View Single Post
Old 10-23-2018, 07:56 AM   #17
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Post nuke Alaska

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
These assume a 1990 attack, which you should keep in mind: some population centers have shifted.
Quite true, and 1990 is starting to be a long time ago now. I didn't find an updated version on the FEMA web site -- but they might well have changed the name. (Or just stopped doing them thanks to reduced tensions.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak_aramis View Post
One of the two is no longer a separate operational base (IIRC, Greely); its used as training grounds, but now part of Wainright for administration and maintenance purposes.
I did check Greely's web site, which still exists. On the other hand, the date for "last updated" is in 2015, and it's slow and pokey. Their Facebook page is still active as of a few days ago, though. It's a small facility, mostly closed down back in the 90's, with under 500 residents and under 1000 workers (military and civilians).

Greely also has a nuclear power plant (I think the only one in Alaska), if that's worth targeting. It's scheduled to be decomissioned starting in 2022, and is/was only a 20 MW plant in the first place, so it's probably not an economic target. (Though it might still make an interesting adventure hook, if un-nuked. Maybe the PCs want some old buildings complete with an electrical plant for a base -- or perhaps the Lord Humongous beat them to it and they track him down.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Wolf View Post
the SIOP, the assumption was that the Soviets were targeting strategic-war bases and attack-detection capabilities in the first strike... The aim, after all, was supposed to be to destroy our ability to resist the "inevitable" expansion of the Soviet Union, and wiping out cities unnecessarily wouldn't accomplish that goal.)
An important point for the GM's world-building. What was the purpose of the nukes? Elsewhere, I've run across assumed plans for Soviet attacks assuming 500 warheads, or 2000 warheads, and thus someone's estimate of the top 500 or 2000 targets worth hitting. There's certainly a lot of leeway to revise any plan based on setting assumptions about the attacker's purpose. (Perhaps the New Russian Empire wants to reclaim their old territory intact, with fighting currently south of Mendocino as they try to reclaim the site of Fort Ross to match their previous southerly extent, and so save the nukes for the East Coast and only urgent tactical targets on the West.)

If you do want to make your own nuclear disaster map, one fun site for getting your name added to FBI and Homeland Security watch lists is Nukemap. (It tells me that an 800 kt airburst over Fort Greely produces an estimated 30 fatalities and 480 injuries, with a 0.88 km fireball radius.)
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote