Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-212.56.135.17-20160525143405/@comment-27565137-20160526192612

Bugthe wrote:

Its the Ark and MW survival for 97 years, station and nuclear rocket rides to earth and now road trips in rovers that is silly to the extreme. The only problem of the Ark was that it survived reentry like it did. Now building them and surviving in space for 97 years. Totally achievable. Especially if they're well build so they can generate artificial gravity.

Mount Weather. Again totally feasable. Although the main problem was the luxury and abundance they showed. A well built bunker/ark can sustain a certain number of people for a thousand years. If all goes well without a major problem. But not to the point you'd have those tables filled with food, cakes and whatever. That to me was without a doubt the main flaw. Also 97 years isn't enough so you'd lose all tolerance to radiation.

Yes. Too much equipment survived the crash. Also why would a space station possess rovers? It isn't like they could use them to ride from the different areas of the Ark.

Also where's the shop where they make the bullets. Seeing that ammo is also in great abundance.