With all the dire events happening in the world right now. I've been wondering all day if Russia actually launched an ICBM attack against the west. Would we even be warned by the government of the impending strike. Or would our first warning be the boom of the fireball rising ? When I was a kid they still had air raid drills. But that was like 45 years ago. I searched on the internet but could not find anything regarding this.
EMA has a system to alert people.....whether or not NORAD sends EMA the info is another question.
Wikipedia - 2018 Hawaii false missile alert (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Hawaii_false_missile_alert)
Quote from: flybynight on February 28, 2022, 07:18:36 PM
With all the dire events happening in the world right now. I've been wondering all day if Russia actually launched an ICBM attack against the west. Would we even be warned by the government of the impending strike. Or would our first warning be the boom of the fireball rising ? When I was a kid they still had air raid drills. But that was like 45 years ago. I searched on the internet but could not find anything regarding this.
Yeah, me too. I'm a child of the Cold War and grew up having nuclear nightmares. And one particularly enticing fantasy of just making it into our county's well-stocked bomb shelter before they locked the doors. With Susy Van Auken in tow, the breathlessly pretty girl I pined for in eighth grade. She would of course be beyond grateful I had saved her from nuclear annihaliation. And it would be up to us to help repopulate society ...
(... * ...)
Sorry, where was I? Ah yes, nuclear attack warning. I think there are remnants of a public alert infrastructure still intact today. But honestly, in this day and age it's something that's so far from people's consciousness, most wouldn't understand the true significance in time to do anything meaningful about it. And in this age of hypersonic weapons, I'd be surprised if we get more than a few minutes warning. The best we could hope for is maybe everyone's phones buzzing all of the sudden with a text alert helpfully suggesting we all kiss our asses goodbye ...
NOAA Weather Radio is one way.
Under a January 1975 White House policy statement, NOAA Weather Radio was designated the sole Government-operated radio system to provide direct warnings into homes for both natural disasters and nuclear attack. (https://www.weather.gov/mob/nwr)
They had something when there was a false alarm in Hawaii a couple years ago. I am expecting something like that in most US states.
Quote from: Dabster on March 01, 2022, 10:35:52 AM
They had something when there was a false alarm in Hawaii a couple years ago. I am expecting something like that in most US states.
If you recall in 2018 the then POTUS sent a test text message nationwide through the new emergency alert system. This was a test of that system.
If and I truly mean IF the current PTB decide to provide any warning that is likely how it will come...IF it comes.
https://www.wired.com/story/presidential-text-alert-fema-emergency-history/
At 67 and physically disabled I'll go outside and look at the flash.
Quote from: Zed hunter on July 09, 2022, 07:19:07 AMAt 67 and physically disabled I'll go outside and look at the flash.
At 66 and disabled, I'll get on my Speedo and meet you in the parking lot with the tanning lotion. We can catch some rays.
I live in one of the most densely populated metropolitan areas in Europe, on the 5th floor, with a balcony overlooking a prime industrial target.
Not that this 5th floor business matters, because I'm well within fireball range for even a tactical nuke dropped onto said ground zero.
Here's a philosophical physics question: Since the human body is a complex mixture of solids, liquids, and gases, would you say it evaporates just as much as it sublimates? 🤔
As noted the 2018 system is the one that would transmit the warning if it is given. If you remember Hawaii had that false alarm around the same time.
IMO the PTB will not provide any warning. I believe the most notice for people outside of the target zones will be a loss of electricity.
Any such attack is likely to result in widespread power outages.
On a more serious note, I have always maintained that there is some validity to "Duck and Cover" techniques.
It might have been government propaganda, devised to appease the population, at a point in the cold war were strategic nuclear arsenals were becoming potent enough to erase entire countries off the map.
Yes, in an all-out nuclear war between super powers, MAD doctrine in full force, many of us are toast. Or vapor, depending on circumstances.
