I was kind of hoping that you might chase me tomorrow morning on 160m. It would be awesome to qualify on top band.
73, Colin
2 Likes
Will it become the norm for anyone with a licence for anything be obliged to undertake a risk assessment? A driving licence (that could be complicated), a TV licence (effect of X Factor and Teletubbies on impressionable youngsters), dog licence (I’ve feared harm from dogs far more often on the hills than radio hams - but is there still a dog licence?), a licence to sell intoxicating liquor (that will shut down any still-surviving pubs)?
My cynical - and slightly intoxicated answer (as I am currently on a Friday night out with Jimmy @M0HGY and Liam) - is that nothing will be risk assessed that makes the Treasury money - and nothing will be policed that doesn’t.
So sleep well and enjoy your QRO.
4 Likes
Tom,
At least it appears UK amateurs have the capacity to do these assessments. I doubt more than half of the VK amateurs could and even less for a very big country to our North East.
We have brought this on ourselves by not campaigning against those who shy at the word radiation and promote fear of it for personal gain, yet hold their mobile phone to their head and do not see the irony.
When I mentioned to another amateur that I once “owned” an atomic clock his response was horror and “Gosh that sounds dangerous”. Such is the emotive and ingenuous work of our community " leaders".
Time to go. Enjoy your night out.
5 Likes
I should be checking top band about 0700z Colin. We are billetting an extra two dogs until Monday, so they’ll be expecting their breakfast around the time. You should work a few top banders hopefully, not just me. I hope today’s wind has dropped for you and it stays dry.
73 Phil
3 Likes
I ran the RSGB EMF compliance calculator for all 41 equipment configurations - combinations of frequency (band), max RF power, mode and antenna type - that I use at home or when portable - and have analysed the results. Restrictions are a very strong function of operating frequency.
- All 31 config’s for 80m to 6m meet Low Power Compliance [for my max power of 35W CW & 65W SSB at home – I’m 10W CW/SSB when portable].
- 2m CW & FM 50W and 70cm CW & FM 20W (at home) met the antenna height criterion (i.e. exceeded the required vertical separation distance ). Interestingly, 2m SSB 50W and 70cm SSB 20W met Low Power Compliance . I think that’s because SSB has a lower duty cycle.
- My portable 23cm 3W FM (transverter) with handheld 8-element Yagi does not does meet Low Power Compliance nor the required antenna height separation distance. In this case, the recommended solution [other than to lower power or raise the antenna height] is to use an Exclusion Zone around the (horizontally-polarized) Yagi. There is a downloadable PDF (PAEC-2_VHF-UHF_Beams_V1p0_2021-09-22) that covers this. In my case, the calculator says to set an Exclusion Zone of 1m diameter around the pole on which the 23cm Yagi is centrally mounted. As I am the “pole” and I hold all of the Yagi in front of me, better to make the radius 1m + the length of the Yagi (0.8m), some of my arm, say radius of 2.5-3m. So, if anyone walks within 3m of me I have to stop transmitting. Shouldn’t be a problem as I generally move away from other walkers standing or sitting at the summit.
3 Likes
Tom
I may be wrong - but I can’t really see Ofcom ‘inspectors’, going up hills and asking to see a risk assessment. I’m not convinced you’ll see many knocking on our doors at home either - unless of course someone claims to have been injured by your transmissions.
Dave
3 Likes
You’re probably right Dave. I wonder if the main call on our calculations might be during any planning disputes/applications?
Though a 60m tower would actually help mitigate the effects of EMF!
Just checked; and my boss still says “no”. Apparently her objection isn’t based on health concerns!
4 Likes
HI Dave
The neighbours only claim they have been injured by your transmissions when you apply for planning permission to erect a mast in my experience!
73 Phil
3 Likes
So, I’ve been playing with the RSGB EMF calculator, and very nice it is too. When I enter various details in the app, I note that I often overstep the limits and some extra fields are shown below the calculator under the title
Further assessment required (average power >10W or peak power >100W EIRP)
Please use one of the methods below
I’m taking the values in these extra fields (e.g. “Required horizontal separation = 1.8m”) to mean that, if nobody comes inside a radius of this value from the antenna, then the setup is OK. Have I got that about right?
Rob
2 Likes
I made a joke to this effect in Part 1 of this thread. And I very much doubt that Ofcom has the time and money to do ad hoc inspections and deal with any consequences in the way the GPO could and did when I was first licenced in the 60s.
When imposing this new safety requirement on licensed UK operators of transmitting equipment I suppose Ofcom had to decide whether or not to include radio amateurs, and they decided the former. [Note: unlicenced users like PMR-446 aren’t included]
And why not? I poo-poo’d the idea at first. But is there a convincing reason why we – supposedly a community of amateur technical investigators – should not determine that our equipment is not harming others? [Pedants, please excuse the double negative]
I know the general public has an irrational fear of “radiation”, ionizing or not but the requirement is based on science that sufficiently long exposure to high-enough RF energy can have injurious effects.
We all suspected that the actual risk from radio amateur transmissions is small to non-existent. I suspect 1000’s of UK amateurs won’t bother assessing their equipment and will never be contacted by Ofcom. But I’ve found a curious satisfaction in quantifying the risks in my case. Should a neighbour, a hillwalker or even Mr Ofcom ever challenge me I could reply with confidence about the safety of my activity.
2 Likes
Although RG174 does not appear in the drop down box for 80m there is a custom option. simply enter the appropriate numbers and job done.
Andy
1 Like
Yes. You need to either physically prevent people entering that radius or only transmit if you can see the area is clear.
2 Likes
Their EIRP is under 10W so wouldn’t need to do an assessment anyway.
2 Likes
Thanks Richard for verifying what I had suspected. Looks like I can do ham radio from my balcony here, and also do SOTA without worrying too much. Not that I did before, anyway! 
In any case, I know I’ll have to do an EMF assessment for the licensing authorities here - prior to setting up this little station a couple of months ago on the balcony, I had never before transmitted from a private address here in Germany.
3 Likes
Fair comment Andy. Like you I want to be armed with the data to clearly show that my home station is compliant with the Ofcom requirements and either of the two ICNIRP limits. I now know that with a 7 element xyagi beam on 2m FM using 50 watts the radius of my exclusion zone using horizontal polarisation is 5.3m to achieve compliance. My nearest neighbours upstairs house bedroom wall is 6m away from the end of my antenna when pointing in that direction. On SSB however I am able to run 200 watts on SSB and 150 watts on CW/FT8 and be in compliance due to the lower duty cycle of those modes compared to FM. The TE systems linear I use can run up to 200 watts.
As stated earlier my neighbours are opposed to me having antennas of any shape or form on my property. Sixteen of them, most from a residents association on an estate backing on to my garden, objected to both my planning applications, with reasons, such as, and I quote:
“I am concerned that the regular migraines I suffer from are being made worse by the applicants’ hobby. My GP states that it is well known that exposure to above average electrical interference can cause problems to migraine sufferers. I need to be healthy to care full time for my daughters at home”.
“We do not like the proliferation of wire aerials in the applicants’ garden”.
“We believe the inverted dish aerial exceeds permitted limits and is a monstrous blight on the landscape”.
“The application is upsetting the elderly in the area."
“After 18 years bats are no longer flying in my back-garden area and swifts are absent from nesting in the barn roof?”
“We often see skeins of geese passing by, and in summer we have house martins return to nest under the eaves. This year they appeared briefly but have now disappeared, despite the good weather. I am no expert, but I query whether radio signal transmissions in the vicinity could have an effect on these species”.
“Don’t allow the applicant to “throw dust in your eyes” regarding the technical requirements of his pastime: as one who has held a professional radio licence and who has used MF, HF, VHF and UHF transmissions all over the globe, I can state that what he is doing is equivalent to fishing with dynamite!”
Most of these neighbours who live on an estate at the back of my house cannot see my aerials.
If these people find out about the new Radio Amateur Ofcom requirements for EMF they will surely push for my station to be inspected. Yes, it is a long way from Baldock to North Yorkshire, however my station was inspected at this address by the Radiocommunications Agency from there in 1998. They brought their mobile lab here and three engineers and conducted emission tests on my station on the main complainants driveway which is 200m from my home. He is anti amateur radio, is a retired BA pilot and is the person who made the “throw dust in your eyes” comment" above!
