Mon Mar 15, 2021 10:25 am
#1833310
John Milner Fairly tolerant PPL/IR flying a TB 20 from Gloucestershire and Flyer Club member
johnm wrote:The more I read on this topic the more it looks like a hurricane in an espresso cup, I have a definite gold plate feeling....
riverrock wrote:...airliner transponders...
Calculator limitations
This calculator has been designed to allow licensees to simply and easily assess compliance, without the need for technical knowledge. It therefore uses simplified assumptions and will produce conservative results. In some cases, it may significantly overestimate the separation distance that is strictly needed to ensure compliance with the ICNIRP general public limits. Licensees can undertake a more detailed analysis, e.g. by using a more advanced assessment tool or by seeking help from a professional installer, and this would likely result in smaller separation distances.
It does not require spectrum users to protect any person from EMF exposure who is:
a) the licensee, owner, operator or installer of the relevant radio equipment; or ...
Crash one wrote:Has someone been vaporised by a handheld radio pointed at them that has prompted this? Why now?
It does not require spectrum users to protect any person from EMF exposure who is:
a) the licensee, owner, operator or installer of the relevant radio equipment; or ...
Dave W wrote:So is it a hazard to health or not?
Make your mind up, OFCOM.
Dave W wrote:It does not require spectrum users to protect any person from EMF exposure who is:
a) the licensee, owner, operator or installer of the relevant radio equipment; or ...
So is it a hazard to health or not?
Make your mind up, OFCOM.
In the UK, Public Health England (PHE) takes the lead on public health matters associated with radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, and has a statutory duty to provide advice to Government on any health effects that may be caused by exposure to EMF. PHE's main advice is that EMF exposure should comply with the Guidelines published by the International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).
4.1 The EMF condition requires spectrum users to ensure members of the general public (as defined in the EMF condition) are not exposed to levels of EMF above the ICNIRP general public limits. It does not require spectrum users to protect any person from EMF exposure who is:
a) the licensee, owner, operator or installer of the relevant radio equipment; or
b) acting under a contract of employment or otherwise acting for purposes connected with their trade, business or profession or the performance by them of a public function.
4.2 This means that the EMF condition does not require spectrum users to comply with the ICNIRP general public limits if they have determined that only the licensee, owner, operator or installer of radio equipment may be exposed to EMF in breach of the ICNIRP general public limits. For example, an amateur radio licensee does not need to comply with the EMF condition in respect of their own exposure to EMF. The EMF condition also does not require amateur licensees to protect each other from EMF when they are visiting each other or working together.
4.3 The EMF condition concerns public exposure to EMF i.e. exposure to the general public. It does not concern occupational exposure and does not therefore require spectrum users to protect workers from EMF.
Dave W wrote:Chaps, my point was that if it is a hazard it logically is a hazard for every human regardless of whether they are owner, operator, maintainer or passenger.
It is illogical to exempt by role some humans and not others.