It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:47 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 10:58 am 
Offline
* * *

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:18 pm
Posts: 479
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 4 times
I have on my website a complete scan of the 1962 "Civil Defense Operational and Survival Plan" of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota. This includes a complete copy of the fallout shelter manager's handbook. It's at the following link:

http://w0is.com/stpaulcivildefense/page000.html

There are occasional pieces of useful information in this document, but it's mostly of interest as a fascinating look at how one city was starting to make preparations for a possible nuclear attack.

_________________
Emergency Communications Primer
Plain-English Study Guide for the FCC Amateur Radio Technician Class License
Caretaker: Post-apocalyptic fiction


Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on TumblrShare on Google+
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:21 pm 
Offline
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 15619
Location: Greater New Orleans Area
Has thanked: 835 times
Been thanked: 467 times
Great find thank you for sharing.

BTW be sure to download the files. If you need this it will not be online anymore. :D

_________________
Duco Ergo Sum

Link to ZS Hall of Fame Forum
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:56 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:00 am
Posts: 2265
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 108 times
raptor wrote:
Great find thank you for sharing.

BTW be sure to download the files. If you need this it will not be online anymore. :D


Image

Looking at the food and water supply, it mentions enough wheat biscuits/crackers to cover 10,000 calories per person and 3.5 gallons per person. I am guessing its a 1 week supply, at 1/2 a gallon/64oz of water per day per person and about 1428 calories of food per day per person. Most fallout sheltering recommend staying sheltered at least 3 days to up to 2 weeks depending how close you are to ground zero, and the outside dose rate. In the grand scheme of things starting with R/h at 1,000 which will kill you, if you wait 8 days, you are down to R/h below 2, which basically natural background radiation. In the end if you are trapped in a shelter in St. Paul you going to die of dehydration , long before starvation.


Image

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand ... fects.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:48 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11337
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
Pg 21-22

Quote:
II
1. Items brought in the shelter by shelterees that may have significance in terms of their use within the shelter should be added to the supply inventory.

2. Items contributing to the welfare of the entire shelter group should be submitted to the shelter manager and pooled with shelter supplies for the common interest. Acquisition by force should be used only as a last resort.


pg19

Quote:
A check of personal possessions shall be made by those responsible for safety working with squad leaders. Potentially dangerous and prohibited items such as weapons,..... .....should be disposed of or receipted for, marked and kept in a place of safety.



Being in a public shelter sucks.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 2:52 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:41 pm
Posts: 3193
Location: Central Cascadia
Has thanked: 130 times
Been thanked: 264 times
Stercutus wrote:
Pg 21-22

Quote:
II
1. Items brought in the shelter by shelterees that may have significance in terms of their use within the shelter should be added to the supply inventory.

2. Items contributing to the welfare of the entire shelter group should be submitted to the shelter manager and pooled with shelter supplies for the common interest. Acquisition by force should be used only as a last resort.


pg19

Quote:
A check of personal possessions shall be made by those responsible for safety working with squad leaders. Potentially dangerous and prohibited items such as weapons,..... .....should be disposed of or receipted for, marked and kept in a place of safety.



Being in a public shelter sucks.


Not that I am a big fan of confiscations but I for one would not want to be in a public bunker or any sort of public place in a time of certain panic, add to that weapons..... I dunno but IF and ONLY IF we are in a public fallout shelter in a massive nuclear attack. I don't want even sharp spoon in that shelter with me because I'll end up cutting people that chew to loud.

But that's just me.

To the OP that is some interesting stuff thanks for posting!

_________________
JeeperCreeper wrote:
I like huge dicks, Halfapint, so you are OK in my book.... hahaha
Spazzy wrote:
Tell ya what... If Zombies attack and the world ends I'll hook tandem toddlers to a plow if it means I'll be able to eat...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:37 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11337
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
My point more was to the the handbook condoning strong arm robbery. That is a tough pill to swallow.

The whole idea of being prepared means not going to the shelter.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 2:07 pm 
Offline
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 15619
Location: Greater New Orleans Area
Has thanked: 835 times
Been thanked: 467 times
Stercutus wrote:
My point more was to the the handbook condoning strong arm robbery. That is a tough pill to swallow.


If because of that one sentence you chose not to use the data in the link that is your right. It is like any reference material. It will have information of varying use and relevance. You should feel free to take away what ever knowledge is useful to you.

This sentence does not negate the value of the other material. If you are saying the entire source reference data is compromised as a result of that sentence then that is a legitimate point to make. Personally I do not think that is the case here.

The other more relevant point is that I doubt very seriously anyone on this forum is not aware that a public shelter (or really any shelter you personally do not control) will likely have rules that include a "whats yours is now ours whether you like it or not" policy.

I agree completely, that is one key reason to prepare and avoid throwing yourself to the "tender mercies" of a public shelter.

_________________
Duco Ergo Sum

Link to ZS Hall of Fame Forum
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 2:22 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:41 pm
Posts: 3193
Location: Central Cascadia
Has thanked: 130 times
Been thanked: 264 times
raptor wrote:
Stercutus wrote:
My point more was to the the handbook condoning strong arm robbery. That is a tough pill to swallow.


If because of that one sentence you chose not to use the data in the link that is your right. It is like any reference material. It will have information of varying use and relevance. You should feel free to take away what ever knowledge is useful to you.

This sentence does not negate the value of the other material. If you are saying the entire source reference data is compromised as a result of that sentence then that is a legitimate point to make. Personally I do not think that is the case here.

The other more relevant point is that I doubt very seriously anyone on this forum is not aware that a public shelter (or really any shelter you personally do not control) will likely have rules that include a "whats yours is now ours whether you like it or not" policy.

I agree completely, that is one key reason to prepare and avoid throwing yourself to the "tender mercies" of a public shelter.


I think that was his point as well.... There's a reason we prep, as to NOT go to a public shelter. But if you do end up in one, then.... Prepare to lose what you have for "the greater good"

_________________
JeeperCreeper wrote:
I like huge dicks, Halfapint, so you are OK in my book.... hahaha
Spazzy wrote:
Tell ya what... If Zombies attack and the world ends I'll hook tandem toddlers to a plow if it means I'll be able to eat...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:44 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11337
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
raptor wrote:
Stercutus wrote:
My point more was to the the handbook condoning strong arm robbery. That is a tough pill to swallow.


If because of that one sentence you chose not to use the data in the link that is your right. It is like any reference material. It will have information of varying use and relevance. You should feel free to take away what ever knowledge is useful to you.

This sentence does not negate the value of the other material. If you are saying the entire source reference data is compromised as a result of that sentence then that is a legitimate point to make. Personally I do not think that is the case here.

The other more relevant point is that I doubt very seriously anyone on this forum is not aware that a public shelter (or really any shelter you personally do not control) will likely have rules that include a "whats yours is now ours whether you like it or not" policy.

I agree completely, that is one key reason to prepare and avoid throwing yourself to the "tender mercies" of a public shelter.


I would be quite cautious in adopting any type of system from a public shelter. Public shelters are/ were designed more from the perspective of the based upon the assumption that the government would allow itself broad powers due to the state of whatever emergency. The goals of what the government was trying to accomplish with the shelters were varied and not necessarily to ensure the best chances of survival for the most people in a disaster/ nuclear war situation.

Trying to bring those into a micro system of internal governance and management might not be the wisest choice. There are plenty of other questionable practices throughout that material.

Caution. Caution and respect for rule of law when planning for the use of such materials.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group