06-11-2011, 08:45 AM | #41 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
It should be noted that the Fallout universe has anarchronistic super-science, like ray guns, super computers that use vacuum tubes and no micro-processors and drugs that work instantly and with potent effects.
Yeah, the exact tech level is probably TL6+2^, with some lower TL societies here and there.
__________________
My blog: http://tabletoprpg333.home.blog |
06-11-2011, 10:31 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
|
|
06-11-2011, 10:22 PM | #43 |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Couple of prospects:
1.) Why the long term seal-up?
I'd favor biological warfare gone very wrong indeed. See Gruinard Island & the anthrax experiments there in 1942. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruinard_Island Years ago, I read an account of a 1973 exchange between military writer (and then Master Gunner of the Royal Army) Ian Hogg and a British biological warfare researcher. Hogg basically opined that the advent of nuclear weapons had made bio-war pretty tame stuff. The reply? "We've got stuff that makes the H-bomb look like a wet firecracker." And that was in 1973 (give or take a couple of years.) What happens when you throw effective recombination DNA engineering into the mix? [Yeah, I know that bio-war research as been outlawed for years. Officially. How often will ALL the governments of the planet obey such a ban?] ". . . after the biological warfare trials had ended, initial efforts to decontaminate the island failed due to the high durability of anthrax spores. For many years, it was judged too hazardous and expensive to decontaminate the island sufficiently to allow public access. As a result, Gruinard Island was quarantined indefinitely. Visits to the island were prohibited, except periodic checks by Porton Down personnel to determine the current level of contamination." "Starting in 1986 a determined effort was made to decontaminate the island, with 280 tonnes of formaldehyde solution diluted in seawater being sprayed over all 196 hectares of the island and the worst-contaminated topsoil around the dispersal site being removed. A flock of sheep was then placed on the island and remained healthy. On April 24, 1990, after 48 years of quarantine, junior defence minister Michael Neubert visited the island and announced its safety by removing the warning signs." From the Wikipedia article; seems to fit the other stuff I've seen. So 1942 level anthrax spores were able to contaminate an island for nearly 50 years. How long do you want? 2.) I'd propose that 20 million is a bit large for any realistic bio-ark population. IIRC at one point in prehistory the entire human species was some 2 to 5000 souls, and recovered from that point. Perhaps with modern genetics we could have some tens of thousands at least APPEAR a viable population? |
06-11-2011, 11:23 PM | #44 |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
I was thinking a massive solar flare could be a good plot device to scare people underground. It would be transient to whatever degree needed, predictable enough to plan for, and would leave the surface mostly intact.
Or you could use zombies.
__________________
Collaborative Settings: Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting! |
06-12-2011, 07:15 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
The problem with hitting the OP's requirement is the "sealed" situation. Apparently even without filtered air. Nothing but some particularly ghastly bio-weapon situation is going to do that.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
06-12-2011, 05:31 PM | #46 | |
Join Date: Dec 2010
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
|
|
06-12-2011, 07:22 PM | #47 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
There's various grossly toxic non-biologicals possible, though I doubt a society much below late TL 7-early TL 8 can do that much damage.
|
06-12-2011, 07:40 PM | #48 | |
Untitled
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: between keyboard and chair
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
(The Diefenbunker has an overflow medical room just outside the infirmary. This room's door doesn't have a handle on the inside. While one could use it as a medical ward, it was intended to be the place where the people who snapped under pressure would be locked up...)
__________________
Rob Kelk “Every man has a right to his own opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts.” – Bernard Baruch, Deming (New Mexico) Headlight, 6 January 1950 No longer reading these forums regularly. |
|
06-12-2011, 11:12 PM | #49 | |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
In any case, it's a plot device and you can fill in the details to suit whatever level of scientific rigour you deem is necessary.
__________________
Collaborative Settings: Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting! |
|
06-13-2011, 08:44 AM | #50 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Minimum TL for a self-sufficient Vault City or equivalent bunker?
Quote:
What really protects us from comic and solar high energy radiation is miles and miles of atmosphere. You can disrupt the ozone layer and get too much UV but that won't cause you to go underground and especially not to seal yourself off from the atmosphere.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
Tags |
base, bunker, colony, self-sufficient, vault city |
|
|