What Film Theory and Fallout Got WRONG about Nuclear Weapons - Nuclear Engineer Reacts

Поділитися
Вставка

КОМЕНТАРІ • 506

  • @tfolsenuclear
    @tfolsenuclear  Місяць тому +42

    Thanks so much for watching! For more info about nuclear winter, please check out: ua-cam.com/video/QBeSNsyLuw8/v-deo.htmlsi=TyvqIG99c2p7Of4o
    Also, I misspoke, a shake is 10 nanoseconds, not 100. 😅

    • @BrickNewton
      @BrickNewton Місяць тому

      Can you please do a reaction to the 80's movie 'Where the wind blows'.
      It traumatized me as a child.

    • @sunnyval3134
      @sunnyval3134 Місяць тому

      44:27 he did say something "similar" happened.

    • @amym2944
      @amym2944 Місяць тому

      Hi. I'd love you to do a reaction to some of the Netflix series, Turning Point the bomb and the cold war. You'll be horrified and how inaccurate the nuclear info is!

    • @mattiasdominguez2757
      @mattiasdominguez2757 Місяць тому

      what do i need to study to become a nuclear engenieer? can you make a video of how to become a nuclear engenieer?

    • @tediustimmy
      @tediustimmy 28 днів тому

      CS here to remind you that light travels approximately one foot per nanosecond, so if he's a mile away from the epicenter, then 528 shakes pass before he can feel any effects.

  • @ClellBiggs
    @ClellBiggs Місяць тому +263

    I'm a Fallout fanatic and I just wanted to point something out. The nukes in the Fallout universe aren't like ours. They're closer to being neutron bombs that are engineered for massive amounts of radiation rather than destruction like ours. This was a consequence of no one in the Fallout universe having a conscience. I know it doesn't seem this way but the ones we have that kill more people instantly are more humane than the ones in the Fallout universe that kill people in horrible ways over long periods of time. They (the theorists) pointed this out in the video, but this has been canon since the very beginning and I just wanted to add some emphasis to it. The fact they got this right in the show when so few people are aware of it is impressive.

    • @rogervanbommel1086
      @rogervanbommel1086 Місяць тому +16

      Even IF they were neutron bombs the 200 year number is still wrong, and neutron radiation stops instantly when the bomb explodes

    • @MXarcx
      @MXarcx 29 днів тому +16

      So more like dirty MOABs than our nukes

    • @Gr13fM4ch1n3
      @Gr13fM4ch1n3 29 днів тому +2

      Good catch

    • @bee281light6
      @bee281light6 28 днів тому +5

      I dunno about this, do you have any proof? Either way I don’t really care since fallout was never known for realism

    • @segganew
      @segganew 28 днів тому

      @@rogervanbommel1086the key thing about neutron radiation is that it makes other things radioactive. So yes it would. That’s why neutron radiation is the most dangerous kind. Look up “neutron activation.”

  • @oxylepy2
    @oxylepy2 Місяць тому +91

    Wait, a lot of the mutations are related to Forced Evolutionary Virus AND radiation. FEV's role is really important to the lore

  • @AmaroqStarwind
    @AmaroqStarwind Місяць тому +83

    7:47 In the lore for the first two Fallout games, the nuclear strikes were specifically targeted as ground detonations in order to maximize the long-term effects.

    • @DieselsVideos
      @DieselsVideos 27 днів тому +6

      And the show gives a possible second reason why the first Bombs detonate on the ground. They ar possibly detonated on place and not fired.

    • @AmaroqStarwind
      @AmaroqStarwind 27 днів тому +4

      @@DieselsVideos In theory, if you perfectly coordinated two nuclear weapons to detonate at exactly the same time and in roughly the same place, you could have a "dual-burst" weapon which combines a ground burst (for maximum contamination) with an air burst (for a larger blast radius). So the ground burst bomb would produce all of the contamination, and the air burst bomb would spread the contamination as far as possible.

    • @DieselsVideos
      @DieselsVideos 27 днів тому +2

      @@AmaroqStarwind has nothing to do with what I said. If you detonate the Bombs on the ground, because you're not firing them but you are the one who build the Vaults, placing the bombs over a long time, you do not have to fire the second bomb. And why spreading the contamination. it has a reason why we talk about half live circles. And yes you spread more. but you need half of your bombs to spread half of the contaminated material.
      What opens another point. Dirty Bombs would be specially designed to spread longer living radioactive particles

    • @AmaroqStarwind
      @AmaroqStarwind 27 днів тому

      @@DieselsVideos Ah, now I understand.
      I am dumb.

    • @Katsura_ja_nai_Zura_da
      @Katsura_ja_nai_Zura_da 25 днів тому

      ​@@DieselsVideos vaulttech didn't say they will definelty nuke, that they will nuke if peace happen. But you forget something, Chinese bombers were detected several hours before first bomb exploded so it was Chinese that bombed first. Because they were desperate to stop Americans advancing more into China.

  • @andyf4292
    @andyf4292 Місяць тому +30

    hard to measure the height of a mushroom cloud when your eyes don't work anymore and you are on fire..

  • @innocentsmith6091
    @innocentsmith6091 Місяць тому +35

    The real biggest problem with Fallout's immersion (at least in the Bethesda ones) is how it seems like the world is as if the nukes dropped a matter of years ago, not a century ago. Why do people have live in half destroyed pre war houses with trash and skeletons lying around? No one thought to build anything new or even clean up since the bombs dropped? It makes sense for desolate places, but not the many inhabited places.

    • @tabathacarruthers5122
      @tabathacarruthers5122 29 днів тому +1

      Some fans think Fallout 3 takes place in 2100, not 2177 or 2277. It was like they chose a random number for how long it's been.

    • @shadewolf0075
      @shadewolf0075 26 днів тому +8

      Basically the whole thing about fallout is the post-apocalyptic aesthetic. You see a bunch of people complaining that fallout 76 still has places with tons of plant life in it and saying “it doesn’t look like fallout!” I agree 3 and 4 definitely feel like they are supposed to be earlier but 4 has the excuse of a secret group of scientists keeping the commonwealth divided and destroying any groups trying to actually rebuild the region. 3 honestly got explained in 76 as everyone basically just left the city and region for the way better Appalachia. We don’t really know anything about Appalachia during 3-4 so for all we know a thriving civilization has appeared

    • @lennysmileyface
      @lennysmileyface 25 днів тому +2

      @@shadewolf0075 It's the whole thing for Bethesda but it's not for the original vision of the games.

  • @Mikitsubizunizu
    @Mikitsubizunizu Місяць тому +44

    One major factor of radiaton in Fallout... Everything is nuclear powered with fission batteries. From radios to flashlights.

