The “initial group” was obviously not considered as being within this problem having initiated the original plan and accepted the family arrangements and other implications of their efforts. The same applied to all those who worked directly on the shelter. These persons were aware of the shelter’s position and could have, at any time, disclosed this information to others. Such disclosure would have been to their detriment and would have been of no benefit to those to whom they disclosed the information. Had this happened the shelter would probably have been saturated without the facilities to support the numbers demanding residency.
It is now obvious that the builder’s shelter workers had fully understood that the other members of the group were required to create their new society. For this reason they maintained the security of the information as this was of considerable value to the survival of their direct families. In addition these were the first people allowed to live in the shelter compound as they would provide the labour necessary to set up the initial, interior, fittings and indeed would enstore the edifice with the material provided by our ignorant guests. From the time of their transfer to the accommodation they would have no contact with the outside world as all communications into (except for public television and radio) or out of the shelter compound was banned and strong action taken to prevent any such things happening. I was surprised that they accepted the restrictions placed on them but, in my opinion, it was necessary as too much vehicular or electromagnetic movement, at that later stage, might have attracted unwanted attention.
The electromagnetic communications ban was strictly enforced by the removal of all means of personnel external communications at least eight kilometres from the shelter. This was enhanced by the fact that all unauthorized travel by any of these persons was forbidden. This proved not to be as great a trial as expected as the communication elements would prove non functional after the impact so cold turkey extraction of all our personnel’s communications was not as painful as one might have expected.
The small group of guests we had invited from outside the country were brought into the shelter compound as soon as was possible. This was to secure their arrival as later travel might have been more difficult and we had to consider the unlikely possibility of a change of heart by those guests. None of our guests ever showed any inclination to leave but our restrictive action was a reasonable precaution.
Our guests, being on site, were involved directly in the work of the project at an early stage; even if only as labourers. However, before being brought to the shelter they were unaware of our shelters geographical position so, in reality, they were, from their original contact with us, fully reliant on the honesty of our offer and presentation; we must have been quite persuasive. Their faith was based, initially, on our explanation that they were needed because of their expertise in an essential, if limited, field of work and, by extension, their belief that we actually offered them and their families a realistic chance of survival.
When foreign invitees arrived they would be immediately put up at the holiday house which, in spite of its size, had very restricted residential space due to the storage of so much of our supplies. As these guests had been advised that they would, from the moment of their arrival, be kept in total isolation from the local population who, it was most important, should not know of their existence. A strange face and accent would have been an unwanted indication to the locals. These foreign invitees, therefore, could also be considered reliable.
In return for their work on the shelter our guests were allowed, as one of our many make-work and time passing schemes, to design their own accommodation within the limitations of our energy and size restrictions. For this reason their accommodation was slightly different to those members of the “original group” when they came later. Whenever a family arrived at the site they were similarly allowed this upgrading freedom to rapidly introduce them to the environment and the existing personnel. This work also tended to stop them thinking of their problems.
All of the shelters prospective families had been advised that no children (those under eighteen years of age), in any of the families, could be told anything about what was going on. If they were told anything it was to be that they were going to stay with a remote family member further to the south or north. The excuse would be that they considered such a move would give them a greater chance of survival away from the central plain.
Nobody outside of the “initial group”, who had not carried their communications system within eight kilometres of the shelter since the start of the project, on arriving close to the shelter were allowed to carry any form of communication technology, with transmission capability, within that eight kilometres radius. All functioning communication equipment could be traced and this would, potentially, have endangered our security. One problem was the governments monitoring system; for this reason many phones were stored as active in remote locations so that they did not suddenly cease to exist.
One request that was made to all our proposed guests was that they gave us any old fashioned, non wireless, analogue communication systems in their possession or they could reasonably obtain. These analogue systems would form part of the initial shelters internal communication system and would later be used to provide communication between our shelter and any viable external group within a wired communication range. We also wanted any available old fashioned short range radio systems that they could obtain. The power supplies to these units were initially removed for our security.
Our guests were further requested, before their transfer to the shelter, to go into the countryside and obtain any fruits and nuts they could find without getting themselves into any trouble; no theft. The size of the fruit was not to be considered a reason for rejection. A small apple or walnut would provide very acceptable sustenance in the early days which would be very important. Any excess soft fruit could be turned into jam, before the disaster, which could then be stored into the medium term.
Once any of our in country guests had arrived at the shelter, they were not allowed to communicate, in any way, with the local population or with anyone from outside our “original group” without express permission which was very rarely given. We were very concerned that separation from friends and family ties, together with stressed nerves, might make someone talkative.
