Page 1 of 2

Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 11:54 am
by justasking
Lets just say that if something where to happen. Something on a global scale,and our homes where not even safe. Caves would be the logical place to go. In Indiana which cave would be the best place to go. The cave would need flowing water and be deep enough to keep safe from dramatic winters, but would need to be safe from flooding. This is just one of those questions as a "just in case" scenerio.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 12:12 pm
by Scott McCrea
Kind of like in Wump World.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 12:20 pm
by Squirrel Girl
You'd probably be toast, cave or no. If you have a nuclear winter, for instance, that flowing water will be bringing radiation in from the surface. Plus, the air exchange would bring radiation in, too. It would be less than on the surface, but it would still be. Then there'd be the food you'd have to have stocked. I looked into this a few years ago when someone contacted me and the civil defense initiatives in the past all had the food go bad.

So, pick a cave, any cave. It might make it better than being on the surface, but not a lot better, and not for a long time.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 12:57 pm
by David Grimes
All caves are affected by the outside temperature so any cave in the same area would be close to the same temperature so depth would not matter for keeping out cold. Indiana caves would not be a good choice anyway if your looking for something deep below the surface since the deepest caves in Indiana are less than 300ft below the surface. As for surviving in a cave Indiana would not be a good choice if any cave would.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 1:19 pm
by Squirrel Girl
David Grimes wrote:All caves are affected by the outside temperature so any cave in the same area would be close to the same temperature so depth would not matter for keeping out cold. Indiana caves would not be a good choice anyway if your looking for something deep below the surface since the deepest caves in Indiana are less than 300ft below the surface. As for surviving in a cave Indiana would not be a good choice if any cave would.


I'm not sure about your line of reasoning. It takes about 2' of overlying rock to insulate a void underneath to make it the average annual temp of the area. However, if there's an *entrance* (what good is a cave without an entrance? :tonguecheek: ), there is exchange between the outside air and inside air. The distance into the cave (not depth) that the outside air affects the T is dependent on a lot of things, but you'll get to equilibration in about a few hundred feet. The temp might average out, but I don't know how far something like radiation, smoke, fumes would make their way into a cave. Presumably much farther in, but I don't have any data.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 2:03 pm
by David Grimes
I was actually refering to the average temperature of the area. If it only averages 30 degrees outside all the caves in that area are going to be near that temp inside and therefore which cave would not make a difference as far as temperature goes. With radiation a cave in Indiana (probably anywhere) will not save you.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 3:38 pm
by Squirrel Girl
David Grimes wrote:I was actually refering to the average temperature of the area. If it only averages 30 degrees outside all the caves in that area are going to be near that temp inside and therefore which cave would not make a difference as far as temperature goes. With radiation a cave in Indiana (probably anywhere) will not save you.


Well, Indiana (except spring and fall) caves aren't going to be close to the ave annual temp. But in the tropics that would be true (or perhaps the arctic). And it's more than just a simple temperature outside/inside. A chimney affect can cause strong winds and that's with simple temp difference over a short area.

I agree, that caves probably won't save you.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 4:00 pm
by David Grimes
Actually the average annual temp in Indiana is 54.5 degrees which is right at what our caves stay at. As far as I know all caves are around the average annual temp of the area. You are absolutely correct about wind but I have never seen an Indiana cave that there is strong enough air movement to make it seem colder or warmer.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 5:00 pm
by ian mckenzie
You could hide out in a Canadian Rockies cave where the temps are between -2 and +4C, but even the cavers here prefer the surface.

There are factors that alter the average-surface-temp thing, such as geothermal heating or evaporative cooling, but that usually only affects things by a degree or two. Cold-trap caves can be much colder than the average surface temp, and guano can make caves really hot...

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 29, 2009 6:11 pm
by wyandottecaver
Well ignoring all the serious reality talk....I would vote Wyandotte by far. It is mostly dusty dry with lots of mostly flat spacious livable areas connected by walking trails and never floods but is 200 feet above and within a 10 min walk (on a road) of a major river. It also does have several in cave areas where water can be collected though these won't support a lot of people continuously. It also has a supplemental food source (30,000+ bats) and you could maybe grow mushrooms or such in the ample and deep bat enriched cave sediments. It has 2 entrances (I can tell you about) plus 2 other 6" well casing holes used to run wiring that would keep fresh air moving but the 10+ miles of cave also has areas of stale air if outside air was an issue. It has a nice sturdy steel bat gate to keep out the zombie monsters and wide concrete steps descending the entrance that in turn are fed by a paved vehicle road right to the top of the steps to make moving your furniture and old mother in law easier. Amenities include bleachers, benches, lights if you have power and pre stashed first aid and rescue kits. Finally it has two functional outhouses in-cave...but they do smell!

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 30, 2009 12:15 pm
by justasking
So....which cave would be closest to northern indianapolis and be the best place with all those qualities i spoke of.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 30, 2009 7:28 pm
by ArCaver
justasking wrote:So....which cave would be closest to northern indianapolis and be the best place with all those qualities i spoke of.


Uh...do you know something we don't know?

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 31, 2009 11:56 am
by justasking
Im not talking radiation,explosions and what not. Just that if weather got bad. Really bad winters, abnormally high winds...yada yada. Just asking....lol

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 31, 2009 6:17 pm
by shibumi
justasking wrote:So....which cave would be closest to northern indianapolis and be the best place with all those qualities i spoke of.


Oh sure. We tell you, you tell two friends, they tell two friends...

and before you know it, our best SHTF bolt holes are full of refugees.

Guess again, suckah!

Anmar - not kidding.

Re: Hypothetically Speaking

PostPosted: May 31, 2009 10:11 pm
by Bill Putnam
Personally, I think the best cave for a person from Indianapolis (or anywhere else, for that matter) to use as a hide-out from the upcoming Global Climate Change Apocalypse would be Ruby Falls Cave in Chattanooga, Tennessee. While you are there, be sure to See Rock City.
:big grin: