CONFIDENTIAL
EFFECTIVENESS OF CIVIL DEFENSE ACTIONS
In this section the desirability of one civil defense action over another is considered
through comparing the proportions of the target populations that would be’killed by
enemy attacks with various numbers of 10-Mt ground-burst weapons delivered with various
cep whenthe civil defense action is (a) to seek the best shelter now available, (b) to seek
shelter with 3 ft.of earth cover, and (c) mass evacuation.
DEATHS FROM IMMEDIATE EFFECTS
Methodof Study
Resident population data for 1950 were distributed into cells 2000 by 2000 m each and
~~
-
variances were computed for the cities as binormal surfaces.
These data are shown for
Boston, Dayton, Milwaukee, St. Louis, and San Francisco in Figs. 3 to 7. For the Washington target, 1955 population data were obtained and were arrayed in cells 2 by 2 miles
each. Weapons with the population lethality rates shown in Fig, 9 were then aimed at
the centers of population * and cumulative deaths were computed. Where mass evacuation was the civil defense action the variances were increased at the rates indicated by
the Washington evacuation model (Table 5 and Fig. 10), and for Boston, Dayton, Mil-
waukee, and St. Louis were modified on the basis of the numberof lanes leaving the target
areas (Table 3). Since evacuation was not considered feasible for San Francisco (evacu-
ation model indicated that 11+ hr would be required to carry out this tactic), that area
is not given further consideration. The minimum times assumedto be spent in evacuating
the target were taken as equal to the warning times expected now, and the maximum as
equal to the warning times expected by the end of 1959 (Table 4).f Further methodological
details are given in Annex A.
Results
The results of these comparisons are given in Table 7 and Figs. 14 to 28. Figures 14
to 18 compare deaths from immediate effects from a single 10-Mt weapon for different
courses of civil defense action when the cer of the attack varies to 12,000 m; Figs. 19 to
28 compare the deaths resulting from different courses of action for 4000- and 12,000-m
cEP attacks when one to four 10-Mt weapons are employed.
|
|
|
*Although this study is limited to single aiming points, it should be pointed out that for all practical
purposes an attack with cep as large as 12,000 m can be considered an attack with random aiming points
throughout the target.
{Even though no warning timeor 0.5-hr warning timeis indicated now for coastal cities, 1 hr was granted
them in this study, on the basis that evacuation would not be considered with only a 0.5-hr warning available. In addition, for Washington and Boston 3 hr was used for comparative purposes, even thoughit is
unlikely that such times will be available.
|
}
ORO—R-17 (App B)
31
6 Eisen
i
“N
(=
* %y,
5
o