If you consider a limited nuclear exchange between nations, or even the use of improvised nuclear devices by non-state actors, a lot of seemingly ridiculous mid-century advice starts looking reasonable, though. Shelter in place in the basement? Provided I've not been deconstructed into my constituent elements, sure.
We had a day where the civil defence sirens were supposed to be tested in 2020. In our entire municipal not a single one was in working order. :eek1:
Then there is the circumstance that I become completely incapable of doing anything other than holding my ears closed if even the smoke detector starts in our house, so it´s probably better for me if they aren´t.
I don´t think there are any working nuclear bunkers in our area and I have tried turning a hand crank of the ventilation system of a private one before, which turned out to be impossible for a longer period. So the sirens wouldn´t be much use anyway as there is no place to take shelter.
The only possibilities are running away far enough or trying to find shelter in one of the old mines around here. Our basement is out, I live in a drafty 18
th house. If there is the chance of radiation sickness, we´ve got a lovely old castle tower still standing very close by that overlooks a nice steep drop to the Rhine valley. The biggest advantage is that I do not have any important targets nearby, so the chance of something happening is quite small even in war times. The chance of one of the ramshackle French nuclear power plants blowing up is a lot higher.
Quote from: mzmc on July 09, 2022, 10:01:20 AMHere's a philosophical physics question: Since the human body is a complex mixture of solids, liquids, and gases, would you say it evaporates just as much as it sublimates? 🤔
Are we talking physical sublimation or psychological? :smiley_blink:
Considering the average human being consists of roughly 70% water I´d argue it mostly evaporates.
If we are talking a very dehydrated, older specimen it might get closer to equal ratio. In that case we´d have to look at the components in human tissue and how much dissociation energy is required im comparison to the dissociation energy of water. If we reach a close to equal energy, I think that should conclude it sublimates as much as it evaporates. (edit: After a quick comparison of the calorific value of the human body and the dissociation energy of the water contained in it, I`m now convinced that the human body mostly evaporates.)
Quote from: flybynight on February 28, 2022, 07:18:36 PMWith all the dire events happening in the world right now. I've been wondering all day if Russia actually launched an ICBM attack against the west. Would we even be warned by the government of the impending strike. Or would our first warning be the boom of the fireball rising ? When I was a kid they still had air raid drills. But that was like 45 years ago. I searched on the internet but could not find anything regarding this.
I remember watching the Electric Company as a kid and getting goosebumps every time they tested the Emergency Broadcast System. That's longer ago than I want it to be, but there must be something like that still in place, something more substantial than the test text we all got back in 2018.
I'm just inside the blast radius and near a large city, though, so I'd be a shadow on the wall by the time it came through.
First, though, I'd grab some marshmallows, Hershey's bars and a couple of graham crackers, walk out to the front yard and turn south.
I'm well under 50 miles from the White House and there's over two dozen high-value military targets within 100 miles. I'll never see or feel a thing.
Quote from: Raptor on July 09, 2022, 11:17:46 AMAs noted the 2018 system is the one that would transmit the warning if it is given. If you remember Hawaii had that false alarm around the same time.
IMO the PTB will not provide any warning. I believe the most notice for people outside of the target zones will be a loss of electricity.
Any such attack is likely to result in widespread power outages.
The FEMA and NOAA alerting systems are connected, although it does sound more like an optional and manual process rather than automatic:
Effective Summer 2021, the connection between FEMA's Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) and NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) is online! After extensive development and testing to replace the HazCollect application, you can now send alerts through the National Weather Service gateway for dissemination to consumer NWR receivers and over other National Weather Service systems. (https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_tip-40-nwems-over-noaa-weather-radio.pdf)
NOAA weather radio is more reliable in my area than cell reception, and suspect that's true in many other rural areas.
