| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
 Posted - 10/31/2022 : 04:01:04
|
Dear All,
on 18.10.2022 I was flying from Frankfurt to Antalya. Find the data in the graphic attached. The counter (GMC-300E+) was stored under the seat. I didn't care about GPS-data, or hight. My intension was only to produce some reliable data with double byte input to test and refine my parser. Hence, the data where recorded in CPM.
The data where downloaded and parsed whith Matlab. A .bin-file is also existing. If someone (Ullix?) can give me a link where I can upload the .bin I would share the file with other guys who are interested in.
On my flight back home I will put the counter in the suitcase, so that it's transported in the trunck. If there is a significant difference to the cabin, I will post these data also.
|
|
| Reply #1
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2022 : 04:22:33
|
Nice!
I am always interested in such data. And if you give permission for public use of the data, I would like to put them to the other flight data on my GeigerLog site (https://sourceforge.net/projects/geigerlog/files/Data%20-%20genuine%20recordings%20-%20as%20log%20or%20bin%20files/) to make them freely available.
To upload the data you can make a post under 'Discussion' at my sourceforge site (https://sourceforge.net/p/geigerlog/discussion/) and attach your data.
Please, post your return flight as well!
Since it takes only a few hours from check-in to landing, you could also record in CPS mode. This may catch a few more details of the X-ray scan! (I assume the big single-point peak is the hand-luggage X-ray).
P.S. you have done downloading, parsing, and graphic more easily with GeigerLog.
|
 |
|
| Reply #2
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2022 : 05:14:35
|
| Already done. |
|
|
| Reply #3
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2022 : 05:48:53
|
| ... and I got it, thanks. Data are all ok; GeigerLog can read it without problems. |
|
|
| Reply #4
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2023 : 07:05:19
|
Dear All,
as promissed some months ago, I'll distribute the flight data FRA-AYT on 13.01.2023 with the counter in the trunk. You can in the picture that there is not much difference in comparison with a place the overhead locker in the cabin. What is different: There is also a x-ray check at the destination airport, which make sense. The data is recorded in CPS and re-calculated to CPM (movsum(60)).
@Ullix: I tried to upload the bin-file (created with GMC-Data-Viewer) to your blog, but Sourceforge complained that javascript is not installed. But it is and also enabled in Firefox. The same problem with Edge. To be honest: I will investigate that later when I'm back home in some weeks and upload then. |
|
|
| Reply #5
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2023 : 07:19:40
|
| I can't upload the picture. I'm unable to login permanently. Maybe a Win11 problem. I'm upset now and I'll try later again. |
|
|
| Reply #6
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2023 : 07:21:19
|
quote:
@Ullix: I tried to upload the bin-file (created with GMC-Data-Viewer) to your blog, but Sourceforge complained that javascript is not installed. But it is and also enabled in Firefox. The same problem with Edge. To be honest: I will investigate that later when I'm back home in some weeks and upload then.
Go to Top of Page
Strange response. Please, let me know what you find out.
Perhaps you can more easily upload to a "Discussion" topic? I tried it out myself, and had no problems. But then I also do not get this js complaint...
|
|
|
| Reply #7
SnailsAttack
USA
8 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2023 : 09:20:18
|
| oh my god, that's like 15x the normal background. do airliners even have gamma ray shielding? |
|
|
| Reply #8
Bobakman
USA
97 Posts |
|
| Reply #9
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2023 : 05:31:24
|
quote:
oh my god, that's like 15x the normal background. do airliners even have gamma ray shielding?
Like what, a lead-enforced cabin? Not only unrealistic, but why should they, there is apparently no danger from such radiation exposure.
@Bobackman quoted two important, recent studies on the topic. The first one is a review of all studies till 2021, and I strongly suggest reading it. It is not behind a paywall, so you can download the full text. From the abstract:
quote:
Despite high levels of CIR [Cosmic Ionizing Radiation] exposure and elevated rates of cancer in aircrew, a causal link between CIR and cancer has yet to be established.
|
|
|
| Reply #10
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2023 : 03:15:32
|
Hopefully it works now.
 |
|
|
| Reply #11
SnailsAttack
USA
8 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2023 : 03:48:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by ullixLike what, a lead-enforced cabin?
Well, I suppose whatever they've got on the ISS. I think they use hydrogen-dense plastics.
quote:
Despite high levels of CIR [Cosmic Ionizing Radiation] exposure and elevated rates of cancer in aircrew, a causal link between CIR and cancer has yet to be established.
Elevated rates of cancer in aircrew sure sounds like a causal link to me. It's weird that it only seems to double the risk of skin cancer, though.
|
|
|
| Reply #12
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2023 : 02:09:22
|
Another beauty, very similar to the first, and including pre- and post-flight Xray. Why post-flight? I did not know they do this.
Would you mind uploading to the GeigerLog site with permission to use?
Hopefully we will also see the return flight. |
|
|
| Reply #13
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2023 : 02:23:45
|
quote:
Well, I suppose whatever they've got on the ISS. I think they use hydrogen-dense plastics.
That would not be very helpful. For gamma absorption, which are the ones going into the cabin or the ISS, you either need high Z material, like lead, iron, copper, or you need very thick, like meter-thick walls from the likes of plastic. Would look a bit strange and both options mean "heavy"!
See e.g.: https://www.eichrom.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Gamma-Ray-Attenuation-White-Paper-by-D-M-rev-6-1-002.pdf
HVL is the thickness needed for a radiation reduction by half.
 |
|
|
| Reply #14
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2023 : 07:14:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by ullix
Another beauty, very similar to the first, and including pre- and post-flight Xray. Why post-flight? I did not know they do this.
Would you mind uploading to the GeigerLog site with permission to use?
