Protect and Survive: A Timeline

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by Tovarich

Hey, Ladas aren't crappy, they're awesome!

This is especially the case when encountering an Audi driver on a one-lane track and he tries threateningly revving his Audi's engine at you to reverse, clearly not realising that:
a) The Lada is made from recycled T-72 tank and can easily win the ramming, plus;
b) just one of his wing-mirrors will be more of a financial loss to him than the entire Lada would be to me, anyway.

'Vorsprung durch Technik' that!

Speaks in favour of Sovjet nukes. You refer to the Niva? I have heard of many people who hold them in high regards.

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by Dunois

I will persist in saying that Australia won't be as hit as the United States or Canada,

I agree on that. Considering it is a continent, it should have a good chance to recover directly from a good dozen hits and even,as I stated before, manage continous governmental, administrative and even rescue-activities.

[Gen_Patton]

According to the Secretary's list here is the total number of deaths in the hit cities alone, the figure may shock you but this is if every soul in the city dies, and the surrounding county! It took me along time to get the list and do the math, but here is the total:

Deaths in the cities affected according to the secretary's list:

25,699,923


from this I can easily see
140 million deaths
being easily a good figure of this TL.

[JN1]

Originally Posted by Gen_Patton

Yeah where I come from we just call the whole UK island thing England as its easier. I know I should be smarter than that but y'all call all of us yanks when that's not true so we should be even.

I'm just going to refer to the United States of Alaska from now on since it's the biggest bit.
How is 'England' easier than 'UK'?

I don't call Americans Yanks because it's not correct and no doubt irritating to people from the South and elsewhere. All I'm asking is the same courtesy.
I've always preferred the term Spams for Americans anyway.

[Gen_Patton]

Originally Posted by JN1

I'm just going to refer to the United States of Alaska from now on since it's the biggest bit.
How is 'England' easier than 'UK'?

I don't call Americans Yanks because it's not correct and no doubt irritating to people from the South and elsewhere. All I'm asking is the same courtesy.
I've always preferred the term Spams for Americans anyway.

Ha! So I guess we're even?

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by Gen_Patton

Ha! So I guess we're even?

I invite you to bring the topic up in the Welsh Assemby or a pub in Swansea/Abertawe.

[JasonQ]

Originally Posted by Hörnla

I invite you to bring the topic up in the Welsh Assemby or a pub in Swansea/Abertawe.

Just make sure to have a friend take video.

As for the overall condition of the US, I would think that the Midwest would largely be an irradiated wasteland for quite some time. I've attached a map I made of the missile silo sites and other military facilities in the Midwest and eastern Mountain states during the 1980s (all the ones I could find info on at least). This doesn't even begin to look at infrastructure assets like rail, power, shipping, etc.

Also not included are auxiliary sites, remote communications sites, etc. that would very likely be targeted (I can think of a few just in the Omaha area alone).

Some notes:

EDIT: The aquamarine dot in northeast North Dakota is a missile warning site, almost certainly on the list for a dose of instant sunrise.
EDIT 2: From what I can find, there at least 938 missiles in the various sites depicted in the map. That's...a lot of bull's eyes.
EDIT 3: Updated map to add the Rock Island Arsenal, on the Iowa/Illinois border.

- You'll notice that there's an "extra" set of missile silos in Kansas; those are the 18 Titan II sites around McConnell AFB in Wichita, which were deactivated starting in 1984.

- The Navy facility in Indiana (yes, Indiana) is part of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. The Army facility in the western part of the state is the Newport Chemical Depot, a major chemical weapons manufacturing and storage facility.

- The Navy facility in northeast Illinois is the Great Lakes Naval Training Center - debatable whether it'd be a major target, but the Navy's only boot camp certainly seems important.

- I only noted Air National Guard facilities on the map, since I ran out of patience and energy. Also because they have the most easily-projectable assets, ones that pose the most immediate threat.

[ivfl]

Looking at the map for the Midwest its pretty obvious there would little left of it and the fallout would certainly reach all the way to the East Coast.Death rates would likely exceed 80% in these regions either in the initial strike or the subsequent contamination.

[037771]

I might really be the only one here, but I'm actually worried now about missing another fantastic update in amidst this rather grim debate on the specificities of annihilation...

[Tovarich]

Originally Posted by 037771

I might really be the only one here, but I'm actually worried now about missing another fantastic update in amidst this rather grim debate on the specificities of annihilation...

I usually check Macragge1's sig on a regular basis, he considerately puts a link to the latest update there.

[Hörnla]

Did anyone ever mention the general weather conditions on that fateful day and the days after, especially about the wind? Is there source material?

[ivfl]

You can check old newspapers from that day and see weather reports.Anything following the exchange would be useless since the weather would have suffered significant changes due to the large number of nuclear blasts.

[Gen_Patton]

Originally Posted by JasonQ

Just make sure to have a friend take video.

As for the overall condition of the US, I would think that the Midwest would largely be an irradiated wasteland for quite some time. I've attached a map I made of the missile silo sites and other military facilities in the Midwest and eastern Mountain states during the 1980s (all the ones I could find info on at least). This doesn't even begin to look at infrastructure assets like rail, power, shipping, etc.

That's my philosophy with the mid west, a nuclear wasteland with raving loons all over the place. I'm going to have some fun updates about there. BTW tanks for the Map its pretty cool.

Originally Posted by ivfl

You can check old newspapers from that day and see weather reports.Anything following the exchange would be useless since the weather would have suffered significant changes due to the large number of nuclear blasts.

I don't know how scientifically accurate this is, but I'm actually seeing tons of rain. Ton of dust = tons of rain if I'm not mistaken. I also have a question on nuclear winter, how long will it last and how "strong will it be" I'm probably looking at a worse "Year With no Summer." Perhaps 2 years or 3?

[Cockroach]

Originally Posted by ivfl

You can check old newspapers from that day and see weather reports.

Alternatively, you can turn to the NCEP or ERA-40 climate reanalysis datasets.

For example, see the map of mean surface pressure as of Jan 29 1984 (somewhere near the start of the TL but still a few days prior to the exchange IIRC) for North America below:

[Tovarich]

Originally Posted by Hörnla

Did anyone ever mention the general weather conditions on that fateful day and the days after, especially about the wind? Is there source material?

Couldn't 90% of the world's nukes going of be enough to seriously distort the weather?
Let's face it, that's an awful lot of heat released into the atmosphere!

[Tovarich]

Originally Posted by Hörnla

Speaks in favour of Sovjet nukes. You refer to the Niva? I have heard of many people who hold them in high regards.

Actually, I just meant the bogstandard Riva, rather than the off-the-road Niva.
They lasted practically forever, probably from being built with Russian driving conditions in mind, so it just laughed in the face of UK driving conditions.
Ours lasted for over 20 years, and only died in 2008 when getting any replacement parts, even from scrap-dealers became nigh impossible.

[ivfl]

Alongside the Midwest of the United States the states of California and Texas would also be pretty much destroyed.California for example had back then major military bases close to the main metropolitan areas of the state.San Francisco and San Diego would be wiped out just because of they had military installations close to them.Ironic considering the fact that San Francisco is known as a hotbed of antimilitarism.Los Angeles had fewer military bases close to it but still a few where close enough to cause damage like LA air force base or Long Beach naval shipyard.Add to this all the other military installations in the state Vandenberg,Beale,Pendleton etc. and California would be wiped out as a functioning state.Texas has similar problems Bergstrom AFB is next to Austin the capital,Carswell AFB was withing the city limits of Fort Worth.Add to this the fact that Texas is an oil supplier for the rest of the nation and it increases its importance even further.Badly hit would also be the state of Virginia which has important Navy and Marine corp facilities,there is also the fact that they border DC probably the most heavily hit target in the US.

[Apollo 20]

Originally Posted by Gen_Patton

That's my philosophy with the mid west, a nuclear wasteland with raving loons all over the place. I'm going to have some fun updates about there...

That might make for a good and interesting storyline, but I have questions about how accurate a picture that would be. While I grew up in a fairly large city in the Midwest, I had relatives who lived in rural areas, including grandparents who had a farm at which I spent a fair amount of time.

The rural areas outside the missile fields and away from population centers would, after the fallout decayed (2-4 weeks), appear completely normal and be safe. There would be no destruction of structures, roads and other basic infrastructure, though EMP would likely disrupt electrical and telephone systems. Provided people had protection from fallout, there would be pockets of relative normality. Yes, the standard of living would be greatly diminished (think late 19th/early 20th Century), but the basic tools for survival would exist. The question is how many would have adequate protection. I suspect the number would be a relatively small one.

The Midwest is a big place and there would be a lot of these pockets where there was no destruction. There might not be a whole lot of survivors, but for those who did survive, they'd have quite a bit to work with. The thing to remember here is that those who survive are not the ones likely to be raving loons; they'd be the level-headed people who (a) had access to a safe location (mainly farmers and relatives of farmers) and (b) knew what to do to and took the necessary steps. When they emerged after a few weeks, the winter cold and radiation would have finished off nearly everyone else. I just don't see these areas being besieged with urban refugees; most people who remained in the cities would have been killed or severely injured in the initial blasts. For those who were relatively unscathed, if you had EMP disabling cars and other vehicles, I can't see people making it 30-50 miles out into the country without getting a lethal dose of radiation from fallout. People in smaller towns or farms that were not affected by blast who were not protected from fallout would likely be killed or gravely ill. The prevailing winds are from west to east, meaning that all of the fallout generated from ground bursts on missile fields in places like Missouri will be blown east, over Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and so forth. It might take a week or two for the fallout to be completely deposited, and another couple of weeks for it to decay to a safe level for outdoor exposure. The main thing, though, is that the fallout is likely to be lethal to those who lack adequate protection from it regardless of how far people are from blast effects. Another thing as well, is that these areas will pick up fallout from urban areas that are targeted as well. Places like St. Louis, Indianapolis, Chicago, Kansas City and so forth.

I have no doubt in my mind that, absent a missile going off target, that these areas would have provided a safe location to ride an exchange out provided there was fallout protection. The scenario presented in this TL with an escalation of tensions culminating in an exchange means that the odds of some people preparing and pulling this off go up.

So, rather than a vast wasteland of loons, I think what you'd be more likely to see is a fairly small number of survivors concentrated in undamaged areas. Those who did manage to survive would either be (a) very lucky or (b) very smart and very level-headed, with there being a lot more of (b) than (a). With a small survival rate, there would be ample material for them to work with (i.e. vehicles, food, farm equipment, fuel, etc.) These survivors might well be the core that rebuilds the nation in the years to come.

I hope this is helpful. I like what I've seen of your TL so far, but I fear from your comment that you might veer off into an unrealistic direction. If I can help further, shoot me a PM. If you want to go in a different direction for a better story, that's OK, too. Just trying to help.

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by Tovarich

Actually,I just meant the bogstandard Riva, rather than the off-the-road Niva.

Ah, that one. The most caryou could get for under 10.000 DM back then... I didn’t know anyone who droveone, but the shape appealed to me as a child. That is how a car should looklike. All angles are 90 degree!

Originally Posted by Tovarich

Couldn't90% of the world's nukes going of be enough to seriously distort the weather?

Originally Posted by Tovarich

Let's face it, that's anawful lot of heat released into the atmosphere!

Good question, but how soexactly? Does it "stop" the weather until it"re-configures"? Is that really enough energy to, e.g., destory alow-pressure system at that point of time?

Does a cluster of explodingnukes with their high pressures create a new high-pressure-system? I lack themeteorological knowledge as well as the imagination, but wouldn’t mind learningmore.

Originally Posted by Cockroach

Alternatively,you can turn to the

Originally Posted by Cockroach

NCEP or ERA-40 climate reanalysisdatasets.

That was exactly what I wassearching for. And the results are quite remarkable. Contrary to my assumptionthat the winds over Germany would blow westwards that day as they more often dothan not, they would blow from East to West.

Fatal, isn’t it?

Or did I use a wrong date(Feb 21st, 1984)? Now my meteorology-knowledge is very amateurish,but these are my assumptions:

The map shows a systemconsisting of a dominant LOW with its centre over Tyrolia/Southern Bavaria,another LOW above Central Spain plus one above the Algerian Coast. Minor LOWScan be found over Ulster, Iceland, Southern Norway and Macedonia.

Then there are HIGHs Eastof Mallorca and East of Iceland.

I have added winsdirections to the map.

As I concern myself mainlywith Germany, I presume that cold and fallout-ridden wind from the East blowsacross most of it, bringing in falloutfrom Poland and the CSSR, but also blowing the (Southern and South-Eastern) Germanfallout over the Benelux and France Fallout from explosions in Denmark and theNorth of Germany is not that much taken westwards, but rather the Scandinavian LOWdrives it along the Baltic Coast to Northern Poland.

The situation in Britainhas a lot to do with the question how strong the LOW over Ulster is. Thestronger it is, the better it stops the German fallout before it reaches theSouth-East of England so it is rather taken southwards deeper into France. Itshould also push most of the English fallout Northwards along the East Coastand then onto the Sea.

[Hörnla]

However, conerning my nuke-map of Germany I consider the "forbidden zones" around Ground Zeroes rather leaning westwards, at least in the South. In the North, the should slightly go eastwards, as I presumed in the beginning.