Conspiracy theories about a planned/coordinated mass depopulation event aside, I'd think politicians, bureaucrats, and the military would want to alert the public of a large scale nuclear attack if they could since I doubt they want to grow their own food, manufacture their own goods, and have their own children drafted. It'd be nice to know that FEMA/DHS have something beyond just the initial notification/alerting written up in a classified appendix to the National Response Plan too, like regular reporting of predicted fallout areas and patterns, radiation levels, and safe daily exposure limits when working outdoors.
Quote from: NT2C on July 09, 2022, 07:55:55 PMI'm well under 50 miles from the White House and there's over two dozen high-value military targets within 100 miles. I'll never see or feel a thing.
I don´t think that´s necessarily the case.
Over 10% of the people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki within a 1 km radius of the explosion survived initially. Even with the higher explosive power of some nuclear weapons nowadays I don´t think its unlikely to survive within a couple of miles radius.
Neither do I think nuclear weapons would be deployed in a widespread bombing of one area, but more as a tactical tool for demoralization targeting objects of symbolic significance or to make certain economic targets uninhabitable. They are expensive after all.
I´d also love to say that I don´t think any opponent would turn an area that is close to them into nuclear wasteland but after the stellar performance of Russian troops in Chernobyl this year I´m not so sure.
Quote from: Raptor on July 09, 2022, 11:17:46 AMIMO the PTB will not provide any warning. I believe the most notice for people outside of the target zones will be a loss of electricity.
Free bump for discussion:
I should clarify my thought here as to why:
1. A massive (or even a restrained) attack is likely to be entail central communications, control and power grids. Attacks on power grids being the simplest and easiest to accomplish. No power reduces the comms network and that means a delay in type of signal.
2. Notice by text provides minimal benefit. From the time any such attack is launched there can be as little as 20 minutes once detected until impact (much less if it is an SLBM or cruise missile attack). In that time it has to be verified as legitimate and valid then pushed up the chain of command for action authorization. The primary thought for the PTB will be to relocate to a safe area leaving not much time to make a decision and authorize a warning.
So for the sake of discussion lets assume you received a text (just like Honolulu did) saying a "ballistic missile is inbound and this is not a drill".
The odds are good that it is already too late to do anything but to "sound the collision alarm and brace for impact".
IMO what is more likely to happen is a power grid imbalance followed by an immediate power outage.
What is everyone else's thoughts on the matter?
90 second Nuclear Preparedness PSA video from NYC Emergency Management released today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-5d7V4Sbqk
Knowing is half the battle, the other half of the battle apparently involves nuclear weapons.
This article discusses what some residents of Hawaii did after the warning:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42680070
QuoteFor some it was panic, a dash to a protective bathtub or hiding under manholes, contemplating what could be their last moments. For others, a resigned acceptance, thinking that staring at the beauty of Hawaii was not a bad way to go.
Hassan Deen, a student at Hawaii Pacific University, told the BBC the alert sparked a frenzy and he was locked for 47 minutes with 29 other students in a room with rubbish bins.
SNIP....
Marathon runner Lucja Leonard said she had heard of children being "pushed into drainpipes to get them protected".
"We all just huddled together and just thought - well, you know - if this is going to be the end I guess we're in a beautiful place, doing something we love but - God - it was pretty scary."
Quote from: tirls on July 10, 2022, 12:32:12 PMQuote from: NT2C on July 09, 2022, 07:55:55 PMI'm well under 50 miles from the White House and there's over two dozen high-value military targets within 100 miles. I'll never see or feel a thing.
I don´t think that´s necessarily the case.
Over 10% of the people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki within a 1 km radius of the explosion survived initially. Even with the higher explosive power of some nuclear weapons nowadays I don´t think its unlikely to survive within a couple of miles radius.
Neither do I think nuclear weapons would be deployed in a widespread bombing of one area, but more as a tactical tool for demoralization targeting objects of symbolic significance or to make certain economic targets uninhabitable. They are expensive after all.
