Solar radiation and high-flying aircraft

So I am flying on Friday and have done extensive research on flying and pregnancy. I read several specialists on radiation and seemed to come to the conclusion that unless there is an X-category solar flare and subsequent storm... don't worry about flying.

However Murphy's Law has prevailed. Apparently there is now an X class (X3) solar flare and major radiation storm.

NOAA: Solar radiation storms

NOAA which tracks this, rates it a category S2 for radiation


So could any of you rocket scientists, I know we do have a few on here, put some clarity on this. How long do these X flares usually result in higher atmospheric radiation levels? When would it be considered safe to fly again? Any thoughts?

Oh this is reassuring:

Where are you flying too? That will determine a lot of factors on what amount of radiation exposure you could get.

into NYC...I assume as the earth rotates, if it lasts for more than a few hours, than all areas would be affected...no? Alas, this is TOTALLY out of my area of knowledge.

Here is some info on solar flares...


http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/flareclasses.html

guess I should have put this in the space category.

An airplane flies around 6 miles up. ACE is just a bit closer to the Sun at around 930,000 miles.

Do you know what ACE is? Do you know WHERE ACE is?
ACE (the Advanced Compostion Explorer) was launched in 1997 and was expected to run from a minimum of 2 years to around 5 years. It's nine years old, almost double its life expectancy, and still working.

It's also at the L1 point. That's about four times further away from the Earth as the Moon is, and all of that distance in the direction of the Sun. No magnetic fields or belts to protect it.


Blasphemy! The Earth is at the center of our universe which, by the way, is about 6,000 years old and was created entirely within a week.

If you want to be really, super-duper extra safe, bring a couple rolls of aluminum foil in your carry-on and wrap yourself (or at least make a you-sized blanket out of it). The other passengerss will laugh at you but you might feel better about the UNKNOWN AND VERY SCARY DANGER THAT YOU'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PANIC ABOUT.

You're flying to New York for seven hours, not to the Space Station for six months!

woof.

Any chance we might see some good Aurora Borealis at the latitude of Munich in the next days? Is it just a moderately big radiation storm, or something really impressive?

to put in a kinder fashion then our K9 friend. You'll be ok. or more importantly your child will be ok. the amount of radiation you'll recieve is in all probability less than that which you make the child suffer by having a mobile. if though the child is born with three heads...

Good thing too:

Astronauts Forced To Take Shelter From Violent Solar Storm In Space

FYI...I love google. Gemini, I bet you probably found this already but Ill post it up here for posterity. Theres a similiar Q&A in the health physics society which describes themselves as a scientific and professional organization whose members specialize in occupational and environmental radiation safety.

Q: I am planning a round-trip flight from Washington, DC, to Chicago. I have a particular concern about my exposure to radiation because there are solar flares predicted for that week and I will be in my 9th week of pregnancy during my flights. What are the additional risks of radiation we might be exposed to if our flights occur during solar flares and the implications that it could have on my developing baby?

A: The radiation exposures while flying are not considered high exposures. During your pregnancy you and your fetus will receive about 300 millirad of background radiation, which of course none of us can avoid. In a 10-hour flight you would receive less than 1 millirad. During solar flare periods the exposure may be increased. Some measurements have estimated exposures of 100 times the usual exposure while flying which would bring your exposure in the range of a low-level exposure from many diagnostic radiological procedures. Even this exposure would not increase your risk for birth defects or miscarriage, which is 3% for birth defects and 15% for miscarriage for all healthy women when they begin their pregnancy. [/b]

I dont know if this covers an X3 category flare so now back to TT scientists

That is about right and to think it came from googling.

High altitude long haul flights are about the equivalent of a finger xray only less energy and spread out over a longer period of time and more surface area. 100 such trips might be the equivalent of a chest xray or two, but would have to check on the exact measurements to be sure. Or you could wait a few years as low dose radiation is part of the grant that I wrote and we should have some results back in 2008 or 9.

If TV has taught us anything atall, its that people exposed to radiation and solar flares develop super-human powers and shit. That'd be soo sweet. I'd become a super villain. Not only do they get to wear cooler costumes most of the time, they actually earn money. Imagine being fucking superman, and working as a bloody reporter. What a fuckwit. Seriously. Fuckwit. Spiderman can do loads of shit, so what does he do for money? Uses his special web spinning skills to essentially sellotape a camera toa building, then sells the photos. HELLO?!? You stupid fucking idiot. Even if he really wanted to stick to the stupid photos shit, at least web some cameras somewhere like Jenifer Anistons bedroom or something. Fucking idiot.

If you do fly near a flare, and your kid gets super powers, don't let the poor child turn out to be such financial twats as supes and spidey. Please - Don't do it.

I would buy a radiation suit just in case though. Oh, and get some clear plastic and heavy duty tape to make sure the aircraft windows are sealed and you create a radiation-safe area around your seat...

Super villians dont cook numbnuts. They get other people to do it for them and then what would you do for fun. Sure you could be tying girls to railroad tracks or whatever but the good guys would lure you into a cage trap with a dead carcass, a pan, a slab of bacon, a tub o butter, and a bunch of sage. Get this through that thick ginga mop of yours: Don Riina and Evil dont mix. Now stop hijacking the nice ladys serious thread and make me a sandwich. Ill take one of them curry nut jobs youve blabbed on about. Get yourself drunk first so I get a good one. Please.

Oh, for the love of pork-based-snacks, you're a bird, you know fuck all about super villainry. Sure, I don't know fo any that cook, but the point in the super part of super villain, is finding your niche, and forming a character. Therfuckingfore I could be a super villain, whose eveil was based around cooking shit. There you go. Simple. I could plan to destroy new york by putting fucking shitloads of instant mash potato mix into the sewers for example. Not that I'd ever use instant mash mix. Sick. Anyway, I'm sure there's loads I could do. For all you fucking know, I could already exist, and simply put on some clown makeup, backcomb my hair a bit, and be planning to fuck the entire world by selling them fat and sugar laden fast food. Your imagination is fucking shit, its not my fault, its yours. Dont fucking take your frustration at your inadequacies out on me just because I live in a world where I can imagine a super villain who incorporates goose fat and demi glace into his heinous schemes.


Martini

now some fun regarding super human powers and radiation shields I expected ...but Bad Doggie, you are just a perpertually miserable pooch. Your only seeming contribution ever to any thread is only at the attempted expense of others (psych 101 chapter on low self esteem). But carry on you miserable pound dog. I can assure you, I have read more on this topic than you, and thus have some concerns (yes, concerns...hardly in panic mode here). Whether they turn out to be justified or not is what I am attempting to find out. As you are not being helpful, witty or even slightly amusing, why don't you simply go away (and I am VERY sure you needed to google ACE).

Anyway, back to people who actually contributed something

Thanks JML, that is one of the sights that I looked at a lot, because it has some very good information from actual scientists. I think pregnant women (and frequent flyers in general) can get a lot of "minimized" information. There is a move to have radiation monitors on planes and then have them fly lower during solar flares, and to make flight attendants categorized as a radiation exposed industry, and thus better regulate their exposure. Flight attendants have significantly higher rates of breast cancer than your average woman (is it linked to increased exposure???)

Eurovol - somewhere on one source I read they stated that a typical 10 hour flight nearer to the poles than the equator is the equivalent of 2 to 3 CXR's. At 10 such flights, one has reached the civilan recommended max for the year, if you went by the radiation limits allowed for people like XR techs.

green tea - the linked page with the solar space weather gives info on the aurora borealis visability.
The explosion hurled a coronal mass ejection toward Earth: movie.


Of course the chance of a problem is low, but there are very few real studies out there (for understandable reasons).

And yes during severe solar flares, one can reach their annual recommended max exposure or greater on one flight.

I dont think shit cooks up very well but your the expert. Ok have it your way, Ill add you to the list of international supervillians. Say hello to Ronald McDonald btw hes got the corner on the clown market, the Colonel and the Burger King. Watch out for Wendys, thats not really a girl ... I hear s/he's packing more than trans fat...if you know what Im saying.

here is that info of equivalent CXR potential during a solar flare.


http://www.solcomhouse.com/solar.html

Yes, it is certainly CRAZY not to want to expose yourself nor your unborn child to that

You wanna pissball about with implied understanding if written stuff, then fine, I'll post in that vein.


waaah, waaaaah, haha and waaah. you did it first, you did it first. la laaaa la laaa la

Pardon me if you've already gotten a sufficient reply, but I haven't read the rest of the thread. I work in the mission operations center for a number of different NASA scientific satellite missions, one of which has the specific goal of studying the sun. I just spoke to one of the controllers in charge of the aforementioned spacecraft, because last week there was a big hubbub about the biggest flare seen in quite awhile. He said that the particle flux (and hence radiation level) is already back to nominal levels, and given that nobody has mentioned the flare today, my guess is it isn't anything out of the ordinary. In fact, you're better off travelling now than you are any other time in the next decade or so, because we're at a solar minimum.

And if you can make sense of these, heres lots of pretty charts, also for posterity. One of the links includes a 3 day solar forecast. I wonder if they have pretty weather girls.

Todays warning
http://www.sec.noaa.gov/advisories/2006121...8_bulletin.html

Space weather now
http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SWN/

Today's weather
http://www.sec.noaa.gov/today.html

Thanks IPJ, that is more along the info I am looking for.

As a follow up, we just looked at a plot of the current solar activity, and I see the flare you're referring to (which is indeed a big one). It looks, though, like such flares normally only take a day or two to go back to nominal levels as far as radiation (x-ray) is concerned. I think that answers your question a bit better.

Edit: Here's a link to the plot to which I'm referring.

Thanks. I too thought a couple of days delay would do it, I am just a bit concerned regarding NOAA's recommending close monitoring over the next 5 days for further activity.

All this science is making me want to go back to school

Gemini, I think those numbers are a bit over the top.

Friedberg W et al. Radiation exposure during air travel: Guidance provided by the FAA for air carrier crews. Health Phys 79(5):591-5; 2000.

* Seattle to Portland: 3 mrem per 100 block hours
* New York to Chicago: 39 mrem per 100 block hours
* Los Angeles to Honolulu: 26 mrem per 100 block hours
* London to New York: 51 mrem per 100 block hours
* Athens to New York: 63 mrem per 100 block hours
* Tokyo to New York: 55 mrem per 100 block hours

Typical radiation exposures for Americans per the American Nuclear Society

* One hour at Trinity Site ground zero = one half mrem
* Cosmic rays from space = 47 mrem at Denver per year, 28 mrem at St. Louis
* Radioactive minerals in rocls and soil = 63 mrems per year on Colorado Plateau
* Radioactivity from air, water and food = about 240 mrem per year
* About six mrem per chest X-ray, 65 mrem per hip X-ray and 110 mrem for a CAT Scan
* Watching television = less than one mrem per year
* Wearing a plutonium-powered pacemaker = 100 mrem per year

PS: change my chest reference to hip. I had those backwards. I should have remembered: chest air, hip dense.

yes Eurovol...there is SO much conflicting info and opinions on this, it is really hard to make an assessment. Examples...




ACOG NEWS RELEASE - Pregnancy, Airline Travel and Radiation Exposure (ACOG = American College of Gynecologists) http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications...r05-31-04-2.cfm

Gemini stop being a woosh and follow BD's advice. God help the poor child if you go on like this for the rest of it's life. By the way if it is a boy please call it Top.

That was not "advice". I also requested opinions from persons who may actually know something on the topic...not sideline pseudoscientists.

Just because one may know anything about potential increases in solar radiation during times of solar flares, does NOT make it invalid. I will stick with trying to decifer what the various experts and studies are saying.

hey, one may even learn something...think of that.

Damn. Your friend the solar flare is making me have to be on call all weekend. It's caused a major particle substorm in the Earth's auroral zones which will very likely cause the main satellite I work with to have a heart attack and self-destruct (ok, maybe not that drastic...it just may reset itself causing me to have to spend hours recovering it).

Just thought I'd let you know, in case you're interested, that there was just another category X flare a couple hours ago. Looks like the Sun's pretty active right now, though there's no way to predict the activity ahead of time.

GREAT!!! The sun is really on a roll. Sorry to hear you will be busy this weekend with malfunctioning mechanical heart attacks.