    • @phecto
      @phecto Місяць тому

      Many of the cars run on nuclear energy, the power plants are all nuclear, and there's nuclear waste products careless stored everywhere to. Then all that gets hit with nukes. I mean 77 for vegas suggests that every city is basically getting a carpet bombing of nukes so all the nuclear infrastructure is getting blown up so every city suddenly makes Chernobyl look like an insignificant accident and there's no attempts at containment or cleanup. Then you have people like super mutants, enclave, brotherhood, and any nutjob raider than finds a fatman continuing to set of more tactical nukes, or even really big ones like in the case of the divide. That's why the fallout world is still a mess 200 years later.

    • @smolpener7430
      @smolpener7430 29 днів тому +2

      And they just magically convert the heat into electricity.

    • @Mikitsubizunizu
      @Mikitsubizunizu 29 днів тому +10

      @@smolpener7430 No, they are most likely radiovoltaic cells, though RTGs are a thing (killed those dudes in Georgia)

    • @cmo_kky
      @cmo_kky 28 днів тому +10

      My thoughts too exactly. So there were factories that could have been hit too which could damage these batteries, fusion cores, etc and expose their radioactive contents to the surrounding areas. It could also be possible that these widely used fusion cores were rigged by the manufactures, whom may be in cahoots with the marketers, that could turn them into mini-nukes which would support the small nuclear yields theory mentioned.

    • @t84t748748t6
      @t84t748748t6 25 днів тому +3

      and dumping waste like the 50's where a fishing lake is so nuclear prewar u get burns from swimming in it

  • @bgiv2010
    @bgiv2010 Місяць тому +16

    The fact that they got so much right must be an honor for them to receive a review from a professional in the field.

  • @stoveman831
    @stoveman831 Місяць тому +79

    the shock wave is shown before hitting the windows

    • @xlgapelsin6173
      @xlgapelsin6173 Місяць тому +6

      As they should be

    • @ShimrraJamaane
      @ShimrraJamaane Місяць тому +13

      Shockwave effects are seen before they are felt. Light travels faster than sound.

    • @miriamweller812
      @miriamweller812 Місяць тому +2

      @@ShimrraJamaane Shockwave IS 'sound'. The light effect would be seen sooner of course by putting everything on fire (or not be seen anymore when you look into it, because it would make you - at minimum temporarely - blind).

    • @ShimrraJamaane
      @ShimrraJamaane Місяць тому +8

      @@miriamweller812 I know a shockwave is sound. You can see the effects of the pressure wave before it hits. Hence, "light travels faster than sound". The light referring to the effects of the shockwave being visible, not the light from the blast itself. The Beirut explosion is a perfect example.

    • @RandomPerson-yq1qk
      @RandomPerson-yq1qk Місяць тому +2

      @@ShimrraJamaane This is also dangerous because a big explosion makes people look in that direction out of windows before the windows get shattered into their faces.

  • @x_atlan_x8100
    @x_atlan_x8100 Місяць тому +23

    We need to remind that especially in fallout 4 and 76 we see a lot of nuclear waste barrels across the map. I think this could potentially explain the intense radiation even after 200 Years . I don’t know if in the other fallout games the same thing applies

  • @StupidCatLady
    @StupidCatLady Місяць тому +26

    I think you should watch the opening scene of the Fallout show. I personally think they did a decent job. They show the shockwave. But the scene is absolutely gut wrenching. The fear and wild terror is very evident and almost painful to watch. They convey just how bad everything is.

    • @j.f.fisher5318
      @j.f.fisher5318 27 днів тому +4

      I love the opening scene. But it's got lots of issues if you look at it from a realism standpoint. First, _nobody_ could mistake the flash of a nuke for a flash bulb - its like the sun outside suddenly got many times brighter which would be incredibly obvious in a house with so much glass. The way it's shown is accurate but _only_ for a fission weapon like Trinity or the weapons dropped on Japan. Fusion weapons have two flashes, the relatively quick fission flash and then a seconds-long "flash" as the fusion secondary explodes. There's practically no effect on skin or eyes from the flash. The shockwave takes long seconds to start. The glass should be deadly shrapnel inside the house. But, it's entertainment, not a documentary. It does what it's supposed to do playing up the humanity of the characters. They totally did the right thing.

    • @Takyodor2
      @Takyodor2 26 днів тому +2

      @@j.f.fisher5318 Don't the two flashes occur within a microsecond or so from each other? (As in, you would need a really good high-speed camera to distinguish them)

    • @joshuaortiz2031
      @joshuaortiz2031 25 днів тому

      ​@@Takyodor2 yes the two nuclear reactions in fusion weapon happen pretty much simultaneously within microseconds of each other.

    • @joshuaortiz2031
      @joshuaortiz2031 25 днів тому +2

      ​@@j.f.fisher5318 yeah the flash was not bright enough that little girl in the beginning who was staring at the explosion would have been flash blinded instantly. The time it took for the sound and pressure wave to hit them was accurate though that's something many films and tv shows get wrong.

    • @j.f.fisher5318
      @j.f.fisher5318 25 днів тому +1

      @@Takyodor2 Look at video of thermonuclear tests. The low framerate makes it less visible but its obvious if you know what to look for. Castle Bravo or Tsar Bomba are examples though their size exaggerates this. There's a quick flash then it reduces and is replaced by a steadily growing brightness. Or look up graphs of thermal radiation over time. Visible light scales with thermal but it's the heat that does the most damage. The thermal and visible energy radiated by the fireball takes much longer than the nuclear reaction. For the largest thermonuclear weapons it lasts around half a minute. Smaller thermonuclear weapons still last multiple seconds, and the human eye is good at distinguishing the separation between flashes. Also this was a big part of why duck and cover was so important to avoid as much of that thermal radiation as possible if directly exposed to the flash at distances that weren't immediately deadly.

  • @darkwinter7395
    @darkwinter7395 Місяць тому +50

    My head cannon (nooo... don't stick meh head in there and fire it! ):
    The blasts shown were just the first ones to fall - shortly after the intro sequence, the bombardment got a whole lot worse.

    • @A_Blip_In_The_Universe
      @A_Blip_In_The_Universe Місяць тому +6

      The first ones were extremely low yield, to give most people time to get to the shelters or find shelter. At least this is my take...

    • @sgtrpcommand3778
      @sgtrpcommand3778 Місяць тому +10

      Adding to this, these were low yield strikes against strategic targets - centres of local government, water purification, power (in the civilian context since that’s what we’re looking at here) while what would come afterwards was the main bombardment.
      In the movie Threads, they assumed the Soviets would detonate a high altitude warhead to disable electrical and power systems across the UK first, so it makes sense.