I´d also love to say that I don´t think any opponent would turn an area that is close to them into nuclear wasteland but after the stellar performance of Russian troops in Chernobyl this year I´m not so sure.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were each hit with a single, very low-yield atomic bomb. Considering we're talking about the White House, major military bases like Andrews Air Force Base, Quantico Marine Base (home of the FBI Academy too), Portsmith Naval Shipyards, Norfolk Navy Base, and a slew of locations operated by various clandestine agencies, if we didn't get plastered with less than a dozen hydrogen bombs I'd be very surprised.
Quote from: Crosscut on July 11, 2022, 03:26:08 PM90 second Nuclear Preparedness PSA video from NYC Emergency Management released today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-5d7V4Sbqk
Knowing is half the battle, the other half of the battle apparently involves nuclear weapons.
Gotta love that the end result here will be a lot of wet, naked people huddled together in the dark. Anyone want to wager on the activities that will ensue? :shades:
A link to an applicable site. Pick your poison and place the impact zone near a likely target and see how your BOL/BIL fairs.
You can select yield, air bust and ground bursts.
https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
As an example I selected Erath, LA for 3.3 MT airburst.
Why and what the hell is Erath? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Hub)
A strike against this site would strike 9 interstate gas pipelines and 4 intrastate pipelines. BTW a 3.3 MT would be over kill for this target. henry hub Capture.JPG
Quote from: NT2C on July 11, 2022, 04:35:12 PMHiroshima and Nagasaki were each hit with a single, very low-yield atomic bomb. Considering we're talking about the White House, major military bases like Andrews Air Force Base, Quantico Marine Base (home of the FBI Academy too), Portsmith Naval Shipyards, Norfolk Navy Base, and a slew of locations operated by various clandestine agencies, if we didn't get plastered with less than a dozen hydrogen bombs I'd be very surprised.
Theoretically, yes of course they could destroy the entire area, there´s certainly enough firepower. Actually just drop another Tsar there and you´re probably good. My point is that I think it´s highly unlikely to drop multiple nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles on closely situated targets, it´s an assessment of probability.
Then there is the fact that they´d have lost their biggest threat. I can´t think of many possibilities to surpass an attack like this and NATO would have to retaliate with similar devastation. A smaller singular attack for demoralisation purposes is something much more likely. The scenario you describe could be the desperate last insurrection in an already lost case. But in that instance, there would have been multiple opportunities to get out beforehand.
Or a head of state going absolutely bonkers, there is that.
I just tried out Raptors nukemap, and even the originally planned yield of Tsar Bomba with 100 Mt only produces a fireball of 7-8 km.
The closest eyewitness report of a survivor of Hiroshima that I know of is 300m away from ground central. If you manage to be outside of the fireball range and in a secure building you have a small chance of survival. The human body can survive an astonishing amount of pressure and the direct impact zone is relatively small compared to your distance to the targets regardless of fission or fusion technology. There is a large possibility of debilitating consequences, so in a lot of cases going instantly might be kinder.
I may very well be too optimistic and trust logics and the ability to correctly predict the ramifications of one's actions and act accordingly too much. It has happened before.
Let´s hope we won´t ever find out who´s right. :smiley_cheers:
On a side note, they could actually drop the 100 Mt on the White House and you should still be fine if you are inside a secure concrete building. Or in this case the White House would be fine if they drop it on your house, I was doing it in reverse. Lets hope that doesn´t happen either.
I am seeing a lot of rumors online about why NYC put out the PSA.
Most of them involve a *dirty bomb* that supposedly has come into the city.
I thought they had stuff to detect things like that?
Anyway, my go-to to check veracity of rumors like this is to look where the politicians, celebrities and the elite are.
If they all bolt out of town, then I'll worry.
Quote from: Lambykins on July 12, 2022, 06:22:21 PMI am seeing a lot of rumors online about why NYC put out the PSA.
Most of them involve a *dirty bomb* that supposedly has come into the city.
