http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4348497.stm
A German historian has claimed in a new book presented on Monday that Nazi scientists successfully tested a tactical nuclear weapon in the last months of World War II.
Rainer Karlsch said that new research in Soviet and also Western archives, along with measurements carried out at one of the test sites, provided evidence for the existence of the weapon.
"The important thing in my book is the finding that the Germans had an atomic reactor near Berlin which was running for a short while, perhaps some days or weeks," he told the BBC.
"The second important finding was the atomic tests carried out in Thuringia and on the Baltic Sea."
Mr Karlsch describes what the Germans had as a "hybrid tactical nuclear weapon" much smaller than those dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
'Bright light'
He said the last test, carried out in Thuringia on 3 March 1945, destroyed an area of about 500 sq m - killing several hundred prisoners of war and concentration camp inmates.
The weapons were never used because they were not yet ready for mass production. There were also problems with delivery and detonation systems.
"We haven't heard about this before because only small groups of scientists were involved, and a lot of the do ents were classified after they were captured by the Allies," said Karlsch.
"I found do ents in Russian and Western archives, as well as in private German ones."
One of these is a memo from a Russian spy, brought to the attention of Stalin just days after the last test. It cites "reliable sources" as reporting "two huge explosions" on the night of 3 March.
Karlsch also cites German eyewitnesses as reporting light so bright that for a second it was possible to read a newspaper, accompanied by a sudden blast of wind.
The eyewitnesses, who were interviewed on the subject by the East German authorities in the early 1960s, also said they suffered nose-bleeds, headaches, and nausea for days afterwards.
Karlsch also pointed to measurements carried out recently at the test site that found radioactive isotopes.
Scepticism
His book has provoked huge interest in Germany, but also scepticism.
It has been common knowledge for decades that the Nazis carried out atomic experiments, but it has been widely believed they were far from developing an atomic bomb.
"The eyewitnesses he puts forward are either unreliable or they are not reporting first-hand information; allegedly key do ents can be interpreted in various ways," said the influential news weekly Der Spiegel.
"Karlsch displays a catastrophic lack of understanding of physics," wrote physicist Michael Schaaf, author of a previous book about Nazi atomic experiments, in the Berliner Zeitung newspaper.
"Karlsch has done us a service in showing that German research into uranium went further than we'd thought up till now. But there was not a German atom bomb," he added.
It has also been pointed out that the United States employed thousands of scientists and invested billions of dollars in the Manhattan Project, while Germany's "dirty bomb" was allegedly the work of a few dozen top scientists who wanted to change the course of the war.
Karlsch himself acknowledged that he lacked absolute proof for his claims, and said he hoped his book would provoke further research.
But in a press statement for the book launch, he is defiant.
"It's clear there was no master plan for developing atom bombs. But it's also clear the Germans were the first to make atomic energy useable, and that at the end of this development was a successful test of a tactical nuclear weapon."
Don't think so. He had a f'ing delivery system, the V2, and would have used it if he had it. At that point, the war was lost. Mass production, my ass. You don't need that, and we proved it We only had two of them, and they were different types. If he had had it, he would have vaporized London, and demanded a cessation of hostilities, at the very least.
You can't just stick a Abomb on a rocket and press a button. It's not that simple.
I find it interesting, and I think it's unlikely but possible. I don't think a tacticle nuke is usually a first generation weapon, and thats the only reason I find this highly unlikely.
I would imagine that if Hitler had the bomb by that date, he wouldn't have tested it out unless it was going to do some real damage on the front lines. He would have wanted to show that he had the bomb and force the allies to negotiate.
Actually, if you just want a ground level explosion, with an impact switch, you could. An airburst would be more effective in terms of damage, but you can't tell me that rigging a barometric/al ude switch was the holdup.You can't just stick a Abomb on a rocket and press a button. It's not that simple.
Ex, have you seen the size of early atomic weapons?
Yup. I also know that the German V2 rocket has a payload capacity of 2,000 lbs. The heaviest part of the bomb, the simultaneous ignition system to compress the fissionables weighed about 500lbs. The actual fissionable materials weighed about 6.2 kG, or 13.67 pounds. A big chunk of the weight is the bomb case and aerodynamic fins, which you wouldn't need since you aren't dropping it out of an airplane. You would just modify the V2 nose cone into a warhead.Ex, have you seen the size of early atomic weapons?
Interesting. I never thought the V2 would have been able to carry a first gen atomic weapon.
Good thing for London that they never got that far in development then.
