Antenna Extra Light Font Free Download [HOT]
Shauncey Cedillo
These are hand-made, ultra lightweight, and nearly indestructible antennas which outperform the stock antenna your handheld radio came with by a significant margin. Originally designed to use as a fundraiser for a youth group, sales from these remarkable antennas now provide funding for HamStudy, ExamTools, and other initiatives which help support the Amateur Radio community.
This antenna is awesome first of all. Extremely flexible, able to be bended and rolled up and placed in a pocket just like the pictures show without getting deformed at all and then opened up in a second when it is needed. Also the warranty and customer service is excellent. I emailed Richard about the antenna starting to rotate inside the base a little bit and he said they had some issues with older epoxy failing and had since fixed this issue. He offered to replace it for me at no extra cost. I sent him the old one and he sent me a brand new one very quickly. I highly recommend this website and the antenna.
Guys,
I recently picked up a ww2 picture of a Rear Gun Turret on a Lancaster bomber. What has me mystified is what is the antenna and secondary light installation for? Was this a trials aircraft or something that was used late in the war. The picture is dated 1944....
The siting of cellular phone base stations and other cellularinfrastructure such as roof-mounted antenna arrays, especially in residentialneighborhoods, is a contentious subject in land-use regulation. Localresistance from nearby residents and landowners is often based on fears ofadverse health effects despite reassurances from telecommunications serviceproviders that international exposure standards will be followed. Bothanecdotal reports and some epidemiology studies have found headaches, skinrashes, sleep disturbances, depression, decreased libido, increased rates ofsuicide, concentration problems, dizziness, memory changes, increased risk ofcancer, tremors, and other neurophysiological effects in populations nearbase stations. The objective of this paper is to review the existing studiesof people living or working near cellular infrastructure and other pertinentstudies that could apply to long-term, low-level radiofrequency radiation(RFR) exposures. While specific epidemiological research in this area issparse and contradictory, and such exposures are difficult to quantify giventhe increasing background levels of RFR from myriad personal consumerproducts, some research does exist to warrant caution in infrastructuresiting. Further epidemiology research that takes total ambient RFR exposuresinto consideration is warranted. Symptoms reported today may be classicmicrowave sickness, first described in 1978. Nonionizing electromagneticfields are among the fastest growing forms of environmental pollution. Someextrapolations can be made from research other than epidemiology regardingbiological effects from exposures at levels far below current exposureguidelines.
La localisation des stations de base pour telephones cellulaireset autres infrastructures cellulaires, comme les installationsd'antennes sur les toitures, surtout dans les quartiers residentiels,constitue un sujet litigieux d'utilisation du territoire. La resistancelocale de la part des residents et proprietaires fonciers limitrophes reposesouvent sur les craintes d'effets adverses pour la sante, en depit desreassurances venant des fournisseurs de services de telecommunication, al'effet qu'ils appliquent les standards internationauxd'exposition. En plus de rapports anecdotiques, certaines etudesepidemiologiques font etat de maux de tiste, d'eeruption cutaneee, deperturbation du sommeil, de depression, de diminution de libido,d'augmentations du taux de suicide, de problemes de concentration, devertiges, d'alteration de la meimoire, d'augmentation du risque decancers, de tremulations et autres effets neurophysiologiques, dans lespopulations vivant au voisinage des stations de base. Les auteurs revisentici les etudes existantes portant sur les gens, vivant ou travaillant presd'infrastructures cellulaires ou autres etudes pertinentes quipourraient s'appliquer aux expositions a long terme a la radiation deradiofrequence de faible intensite >. Bien que larecherche epidemiologique specifique dans ce domaine soit rare etcontradictoire, et que de telles expositions soient difficiles a quantifiercompte tenu des degrees croissants du bruit de fond des RFR provenant deproduits de myriades de consommateurs personnels, il existe certainesrecherches qui justifient la prudence dans l'installation desinfrastructures. Les futures etudes epidemiologiques sont necessaires afin deprendre en compte la totalite des expositions a la RFR ambiante. Lessymptomes rapportes jusqu'ici pourraient correspondre a la maladieclassique des micro-ondes, decrite pour la premiere fois en 1978. Les champselectromagneitiques non-ionisants constituent les formes de pollutionenvironnementale croissant le plus rapidement. On peut effectuer certainesextrapolations a partir de recherches autres qu'epideimiologiquesconcernant les effets biologiques d'expositions a des degrees bienau-dessous des directives internationales.
Hutter et al. (2006) sought to determine cognitive changes, sleepquality, and overall well-being in 365 rural and urban inhabitants who hadlived for more than a year near 10 selected cell phone base stations.Distance from antennas was 24 to 600 m in rural areas, and 20 to 250 m in theurban areas. Field strength measurements were taken in bedrooms and cognitivetests were performed. Exposure to high-frequency EMFs was lower thanguidelines and ranged from 0.000002 to 0.14 [micro]W/[cm.sup.2] for allfrequencies between 80 MHz and 2 GHz with the greater exposure coming frommobile telecommunications facilities, which was between 0.000001 and 0.14[micro]W/[cm.sup.2]. Maximum levels were between 0.000002 and 0.41[micro]W/[cm.sup.2] with an overall 5% of the estimated maximum above 0.1[micro]W/[cm.sup.2]. Average levels were slightly higher in rural areas(0.005 [micro]W/[cm.sup.2]) than in urban areas (0.002 [micro]W/[cm.sup.2]).The researchers tried to ascertain if the subjective rating of negativehealth consequences from base stations acted as a covariable but found thatmost subjects expressed no strong concerns about adverse effects from thestations, with 65% and 61% in urban and rural areas, respectively, stating noconcerns at all. But symptoms were generally higher for subjects whoexpressed health concerns regarding the towers. The researchers speculatedthat this was due to the subjects with health complaints seeking answers andconsequently blaming the base station; or that subjects with concerns weremore anxious in general and tended to give more negative appraisals of theirbody
Kristiansen et al. (2009) also explored the prevalence and natureof concerns about mobile phone radiation, especially since the introductionof new 3G-UMTS (universal mobile telecommunications system) networks thatrequire many more towers and antennas have sparked debate throughout Europe.Some local governments have prohibited mobile antennas on public buildingsdue to concerns about cancer, especially brain cancer in children andimpaired psychomotor functions. One aim of the researchers was riskassessment--to compare people s perceptions of risk from cell phones andmasts to other fears, such as being struck by lightening. In Denmark, theyused data from a 2006 telephone survey of 1004 people aged 15+ years. Theyfound that 28% of the respondents were concerned about exposure to mobilephone radiation and 15% about radiation from masts. In contrast, 82% ofrespondents were concerned about other forms of environmental pollution.Nearly half of the respondents considered the mortality risk of 3G phones andmasts to be of the same order of magnitude as being struck by lightning (0.1fatalities per million people per year), while 7% thought it was equivalentto tobacco-induced lung cancer (approximately 500 fatalities per million peryear). Among women, concerns about mobile phone radiation, perceived mobilephone mortality risk, and concerns about unknown consequences of newtechnologies, increased with educational levels. More than two thirds of therespondents felt that they had not received adequate public information aboutthe 3G system. The results of the study indicated that the majority of thesurvey population had little concern about mobile phone radiation, while aminority is very concerned.
df19127ead