one looks like Harry Andrews the actor and other Hughie Green!!!!

Just to return to one of Roy’s points.

As far as I am aware, the legislation is intended to cover museums and companies, and thus for an individual to own such an item is entirely legal.

I guess the problem would come where an individual owned a collection of watches, instruments, or RR Vipers, and then was employed in a capacity which brought him into contact with radiation on a daily basis, such that he was issued with a monitor. Without wearing it all the time, there would be no way of knowing how much radiation he had been subject to.

Anyone know the exact problem with RR Vipers? Having just had two delivered to the museum, I want to add them to our list of ionising materials, AND I want to know how best to preserve them now I have custody.

Bruce

Thorium in casing…just dont cut and adequately mark (ours is), some Avons have Thorium too. Some microscope lens (and other opticals) need checking having Thoriated lenses.

My postings are not intended to annoy HSE individuals, i live in the risk based/mitigated and highly trained world of flight test…..

I was actually made aware that the situation existed about 3 years ago when I visited the Southampton aviation museum, as it was then, now Solent Sky. Their Sunderland was open to the public and myself and another gent were in the cockpit with one of attendants/guides or whatever else you wish to call his position. The other gent mentioned the fact that a lot of the instuments were missing and was told that this was because the aircraft was open to children during school visits and that they’d been instructed to remove them as they were a radiation hazard. I would hardly think they’d be in there long enough to encounter dangerous levels of radiation. I agree that it is more like a typical nanny state over reaction.

Alan at that museum was well aware many years ago. The situation was debated at length in the BAPC in the few year years I was on the committee. It has been bubbling for 10+ years. I had hoped that the BAPC would act as a voice box to seek a united voice and possibly an exemption (as timepieces have). It did not happen. The rules have not changed one iota since years ago (and I mean 10+). Handled with care instruments are fine, but HSE have now had the time (and resources) to ‘police’ this one. I believe it is boyed by our dear PM signing up to the reduction of such hazards by a certain time. Incidentally, you will see that the UK is one of the few parts of the EU that makes a large effort to comply with directives!!

Many questions have been asked of currently airworthy aircraft who have radium instruments and how they fall in the rules. At the moment the rules cover organisations and companies not individuals. However, it is a little grey. One could argue that a flying spit owned by a company could be breaking numerous parts of the legislation not least transportation of a substance. However, the big clincher is that if you put an instrument in a glass lined box or keep the public a certain distance away then noone can prove you have a hazard!! The Geiger counter cannot pick it up above background. It is a bit like a HSE chappy saying that your locked Pandora’s box is a hazard, you say it isnt cos its locked and then he says it is and proves it by unlocking and opening the box!

The main advice I give to individuals is do not dismantle an instrument and stay away from those with no glass on…the dust is not nice.

These are my initial precised thoughts. Our museum had a radiation survey and now complies with the rules. It involved removing 2 instruments from my F1 Hunter!! They then went back to the F6 cockpit which had passed, and tried to fail it…! To no avail. Diff dates on the instruments (about 1956 GM4 and triple brakes).