Thread: Are you prepared?

I remember the drills. They were still doing them in the 80's when I was in elementary school.
I think the idea is to keep low, protect oneself (as best as possible) from falling debris, and stay out of the shrapnel field from shattering glass windows, not to mention the heavier walls of the school (especially in the basement underground) allows many of the threats to pass overhead.

Both Hiroshima AND Nagasaki had survivors.

As for Patriot Missiles, they are not (AFAIK) part of any ballistic missile shield, but are made to stop medium range missiles (SCUD, etc). I cannot say how effective they were in the first gulf war but the Patriot II models were pretty effective at the beginning of this latest festivity in the middile east. During the beginning of the war they shot at my particular camp (prior to our relocation to central Iraq) I want to say 23 times in a 2 week period-none hit us. We did have some last second intercepts though, and had to relax in the 140+F temperatures in CBR suits until EOD had inspected the missile for Chemical/Biological agents. No fun.

Unfortunately, the Patriot batteries at our camp were originally on automatic, and were responsible not only for killing all of the incoming SCUDS but one Tornado from our base as well as a Hornet, which happened to come in through "Scud Alley". Originally the Patriots killed anything coming in from this direction, but after the fratricide losses they were placed on manual settings, which allowed less heads up time.

I don't know much about ICBM's other than I've seen one re-enter the atmosphere once (it was a test-not a live weapon). Looked a lot like a shooting star, which then split into multiple smaller shooting stars. Not positive they are faster than satellites at all. They are lobbed into space in much the same way, and by their nature, an ICBM goes into orbit or near orbit then simply falls back to Earth in the general area of the target, after which the re-entry vehicles take over individual guidance. The hard part is no doubt detecting the launch and initial tragectory, and the huge amount of space required to then send an interceptor into outer space ahead of the missile, and allow the two to crash into each other.

I'm not sure Belgium or the Netherlands etc. were ever really under the nuclear shadow quite the way Russians and Americans were, and perhaps those who lived between West Germany and Moscow. While the U.S. first strike policy is well publicized, I've also heard it suggested the Soviet Union planned to throw the Warsaw Pact Nations (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, etc etc) against NATO, and then if that failed to nuke its own allies in a scorched earth strategy to catch NATO forces in the open, then roll its own tanks to "mop up".

Anyway, just a few thoughts on the subject. The inventor of the Neutron bomb even suggested that a simple trench a mere 6 ft or more deep would be enough to save most from its effects, and past experience has shown that people who do not die in the first few days from radiation sickness typically get over it. I don't know, I'm not a doctor.
Just because you are going to be nuked does not mean you are automatically a dead man. Ground zero people maybe, but other than them, there is hope.


Sorry for the ramble folks.

John P.

I voted no, but the answer is more of a maybe...

In california we're taught the same dril in case of an earthquake (with the addition in the late 80's of looping your arm around a leg of the desk to keep it from sliding past you.) But many teachers also mentioned this was the same thing we should do if an atomic bomb dropped.

(That's my on topic post, I'm gonna refrain from participating in the off topic stuff because there's some crazy misinformation going on there.)

Originally Posted by Nickelking

(That's my on topic post, I'm gonna refrain from participating in the off topic stuff because there's some crazy misinformation going on there.)

If some of it is coming from me, please correct me.
I try to use only correct information to build my side of the discussion. If I build upon wrong information that is not intentionally because it weakens my point.
And I know I am not an expert on the topic so it is entirely possible I was wrong.

Originally Posted by JohnP

As for Patriot Missiles, they are not (AFAIK) part of any ballistic missile shield, but are made to stop medium range missiles (SCUD, etc). I cannot say how effective they were in the first gulf war but the Patriot II models were pretty effective at the beginning of this latest festivity in the middile east. During the beginning of the war they shot at my particular camp (prior to our relocation to central Iraq) I want to say 23 times in a 2 week period-none hit us. We did have some last second intercepts though, and had to relax in the 140+F temperatures in CBR suits until EOD had inspected the missile for Chemical/Biological agents. No fun.

The reason I mentioned Patriot 1 was to illustrate to geoffreyt that propaganda about 'proven' technology is sometimes only that: propaganda. Anything we -the general population- are told is completely unreliable for the purpose of making assumptions.

