[aprssig] APRS Radiation sensor

Randy Allen ka0azs at earthlink.net
Wed Mar 23 18:19:31 EDT 2011

I agree it could be "pointless and dangerous" depending on how it's done.

I certainly don't plan to send ARES members out with handheld equipment 
to scout the area for me.

However, speaking as someone that uses APRS in our EOC as A WX 
information source (notice "A" not "The"), I could see value in 
automated reports from scattered locations in the county as A source of 

I know there can be issues with calibration, just like weather stations. 
  But I know the stations in my area, and know which of them 
consistently read a little high/low on temp and wind, and can make 
allowances for that, especially if all I want to know is if there has 
been a change.

Applying the same logic to radiation sensors, over time I could 
determine which are reliable and accurate, and which ones were valuable 
only to detect a change in value, not what the absolute value of that 
change is.

And given that we are talking about stations that can run unattended, 
and will be in place anyway (i.e. the A in APRS, just to keep it on 
topic), it might provide information allow us to prioritize where to 
deploy properly trained and equipped teams without placing someone at risk.

Just my thoughts.



On 3/23/2011 13:54, Eric Hansen wrote:

> I still think involving hams in radiation monitoring is pointless and
> dangerous.

More information about the aprssig mailing list