Flying with flashbulbs?

Didzis · Jul 12, 2006

Is it a good idea to fly with flashbulbs? For example, is it possible that X-ray checks could ignite them? A suitcase fire would be a pretty nasty experience. Or probably airport officials believe that they are potential explosives and will refuse you to board the plane if they find any flashbulbs? With all the post-9/11 paranoia, the security regulations are somewhat tighter, and the fact that people in 1960ies probably flew quite happily with all the flashbulbs they would ever want does not mean that the same thing is possible today. What is your experience (if any)?

Kino · Jul 12, 2006

That is an interesting question. I would guess it just MIGHT set off the bulbs.

You might try contacting someone directly at the airport, but knowing the rampant stupidity and idiotic attitudes of "if you ask, you gotta be up to no good" here in the USA, you might find yourself under heavy suspicion for trying to do the right thing.

Gotta love it...

df cardwell · Jul 12, 2006

How about contacting the TSA ?

http://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/default.aspx

Gerald Koch · Jul 12, 2006

The only thing that is going to unintentionally set off a flash bulb is a static electric charge. This could be present around any piece of electrical equipment not only x-ray equipment. The x-rays themselves will have no effect. If you are concerned then use a piece of aluminum foil to short out the contacts on each of the bulbs. This will prevent them from firing.

Kino · Jul 12, 2006

df cardwell said:
How about contacting the TSA ?

http://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/default.aspx

I think he is in Russia...

paul ewins · Jul 12, 2006

I've taken them interstate in Australia without any problems. No questions asked when it went through the scanner, even with the 3 cell Graflex gun sitting next to them.

My usual policy for things that may look unusual is to have them in my hand luggage so that I can pull them out and explain what they are rather than have somebody stuff around with my checked luggage.

Although I have never had it happen, it is supposed to be static electricity that sets bulbs off accidentally. So long as they are in their original cardboard packets or sleeves they should be fine and these also help protect them and identify what they are to interested officials.

DBP · Jul 12, 2006

I did call TSA. They recommended putting them in carry on luggage to avoid damage from baggage handlers, but said they are permitted.

Photo Engineer · Jul 12, 2006

Flashbulbs can be ignited by both radar and microwave, if the frequency is right and the intensity is high enough. IDK about X-ray, but I doubt it.

On one of the missions, an associate of mine was carrying 24 flashbulbs in his uniform and coat pockets when he walked in front of a jet fighter with electronics undergoing tests. All bulbs fired and he was burned by the heat.

PE

DBP · Jul 12, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
Flashbulbs can be ignited by both radar and microwave, if the frequency is right and the intensity is high enough. IDK about X-ray, but I doubt it.

On one of the missions, an associate of mine was carrying 24 flashbulbs in his uniform and coat pockets when he walked in front of a jet fighter with electronics undergoing tests. All bulbs fired and he was burned by the heat.

PE

Ouch! Of course a fighter radar puts out a lot of power. I wouldn't stand in front of one without flashbulbs. There used to be a joke in the F-14 community that you didn't need a receiver to know you were being painted by an F-14 - the cockpit would warm up. I suspect that was a slight exaggeration.

Photo Engineer · Jul 12, 2006

Granted that a fighter puts out a lot of microwave energy, a commercial airliner nowdays does this as well, and so does the airport tower radar! My associate was at least 100 ft from the plane if not more. And, this took place in the '60s when fighter radar was weaker than it is now.

How close might your luggage come to an active plane radar? How much of the field of the tower radar might it encounter?

Since I have no idea, and the age of flasbulbs was dying at the time the age of radar was starting, we really don't have much data at all.

I hope that you see the unknown level of hazard which might be lurking here.

Radar emissions are strictly regulated and all attempts are made to keep them from being encountered by people, as they are akin to microwaves and can 'cook' things! They are not regulated as far as objects such as luggage are concerned.

Just pointing it out.

PE

copake_ham · Jul 12, 2006

I would also be concerned about the possibility that the trooper's radar gun might trigger the bulbs during the drive to the airport!

Clearly the safer option would be to carry a tray and flash powder - obviously in separate bags on separate flights.

Photo Engineer · Jul 12, 2006

You may not know the following:

1. Highway radar was just coming into use as flashbulbs went out of use. There is probably no data on their interaction.

2. There are several cases of police being burned or having cancer induced by their use of radar and leaving the unit on for 'quick response' while sitting by the side of the highway.

3. Radar emissions can sometimes be tested by carrying a light bulb into the field and observing as it lights up. This denotes a signal strength that is above recommended levels. By then, it is probably too late. Some brain cells are dead even if you survive. At one time, it was believed that this was a 'safe' level.

This is bringing back a lot of old memories. We had a radar technician accidentally 'cook' a hand by an overdose of radar. IIRC, his hand turned red and gradually blistered. This took several hours as he gradually lost the use of the hand. Surgeons at our base had to finally amputate the hand.

