How long does it take after a nuclear explosion for radiation

>>35053963
Generally a few weeks, but living in the site of a nuclear explosion would be retarded
A: No general contractor is going to start rebuilding housing that soon
B: Your government will probably have the place cordoned off for years pending investigations/war time status
C: A memorial is probably going to be built on ground zero reducing the possibility of building housing on it

>>35053963
The speed of light, assuming it's in a vacuum. For all intents and purposes, instantly.

>>35054015
Do you have the reading comprehension of a 2nd grader?

File: image.jpg (3MB, 4818x2966px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4818x2966px

>>35053963
Go look at pictures of Chernobyl. You wouldn't want to live there all the time, but there's a good amount of green plants growing.

>>35053963
Depends on the size, content, and distance from ground zero. I don't know much about nuclear weapons, but I do know that something like a cobalt bomb would leave an area uninhabitable for several human lifespans, whereas the radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki has gone down to negligible levels.

>>35053963
Radiation from a nuclear weapon will generally come in 2 forms.
1.The initial detonation
2.Fallout

In regards to the radiation from the initial blast you honestly will have bigger problems to deal with such as the shockwave/fireball. This discharge of radiation will be over in an instant as far as you are concerned.

As for fallout well this is much longer lasting. Fallout is irradiated matter from the initial blast and will do some hefty damage to your cells should you be exposed to it for too long. However you need not fear as fallout is mainly produced with ground burst nuclear weapons and the good majority of weapons in use are air burst. If you do fear fallout however the general rule is to wait 2 weeks indoors in a relativity sealed environment as the radioactivity of fallout decreased by a factory of 1 per unit of time.

>>35054036
A nuclear reactor and a nuke aren't the same thing. Hell, there's various types of nukes and nuclear reactors to begin with.

File: nw012.jpg (8KB, 560x311px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 560x311px

>>35053963
depends on what the fireball touches, weather, where it hits

http://www.oism.org/nwss/

>>35054083
Funny thing is Fallout 1 and 2 got that mostly right, while Fallout 3 and onwards fucked it up, pardoning New Vegas.

File: DUNK.jpg (424KB, 792x720px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 792x720px

>>35054036
well a nuclear blast and a nuclear incident are two different things. With modern nuclear weapons, most of the radiation gets dissipated in the explosion. In a nuclear incident like Chernobyl, all that radiation is just spewed everywhere and takes a long ass time to go away.

Source: How to survive a nuclear holocaust (or something like that) by Tarl Warwick

>>35054083
Why does a nuke behave differently depending on how close it is to the ground?

>>35054115
fireball touches mass and turns it into radioactive fallout in the form of a mushroom cloud

>>35054115
A nuclear weapon on the ground will touch a lot of matter with the radioactive fireball, turning it into fallout. An airburst weapon won't be able to contact nearly as much if any and so won't create fallout.

Airburst weapons are used because they are more effective during the initial blast than groundburst.

>>35054142
Okay, that makes sense

>>35054115
Air explosion more radioactive matter is consumed and on ground more radioactive material remains intact, embedded in dust, rain and the like.

>>35054115
(not the guy who wrote that post) I would imagine that it would have to do with the particles of ground matter being highly irradiated when caught in the blast rather than just air

>>35054115
if the fireball touches the ground it sucks everything up radiates it and then lets it fall back down to earth as fall out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GJttnC8PoA

>>35054142
This is wrong. I'm not sure if it's a bad oversimplification or poster just doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.

>>35054115
Generally, you have ground bursts and air bursts. Since fission bombs aren't super efficient, a large amount of radioactive material does not fission and remains in the area. Thermonuclear bombs are more efficient, but their primary is still fission and if they have a uranium tamper, they can be very dirty. But that's another story.

Ground bursts, like the name suggests, go off in very close proximity to the ground. They're used to attack hardened targets. In the event of a ground burst, radioactive particles tend to mix with dust from the ground. The radioactive dust is heavier than the radioactive particles alone (which have basically been turned into plasma and completely disassociated from one another) and falls back to earth in the area around the blast. This is fallout. It is not created by the fireball, because the fireball itself is too low energy to induce radioactivity in a substance. Yes, that's right, a several million degree fire isn't hot enough to do something. Crazy, huh?

Airbursts spread out less destruction but in a larger area. Generally they're used for attacking civilian or soft targets. In an airburst, the bomb detonates high enough that a majority of the radioactive gas and plasma rises through the mushroom cloud without mixing with dust. It enters the upper atmosphere and gets distributed fairly evenly around the world at levels not generally considered dangerous.I'll point out that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were airbursts, and both were resettled soon after the end of WWII with no significant increase in cancer rate.

>>35054256
I should mention a mushroom cloud will form regardless of if a detonation is an airburst of ground burst. It's a consequence of hot gasses rising, and if it's close enough to the ground to damage it, it's close enough to create a suction. The difference is by the time the dust gets sucked up in an airburst, the radioactive particles have already been scattered into the upper atmosphere for the most part.

>>35054256
> Hiroshima and Nagasaki were airbursts, and both were resettled soon after the end of WWII with no significant increase in cancer rate.
Because the radioactive bits dropped in other areas. My hometown has a masively higher cancer risk than normal.
Could also be from Chernobyl, KOSMOS, or just the really high levels of uranium and radon in the area. We can actually date trees by checking rings with a geiger counter though.

>>35054256
>When a nuclear weapon explodes near enough to the ground for its fireball to touch the ground, it forms a crater.
>An air burst. The fireball does not touch the ground. No crater.

If all of you want a basic understanding of this shit and aren't willing or able to read a book, I recommend this lecture series:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVhQOhxb1Mc

At the very least, it would make the questions in these threads more interesting.

>>35054336
This is interesting. I can't wait to watch this in the morning

>>35053963
Go on /k/ and REEEEE for Oppenheimer.

>>35053963

It doesn't really matter, you'll be getting swarmed with chinese autodrones and soldiers.

File: 1479094729164.png (1MB, 1600x1225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1225px

>>35053963
2 weeks is a generally good measure.
Depending on how close to the blast site it could be as little as 48 hours for radiation to be at an "acceptable" level.

>>35054036
Nuclear reactors aren't nukes. A reactor will seep out radiation constantly, a nuke expels it all in one go.

File: 1503958763794.png (332KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 500x501px

>>35055136
>in the morning
If there is one.

File: 1426988423033.png (206KB, 1090x803px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1090x803px

>>35053963

>>35055835
I live in that shit state and my dog just died, I'm fucking ready.

>>35055864
Sorry to hear about you dog, anon

>>35053963
>How long does it take after a nuclear explosion for radiation to reach acceptable levels to live/be in?

The old CD manuals state to plan for survival in shelters for up to 2 weeks. This will bring down the radiation to reasonably safe levels for everything save for ground zero and radiation pockets.

That doesn't mean that you should start licking the dust you'll find on your car after two weeks though.

File: firecracker.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

They are all airburst now, aren't they?

>>35056068
not the ones aimed at Cheyenne mountain
you bet your ass those ones are meant to blast through the rock

>>35056068
>firecracker.webm
One in every 10 is a free t-shirt kids!

>>35054036
>nuke warhead explosion
>basically carefully controlled explosion to set off chain reaction whose resulting energy is tremendous

vs.

>reactor with radioactive source that blew out of it's containment and slowly spewed radioactive shit everywhere and anything it touched

>>35053963
Not that long, really. The main issue is radioactive dust that settles fairly quickly.

Long term, you'll face radiation sickness though.

>>35056068

>Aerial Warcrime Delivery Systrem

>>35057123
>Warcrime
Says who?
And if they don't have more nuclear warheads then the US, who cares what they say?
AFAIK the US haven't signed shit about landmines.

>>35056068
Depends on the target and the purpose of the attack.

Typically hardened targets (ICBM) will be targeted by ground burst. Unhardened targets will be targeted by airburst.

>>35053963
Depends on the type of attack (airburst vs ground burst), the type of weapon (how 'dirty' it is), and how far away from it you are or how close to the explosion is the area you want to live in.

Groundburst has more fallout than airburst (airburst has little to none) and the ground zero location is going to be heavily radiated and stay that way for a long time.

Older, cruder, less efficient nukes will put out more radiation and less bang. Your North Korean nukes are likely to be pretty dirty, as are the Chinese weapons. Less so the Russian nukes and much less so the US nukes.

If it is an airburst you can probably go hang out just below the point of detonation without a whole lot of problems and live there soon after the detonation. Since cities will likely receive airburst attacks (if attacked at all), they should be habitable pretty fast. ICBM silo will likely receive several ground burst strikes and be highly radioactive for a long time - but you didn't live there anyhow.

>>35053963
I remember hearing something about the rule of 7 or something like that.
7 minutes is when its most lethal, 7 hours is less lethal but don't go outside, 7 days is fine for going outside for a few hours, 7 weeks is when you should leave the area quickly.

>>35054083
>fallout decreased by a factory of 1 per unit of time.
Well that tells me very little about the time frame.

File: Fallout 1.jpg (4KB, 250x140px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 250x140px

1 of 26

>>35054036
I fucking wish I lived there all the time

File: fallout 2.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

2 of 26

File: fallout 3.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

3 of 26

File: fallout 4.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

4 of 26

...and I have to go run some errands, will post rest later.

File: Dr.Strangelove.Or.How.I.Learned.To.Stop.Worrying.And.Love.The.Bomb.1964.1080p.Bluray.X264-BARC0DE.mkv_snapshot_01.27.49_[2014.09.19_20.57.49].jpg (57KB, 1792x1080px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1792x1080px

>He doesn't have a mine to hide out in

>>35054145
>An airburst weapon won't be able to contact nearly as much if any and so won't create fallout.
There is fallout from fissile materiel of nuclear warhead itself. Small fission and two stage nukes are relatively clean. But three stage fission-fusion-fission like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88
Are extremely dirty and produce more short term fallout by themselves than cobalt bombs.

>>35054015
Even if that was the question OP was asking, you'd still be wrong.

>>35057928
kind of, but not really.

The Rule of Seven is that for every seven fold of time (expressed as hours) the amount of radiation decreases by ten fold. OK, so what does that mean.

After seven hours (the first seven) radiation decreases by 10, that is, it is one tenth of what it was at detonation. 49 hours after detonation (the second seven) radiation is 1/100 of what it was at detonation (usually short handed as 'two days'). After 343 hours (the third) radiation is 1/1000 of what it was (usually short handed as two weeks).

So it sort of depends on how much radiation there was at the beginning as to what impact this rule has.

But in general, it is thought that at day two you will be able to go outside for a short period of time without negative effect. After two weeks you can spend extended periods of time without negative effects.

Again, it greatly depends on how much starting radiation you have. For example, most places will not receive any radiation. So the rule doesn't apply. What is really needed though is a way to measure radiation. The rule of seven/ten is really only useful if you know the starting level of radiation.

>>35058438
So you're saying When The Wind Blows was just fictional nightmarish lies?

File: Angry Daffy.jpg (19KB, 479x360px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 479x360px

>>35055945
Fuck that, I'll lick all the dust I want.

>>35058465
No, that was a lot of nukes being thrown around. So much radiation at once will fuck things up and break the rules in a way.

File: IMG_0125.jpg (134KB, 1021x1003px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1021x1003px

>>35054073
>the radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki has gone down to negligible levels
Fuck i hope so, crazy bastards already built new cities over there and shit, did you know that?

>>35058465
depends on the amount of starting radiation. if there is a lot, it can take far longer for things to die down to a safe level. Because even 1/1000 can kill you real fast.

Seattle is a good example of a place that is likely to be in very bad shape and will be like that.

It depends on if it was an airburst or groundburst. If it's an airburst, a few days and you should be OK, not great, but OK. If it's groundburst, not in your lifetime.

>>35055169
this /k/ numbnuts

don't feel bad though, I thought it was /tg/

File: Sally 9.jpg (238KB, 780x1182px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 780x1182px

>>35059187
MAGIC

MISSILE

>>35054083
USAF here. Wanted to an hero recently after a co worker spent 10 minutes arguing that a single air burst nuke would cause enough fallout to make NA lethal to humans permanently.

File: fallout 5.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

5 of 26

File: fallout 6.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

6 of 26

File: fallout 7.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

7 of 26

File: fallout 8.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

8 of 26

File: fallout 9.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

9 of 26

File: fallout 10.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

10 of 26

File: fallout 11.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

11 of 26

File: fallout 12.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

12 of 26

File: fallout 13.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

13 of 26

>>35053963
1. How far away from the blast?

2. What is the initial peak radiation reading?

3. What was the altitude of the burst

4. What is the humidity in the area? Any Precip? What kind?

5. What is the fission fraction of the bomb?

6. What do you call safe? Increased risk of cancer over decades?

File: fallout 14.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

14 of 26

File: fallout 15.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

15 of 26

File: fallout 16.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

16 of 26

File: fallout 17.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

17 of 26

File: fallout 18.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

18 of 26

File: fallout 19.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

19 of 26

File: fallout 20.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

20 of 26

File: fallout 21.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

21 of 26

If ground zero is not in your backyard after a 100 days you can spend a full hour outside.

File: fallout 22.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

22 of 26

File: fallout 23.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

23 of 26

File: fallout 24.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

24 of 26

File: fallout 25.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

25 of 26

File: fallout 26.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

26 of 26

>>35060050
That was really cool. Saved the whole pamphlet thanks anon

>thread about nuclear attack
>0 pic about EOD units

>>35059244
What does being a welfare queen have to do with your post, faggot?

>>35057944
>>35059800
Anon, mucho thanks for posting. Double dubs checked.
>fallout_19.jpg
>fallout_20.jpg
Two different images posted of same pages (36&37,) but...
>fallout_??.jpg
no image posted of pages 38&39. If pages exist, can into post img pls?

>>35060661
Sorry I guess I fucked up photographing the book. We were all sitting around my grandmother's table. It's her book. I asked her if I could have it and she said, "No, I might need that."
I love my Grandmother. Next time I'm out there I'll see if I can get them sorry.

>>35061699
>"No, I might need that."
awesome

>>35058606
Well, believe it or not, we didn't have the greatest understanding of radiation back then. Even if it was a lot worse, people would have still built cities back up

>>35059849
Not OP, but never realized humidity was a major factor. I know it can affect the attenuation of other EM, so I guess that makes sense. Does higher humidity increase or decrease the effects in this case?

>>35059199
if those are real, that's disgusting. she needs surgery.

>>35053963
Actually it would depend on the type of nuke that went off and the size of it. Depending on the isotope it could be a few months to thousands to millions of years. It basically depends on the halflife of the radiation it leaves. In Chernobyl there were a few different types of isotopes emitting radiation. The elephants foot as an example has a half life of over 4 Billion years. The earth will be ling gone by then.

>>35065153
>The elephants foot as an example has a half life of over 4 Billion years
After 10 years it was emitting 1/10th the radiation it did when the accident occurred.
I think your math is just slightly off

>>35060050
We have a similar handbooks in the Soviet Union.

>>35053963
None

>>35057947
Get out of here, Stalker.

>>35066160
Is one page, says "PLACE SELF IN FRONT OF VALUABLE MILITARY ASSETS TO PROTECT THEM FROM RADIATION WITH YOUR BODY."

>>35061699
>>35061835
Ha, good for grams. Exactly how mine woulda responded, too. You didn't f up, either, kiddo. No apologies needed. Spending time with your loved ones is wat this whole journey is about. I'm tickled you actually thought of sharing with the /k/ommunity. Tell grams anon says thank you and good job!

>>35056068
>Put mines in it
>Flying minefield maker
>HAHAHAH FUCK YOU GENEVA CONVENTION!