    • @Merennulli
      @Merennulli Місяць тому +3

      I agree. In practice, a first strike would initially be aimed at taking out the enemy's second strike capability. The nuclear equivalent of calling "no tag-backs". That's why nuclear silos and air bases of the nuclear era moved away from population centers, but it's entirely plausible the Fallout universe opted for the economic efficiency of keeping them in cities too be closer to manufacturing and increase total output (in line with having so many).
      Adding to that likelihood is that the small ones were short range, meant to reduce the detection time. Air bursts as a "fighting nuclear with nuclear" defense mechanism were proven effective in Operation Plumbbob, so taking out the defensive options first with the warheads least likely to be detected in time is sound strategy.

    • @bee281light6
      @bee281light6 28 днів тому

      Are you sure? All they really needed was those nukes they dropped in the intro

    • @Merennulli
      @Merennulli 28 днів тому +2

      @@bee281light6 As the video mentions, the yield was far lower than the book claimed. It's also nowhere near enough for the devastation seen after they leave the vault. The total yield we saw was the same as the 2020 disaster in Beirut. Terrible, but far less than what you are saying this would do.

  • @dahwriter
    @dahwriter Місяць тому +9

    When a nuclear engineer tilts their head and delivers a slightly suspicious and monotone, "Okay..."
    You realize you might be under a misapprehension.

  • @wernerviehhauser94
    @wernerviehhauser94 Місяць тому +14

    Just consider the bomb in Megaton. In the Fallout universe, nukes are low yield, somewhere between a Davy Crocket and a SADM. This is how that universe works, not ours.

    • @Naedlus
      @Naedlus Місяць тому +2

      Yup. Bethesda pretty much stated that the physics of the world of Fallout isn't the same as our own, with semiconductor tech not being feasible, but atomic was much more so.

    • @russellg1473
      @russellg1473 27 днів тому +1

      @@Naedlusis that not a detail that interplay would be responsible for? Seems like a core part of lore, as a complete layman, seems like it would have been established long before Bethesda.

  • @cosmiceon
    @cosmiceon Місяць тому +11

    Tell all your friends about nuclear power. We must educate others about how important this energy source will be in the future and how safe it is compared to coal. If society continues to be afraid of nuclear power we are stuck burning fossil fuels. I support nuclear power!

  • @RangerHouston
    @RangerHouston Місяць тому +7

    2:06 keep in mind that the vaults are also build underground so in addition to the 3 feet thick lead walls you’d have all that earth too.

    • @S1ipperyJim
      @S1ipperyJim 23 дні тому +2

      A woman in Japan survived a nuke by just being inside a concrete bank only 300m away from the hypocenter, whereas someone on the stairs outside was vaporised

  • @Sho-td8wg
    @Sho-td8wg Місяць тому +14

    Random theory. Maybe those nukes were designed for the 250 kTon yield, but underperformed due to poor maintenance.
    Modern nukes require expensive servicing as some elements (tritium) have half-lives measured in decades. Maybe Fallout nukes were closer to dirty bombs.

    • @andyf4292
      @andyf4292 Місяць тому

      fizzles

    • @sanctionh2993
      @sanctionh2993 Місяць тому +1

      As he said, misuse of the word theory 😂

    • @carlosfbarajas7755
      @carlosfbarajas7755 27 днів тому +2

      Maybe cobalt bombs?

    • @samiraperi467
      @samiraperi467 4 дні тому

      @@sanctionh2993 I dunno, seems like there's backing evidence, so it's one step above hypothesis.

  • @TheSpookiestSkeleton
    @TheSpookiestSkeleton Місяць тому +7

    I mean I think chernobyl would be very dangerous to be around IF and I say IF there hadn't been efforts to clean up and contain the issue, such as if everyone died in a nuclear conflict and any survivors wouldn't know the first thing about how to go about cleaning up a nuclear disaster.

  • @Hootersnoocher
    @Hootersnoocher Місяць тому +4

    I’m not sure many know this but, when Mount St. Helen erupted, a science teacher in Warren, Michigan, took one meter square sheets of plywood, placed visqueen over that and spread Vaseline petroleum jelly on top of that. I don’t remember how long they were placed on the roof of the school, however when they retrieved them and dissolved the jelly and filtered it out, it resulted in a significant amount of ash that had drifted those many miles.

  • @ancientgamer3645
    @ancientgamer3645 12 днів тому +1

    One thing that is commonly overlooked is all the dead bodies that would go unattended. Diseases would run unchecked because the emergency response units would be overwhelmed and unable to clean up the corpses quickly.

  • @gruanger
    @gruanger Місяць тому +8

    I think the biggest issue is what I call Devolution. Jobs would end, manufacturing, factories, etc. Then human knowledge would end in the dog eat dog food first world. Very quickly, knowledge about computers and other tech would disappear. For example, most kids don't even know how to make a lightbulb, forge materials, identify edible plants or other things people for most of history could do. Also, the scientist and intellectuals probably wouldn't survive the first generation of fighting. People wouldn't spend the time to teach reading and writing, etc. Eventually you might return to caveman, lol

    • @jazzyjaytee9961
      @jazzyjaytee9961 24 дні тому +3

      Absolutely, yes. Well, maybe not actual cavemen dressed in raw animal hides, but most certainly to a level of pre-industrial society.
      On a side note, while I have read all about Edison's light bulb, I personally would have no idea how to build one from scratch in my garage. Especially without a vacuum pump.

    • @modelcitizen8731
      @modelcitizen8731 11 днів тому +2

      Watch threads, you'll see what would happen, it's grim

  • @A_N1ne
    @A_N1ne Місяць тому +6

    What Film Theory got wrong (and most of Bethesda's Fallout games) is you do see the thermal effects of the bombs on humans. In Fallout 1 (Black Isle Studios Fallout) you meet many Ghouls who survived the great war in Necropolis (Bakersfield) their leader Set is depicted with most of his skin burned off, exposed organs and so on. This depiction of Ghouls was dropped after Bethesda bought the franchise

    • @SpitFir3Tornado
      @SpitFir3Tornado Місяць тому +4

      I wouldn't say Betheada dropped it when they took overthr franchise... FO3 and FNV have similar appearing ghouls with melted flesh. FO4 is the first one with the smoothskin sunburnt ghouls.

    • @A_N1ne
      @A_N1ne Місяць тому +1

      @@SpitFir3Tornado true, but if you look at the model made for Set and then the model used for ghouls in 3 and NV, Set actually looks like he went through a nuclear explosion. Compare that to Moira in Megaton who also went through a nuclear blast, there's a big difference between the 2. Don't get me wrong 3 and NV's ghouls are way better then 4 and 76's, but I think Fallout 1 and 2 did them best. I also prefer the talking heads of the original games to the Xbox 360 era textures in the 3D games. So it could just be a personal bias and texture limitations.

    • @danchrapko445
      @danchrapko445 29 днів тому +1

      i do wish for a nother fallout game in the style of 1 and 2

  • @Fred-rv2tu
    @Fred-rv2tu 23 дні тому +3

    I worked with nukes once upon a time. People are always shocked when I explain how survivable a nuclear war would be if you were outside the thermal pulse. Your biggest threat would be starvation after the collapse of the supply chain(refineries targeted) and the fallout falling in Americas breadbasket.