I thought they had stuff to detect things like that?
Anyway, my go-to to check veracity of rumors like this is to look where the politicians, celebrities and the elite are.
If they all bolt out of town, then I'll worry.
It wouldn't have "come into" the city, it could originate there. Hospitals and the like generate a lot of radioactive medical waste that has to be collected and disposed of. That waste could become a dirty bomb fairly easily.
Quote from: tirls on July 12, 2022, 06:59:14 AMQuote from: NT2C on July 11, 2022, 04:35:12 PMHiroshima and Nagasaki were each hit with a single, very low-yield atomic bomb. Considering we're talking about the White House, major military bases like Andrews Air Force Base, Quantico Marine Base (home of the FBI Academy too), Portsmith Naval Shipyards, Norfolk Navy Base, and a slew of locations operated by various clandestine agencies, if we didn't get plastered with less than a dozen hydrogen bombs I'd be very surprised.
Theoretically, yes of course they could destroy the entire area, there´s certainly enough firepower. Actually just drop another Tsar there and you´re probably good. My point is that I think it´s highly unlikely to drop multiple nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles on closely situated targets, it´s an assessment of probability.
Then there is the fact that they´d have lost their biggest threat. I can´t think of many possibilities to surpass an attack like this and NATO would have to retaliate with similar devastation. A smaller singular attack for demoralisation purposes is something much more likely. The scenario you describe could be the desperate last insurrection in an already lost case. But in that instance, there would have been multiple opportunities to get out beforehand.
Or a head of state going absolutely bonkers, there is that.
I just tried out Raptors nukemap, and even the originally planned yield of Tsar Bomba with 100 Mt only produces a fireball of 7-8 km.
The closest eyewitness report of a survivor of Hiroshima that I know of is 300m away from ground central. If you manage to be outside of the fireball range and in a secure building you have a small chance of survival. The human body can survive an astonishing amount of pressure and the direct impact zone is relatively small compared to your distance to the targets regardless of fission or fusion technology. There is a large possibility of debilitating consequences, so in a lot of cases going instantly might be kinder.
I may very well be too optimistic and trust logics and the ability to correctly predict the ramifications of one's actions and act accordingly too much. It has happened before.
Let´s hope we won´t ever find out who´s right. :smiley_cheers:
On a side note, they could actually drop the 100 Mt on the White House and you should still be fine if you are inside a secure concrete building. Or in this case the White House would be fine if they drop it on your house, I was doing it in reverse. Lets hope that doesn´t happen either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_independently_targetable_reentry_vehicle
Attack on Kansas city, Lawrence area and the former ICBM missile bases
https://youtu.be/7VG2aJyIFrA
Quote from: flybynight on July 13, 2022, 04:54:10 AMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_independently_targetable_reentry_vehicle
And those, agreed. However then you are back down in explosive power giving you a maximum impact zone of around 2,5 to 4 km in radius for each head and unless you are directly in it you have a reasonable possibility of survival if you are in a safe building. Safe building meaning something like a concrete basement or building, not necessarily a nuclear bunker. The chances are of course lower if the explosion isn´t airborne, but it does not mean guaranteed instant death. Even radiation sickness up to a point is survivable.
I still think the chances of this happening are immensely small. There is not much room for intensification after such an assault making an area-wide nuclear attack without any premonition highly unlikely. You´d need an absolute madman for such a scenario and even with the current occurrences, Russia is not it (yet). The other leading politicians who I do thing would be capable of such an action at this point in time do thankfully not have the technology for it, or at least it isn´t known off. A dirty bomb by terrorists or a singular target for intimidation purposes are just more probable.
I don´t think we´ll agree on that topic. Maybe I have a too European viewpoint. Germany to the Russian border is about the distance of NapalmMan67 to NT2C , so we are talking different tactics being viable. :smiley_shrug:
Regarding the warning of a nuclear attack I think Raptor might be right. Either the electric grid or a disruption of communication might be a good indicator considering the EMP caused by a nuclear explosion. It certainly won't be any sirens for me. There is an app for warning messages, but we don´t have any cell reception where we live.
