Everything we thought we knew about nuclear war MIGHT be wrong!

[Magus]

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/8-facts-about-the-animals-of-chernobylSeems the critters don't live long enough life span wise for the radiation to build up enough to harm them or something, BUGS actually took it on the chin and thinned out greatly, SO.. all us gamers who play fallout and STALKERS (based around Chernobyl.) are in for a big let down! the place is almost Eden, deadly as hell still to humans however. So after we blow ourselves up, nature will be like "Meh, good riddance." and pick up where she left off.

 

[Aerindel]

Well, I don't want to sound like a know it all...

But anyone who actually researched nuclear war has known this for literally decades. Except the deadly to humans part. It's not. There are many places in the world that are naturally far more radioactive than Pripyat, places where tens of millions of people live. Pripyat, by virtue of being most empty of people, is one of the safest places to live in the world, and people have lived (illegal) inside the exclusion zone since the day of the accident. Almost everything in pop culture about Chernobyl, is pure myth.

Nuclear war and nuclear accidents have been MASSIVE exaggerated for propaganda, political, and commercial reasons, (The fossil fuel industry has a huge anti-nuclear lobbying operation that masquerades as an environmental movement)

I highly recommend the documentary "Pandora's Promise" for more info. Its absolutly outrageous the gap between what people believe, and what reality is. More people die in a bad weekend in Chicago than in the worst nuclear accidents of all time. You would be exposed to many times more radiation on the flight to Pripyat, than you would from living there for years.

 

[Magus]

I dunno why, but I got this expression reading your post. got more?

 

[Neb]

I got the bulk of my education about radiation in the navy 10 years before Chernobyl happened. I was part of the security alert team that guarded the weapons while on board. The bunny suits we had to wear were a pain.

Ben

 

[Supervisor42]

I think mixing a nuclear power plant meltdown with nuclear ICBMs landing is a mistake.
A nuclear bomb puts all of it's resulting radioactive material into the atmosphere all at once.
The nuclear power plant puts it's material into the atmosphere over weeks or months, or longer.
I do agree that exposure to fallout is the biggest danger to the vast majority of us.
Do you have a meter to tell when it is safe to go outside? Or if the food you get months later is safe to eat?
Your life may depend on it.

 

[hiwall]

I think this place has fairly accurate info on nuke war.

http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm

 

[Rick]

As someone who has dealt with radiation professionally as well I concur with Aerindel.
Popular culture is full of popular inaccuracies and gross exaggerations.

 

[Terri9630]

I've never worked with or studied nukes but all you have to do is look at Japan. It was hit with 2 nukes and a reactor melting down and its not a wasteland.

 

[Aerindel]

I've never worked with or studied nukes but all you have to do is look at Japan. It was hit with 2 nukes and a reactor melting down and its not a wasteland.

What I can't figure out, is why it's so hard for most people to apply this same common sense. We know what happens to places struck by nuclear bombs. We know the result of nuclear power plant accidents.....yet we still make up wild stories in our imaginations about them.

I do agree that exposure to fallout is the biggest danger to the vast majority of us.
Do you have a meter to tell when it is safe to go outside? Or if the food you get months later is safe to eat?

It doesn't even make my top 20 biggest danger list.

You don't need a meter. All you need is a clock and the knowledge that raditation decays on an exponential curve. Falling off very quickly at first, and more slowly as time goes on.

Stay in as long as you can. Its completely irrelevant what the outside radiation levels are if you have run out of food or water. Its completely irrelevant how contaminated the food or water is, if you need it to survive.

If you can only stay in your shelter one night, good for you, your risk is 1/10th of the person who was in the open.

If you can only stay in for two days, good for you, your risk is 1/10th of the person who only could stay in one night.

If you can only stay in for two weeks, your risk is 1/10th smaller than the person who could only stay in for two days.

If you can only stay in for three months, your risk is 1/10th that of the person who could only say in for two weeks.

For most places, if you can shelter for just a couple of weeks, your risk from the radiation falls below your risk from other causes.