    • @gwynnmccallan8856
      @gwynnmccallan8856 21 день тому

      If it's every nuke Russia and the US has, is Nuclear Winter a real possibility?

  • @TheSpookiestSkeleton
    @TheSpookiestSkeleton Місяць тому +4

    well the first fallout game takes place in 2161 and by that point there's already small towns popping up and some larger towns even.

  • @blackXhawksXkickXbut
    @blackXhawksXkickXbut Місяць тому +5

    One issue with the theory is that I believe the height of the mushroom clouds in nuke map is the tallest point the mushroom cloud reaches. It would take the plume many minutes to rise to that height. So judging the height only a few seconds after detonation is bad methodology

    • @samiraperi467
      @samiraperi467 4 дні тому

      You underestimate the shockwave. It moves *fast*. Sure, the plume after the shockwave takes long to rise, but you have to remember that the shockwave is supersonic.

  • @SpookDudeGoesWild
    @SpookDudeGoesWild Місяць тому +35

    So the fun part about the nukes in the opening scene are ground nukes detonated internally, so they were low yield first before the Chinese and American nukes even started launching.

    • @tauceti8060
      @tauceti8060 Місяць тому

      Where did you get that info?

    • @SpookDudeGoesWild
      @SpookDudeGoesWild Місяць тому +13

      Lore on the Fallout Series as a whole tells you Vault Tec set off the initial bombs, just have to dig deep for it. In good faith of trying not to spoil the show, you should watch it, as it is cannon in this universe.

    • @Chopstorm.
      @Chopstorm. Місяць тому +5

      ​@@SpookDudeGoesWild Was that actually confirmed? They obviously say that they can start the war themselves, but did they actually go through with it? Tim Cain stated multiple times (and it's present within Fallout 1) that the Chinese were the first to launch the nukes.

    • @gavros9636
      @gavros9636 Місяць тому

      ​@@Chopstorm. There's evidence in one of the dlc's that aliens started it

    • @Chopstorm.
      @Chopstorm. Місяць тому +3

      @gavros9636 Yeah, in Zeta. Again, evidence =/= proof.

  • @Naedlus
    @Naedlus Місяць тому +3

    Well, now I'm starting to fall back on an old theory, that as of Fallout 3, with their inclusion of Dunwich Borers, they took a page from Deadlands: The Wasted West, and that in their world, the radiation is tied to the paranormal, which would also explain why it played nice for so long, encouraging society to adopt atomic cars, etc. so that when the fit hit the shan, they (whatever paranormal entities are toyed with in the series,) would have the best chance of causing true chaos in society to allow the paranormal to have a proper chance to take hold largely unnoticed by the population outside of ghouls, and even then, it's not the population noticing the paranormal, but the questioning audience putting things together over time.

  • @akuyume7
    @akuyume7 Місяць тому +2

    47:05 I think he had it the right way around, he was saying the volcano was equal to thousands or tens of thousands of nuclear weapons.

  • @jiffypoo5029
    @jiffypoo5029 9 днів тому +1

    Civilization tried to restart immediately after the bombs in the Fallout Universe. Brotherhood of Steel formed directly after the war in 2078 by remnants of the US military. The US government reformed as the Enclave immediately. Vegas never fell and remained a functional city. Former US Millitary went to war with the Former US Government and various Militias for control of vital assets. Both BoS and Enclave love using Nukes so there was most definately more Nukes dropped in their post-war conflict.

  • @olliaalto5638
    @olliaalto5638 Місяць тому

    Hello. Thank you so much for making nuclear related videos, they are very interesting and learning so much.
    I was wondering have you made a video of N. S Savannah? I think Savannah was first commercial nuclear powered freight ship + it could also passengers.

  • @pdonettes
    @pdonettes 26 днів тому +1

    My biggest beef is always the dead plants. Plants, and many other creatures and organisms are affected by radiation to a much lesser degree than humans are.

  • @ericerpelding2348
    @ericerpelding2348 21 годину тому

    Regarding the typical yield of a Fallout nuclear weapon being 200-750 kt, a wiki article has this to say about real weapon.
    "The Mark 18 nuclear bomb, also known as the SOB or Super Oralloy Bomb, was an American nuclear bomb design which was the highest yield fission bomb produced by the US. The Mark 18 had a design yield of 500 kilotons. Nuclear weapon designer Ted Taylor was the lead designer for the Mark 18."

  • @kevinhardy8997
    @kevinhardy8997 24 дні тому +1

    I'd like to think that the Fallout alternate universe diverged from our real timeline at the moment if the first Atom bomb test

  • @skube587
    @skube587 Місяць тому +2

    12:03 correction: a shake is actually 10 nanoseconds or 10^-8 seconds.

  • @DieselsVideos
    @DieselsVideos 27 днів тому +1

    The main Point is: he gets a range for strategic nukes and assumes that the biggest in the show is on the upper end. Then he said that everything is too small for the estimated upper end bomb. the question would be: is the cloud realistic to the other effects? maybe its just not 750kt and 200 kt but 200 kt and 50 kt?

  • @tacticalgrace6456
    @tacticalgrace6456 23 дні тому +1

    Many of the creatures in the Fallout games aren’t that way from radioactive mutations but deliberate experimentation at Big MT

  • @Potatoboii2
    @Potatoboii2 Місяць тому +2

    Yoo I was hoping you'd react to this one! Commenting during the intro to get the comment in a soon as possible, so I can't wait to see what you say!

  • @Chestyfriend
    @Chestyfriend 25 днів тому +1

    Some kid in fallout 4 survived for 200 years by hiding in a fridge when the bombs fell right on top of the city. How he survived without food and water that long, and how his parents didn't find him for 200 years despite living about 100 meters away from him for those 200 years is a mystery so mysterious even the writer of the quest doesn't know the answer and he blocks everyone who asks.

  • @x_atlan_x8100
    @x_atlan_x8100 Місяць тому +6

    I guess the warhead yield is under 100kt . I don’t know much about the Chinese nuclear weapons in the fallout universe but I think because of the ressource war going on the chinese government would probably use warheads that aren’t thermonuclear . But because we didn’t see any type of MIRV falling down the weapon could have been planted on the ground by Vault tec maybe , but who knows .

    • @samiraperi467
      @samiraperi467 4 дні тому

      They would definitely be psychopathic enough.

