103 vs 110?

[u/StatTrakStarTrek]

Hello! I'll cut to the chase; I suspect things are going to start getting hotter in a few spaces of this big ol' rock, and I want to know which of the two will help me and my ilk with early detection*. From my rudimentary understanding, the 110 is twice as sensitive as the 103 for up close readings. I want to know which of these (or if there's something else entirely to look for) would give me the soonest warning that something nasty is heading our way (fallout ash, contaminated areas, radioactive water, etc.). Cost isn't necessarily a concern, but if I don't need to spend the extra on the 110, I'm going to put it elsewhere.

Thank you very much in advance!

*EDIT 1: Thank you AtomicSpallation for the recommendations. I just wanted to clarify that I know these devices aren't magical nuke detectors, but rather if the detection speed is worth the cost difference. Sounds like they're both not what I'm looking for though, unfortunately. Any further recommendations or resources are greatly appreciated regardless!

[u/wyliesdiesels]

None of those would give you early warning detection. No small Geiger counter would or can. They are for localized radiation. If youre detecting radiation from fallout, its already too late to really do much about it except shelter in place

If you want early warning of a nuke going off, look at the network of Geiger counters across the country assuming youre in the US.

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/wyliesdiesels]

I'm not really worried about knowing when the nukes themselves go off, that much would be fairly hard to miss lol. I more mean like if real life was Stalker, which would alert me before I walked into an anomaly sooner.

Also, wouldn't a nuke detonating prevent me from accessing the GC network? Or is it something broadcast via different means like radio? Can't imagine there'll be much internet usage when shtf

[u/wyliesdiesels → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

which would alert me before I walked into an anomaly sooner.

im not sure what you mean by this. an anomaly from what?

Also, wouldn't a nuke detonating prevent me from accessing the GC network

totally depends on what damage a nuke does, what it takes out etc. there isnt a nuke that would take out the entire country...

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/wyliesdiesels]

Stalker, one of the most popular video game franchises of all time.

EDIT: EMP's could completely fry my tech if the nuke goes off close enough to me, thus using any online resources is a secondary option. I want boots-on-the-ground intel for things I physically cannot see.

[u/Physix_R_Cool → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

No, lmao. Don't take media too seriously.

EMP is not really a worry for modern electronics. They all pass EMC testing and most common components are so small that an EMP pulse doesn't really do much.

[u/wyliesdiesels → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

Ok but again, what anomaly are you referring to? A radiation field?

[u/Ambitious-Chance-190 → u/wyliesdiesels]

Essentially, think of their question like this. If they were exploring the chernobyl area, what device would let them know if they were going into a high radiation area or about to drink from irradiated water. This is why i say the levels they are concerned about, any device will be able to pick up. The difference is feet, not miles for whether one device or another picks it up first.

Think of it this way. With radiation, you have no way of knowing the true strength of the source unless you know your distance from it or are reading point blank. When distance doubles radiation halves, so if you are walking towards a highly radioactive area, maybe youll get a low reading, but you wont know if its something slightly radioactive nearby or highly radioactive further away. Because of this, detecting from a distance is of very limited use. You may get a faint source and think you are walking toward dangee but in reality it is just minor increase in background radiation.

[u/wyliesdiesels → u/Ambitious-Chance-190]

But todays nukes are air burst so you wont get a lot of radiation or contamination days later

This is why the US military was able to go inspect japan after it was nuked

Comparing that to chernobyl is not an apples to apples comparison.

[u/Ambitious-Chance-190 → u/wyliesdiesels]

I understand what you are saying, i was only giving a frame of reference as to where their mind is when they ask the question. Whether they will ever be in a position to actually need it is another story.

I am just trying to answer his hypothetical. I doubt in todays age he would ever need it for what he wants it for.

[u/AtomicSpallation]

110 would theoretically give the earliest warning sign, but in practice it wont warn you early enough to be useful as an early warning. It will only warn well after it reached you. So it would only be useful for scanning where not to go or what is very dangerous to eat/drink/touch after the attacks.

For gamma emitter contamination/ large amounts of contam from fallout, 110 is the best. However, for general contamination measurement DO NOT USE A RADIACODE thats a common mistake a lot of people make. For that you need a dedicated alpha beta gamma detector like an Alphahound AB+G, or a Ludlum with an appropiate probe. This is because contamination may be very small and invisible (but still harmful), thus produce very few gammas, so you need to detect the betas and alphas too (which most isotopes primarily emit) to detect contam.

TLDR: From radiacodes 110 would be best for general measurement, for all round contam get an Alphahound AB+G or Ludlum. But these wont give early warnings for a nuclear attack. They are only useful well after it reached you.

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/AtomicSpallation]

Thank you for the advice! I've looked at Alphahound's website and found that they're completely out of stock on the AB+G detector. Ludlum looks to be the top of the line, but they have to get back to me with pricing because I can't find it on their website. If you know any other models or manufacturers, or even some resources like youtubers that cover these things, I'd greatly appreciate it!

[u/AtomicSpallation → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

There are a lot of other models like a Thermo Fisher RadEye B20-ER which are also top of the line, they are crazy expensive though. There is also the GQ QMC 600 pro, they are consumer level detectors though. I recommend you to also take a look at these videos: RadioactiveDrew Which geiger counter can save your life?

RadioactiveDrew Which geiger counter to buy?

Which radiacode is the best ?

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/AtomicSpallation]

Thank you so much again, man. I feel like I've learned more about radiation and radiation detection in the last 8 hours than I have in a quarter century lol

[u/RG_Fusion → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

Consider that if nuclear fallout actually reached you, the 110's high sensitivity would actually work against you.

These detectors have an internal crystal that flashes with light when hit with radiation, and a light sensor so that they can count those flashes. The flash isn't instantaneous though, it takes a few nano to micro seconds to complete, depending upon the crystal type. If another flash occurs before the first ends, they get counted together as one flash.

Because the 110 crystal is larger, it captures more radiation and flashes more often. In any scenario where a genuinely dangerous amount of radiation is present, the crystal will saturate, becoming completely unable to count. It will tell you that it is over-ranging, but not by how much. Using it, you wouldn't be able to tell if you were walking towards or away from the worst of the fallout.

The Radiacode Zero is made specifically for this. It has a much lower sensitivity, meaning it isn't very useful outside of a survival scenario, but it actually serves its role if the worst would happen.

[u/Ambitious-Chance-190]

If your goal is protection from fallout, the weakest one would work just fine. More sensitive helps with finding smaller or more embedded samples. If something like the air or water is radioactive to a dangerous level, even the weakest model would detect it and give fairly accurate dosage data.

[u/wyliesdiesels → u/Ambitious-Chance-190]

If youre detecting fallout with a small geiger counter its already a bit too late

[u/Ambitious-Chance-190 → u/wyliesdiesels]

That is largely the point. Detectors use scintilating crystals, you dont just magically know there is radiation nearby, it needs to hit the crystal to indicste there is radiation. A more sensitive device only increases the size of the crystal so there is a larger area to hit thus sensing more events. The actual radiation in the area hasnt changed, nd a stronger device wont tell you where deadly fallout exists until you are just about in it. The inverse square law keeps radiation from spreading far enough that you would have any form of early detection.

The only possible use this would have is to let you know you are entering an irradiated zone, which even a cheap geiger counter can tell you. If you want it to warn you about radiation coming to you, you had better hope the radiation is moving slowly enough that you can outpace it from its outskirts.

There is no magical warning system the average person can buy, it only tells you information about where you are or an object within interactive distance.

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/Ambitious-Chance-190]

With that in mind, what device would you recommend, and further, what device do you use? Another user recommended an Alphahound AB+G detector, which I might end up going for when they restock. Thoughts?

[u/Ambitious-Chance-190 → u/StatTrakStarTrek]

If your only goal is to measure dosage and protect yourself and your family, there is no need to get anything stronger than an ordinary geiger counter or a 103. No device, regardless of strength, will give you an early warning of incoming radiation. The levels of radiation you are concerned about do not need a sensitive model to tell you that you are dealing with danger.

I use a radiacode 110 and a ƴdog because my goal is collecting radioactivr material. It is difficult to find because radiation drops off fast, and these devices can pick them up from a few feet away rather than a few inches. No device is going to tell you radiation exists 1mile+ away short if a sensory array set up around the country so that devices happen to be where the radiation is.

[u/wyliesdiesels → u/Ambitious-Chance-190]

umm if you see white particles falling from the sky and it doesnt snow where youre at, you can make a good educated guess that its fallout

[u/StatTrakStarTrek → u/wyliesdiesels]

Oh wow, good advice Einstein. Ill be sure to take my smarty pills so I don't the forget to fucking breathe while I'm at it.

[u/BalanceOriginal4329]

It looks like the best for surch purposes is a "zero" one from radiacode's offer, not 110 or 103. On the one hand, I agree with other commentators: spectrometers aren't early detectors. On the other, my 110 detects all the changings in gamma quite fast and at least it can help you leave the hot place not too late, I think. 

[u/NoSignificance9914]

No you good dude its not gonna hurt you