This sort of thing is probably more common and less reported than is warranted.

PE

DBP · Jul 12, 2006

The microwave oven was invented when a Raytheon engineer's candy bar melted in a radar lab, so you definitely don't want to be too close. But the energy attenuates over distance as it spreads to cover a greater area (just like a flash, for example). According to the WHO http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs226/en/, the outputs from police radars are very small, in the milliwatt range, as opposed to average power of a few hundred watts for air traffic control radars and a few thousand for military units. The latter can be a significant hazard as it is a highly focused beam. So I wouldn't carry flashbulbs around an aircraft carrier, but an airport should be fine. Either that or I am getting cooked as I write as I can see the tower for National Airport from my desk.

Lachlan Young · Jul 13, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
3. Radar emissions can sometimes be tested by carrying a light bulb into the field and observing as it lights up. This denotes a signal strength that is above recommended levels. By then, it is probably too late. Some brain cells are dead even if you survive. At one time, it was believed that this was a 'safe' level.

This is bringing back a lot of old memories. We had a radar technician accidentally 'cook' a hand by an overdose of radar. IIRC, his hand turned red and gradually blistered. This took several hours as he gradually lost the use of the hand. Surgeons at our base had to finally amputate the hand.

This sort of thing is probably more common and less reported than is warranted.

PE

A bit like the urban legend of the guy who was killed and cooked by the radio waves in a relay station on New Year's Eve 1999 due to the vastly increased quantity of traffic.

Lachlan

Photo Engineer · Jul 13, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
A bit like the urban legend of the guy who was killed and cooked by the radio waves in a relay station on New Year's Eve 1999 due to the vastly increased quantity of traffic.

Lachlan

Lachlan, one thing is sure and that is the fact that the metal in a bulb filament can begin to glow by an induced current. That is why flashbulbs go off when hit be radar, and that is why an ordinary light bulb can produce a glow from radar.

PE

RichSBV · Jul 14, 2006

PE, as an old RF tech, I have some curiosity here.

Could you possibly be mistaking that "bulb" for either a neon bulb or even flourescent tube? Back in the old days, we used both as RF indicators. It doesn't take much to excite the gas into glowing. Not much as in 5 watts to 500 depending on distance and bulb size. The thought of how much radiation would have to actually strike the filiment of an incandescnet bulb to generate enough power to make it glow makes me think it would be slightly inefficient as an indicator for anything alive...

We did however occasionaly use incandescent light bulbs as direct wired loads for RF transmitters, and they would light up...

And as one who used to fill the air waves with a thousand watts or so now and then, not 20 feet from the closet that held a case of flash bulbs, it now makes me wonder why they never went off? Okay, so it wasn't microwaves, but I still was able to fire up flourescent tubes 300 feet away when I transmitted ;-)

roteague · Jul 14, 2006

Kino said:
I think he is in Russia...

No, I believe he is in Latvia.

DBP · Jul 14, 2006

RichSBV said:
PE, as an old RF tech, I have some curiosity here.

Could you possibly be mistaking that "bulb" for either a neon bulb or even flourescent tube? Back in the old days, we used both as RF indicators. It doesn't take much to excite the gas into glowing. Not much as in 5 watts to 500 depending on distance and bulb size. The thought of how much radiation would have to actually strike the filiment of an incandescnet bulb to generate enough power to make it glow makes me think it would be slightly inefficient as an indicator for anything alive...

We did however occasionaly use incandescent light bulbs as direct wired loads for RF transmitters, and they would light up...

And as one who used to fill the air waves with a thousand watts or so now and then, not 20 feet from the closet that held a case of flash bulbs, it now makes me wonder why they never went off? Okay, so it wasn't microwaves, but I still was able to fire up flourescent tubes 300 feet away when I transmitted ;-)

Big difference, the radar that set off those bulbs was throwing all of its few thousand watts in a tightly focused beam, as opposed to broadcasting. So I suspect that there was a lot more energy 100 feet in front of that aircraft than 20 feet from your antenna. And come to think of it, I regularly carry flashbulbs to a site that is so close to a TV tower that it jams my car alarm remote. I pass within 50 feet of that tower. The flashbulbs do fine.

Photo Engineer · Jul 14, 2006

DBP said:
Big difference, the radar that set off those bulbs was throwing all of its few thousand watts in a tightly focused beam, as opposed to broadcasting. So I suspect that there was a lot more energy 100 feet in front of that aircraft than 20 feet from your antenna. And come to think of it, I regularly carry flashbulbs to a site that is so close to a TV tower that it jams my car alarm remote. I pass within 50 feet of that tower. The flashbulbs do fine.

You are exactly right about the focused energy of the fighter radar. But this is similar to the airport X-ray, and is why it came to mind as a possible problem in this thread.

