Bought this today….

But so many people have contracted cancer and the medics don’t know why or how. Some of them might be because they wore a luminous watch when a child, played in an old cockpit in a scrapyard – who knows???

Roger Smith.

Hi Roger,

Elliots very enlightening report must surely put to bed, that any risk due to direct exposure to instruments in normal operation by presentation to, is non exisitant. Even painting the dials without licking the brush was a pretty safe pastime. Licking the brushes was clearly the elephant in the room.

Yes you are correct, Cancers and their origins can be difficult if not impossible to predict their causes.

It would be an act of absolute folly to speculate and then conclude, without a similar detailed historic survey, that for example playing in a cockpit as a child or wearing an old luminous watch has an elevated risk at all.

Cancer – the means by which humans die after radiation poisoning (I think) – still holds a lot of secrets.

We know with some sureity that someone with lung cancer who smoked 40 fags a day for 30 years got their cancer from smoking cigarettes. Yet there are many examples of persons with a similar smoking habit that remain unaffected.

Several posts have included something along the lines of “what about all the pilots who’ve been sat in front of their instruments for a long (cumulative) time and haven’t died from cancer”.

But so many people have contracted cancer and the medics don’t know why or how. Some of them might be because they wore a luminous watch when a child, played in an old cockpit in a scrapyard – who knows???

Roger Smith.

PS Merkle – your signature makes me chuckle 🙂

However, a few sensible questions should be asked before the hysteria takes off into orbit once more. Once a jobsworth in UK officialdom picks this up properly and runs with it, the implications regardless of the facts will be impossible to correct, I can just picture the ill informed newspaper headlines…… :

1. Does the paint turn to dust or does it come off in flakes typically?

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how much typically falls off say a 1940’s instrument, (1 being none, 10 being all)

3. For an instrument which isn’t ever dismantled, is there away for these physical particles to fall out?

4. What are the statistics of death, or injury directly attributed to exposure to these instruments by flightcrews, techs, instrument repair shops, panel collectors? Is there even a single death noted?[/QUOTE]

Some good questions Andy G
1 & 2 Both, it depends how much its been bashed about or rather looked after and i have seen stacks of instruments covering 1 to 10.

3 if there is a hole or the intrument is not sealed properly missing the seal on the glass front then any dust can drop out

4 I dont know if any medical research has been done concerning deaths, my feeling is that it depends on the Oncologist and how much investigating they have done, most of the time they would put the cause of certain cancers down to fags booze and genetics. The only way to find out if any Dr. has written a thesis in some medical journal.

I remember that there was a trend in late Victorian times to use radio active toothpaste and eneamas, all with tragic endings.
G.

truth is, i have only dealt with mainly Iridium 192, . so have no information on Radium what so ever, its never been used in my line of work ,

also i mainly work with x-ray… that is my day to day work. X-ray using a CP160 unit..

so I have never seen the charts regarding the half life of radium.

thankyou for sharing it with me .

Chaps the luminescent paint is a mixture of radium and a zinc salt. Luminescence is caused by gamma radiation causing the salt to excite and glow.

Over 50 years the gamma radiation is till strong but the zinc salt is knacker*ed = either by changes in the salt or the binder. Hence no luminescence.

The luminescence is no indication of radiation.

I took in a old 50s Altimeter to work today, to use various instruments to see if there was any gamma radiation being emitted from it..

If the 50s instrument was not a gamma emitter then it wasn’t luminous in the first place. I can’t quote them from memory but the relevant half lifes are such that the time elapsed since the 1950s pales into insignificance.

Luminous instrument usually show a thick dark brown paint applied to only some of the numbers and letters. They are also ferocious gamma emitters and do not glow in the dark. One of the problems with luminous was that it needed frequent re-painting due to failing luminosity. The mechanism for this is the radiation knocking hell out of the fluorescent paint, and nothing to do with half life. (In contrast, the modern Tritium gas luminous devices do have a short half-life.)

Fluorescent instruments which are more common in the 1950s light up very prettily if exposed to UV light, for example from a forged note or security pen lamp. You could try this out, the other giveaway is the lack of gamma radiation (although there are some instruments which have been reworked from luminous to fluorescent and are lightly contaminated with Radium).

I took in a old 50s Altimeter to work today, to use various instruments to see if there was any gamma radiation being emitted from it..

also i noticed when i took it into the dark room, it had “Lost ” its luminescence .

A Colleague of mine said, what about the half lives of this paint, re the decay.
its a point worth mentioning, as as the isotope decays to try and stabilize, eventually it becomes harmless over a very long time, some isotopes taking a few years, and others, hundreds of years.

due to the instrument losing its luminescence over 50 odd years, and having no gamma readings what so ever when i tested it… can i take it this radium has decayed to a point that it is now stable ???.. probably not,.. but it did make me think .

