Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
Hitler and the Atom bomb
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Sleepysissco (U4090737) on Wednesday, 24th May 2006
HOw different would world war two have turned out had Hitler's scientists managed to make an Atom bomb by later 1944 or early 1945? Would hitler have used it agains soviet Russia or against the United States? Just a Thought!
Thanks
Philip -
Message 2
Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Wednesday, 24th May 2006
Hmm, good one. I can see him nuking a moderately important city to make his point, then threatening the allies with further attacks (London, Paris, Brussles, Rome) unless they come to a negotiated settlement. The western allies will consider it, but the Soviets will just ignore the threats and roll on anyway, ignoring any attacks (the Germans probably couldn't reach Moscow and Stalin would be willing to sacrifice anything west of there.) Ultimately Germany would still lose, but whether Russia would get further west than they did is a possibility.
-
Message 3
Posted by generallobus (U1869191) on Wednesday, 24th May 2006
Pure speculation, but if the image of Hitler in the final days is correct ie. the portayal in Downfall, then I'd have thought he would have tried anything. I think there was some talk on here a while ago of German plans to find some way of sending missiles over to the US. Could be wrong tho'.
Slight tangent here. I love that line of Speer's in Downfall. Hitler's wondering if he should get out and head for the hills. Speer answers "the lead actor should be on stage when the curtain falls." -
Message 4
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 24th May 2006
OK, based on the Germans behaviour when they did develop a new V weapon, it is safe to say that they wouldn't use it in anger until they had a fair size stockpile, so here's how I'd do it.
First off, a test detonation, not in the New Mexico desert, but in New York Harbour. A nuclear "mine", delivered in secret by U-boat is set off in the harbour, with catastrophic results from blast and the resulting tsunami. Massive casualties, and New York is a bit of a mess.
Secondly, a second "mine" set off in the Solent, just outside Portsmouth harbour, targetting invasion fleet shipping, with the same result.
Although the Germans had assumed that the invasion would happen at Calais, they'd not want to target London directly, they want a negotiated peace, not the destruction of London.
Third, a multiple attack on the Russian Front (In Poland at this time), targetting major troop concentrations and the rear echelon of the Red Army.
For the US, the effect would be bad, they had never been attacked on the mainland in force, and the casualties would be massive, however, I doubt they'd be wanting to talk surrender.
For the UK, the results are even worse, London forcibly evacuated, chaos amongst the people, the government moves to its reserve location.
A large percentage of the invasion force is lost, the rest scattered to smaller ports.
On the Russian Front, things are worse, with the Germans also unleashing their stockpiles of Nerve Gas, which they had since 1940 on the shocked Russian frontline troops. The Russian front becomes unstable, with massive gaps in the lines, and terror and chaos amongst the troops.
So, I'd follow that up with a demand to the US and UK to cease all air raids on Germany immediately or face more nukes. With the Russians, no demands made, just a second wave of four more nukes deep behind the lines, this time launched by V2s, to spread the panic further.
The US and UK naturally refuse, and send over a massive bombing raid to Berlin, so forcing further action. This time, nuke mines set off just off the Virginia coast, targetting Norfolk naval base, Nova Scotia, and New Orleans, with the same result as on New York. Against Britain, Scapa flow gets the same treatment, along with a nice badly defended city, probably Norwich or Ipswich receiving an air dropped nuke. Just for good measure, a wave of V1s is launched at London, and panic ensues. One of the V1s is armed with a nuke, and instead is set to go off just south of the capital, causing blast damage and fallout, but nothing huge. A final demand for a negotiated peace is sent to London and Washington, similar to the "rain of ruin" speech made by Truman, and the US and UK agree to a ceasefire.
In the East of course, no ceasefire is offered, and the Germans now begin to advance, avoiding the nuked areas as they do so. Then finally, a long range FW200 Condor drops a nuke on Moscow, killing Stalin and most of the Politburo. Russia is now leaderless, and the V2s continue to fall, targetting concentrations of radio signals, directly attacking the Russian generals.
That's how I'd see it unfolding...
Not pleasant! -
Message 5
Posted by Little Enos Rides Again (U1777880) on Wednesday, 24th May 2006
Surely German nuclear capability by late 1944 or early 45 would be to late?
i.e. Allied forces already occupy France, Italy and are pushing into Belgium and the Ruhr / Rhineland. The Russians advance on the east towards the German borders etc. Its still check mate to the allies.
If Germany nuked any allied country, which i'm sure they would of done in desperation given the capability, it would no doubt be met by a US B-29 dropping the A-bomb and repaying the compliment on Berlin and no more Adolph war over.
If the Germans had an A-bomb in 1943 however then DL's post may be the right outcome? -
Message 6
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Thursday, 25th May 2006
Hi little Enos, I'd set it as the Nazis having the bomb ready to use at the beginning of 1944, like you said, anything after that, and the allies are already getting close to victory.
The Germans would have attempted to get a negotiated peace rather than win against the western Allies, but the Russians would have just been nuked into the stone age. The Russian Front was always a "war of annihilation", so nuking cities would have been well within Hitler's plan, he didn't want the population centres, just the territory. -
Message 7
Posted by Colquhoun (U3935535) on Thursday, 25th May 2006
I don't think it would have been as bad as DL suggests.
If Hitler did get the bomb it is likly that he would only have one or two actual bombs. Remember if the Japanese hadn't surrendered after the second nuke it would have been months before the Americans had any more nukes ready. The same would apply to the Germans, probably more so given the state of German rescources at the time.