Quote from: tirls on July 13, 2022, 11:24:19 AMwe don´t have any cell reception where we live.
That sounds like a blessing
and a curse.
QuoteYou´d need an absolute madman for such a scenario and even with the current occurrences, Russia is not it (yet).
An absolute madman, plus the followers loyal enough to carry out the order. I truly hope that by the time Putin is truly desperate enough for the former, he will have lost too many of the latter.
Quote from: Mr. E. Monkey on July 13, 2022, 11:51:53 AMThat sounds like a blessing and a curse.
I don´t mind it at all. :smiley_blink:
But in the case of warning messages it is detrimental. The app is known to be buggy though so it might not be such a loss.
Quote from: Mr. E. Monkey on July 13, 2022, 11:51:53 AMAn absolute madman, plus the followers loyal enough to carry out the order. I truly hope that by the time Putin is truly desperate enough for the former, he will have lost too many of the latter.
I remember reading about a sowjet submarine officer in the cuba crisis refusing to launch a nuclear missile or torpedo.
The thing that scares me is that some of the things Lawrow says are a lot worse.
Been playing with this calculator for the past hour, http://www.radprocalculator.com/Gamma.aspx , mostly with U-235 and PU-239 and different shielding types and thicknesses, and thinking about how rearranging some of the heavier (more massive) objects in the house outside the walls of our 'fallout shelter room' might provide more protection. Nothing too extreme, but since we already keep a few 5 gallon pails of water for flushing and 1 gallon bottles of distilled water for the batteries, might as well store them where they'll be between us and the radiation for example. Same for things like tool chests or tool boxes, books (shelves), or any other heavy items. And also considering, yet again, how I could have designed our home better in regard to a radiation event. The pantry, with shelves of canned goods, and our big lead acid batteries could have been positioned better to provide more shielding around the shelter room without adding any additional cost during the construction, among other things.
With short notice, or even after an event, stacked containers of water might be an expedient method of adding more shielding. Stacked coolers, plastic totes, or 5 gallon pails with ~12" of water is about one halving thickness for U-235 gamma radiation according to that calculator, better than nothing and maybe enough to make a difference in some cases.
Water is a good convenient and low cost shielding material. Radioactive items are frequently stored in pools of water for that reason.
QuoteWater as a neutron shield
Water, due to the high hydrogen content and availability, is effective and common neutron shielding. However, due to the low atomic number of hydrogen and oxygen, water is not an acceptable shield against gamma rays. On the other hand, in some cases, this disadvantage (low density) can be compensated by the high thickness of the water shield. In the case of neutrons, water perfectly moderates neutrons, but with the absorption of neutrons by hydrogen nucleus, secondary gamma rays with high energy are produced. These gamma rays highly penetrate matter, and therefore they can increase requirements on the thickness of the water shield. Adding a boric acid can help with this problem (neutron absorption on boron nuclei without strong gamma emission) but results in another problem with corrosion of construction materials.
https://www.nuclear-power.com/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/atomic-nuclear-physics/fundamental-particles/neutron/shielding-neutron-radiation/
That water container idea is brilliant.
Other important aspects of bomb shelters are gas tightness, an orthogonal shifted entrance and air filtration. As far as I remember the air filtration is achieved by filtering it through large amounts of quartz sand, but I might be wrong there.
Not sure how to achieve that without a proper building though. Unless you have a chest type freezer you want to lock yourself into.
I´m going to look for the construction plans of the one in my parents' house. They have got to be around somewhere, but it might take a while.
If you stack the water canisters (or anything, really) around the inside of the exterior walls, make sure to leave enough room for ventilation. Otherwise you might get damp walls and mould or worse. But that is just my inner blinkered specialist talking.
