Title:
A REVIEW OF AERIAL RADIOLOGICAL SURVEYS OF FALLOUT FIELDS 1951 THROUGH 1958 ( DRAFT )
Subject Terms:
ANNIE EVENT; FALLOUT PATTERNS; BOLTZMANN EVENT; SMOKY EVENT; DATA; JANGLE PROJECT; RADIATION DETECTORS; HARRY EVENT; BUSTER OPERATION; AEROSOL MONITORING; NANCY EVENT; HARDTACK II OPERATION; UPSHOT OPERATION; DOSE RATES; PLUMBBOB OPERATION; SURVEYS; SIMON EVENT; TEAPOT OPERATION; GRAPHS; BADGER EVENT; BUSTER-JANGLE OPERATION; UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE OPERATION
Document Location:
Location - DOE/NNSA NUCLEAR TESTING ARCHIVE Address - P.O. Box 98521 City - Las Vegas State - NV Zip - 89193-8521 Phone - (702)794-5106 Fax - (702)862-4240 Email - NTA@NV.DOE.GOV
Publication Date:
1982 Nov 30
Declassification Status:
Never classified
Accession Number:
NV0067626
Originating Research Org.:
* EG+G
OpenNet Entry Date:
1994 Aug 26
OpenNet Modified Date:
2003 Sep 18
Description/Abstract:
AERIAL SURVEYS OF OFF-SITE FALLOUT RADIATION FIELDS BEGAN IN 1953 AND CONTINUED THROUGHOUT THE ABOVE-GROUND TESTING PERIOD. THE RESULTS WERE USED TO SUPPORT GROUND DATA IN DETERMINING THE EXTENT OF THE FALLOUT PATTERNS. FOR THE UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE AND TEAPOT SERIES, THE PRIMARY PROBL EM WAS LOCATION. NAVIGATION WAS MADE FROM AERONAUTICAL CHARTS OF SCALE 1:1,000,000. ERROR IN LOCATION OF SEVERAL MILES WAS EXPECTED. THE SEC OND PROBLEM WAS THAT EXPOSURE RATE READINGS MADE IN THE AIRCRAFT OF MI LLIROENTGEN PER HOUR OR LOWER USUALLY READ TOO HIGH, AND THEREFORE, WE RE NOT RELIABLE. EXPOSURE RATE MEASUREMENTS ABOVE MILLIROENTGEN PER HO UR WERE GOOD, HOWEVER, AND ARE CONSIDERED RELIABLE TO WITHIN A FACTOR OF 2 OR 3 IN PREDICTING 3 FT EXPOSURE RATE LEVELS. FOR THE PLUMBBOB SE RIES, THE AIRCRAFT POSITION DATA WAS GOOD. GROUND LEVEL EXPOSURE RATES PREDICTED FROM AERIAL DATA FROM THE USGS PLANE ARE EXPECTED TO BE REL IABLE TO WITHIN PLUS OR MINUS 50% OR BETTER FOR MOST OF THE SURVEYS WH EN THE FIVE-DETECTOR ARRAY WAS USED. WHEN THE SINGLE DETECTOR WAS USED T, THE ACCURACY DECREASES TO ABOUT A FACTOR OF 2. RELATIVE COUNT RATE S FROM THE AEC RAW MATERIALS DIVISION PLANE ARE PROBABLY VALID, BUT QU ANTITATIVE DETERMINATION OF 3 FT EXPOSURE RATES ARE NOT.