Nuclear event survival chances

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by zlots331


A funny (?) story I have concerns the Seneca Army Depot located in Upstate NY in the Finger Lakes region.


Hits close to home since I live in the Finger Lakes region as well. I didn't even know that Army Depot existed. I bet it's on the list of places to nuke by China or Russia if we ever get into a nuclear war with them.


And here I thought the only thing near me that would get nuked is the City of Syracuse.

Guess I should add Fort Drum to the list as well.


I'm trying to calculate if I would be safe in my house during a nuclear war (fallout not considered) based on likely targets and my proximity to them.




posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by LogicalSolution
 


The depot is pretty much closed down now. Its south of Geneva near Romulus along Seneca Lake. Upstate NY is not a good place to be. Walking bombs down the length of the Thruway would wipe out every major city outside of NYC.

And Fort Drum is the base for a lot of the troops fighting in Afghanistan with the Mountain Division and cold weather corps stationed there. Big target.



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by zlots331
[Walking bombs down the length of the Thruway would wipe out every major city outside of NYC.


Ouch. The thruway is actually about 1,000ft from my house.



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by flice
Well... if America had 9ks during the coldwar. I'd say 9k+?


What kind of EMP effect would thier be from a 10kt bomb?

Anyone know?

Would it knock out my vehicle's ignition from 15 miles away?



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Here's a link to a collection of online British Gov (old gov) leaflets that were handed out in the '80's.

Some of interest are:

Domestic Nuclear Shelters - personally, I think underground, reinforced concrete shelters would be best;

Protect And Survive - a guide to making your home safe (lol); and,

Home Defense and the Farmer - important for those who have crops to protect.

To find out how to protect from EMP and to download a large, handy US Army Survival guide, try the Project Avalon's Resources for Survival

You'd be surprised how much is incorrect of what most people think they know about fallout, contamination and long-term survival. I wont post details from the links because doing so might deter you from getting the best of the information available.

P.S Get ready for 7th Oct. There are a lot of rumours at the moment.

Edited to add: you might be able to protect items from EMP by insulating them from direct contact with the atmosphere. To do this, cover them in cotton or polystyrene then encase in foil. Ground the foil. You will find details at the last link, above.

[edit on 4/10/08 by Rapacity]



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by hinky

I'd bet some money you don't have have any radiac equipment. Meters are good to have, and different meters for different things, but you also need personal dosimeters that can detect radiation. You could be fried and not even know it.


I have radiac equipment here. I also have my film badge here too. Dosimeters I can also get. However,You need them of the proper range. For a nuclear detonation of the type being described here you need a radiac or dosimeter which can go over 10 R...which is a significant dose in itself depending on how rapidly you pick it up.
This equipment ..even the olde Civil Defense type is not inexpensive. Modern testing and sampling equipment even more expensive. Most people would never have need for it nor know how to use it.
I wouldnt trust the government to much should some event like this happen. Most of them will be trying to save thier own butts. Nor the news media...looking out for us.

Orangetom



posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
3 ft of mass (dirt or solid material) to protect against the fatal fallout for a term of 2 weeks. Most people don't know that the fallout causes 90% of the deaths after the initial blast and surviving that fallout is probably one of the best steps in prevention.

www.ki4u.com...

WHAT TO DO IF A NUCLEAR DISASTER IS IMMINENT!

www.ki4u.com...



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by infolurker
3 ft of mass (dirt or solid material) to protect against the fatal fallout for a term of 2 weeks. Most people don't know that the fallout causes 90% of the deaths after the initial blast and surviving that fallout is probably one of the best steps in prevention.


Fallout...you mean contaminated particles. In addition to the ,time distance, and shielding formula ..the basics of which you are describing...you need to protect your breathing. That is..if it is even possible. Most external contamination from fall out particles can be gotten rid of ...much faster than internal contamination of the body ..breathed in. When you get "crapped out" ..internally ...it is difficult to get rid of it quickly. If you survive the initial onslaught ...internal contamination must be flushed out of the body..from the inside organs. This takes longer than external contamination or fallout of which to get rid...or shed.
Hence if possible it is necessary to keep something ..a cloth...rag...something to filter your breathed air..and then you have to find a way to replace it with something clean or decontaminated. A tall order in such a scenerio.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Air filtration depends on distance from the blast and the time you have and the type of shelter.