I think that is why the priority was give to Europe first, then Asia, in the WWII combat sequence. We had broken damn near all of their codes (Germany, and Japan) and knew that the Germans had much more on the board as far as exotic weapon development. Strange to think that mostly unheard of sabotage in Norway to keep the Germans from obtaining heavy water was probably as important as D-Day. They actually created a large sample, and the resistance in Norway sank the ferry that it was being transported on with a bomb on a timer, killing some Norwegians in the process. They couldn't warn them. It would have looked su ious if NO locals decided to ride the ferry that morning. That event pretty much put their nuke program in the can.Interesting. I never thought the V2 would have been able to carry a first gen atomic weapon.
The German scientific lead was incredible. Take a look at the greatest minds on the Manhattan project as well. German minds.
And think about the lead they had all over the board in weapons systems. They fielded a jet before the end of the war, and were designing a bomber with the same technology as the B2 that would have had a range to reach new york. I wonder how Manhattanites would have loved to have bombs dropping on their heads?
The lack of a bomber is what cost them the war. The exotics were a crapshoot, and they lost, but if they had even gotten the Ural bomber off the drawing board, Russia probably would have fallen. It was just a 4 engine prop bomber, much like our B-17 or B-24, but if they could have done strategic bombing of Russia, the invasion would have been MUCH easier.
Daylight precision strategic bombing is what won the war for the allies. It cost a of a lot of lives, but it forced Germany to make decisions on weapons programs due to a drastically reduced industrial base. They chose the wrong ones.
Interesting analysis. If I am to understand correctly, the Nazis got bogged down in Russia by the brutal winter and the subsequent disruption of oil supplies to their heavy machinery on the front lines. The Nazi machine simply ran out of oil.The lack of a bomber is what cost them the war. The exotics were a crapshoot, and they lost, but if they had even gotten the Ural bomber off the drawing board, Russia probably would have fallen. It was just a 4 engine prop bomber, much like our B-17 or B-24, but if they could have done strategic bombing of Russia, the invasion would have been MUCH easier.
I wouldn't be surprise if the Nazi's had a project similar to our own Manhattan Project, but I doubt if the Nazi's had developed a workable mode - yet. Many former Nazi rocket scientist secretly helped the U.S. develop its own arsenal of Intercontenental Ballistic Missiles after the war.
I agree with Ex about the long range bomber theory.
There's a lot of military historians (had one who is a Navy consultant up at A&M) who will tell you that the Germans lost the air war, and ultimately the whole war, because they failed to successfully develop a long range heavy bomber.
Stupid Germans.
Hitler had planned to capture the oil fields in Romania by 1939 so Germany would have its own supply of oil. This was accomplished. Then Rommel was to have captured the oil fields in Persia by 1941, the oil fields in Russia in 1942. Only then would Hitler have sufficient fuel for prosecuting a war with the United States. But less than a week after the Pearl Harbor attack, the Japanese convinced Hitler to declare war on the United States. Hitler agreed only if the Japanese would attack Russia, since German troops were now bogged down in Russia and Hitler would gain strategic advantage if the Russians had to defend themselves from Japan on their eastern flank. When the Japanese failed to attack Russia, Hitler was driven out of Russia and now was without a fuel source. The Romanian oil fields in Ploesti were insufficient for Germany to carry on a war on two fronts, and Germany's war effort began to collapse.
The last major German campaign was the Battle of the Bulge, in which Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt was to attack the invading allies with his tanks, then capture the Allied fuel dumps. This would stop the American and British forces and obtain the necessary fuel for Germany to continue its war effort. But General Eisenhower ordered the Allied fuel dumps burned and Germany was defeated.
Fuel is the life of any army.
I honestly don't think you can peg the German loss on any one thing.
Not to mention that B-24 wings based in Africa were bombing the crap out of them.The Romanian oil fields in Ploesti were insufficient for Germany to carry on a war on two fronts, and Germany's war effort began to collapse.
There was only so many people in Germany too. Man power was crtical.
I think Dan overlooked that one ex.
I don't think you can point to any one thing Manny. But like you said - it boils down to supplies.
My senior thesus with the prof mentioned above was that the British/American cracking of Enigma ultimately led to Germany's downfall in the war as 1) we got to listen in on the German supply situation (was invaluable in Africa, European front) 2) made sure more of our shipping convoys through/decimated the U-boat Atlantic campaign.
There is a lot of interesting information out there, Churchill read Enigma intercepts daily and used it in battle planning. Great stuff.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote