I don't know if I agree with this post (and haven't given it much thought), but it's worth discussing. I remember shopping for them with my dad in the late fifties, though we never ended up getting one.

That was then, this is now. Do they make sense in the current environment?

[Update a few minutes later]

More thoughts on the subject from Dr. Kurtz.

The subject of Internet/email alerts is actually coming to life in the near future. Federal Computer Weekly had an article in the last several weeks on a system being developed for DHS by Sandia Labs called NPAWS (National Public Alert Warning System). It is a vastly expanded alert system that will allow opt-in access to alerts for regional or national disasters via the web and email.

I think the risk increased enough to do some research on fallout shelters based on old gov't CD materials still available on the web. I priced out a shelter (minus supplies) made of 4x4's, 3/4 inch plywood and about 100 bags of dirt that can be quickly constructed in a basement corner for around $650.

A small yield bomb isn't going to present much more blast and fire damage to the suburbs than what you'd get with a hurricane. Being able to sit someplace for 2 weeks while the fallout decays is the key, and I think sheltering in place is a better solution than bugging out of the city.

That said, I still don't discount a revival of the cold war, as Russia and China still maintain large and modernized public fallout shelters.

Orville, unless there's multiple nuclear explosions, another approach is going to be evacuation.

According to my PDA "effects of nuclear weapons" program, a 100kt blast at 100 feet altitude is down to 1.25psi overpressure at about 3 miles. In Los Angeles, the probability that your residence would be inside that 3 mile range is about 6 percent assuming random placement of the weapon, but since it's very likely that some type of symbolic target (City Hall?, Beverly Hills? Disneyland?) would likely be attacked, not living next to such a target means that it's a pretty good bet that you don't need an underground fallout shelter, even if your city is attacked.

You still can't ignor the failout, but you might be able to get away with piling dirt around the house or perhaps a sealed room inside the house with the proper air filtration systems and food. And don't forget the firearms to keep those pesky radioactive mutants who were once your neighbors away.

Evacuation? Good if you're at the head of the line. Hurricane evacuations jam highways, and a mushroom cloud on the horizon will cause panic beyond believing; biggest traffic jam ever. The safest move will likely be to hunker down in place for a couple of weeks...

I for one will welcome our radioactive mutant citizens and appreciate the added diversity they offer society. After all we shouldn't judge mutants by the color the slime that oozes from their eye sockets, or the number of brains they have eaten.

Stewart, you are correct. Still there will be plenty of people who have the ability to evacuate. And even after the fallout has occured, there may be ways to pull people out of harm's way without exposing them to a lot of radiation. Say lead-lined personel carriers?

Also, given that the roads would be jammed, I wonder how authorities would move around? I wouldn't be surprised if they resorted to bulldozing their way through traffic.

I live pretty far out in the country in Texas, well upwind of most likely targets and pretty far downwind of others. Not safe, but less exposed.

We get the occasional Angelino passing through. Mutants with green slime oozing from their eyeballs would hardly be noticed.

Regards,
Ric

Evacuation is only advisable if you KNOW without a doubt that you can get down the road and away. Otherwise, you stand an almost certain risk of being caught in a column of cars when the high-rad materials rain down on you.

Shelter-In-Place is going to be the prudent choice for most people.

By the way, Rand, your second link is broken.

Also, with regard to fallout shelters, here in North Texas, it seems that most homes are built without basements these days, or even crawlspaces. THe house sits directly on the slab. No room for an underground shelter there.

Rick C. Dig a tunnel under your slab. Don't forget to take your Iodine pills and plenty of water.

Re: Houses without basements - For a temporary underground shelter, you can burrow under the slab itself from the outside, then pile mass (Dirt, rock, residential building materials, whatever) around the dig. Just leave an access to the outside.

It would suck for a couple of weeks, but it would be better than doing the whole "dead" thing.

There are a number of things you can do to improvise shelter.

Well you guys have a good point except I'm renting the house and I doubt the owner would appreciate it.

"Well you guys have a good point except I'm renting the house and I doubt the owner would appreciate it."

Humph. If the owner had a problem, he could bill me later. :)

I for one will welcome our radioactive mutant citizens and appreciate the added diversity they offer society. After all we shouldn't judge mutants by the color the slime that oozes from their eye sockets, or the number of brains they have eaten.

Just think. The living dead. That's closer to legal voting than really dead. The left shall then flourish.

This is the best source on expedient fallout and blast shelters:

http://www.oism.org/nwss/

These shelters, iirc, have the virtue of having bee tested with actual nuclear weapons.

The problem with the book, though, it that it is predicated on the notion that there will be a "crisis" period in which to prepare. I think it far more likely that a terrorist strike will have no warning, and those in a fallout area won't have time for these shelters.

One of the old CD studies from the 1960's tested a mother and three kids left in a field with rudimetary instructions and hand tools. In something like 12 to 18 hours they were able to dig a trench, cover it with some small diameter trees for strength, followed by a tarp and the excavated dirt on top. It was just big enough for the four of them and their supplies.

Though I'm not sure today's youth is up to such a physical task.

I'm not sure I can dig a hole big enough for four people under my slab in fifteen minutes.

I'm not sure I can dig a hole big enough for four people under my slab in fifteen minutes.,/em>

I think you're just lazy. I'll bet you've never even tried it.

I recall fallout shelters can be made inside mostly intact homes, even those without basements. I believe some of the prior links give examples of how to do this.

Also, I heard a variation on the trench idea above, one can replace the small diameter trees with a car or other vehicle. Dig the trench, park the car on top, and fill the car with the escavated dirt. Then plug the gaps with more dirt. As a bonus, you make it hard for someone to steal your car. :-)

There are solutions, and the point is to have a contingency plan ready just in case. Fear is a good cure for laziness.

I was thinking though that a dirty bomb would probably be a conventional explosive, so the blast damage would be reduced to mere blocks, and the radiological contamination would be a lot less than a small nuke...unless you were unlucky enough to be within a few miles and downwind. With a conventional explosive the fallout probably wouldn't even reach 2000 feet in altitude unless there were a lot of combustibles in the target site.

IIRC, one of the issues with dirty bombs is that the half-life of some of the available isotopes have very long half-lives. The effect being, while a smaller geographical footprint, the contamination lasts longer than a nuke.

I reserve the right to be wrong. :)

Do they make sense in the current environment?

Probably. Note that if you're in the blast zone there is nothing you can do - you're a goner. But outside the zone and downwind survival is possible with some foresight.

I think it far more likely that a terrorist strike will have no warning, and those in a fallout area won't have time for these shelters.

Depends on how far away you are and how strong the wind is. It's been years and years since I had to think about this but I think that if you survive the blast you've got at least 30 minutes.

Longer if the target is far away; if Minneapolis gets it I've got all day before their fallout gets me. I might even have time to drive out of the pattern and book a motel room.

Thirty minutes is a lot of time if you keep your head. Fill up everything with water, drag food and kids to a sheltered spot and pray hard.

By the By, Marine Corps NBC training is interesting but not strictly applicable. I recall an improvised fallout hide was a trench under a tank. Where the heck am I going to get an M1A1 in Wisconsin?