MANY people think that mobile phone masts are inherently bad, That they are the cause all sorts of maladies from headaches to far worse. This web site is maintained by an electronics engineer who wants to inject some sense into the whole subject of cellular mast placement. I do not work for any phone business but just want to present the other side to the no-no objectors. I am not in favour of mobile masts being set up anywhere, for example not right outside homes nor where they would compromise the appearance of a building but I am a realist and want to stress one thing, if there were to be more mobile masts each could work at the lowest possible power.

Please let me explain. When you use your mobile it can work at almost any power from the miniscule to several Watts output. Keeping the power low is to help save battery power as much as anything else. If the mast that your phone connects to is nearby then both the mast and the phone will work at a lower power and given that almost all users hold their mobile phone up to their ear then their brain will receive less energy. If the nearest mast is a long way away - in our case more than 5 miles away - then your phone works at maximum power and you brain quite simply gets more energy injected into it. It will measurably warm up! It really and honestly is that simple, nearby masts means lower power which means less radiation getting into your brain.

Ah, but you say if the mast is placed near to my home then I will get more radiation all the time even when I am not using a phone. The answer to this is the partly explained above, the more masts the lower the power that the system needs to operate at. Then there is the dreaded inverse square rule. Put extremely simply this means that the further you are from a transmitter the less signal that you will receive - which is obvious. As soon as you move more than a few metres or so away from any transmitter the radiation that your body will receive is so small it is almost immeasurable. You see to make the mobile phone system work they have to use aerials cut to an exact length. Your body is not an aerial and most of the radiation is not absorbed. Much more on this on our other pages.

You are most welcome to contact the webmaster at the following email address I am a qualified electronics engineer and am happy to act as an expert for those who propose and enjoy using the latest technology.

I will be adding a lot of substantial content to this site as soon as possible. The plan is to make it readable by even non technical visitors. If you are interested in studying both sides of any argument please bookmark the address and look back soon.       January 12th 2014




ONE thing that I must make clear at the very start is that this site is entirely dedicated to mobile phone and mobile broadband technology, 2G, 3G and 4G from a UK perspective. It is not concerned with the TETRA system that UK police and emergency services use. In my opinion the TETRA system is to be avoided at all costs. I personally do not think that TETRA transmissions are particularly good for the human body (although others disagree). TETRA works at repetition rates and at frequencies that are far removed from mobile telephony. If a TETRA mast is proposed near your home then study the plans carefully.


THIS website is especially written from a UK perspective. Why is this important? When we read objections to proposed masts we see complaints that can only have come from overseas, particularly American web sites. Every country has its own broadcasting rules and regulations and in particular transmission powers. The UK has some of the strictest transmission regulations. Just one example, in the USA they have to ensure that their transmitters cover much larger areas than our small country. If our providers were to transmit at US powers then their cell sites would be illegal before they even started!


WHY was this web site set up? We live in the middle of an electronic nowhere. In fact in a small village in Sussex just 8 miles from Gatwick airport, but one that has almost no mobile phone and absolutely no mobile internet coverage. Even broadband is slower than average. A couple of years ago Orange (now EE) put in a planning application to erect a mast that would have been sited on top of a hill in a field on the edge of the village, less than 150 metres from our home; in fact we would have been the second nearest dwelling to the new base station. We immediately backed the application both on line and in print. Were the other locals happy about being able to at last use their phones properly? No, they put up every objection that they could think of. Posters were printed and letters of objection written most based on very out of date information gleaned from campaigning sites on the internet, If the objectors were to be believed a simple telephone pole height mast would have virtually stopped normal life in a huge area! It rather reminded us of the complaints if NASA had proposed a new rocket launch pad. Orange were helpful and suggested three other sites, none as good as the original, but in the end the application was abandoned.

Move now to last year when a village plan was circulated inviting residents opinions of how the area could be improved. What was one of the main objections to living in this area? "Poor mobile phone reception!" We kid you not, and a perfect example of the "not in my back yard" phenomenon! Yes villagers wanted to be able to use their mobiles indoors around their homes, in their cars and on the way to work, but only as long as the mast was a long, long way away!

We are realists and recognise that mobile communications are here to stay. Yet we are not the slightest bit worried, as long as masts are sited sensibly, We want to put less technical minds at ease. Hence