  • @ItatsuMagnatsa
    @ItatsuMagnatsa 18 днів тому

    There is a Quest called "Here there be Monsters" in Fallout 4 and it is given to the Player by a Kid on the Docks who tells the Player that he sees a Monster looking out from below the Surface of the Water but its actually a Parascope from a Chinese Submarine that has been Damaged 200+ Years ago and it was possibly the Sub that launched the Nukes in Boston, Massachusetts but was damaged by a Mine and everyone in the sub turned into Ghouls, but Captain Zao was the only one who didn't Turn Feral.
    If you help him repair the sub he gives you a Chinese Sword and a Transponder so you can call in Nukes from the Sub. But like all Nukes, they are Small like a Mini Nuke, or Fat Man Shell.

  • @Gin-toki
    @Gin-toki Місяць тому +2

    There isn't really any lower limit to how small a mushroom cloud can get. I've seen them on smaller explosions similar to a single stick of dynamite. It's just a matter of how the gasses, dust and whatnot gets thrown around.

    • @ShimrraJamaane
      @ShimrraJamaane Місяць тому +1

      It's a matter of convective forces. That's what a mushroom cloud is: convection.

  • @sadmermaid
    @sadmermaid Місяць тому

    Congrats on 100k!

  • @ToxicGamer86454
    @ToxicGamer86454 Місяць тому +2

    100 tons is only 9 GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bombs.

  • @detvarvalfanda
    @detvarvalfanda Місяць тому +5

    The explosions of the nukes themself would not lead to a nuclear winter
    But I think they implied that the majority of the smoke would come from all the fires that the nukes cause.
    Is there a reson why there wouldn't be so much fire to cause a nuclear winter?

    • @davidroberts9099
      @davidroberts9099 Місяць тому

      The smoke was the excuse used to make the claim to begin with. The entire winter theory falls apart when peer reviewed by scientists instead of activists.
      The radiation is a different problem, that would kill a lot of people.

    • @Staladus
      @Staladus Місяць тому +4

      I mean we already have thousands of forest fires on earth, and they dont even have an effect on cooling the earth. The problem is that while there will be a lot of soot, most of it will fall back to earth by just gravity or rain.
      Things only stay for longer if it reaches the stratosphere, and its highly unlikely that surface fires would send stuff that high.

    • @detvarvalfanda
      @detvarvalfanda Місяць тому +1

      @@Staladus ok
      That seems logical

    • @S1ipperyJim
      @S1ipperyJim 23 дні тому

      Depending on the yield the blast wave can extinguish the fires from the thermal radiation

  • @Lucky32Luke
    @Lucky32Luke Місяць тому +1

    Let's check out my Daddy sense by listening to the a baby in the background. Sounds like a baby girl saying twice at least, "Daddy, I think I have something for you here!" Dedication at full blast. Pls mate, that baby (no matter what) needs your attention more than me as a channel follower or any of us here could ever deserve or thank you for. Sorry if I was too straight forward. Great vid as always!

  • @ericcartmanofborg8669
    @ericcartmanofborg8669 8 днів тому

    44:30 Yea another thing about that time period of 1816 was it was still in the Little Ice Age that ran from the 14th century to the mid of the 19th century, so the impact if there was to be one would have been increased during that point of time.

  • @CC-ke5np
    @CC-ke5np Місяць тому +10

    The problem with the "Nature reserve" in Tschernobyl is that humans live longer than animals so they are more likely to develop cancer and other medical problems due to radiation. So small animals mostly die of old age before they get cancer. Birds are a different story due to their fast metabolism. Birds really can't thrive in Tschernobyls nature reserve (yet).
    Nuclear fallout affects humans most.
    Nukes are actually the most harmless ABC weapon. C weapons can destroy the ecosystem on a bacteriological level preventing recovery for a very long time. A-weapons have a very local effect and the area can recover relative quickly.

    • @PhantomHelix
      @PhantomHelix Місяць тому +1

      Not that any are in the vicinity of Chernobyl, but giant tortoises species are mostly larger and longer lived than humans and are extremely resilient to cancers so……..

    • @samiraperi467
      @samiraperi467 4 дні тому

      @@PhantomHelix They also have stupidly slow metabolisms.

  • @miriamweller812
    @miriamweller812 Місяць тому +1

    Erosion by wind and wearther and alike will simply spread and by that thin out radioactive elements. People also often don't get the difference between the radioactive elements and the radiation. You can block most radiation easily, especially alpha and even beta and an alpha emitter on your skin wouldn't be good, but also not lethal (as long as you wash it off sooner or later and of course you you don't have such high radiation level, that it pretty much cooks you). But when you consume a radioactive element and at worst it stays in your system, constantly denaturalizing your organs...
    Biggest (longer term) problem in Tschernobyl was that certain plants liked to absorb those elements, what could then also get into animal which eat them, what then made consumption of these animals or plants not exactly healthy. It would not kill you, but of course raise your long term risk for health issues.

  • @user-md8jw2dx2x
    @user-md8jw2dx2x 7 днів тому

    Love the vid! A lot of the radiation came from pretty much every pre war nook and cranny was used as a nuke waste dump. In F4, you can find entire dump sites in lakes, streams, in populated areas etc. Glowing goo everywhere in busted barrels. So I would guess that it too got thrown all over via shockwave and 'Fallout.'

  • @justinebright2328
    @justinebright2328 Місяць тому +5

    My biggest issue is that if you can see the mushroom cloud then you've already survived the thermal blast and shockwave. Hence, you still have time to get away, even if radiation exposure is higher because the two biggest quick k*ll scenarios would happen before you see a well defined mushroom cloud.

  • @davidjh7
    @davidjh7 Місяць тому +4

    I'd almost recommend you react to the classic "Threads", but things are depressing enough these days.

    • @mikhailiagacesa3406
      @mikhailiagacesa3406 9 днів тому

      People who play Fallout should DEFINATELY see it, if they haven't already.

  • @kattterina
    @kattterina Місяць тому

    yessss! i’ve been hoping for you to this show 😊
    i love nuclear ☢️ topics and fallout is my favorite game ahhh

  • @0chuklz0
    @0chuklz0 18 днів тому

    One thing that seems to be ignored from the equation is the presence of quick healing medicines and insanely effective anti-radiation medications. Assuming the nukes were actually more like neutron bombs, as well as being ground bursts, Cooper's survival for the next few hours is 'believable'. If he came across some radaway and/or stimpacks, both he and his daughter would be saved from their initial damage and exposure. The ghoulification was just something that happened to a small number of people, and the script says that having received a terminal dose of rads, Cooper changed into a ghoul. He was one of the few that reacted to the rads that way. Thanks for the analysis.

  • @miriamweller812
    @miriamweller812 Місяць тому +1

    To be fair: a lower yield can be a bigger problem, because high yield can easily lead to a lot of material just blown into space.
    It would be a lot about the 'perfect' yield to reach that orbit in which a majority of that material would stay for a long time and not either be thrown from the planet for good or fall back again.