I changed my flight to Fri to Sat, so hopefully it will quiet down a bit. And the radiation levels will drop again

This is however the response I received from one of the specialist Radiation docs docs I consulted with.


he addresses the short term, which I agree with. Of course that does not answer the issue of long term effects of the increased exposure.

Gemini. Don't forget that the paranoia, sorry, terrorist threat level is "Orange" here at the moment too. No clue how paranoid we are supposed to be but I saw a few nervous looking people at SFO airport today so I guess we may all die. Best thing would be not to fly at all and hide in your bedroom underneath the bedclothes. Experience has taught us that bedclothes can withstand anything, so maybe you can take them with you on the flight and you will be as safe as houses

Crawlie...you have so much time with your unemployed self. If you hold such strong opinions, perhaps you have actually taken the time to consult any scientific journal or organization...website perhaps.

Now go get your coors and big mac and go inform yourself.

I am fascinated how the search for valid medical & scientific information is translated to paranoia. And yet, none seem to have read or know anything on the subjects.

Don't drink coors and don't eat big macs. Sorry. But great comeback there though.. Cool... Yeah, I was unemployed for a while but that was voluntary and actually quite enjoyable. Nice to take some time off from the corporate environment once in you life.

But anyway, why read medical journals and the like? That letter to you from the professor blokey confirmed your paranoia

Oh yes, make sure to insult anyone who questions in any capacity any issue.

I clearly stated that I had some "concerns" and that I was researching to see if they were justified or not. Gosh I see the pursuit of knowledge become such a unpalatable thing to those with a zero knowledge base to start from.

Actually the doc confirmed my issues regarding the potential for quite an increase in atmospheric radiation, but that in several flights this should remain in the safe zone. Reassuring.

And that bothers you because

That is why my grant for studying low dose radiation will probably get funded. We really don't know what effects there are as it is extremely difficult to quantify and qualify. As we are exposed on a daily basis, any slight increase over a protracted time is a total unknown. Part of my grant points out the benefit to high altitude flight and space travel situations. NASA and the ESI are both funding quite a bit of this kind of research. The comforting take home message here is that DNA damage occurs constantly due to the cells own metabolism and at a rate of up to 100,000 times per day per cell, so a couple more rad induced lesions are really not all that significant when you put it into perspective.

That is great Eurovol...glad to see there is to be more real research done in this area...much needed.

Of course not so important for infrequent fliers, but very important for those in the industry, frequent fliers and in the military.

From several sources I have read there is statistically increased levels of skin and breast cancers in industry workers.

Read Dr. Rob Barish, he has some very interesting data and scientific opinions. (though as he also tried to make a business out of an alert service he had, one must read critically)

Actually, it is important for everyone regardless. The DNA repair mechanisms involved with reactive oxygen species induced lesions (like those caused by radiation and chemicals) are involved in metabolism, aging and cancer.

Hmm, I'd take that increased skin cancer idea with a grain of salt. If you work a plane flying long-distance flights, one of the perks would be to get to lie on the beach on your rest days, wouldn't it?

Actually showem you are exactly right. They want to do better studies because they actually believe that the "beach perk" may have more to do with it than the atmospheric radiation.

Thats why I love well designed scientific studies...sort out fact from fiction.

The breast cancer issue is harder to explain away, and of course a real concern.

And as a result of the suns quite prominent solar activities, and magnetic storms, there is the beautiful side effect of aurora.


These auroras over Kalamazoo, Michigan, last night were plainly visible to the unaided eye: http://www.spaceweather.com/

Not really. You have to look at the sample group. Until a decade ago, smoking was allowed on airplanes and such a situation would probably qualify as active smoking. The lifestyle of flight attendents probably also includes lots of caffeine, irregular sleep and airplane food. You also have to remember that the typical stewardess of yesteryear was skinny with big boobs.

Well if I was a airline "hostess", I think I would want some slightly more scientific data to back up your theories. Till then radiation exposure as a contributing factor is probably a hypothesis needing further study.

That is extremely scientific. Fat cells don't do cancer. Skinny broad with big tits has a greater chance of having more ductal tissue as opposed to fat.