Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!att!cbnews!military
From: arf@chinet.chi.il.us (Jack Schmidling)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Shielding Nukes
Summary: case closed, almost
Message-ID: <8693@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 31 Jul 89 12:29:17 GMT
References: <8530@cbnews.ATT.COM> <8631@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Chinet - Chicago, Ill.
Lines: 41
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: arf@chinet.chi.il.us (Jack Schmidling)


areich/e4 
 
 
Article 2118 (10 more) in sci.military: 
From: pwcs!royf@cs.utexas.edu (Roy Forsstrom) 
Subject: Re: Shielding Nukes 
 
>On the California, CGN-36, the engineroom was zoned for  
maximum hours per day that a person could remain in a  
particular area while the reactor was operating.The times  
ranged from a minimum of 3 h/d along the reactor compartment  
wall to 24 h/d in the control room.  
 
>As for weapons, I don't recall seeing any signs limiting 
exposure in the vicinity of the ASROC compartment. I did  
tour the Sherwood Forest area of several boomers, and also  
don't recall seeing any signs. In fact, I did see  
weightlifing equipment and lounge chairs!   
 
ARF says: 
 
In view of the fact that no numbers appear to be  
forthcoming, I accept your anecdotal and circumstantial  
evidence as indicating that there is probably no conspiracy  
to coverup the radiation danger of nukes because the same  
incentive would exist for reactors. 
 
             CASE CLOSED  
 
Well, then again, one thing did occur to me.  If the  
presence of nukes was supposed to be a secret, the warnings  
would be a give away. 
 
Thanks, 
 
The Amateur Radio Forum (arf)