    • @Staladus
      @Staladus Місяць тому

      Ok I dont think high yield nukes can send stuff into orbit lmao. The ash cloud doesnt even reach the stratosphere most of the time

  • @murilotheodoro5025
    @murilotheodoro5025 21 день тому

    Hey, while you're at it, I'd love to see your reactions to Shoddycast's series on the science of fallout. He even has a video on the mini nukes you mentioned. He even talks about how the mushroom cloud visuals on small explosions too

  • @RandomPerson-yq1qk
    @RandomPerson-yq1qk Місяць тому +2

    In Fallout 76 you get more than daily nukes still being launched by players to farm endgame items and enemies on a single server. So if we consider player action in f76 as canon across all servers then A LOT of nukes are being continously lauched even 25 years after the war. All just in the name of creating exotic materials.

    • @shadewolf0075
      @shadewolf0075 26 днів тому +1

      Lore wise there are only 2 confirmed cases of the vault 76 dwellers using the nukes

    • @jimskywaker4345
      @jimskywaker4345 23 дні тому

      I love that explanation.

  • @tiberius8390
    @tiberius8390 23 дні тому

    What I noticed is in the games e.g. Fallout 4 obviously the greater Boston area is much much smaller than it actually is. So when we consider that "Sanctuary" is actually a little bit North West of Concord and ground zero of that nuke is somewhere around the town of Dover (which is way outside of downtown Boston), we are talking a distance of 27 kilometers or about 17 miles. That means the single nuke in Fallout 4 that hits the Boston area when scaled to the real world must be approximately 2.3 megatons in size to do the damage we see in the game (then again it's 200 years later when you actually play in the game and a lot of damage could just be done by time).
    So it might be an oversight in the show or just following the game aesthetics that the nukes look so small, while IRL they should be much larger. For the show it's certainly a jawdropping shot.

  • @Tijuanabill
    @Tijuanabill 27 днів тому +1

    The breakdown zero humans were asking for, fact checking a game that doesn't even take itself seriously, and makes jokes about how laughable the premise is, in the game itself.

  • @BubbleShield570
    @BubbleShield570 16 днів тому

    Lets not forget that in the Fallout universe the nukes were made to pollute the land and air as much as possible so that the other nation couldnt use said land after detonation and not destroy infrastructures. In fact in fallout most buildings were still up after the bombs, with exceptions of course.
    They used one nuke like we do in our world that was meant to destroy the city of Shady Sands and you can see the difference, not much radiation but a big crater.

  • @williampmcd8548
    @williampmcd8548 8 днів тому

    Hi, can you comment/speculate any way acoustic materials could be engineered to absorb radiation as at Fukushima or Chernobl? Thank you.

  • @johnwiebe8581
    @johnwiebe8581 5 днів тому

    Hey, First time here and this is a good review video, I had actually not seen the film theory vid for the TV show. It is good to hear opinions from a person who is educated in the field. That said Fallout games are...Games, and I prefer them to be over the top comical and relaxing. This is why the games have 'Crocket' launchers you can aim at your feet and survive, miracle drugs that heal and remove rads, etc. The TV show had a chance to show some real blasts but this shows they went small, like micro nukes that were still the size of 'Big Boy'. I will check into your other videos on Fallout and Chernobyl.

  • @frederickmiles8815
    @frederickmiles8815 26 днів тому

    Wow 1st time i have seen actual accurate analysis - great analysis

  • @rflats771
    @rflats771 5 днів тому

    In the game, MOST of the delivery systems are aircraft(the 50's aesthetic) so MOST of the weapons in game are closer to older lower yeild free fall bombs. Missiles etc were actually rare in game.
    The book be mentioned from the F1 game is just stating ACTUAL weapon facts,not the ones in game, also people should ask the game devs and show's producers

  • @jonasprebenmindejohansen930
    @jonasprebenmindejohansen930 26 днів тому

    Nice video, good info but dude you know that you have to make a video about how to shelter, shield ourselves and survive a nuclear Fallout since we are in a possible future where threats of nuclear war is very possible.

  • @edwardwoodhead7979
    @edwardwoodhead7979 Місяць тому +2

    In the year 536 was the closest we came to a global nuclear winter.

  • @alexbryda
    @alexbryda 27 днів тому

    BRO YO THIS IS ACTUALLY AWESOME! Much respect to your knowledge ❤🙏 i always wondered what about fallout is actually possible? 👌 and with the bomb dropping scene it's in slow motion so the shock waves do come in momentarily after than breaking all the glass and causing destruction 👾♥️ and the 50s theme is because it takes place in a timeline where technology progressed differently and Bethesda wants to reference the actual 1950s since at that time nuclear war was very very feared

  • @skunkmyrddyn
    @skunkmyrddyn 27 днів тому

    There's also a comment in one of the games (I forget which one) that the bombs that started the devastation also set off most of the various small batteries and other nuclear devices that were powering everything. From cars, to homes. Each of these would not have a large explosive blast, but could add to the amount of localized blanketing waste. It's never described how well these more portable devices would detonate. Could they be incomplete explosions, or just shatter and spray their irradiated components about.

  • @darkhoodorderofgray6354
    @darkhoodorderofgray6354 25 днів тому

    Little bit of a fun fact with the lore of the fallout universe the nukes were actually part of a submarine stealth launcher or basically they are a rocket

  • @ravenauslander3726
    @ravenauslander3726 12 днів тому

    In the Fallout universe, they canonically used ground burst nukes to create more radioactive fallout.

  • @RovingTroll
    @RovingTroll Місяць тому +2

    My headcannon for the Fallout Great War has for a long time been that they peppered the continent with thousands of small yield nukes. A half a dozen or more for each city kinda bombardment. But I also think that the aftermath of that Day was a whole lot of survivor settlements rising, fighting, and using now abandoned nuclear facilities to effectively continually nuke themselves for generations. This is why by time you get to Fallout 3, the world just looks GHASTLY

    • @RandomPerson-yq1qk
      @RandomPerson-yq1qk Місяць тому +1

      In f76 people use nukes just to get their hands on exotic irradiated plants and similar materials. In Fallout radiation = magic and Fallout's dirty nukes are a perfect way to irradiate a lot of stuff for the magic properties.

  • @borisivanov2806
    @borisivanov2806 21 день тому

    Note that mutated fauna, super mutants and ghouls aren't due to radiation, but due to the massively more advanced gene- and biotech in the Fallout universe. The chems they used 2077, including stimpack, were really crazy.

  • @dotdedo
    @dotdedo 25 днів тому

    4:50 I will say they did show the shock wave, it was in the scene before the one film theory showed. I bet they just didn’t want to cgi it for every bomb dropped

  • @spartenkiller456
    @spartenkiller456 27 днів тому

    Fallout is an alternate universe. The 1950's "atomic punk" is more than just an aesthetic. It's a world were the 1950's, pop/comic book understanding of radiation. Less cancer, more superpowers. To quote the fallout 4 parady "radiation can lead to debilitating death... It can also make you immortal."