Our biggest actual problem, however, came from an apparently unlikely source that should have been predicted. Fernando, son of our leader Tomas Prieto, had a very long term girlfriend. He stated, about three months before the impact that he wished to stay with the young lady regardless of the consequences. A discussion with the young ladies family resulted in an agreement, which included the young lady, that when the Prieto family moved, as they had advised those from their local area, to the Pyrenees, the young lady, Cristina, could join the Prieto family rather than go to the local government shelter with her family.
From our point of view the Prieto shelter home had four beds so no additional facilities were required. It was only in the matter of additional food, and this was not considered a difficulty, hence we were certainly prepared to accept her. I was very concerned about accepting such blackmail but what could we then do? This was, fortunately, the only time, except for a few people in nearby houses that we invited and those we found wondering nearby at the last moment, that we accepted an external, non family inmate other than within the builder’s family and rich friend whose acceptance by us was somewhat different as they were beneficial to our cause.
It was arranged that two month before the impact she would leave, with the Prieto family, to the mountains. Though Cristina’s family was unhappy the father told Mr. Prieto that he was content that one of his large family had an alternative chance of survival. He did, however, insisted on a marriage before she left them. The marriage was arranged for the day prior to separation and this was a very tearful occasion; especially at the final departure.
The young lady was very unhappy when she eventually discovered what she was entering
into and wanted her family invited. It was pointed out, somewhat illogically, that it would be impossible due to space limitations. I considered it was a good thing that her phone had been removed. Even then she was watched very carefully until the shelter doors were finally closed. Although sad she accepted the separation and made no attempt to escape nevertheless it was a nervous few weeks.
Later, in a form of compensation, the couple were given, like our chemist, a small end of line home on their own and she slowly came to accept the situation. I believe, from memory, that his parents then shared their home with the veterinary nurse. The young couple later became very useful members of society; she as a nurse and he as an agricultural assistant initially learning, at his request, his new trade in our little garden areas.
When writing this history I considered that we were very lucky that our simple forms of security were so successful. At the time I wanted a far more rigorous form of isolation for those at the shelter. This was because they were, on arrival, aware of the shelter’s position and hence a greater danger to everyone. It should be noted that it only needed one of our guests to make a wrong remark at the wrong place to destroy all our hard work.
We had made up a list of items that we considered would be useful to our survival. Everything that was even potentially of some benefit, to our shelter’s future and us on our return to the world, that could be found in the homes of the “original group’s” families, were included in that list. This list included, though was not limited to, food (obviously), jewellery (gold, diamonds, silver as potentially technically useful), calculators (manual or electronic), alcohol, candles, clothes, paper, pens, ink, books, shoes, medicines, carpets, seeds, small items of furniture, electronic and electrical equipment (except radio emission phones), manual tools of all sorts (including some electric drills, quality drill bits, gardening equipment, measuring instruments of all types, manual engine hoists and other lifting equipment), cutlery, knives, cups, pots and pans, sports gear, blankets, car trailers, thermal insulation material of all sorts (we advised our guests that old carpets should also be considered here), undiluted antifreeze (this was a preference but we accepted high concentration antifreeze) and fuel antifreeze if obtainable (We succeeded in getting a small amount from Sweden and the Ukraine) in fact almost anything that could be easily transported. This even included old nails and mechanic’s junk boxes (from garages and amateur mechanics). These items were sorted and incorporated into our stores.
Most of the household excess of such materials had previously been removed, by each of the families, to our designated pickup points; often a builder’s yard or a safe address. Again all these persons were operating under faith of our good intentions. All this equipment was transported, by lorry, to a shelter outbuilding into which, whenever possible, it was initially dumped for future sorting.
Entertainment systems, clothes, candles, hand tools, paper and books received special treatment as being envisaged as most important. All items considered a risk, including all transmitting power sources were removed or rendered inoperable; normally by the simple removal of any power source. In this latter list were included generators, televisions, computers, radios etc. Some of these elements would later be returned to the owners, after the shelter doors had been closed in preparation for the impact, or given to one of the projects if it was thought they might benefit.
At the time of a family’s transfer to the shelter they were advised where and when to go with all their personally required, portable baggage including any specialist equipment, food etc. that they might have obtained since their last transfer of such items. The initial transfers were made as early as possible, while transport remained available, and was based on the availability of accommodation at the shelter.
The meeting point was always close to our guest’s homes as the availability of fuel to the public was, even at this time, limited. They were advised that at the meeting point they would be met by persons designated to assist them to the shelter. This communication, to the families, was always made by direct face to face communication with proof of identity either way, where there could be any doubt. This level of security was designed to further reduce the risk of information being accidentally made available to the wrong people.
