If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buck Turgidson)   Google maps + thermonuclear weapon high yield detonation effects simulator = hours of depressing fearmongering fun   (meyerweb.com) divider line 193
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

43285 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2006 at 12:28 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



193 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-10-10 04:25:48 PM
Something I occasionally worry about. Nuclear bomb going off in the port of Long Beach. I'd be farked.

www.ethridgefamily.net
 
2006-10-10 04:44:50 PM
Well there's so much gamma in the LBC
It's kinda hard being pudd-to-the-i-n-g?
 
2006-10-10 04:49:54 PM
But I, somehow someway
Got vaporized to bits very much to my dismay
 
2006-10-10 05:00:20 PM
I've been praying for one of these since I saw the text based sim years ago.
 
2006-10-10 05:04:09 PM
Oh, sweet! I remember seeing this a while ago, and was curious about whether the mountains near where I live would shield the valley I live in from an airburst on the other side, and was trying to remember where this was.

What with the NSA and all, I get a little nervous about searching for "nuclear explosion simulation" and all that.

/Let's give this a shot.
 
2006-10-10 05:05:38 PM
muninsfire: was curious about whether the mountains near where I live would shield the valley I live in from an airburst on the other side


I don't think this takes into account terrain. :-/
 
2006-10-10 05:06:04 PM
Oh, good. Even on flat terrain I'd probably be safe from most effects. Thanks, submitter
 
2006-10-10 05:08:44 PM
The site is useless without fallout and thermal damage.

A bomb's mere detonation pressure isn't the most destructive part.
 
2006-10-10 05:09:05 PM
Bandman614: I don't think this takes into account terrain. :-/

It doesn't, but I wanted to get a rough idea of the distances involved.

Pity it doesn't really measure radiation--that's what I was mostly worried about--but if the pressure wave is that far away, then radiation shouldn't be *that* much of a problem, right?

/I've still got at least twenty miles from where I am [ roughly ] to the limit of the lowest-shown pressure wave for a 1 MT explosion, so I should be alright.
//Unless I go into the city on that particular day...but eh. You only live once, ne?
 
2006-10-10 05:09:17 PM
I'd rather be in the blast than deal with the aftermath of the radiation poisoning.
 
2006-10-10 05:10:11 PM
I'm boned.

Fortunately, Boston is only a target due to our large amount of quality hospitals. New York and DC make better targets for one shots.

But all out World War Terminus? Yep. If the blast don't get me, the fallout will.
 
2006-10-10 05:15:54 PM
HA! My city is not on the list so I won't ever worry about a Nuclear war.
Ever.
 
2006-10-10 05:27:07 PM
Well, as long as they stick to Fat Man/Little boy size, I would only probably get shreaded by flying glass from my office window, or hit by fallout at my house.

/Hurray!
//Let's not consider the 1 megatonner, shall we?
 
2006-10-10 05:38:35 PM
BOO, it only goes up to 99,999 KT (99.999 megatons). What if I wanted to set off the tsar bomba in it's full 100 megaton configuration?
 
2006-10-10 06:01:13 PM
I don't know about the "hours of fun" claim, but it kept me interested for 3 or 4 minutes. Apparently a 1 megaton bomb is enough to destroy almost any size city.
 
2006-10-10 06:03:42 PM
I'd rather be in the blast than deal with the aftermath of the radiation poisoning

Just stay underground for about 2 weeks and most of the alpha/beta radiation will wash away or decay to the point where it's no longer a problem. Gamma burst radiation is only a problem initally (and if you get too much it's all over), but if you can stay under cover and NOT go nuts in the process you'll come out the other side fairly well.

Now, as for the aftermath of a nuclear explosion, that's pretty much anyones guess. One of the nastier parts of a breakdown in supply chains after a war like that would almost have to be all the drug addicts suddenly quitting cold turkey.
 
2006-10-10 06:15:42 PM
Weaver95: Now, as for the aftermath of a nuclear explosion, that's pretty much anyones guess. One of the nastier parts of a breakdown in supply chains after a war like that would almost have to be all the drug addicts suddenly quitting cold turkey.

Oh, jeeze, I'd never considered that aspect of things. That'd be one hell of a trip...I betcha that it would happen in all those Cold-War Era Radiation Shelters, too...

Geeze, Weaver. You sure as hell know how to get a guy to wake up on a Tuesday afternoon....

/Betcha a bunch of 'em, not having the best common sense in the world, would go out in search of hookups, and probably get irradiated quite nicely.
//Hey, solves the problem of sterilizing 'em....now, just make sure your shelter's got a good enough lock on the door....
 
2006-10-10 06:24:45 PM
Oh, jeeze, I'd never considered that aspect of things. That'd be one hell of a trip...I betcha that it would happen in all those Cold-War Era Radiation Shelters, too...

you'd have a 'primary kill', which is what the bombs/radiation would get. Then you'd get a second wave of deaths (diabetics, cancer patients, AIDS victims...anyone needing a constant supply of meds/level of critical care to stay alive). In the middle of all that, all the crack heads would suddenly forcibly quit cold turkey (and probably NOT like it). So they'd be raiding already limited medical supplies looking for a fix, chugging down whatever liquor they could find, ect ect. Add in the breakdown in civil authority and overloaded law enforcement and you get quite the picture.

Sometime after the initial wave of chaos you'd also start seeing flu like symptoms (strontium 90 poisoning affecting the human immune system). Given the probable low morale (which tends to suppess immuno-response even further), a 'delayed die off' is highly likely from a sudden outbreak of flu and dysentery. Worst case you get cholera. That should do for whatever is left of civilian medical supplies.

Mind you, that's a possible outcome from a limited nuclear exchange affecting the east coast (and assuming a majority of major distribution points are destroyed).
 
2006-10-10 06:31:20 PM
Weaver95: In the middle of all that, all the crack heads would suddenly forcibly quit cold turkey (and probably NOT like it). So they'd be raiding already limited medical supplies looking for a fix, chugging down whatever liquor they could find, ect ect. Add in the breakdown in civil authority and overloaded law enforcement and you get quite the picture.

Wow.

Suddenly, I start thinking that maybe I might want to invest in some kind of a sidearm after all. I mean, I don't do guns...don't really know anything about them other than the point-and-click interface, but some of this is kinda starting to make me think twice about my normal commitment to blades-only.

/I mean, a knife isn't going to "go off accidentally" when I clean it, but it does kinda suffer in the 'range' category.
 
2006-10-10 06:42:23 PM
Suddenly, I start thinking that maybe I might want to invest in some kind of a sidearm after all. I mean, I don't do guns...don't really know anything about them other than the point-and-click interface, but some of this is kinda starting to make me think twice about my normal commitment to blades-only.

That's a 'worst case' scenario at best tho. One thing that was fairly encouraging was to see people pulling together after major disasters in NYC and New Orleans. I think it's fairly safe to say that you WOULD get people who'd work together in the face of adversity.

One thing is for sure tho, in the aftermath of even a 'limited' nuclear exchange you won't be able to rely on any level of government to bail you out. I can't say if a gun is a good idea or not - that's as much a personal choice as ideological. But i'd recommend a shotgun of some sort. It's easy to use, easy to load, easy to maintain and the ammo is easy to aquire. It's also intimidating as hell when you point it at someone and even poor shots will likely hit someone with a full spread of buckshot.

If you're serious about it tho, it's not hard to find resources on the web about basic survival supplies and simple shelter designs. It's a facsinating read and if nothing else you can look it over and be happy we don't live in that kind of situation.
 
2006-10-10 06:46:50 PM
Weaver95: But i'd recommend a shotgun of some sort. It's easy to use, easy to load, easy to maintain and the ammo is easy to aquire. It's also intimidating as hell when you point it at someone and even poor shots will likely hit someone with a full spread of buckshot.

Can't go wrong with an Area of Effect rather than a ranged touch attack.....

/D&Dness.
 
2006-10-10 06:47:27 PM
where's that big article written about the most likely strike against american soil?

I remember reading that in the 90's, was on some .gov site... then got ripped off of it. was a pretty big study too.

course that was before zips, when seagate external encased platters were the shiat.

Texas is screwed. big time. way worse than the north east.
 
2006-10-10 06:49:26 PM
I don't think this takes into account terrain. :-/

I thought most blasts were triggered before ground level, or at least aimed for at the highest peak of the terrain.
 
2006-10-10 06:58:08 PM
I thought most blasts were triggered before ground level, or at least aimed for at the highest peak of the terrain.


Depends on the objective. I think an airburst is the most likely type of explosion in a 'formal' nuclear war. With terrorism, you'll most likely get a ground burst.
 
2006-10-10 07:12:09 PM
Haha, Alaska isn't even considered.

Suckit small staters! (That's the other 49).
 
2006-10-10 07:22:15 PM
I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed.
But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops.
Depending on the breaks.

/not teh submitter
 
2006-10-10 07:48:40 PM
www.urbanemonkey.com

This just another reason is why living in L.A. is alright with me.
 