Originally Posted by JohnP

I don't know much about ICBM's other than I've seen one re-enter the atmosphere once (it was a test-not a live weapon). Looked a lot like a shooting star, which then split into multiple smaller shooting stars. Not positive they are faster than satellites at all. They are lobbed into space in much the same way, and by their nature, an ICBM goes into orbit or near orbit then simply falls back to Earth in the general area of the target, after which the re-entry vehicles take over individual guidance. The hard part is no doubt detecting the launch and initial tragectory, and the huge amount of space required to then send an interceptor into outer space ahead of the missile, and allow the two to crash into each other.

An ICBM is desgined to have good aerodynamics (fuel economy and speed are of the essence) while a sattelite is designed with other goals in mind. Since a sattelite is never meant to move inside the atmosphere, aerodynamics isn't one of them.
I've worked on a number of space projects, and the sattelites I've seen (through a glass wall) were hulking, freight container sized rectangular boxes.

Originally Posted by JohnP

I'm not sure Belgium or the Netherlands etc. were ever really under the nuclear shadow quite the way Russians and Americans were, and perhaps those who lived between West Germany and Moscow. While the U.S. first strike policy is well publicized, I've also heard it suggested the Soviet Union planned to throw the Warsaw Pact Nations (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, etc etc) against NATO, and then if that failed to nuke its own allies in a scorched earth strategy to catch NATO forces in the open, then roll its own tanks to "mop up".

Most of the scare was before my time. I think our pov was that we were too small to have any significance in the nuclear arena. so we were a minor target, and even if we were going to be bombed, there was nothing we could do. que sera,sera as they say.
I think we relied on France and the UK to protect us, since any attack on us is an attack on either, due to proximity.

We have a couple of US nukes lying in Kleine Brogel air base, to be delivered on combined US and Belgian authority when needed. But they are F16 mounted drop bombs, so they probably don't have any significance anymore, other than psychological, and to tie the alliance between Belgium and the US.

Originally Posted by JohnP

Anyway, just a few thoughts on the subject. The inventor of the Neutron bomb even suggested that a simple trench a mere 6 ft or more deep would be enough to save most from its effects, and past experience has shown that people who do not die in the first few days from radiation sickness typically get over it. I don't know, I'm not a doctor.
Just because you are going to be nuked does not mean you are automatically a dead man. Ground zero people maybe, but other than them, there is hope.

That's true. Anything outside of the blast site would only need to worry about fall-out and the sideways air pressure carrying shrapnell.

Originally Posted by JohnP

Sorry for the ramble folks.
John P.

It's no fun to ramble if noone rambles back. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Bruno

If some of it is coming from me, please correct me.

Not you, PM sent.

Edit: if anybody really wants to know PM me and I'll send you the list that I sent Bruno. The only rule is that it's not up for discussion even in PM, I said I don't feel like talking about those things and I won't.

Originally Posted by Bruno

The reason I mentioned Patriot 1 was to illustrate to geoffreyt that propaganda about 'proven' technology is sometimes only that: propaganda. Anything we -the general population- are told is completely unreliable for the purpose of making assumptions.

I agree completely. We're all at the mercy of the information we have, and after that it is up to us to attempt to sort truth or something close to it, from what we are told, which often enough is only technically true. Sometimes we are right, sometimes not, and sometimes nobody has it right. IMHO, anyway...

Originally Posted by Bruno

An ICBM is desgined to have good aerodynamics (fuel economy and speed are of the essence) while a sattelite is designed with other goals in mind. Since a sattelite is never meant to move inside the atmosphere, aerodynamics isn't one of them.
I've worked on a number of space projects, and the sattelites I've seen (through a glass wall) were hulking, freight container sized rectangular boxes.

interesting points, and no disagreement here, my logic simply being that many of the same vehicles used to launch satellites into orbit-got their starts as ICBM tossers. As hulking as the satellites may be, I wouldn't be surprised if the weights involved may have been somewhat similar, considering the extreme weights of most isotopes used in nuclear weapons, let alone multiple warheads. I think the aerodynamics is less of an issue in orbit outside the atmosphere, but the idea of an interceptor is to kill the weapon at this point or just after launch, before the multiple re-entry warheads can be deployed (after which things become much more complicated, and perhaps even then, it is too late)

Originally Posted by Bruno

Most of the scare was before my time. I think our pov was that we were too small to have any significance in the nuclear arena. so we were a minor target, and even if we were going to be bombed, there was nothing we could do. que sera,sera as they say.
I think we relied on France and the UK to protect us, since any attack on us is an attack on either, due to proximity.

We have a couple of US nukes lying in Kleine Brogel air base, to be delivered on combined US and Belgian authority when needed. But they are F16 mounted drop bombs, so they probably don't have any significance anymore, other than psychological, and to tie the alliance between Belgium and the US.

I am old (35 over the weekend, in fact) but I think it wasn't that Belgium was not significant, so much as NATO/U.S. and Warsaw Pact/Soviet Union were busy rattling their nuclear weapons at each other, each promising to protect various other countries with similar ideals, from the evils of the other. There were several nuclear weapons allotted for every major U.S. and Soviet city during the period, "Boomer" Ballistic missile submarines prowling the coast of both countries within swimming distance in some cases, just waiting to pull the trigger. Different times. Common expectation was for every country between Berlin and Moscow (e.g. the Warsaw Pact) to be scorched flat and covered with tank tracks, either from Soviet Tanks rolling through to get to the West, or Western tanks (U.S. and British, perhaps West German) tanks rolling east toward the Soviet Union, something of a no-man's land. I've also heard years ago a report that the Soviets were trying to get surveys of places within the United States to pre-stage nuclear weapons, to be detonated remotely-no need for a missile, it's already here. No idea if this was ever followed through with, of course.

Originally Posted by Bruno

It's no fun to ramble if noone rambles back. Thanks.

Then thanks for the opportunity, I do have a weakness for rambling on and on and...


John P.

Originally Posted by Bruno

demonstrated like those patriot missiles?
the ones that were claimed sto be such a big success in the first ulf war?
the same ones that were afterwards proven to be completely defective? And the only reason the scuds didn't succeed was that they were so dodgy they never made it to their targets?

And the trials you mention -at least if they are the ones I read about- consisted of 1 team firing a missile, the other firing the interceptor, and both having agreed in advance where they would meet.

Its probably like that sorry misscle defense system that Russia does not want in its back yard, cause it dont work. Some people need to get a clue.

Am I prepared? Hell no, what are you crazy? How do you prepare for that type of destruction? For me, if the end comes, then so be it. I don’t ever worry about death, because when it happens there is nothing to further worry about.

I can see the maneuver working for tornados though. Growing up in Ohio, it was a periodic drill to squat down in the hallways of the elementary school while laughing and joking with your buddies. I don’t remember them doing this in junior high or high school though. I guess we become less valuable at that point.

I've wondered about that. What's the point of ducking underneath a desk if a 10 Megaton bomb is dropped above you. It would vaporize everything in a 50 mile radius (or something similar. not a scientific estimate).

Don't get me wrong I am not poking fun. There is always going to be an outer limit where the blast will be survivable if you are not shredded by window fragments, so underneath a desk would be a good place to be for that eventuality.

Bruno

***I was in school in the fifties and sixties. The place I live is roughly halfway between an Oil Refinery and a Steel Mill. A mile, or so downriver from the Steel Mill is the largest Railyard in North America (perhaps the world, at that time, I don't remember.) It was well known in this area that we were the seventh most strategic area in the country. Washington, New York, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth and a couple of other places were a bit higher than we were, on the list. Local 'experts' "Guesstimated" we would probably get three Nukes. But bear in mind that from the Refinery all to the way the Railyard (with the Steel Mill between) is only about six miles...
We did the Duck and Cover Drills about every two, to three weeks. I always figured that if we DID get the word that an attack was impending, it was to give us something to do, while we waited.
My childhood was kinda gloomy. I was aware of all this at the age of seven.

Originally Posted by jockeys

(who would bomb kentucky???)

They were just assuming that if the Russians were trying to hit Washington DC, the bomb would probably end up somewhere on a radius that intersected the state of KY. Military targeteer guys call this the circular error probable. And if you bought that, I have some great land for sale... practically free in the Nevada test range where they used to light off nukes.