Has anyone built an above-ground fallout shelter?
Posted by yes_hahaha_yesss@reddit | preppers | View on Reddit | 33 comments
Indulging the idea of building one, given the uncomfortably nonzero chance of a nuclear war right now.
The water table here is too high to build underground. I'm located far enough away from likely targets that the flash and shockwave wouldn't destroy the structure, but we are downwind of some military targets that would probably be hit with ground bursts, so fallout would be a problem.
Has anyone here actually built an above-ground shelter? What materials did you use? How did you tackle air filtration? What kind of toilet would you recommend installing, if I can't go outside for two weeks and don't want to baste in my own sewage the whole time? Did you hire a contractor or DIY it?
EDH70@reddit
I’m near a very large Air Force base. I don’t think I need to worry about a bunker. I’ll be dead. Quickly, I would imagine.
dittybopper_05H@reddit
You're not that close to it, I bet. You'd have to basically be right off the runway.
People *VASTLY* overestimate the effects of nuclear weapons because it's something outside of their normal experience.
Play around with this:
https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
and it will give you a very rough idea of what you could expect. Note that it doesn't take into account terrain though, or blocking of prompt ionizing radiation by buildings, or the blocking of thermal radiation by the same.
Also, the Air Force base might not even be a target. Nuclear arsenals are so low now thanks to a bunch of treaties, especially New START, that basically there are only enough deployed nuclear warheads to constitute a counter-force strike, with a modest reserve. If the air base near you isn't really a nuclear capable one, it might well be skipped. Might not either, because it could act as a dispersal airfield, but that's a calculus we're not privy to. Still, just because it's an Air Force base doesn't mean they're going to waste the warheads on it if it's not connected to our nuclear strike capability.
One way you can tell is go to Google Maps and see if you can find a nuclear weapons storage facility on post.
Syphox@reddit
doesn’t russia have like 1,600 that they can deploy?
all i know is we have enough on this planet to kill it many many many times over
dittybopper_05H@reddit
It would take an order of magnitude higher to kill the planet just once, and bigger warheads too: Since targeting systems have become more accurate, warheads have gotten smaller because you can make them lighter, which means increased range for any given delivery system, or the same range with more warheads.
Now, let's do the math, shall we?
The US has 450 Minuteman III missile silos, controlled by 45 Launch Control Centers, deployed from 3 main bases where spare missiles and warheads are based.
That's a total of 498 targets.
To ensure destruction of a target, especially hard targets like missile silos and LCC's which are mostly or all underground, you need to target at least 2 warheads at each one to account for things like failure rate of warheads (they aren't 100% reliable), failure rate of missiles (again, not 100% reliable), failure rate of bombers (same), and of course the possibility that the incoming bombers or missile warheads will be shot down.
So with the bare minimum necessary to take out just *ONE* leg of the US's nuclear triad, the Russians would have to target at least 498 * 2 = 996 warheads at our Minuteman III sites.
That's (996 / 1600) * 100 = 62.25% of their warheads just on that.
That's before we talk about strategic bomber bases (some are co-located with ballistic missile basis, a cost savings measure but strategic mistake), the two missile submarine bases, and the various vital communications, intelligence, and control centers around the country and abroad.
AnitaResPrep@reddit
Add the hidden submarines US France, UK, ... well located deep, ready to fire.
dittybopper_05H@reddit
Problem is to can’t shoot at things you can’t find.
AnitaResPrep@reddit
No. You need Starwars or StarTrek level Scifi Death weapons, able to destroy a planet or a solar system.
AnitaResPrep@reddit
another issue making nuclear war useless at the exception of pure terror and devastation (and military are generally not mad, even Wermacht was more realistic than the Fürher) ... how you nuke the enemy submarine that can nuke you? The only reliable ways of nuking today are hypersonic missile (intercontinental level - Putin's ones are not so reliable) and submarine. Ok Big Kim can nuke easily his hated neighbourgs a few miles away, but in the following hours nothing will be left of any NC threat. From powerful US hightech vectors.
lizerdk@reddit
Broke: not planning for nuclear Armageddon
Woke: moving to the countryside to avoid nuclear Armageddon
Bespoke: moving next to a first salvo target, stop worrying and learn to love the bomb
theRealLevelZero@reddit
Build your house on Cheyenne Mountain and spend all your prepping money on bourbon and a pool. Kind of like that idea
EDH70@reddit
This!
Additional-Stay-4355@reddit
Same. As well as a major port and refineries. I would be a crispy critter instantly. No need to fuss about building a bunker.
So convenient! :)
EDH70@reddit
One less thing!
Have a great day!
Peace and love! 🙏❤️
Timlugia@reddit
Most large RC residential/office buildings actually offer very good resistance to both radiation and blast.
AnitaResPrep@reddit
blast ... look at Beyrouth harbour explosion. Or in France at Toulouse. No for such range of detonation
Hoyle33@reddit
If a nuclear fallout happens, you want the most amount of space between you and any sort of radiation. Do you have space to build some sort of a hill of dirt above it?
yes_hahaha_yesss@reddit (OP)
Not really... maybe if I turned the entire backyard into a hill. Thinking it'd be more efficient to stack some lead on it
Hoyle33@reddit
How would you go about getting clean air circulated inside? An outdoor shelter in the middle of summer could kill you if it got hot enough
MNVikesFan69@reddit
Don’t forget radon
AnitaResPrep@reddit
no radon, radon comes from oldest stones, as granite
yes_hahaha_yesss@reddit (OP)
True. Might need a concrete roof or some insulation to keep the r value up. I guess the only way to circulate the air would be a pump with a HEPA filter on it. Which means you'd either need a manual pump that you operate around the clock, or a generator, somehow set up in such a way that you can refuel it from inside the shelter, but where exhaust is vented outside.
Maybe it would be simpler to just plan on dying in this situation
hope-luminescence@reddit
The main misconception is that you need filtered air at all.
AnitaResPrep@reddit
2 misconceptions (I had emergency training ) filtered air, and wide spectrum of filtration for dust, fine particulate, organic vapors, at the very least
AnitaResPrep@reddit
activated charcoal and HEPA filter, both
Hoyle33@reddit
Honestly moving would be your best bet, but very difficult. We don't have any targets around us but Chicago is about 200 miles west. We would drive north if anything happened, as long as we knew about it before the radiation makes it to us
hope-luminescence@reddit
Fallout shelters do not really need air filtration. In all but cool weather they do need ventilation.
Ornamentalgrass@reddit
I was thinking about this as a mental exercise, but mine would be indoors (security, dry, relatively dust free, stores on hand etc). It would be created from supplies easily and cheaply bought from local builders merchants at short notice or what I have in the garden already.
In essence, seal the windows, vents etc in whole house as best as possible. Choose a room, sandbag windows in the chosen room to create first wall of mass depth i.e. surrounded by sandbag or brick. Within that room, create a double hull shell made of plywood, fixed to a wall for stability. Fill the hull space with soil from garden to required width (so that you have 30 inches plus of mass between you and the outside world). Within this ‘soil hull’ build a strong inner frame of sleepers (already on property) with ply roof. Put soil (or sandbags) on roof of structure to required depth. Small door to shelter would be sand bags (sealed as you enter for the final time) fitted with crude air filtration system. This would not be a blast shelter but fallout only (and I appreciate my description of the shelter is outline only). I think even my basic DIY skills combined with stress would make this doable in a few days. It is effectively a room within a room. Brick walls obviously.
yes_hahaha_yesss@reddit (OP)
Thanks for the detailed answer, that sounds reasonable
ResolutionMaterial81@reddit
Yes. Mine is
PlanetExcellent@reddit
I think the key with an above ground shelter is to cover it with 3 feet of earth. Or if it’s a temporary fallout shelter, dig it into the ground about 6 feet and cover the roof with earth.
I’ve been reading the paper by that Cameron Kearney guy and he has plans for shelters that can be dug with hand tools in two days. Also plans to build your own manual air pump and Geiger counter.
ConfuddledConfusion@reddit
https://www.civildefensemuseum.com/docs/FamilyShelterDesigns.pdf
This link has a few above ground designs , enjoy :)
yes_hahaha_yesss@reddit (OP)
Thanks, I'll look into it
Objective-Title-681@reddit
I haven't, but I've seen some online that were investigated when the US, occupied Japan after ww2. That said, the shelter was a quarter mile from Hiroshima and remained intact. The only negative was there was no blast door which would have killed all occupants inside. So if you build your shelter with enough earth etc. And build a robust door, I think your chances are greatly increased then having no shelter. Good luck!