going to lie down on a radome while the radar is switched on any time soon, but I will be pretty relaxed about whether I’m going to get fried if the radar happened to get left on.

As a general rule, a while ago I read 50ft avoidance should cover pretty much most of the radars out there today.
zoigberg is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 18:18
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 344
Likes: 1
From: Germany
Those distances are for being in front of the radar dish.
Isn't the more interesting figure how much radar energy there is in the cockpit from the weather radar? (none to speak of)

Also i get the impression people get confused mainly because it's "radiation".
Even without getting a sun burn, the light ("radiation" in the same sense as radar) from the sun will be much much more dangerous than the weather radar for pilots in the cockpit.
wiedehopf is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 19:17
  #37 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
Community Builder
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Air Force
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,115
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
The Wx radar in the aircraft I fly is wired through a weight-on-wheels switch so it doesn't actually transmit on the ground.
ShyTorque is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 20:13
  #38 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 352
Likes: 148
From: FL390
No predictive windshear?
Fursty Ferret is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 22:22
  #39 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
Community Builder
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Air Force
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,115
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Originally Posted by Fursty Ferret
No predictive windshear?
There's little or no problem with that in the type I fly, especially as it can fly at zero IAS.
ShyTorque is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2019 | 23:18
  #40 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 169
From: Walton on the Naze Essex.
The Wx radar in the aircraft I fly is wired through a weight-on-wheels switch so it doesn't actually transmit on the ground.
Hmm . . . I've squirted my beam up into threatening clouds before opening the taps on more than a few occasions. Often got useful returns.

Taxiing out at JSY and being stopped adjacent to the radar head. Bzzzzz Bzzzzz Bzzzzz on the headphones and even little movements on the old moving coil instruments. Vasectomy a waste of time on those nights. Nah, more than a few nippers given the spark of life thanks to that myth.

https://www.who.int/peh-emf/publicat...acts/fs226/en/
Loose rivets is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.