  • @Snavels
    @Snavels 26 днів тому

    I think it's important to also note that Nukes (and physics as a whole) in Fallout do not act the same way they do in the real world. Instead, they act according to the pulpy 50s common sensibilities of what Nuclear Armageddon would entail: Gigantified Bugs, Endless Radiation, Zombified Humans, etc. Since Fallout one, it's never been particularly realistic, but it wasn't really trying to be. Thank you for your valuable input on this topic

  • @xPancakes4lyf
    @xPancakes4lyf 19 днів тому

    the smaller, surface level nukes falls in line with lore and vault techs plan to purge the land and wait for the radiation to kill the left overs and wait for the radiation to fade before opening all the vaults to re populate, not expecting people to survive.

  • @shaft_raiser
    @shaft_raiser 21 день тому

    The fact your mentioning that we don't see any bombs or rockets falling just makes me believe even more than vault tec in the end set them off on purpose

  • @sobas8411
    @sobas8411 24 дні тому

    i know near nothing about radiation so bare with me and this is just a question but, does the time for uranium etc to lose its radiation shorten if you break it down and separate it into small pieces? think of how ice melts faster when its in smaller pieces compared to if it where all connected. again i know nothing and im just speaking my curiosity

  • @cmkeelDIM
    @cmkeelDIM 2 дні тому

    Real Word attacks would use approximately 20-22 800KT warheads in airburst at about 3000 feet. This would cover the ENTIRE of the LA basin from Redlands to Van Nuys to Long Beach. That is roughly 4 - 6 SS-25 missiles. And they would detonate within 5 seconds of each other in a Time on Target attack. BOOM!
    I am pretty sure that the Teller-Ulam Fusion bombs were never a thing in the Fallout Universe. Read that somewhere over a decade ago so I can't back it up, but a fully fission warhead can get into the megaton range, but it is HORRIBLY inefficient. Something like 11-15% of the material actually undergoes fission before the core is blasted apart.
    Also wanna read about a humanity killing volcano look up Toba.

  • @slab-dd6vj
    @slab-dd6vj 9 днів тому

    Good reaction video, I liked it a lot.
    About the nuclear winter section, the question I have is what would be something like this: to release soot in the atmosphere what would be more efficient? 1* 30 000 MT bomb or 10 000 * 1MT bombs and the factor that came to my mind is location and time.
    The volcano that erupted was mostly surrounded by seas, While the bombs would mostly fall on the northern continents during what looked like summer to me. the bombs could start many more large forest fires than the volcano could. would that be enough to produce as much or more soot the volcano?

    • @samiraperi467
      @samiraperi467 4 дні тому

      Volcanos produce soot only secondarily, by lighting fires. What you get out of volcanos is basically very fine dust, not soot. If you ask me, what you want to do for maximum particulate emissions, you blow up forests, oilfields, *anything* that burns.

  • @sealstech8087
    @sealstech8087 25 днів тому

    Thanks to the animation of intense storms in fallout 4 and even more so in its Far Harbor DLC, I think “nuclear winter” is a blanket term, while it’s obvious the environment sees a swing of extremes day to day, it was never an ice age.
    The mass fire idea is supported by how everything is burned or has evidence of a fire in the past even far beyond the immediate blast area.
    I suspect the mutations are less from the initial fallout or the half lives of the remaining fallout and more so from generations of contaminated food and water being consumed bit by by decade for decade.
    Some vaults opened soon by design while others played a long game. You can see some towns being rebuilt before being destroyed again. The wasteland has gotten worse, not better.

  • @Metaljacket420
    @Metaljacket420 7 днів тому

    'Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.' -Mark Twain

  • @stefthorman8548
    @stefthorman8548 20 днів тому

    you have to remember, even if they are aesthetically 1950's, they are technologically more advanced than us in nuclear research, since unlike us, they didn't screech to an halt like when our cold war ended.

  • @KeiranTrick
    @KeiranTrick 26 днів тому

    I got recommended this video, as a long time '___ Theory' fan.
    Great video, thanks for making it. I haven't seen anything else you've done yet, but plan to watch your video on Nuclear Winter!
    I do think it's a little silly to say they're 'misusing' the term theory, when they've always (to my knowledge at least) been using it colloquially and not intentionally conflating it with the scientific definition. Though, I understand the frustration with so many people not knowing there is a difference.
    Other than that minor nitpick, I appreciate the fair criticism leveled here, and was glad to learn from a professional's corrections. I never take any Game/Film Theory video as fact without doing my own reading, unless they've cited/brought on a professional on the topic. I wish more fans would do the same, and I'm sure Team Theorist want that as well. I hope their ever-growing resources are used to reach put to more experts in the fields they discuss, such as nuclear physics/engineering, to avoid mistakes like they made here.
    (Also, just to be clear, I'm dumb as a sack of bricks with no expertise in any stem/steam fields to speak of. Which is why I know mistakes happen, people get misinformed or misunderstand information, and learning requires double-checking what people say instead of assuming people are correct)

  • @Mastikator
    @Mastikator Місяць тому +1

    Don't you need the really big yields to push the aerosols high enough into the atmosphere to cause a nuclear winter anyway? A hundred thousand tiny nukes seems like answer to the question "how to we kill a country without causing nuclear winter".
    Also, setting off volcanoes to slow down climate change sounds like a Bond villain's plan.

  • @As3th8r
    @As3th8r Місяць тому +1

    What yield would you guess for the visuals? 1-2 kt?
    Edit: That's what i get for commenting early. The Info is in the video

  • @aka-chi_hurron
    @aka-chi_hurron 22 дні тому

    So here's the thing, people forget that EVERYTHING from alarm clocks to the cars to power suits and everything between is powered by mini nuclear reactors or nuclear fission batteries. So while the bombs themselves having short half-lives isn't an issue.
    The radiation 200 years later isn't from the bombs, it's from all the mini nuclear reactors in the blast radius going critical, which would have half-lifes more than enough to be a danger 200 years later. It would be more of a comparison to simulate a fat man being dropped on Chernobyl before the melt down
    This is on top of the fact that the nuclear bombs in game are vastly different from real world nukes. Ours being designed for as much physical destruction in as large of an area as possible, the radiation being more of a side product. The nukes in Fallout were designed to output as much radiation as possible, the physical destruction being a side product.
    People tend to directly compare the bombs in fallout to real world bombs without taking into consideration the different design philosophies and the environments they are detonated in

  • @laser85
    @laser85 Місяць тому

    If possible to answer due to security reasons, what is the most dangerous event that’s happened at the nuclear plant you work at. And is/are the reactor(s) at your power plant pressurised water reactor(s)

  • @KarmCraft
    @KarmCraft 27 днів тому

    A widely disregarded detail is that the mutations are a consequence of the FEV in the atmosphere and not of the radiation.

