Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:10 AM - Re: Radium (was: A heads up) (Brian Lloyd)
2. 09:59 AM - Re: Radium (was: A heads up) (Doug)
3. 01:03 PM - Re: Radium (was: A heads up) (Brian Lloyd)
4. 01:56 PM - for info (Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd)
5. 07:28 PM - Re: Radium (was: A heads up) (Ron Davis)
6. 07:33 PM - Re: Radium (was: A heads up) (Ron Davis)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium (was: A heads up) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Ron Davis wrote:
> What I meant to say, and perhaps didn't say clearly, is that it's a good
> idea for anyone who has access to a meter to determine if their knobs have
> radium because not all glow in the dark materials are radioactive.
That was the point of my suggestion. If it continues to glow after it has been
removed from a light source for a relatively long period of time, it has its
own energy source, probably Radium in this case.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
GMT-4
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium (was: A heads up) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
Brian,
The text below is from my friend in Australia. very interesting. I am
sending a ball to the National Lab on Monday.
Hi Doug,
Sunday just drawing to a close over here.
I took my radiation meters to the CJ today and what I found disturbed me.
Firstly as we know the undercart and Flap knobs were hot, and the throttle
handle took my meter to about 5 mR(much more than the Flap or U/C). But the
first disturbing point was that the Front cockpit (more worn) had about half
the readings, showing that the material was being removed by the occupants.
The most distrurbing point was that when I stepped away from the aircraft,
my hand was giving measurable readings after minimal contact.
I'm going to try and get Our Radiation Health boys to come up some ideas,
I'll keep you posted.
Have you worked out any priced elevator solutions for me?
Regards
Franc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Radium (was: A heads up)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
>
> Doug,
>
> No doubt about it, if you have Radium-painted controls, you are right, it
should be dealt with. The instruments are not really a problem. Alpha
particles are dangerous but are stopped by almost anything (paper or skin
stops alpha particles). The only time an alpha-emitter is really dangerous
is if it is ingested where it can lodge in the tissues and act directly.
>
> Radium is dangerous, but probably not as dangerous as the government would
have us believe. We are surrounded by radioactive materials. Consider, the
waste ash from a coal-fired power plant (coal, not Uranium) is about 50
times more radioactive than the government will permit for anything coming
out of a nuclear power plant. If you have a basement, there is probably
Radon gas, a radioactive byproduct of the disintigration of Radium into
lighter isotopes, down there. Even the dust in the air is radioactive
(http://www.blackcatsystems.com/GM/experiments/ex1.html).
>
> Now that doesn't mean that radiation is good for you or that the
government is not correct in setting limits, but it does mean that there are
lots of threats, not just the Radium in your flap handle. Heck, the
neighbor kid behind the wheel of his car is probably more of a threat to
your life than is the Radium in the flap handle of your CJ6A.
>
> It is not unusual for instruments back in the '40s to have radium dials.
In the '50s most went to just fluoresent paint that glowed red, orange,
yellow, or green under ultraviolet light. The CJ uses UV panel lamps for
that reason and that does not require Radium to cause them to glow in the
dark.
>
> So how do you tell the difference, i.e. whether the instrument or handle
is radioactive or not, and you don't have a geiger counter? Put them
someplace really dark so that no light whatsoever can get to them and leave
them for several hours. Wait until the middle of the night when your eyes
are fully dark-adapted and take them out. If you can see *any* glow from
them, they have Radium in them and you need to get rid of them. If they are
completely dark they are just fluorescent paint that are designed to glow
under the UV panel lamps. You have to wait to perform this test because it
can take quite a while for fluorescent paint to stop glowing after exposure
to light.
>
> If you have something that has Radium in it, you should get rid of it.
Paper will stop the alpha particles and thick aluminum foil will stop most
of the beta particles. Lead will definitely stop it but it is overkill.
Here is a thought; next time you make some concrete to patch your driveway,
drop your radioactive balls in there. That will keep them safe. ;
> )
>
> BTW Doug, here is some not-so-useful but interesting information.
Polonium was the first radioactive isotope the Curies isolated from Uranium
ore. Radium came second but was more interesting because it was more stable
and had a longer half-life. They named Polonium after Marie's native
country, Poland. Both Radium and Polonium are decay products of Uranium but
have shorter half-lives so they decay more rapidly and appear more
radioactive.