As far as the fluorescent lights, yes, I know about them and have for years, but I have also heard about tungsten lights glowing via induced current. This is why metals begin to burn in a microwave. In a bulb, they will not burn, but rather glow from the heat induced by current flowing. A flashbulb in a microwave would presumably fire.

My wife will not let me test any of these in our microwave. As a retiree, she has pointed out that our budget will not allow for a new microwave at this time.

PE

Kino · Jul 14, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
My wife will not let me test any of these in our microwave. As a retiree, she has pointed out that our budget will not allow for a new microwave at this time.
PE

Oh, darn!

There goes the R&D portion of APUG.

Frank

copake_ham · Jul 14, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
....
3. Radar emissions can sometimes be tested by carrying a light bulb into the field and observing as it lights up. This denotes a signal strength that is above recommended levels. By then, it is probably too late. Some brain cells are dead even if you survive. At one time, it was believed that this was a 'safe' level.....

PE

Depends on what you mean by "light bulb".

In olden days, ham radio operators would "test" radiating patterns of various antennas by waving a flourescent light bulb (really a tube) along the antenna wire. It was the RF energizing the florescence that lit the tube.

This would not work with an incandescent bulb which uses a filament.

Photo Engineer · Jul 14, 2006

Kino said:
Oh, darn!

There goes the R&D portion of APUG.

Frank

Frank;

Don't worry, she supports the emulsion work!

Hooray!

PE

Photo Engineer · Jul 14, 2006

copake_ham said:
Depends on what you mean by "light bulb".

In olden days, ham radio operators would "test" radiating patterns of various antennas by waving a flourescent light bulb (really a tube) along the antenna wire. It was the RF energizing the florescence that lit the tube.

This would not work with an incandescent bulb which uses a filament.

I agree fully with most of what you are saying.

Consider this though. A light bulb is a tungsten metal filament in an inert atmosphere, and a flash bulb is a magnesium metal filament with an oxidant present.

Electrically generated heat causes both filaments to glow, but the flashbulb ignites due to the oxidant and the light bulb does not, it just glows.

If there is enough electrically induced current to fire a flash bulb (about 3 V or 2 D batteries in old style holders) then a 1.5 v or 3 v tungsten lamp would also be expectd to glow in the presence of a similar induction field. And, tungsten is a better element for that than magnesium.

This is what I once saw demonstrated.

In fact, there is a small test device for microwave ovens that relies on a small LED with an inductor embedded in plastic. You move it around the microwave on the outside, and if there is a leak, the LED lights up due to the induced current. Same thing with a tungsten bulb if there is enough current flowing. The lower the voltage rating on the bulb, the brigher the glow from a given microwave current IIRC.

Just some thoughts for you to ponder.

PE

copake_ham · Jul 14, 2006

Photo Engineer said:
I agree fully with most of what you are saying.

Consider this though. A light bulb is a tungsten metal filament in an inert atmosphere, and a flash bulb is a magnesium metal filament with an oxidant present.

Electrically generated heat causes both filaments to glow, but the flashbulb ignites due to the oxidant and the light bulb does not, it just glows.

If there is enough electrically induced current to fire a flash bulb (about 3 V or 2 D batteries in old style holders) then a 1.5 v or 3 v tungsten lamp would also be expectd to glow in the presence of a similar induction field. And, tungsten is a better element for that than magnesium.

This is what I once saw demonstrated.

In fact, there is a small test device for microwave ovens that relies on a small LED with an inductor embedded in plastic. You move it around the microwave on the outside, and if there is a leak, the LED lights up due to the induced current. Same thing with a tungsten bulb if there is enough current flowing. The lower the voltage rating on the bulb, the brigher the glow from a given microwave current IIRC.

Just some thoughts for you to ponder.

PE

PE,

As you noted, a flash bulb requires the electrical potential of about 3V in order to fire. The magnesium fliament has a very low resistance (versus tungsten in an "ordinary" incadescent bulb).

The electrical potential that might leak from a microwave or be present in a jet fighter's radar device would be in microvolts at even very close distances - so the potential would be insufficient to "fire" a flash bulb.

Then, consider the OP's query which was about X-rays in a TSA airport scanner. The electrical potential of such rays would not even reach the level of radar. At the end of the day, returning to the OP, I don't think that the airport x-ray is going to fire his flashbulbs. I think most of the initial responses were "tongue in cheek" and then.....

Photo Engineer · Jul 14, 2006

George;

I agree, again, for the most part.

I am just not sure about today's focused high energy x-ray devices in airports. After all, there are reports of film fogging that are more and more common. I'm also sure that the resistance of a tungsten bulb is rather low. In fact, a 60W bulb measures about 15 ohms with my VOM. I couldn't find a flash bulb, but I have some. They are packed away somewhere waiting for the time when I need them though.

So, I really don't know what modern X-ray will do to a flash bulb, and that is my point and it has been all along! We can't say "No it won't" or "Yes it will" categorically with 100% assurance.

PE

Flying with flashbulbs?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency