View Single Post
  #13  
Old February 15th 08, 08:08 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike the Strike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 952
Default "A Guide to Transponders in Sailplanes" - updated!

On Feb 15, 10:18 am, "bumper" wrote:
"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message

...



And to reiterate, it's not a "200 watt transmitter". The peak power of
the pulses is 200 watt, but it's only about a 5 watt max transmitter,
as the pulses are short.


I know you are talking about peak power vs average power. However, even
though pulse width is narrow, and thus the average radiation from a 175 or
250 watt transponder might be on the order of 5 watts, I'm not sure the
radiation exposure should be equated to just the low average power.

Consider a single high powered pulse as being one .22 rifle bullet. The
bullet might have on the order of 100 ft pounds of energy and would
obviously do considerable tissue damage. Compare that to several hundred
BB's from a low powered air rifle, the combined energy of which equals the
energy of that one .22 bullet. Same total energy, far less damage. The point
I'm trying to make is that pulsed high energy may well do more tissue damage
than the same total amount of low level energy delivered over a longer time
frame.

I want that transponder antenna installed away from me.

bumper


A colleague who deals with radiation safety said that the argument
that low energy long-duration doses of radiation are equivalent to
high energy short duration doses is like equating jumping off a 3-foot
wall ten times with jumping off a 30-foot wall once.

Mike