Hitler's Atomic Bomb, BUUUUMMM!

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4348497.stm

I heard about this verry controversated book.

But in my opinion if they wanned to use atomic weppons the wold it used it even it reqaired sinucide operations.

Not long before the end of the third reich, the Germans sent U-234 loaded with Uranium to Japan in order to help them with a nuclear program.
U 234 never got to japan,but surrended to the Americans(the two Japaneese oficers comited suicide ).
The Americans were glad about the Uraniumfound on bord and it was sent to the Menhatten project-and helped to make the Atomic bomb that was droped on Hiroshima.
cinic isn't it?

cinic cinic...but is it true? and if he had it, why not use it then?

cinic cinic...but is it true? and if he had it, why not use it then?

It is a truth supported by many proofs, but one sure thing is that the 500 kg of Uranium Oxide could provide just a small percent of the raw material needed for the American bombs as they were in 1945. This is the real unclear part: if the refined product from the German Uranium Oxide was really a part of the bombs dropped in Japan, or just used for the following bombs.

Anyway, this truth is more solid than the subject we discuss here.
Something I don't understand:
Considering how desperate was the military situation of Germany in the spring of 1945, why they wasted the chance given by this test? They should drop the bomb somewhere on the Western Front, over the Allied troops, and then try to bargain / negotiate by claiming (i.e. lying) that there are many others available.
(Indrid also made a similar statement, in less words.)

The argument that there were no bombers available does not stand. There were German bombers in the skies as late as May 8, 1945. (And maybe even on May 9, 1945.)

The sad thing is that in the spring of 1945 Germany was in such a situation that whatever she could try, there was no way out. A resonable leadership should surrender after the failure of the Battle of the Bulge (the German offensive in Ardennes).

This post has been edited by Florin on March 19, 2005 08:09 pm

The reactor functioning near Berlin is a matter known for decades. There is a photo with it in the book "The history of the atomic bomb", written in the 70's by Castelano Gigante.
Returning to the article quoted by Alexandru, 500 square meters means a square with an edge of 22.36 meters, or a circle with the diameter of 25.23 meters. You can do more damage with a classical bomb, even with one to be lifted by a twin engine WWII bomber.

Something which so many people didn't / don't know (including Isaac Asimov, who made one character to hide an atomic bomb in the mouth, under his tongue, in the "Foundation" series of novels) is that you cannot make an atomic bomb as little as you want. You cannot make an atomic bomb to develop the equivalent of a one ton classical bomb, for example. Somebody explained to me once upon a time that at least about 2 kg of Uranium / equivalent material are needed to produce the fission. This means the "smallest" nuke still have the equivalent effect of 1000 tons of TNT or more.

This post has been edited by Florin on March 20, 2005 10:01 pm

ok, but i still doubt that there would have been lift problems....so if they had it, once again, why not use it?

So, no nuclear grenades?

I don't know "why he did not use it". But that is not an argument, since we are discussing whether he had it or not, not if he used it. Not every bomb is destined to explode.

Besides, I don't think Hitler was very much interested in the nuclear field. Sure, he loved big stuff, but I suspect he relied too much on his WW1 experience in discussing priorities... Anyway, I don't think Hitler had a nuclear bomb but Germany certainly was more advanced in the field than history tells us...

Sometime during 1942, before Stalingrad and El Alamein, Hitler had a meeting with a whole bunch of German scientists from various fields, and he guaranteed full support for developing any idea which may become a weapon, however unconventional.

The result was tens and tens of projects and prototypes, but just few reached the series production, and of course when it was too late.

The question is why the Germans lost 3 precious years until they "woke up" to realize that the war cannot be won with conventional weaponry. There were no big leaps in basic physics, chemistry and mathematics from 1939 to 1942, and the scientists and engineers were the same guys, so all that "weirdo" could be researched 3 years earlier, and be ready for series production by the end of 1943 or the beginning of 1944.

This post has been edited by Florin on March 20, 2005 10:16 pm

So, no nuclear grenades?

No. But they built in the 50's or 60's nuclear mines. Yes, like the mines buried in the ground, to walk on them. But I don't know what was the point, because even when you roll over a classical mine, you get anyway a fast trip to paradise (or hell).

So, no nuclear grenades?

No. But they built in the 50's or 60's nuclear mines. Yes, like the mines buried in the ground, to walk on them. But I don't know what was the point, because even when you roll over a classical mine, you get anyway a fast trip to paradise (or hell).

well maybe the purpose was to wipe out an entire natallion or more, rather than just maim one and make the others careful....

Actuly the information about the size of a nuclear weapon is not accurate.
It is considered that now the smalest tactical Nuke firing weapon is the 152-155mm Howitzer. US developed even a smaller one Davy Crocket rocket projectile . it was a small Rocket 120mm i think..with a power of up to 50t.

oh, and that is small?

Sory I was wrong about Davy Crokett M-388 ... a little

here is a picture:
DavyCrocket warhead Copyright nuclearweaponarchive.org

The warhead is Mk54.It had 2 yelds 10T and 20T ..Lenght 10.75 " x Width 17.6".
there was another version of it Atomic Demolition Warhead .Same warhead but with a selectable yield from 10T to 1KT. This where manufacture between 1961 and 1965.