Blast and thermal effects only, fallout not modeled.
Methodology:
GDW canon target list compiled into appropriate nudets for each area, paired with actual Soviet weapon yields (e.g., 3MT becomes 3x1 MT, 1.5 MT becomes 3x500 kt) to create a laydown file.
Fine grid population data from
https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/da...tes-rev11/docs loaded into a Postgresql database.
For each nuclear detonation, each population grid point within the 1.0 PSI or greater footprint assessed for casualties and accrued to a dead/injured column. Since there were a lot of high population areas where detonation effects overlapped, this was necessary to keep from double counting the population that was killed two or three times.
Assessment for casualties was done by curve backfitting fatalities and injuries from the Hiroshima atomic bombings to PSI levels.
Potential undercounts of casualties (methodology flaws) are:
- thermal effects (thermal scales more linearly than blast effects with larger weapons)
- firestorm fatalities (some casualty models basically assume 100% mortality within the >=5 PSI ring due being unable to escape before being engulfed by firestorms)
- obviously no fallout modeling