>
> So while we wonder at the advances in aviation over the last 100 years,
consider that the Curies did this work only shortly before the Wrights flew
their first airplanes (1898).
>
> --
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
> brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> GMT-4
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium (was: A heads up) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Doug wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
>
> Brian,
> The text below is from my friend in Australia. very interesting. I am
> sending a ball to the National Lab on Monday.
Well, before you get too carried away, try the "glow in the dark" test I proposed.
That will give you an idea as to whether it is Radium or just fluorescent
material.
> Hi Doug,
>
> Sunday just drawing to a close over here.
>
> I took my radiation meters to the CJ today and what I found disturbed me.
>
> Firstly as we know the undercart and Flap knobs were hot, and the throttle
> handle took my meter to about 5 mR(much more than the Flap or U/C). But the
> first disturbing point was that the Front cockpit (more worn) had about half
> the readings, showing that the material was being removed by the occupants.
I presume that is 5 milli REM per hour (REM=Roentgen Equivalent in Man). How dangerous
is this dosage? Well, the US government says that under 5000 mREM per
year is OK. So you could be exposed to 5 mREM/hr for 1000 hours and still be
safe. And that measurment was probably right up against the knob. A few inches
away it is attenuated even more. Clothing attenuates it even more. Based
on this, you had better not keep that throttle knob pressed up against your
naked crotch any longer than 1000 hours every year. Heck, in my best year I flew
my CJ about 350 hours and I didn't keep the throttle knob pressed up against
my head or my crotch. I didn't put it in my mouth either. I don't think I
am going to worry too much.
I am presuming that he is using a geiger counter designed to respond to alpha and
beta particles. It is designed to let them pass into the geiger-mueller tube
where they can be counted. That doesn't mean that they necessarily pose a
threat because they can still be stopped by clothing, paper, skin, aluminum foil,
etc. So even tho' the counter can count them doesn't mean that any of that
radiation is actually able to penetrate your body and do any harm.
Here is a doc from the State of California Hazmat training on radiation exposure.
It is directly applicable to this thread. Read it and make up your own mind.
http://www.oes.ca.gov/oeshomep.nsf/0/844b55f68729ac0088256a3a0072f998/$FILE/SM%20CHAP%2013_5%20RAD%20DETECTORS.doc
> The most distrurbing point was that when I stepped away from the aircraft,
> my hand was giving measurable readings after minimal contact.
And before anyone gets too carried away, have him pick up a handful of dirt from
the ground and measure it. It will have a measurable reading too. I don't
notice anyone worrying about the background radiation in plain old dirt.
> I'm going to try and get Our Radiation Health boys to come up some ideas,
> I'll keep you posted.
Fine, but let's not get carried away here. This is not life-threatening.
> Have you worked out any priced elevator solutions for me?
Now your elevator price is far more likely to hurt him than the radiation is.
His heart might stop and that *IS* life threatening. ;
)
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
GMT-4
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd" <mark@yakuk.com>
Al, There is a check valve next to the PRV that is stuck. Simple to fix, just change
it.
You not UR a/c is 1996, that's 7 years old in my books. 2 years outside of the
overhaul period. hence you are now getting air leaks and problems, basically you
are pushing the a/c beyond OH limits therefore you can expect further problems
to surface.
The OH period is 5 years.
I respectfully suggest at next annual or winter you do a total strip down of all
components that contain rubber parts, u/c legs, lifters, brake divider, flap
ram, shuttle valves, PRV and the list goes on. I am sure George Coy and others
will be able to help with the parts. Also your rubber pipes are out of date
depending upon who's rules you apply !!
> I have a 1996 Yak-52. Air system is very tight.
> Never have had any problems with the air system. Any help would be appreciated.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium (was: A heads up) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
The US federal limit for skin dose (beta) and for extremity dose (anything
below the elbow) is 50,000 mRem/year for occupational exposure and 10% of
that for the general public. Do you hold the throttle more than 10,000
hours a year? More than 1000? This federal limit is based on the premise
that the death rate in a group with exposure at the limit each year for a
career of 50 years would roughly be double the rate of a group with zero
exposure. The risk level of the knob for a pilot flying 100 hours a year
and holding the throttle for a fraction of that time hardly warrants
hysteria, testing, or replacement. I'd put some epoxy over it and move on
to more serious health risks like being struck by meteors.