ANY gap will allow gamma, x-ray and neutron rads to pass through. Look up how shielding is applied to the walls of a radiology lab.
Quote from: Raptor on July 14, 2022, 12:49:09 PMWater is a good convenient and low cost shielding material. Radioactive items are frequently stored in pools of water for that reason.
QuoteWater as a neutron shield
Water, due to the high hydrogen content and availability, is effective and common neutron shielding. However, due to the low atomic number of hydrogen and oxygen, water is not an acceptable shield against gamma rays. On the other hand, in some cases, this disadvantage (low density) can be compensated by the high thickness of the water shield. In the case of neutrons, water perfectly moderates neutrons, but with the absorption of neutrons by hydrogen nucleus, secondary gamma rays with high energy are produced. These gamma rays highly penetrate matter, and therefore they can increase requirements on the thickness of the water shield. Adding a boric acid can help with this problem (neutron absorption on boron nuclei without strong gamma emission) but results in another problem with corrosion of construction materials.
https://www.nuclear-power.com/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/atomic-nuclear-physics/fundamental-particles/neutron/shielding-neutron-radiation/
I read that quote about a dozen times trying to understand if a relatively thin layer of water alone would be desirable for neutron shielding, or not.
Finally found this which helped explain it for me https://www.iasj.net/iasj/download/77884b680a61914b
QuoteNeutron Shielding
The attenuation of neutrons involves several different phenomena; first, the very fast neutrons must be slowed down into the moderately fast range, which requires a suitable(inelastic) scattering material, such as one containing Barium or Iron. Then the moderately fast neutrons have to be decelerated by (elastic scattering) into the slow range by an element of low atomic weight.Water is very satisfactory for this, since it‟s two constituents; Oxygen and Hydrogen,both have low atomic weights. The slow neutrons must then be absorbed by elements of low atomic weight. Also sufficient gamma-attenuating materials must be included to minimize the escape of gamma-rays created as a result of neutron capture [4].
It also mentions concrete, with its 7-8% water content being a good alternative for both gamma and neutron shielding. Although if I understand it right the high energy neutrons are really only a concern in the second or so following the blast and not so much for fallout/residual radiation. I could be mistaken on that however.
Quote from: tirls on July 14, 2022, 02:57:23 PMI´m going to look for the construction plans of the one in my parents' house. They have got to be around somewhere, but it might take a while.
I'd be interested to see the plans if you can find them tirls.
QuoteThe slow neutrons must then be absorbed by elements of low atomic weight.
Excuse my non scientific mind since the coffee hasnt kicked in yet (closing shift last night) Wouldn't this be an issue if using drinking water as a barrier?
Quote from: SCBrian on July 15, 2022, 11:01:55 AMQuoteThe slow neutrons must then be absorbed by elements of low atomic weight.
Excuse my non scientific mind since the coffee hasnt kicked in yet (closing shift last night) Wouldn't this be an issue if using drinking water as a barrier?
From what I understand, it shouldn't be a significant issue (as long as we're talking about simply absorbing radiation in closed containers, and not actually collecting fallout), but I am going to try to find something more authoritative than a monkey on the internet who may just be pulling this from his 4th point of contact.
https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/emergencies/food_water_safety.html
Quote- Water in other containers in your home, such as a toilet tank or hot water heater will also be free of radioactive material.
- You can still use tap or well water for cleaning yourself and your food.
- Even if the tap water is contaminated, you can still use it for decontamination. Any radioactive material that gets into surface water or ground water sources will be diluted to very low levels by the water and will be safe to use for washing skin, hair, and clothing.
Everything I've been able to find so far indicates that it's potential radionuclides, such as uranium, radium, and radon, rather than any radiation absorbed by the water, that is a problem.
https://www.easyhome101.com/how-to-remove-radiation-from-water/#:~:text=Irradiated%20water%20is%20unsafe%20for%20consumption%2C%20especially%20if,water%20include%20active%20carbon%2C%20reverse%20osmosis%2C%20and%20ion-exchange.