Merkle,

I’m surprised by your comments if as you say you work in an industry where you are involved with radiation.

A quick search on google will bring up much info on radium. It has a HALF LIFE of 1602 years, and it’s decay products of which there are many, are also quite active. One of concern is Radon-222 (3.8days hl) which is a gas. So no instruments painted with Radium based radio-luminous paint will have lost any noticeable radioactivity.

Also, it is not the Radium in the paint that gives off the glow, but is something like Zinc Sulphide which emits light when ‘hit’ by a radioactive particle. The Ra-226 is purely the ‘exciter’. The light emitter decays down and is what gives that characteristic brownish colour. It becomes non-luminous after quite a short time. Just because an instrument doesn’t glow, doesn’t mean it isn’t hot, believe me.

I doubt whether your 1950’s instrument is radio-luminous. Try something like a 1940’s instrument instead. Out of my stash of instruments, I only have a very few that are hot. However there are a couple of surprises in what I do have!

You live quite close to me – if you are interested, I can ‘demonstrate’ some ‘hot’ stuff – and you are more than welcome to bring anything you are concerned about. Though if you have suitable kit at work then I’m sure you could check out what you have. PM me if interested.

I think I better change my signature :o…… i pput it on for a giggle.. but in this day of political correctness.. the likes of me.. a junior version of alf garnett, is not acceptable… its put me right off chocolate 😀

So Merkle, what happens when these women who have already expressed a dislike for men, are on a diet?

I took in a old 50s Altimeter to work today, to use various instruments to see if there was any gamma radiation being emitted from it..

also i noticed when i took it into the dark room, it had “Lost ” its luminescence .

A Colleague of mine said, what about the half lives of this paint, re the decay.
its a point worth mentioning, as as the isotope decays to try and stabilize, eventually it becomes harmless over a very long time, some isotopes taking a few years, and others, hundreds of years.

due to the instrument losing its luminescence over 50 odd years, and having no gamma readings what so ever when i tested it… can i take it this radium has decayed to a point that it is now stable ???.. probably not,.. but it did make me think .

and i do have to add ,i agree with the above about wrist watches etc,

and i wont ever be panicking about it,

You are quite correct they are indeed blank

To avoid giving information on rate of production etc to the enemy, I should think?

An how about those millions of people who used to wear ordinary wrist watches with luminescent hands and digits? Did they all die from cancer? :confused:

But I can’t see the year and date stamps from your photo. Are they in fact blank?

.

You are quite correct they are indeed blank

That report only deals with the painting, but it doesnt cover 70 years of decay and flaking dust forming particles which is much more of a danger to health, making it easy to inhale. Alpha particles may not have the strength to penertrate a fag paper but it loves the soft tissues of the nasal cavities and lungs and will cause future problems
Best advice keep away from the stuff
G

I agree that inhaling the stuff, if actually possible that is, could be fraught with potential danger.

However, a few sensible questions should be asked before the hysteria takes off into orbit once more. Once a jobsworth in UK officialdom picks this up properly and runs with it, the implications regardless of the facts will be impossible to correct, I can just picture the ill informed newspaper headlines…… :

1. Does the paint turn to dust or does it come off in flakes typically?

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how much typically falls off say a 1940’s instrument, (1 being none, 10 being all)

3. For an instrument which isn’t ever dismantled, is there away for these physical particles to fall out?

4. What are the statistics of death, or injury directly attributed to exposure to these instruments by flightcrews, techs, instrument repair shops, panel collectors? Is there even a single death noted?

That report only deals with the painting, but it doesnt cover 70 years of decay and flaking dust forming particles which is much more of a danger to health, making it easy to inhale. Alpha particles may not have the strength to penertrate a fag paper but it loves the soft tissues of the nasal cavities and lungs and will cause future problems
Best advice keep away from the stuff
G

Have a read of this AndyG – its quite interesting:

http://www.rerowland.com/dial_painters.htm

That’s very interesting Elliot, thanks a lot.

It would appear that unless you eat the dam stuff, the risk is very small to zero.

Bit late though, now the Stormtroopers have a new cause to whip us with.

Thanks for posting the revised comments merkle! 🙂

no Problem… I was only trying to help, on the experience i have had and been told, same as all of us, it wont stop me collecting bits a bobs though, and i know you museums have to be careful,

but me personally, i wont worry to much about it, just treat them with the respect they deserve.. thanks for NAM’s enlightening on the subject 🙂

Have a read of this AndyG – its quite interesting:

http://www.rerowland.com/dial_painters.htm

I’ve asked this before, though still no answer.

How many people are known to have been mamed or died directly from exposure to aeroplane instruments? (not manufacturing them historically)

Given the increasing EU trusted and sponsored paranoia, there must be hundreds of examples to quote?

Thanks for posting the revised comments merkle! 🙂