2006-10-10 08:07:43 PM
DMentia777: This just another reason is why living in L.A. is alright with me.


A Downtown detonation makes The Valley a cool place to live.
 
2006-10-10 08:53:33 PM
DMentia777 & RocketRod: Studio City, baby.

Only real problem is that instead of the instant vapor death of say downtown, Hollywood, K-Town, etc. I'm gonna get the slow cancer death of exposure to radiation while sitting in grid lock traffic on the 101 or the 5 trying to get out of town.

Anybody have a private plane at the Van Nuys airport?
 
2006-10-10 10:13:09 PM
Well, my mom will be okay as long as the bomb hitting Denver is 25 megatons or less. And apparently Seattle is safe, despite our major nuclear submarine base nearby. Woohoo!
 
2006-10-10 10:15:26 PM
Of course, after centering the blast on Rocky Flats, which was a primary nuclear target back when I was growing up, I can say for certain that I would have been so dead.
 
2006-10-10 10:22:51 PM
Never mind. A direct hit on Bangor Sub Base, 25 Megaton payload. I'd have some structural damage, but that's about it. Any higher and my POS apartment building would be a-crumblin' down, though.
 
2006-10-10 11:59:46 PM
 
2006-10-11 12:32:05 AM
Lol'd at Dmentia777
/thanks for the laughs
//shashiaty
 
2006-10-11 12:33:43 AM
www.gardengames.co.uk
 
2006-10-11 12:35:22 AM
Dammit George, why don't you stick to pissing off folks on YOUR seaboard?

/cascadia anyone?
 
2006-10-11 12:35:50 AM
Well the people in the red circle will be killed instantly, however the people in the outer orange circle (which I'm sorry to say that we are in) will die a much slower, more painful death.
 
2006-10-11 12:36:35 AM
Did anyone notice what happens if you change the strength to 0 KT? I got a big red circle in the Atlantic Ocean.
 
2006-10-11 12:36:54 AM
Would you like to play a game?
 
2006-10-11 12:37:29 AM
So... who's matched up with the map of the Chinese broadcast from Jericho?
 
2006-10-11 12:37:29 AM
rose8199

I'd rather be in the blast than deal with the aftermath of the radiation poisoning.

I realized that at a very young age.

One of my high school teachers put it best. He used to say that, if missiles were incoming, he wasn't going to run away, he'd go downtown with a catcher's mitt.
 
2006-10-11 12:38:55 AM
http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/gmap/hydesim.html

A nuke in Hartford would tear apart my fathers house, heavily damage my job, and damage my mothers house.


I also figured out the best intersection to drop it in order to totally obliterate all three.


/sad
 
2006-10-11 12:39:20 AM
If, heavens forfend, we were to actually get nuked, I'd hope to be either within 1 km of the blast or at least 500 km away. The latter is preferably, obviously. But turning to vapor sounds like a much more pleasant way to go than a combination of radition poisoning, lack of medical care, a totally fubared local economy, and general violence.
 
2006-10-11 12:39:43 AM
It doesn't mention that people outside these rings will be bbq'd to a crisp.

Thermal damage isn't included in this. If it was just a big boom without the big ball of fire, then yeah.. this is accurate. :)
 
2006-10-11 12:40:26 AM
Epsilon: 10 Megatons centered in Las Vegas = Total Ass Destruction


All you people today have to be farkin' up my honeymoon...
 
2006-10-11 12:41:24 AM
Thankfully, I live in New Zealand - a country too small and insignificant to be nuked.

/like my Australian counterparts, I'd probably die in nuclear winter
//farkin kangaroos
 
2006-10-11 12:42:25 AM
img244.imageshack.us

/Dayum! I'm farked @ 99,999KT
 
2006-10-11 12:42:28 AM
Ha ha! It'll take more than a 1 megaton blast to take out Rhode Island. Hell, it looks like I won't even have any broken glass from where I live in Warwick.

img145.imageshack.us

Of course, I'll be a crispy critter.

Hmm...move that blast a little bit, and it'd clear out West Warwick perfectly for that casino...
 
2006-10-11 12:42:42 AM
I just want to repeat what Mister Peejay's high school teacher said.
 
2006-10-11 12:43:25 AM
thisispete: Thankfully, I live in New Zealand - a country too small and insignificant to be nuked.

/like my Australian counterparts, I'd probably die in nuclear winter



I just finished reading On The Beach. I suggest you pick it up...and keep your cyanide capsules ready :D
 
Displayed 50 of 193 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report