Shelters "of no use"?, was Re: Media ignores Ballistic Missile defense.

From: Michael M. Butler (
Date: Tue Aug 28 2001 - 00:45:11 MDT

Brian D Williams wrote:
> >From: Eugene Leitl <>
> >I don't care about the group (assuming, they're nice enough to
> >advertize their name and their location), and the group doesn't
> >care about being rational, otherwise it wouldn't do something as
> >foolish. I care about the people nuked.
> Me too, but your shelters would be of no use in such an attack.

Please forgive me--I don't get the context here.
* Which shelters are [Eugen*'s]?
* What, specifically, is "such an attack"?
I am guessing you are talking about nonballistic delivery.

Fallout shelter tech has been dealt with in depth by Dean Ing,
Cresson Kearny and others. And they were working under the assumption
that you'd have a warning of a plume headed your way in the 30-120
_minute_ range. This does include a lot of people not at ground zero,
especially of submegaton yield strikes, even if multiple.

Shelters are hardly "of no use"--just no use to a poor sod out in the
open, very nearby--since there'd be no air raid siren.

But if somebody takes out (say) downtown San Jose, CA, and I am living
20 miles away, then hell, yes, a shelter is some use to me, depending on
how the wind blows. It certainly beats dying in the exodus traffic jam.

How about shelters 20 _blocks_ away? It depends.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:20 MDT