2 ms·
A tall above-ground building with no windows doesn’t seem like a good candidate to survive a nuclear blast.
by matthewdgreen 2y ago
A tall above-ground building with no windows doesn’t seem like a good candidate to survive a nuclear blast.
- petre 2y agoYup, an underground structure would normally be a better design. But that would quickly get flooded with water in Manhattan in the event of a nuclear blast followed by loss of power.
- Spooky23 2y agoLong lines buildings were not going to take a direct nuclear hit, but were very robust to handle shockwaves and EMP. I came very close to buying a long lines microwave relay site, and got to tour it a few times. It had a hardened tower, as well as copper grounding that went deep into the ground. Mining the copper would have paid for the site, but alas. These buildings were built based on the 1950s threat of Soviet bombers attacking the United States. The New York City metro area was protected by air defense missile sites and interceptors. The air defense systems would air burst small nukes in wartime to destroy bomber formations. Once the threat shifted to ICBMs in the 1970s hardening was moot.