Situation X: Radioactive Fallout Cloud. Population: YOU.

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 27 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   
All of this is assuming that you aren't caught somewhere OTHER than your house or shelter for any of this to work. The chances of that are pretty slim since any smart terrorist will detonate a bomb at morning rush hour for maximum casualties. A fat lot of good a decent shelter and 7 days of food and water will do me if I am stuck on 395 five miles from the pentagon when the bomb goes off...




posted on May, 27 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Very good thread ...

but, just tell me one thing:

If you seal a room in your house completely, where do you get clean air from ?

As for three days, for shure you´ll die if you get not enough oxygen ?



posted on May, 27 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Escrotumus
All of this is assuming that you aren't caught somewhere OTHER than your house or shelter for any of this to work. The chances of that are pretty slim since any smart terrorist will detonate a bomb at morning rush hour for maximum casualties. A fat lot of good a decent shelter and 7 days of food and water will do me if I am stuck on 395 five miles from the pentagon when the bomb goes off...



Well good thing we dont all work in Washington then.

I thought the thread helpful to the majority of Americans, who also have never been close to the pentagon.

Maybe you should think about what you CAN do, where along your daily route you CAN seek shelter.

Or you can just curl up into a ball and die. I am counting on many people dieing, it is part of any sit. x survival plan and unfortunately necessary for the survival of those of us who do choose to consider such things.



posted on May, 27 2007 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by cycles
If you seal a room in your house completely, where do you get clean air from ?


The idea is to keep MOST of the particulate mater out. Nothing will stop ALL of it. And since you cant stop all of it, you would do well to let a little fresh air in. Radiation doses are measured by intensity and time, one particle wont kill you (hopefully.)



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 01:06 AM
link   
"Tar was once used to collect radioactive fallout because it acts like a fallout magnet. Smoking, while not a good idea anytime, will be a big no-no after the bombs fall."

1. Would tarred roads become no go zones as they are attracting a lot of fallout? I mean the fallout after a week would be very weak indeed, but surely in large amounts it could still be harmful right?

2. Why can't you smoke afterwards?

3. I don't know anything about the whole "burning fallout contaminated items" discussion. haven't read about burning fallout anywhere yet. Is it useless? Or does it just spread the fallout back into the air?



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 01:09 AM
link   
THANK YOU FOR THIS THREAD!!!!!!!! i have always thought of what i would do in the event of a nuclear fallout. i thought of it and disregarded it in seconds time, when my senses said "that'll never happen dont worry about it".

now you've got me thinking. and i am screwd if that were to happen to me. i live like, almost 10 miles away from Los Angeles. So i would be getting some of that nasty stuff. But anways, i think i need to re-think my COA in this type of event.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 01:20 AM
link   
The book that inspired this thread was:

The Survival Guide: What to do in a biological, chemical, or nuclear emergency. by angelo acquista, M.D., medical director of the New York City mayor's office of emergency management.

I don't want to post his whole book online, but I'll give you the gist of what I've gotten from the "nuke" chapters.

Basically, I would divide the nuclear threat into three types: dirty bomb, small "suitcase" nuke, and military weaponry.

Dirty Bomb.
The author states that although this gets the biggest hype, it is probably the least threat to your health. Basically, it involves terrorists stealing radiological waste from a hospital or power plant, and sticking explosives in the middle of it, with the goal of blowing radioactive debris all over your town. He states that the Iraqi government actually tested this in 87 in the desert, but decided it wasn't feasable. Even the best portable (read: terrorist) bomb only covered about 25 blocks in diameter with ANY measurable effects, even at the time of detonation. The medical waste and fuel rods are so heavy (americium and so forth), that most of it would fall back to earth within a few blocks of the blast. Even people who breathed the initial dust would probably remain healthy for several decades before succumbing. The main goal would be to creat hysteria, and cost billions in cleanup. The government would almost certainly set up a "decontamination shelter" and give you better attention than you could do yourself. From a terrorist standpoint, most of the terrorists would be sick from radiation exposure--not that they'd care, but it would reveal the whole terror network, as a line of sick fanatics would stretch all the way back to the source material.

The other two questions are basically weapons acquired from the military.

He says the main 3 considerations for your health are time, distance, and shielding.

Here are his bullets, beginning on pg 190:

-Cover your mouth and nose with (wet) fabric

-Leave on foot.
He says you have a bigger chance of being trapped in the radiation by being bogged down in mass transit. he also states that your chances of further contamination increase from using mass transit like subways, busses, and road surfaces where vehicles from the irradiated area will be tracking particles into your presence.

-Shower with soap as soon as possible, and put on uncontaminated clothes that were not exposed to much fallout.

-Get to an area where you are not covered in residue, and neither is the area around you; at that point, seek shelter at once. Stay there and minimize your exposure for as long as possible.

-Take potassium Iodide if available

-Try to meet up with search and rescue as soon as possible

-if you must leave, cover all exposed skin with cloth, including scarves, hats, and, if possible, swim-type goggles and gloves. walk into the wind but away from the direction of the blast, even if that direction is not your immediate goal.

Acquista is pretty upbeat about what is a grim scenario, pointing out how many US soldiers survived direct radiation from atomic tests, how many lab-workers have been exposed, and how many russian citizens actually survived the gross overdoses in the wake of Chernobyl, often many times what was considered an instantly fatal dose.

As far as worrying that "one slip-up will kill you," he even addresses that and states that if you are aware of keeping your skin and lungs and stomach free of radiation, the odds are not as grim as you'd imagine. The key is not to avoid any radiation, but to watch out for a lethal build-up, by needlessly exposing yourself.


.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 06:09 AM
link   
Dr Strangecraft, once again good idea for a thread. Come on people give it some flags! Keep the scenarios coming at us Dr. We all need to think about "What would you do if......"



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Part of my reason for starting this thread is that I have personally learnt a bit that's changed my outlook and made it more positive. That may sound absurd, but I'll tell you why.

The bomb that was used on Hiroshima was tiny by modern military standards --- a "mere 15 kilotons."

I grew up during the cold war that followed. The US and SU spent huge chunks of their respective national outputs to create bigger and bigger bombs, that would eventually be measured in megatons.

The goal of that atomic arms race was to deter the enemy, by making a bomb so nefarious that the enemy couldn't hope to build adequate shelters against it. They designed weapons that were estimated at up to 25 megatons. Such a weapon would kill millions, and render the enemy landscape for hundreds of miles around uninhabitable. These strategic weapons were designed to produce fallout on the order of 500 to 1000 rads after the blast, and a dustcloud that would stretch 10 miles across or more.

Even such uber-weapons couldn't penetrate a civil defense shelter a few miles away, so their goal was to irradiate the environment so forcefully, that survivors would have to stay in their shelters for weeks or months afterward. The thought of trying to rebuild in a postatomic hell was supposed to be so bleak as to scare even the enemy leaders away from nuclear war.

It worked.

********

But today, we are no longer talking about those kinds of super-threats. The largest atomic bomb in either arsenal is now on the order of 1.2 megatons. And all of the strategic warheads require hundreds of scientists and technicians to maintain, fuel, and aim them. Terrorists are unlikely to acquire or deploy that kind of weapon.

Terrorists could hope to acquire much smaller, tactical nukes, in the range of 10 kilotons up to 1 megaton. These much smaller weapons could concievably be detonated by a small terrorist cell. But the blast would be much smaller that a strategic weapon - such a "briefcase bomb" would create a cloud less that a kilometer across, wikipedia article, and consequently much less radiation. And it is THESE weapons, which would dissipate quickly, where you cold leave your shelter after less than a week, without endangering your health. Additionally, they'd almost certainly be "ground burst" weapons, which would further decrease the range and intensit of their fallout.

The point is, survivalists need to realize that the threat from a terrorist nuke, or even from a terror-state, is not the same as what we grew up with in the cold war----these are orders of magnitude smaller, and thus more survivable.

.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   
I was under the impression that a ground burst creates far more fallout than an air burst because of the particulate matter that it throws into the air and then this fallout comes back to earth and settles on everything. I have also read the books you talk about and even spot read the nuclear survival manual. Air bursts are for maximum destructive power and ground bursts create far more fallout. For anyone caught in a major city when something like this happens your chances of survival have almost nothing to do with planning, but have everything to do with luck and how quickly (if at all) you can make it to your shelter. Sure, sure it's good to have a plan, but you can kiss your *cough* goodbye if you are caught in rush hour anywhere near an explosion. Even if the blast doesn't kill you, then your fellow man most likely will as panic sets in and the inevitable crime wave that will follow by opportunists and looters.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Dr. Iam curious, what would the side effects be of taking potassium iodide for those on prescription medication. I believe you said it effects the thyroid and what would happen to those already on meds for a thyroid problem?



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Escrotumus
I was under the impression that a ground burst creates far more fallout than an air burst because of the particulate matter that it throws into the air and then this fallout comes back to earth and settles on everything.


It does create a lot more particulate matter. On the other hand, the particles are heavier, and don't travel as far. Sort of a fifty fifty trade-off.





For anyone caught in a major city when something like this happens your chances of survival have almost nothing to do with planning, but have everything to do with luck and how quickly (if at all) you can make it to your shelter.



I disagree. I doubt that terrorists can get their hands on, or build a bomb with more than a 50 kiloton explosion.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, this is what you are presented with. Again, that's a fireball less than a kilometer across. If you are 5 miles from the blast, and there's 15 mph wind, and you are directly downwind of the blast, you've still got 20 minutes to prepare. I can imagine a dose of 500 rads when the cloud reaches you. The 7/10 rule means it will drop to 50 rads after 10 hours, and 5 rads at 49 hours.

In my thread about a non-electronic fallout meter (link) I provide a link to Kearny's original brochure, here's a quote from that pamphlet:



A healthy person who previously has received a total accumulated dose of no more than 100 R distributed over a 2-week period should realize that:

100 R, even if all received in a day or less, is unlikely to require medical care - provided during the next 2 weeks a total additional dose of no more than a few R is received.

350 R received in a few days or less results in a 50-50 chance of being fatal after a large nuclear attack when few survivors could get medical care, sanitary surroundings, a well-balanced diet, or adequate rest.

600 R received in a few days or less is almost certain to cause death within a few days.




Now, if you can get your *cough* inside a shelter with 18 inches of dirt around you, This Handy pamplet from the UK shows that you reduce the radiation to 16 rad for the first hour, which is means less that 100 rad in the first seven hours. After that, your exposure in the shelter effectively drops below 2 rads per hour.

But suppose you are on the highway, doing 70. You'll get pretty serious dose if you can see the blast. But suppose you happen to be in a small valley when it goes off. If traffic just keeps going, and you can drive out from under the fallout in 10 minutes. Then you'd be somewhere around the 350 rad level. Youd still have a 50/50 chance of survival.

So yes, by my calculations, you could survive a terrorist's tactical nuke, if you take measures to increase time, distance, and shielding.

In the US, a lot of public buildings are still technically classed as a fallout shelter, even if they have taken their signs down.

But if you just stand there, you are correct--you are most certainly doomed.

.

[edit on 28-5-2007 by dr_strangecraft]



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I still feel that given the circumstances of a terrorist explosion going off on a sunny day during rush hour to maximize destructive power and killing potential that little can be done unless you happen to work the night shift and are at home, or you call out sick that day or don't have a job. For those of us in major suburban centers who do work a 9-5 job I still say there is little to do other than hope for a gift from God. I work maybe 7 miles from the pentagon so I am screwed. The link below has the entire book that I was referring to in my last post and it is the definitive guide on what to do and how to survive. I ordered it from Amazon a few years back.

www.ki4u.com...



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Escrotumus

. . . For those of us in major suburban centers who do work a 9-5 job I still say there is little to do other than hope for a gift from God. I work maybe 7 miles from the pentagon so I am screwed. . . .



As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.


When we moved away from the Dallas area about 2 years ago. I can't say that terrorism was THE consideration to get out of the big D, but it was one factor we discussed. Our decision was ultimately about the quality of life, so you could say it figured in somehow.

In fact, where we live now is remote enough that if a nuke went off in the nearest major city, most fallout would precipitate out before the cloud reached us. Plus we'd be able to outdrive it, if it was on the news.

.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Vixon

The UK did issues a handbook with guidelines in what to do in such a case.



And yes I did start to build up my supplies of water,clothing,food ect ect
But my wife was convinced I was going mad and to stop reading ATS.

I shall once again heed this advice and replenish my stocks and hope they shall never have to be used....

What does she know - So long as Peter and Jordon are on her world is complete.

P.S Asda have some dynmo wind up radios (no batteries required with a touch for £15)



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Doc, if there ever was all-out nuclear attack on the US, Texas is toast with it's numerous military bases as prime targets not to mention 1/3 of the US's oil refining capability within its borders. Let's not forget the Pantex plant in Amarillo. I'm not afraid of all out nuclear attack though. It's the nut case with 3 or 4 smaller tactical nukes. Every major dam in the Western US is a prime target as well as the major ports like LA or New Orleans.

Symbolically, any of the major urban centers especially Wash.DC and LA (Hollywood) are also prime targets. Fall out is greatly affected by weather patterns, so in order to maximize the fall out zone, it will likely be done during a period of maximum wind activity like during the Santa Ana winds in CA or in front of a fast moving front in the Plains States.

A weather radio and one of those keychain dosimeter might be useful as well.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by crgintx
Doc, if there ever was all-out nuclear attack on the US, Texas is toast with it's numerous military bases as prime targets not to mention 1/3 of the US's oil refining capability within its borders.


I don't live down-wind from either type of facility. But I know what what you mean. Military bases would certainly draw fire, but if I were nuking oil capacity, I'd aim for the Houston area, where it bottlenecks. Heck if it gets down to it, the "enemy" might be driven to nuke every crossroads and convenience store in the Union. At some point, everyone becomes vulnerable.

On the other hand, if you have less than 50 nukes, I don't think you'd pick my zipcode to spend one.





Let's not forget the Pantex plant in Amarillo.



Indeed, anyone who grew up in Texas during the cold war can tell you stories of Men in Black and unmarked trucks looking asking for directions in the middle of nowhere, asking how to get to "Amarillo." We were still having Civil Defense drills when I was in school, in Texas, in the 1980's. Back in those days, since Pantex is a hardened, bunkered target, the russians would have used a 5 or 10 megaton bomb. Enough that nothing would shield you, even hundreds of miles away. . . .





I'm not afraid of all out nuclear attack though. It's the nut case with 3 or 4 smaller tactical nukes. Every major dam in the Western US is a prime target as well as the major ports like LA or New Orleans.



Well, I have specific theories of what a terrorist would do with a nuke on the US mainland, but I don't think I'll post it here. Let's just say that such people would try to maximize the terror quotient, not necessarily industrial damage per se.




Symbolically, any of the major urban centers especially Wash.DC and LA (Hollywood) are also prime targets. Fall out is greatly affected by weather patterns, so in order to maximize the fall out zone, it will likely be done during a period of maximum wind activity like during the Santa Ana winds in CA or in front of a fast moving front in the Plains States.


The problem with high winds is that it might cause the plume to be very narrow and elongated. It might also "smear" the cloud to where the intensity of the irradiation got trapped in the upper atmosphere; much worse for the earth as a whole, but less deadly for people in the bombs "shadow" at the date of the blast. Or it might be a "streak" a few miles wide and 200 miles long. VERY hard to predict, out among the cacti and sand dunes.

Also, I don't think you could get a nuke very far inland in the US by truck. So I'd expect a coast city to be a prime target. The time (risk of being caught) it would take to deliver a bomb to "the fly-over states" makes them that much less vulnerable.

.



posted on May, 29 2007 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Accually there was a pretty extensive thread a while back before there was the Survivalist board that covered this subject. Okay yeah I started it, but I'm not tooting my own horn, there is a lot of good info on this subject by many posters.

You can find it here



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Thank you for the information, it is very helpful!

I have flagged this one.




posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I too have to thank you for sharing survival info.
And I think, if anything, that I will get a box ready, or one of my numerous backpacks ready filled with clothing sealed with masks and such.
Peace to all that are here to help in everyway.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join