It is questionable whether the bomb could be adapted to a v1 or v2 - little boy was actually quite big and heavy. Thus the bomb would have to be dropped by an aircraft - very risky in late 44 early 45. Given that the allies had almost complete air superiority it is likly that any aircraft would be shot down before it could reach its target. As well as this I don't think the Germans had any strategic heavy bombers like the B29 that could carry the bomb.
The only remaining delivery ssytem would be a submarine carried mine as been suggested. This too involves quite a bit of risk, the submarine has to reach the target and escape undetected. This at a time when the battle of the Atlantic had been won, the chances of a uboat reaching New York or even making it close enough to a heavily defended UK harbour are not great.
Because of the high risk of the bomb not reaching its target I think the best strategy for the Germans would have been to detonate it in German controlled territory but reletively near the frontline so it could be seen by the allies. Then Hitler would hope that he could bluff the allies into believing that he had many bombs and get the allies to agree a favourable peace. -
Message 8
Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Thursday, 25th May 2006
A captured B29/B17/adapted Dakota which takes off during a bombing raid and mingles in with the returning bombers might get away with it (although almost certainly a suicide mission.)
-
Message 9
Posted by Little Enos Rides Again (U1777880) on Thursday, 25th May 2006
I would of thought that a V2 would of been capable of being fitted with a nuke war head as it was arguably the only delivery system available to the Germans. As has been said the sea and air were virtually dominated by the allies.
Could a Heinkel HE-111 get away with carrying a fat boy equivalent? Albeit no doubt it would be shot down unless a night mission was attempted even then very slim odds.
But a German use of an atomic weapon would only make the allies even more determined to end the war and I could never see them negotiating a surrender. 1 or 2 bombs probably wouldn't be enough to turn things round for Germany. Albeit a German nuclear strike may actually have helped the Japanese cause in the pacific as no doubt any nuclear strike on them would have been put on hold.
P.S. DL, I am about 600 pages through Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising, great book thus far and pretty convincing....... -
Message 10
Posted by MB (U177470) on Saturday, 27th May 2006
I would have thought a single U-Boat would have a good chance of getting across the Atlantic if it kept radio silence and well away from any convoys.
Approaching London or Portsmouth might be more difficult with mine fields, booms and loops but not impossible.
MB -
Message 11
Posted by mickeymay (U3600416) on Sunday, 28th May 2006
Well as I recall, Hitler was pretty close. I saw a documentary on heavy water made in scandinavia, I think? Yet if Ihad been hitler, and the technology available, I would've used it firstly, on the oncoming Russian army, and then London. Churchill would have probably been shocked, but tightened his belt and demanded the end of of the hun. If more A- bombs fell, then who knows?
-
Message 12
Posted by mickeymay (U3600416) on Sunday, 28th May 2006
From what I can remember, British and partisan forces destroyed Hitler's Nordic heavy water plants,thus leaving his A bomb factories ineffectual.
-
Message 13
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Tuesday, 30th May 2006
Nah, Hitler wasn't even close.
Heisenberg didn't have a clue about how to make a working nuke, he hadn't even figured out the mechanism behind it, and was nowhere near to producing weapons grade fissile material, so the best they could have managed was a "dirty" bomb, spreading radioactivity rather than a big boom.
Heavy water is one thing, but most of the Nazis supply ended up at the bottom of a fjord. They didn't have the industrial capacity required to make a functioning bomb. The US was the only nation which could have done it, and it took them billions of dollars, with tens of thousands of people working on it-not even counting the Los Alamos team.
The Norsk Hydro plant was attacked quite regularly by British and Norwegian forces, which prompted the Nazis withdrawal of all heavy water produced back to Germany. Quite funny really, they loaded it all on to a heavily armed train, then onto a ship. They never bothered to check the ship over before sailing, and the Norwegian resistance had put a bomb on the hull. The ship sank and the deuterium went with it. There was a recent expedition to see if they had actually sunk the heavy water, since it seemed a bit too easy. They recovered one of the drums, and it was intact, and still filled with heavy water. -
Message 14
Posted by Brevabloke (U1685837) on Tuesday, 30th May 2006
DL is right they were not at all close... Hiesenberg was a great scientist, but needed his intellectual foil Lise Mietner, who for obvious reasons was not there... Without her he was pretty ineffectual.
Plus until quite late the calx were wrong and showed 100 (or was it 10x) times more fissile material needed than really was; which depressed the lot of them considering how much they had actually produced.
Strangely enough some of the reactor designs they produced were far more interesting than the Chicago Pile, but none ever went critical. -
Message 15
Posted by SONICBOOMER (U3688838) on Tuesday, 30th May 2006
The Manhatten Project was a simply massive effort, in people, material and money.
Needing a place totally secure from attack.
The US was the only place this could be done in the 1940's.
Even then, a lot of 'brains' were imported for Manhatten, ironically including Jewish physicists who had fled Nazi rule.
Hitler himself was opposed to 'Jewish Science' whatever that meant.
They never had a chance, not that this was known for sure at the time, when the V-2's started falling on the UK, some Manhatten Scientists realised this weapon only made any sense with a nuke warhead, raising fears and probably, providing a further push as the construction and testing of the first device neared.
At least one Manhatten Scientist, became to beleive that Germany was not seriously in the atomic race, from what he knew of their science and industrial base, resigned before Trinity, before the final German surrender, he only justified working on Manhatten to himself by fears Hitler might just get there first.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.