Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a visitor to the US I'm fascinated by these signs. One question I have about them is how the number of people each shelter could contain was shown on the signs. Was the number written on each sign or were there printed stickers?
As a visitor to the US I'm fascinated by these signs. One question I have about them is how the number of people each shelter could contain was shown on the signs. Was the number written on each sign or were there printed stickers?
I don't recall there being numbers on the signs (if that is your question).
My assumption is some sort of calculation related to square footage such as an auditorium or swimming pool.
Those designated shelters were very common when I was growing up but now seem a rarity. Given the intensity of our recent weather it might be a good idea to redesignate some of these and make sure people know where they are.
I don't recall there being numbers on the signs (if that is your question).
My assumption is some sort of calculation related to square footage such as an auditorium or swimming pool.
Each shelter must have had a capacity figure and I assume that it would have been posted on the sign; if not on the sign it would have been visible somewhere, wouldn't it?
Charles is right. Many, if not all, didn't have a capacity figure. In a situation like a nuke dropping, you would be hard pressed to find someone who would say "Ohh, capacity 47 and I'm the 48th. I'll just have to go elsewhere." Brits might be like that, but Americans aren't.
Charles is right. Many, if not all, didn't have a capacity figure. In a situation like a nuke dropping, you would be hard pressed to find someone who would say "Ohh, capacity 47 and I'm the 48th. I'll just have to go elsewhere." Brits might be like that, but Americans aren't.
Brits are not like that, Harry. I have friends who survived the London Blitz and no one was ever turned away from a shelter. They were pounded on day and night and ducked into the nearest bomb shelters and tubes. Some were so full that folks stood up for hours and hours in order to let others in. We and the British are very much alike. After all, we're cousins as well as allies.
Brits are not like that, Harry. I have friends who survived the London Blitz and no one was ever turned away from a shelter. They were pounded on day and night and ducked into the nearest bomb shelters and tubes. Some were so full that folks stood up for hours and hours in order to let others in. We and the British are very much alike. After all, we're cousins as well as allies.
That's true. I have friends who are East Enders and they tells stories of great camaraderie.
I grew up in the Nuclear Fallout Shelter age. Never saw a capacity listed on a sign. The closest one to my home was in the basement of a bank.
Had we been at home we were going to use the bedroom hallway, which could be closed off and was away from any windows. During the Cuban Missile Crisis my parents took all the towels out of the hallway closet and stocked it with canned food.
Charles is right. Many, if not all, didn't have a capacity figure. In a situation like a nuke dropping, you would be hard pressed to find someone who would say "Ohh, capacity 47 and I'm the 48th. I'll just have to go elsewhere." Brits might be like that, but Americans aren't.
Or more likely, the people who comprise One "group" based on neighbors, friends, religion or whatever matters most to them would take over a shelter. When "their" shelter was deemed full of their people they'd shut it. The first thing to go would be human kindness in favor of paranoia. And I suspect this judgement of "full" would not be based on how much food and water as much as social issues.
Nor do I think people would be immediately thinking about how long they might stay, for if they did they'd look at how much room, and food and water and other very pertinant considerations. It tomorrow after a bunch of tomorrows that they'd start eying the rest wondering who should go out the door when the water is low.
We have a survival instinct and it blinds us to the sensitivites we think we've created, and while people would group for the advantages of group survival, I don't know that they'd see the potential advantages of uniting with some other "group" over seeing potential thieves. But that is why we have this drive or there would be no people.
That's true. I have friends who are East Enders and they tells stories of great camaraderie.
I grew up in the Nuclear Fallout Shelter age. Never saw a capacity listed on a sign. The closest one to my home was in the basement of a bank.
Had we been at home we were going to use the bedroom hallway, which could be closed off and was away from any windows. During the Cuban Missile Crisis my parents took all the towels out of the hallway closet and stocked it with canned food.
Horrible memory.
I think my parents figured we'd just all go together. But my dad stayed home from work, and I was kept home from school. There are not a lot of clear memories from that age but that one has never faded.
Or more likely, the people who comprise One "group" based on neighbors, friends, religion or whatever matters most to them would take over a shelter. When "their" shelter was deemed full of their people they'd shut it. The first thing to go would be human kindness in favor of paranoia. And I suspect this judgement of "full" would not be based on how much food and water as much as social issues.
Nor do I think people would be immediately thinking about how long they might stay, for if they did they'd look at how much room, and food and water and other very pertinant considerations. It tomorrow after a bunch of tomorrows that they'd start eying the rest wondering who should go out the door when the water is low.
We have a survival instinct and it blinds us to the sensitivites we think we've created, and while people would group for the advantages of group survival, I don't know that they'd see the potential advantages of uniting with some other "group" over seeing potential thieves. But that is why we have this drive or there would be no people.
Most interesting, thank you. I don't know when fallout shelters first dated from but the 1950s and '60s were very different socially and politically to nowadays and I can well believe that some neighbourhoods might have potentially excluded a stranger if space was running short. If there'd been an alert during the McCarthy era would someone with a foreign accent have been welcome in every shelter?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