I know this is a classic and most people here have probably already read this, but if you haven't I strongly encourage everyone to at least read the first chapter

https://www.oism.org/nwss/

 

[Bacpacker]

I've worked in the Nuclear field 2 different times in my life, over 20 years total. There are procedures to work with, or be in rad areas. Ultimatly use ALARA principal and you'll be good. "As Low As Reasonably Achievable"
Time = As short as possible
Distance = The more the Better
Shielding = Lead, concrete, dirt. Thicker is better. Some of the facilities use glass for work cells. Accept it's 4' thick

 

[Aerindel]

I've worked in the Nuclear field 2 different times in my life, over 20 years total. There are procedures to work with, or be in rad areas. Ultimatly use ALARA principal and you'll be good. "As Low As Reasonably Achievable"
Time = As short as possible
Distance = The more the Better
Shielding = Lead, concrete, dirt. Thicker is better. Some of the facilities use glass for work cells. Accept it's 4' thick

I like that acronym, its a new one to me, but seems useful for a variety of things.

 

[kd4ulw]

The timeline for radioactive decay from a nuclear bomb is different than a nuclear power plant accident. That’s why they built the ‘sarcophagus’ to cover Chernobyl.

 

[Aerindel]

The timeline for radioactive decay from a nuclear bomb is different than a nuclear power plant accident. That’s why they built the ‘sarcophagus’ to cover Chernobyl.

It's different only in that a nuclear power plant will keep producing new 'fallout' over time. Its not one event, but an ongoing issue until contained.

The purpose of the sarcophagus at Chernobyl is to contain that, as is the icewall at Fukushima.

The other thing about radioactive decay, is that its proportional to its radioactivity. The most dangerous isotopes, decay the fastest, while the ones they always talk about 'lasting ten thousand years' are the least radioactive.


Here is a 'fun' question for everyone to test their knowledge of radiation....its easy to look up but more fun if you try to figure it out yourself.

You are given four cookies.

One emits Alpha radiation.

One emits Beta radiation.

One emits Gamma.

And the last one emits neutrons.

You can throw one cookie away, hold one in your pocket, hold one in your hand, and eat one. No other options.

So which cookie do you do what with for the best outcome?

 

[Rick]

Gamma cookie, Neutron a close 2nd.

 

[Morgan101]

I too worked in the Nuclear industry for 15 years. It was by far the safest industry I worked in during my entire career, and gets a very bad rap because of politics. Backpacker is exactly right in that there are only three things that will protect you from radiation: Time, Distance, and Shielding. Nuclear war is survivable, but I don't know what will be left of the planet if we have one. The planet will still be here. I just don't know how well the population will fare.

 

[Alaskajohn]

I've worked in the Nuclear field 2 different times in my life, over 20 years total. There are procedures to work with, or be in rad areas. Ultimatly use ALARA principal and you'll be good. "As Low As Reasonably Achievable"
Time = As short as possible
Distance = The more the Better
Shielding = Lead, concrete, dirt. Thicker is better. Some of the facilities use glass for work cells. Accept it's 4' thick

We certainly were taught that concept in the Army’s NBC Officers course in the 1980s. I wish I still had my manuals from the course. When I bought my place, part of the equation was being outside of the fall out radius of likely targets. I have also made sure that I have suitable shielding in place and the ability to stay in that location in just in case. I do need to get my hands on those manuals though, as “time” is an important aspect that takes some precise calculations.

 

[Morgan101]

We certainly were taught that concept in the Army’s NBC Officers course in the 1980s. I wish I still had my manuals from the course. When I bought my place, part of the equation was being outside of the fall out radius of likely targets. I have also made sure that I have suitable shielding in place and the ability to stay in that location in just in case. I do need to get my hands on those manuals though, as “time” is an important aspect that takes some precise calculations.

I don't think the time aspect is as difficult as you might think. If you know where the source is you spend as little time as possible being near it. If you have to do something close to the source do it as quickly as possible, and get away. Obviously, the more time you spend around the source the more exposure you will receive.

This is a pretty good equivalency chart showing how different materials can be used as shielding. Think of radiation as light. It will pass through any straight path; like light shining under a doorway or through a crack. Materials should be staggered, so there is no straight path.

