Keith Simmons has worked for the Ministry of Defence for over 40 years and has been involved with Radiation Detection and Monitoring Equipment ( RDME ) both as a user and latterly as the Technical Authority within the CBRN Delivery Team at Defence Equipment and Support .

I often hear comments that military instruments and military Radiation Detection and Monitoring Equipment ( RDME ) are not compatible with the civilian market , and that military and civil radiation metrology are completely different . This article is intended as a gentle push-back to dispel the myths and to enlighten the debate .

The first and most obvious statement I can make is that the laws of radiation physics do not differentiate between civilian and military radiation . It ' s all alpha , beta , gamma , X-ray or neutrons . Where it comes from and what generates it may be slightly different in a small number of cases , but these are the exception . When we understand the type , energy , spectrum etc . we find very little that is different to radiation exposure scenarios found in the civilian sphere . The defence sector has medical and dental applications , security X-ray machines , smoke detectors and power generation , it ' s just that our military generating plants aren ' t static .

So why are military instruments so different ? Simply , military users perform a huge range of roles in a wide range of environments including Health and Safety legislative compliance , Health Physics monitoring ashore and afloat , nuclear emergency response and the specific military application of nuclear war . There is a variety of Commercial Off The Shelf ( COTS ) equipment available that can cover most of these applications , but supporting multiple instrument types would be extremely challenging . The military ' s desire is to rationalise the number of different Createc , Ltd System instrument types to be used , minimising the requirements for user training , instrument support , demand for spares Gamma availability Reality and , ultimately , cost . The most Inc versatile System instrument that can be the master of all applications is going to be the instrument of choice . However , a balance needs to be found , because versatility may mean an instrument is more expensive to purchase , harder to use and requires more training .

After a monitoring instrument ' s radiological performance has been defined and verified , two of the biggest factors to consider are its useability and environmental survivability . Users working in a closely defined and relatively stable or benign environment will have options , but when an instrument is to be used across a range of environments with varying temperature , humidity , atmospheric pressure , transportation modes ( air , land , sea ), interferent fields , restrictive material controls and hazardous environments , the ability to detect or monitor the radiation may not be the dominant concern . It is the imperative to make the instrument suitable to survive the environment ( usually referred to as “ military ruggedisation ”) that drives the design or choice . A lot of the military roles and their locations mean readily available replacements or repairs are not to hand , so reliability to survive the mission becomes the key requirement .

Although radiological capabilities and environmental survivability may be the main priorities , human factors are a critical consideration . The best instruments are those that are intuitive to operate and provide the smallest burden on the user , allowing them to concentrate on the task at hand without having to constantly engage

16 Radiation Protection Today www . srp-rpt . uk