If your in a "makeshift basement saferoom" lets say and not close to the blast you shouldn't have a problem with dust coming in if you don't bring it in.

If your in an underground shelter with air intakes it is a good idea to have a dust filter. Even the 15$ allergy filters will work in this situation as the fallout is generally dust.

Breathing radioactive dust is of course one of the big "killers" when it comes to fallout.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by infolurker
 


Nice PDF you've linked to there. Much more recent than the ones I posted.

orangetom1999,

to protect/filter the air you breath, place some wirewool into your shelter's ventilation pipe (u-bend it if makes you feel better). Unless you have better materials available.

[edit on 5/10/08 by Rapacity]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:12 AM
link   
i was always told you have approximately 3 seconds to respond if not your dead.


like hit the ground face first. feet folded out. and arms crossed over your chest.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
What is the probable yield from a non-ICBM weapon?




[edit on 4-10-2008 by In nothing we trust]



what about the ones from terminator?



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Recently I read a lot of survivor accounts of the Hiroshima bomb and I think it's safe to say i'd rather die initially than suffer the horrendous aftermath a lot of the people did. Some of the stories were amazing though, in a way that it seemed like a miracle that they survived. I think to survive in those conditions you just need to be incredibly lucky.

I had to remind myself though, that these were weapons made in the 40's and now the things we are capable of using are thousands of times more powerful.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by StrangeVision]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 08:36 AM
link   
It certainly wouldn't be pleasant but unless you're fairly close to ground zero your chances are pretty good if you follow protection guildeines that have been posted earlier.

EMP is dependent upon altitude. Maximum EMP is created with high altitude detonations. If it was a ground detonation (terrorist attack) EMP would be localized. Ground detonations would also create more fallout.

Yields have actually come down dramatically since the Cold War. Exceptionally better navigation technology have allowed designers to build weapons with lower individual yields because they are far better able to get them on-target. In the ColdWar the higher yields were designed in to accommodate for a higher likelihood of being somewhat off-target. High yield (megaton) warheads are much heavier and significantly larger. Designers prefer smaller (100-200kt) multiple warheads.

So, if a terrorist was able to smuggle in a 'suitcase' nuke or some other truck-delivered device it would most likely be sub 100kt. If it was an attack from a ballistic missile (from another country) figure most liikely in the 200-250kt range.

Outside the immediate blast zone, inhaling oir injesting fallout is the biggest issue.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
What are the chances of surviving a nuclear event of unknown magnitide by distance?

At 5 miles what are the chances of survival?

At 10 miles?

At 15 miles?



There is an equation to find the blast radius of a given size of device here:
en.wikipedia.org...

Todays nuclear weapons are nothing in comparison to the Tsar Bomba. Glad really.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Even a 1000k nuclear blast is not that large, we have blown more bombs off at test ranges than that with more frequency and no nuclear winter has happened.

There is also a major factoring of wind speed and direction to be taken into account, dont be down wind from any major city.

If a nuke does go off, I think it might be by ship into new york harbor. Look at the african pirates that took an iranian ship hostage, they all died days later from radiation poisining by somethin aboard that ship.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   
There has been a load of bull often posted over the years about nuclear weapons, them being unsurvivalable etc etc, much of it was put out by HMG and the USG to try and persuade people that very expensive public shelters systems wre not worth the effort.
Unfortunately as the govts were telling us we could not survive a nuclear war they were building super bunkers all over the place to house themselves. The UK built huge bunkers in various places to protect the government and the nations wealth and arts and information archives. We even built a supoer bunker in Canada to house the royal family. The US govt built hidden bunkers all over the place like the huge one under the Greenbriers hotel. With a fair amount of luck and a good deal of planning a nuclear exchange is survivable provide you are not at ground zero.

Get a hold of C Bruce Sibleys book Surviving Doomsday, plus The nuclear survival handbok by Barry popkiss, and if your a brit read Beneath the City Streets. Also visit the military section of the Subterania Britania ( Sub Brit) and see just how much effort went into building shelter for the elite. At the end of the day a nuclear explosion is still just an explosion, remember that Heat, Light and Blast can only travel in straight lines, Its not the total armageddon weapon that governments, lefties and CND want you to believe. Providing you survive the blast ( just like surviving a blast from any bomb) and you get into shelter before any fallout starts to fall you have a reasonable chance of surviving.
Ref Fallout, You only get that from ground and sea and subteranian explosions, Air bursts dont create Fallout, most modern nuclear wapons are air burst types. The greater threat is from EMP as a 10 KT bomb gouing off over Birmingham UK would toast all unprotected electrical circuits right across the UK. Electronic Ignition, MPCs, Radios, Batteries, Stasrt Motors, flourescent lighter circuits etc etc.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by LogicalSolution

Originally posted by zlots331


A funny (?) story I have concerns the Seneca Army Depot located in Upstate NY in the Finger Lakes region.


Hits close to home since I live in the Finger Lakes region as well. I didn't even know that Army Depot existed. I bet it's on the list of places to nuke by China or Russia if we ever get into a nuclear war with them.


And here I thought the only thing near me that would get nuked is the City of Syracuse.

Guess I should add Fort Drum to the list as well.


I'm trying to calculate if I would be safe in my house during a nuclear war (fallout not considered) based on likely targets and my proximity to them.


Yeah, and you better add Oswego NY to your list also... remember, it has 9 Mile Nuclear plant and IS on THE LIST of hot spots to hit. Also, add Rochester NY to your list because Kodak Chem field IS on THE LIST.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Nuclear weapons use is just a way for govenments to threaten one another,that is the reason that smaller,less significant countries are prevented in every way from obtaining them,to keep them powerless and insignificant.
Nukes will not likely be used,because the governments depend on the people to provide them with their parasitic existence,the threat of nuclear weapons use is just a scare tactic between disputing governments.
"We will destroy your livestock if you don't bend to our will",is all they are saying when they threaten to used them.
Unfortunately,we little fellas are the ones who have to fry if someone actually does drop a nuclear weapon.



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by LogicalSolution
This doesn't answer your question, but I'd like to use this thread to say that the government lies to you to make you feel better.

During the cold-war, what did little Johnny and little Suzie fear the most? They feared that they were going to get nuked by the USSR and die.

So what did the government do? They created all those "duck and cover" films. Remember those? The films would tell kids that if they saw a nuke going off or heard the sirens, to quickly get underneath their desks while at school.

In reality, would ducking under your desk do anything if a nuclear bomb is dropped next to your school? Of course not.

But the government wanted our kids to stop fearing that they would die, and instead focus on other things. So they created these films and lied to kids to make the kids feel better.


-LS

[edit on 4-10-2008 by LogicalSolution]


Actually, during the Cold War, when the US was testing Nukes on Live US Soldiers to see if they would survive & be able to continue fighting....

A platoon of US soldiers were "actually at 1000m distance from ground Zero" & had to duck for cover behind a rock & those that could not find a rock to get behind, had to lay flat on the ground.

They all survived & then continued their manouvers onto & beyond the actual Blast sight.

Mind you, all of those soldiers have since died of Cancer & other related diseases....., but they all did survive using the duck & cover technique.

This also proved another Myth about Nuclear war..

YOu don't actually die from fallout over a week ot two after being exposed... well not all the time anyway.

Remember, these guys were at ground Zero, they survived the blast & got a hell of a lot of Rads to-boot... They all survived (with all their hair..lol), for a good 15 - 30 years after the incident.

Though they all did die of complications, fallout is really a myth & isn't as instantainiousely deadly as people think.

[edit on 10/5/2008 by Ironclad]





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join