How exactly are you "going to send" the knob to the lab? Shipping hazmat
with improper labels carries a fine of up to $10,000.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Radium (was: A heads up)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
>
> Brian,
> The text below is from my friend in Australia. very interesting. I am
> sending a ball to the National Lab on Monday.
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Sunday just drawing to a close over here.
>
> I took my radiation meters to the CJ today and what I found disturbed me.
>
> Firstly as we know the undercart and Flap knobs were hot, and the throttle
> handle took my meter to about 5 mR(much more than the Flap or U/C). But
the
> first disturbing point was that the Front cockpit (more worn) had about
half
> the readings, showing that the material was being removed by the
occupants.
> The most distrurbing point was that when I stepped away from the aircraft,
> my hand was giving measurable readings after minimal contact.
>
> I'm going to try and get Our Radiation Health boys to come up some ideas,
> I'll keep you posted.
>
> Have you worked out any priced elevator solutions for me?
>
> Regards
>
> Franc
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: Radium (was: A heads up)
>
>
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
> >
> > Doug,
> >
> > No doubt about it, if you have Radium-painted controls, you are right,
it
> should be dealt with. The instruments are not really a problem. Alpha
> particles are dangerous but are stopped by almost anything (paper or skin
> stops alpha particles). The only time an alpha-emitter is really
dangerous
> is if it is ingested where it can lodge in the tissues and act directly.
> >
> > Radium is dangerous, but probably not as dangerous as the government
would
> have us believe. We are surrounded by radioactive materials. Consider,
the
> waste ash from a coal-fired power plant (coal, not Uranium) is about 50
> times more radioactive than the government will permit for anything coming
> out of a nuclear power plant. If you have a basement, there is probably
> Radon gas, a radioactive byproduct of the disintigration of Radium into
> lighter isotopes, down there. Even the dust in the air is radioactive
> (http://www.blackcatsystems.com/GM/experiments/ex1.html).
> >
> > Now that doesn't mean that radiation is good for you or that the
> government is not correct in setting limits, but it does mean that there
are
> lots of threats, not just the Radium in your flap handle. Heck, the
> neighbor kid behind the wheel of his car is probably more of a threat to
> your life than is the Radium in the flap handle of your CJ6A.
> >
> > It is not unusual for instruments back in the '40s to have radium dials.
> In the '50s most went to just fluoresent paint that glowed red, orange,
> yellow, or green under ultraviolet light. The CJ uses UV panel lamps for
> that reason and that does not require Radium to cause them to glow in the
> dark.
> >
> > So how do you tell the difference, i.e. whether the instrument or handle
> is radioactive or not, and you don't have a geiger counter? Put them
> someplace really dark so that no light whatsoever can get to them and
leave
> them for several hours. Wait until the middle of the night when your eyes
> are fully dark-adapted and take them out. If you can see *any* glow from
> them, they have Radium in them and you need to get rid of them. If they
are
> completely dark they are just fluorescent paint that are designed to glow
> under the UV panel lamps. You have to wait to perform this test because
it
> can take quite a while for fluorescent paint to stop glowing after
exposure
> to light.
> >
> > If you have something that has Radium in it, you should get rid of it.
> Paper will stop the alpha particles and thick aluminum foil will stop most
> of the beta particles. Lead will definitely stop it but it is overkill.
> Here is a thought; next time you make some concrete to patch your
driveway,
> drop your radioactive balls in there. That will keep them safe. ;
> > )
> >
> > BTW Doug, here is some not-so-useful but interesting information.
> Polonium was the first radioactive isotope the Curies isolated from
Uranium
> ore. Radium came second but was more interesting because it was more
stable
> and had a longer half-life. They named Polonium after Marie's native
> country, Poland. Both Radium and Polonium are decay products of Uranium
but
> have shorter half-lives so they decay more rapidly and appear more
> radioactive.
> >
> > So while we wonder at the advances in aviation over the last 100 years,
> consider that the Curies did this work only shortly before the Wrights
flew
> their first airplanes (1898).
> >
> > --
> >
> > Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
> > brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> > +1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> > GMT-4
> >
> >
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium (was: A heads up) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
P.S. The icing detector on an L-39 reads over 4000 mRem/hour on contact.
These actually should be removed from if you own one and avoided on other
people's planes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Radium (was: A heads up)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
>
> Brian,
> The text below is from my friend in Australia. very interesting. I am
> sending a ball to the National Lab on Monday.
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Sunday just drawing to a close over here.
>
> I took my radiation meters to the CJ today and what I found disturbed me.
>
> Firstly as we know the undercart and Flap knobs were hot, and the throttle
> handle took my meter to about 5 mR(much more than the Flap or U/C). But
the
> first disturbing point was that the Front cockpit (more worn) had about
half
> the readings, showing that the material was being removed by the
occupants.
> The most distrurbing point was that when I stepped away from the aircraft,
> my hand was giving measurable readings after minimal contact.
>
> I'm going to try and get Our Radiation Health boys to come up some ideas,
> I'll keep you posted.
>
> Have you worked out any priced elevator solutions for me?
>
> Regards
>
> Franc
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: Radium (was: A heads up)
>
>
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
> >
> > Doug,
> >
> > No doubt about it, if you have Radium-painted controls, you are right,
it
> should be dealt with. The instruments are not really a problem. Alpha
> particles are dangerous but are stopped by almost anything (paper or skin
> stops alpha particles). The only time an alpha-emitter is really
dangerous
> is if it is ingested where it can lodge in the tissues and act directly.
> >
> > Radium is dangerous, but probably not as dangerous as the government
would
> have us believe. We are surrounded by radioactive materials. Consider,
the
> waste ash from a coal-fired power plant (coal, not Uranium) is about 50
> times more radioactive than the government will permit for anything coming
> out of a nuclear power plant. If you have a basement, there is probably
> Radon gas, a radioactive byproduct of the disintigration of Radium into
> lighter isotopes, down there. Even the dust in the air is radioactive
> (http://www.blackcatsystems.com/GM/experiments/ex1.html).
> >
> > Now that doesn't mean that radiation is good for you or that the
> government is not correct in setting limits, but it does mean that there
are
> lots of threats, not just the Radium in your flap handle. Heck, the
> neighbor kid behind the wheel of his car is probably more of a threat to
> your life than is the Radium in the flap handle of your CJ6A.
> >
> > It is not unusual for instruments back in the '40s to have radium dials.
> In the '50s most went to just fluoresent paint that glowed red, orange,
> yellow, or green under ultraviolet light. The CJ uses UV panel lamps for
> that reason and that does not require Radium to cause them to glow in the
> dark.
> >
> > So how do you tell the difference, i.e. whether the instrument or handle
> is radioactive or not, and you don't have a geiger counter? Put them
> someplace really dark so that no light whatsoever can get to them and
leave
> them for several hours. Wait until the middle of the night when your eyes
> are fully dark-adapted and take them out. If you can see *any* glow from
> them, they have Radium in them and you need to get rid of them. If they
are
> completely dark they are just fluorescent paint that are designed to glow
> under the UV panel lamps. You have to wait to perform this test because
it
> can take quite a while for fluorescent paint to stop glowing after
exposure
> to light.
> >
> > If you have something that has Radium in it, you should get rid of it.
> Paper will stop the alpha particles and thick aluminum foil will stop most
> of the beta particles. Lead will definitely stop it but it is overkill.
> Here is a thought; next time you make some concrete to patch your
driveway,
> drop your radioactive balls in there. That will keep them safe. ;
> > )
> >
> > BTW Doug, here is some not-so-useful but interesting information.
> Polonium was the first radioactive isotope the Curies isolated from
Uranium
> ore. Radium came second but was more interesting because it was more
stable
> and had a longer half-life. They named Polonium after Marie's native
> country, Poland. Both Radium and Polonium are decay products of Uranium
but
> have shorter half-lives so they decay more rapidly and appear more
> radioactive.
> >
> > So while we wonder at the advances in aviation over the last 100 years,
> consider that the Curies did this work only shortly before the Wrights
flew
> their first airplanes (1898).
> >
> > --
> >
> > Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
> > brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> > +1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> > GMT-4
> >
> >
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|