Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Third Reich Intercontinental Nuclear Threat?
Overrated
Hitler personally quashed the atomic bomb and the 4 engine bomber to carry it.
No he never...
Nazi Germany's focus was short-medium range warfare, considering they were
sourrounded by land (I.e. possible invasion forces from multiple sides).
The atomic bomb was never 'quashed' by Hitler. Given more time and funding (which
would have been available if war was not initiated) Hitler could have indeed possessed
the first atomic bomb.
Without Moscow the war would have been completely different.
Yes, Hitler forbade development into the atomic bomb. Perhaps rightly, since it would have been a suicidal development without aerial supremacy.
1: Germany still had the V2 rocket as a launch mechanism. Even if Germany didn't have air superiority, they could have still launched the rocket.
2: Debate 101: When the issue in question is a statement of fact, rather than a normative question, you can't argue it analytically. Only evidence can win the debate.
Translation: I'm calling both of you guys out! Sources on whether Germany banned atomic bomb development!
Zarf this isn't discussion. It's a flame war X(. Go sit in the corner
and think about your actions.
I'll work out sources later.
Our scientists had no nuclear weapon or even a good idea how to reach a critical mass. Rumors say that in March/April 1945 a group of scientists of the projekt and some soldiers made some tests in central germany. they combined most of their nuclear material and some explosives. but they did not reach a critical point. the result was at best a weak "dirty bomb". the only source i have is a german book: Rainer Karlsch, Hitlers Bombe, die geheime Geschichte der deutschen Kernwaffenversuche, M
They (the nazis) had the technical capabilities to
develop nuclear experiments in the sense that they
had scientists, resources and time.
They jumped into WW2 too quickly, and thus lost the
ability to focus on such developments.
Assuming they could develop a nuke, they could have
then taken out Moscow and London in a short amount
of time.
After this Europe would have crumbled in chaos. The U.S.
wouldn't have joined the war and the world would be very
different.
@Morbo
Assuming the dinosaurs would have survived the great impact 65 million years ago, they would still rule the world.
If you would have read that book, you wouldn't assume a german nuclear weapon. The Nazis had no ressources for a great nuclear project. The scientists were not working together, instead they fought against each other for money and influence. Besides: Hitler was not a friend of WMDs. He never ordered to use gas in combat, even when everything was over.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage
>>After this Europe would have crumbled in chaos. The U.S.
wouldn't have joined the war and the world would be very
different.<<
We fought in Europe because the Japs hit us, and then Hitler decided WTF and declared war on us for declaring war on Japan.
@morbo:
There is a huge difference between inventing an atomic bomb and producing enough of them to be strategically important.
@LP
You only need one nuclear warhead to be strategically important.
With the V2 rocket, Germany would have been able to launch a nuclear warhead at pretty much any target in Europe, including Moscow and London. One attack against Moscow would have wiped out the Soviet central command and taken a huge chunk out of the Soviet economy. Considering that the USSR was centrally planned, there would have been a disorganization in at least the Russian nation's economy, if not the entire Soviet economy. Furthermore, that's a huge blow to the Soviet military command structure, disorganizing the Eastern Front.
I'm not too sure about the potential applications on the Western front during the later parts of the war... maybe a reopening of the Battle of Britain?
all we needed from other countries in WW2 was parking space
and girliesluts
@zarf:
this discussion itself is a bit flawed ofc because of all hypothetical questions but for the sake of debate:
1.) The v2 rocket was operational only somewhere end 1944 (if I'm not mistaken, I have to look it up when I have more time).
2.) Making the atomic bomb, given there would have been no sabotage attempts, would have costs the Nazis a lot of manpower, money and resources. This would mean saving on another department. Nowadays we know where we would save the money as we know the future, but they didn't know.
3.) The atomic bomb was ways to heavy for a V2.
4.) The V2 was still far from reliable to hit target accurately. Some of them exploded at the ground. Which wouldn't be nice with an a-bomb on it.
5.) One of the effects of destroying a huge city would be a huge decrease in popularity and an increase in "patriotism".
edit after research:
the V2 was operational after the 8 of September 1944
The V2 carried a warhead around 1t
Little boy and fat man, the 2 a-bombs the allies used, were around 4,5t
1/4 of the V2 where launched using a guidance system and were more accurate.
Those numbers are based on a premature war Little Paul. Even under the most extreme conditions of war was the nazis able to still produce technology like the V2 rocket.
If they waited too long Israeli commandos would have blown up their rocket base
lmao
Sure and FSB agents would have stolen their cake!
... and give it to a guy black jew with nazi symbols in pink.
As stated previously, the V2 had neither the carrying capacity nor the accuracy to be used as a viable nuclear weapons platform.
V2 had a carrying capacity of 975 kg
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/v-2.html
"Little Boy" the worlds first weaponized nuclear device came in at 4000 kg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Boy
Another key component that the Nazi's lacked was a sufficiently well designed detonator for the weapon. The US used a 3 stage fuse, starting with a 15s wire fuse from the time the bomb is released, to a barometric fuse based on air pressure, and last but not least a doubly-redundant radar system. While the first 2 were pretty basic the 3rd was something the Nazi's simply did not have.
This isn't taking into account that the Nazi nuclear program was nowhere near as advanced as it's American counterpart. They were quite literally still in the experimentation phase to see how the basic principles still worked. I had read up once that best case at their given pace they wouldn't have had a nuclear device before the turn of the decade. Yes they were that slow in development.
du-ring th-e w-arrrrrrrr
no war = better planning with more resources
If you make the assumption that the nazis
waited and developed a nuclear weapon, you
also have to make the assumption that they,
at some point in time, also sat back and
said "now how do we deliver this bitch?".
That was the OP down fall. The nazis could have
built 4-engine bombers, but had little reason to.
Given the first assumption they would have had
reason and would have developed the bombers.
Also being side tracked by V2 rockets and detonators
is irrelevant because they are covered by the first
assumption...
The Nazi program was never really considered as a priority project from the very beginning. It was much too theoretical. The Nazi's if anything were a very practical bunch. They wanted results and results now. Due to that severe lack of focus the program never even remotely compared to it's American counterpart; which got extensive funding and mobilized every major university and scientist in the country for the project.
I only made my post to all the ppl here who assume the Nazi's were close to developing the bomb and were going to rule the world. The truth is they never got remotely close and in hindsight never stood a chance in the war.
Of course they stood a chance...Without Hitlers blunders
the war would have been completely different.
But theres no way of knowing for sure either way.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Third Reich Intercontinental Nuclear Threat?
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.