So yes, in my case it is a neccesity to create this data, which I am part way through creating in case I am challenged.
I have no fears about operating portable for SOTA and the affect of these Ofcom requirements on that activity. On HF I run no more than 10 watts anyway in any area where the public may be present.
73 Phil
7 Likes
Phil, I often wonder what their reaction would be if such complainants were to be informed - or have it demonstrated to them - that, to a high degree of likelihood these days, many devices in their own homes are pouring out extremely wide-band EMF pollution at signal strengths much in excess of what is permitted by regulations, and causing disturbance to, amongst others, licensed users of the airwaves. Regulations which, it has to be said, are largely ignored by manufacturers/suppliers of such devices, and of which the public are mostly completely unaware.
What might that say about the populations of bats, swallows, geese - to say nothing of insects - having plummeted in numbers recently?
5 Likes
While I have no experience in the matter, it would appear that the FCC in the USA requires pilots operating aircraft flying outside of the USA to have a “Restricted Radiotelephone Operators Permit”, the application form for which is FCC 605, and which may be found here. Applicants enter their personal details and, in the section “Basic Qualifications”, state that they have not been convicted of a felony (criminal offense) by any state or federal court. Then they pay a fee of around $70 - that’s it.
I’m assuming that other licensing authorities require a similar permit or certification. If so, and assuming also that not much has changed since the days in which your neighbour flew commercial planes, his “professional radio licence” is basically the equivalent of:
- fill in the form,
- pay the fee, and
- you’re good to push the buttons and talk into the device marked “microphone”.
…and, just for a chuckle, here’s a short video of a pilot “throwing dust in the eyes” of some people - or should that read “throwing some people’s eyes into the dust?” - on the island of St Maarten in the Caribbean. Enjoy!
3 Likes
Did you get permission?
Probably more likely due to intensification of agriculture and destruction of hedgerows in the countryside.
2 Likes
Yes, on appeal for the Tennamast, and non-specific aerials. I appealed on the ground of non determination within 13 weeks by the council.
The residents association didn’t give up and continued complaining, so I had to submit another application over a year later for a retrospective minor material change to permit the mounting of a Hexbeam and 6m yagi to sit on the Tennamast. This was passed unanimously by the planning committee. No planning application was deemed necessary for the 2m beam fixed on the house and the three tree mounted wire / fishing pole aerials I have in my back garden. You need to stand up to these Nimby people and fight for your rights!
The theory about the swifts and bats etc was a fabrication. They are here, especially the bats who at certain times of the year when conditions are right for feeding on the wing, fly within feet of my aerials. There were many more lies told about garage doors and car windows being wound up/down etc which were blamed on my station. Total lies and fabrication… The planning officer made it clear in her appraisal that Ofcom was the authority responsible for such issues, yet not one complaint was received by Ofcom. I used the freedom of infomation of act to confirm this.
73 Phil
8 Likes
If this question has already been answered in Parts 1-3 above, please let me know. I determined the results for each EMC test case [I have 43 home and portable cases] using the RSGB online calculator at:
https://rsgb.services/public/software/emccalculator/
Most cases are ‘low-power compliant’ (end of story) but several involving a Yagi require an exclusion zone, e.g. 2m CW 5W horizontal 3-el Yagi. The calculator produces two versions, ITU-T and PAEC-2, but they’re slightly different. The exclusion zone applies only to members of the public (so you can fry your own brain in the EZ if you like). I sit in my portable chair next to the pole so I can rotate it (and the Yagi).
For the ITU diagram, I think it means a 1.8m person near the pole needs a 0.8m minimum clearance under the Yagi (hence 2.6m minimum antenna height). I guess they guard-band that to 1.0m compliance distance. They also need to be standing no closer than 0.7m from the pole.
For the PAEC one, the minimum antenna height is slightly lower but the radius of the EZ is much bigger (at the height of the horizontal Yagi) but seems to cone in towards the ground.
So which is right? Which to apply?
In practice, nobody comes near whilst I’m operating [they probably think I’m directing aliens to a landing site] and if anyone did, I would stop transmitting. But it would be nice to know.
2 Likes