Normally the meeting place would be a designated point on the map, given in GPS coordinates. This point would usually be an open area, on a track or road, well away from any normally visited localities. An order, and it was always an order, would be given to the family telling them to drive their vehicle to this designated place at a particular time and date being, usually, as soon after the arrangement for this meeting had been made as was possible.
At this meeting point they would be met by a carefully described vehicle whose personnel would remove and load all their baggage. This removal included useful elements removed from their vehicle; i.e. batteries, fuel, wiring - from older vehicles, spark plugs (the holes left in the engine were sealed), even tyres, alternator etc. Their vehicle was hidden, as well as possible, just off the road, the radiator and cylinder drained, to prevent frost damage. Note was taken of the vehicle position as further items, such as engines, might be useful later.
The families were then taken, by a modestly circular route through back streets, to the shelter. In fact they were first taken to a second point while a small group remained unseen at the pick-up point. These persons were to insure our guests had not been followed; this, fortunately, never happened and none of our planned reactions to such situations proved necessary.
At this second point the family and all their baggage were removed from the vehicle and carefully examined. Every member of the family was gently told to strip, either in the van in private or in a safe house, and they were then medically examined, by the doctor. This must have been very stressful for our guests but was necessary for the security of us all. An infectious disease, at this stage, could have been very dangerous within the restricted space of the shelter.
The medical examination was as thorough as possible within the limitations of time, resources and personnel. We had previously made all reasonable efforts to check on the health of all our guests’ family members but our previous methodology had, for obvious reasons, been rather basic. Unfortunately even such simple problems as diabetes would exclude any family from consideration for entrance to our shelter accommodation.
Two families were, in fact, excluded, fortunately before being offered a place, for medical reasons. The exclusions were necessary as a slow inevitable death or psychological breakdown from any known medical problems, in the limited space that was our shelter, would have had a distressing effect on the morale of already highly stressed inmates. The rational for the exclusions was that basic medicines, if such were available, for such problems could not be manufactured or stored during our time in the shelter. Fortunately no such problems were found in any of the invited families though some were given sedatives, on request, to help with the stressful situation they had found themselves in. Being unexpectedly told to strip, especially by strangers, in an isolated area is not conducive to calming already stressed nerves.
Though it proved unnecessary we had plans to use the cellar as a quarantine area had this been required as a result of any examination. This would not have been comfortable for any inmates placed in that environment at that time. Those required to stay in the quarantine area would have included the reception team and others being picked up which would have presented considerable problems for us as we had, at that time, but one doctor. If necessary we would have used the vets for further examinations but fortunately this option was not required
The new personnel were electronically scanned for any radio emissions; here, again, we always obtained a negative result. During this scanning their clothes and baggage were carefully examined for any contraband items (weapons and communication equipment most especially) and anything even remotely suspicious was removed and destroyed or retained for general storage.
Normally five fam
ilies would then be grouped, after an acceptable examination, and taken to the shelter together. This was necessary to reduce the number of journeys; many being over three hundred kilometres and therefore a potential risk at that time. The transfer exercise took less than two weeks and was fortunately completed without problems. It has become apparent that our caution, if actually necessary (I still strongly believe that it was on the basis of better sure than sorry), was successful.
Once people had arrived at the shelter and found that our presentations had been genuine they rapidly calmed down. They found the discomfort of their new surroundings a great deal less than they had been led to expect and the accommodation provided was far superior to their expectations. Now they knew that what had been promised had been exceeded and was, at least, acceptable almost all acquiesced to the situation and our orders without complaint.
When people arrived at the shelter they were given, as their first task, the transfer of their limited personnel baggage allowance to their designated home within the shelter. The family was then allowed the normal period of time to personalise their home to the extent that they were able. This period allowed them to integrate into the shelter within the limits of their home environment. It also provided them with time to feel that they had met their own habitation requirements prior to working with other inmates on the shelter environment itself. Much of this effort was make-work but we always tried to ensure that any such work had the potential to be useful either immediately or in the future. From this it can be seen that during this pre impact period we, of the initial group, were, of necessity, in charge of the daily running of the complex.
We were fortunate in that, during this initial period, most of the children saw the “holiday” in the shelter as an adventure. We were fully aware that this perception would not last long after they noticed the stress in their elders. It was at that point that they had to face, as innocents of true knowledge, the reality of the coming event; this they did with considerable courage.
Our asteroid survival: A fictitional history of the ten year survival of a large ELE asteroid impact by a small, pre advised, group Page 11