Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner
21 - 29 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
There's so much bad information on surviving a nuclear war.

There's a big difference between a power plant and a nuclear bomb. The radioactive fallout is not even remotely the same, its like the difference between a pressure washer and a bucket of water.. sure, they both get you wet, but not the same way. . So let me elaborate a bit, I'll try not to be technical.

Nuclear plant fallout is easy to survive, you just leave the area. It is your only option. The fallout from a nuclear plant is a type of radioactive isotope that will irradiate an area for thousands of years. This radiation is low level, meaning you can walk out of the area if you need because a few hours or even a few days of exposure isn't going to kill you... well, unless you live across the street from the plant. You will never get to come back so take what you need.

Nuclear weapons are another animal.. Modern nuclear weapons are detonated high in the atmosphere.. like at around >20,000 feet in altitude. The radiological fallout is extreme and just a few hours of exposure will cause you to die within a week to a month, depending on how much you get. The good news is that the radioisotopes are short lived. 80% to 90% of the radiation is gone within the first 10 hours or so, the other 10% to 19% is gone within a few days, and the remaining 1% takes a week or two. In other words, within a day or so, you can come out of your bunker for short walks.. within a week, you can resume what's left of your life.. For the most part anyhow.

This is why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt.. and fission bombs (little boy and fat man) are dirty bastards.. modern fusion weapons are pretty clean by comparison.

The most important part of a nuclear bunker is the air filtration.. without it, you die. You need water, and a bit of food, and a toilet if you don't want to stink the place up.. Beyond that, that's really all you need because you're only going to be in there for a few days.

If you live in a populated area, a nuclear bunker is a waste of time. You won't have any warning its coming and you'll probably be burned alive and never make it to the bunker.

If you live in the countryside, a bunker is only good if you have a Geiger counter.. otherwise you might be heading down there for no reason.

Radiation shielding is about mass.. On a mass (weight) basis, lead does not shield radiation any better than goose feathers.. The thing that makes lead nice is that you only need about an inch of it, where you would need about 200 feet of feathers.

1 inch of lead = 10 inches of concrete = 30 inches of dirt. (for the most part as a general idea). And if you think about it, a square foot of lead 1 inch thick weighs about the same as a square foot of concrete 10 inches thick..

hope that helps..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,052 Posts
most of the charts and maps concerning the nuke warfare are totally obsolete

And I agree. I was still in high school when post of those charts and maps were making the gun magazines. In fact, I think Tappan was still drawing maps of wind currents to make sure his little band of followers would not be pelted with radiation.

I just turned 70 years of age, I still have muscle tone and I do not glow in the dark. Clearly I should have read the entire treatise of Mel Tappan to see if his in-depth writing was more solid than the few paragraphs shown in magazines. Without that info, I might have to run to be free of the danger. sigh it's my arms that have strength, not my legs...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,529 Posts
There's so much bad information on surviving a nuclear war.

There's a big difference between a power plant and a nuclear bomb. The radioactive fallout is not even remotely the same, its like the difference between a pressure washer and a bucket of water.. sure, they both get you wet, but not the same way. . So let me elaborate a bit, I'll try not to be technical.

Nuclear plant fallout is easy to survive, you just leave the area. It is your only option. The fallout from a nuclear plant is a type of radioactive isotope that will irradiate an area for thousands of years. This radiation is low level, meaning you can walk out of the area if you need because a few hours or even a few days of exposure isn't going to kill you... well, unless you live across the street from the plant. You will never get to come back so take what you need.

Nuclear weapons are another animal.. Modern nuclear weapons are detonated high in the atmosphere.. like at around >20,000 feet in altitude. The radiological fallout is extreme and just a few hours of exposure will cause you to die within a week to a month, depending on how much you get. The good news is that the radioisotopes are short lived. 80% to 90% of the radiation is gone within the first 10 hours or so, the other 10% to 19% is gone within a few days, and the remaining 1% takes a week or two. In other words, within a day or so, you can come out of your bunker for short walks.. within a week, you can resume what's left of your life.. For the most part anyhow.

This is why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt.. and fission bombs (little boy and fat man) are dirty bastards.. modern fusion weapons are pretty clean by comparison.

The most important part of a nuclear bunker is the air filtration.. without it, you die. You need water, and a bit of food, and a toilet if you don't want to stink the place up.. Beyond that, that's really all you need because you're only going to be in there for a few days.

If you live in a populated area, a nuclear bunker is a waste of time. You won't have any warning its coming and you'll probably be burned alive and never make it to the bunker.

If you live in the countryside, a bunker is only good if you have a Geiger counter.. otherwise you might be heading down there for no reason.

Radiation shielding is about mass.. On a mass (weight) basis, lead does not shield radiation any better than goose feathers.. The thing that makes lead nice is that you only need about an inch of it, where you would need about 200 feet of feathers.

1 inch of lead = 10 inches of concrete = 30 inches of dirt. (for the most part as a general idea). And if you think about it, a square foot of lead 1 inch thick weighs about the same as a square foot of concrete 10 inches thick..

hope that helps..
Altitude detonation creates very little fallout. Fallout is created when detonation is at or near ground level. The soil and other debris are irradiated, lifted up, and fall elsewhere.
Most weapons will be detonated at altitude so as to destroy cities. Some will be used to cause maximum structure damage, such as strategic airports and underground command and control sites, and they will not be at a high altitude detonation. I live several miles from such a place but the prevailing winds will carry the fallout away from me. Good for me but not good for Georgia.

A nuclear attack is very survivable. Well, the attack is survivable. The results of the war will be challenging, to say the very least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Most weapons will be detonated at altitude so as to destroy cities.
Do you really think so? Then why exactly such goals?
I hope you do not read publications that are promoting the interests of our "experts" in the USA?
Here is an example of nonsense:
If we talk about the aviation component of nuclear forces, then personally, I can not link the cost of modification, for example, B61-12 with cities.
Why so expensive and difficult?
Other types of nuclear ammunition are upgraded in the same direction. Is it necessary for cities?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,529 Posts
Do you really think so? Then why exactly such goals?
I hope you do not read publications that are promoting the interests of our "experts" in the USA?
Here is an example of nonsense:
If we talk about the aviation component of nuclear forces, then personally, I can not link the cost of modification, for example, B61-12 with cities.
Why so expensive and difficult?
Other types of nuclear ammunition are upgraded in the same direction. Is it necessary for cities?
Russia has done much, more than the U.S. to protect the people living in cities. The U.S.? Nothing at all.
Yes, those living in targeted cities will die immediately or worse, but the rest of us have a good chance of not dying due to the attack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Russia has done much, more than the U.S. to protect the people living in cities.
Oh my God! You just did not see real Russia.
Yes, those living in targeted cities will die immediately or worse
I just asked why you still think that cities are included in the list of priority targets for such a complex, capricious and expensive weapon, as a nuclear. I last heard such stories in school during the Cold War.
but the rest of us have a good chance of not dying due to the attack.
I do not argue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,052 Posts
The last time I saw kids in Russia they were dancing to 1950's oldies and acting like they were on "American Bandstand." For those members here in their teens, the TV show called 'American Bandstand' was a televised national spy attempt to hide good looking American kids to infiltrate Moscow. None of the supposed 'females' were really young girls, just featureless boys, but everyone packed a 1911, the chosen weapon of slang-speaking rock n' roll youngsters...
 
21 - 29 of 29 Posts
Top