 

[Alaskajohn]

I don't think the time aspect is as difficult as you might think. If you know where the source is you spend as little time as possible being near it. If you have to do something close to the source do it as quickly as possible, and get away. Obviously, the more time you spend around the source the more exposure you will receive.

This is a pretty good equivalency chart showing how different materials can be used as shielding. Think of radiation as light. It will pass through any straight path; like light shining under a doorway or through a crack. Materials should be staggered, so there is no straight path.

View attachment 73961

That isn‘t what I am talking about with time. Fallout typically contains many different types of radionuclides. Some stay in the environment for a long time because they have long half-lives, like cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30.17 years. Some have very short half-lives and decay away in minutes or days, like iodine-131, which has a half-life of 8 days. I know my distance, I know the value of my shielding. I don’t have the charts to compute total dosage over time and to correctly compute the length of time I would need to stay shielded. These are very precise calculations. And of course, to be precise I would need to know the type, yield and method of detonation to truly know.

If I had my old manuals, I could run various scenarios and plot for them. I could then plan for worse case sense I would not likely know size, type or delivery method.

What I am talking about is some like this. With some observation, you can make reasonable prediction.

FM 3-3-1 Chptr 4 Detailed Fallout Prediction--NBC 3 Report

 

[Supervisor42]

That isn‘t what I am talking about with time. Fallout typically contains many different types of radionuclides. Some stay in the environment for a long time because they have long half-lives, like cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30.17 years. Some have very short half-lives and decay away in minutes or days, like iodine-131, which has a half-life of 8 days. I know my distance, I know the value of my shielding. I don’t have the charts to compute total dosage over time and to correctly compute the length of time I would need to stay shielded. These are very precise calculations. And of course, to be precise I would need to know the type, yield and method of detonation to truly know.

If I had my old manuals, I could run various scenarios and plot for them. I could then plan for worse case sense I would not likely know size, type or delivery method.

Fallout can go thousands of miles in the upper atmosphere. The good news: the heavier more dangerous ones fall out close to the blast zone.
But a heavy 'snowfall' of the lighter particles can be just as dangerous. Especially if there are multiple detonations and the jet-stream is blowing stuff from all of them over to you. It is a crapshoot.

 

[Alaskajohn]

Fallout can go thousands of miles in the upper atmosphere. The good news: the heavier more dangerous ones fall out close to the blast zone.
But a heavy 'snowfall' of the lighter particles can be just as dangerous. Especially if there are multiple detonations and the jet-stream is blowing stuff from all of them over you.

Yes, and you can make predictions based on observations. And with those predictions you can calculate for total expose over time given known shielding.

 

[SheepDog]

Modern thermonuclear bombs are delivered in a manner to get maximum blast coverage which reduces the amount of fallout to a minimum amount. Direct radiation is most dangerous if you are close enough to get a lot of exposure. Certain elements carry radiation into your body better than others. Your body can deal with certain radiation just as it can deal with lead or mercury poisoning.

 

[Supervisor42]

The thread title is right.
@Alaskajohn The NBC-3 report is for calculating when, and how far, our troops can safely advance after we use one of our nukes that we know every detail about.
I doubt China or N.Korea will give us detailed info about the weapons they use on us.
The shielding info is great if you are designing and building a shelter, but when bombs fall, you got what you got.
@SheepDog Assuming that our enemy will 'fight fair' may be a deadly mistake.
Ground-burst will kill way more people than air-burst.

Even a couple of dosimeter pens in different scales, a charger, and a fishing rod, can tell you how 'hot' it is outside your house and when it is safe unsafe to go outside.

 

[Alaskajohn]

The thread title is right.
@Alaskajohn The NBC-3 report is for calculating when, and how far, our troops can safely advance after we use one of our nukes that we know every detail about.
I doubt China or N.Korea will give us detailed info about the weapons they use on us.
The shielding info is great if you are designing and building a shelter, but when bombs fall, you got what you got.
@SheepDog Assuming that our enemy will 'fight fair' may be a deadly mistake.
Ground-burst will kill way more people than air-burst.