  • @Merennulli
    @Merennulli Місяць тому +6

    The difference with the Tambora eruption was secondary effects. Yes, the yield is far lower for the Fallout war, but it's spread out with secondary sources of particulate into the upper atmosphere. But, yes, more up to date models for nuclear winter are relatively short and survivable. The problem is after nuclear winter ends with the particulate falling out of the atmosphere, you're left with the CO2 and other greenhouse gasses from all those projected fires and a lot of decaying matter from the nuclear winter period adding more to it and a slow recovery as plants and algae re-colonize areas.
    Obviously, neither of these is the end of the world, but it's certainly plausible to end up with post-apocalyptic power struggles, resource shortages and systems collapse like something out of Mad Max. To be honest, the biggest threat of nuclear war is systems collapse. We could feasibly bounce back to producing enough food not too long after nuclear war, but if we don't have the systems in place to get it to people, things get really bad really fast for anywhere that isn't within walking distance of enough actively producing farmland for the population. Which doesn't just mean every big city but even a lot of rural towns.

    • @LoricSwift
      @LoricSwift 27 днів тому

      One of the things that always sticks out to me in these post-apoc settings (Fallout, Mad Max etc), humanity's biggest enemy is invariably humanity itself. For person trying to rebuild any scrap of civilisation there seems to be someone just out for themselves ready to take what they can carry and burn everything else down. Its even worse in Fallout where it has been 200 years and people are still struggling and living of pre-war scraps.

    • @mikhailiagacesa3406
      @mikhailiagacesa3406 9 днів тому

      No seed crops, no fertilizer, no irrigation water, no food; if you survive initially, you will be living off the land. What's left of it.

    • @Merennulli
      @Merennulli 9 днів тому

      @@mikhailiagacesa3406 Why would there be no seed crops, fertilizer or irrigation water in what we just talked about? That may be true of the fantasy world of Fallout that has openly admitted it's based on "because we needed a wasteland for the story" logic, but it doesn't work with even the outdated and incorrect projections of nuclear winter at the height of the Cold War, let alone the current projections.

  • @plantelo
    @plantelo 12 днів тому

    I'll just point out here that Honest Hearts offers a much more realistic and grounded view of nuclear explosions through Randall Clark's journal entries, including musing "Two months in cave. Still lethal outside. Don't get it. In army they said 2-4 weeks cleared fallout."

  • @olibeau7955
    @olibeau7955 25 днів тому

    AFAIK the Fallout universe is different from ours not only historically but also the laws of physics are different. Energy behaves differently there. That's why radiation can spontaneously mutate things and they never were able to develop semiconductors despite investing massive amounts of money into science and robotics.

  • @Metaljacket420
    @Metaljacket420 7 днів тому

    Detonating on the surface will cause less direct destruction, but doesn't it also greatly increase the amount of fallout from the bombs?

  • @drakenred6908
    @drakenred6908 25 днів тому

    1 Fev. The fallout universe has a couple of decades of genetic engineering. It also has people able to buy some surprisingly advanced self motivating AI. That is able to function after 200 years with minimal maintenance. Also the super mutants seemed to have been a research project that went on during and after the great war.
    Radiation. The fallout universe seemed to have gone in for nuclear power on an insain scale. Now visualize a world that replaced its 1950 s era power plants in every small town that was big enough with nuke plants. For example fallout 4 Concord had a Plutonium breeder reactor powering it.. add in fission powered jets and cars and the appearance of early fusion power, and 1950 s attitude to just dumping toxic waste anywhere...to parody levels.
    Again part of the point with fallout is it took 1950s paranoia and culture to insain levels to parody it. I mean seriously they were thinking about building actual atomic powered trains, cars, aircraft, and nuclear bomb powered rockets (Project Orion) (never mind the Other nuclear propulsion projects like Pluto)

  • @thefigure13
    @thefigure13 10 днів тому

    The nukes in fallout seem to be MIRV type smaller yield weapons. The point was to also facilitate a ground invasion by the Chinese as we can see in Fallout 4 by the presence of the Yangtze in Boston harbour. The Chinese wouldn’t have ships or subs this close to America if they had planned to just wipe out the Americans they’d be using Tzarbomba yield warheads that can wipe out a 100 mile radius with a single bomb at max yield.

  • @danielrickner7190
    @danielrickner7190 4 дні тому

    Can nukes, radiation, or magnetic fields mess up clocks?
    Bethesda has a habit of showing the world as if a few years have passed, but says it's been decades or centuries. We built steel skyscrapers and mass air transit just a few decades after wood balloons and horses were ubiquitous.

  • @jakeand9020
    @jakeand9020 27 днів тому

    The nuclear war caused far more radiation than predicted. Vault 111, for example, ran out of supplies within 180 days, which not only took into account the fallout it's self but potential enemy invasions and "other factors." It was expected the "all clear" would be received well within that time frame. Nobody knows what happened to cause the extreme amounts of radiation.
    Basically, even in game lore, there's no explanation why things didn't go basically the way you predict.
    There are rumors/theories, ranging from FEV being released into the atmosphere by the explosions combined with the abnormal amounts of radiation caused the mutations to alien intervention or Vault-tec playing with alien tech they thought they understood. Or the fact that virtually everything ran off nuclear power from cars to homes, not to mention the larger powerplants, which basically caused Chernobyl everywhere there was civilization.
    Regardless there's no real explanation for what happened except that it shouldn't have.
    All the long term vaults that were to remain closed for ridiculous amounts of time were experiments that were supposed to be monitored by Vault-tec after the few days to months it was supposed to take to be safe. Again "months" because of the risk of invasion, domestic turmoil etc, not radiation. All the "you're going to have to remain in the vaults for generations" was fear mongering towards the general population whose only knowledge of anything really was what they were told by the corporate media, or to put simply, what Vault-tec wanted them to know/believe.

  • @drTERRRORRR
    @drTERRRORRR 26 днів тому

    Also : "M.A.D." means there would be multiple hydrogen bombs per square kilometr over any major settlement, so picture New Year's Eve, but with heavy nukes, so I'd expect a huge slab of black glass covering the LA,not ruins.

  • @endymion30
    @endymion30 7 днів тому

    Prior to 76 I’m 💯 certain people were on the surface and several control vaults actually opened up less than a fee decades after the bombs dropped
    Some vaults waited longer as per directive
    1 took place roughly 100 years later, 2 was 80 years after 1
    3 was 200 years and were born outside of the vault and was told a lie by dad
    4 200 + years and was frozen

  • @lennysmileyface
    @lennysmileyface 25 днів тому +1

    That's just a hypothesis, a game hypothesis!

  • @Jameshunt2663
    @Jameshunt2663 18 днів тому

    Fallout 4’s mc was trapped for a little over 210 years thanks to being frozen in a cryopod