Hopefully we will also see the return flight.
Sorry I haven't seen your post so far. I'll upload the bin-file when I'm back home. As I mentioned above, I have some problems here in the hotel to upload to sourceforge. Admin restrictions?
Another issue: I will record the data not CPS but in CPM because 16 hours of recording is very short with respect, that I can't access the counter between airport transfer an comming home. |
|
|
| Reply #15
Erwin55
Germany
41 Posts |
|
| Reply #16
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2023 : 01:20:43
|
Truly nice data, thank you! I'll put them as examples into the next GeigerLog release.
And all were done with a GMC-300E+ counter.
One can nicely see the decrease in count rate when going south, and the increase when going north. Although, given that both times the counter was in the luggage compartment, the slight difference between them is a bit puzzling. Different flight altitude?
 |
|
|
| Reply #17
Ro
2 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2024 : 00:39:42
|
| I'm attempting to download my first data file now. It has about 90 hours of flight data for the last month, mostly over the West Pacific on flights between HNL, Guam and Manila. I'm not sure it's going to download though because it's still at 0% after 10 minutes of downloading... Dosimeter read ~135 uSv over that time. |
|
|
| Reply #18
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2024 : 02:21:11
|
This route will be new, and a nice complement to other existing routes.
I don't know where you are downloading from and uploading to, but you are always welcome to upload to this place:
https://sourceforge.net/p/geigerlog/discussion/easyuploads/
If anything is too big, consider zipping the file!
|
|
|
| Reply #19
EmfDev
2250 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2024 : 12:21:38
|
| If you are using the Data Viewer software, check if the address log under the software is updating. If not, you may need to restart the download. |
|
|
| Reply #20
Ro
2 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2024 : 15:00:49
|
There are over a dozen studies to date, ONE showed no increase in cancer rates (who sponsored it? ...). The two main cancers that are associated with flight crews at an increased rate are prostate in men and breast cancer in women. Since ionizing radiation is a factor in both, it doesn't take a leap of faith to conclude the increased radiation exposure is likely a significant factor.
When carrying a tradition dosimeter (from my hospital job) flying about a 2/3 schedule, I exceeded the general public limit of 1 mSV in 4 months -- in about 200 hours of flying East coast to Europe back and forth.
EU pilots (ICAO technically) have some protections and mitigation strategies for exposure. US airlines currently have nothing.
quote:
Originally posted by ullix
quote:
oh my god, that's like 15x the normal background. do airliners even have gamma ray shielding?
Like what, a lead-enforced cabin? Not only unrealistic, but why should they, there is apparently no danger from such radiation exposure.
@Bobackman quoted two important, recent studies on the topic. The first one is a review of all studies till 2021, and I strongly suggest reading it. It is not behind a paywall, so you can download the full text. From the abstract:
quote:
Despite high levels of CIR [Cosmic Ionizing Radiation] exposure and elevated rates of cancer in aircrew, a causal link between CIR and cancer has yet to be established.
|
|
|
| Reply #21
GBG12
Canada
101 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2024 : 12:17:12
|
quote:
One can nicely see the decrease in count rate when going south, and the increase when going north. Although, given that both times the counter was in the luggage compartment, the slight difference between them is a bit puzzling. Different flight altitude?
There is more cosmic radiation at northern latitudes. CDC suggests flight crews to minimize the number of polar flight paths: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/aircrew/cosmicionizingradiation.html |
|
|
| Reply #22
wikilicious
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2024 : 15:43:03
|
I too took a GMC on a flight... from Portland to London and back (In my carry on backpack)
I noticed something interesting... it seems like there is something missing on my return trip. I had the GMC recording the whole time.
Plotted with Python matplotlib & pygmc https://pypi.org/project/pygmc/ |
|
|
| Reply #23
EmfDev
2250 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2024 : 09:43:08
|
| did you try using other software to download the bin file? |
|
|
| Reply #24
ullix
Germany
1171 Posts |
Posted - 04/23/2024 : 22:24:21
|
I suppose the initial high counts were Xray check, and flight PDX to UK? When was the return flight?
Can you post the bin file? If nowhere else then here:
https://sourceforge.net/p/geigerlog/discussion/easyuploads/
Does the counter now work again, or does it still produce zeros? The tube looks ok - no whitish, cloudy layer inside? |
|
|
| Reply #25
wikilicious
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2024 : 14:34:01
|
It's not a plotting issue nor data issue.
The missing part... that I'm deducing and speculating... is that the x-ray machine was not working on the return trip.
There is no x-ray spike at all or any bump in the data.
There is an obvious spike before PDX-LHR... then a ~10hr elevated count.
Then a continuous normal background level count.
Then an elevated return flight count for ~10hr... but no spike before. |
Edited by - wikilicious on 04/24/2024 14:40:52 |
|
|
| Reply #26
EmfDev
2250 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2024 : 13:56:31
|
| it is also possible that the xray pulse duration is too short to be detected. |
|
|
| Reply #27
wikilicious
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2024 : 17:58:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by EmfDev
it is also possible that the xray pulse duration is too short to be detected.
That raises a question...
Is it possible for an x-ray pulse to be sufficient to create an image of the contents - yet be insufficient to record any bump at all on a GMC800? (with data recording set at CPM and fast-estimate-time=dynamic the default)
I'd need to know the algorithm for fast-estimate-time=dynamic to say for sure... even if that is the case... I'd complain about FET=dynamic by default while not showing any bump at all going through an x-ray! |
|
|
| Reply #28
EmfDev
2250 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2024 : 11:34:20
|
| Data recorded are from cps, those are raw data and were not affected by fast estimate time. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Flight Data, FRA-AYT