Even a couple of dosimeter pens in different scales, a charger, and a fishing rod, can tell you how 'hot' it is outside your house and when it is safe to go outside.

Thanks. I know what an NBC 3 report is used for. Those were things we learned about and practiced back in the 1980s. My post listed that as an example of what I used to have in my bag of tricks. There is a lot you can do if you had the right technical information and equipment which I no longer have. I have done some searches and am starting to collect some of the old FM that I am familiar with, so I am happy that those things are downloadable!

 

[Alaskajohn]

@Supervisor42, I‘d love to get my hands on those items you have posted. What would something like that cost for functional items?

 

[Supervisor42]

@Supervisor42, I‘d love to get my hands on those items you have posted. What would something like that cost for functional items?

Less than $100 if you go ebay, but unknown functionality. If you go with tested by certified people, ~$200.
The pens are pretty much bulletproof. (The only moving part is inside a vacuum tube) Put it on a charger, twist the knob, and if the needle in it moves smoothly full scale, it is good to go. I only found one out of the 14 I bought that wasn't good. They can be tested if you have a source of known intensity but it takes weeks for the higher scale ones.
Don't get the silver Russian surplus ones.
With a scale of 0-800r, all they can tell you is how quickly you will die.

 

[Supervisor42]

They won't replace a survey meter because like snowfall, fallout will be thicker in some places than others. Like snow will be thicker on one side of your house than the other.
And your neighbor a few miles up the road may have gotten much more 'snow' than you did.
Edit: The most important part is, you cannot perceive radiation with any of your 6 senses. If you go outside your house right now, that is exactly what a deadly level of radioactivity will be like.
"Look honey! They missed us completely! All we got was a bunch of dust on the car!"

 

[Rick]

We certainly were taught that concept in the Army’s NBC Officers course in the 1980s. I wish I still had my manuals from the course.

You can download all the manuals for free from globalsecurity.org here:
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/index.html
examples of relevant manuals:
https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/army/fm/3-3-1/index.html
https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/army/fm/3-3/index.html
https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/army/fm/3-11/index.html
etc etc etc

 

[SheepDog]

Supervisor,
It's not about fighting fair, it's about using your bombs to their most effective capabilities. An air burst at 2 to 5 miles will do more damage than the same bomb at ground level. Plus if you want to move in to your newly acquired home you can do so in about two weeks with an air burst but it can be years with a ground burst. The ideal use would be a low efficiency hydrogen bomb at 2 to 3 hundred miles above the middle of the area you wish to own. It causes no physical damage except to the infrastructure. New computerized controls and everything is back to normal - more or less.

 

[joel]

It's different only in that a nuclear power plant will keep producing new 'fallout' over time. Its not one event, but an ongoing issue until contained.

The purpose of the sarcophagus at Chernobyl is to contain that, as is the icewall at Fukushima.

The other thing about radioactive decay, is that its proportional to its radioactivity. The most dangerous isotopes, decay the fastest, while the ones they always talk about 'lasting ten thousand years' are the least radioactive.


Here is a 'fun' question for everyone to test their knowledge of radiation....its easy to look up but more fun if you try to figure it out yourself.

You are given four cookies.

One emits Alpha radiation.

One emits Beta radiation.

One emits Gamma.

And the last one emits neutrons.

You can throw one cookie away, hold one in your pocket, hold one in your hand, and eat one. No other options.

So which cookie do you do what with for the best outcome?

Throw Gamma away, bury it.
beta in your pocket
alpha in your hand
Eat neutrons from the other hand
All I know, I learned in NBC training in hot George sun in a Charcoal line suit. It was 35 years ago & may have forgot some of it.
I believe even the crazies love their mother & children, that the only reason we have not been bombed by a nuke.
We are the ones who have dropped them on cities & tested 1030 more.
We have proved we are scary.

 

[joel]

Some arm chair Generals say South Carolina will be hit, because of the Fort Jackson training post.
Others say South Carolina does not met the threat level or a large population, so we are not important enough.
China & Russia has lot of bombs so who knows.