QuoteRadiation water contamination occurs when unwanted radioactive substances "also known as radionuclides" get into the water sources such as lakes, rivers, and underground water.
https://www.epa.gov/radiation/will-it-be-safe-me-eat-food-or-drink-water-my-area-after-radiological-emergency
QuoteFood in sealed containers, bottled water, sealed juice, unopened soda containers and any unspoiled food in your refrigerator or freezer will be safe to eat.
That's about all I've been able to find so far.
Quote from: Zed hunter on July 15, 2022, 08:49:38 AMANY gap will allow gamma, x-ray and neutron rads to pass through. Look up how shielding is applied to the walls of a radiology lab.
You are right that any gaps allow room for radiation. I meant a space between the wall and the objects, one encompassing layer (wall) that blocks part of the radiation, followed by a small air space, followed by another encompassing layer (water containers) that blocks part of the radiation, not openings through the layers. As I said, my inner blinkered specialist talking, I work in building design and have seen enough damages.
Quote from: Crosscut on July 15, 2022, 08:57:31 AMI'd be interested to see the plans if you can find them tirls.
I have found some of the documents, but I need to translate them first and probably redraw some of the construction plans as they are quite faded. I´ll try to get it done by next week.
Being about 6mi from DMAFB... I hope we get warning as early as possible.
But, Things don't usually go that way, If we have say a 90min warning,
Then I'd have a set of mountains between us and DM.
If it's more like 30min... The last part of our run would be speeding our collective ass off
to avoid the outer edge of the blast radius (Tsarbomb 50MT), and hopefully clear the initial fallout zone.
According to nukemap the b.o.l. is outside both due to mountains being between it and the base
And the general wind currents.
We could make it to the far side of the mountains in 30, but having the 90min to make it there
and get into the basement/shelter would be better.
Maybe time to rethink the current strategy on our bug out...
J
Quote from: superduder on August 14, 2022, 12:50:31 PMBeing about 6mi from DMAFB... I hope we get warning as early as possible.
But, Things don't usually go that way, If we have say a 90min warning,
Then I'd have a set of mountains between us and DM.
If it's more like 30min... The last part of our run would be speeding our collective ass off
to avoid the outer edge of the blast radius (Tsarbomb 50MT), and hopefully clear the initial fallout zone.
According to nukemap the b.o.l. is outside both due to mountains being between it and the base
And the general wind currents.
We could make it to the far side of the mountains in 30, but having the 90min to make it there
and get into the basement/shelter would be better.
Maybe time to rethink the current strategy on our bug out...
J
There is no chance of a Tsar bomb being used . It was a cold war test detonation and is too large to be launched on a icbm.The largest I see is a 10 megaton Icbm by China. Most modern missile payloads are multiple 300-500 KT per each missile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_ICBMs
ETA Also remember any nuke strike will probably be preceded by a EMP detonation in the upper atmosphere
https://youtu.be/_8l5xznESLc
I figured go with the largest tested, and if you could get away from that
then you'd be good for anything lighter in the same area.
Being a child of the Cold War myself and serving in the military during that time I do not think Russia would pull the trigger..There is no winner in a nuclear war....
The 'Beyond the Press' channel (2nd channel for the 'Hydraulic Press Channel' on YouTube) just did a simulated nuclear blast video. They worked out the calculations needed to simulate the pressure using 25kg of dynamite and then set up a "living room" and several cars to see what would happen to them. The unexpected surprise was that the actual building on site (which was quite a distance away) ended up with damage as well. Oops! Some great slow-motion shots of the shockwave as it hit.
He's in Finland, so he has a bit more concern around potential Russian threats than most of us would. I'm sure that was the reason for this video. Well, that and the opportunity to blow things up!