nuclear fallout maps ?
 

Anyone got any links to share?

Im trying to find a few examples of maps that show what "might" be the radioactive fallout pattern in the event of nuclear war.

I found this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:F...%28FEMA%29.jpg

However, I think all one really needs is a map of the wind patterns relative to various large cities.

Then one can look for areas to consider finding a retreat or safe place to have ready ahead of time. It would do no good to buy a spot of land if your directly downwind of where the fallout is headed.

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

Nuclear fallout is a thing that would be hard to avoid,BUT is usualy only critical in a low altitude/ground burst explosion, as fallout is created from dirt
particles that are thrown or sucked up by the blast, fortunatley, most militarys realize the mass carnage can be increased by a higher altitude blast, so those weapons usually detonate far higher in the atmosphere for maximum effect.anywhere in the US is suseptible to fallout from a large city, as most of outr cities have grown immensly in the last several decades, Phoenix and tucsan,fifteen years ago would have been the only targets in AZ for example, and as long as you avoided the near area,youd avoid it now they are both metroplex type cities, there is really no place to avoid it any longer in a large strike, so youll have to learn to survive it, fallout as it is radioactive dust, folows the wind currents of the seasons, just look at a weather map and thats where fallout would travel, although the only reason imho it would be a factor would be a general war with China, and their inferior weapons and guidance technology, or if Abdul Akmed snuck a dirty bomb into a port city.

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

id like to add a few other points i forgot,as i mentioned fallout is dust,so it makes sense not to be downwind of extremely dry areas.ill use phoenix again for example, if phoenix were hit, by a ground burst the fallout would be horrific the dry desert soil would suck up massively, the dust cloud would be huge and travel mainly easterly over new mexico and texas and possibly all the way to georgia this is an estimate only but use it in comparison to chicago same bomb because of illinois wet climate, and proximity to lake michigan the same easterly wind probably wouldnt cover more than a few hundred miles maybe central michigan, the best protection wouldnt be to avoid it completly but build a shelter with its own supplies to ride out a week or two it remember though, radiation can be absorbed through sunlight, so outside light must be eliminated, air filtration is a must as well as sanitation.

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

I think that chart is pretty worthless. It looks like it is predicated on ICBMs hitting hardened targets out in our old missle fields. Ground bursts create massive amounts of radioactive fallout.

I think it's probably more realistic for any nukes to be air bursts limited to military and Mil type industry. Relatively little fallout but lots of collateral destruction. Unless it's owned by a terrorist and loaded on a Rider truck. That would be a ground burst but fairly low yield.

Anyway, where do you live? If you live near a large mil industrial complex you could have a problem depending on the wind.

It's probably more important to have KI or KIO3 available as radioactive Iodine can travel for quite a distance.

If/when nukes are used there will be far more people die from starvation and exposure to winter conditions than radiation. The entire system would collapse overnight. Food, fuel, water will become real scarce. Electricity won't come back on line for months if even then.


sb

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

Here, I found a Fallout Footprint. Go to:http://cats.saic.com/cats/techhazards/nucexmpl.htm

Toward the bottom of the page they show the footprint for a 1 megaton ground burst on NYC. It would be nice if they would also show an air burst to show you how much less radiation there is.

sb

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

A couple years back I bought the book No Such Thing As Doomsday ( http://www.baproducts.com/nodooms.htm ). The back of the book contains a very thorough US fallout map (IMO). When I get home from work I'll try to remember to scan it in and post it. It was definently a good read. LOTS of information.

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

research the nuclear tests of the 50s, the links will show the gov't tracking data of that period. they tracked some bursts for a month or so with weather balloons, the patterns formed are pretty amazing. glad i was part of THAT experiment, did my part to combat the red menace. duck and cover!:confused_ma::confused_ma:

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

The map in your link is the standard map used to show a single typical pattern of jet streams. Another textbook (probably difficult to find) is "Environmental Radioactivity" by Eisenbud, 1963 that has a set of figures showing potential spread of the fallout by time.

Another general reference on nuclear attack sites is:
http://www.webpal.org/d_resources/list.htm

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

Nearly all such maps are worthless for any current or future scenario. There were developed for "maximum strategic exchange" type stuff between the US and USSR. Many of the targets on such maps no longer exist (we have a radar station to the southwest of us fully deactivated many years ago still listed on some of the fallout maps you'll find).

Basically, all you need to know nowadays is this:

If you are downwind of any "terrorist" target or major city (sometimes synonymous), you may have a problem. (you will have a problem if they let one off there)

Solution: move.

If you are inside such target, I emphasize even more: MOVE!

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

At least HALF the targets listed in California, for example, are no longer targets.

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

While I definitely agree with this statement, I believe it assumes that Russia and, more so, China are not viable threats anymore. I am not of the opinion that the Cold War ever really ended. While I do not believe we will see a scenario that resembles MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) I would not rule out an attack that targets, specifically, our highly effective, extremely accurate modern military force.

We went into Iraq with this force and suffered less than 200 KIA. That was unbelievable. Most of our allies were expecting anywhere from 5,000 to 25,000. We were literally a hot knife in butter. We went against some of the best stuff they had. At this point in time I do not think our high technology force can be stopped by anyone on the planet and I believe this has, especially China, very, very concerned. That is why they are in the process of the largest peacetime military build-up ever.

Eventually, it will be used.

They have destroyed us economically. We are flat out broke(did it to ourselves actually)

The next step will be to take out our Conventional Military forces. Best way to do this is with surprise, hitting us very hard with small highly accurate nukes (air burst). No more F-15's, F-16's, F-18's. No more Aircraft Carriers. No more B-52's that can reach around the world. Total devastation within one hour!

Our entire civilian infrastructure will simply collapse. Millions will starve and freeze to death. Total undeniable chaos.

Our President will not exercise the unthinkable option of MAD as both Russia and China never stopped their civil defense programs of building and supplying bomb/fallout shelters. Besides, their big ICBM's are on "high Alert"

They are ready for this scenario. We are not even acknowledging it is a possibility!!

Welcome to the Labyrinth


sb

Re: nuclear fallout maps ?
 

There never was a "Cold War." All through it, "They" controlled both sides, so the "threat" never existed, and hence, I have no fear for a massive nuclear war breaking out. You know that "fiction" book 1984? Well, the "Oceania," "Eurasia," and "Eastasia" thing, all three controlled by "the Party," was non-fiction.

As for hitting US forces, nah, no need for that...just let Bush send all the troops and equipment to the Middle East. No need to nuke the CONUS.

A limited nuclear war, yeah, that's probable. US / "Israel" v. Iran. India v. Pakistan over food, etc.

Even if they were able to act independently, the Chinese aren't stupid: they know their puny strategic forces would level a few of our cities (at best), while ours would take China back to the Stone Age.

The strongest probability for use of nuclear weapons is actually a synthetic "terrorist" attack planned and implemented by the CIA/Mossad/MI-5 against a "Western" target. Another scenario is an EMP burst over the US, to cripple our electronics - Jericho-style, that is, the US doing it to itself.