German Atomic Bombs in WW2

[RyanC]

That's nice. Now Accession number?

For christ's sake, there are tens of thousands of boxes at the National Archives (I've actually gone there); and they're not numbered chronologically. There's thousands upon thousands of "box number one".

This is just an attempt to sound like you know something -- that it's all based on FACTS....it sounds all officious like "Box G-112 of Oak Ridge Collection".

I could make up something like that but for UFOs.

"Based upon Project BLACK SKY report found in Box F-121 (LeMay Collection)"

And it would sound impressive enought to fool gullible idiots.

It's just too bad I've been to the National Archives many many times and thus know how the system works there.

 

[Kiwiguy]

So how many nations use this 'ultracentrifuge' today?

Centrifuge method was used by South Africa and Pakistan to enrich Uranium for their A-bomb projects. It is currently being used by Iran which at latest estimates now have 3000 centrifuges.

A comment earlier criticised the likelihood of developing an A-bomb due to the complexity. One has to understand that there are two different types of A-bomb researched by both the Allies and the Germans.

(1) Plutonium Bomb favoured by Houtermanns, Schintlemeister, Heisenberg etc which required development of a breeder reactor and then complex technology to obtain sychronised implosion of the A-bomb core. That was way beyond germany's resources and Germany ran out of time to even consider this option.

(2) Uranium A-bomb. Easy and straight forward to build. Uncomplicated device and the critical mass required and even issues of using tampers were well understood by late 1941. The challenge for a Uranium bomb was enrichment of sufficient Uranium 235 before the war ended.

I have to apologise to Ed West as I was not persuaded for many years of Karlsche's claims. Even though I knew of Germany's nuclear projects, I was persuaded by other claims that there was some other explanation, including one that Mercury, Uranium and coal dust were mixed in a manner which excited mercury to flouresce and create a pinkish FAE mixture. My mistake

Yildirim said:

If you mix coal dust and enriched uranium you are not going to get a pink liquid. In the real world, uranium is a metal, and it looks like a metal. Yellow cake is as about as exciting as it gets with uranium. I know that in si-fi you have cool looking translucent, incandescent radioactive material, but that's the movies. Sorry to disappoint.

Subsequently I have been persuaded by my own research. I feel that Karlsch identified some real events at Rugen and Thuringa, however he was then led to believe that ipso facto it corroborated other evidence of a proposed Plutonium bomb. There is no secret that German scientists proposed a Plutonium bomb, but the radionuclides found in the soil at Ohrdruf do not match residue of a plutonium explosion. Whilst I do not accept all of Karlsch's conclusions, he has however uncovered important events in WW2 which merit serious study.

We know this because we have radionuclide fall out surveys from Nagasaki (Plutonium bomb) and from Hiroshima (Uranium bomb) Journal of Radiation Research, Vol.24 , No.3(1983)pp.229-236 [Hiroshima fall out study] and findings of the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) reported in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol 26, #8 August 1985 pp. 842-844

Nagasaki left detectable quantities of Plutonium 239, Plutonium 240 and Americium 241 in the soil which were absent at Hiroshima.

Surprisingly in a radionuclide fall out study performed at Hiroshima in 1983 Uranium 235 was almost undetectable, but there were high levels of Caesium 137. This matches the profile of soil samples taken from Ordruf.

Whilst the evidence for a Uranium bomb at Ohrdruf is not conclusive, suggestions that the Caesium 137 at Thuringa arise from Chernobyl fall out are not proven either. Most interestingly A survey report intended to disprove Karlsch failed to return results for other radionuclides which one would have expected to find from Chernobyl fall out.

 

[edwest4]

I am currently following research in Austria regarding their contribution to the German atomic project. I am hoping to see an initial report soon. The project started only last year. I don't know what list of German atomic experts you have but some were from Austria (at that time, part of the greater Reich). The OSS produced such a list. I would like to point out that intelligence documents are strictly factual so I view the word experts as a deliberate usage.

Also, like Germany, Austria was divided into occupation zones. Unlike Germany, little has emerged as to what was found there. The Institute for Radium Research in Vienna appears to have played a role, but I'll wait for an official report before adding more.

 

[Kiwiguy]

Hi Ed. I just emailed you the JOIA list of all German and Austrian nuclear scientists in WW2 plus a PDF of the Soviet ALSOS mission to capture Nazi scientists for work on Russia's bomb. Hope that helps?

Regards the PBT report on samples at Ordruf. A more meaningful result would be to appraise the ratios of Caesium 133, 134, 135 and 137 because that would then help to date whether the origin was 1945 or 1987 ?

Various decay chains work like stopwatches from the moment the radionuclides were ejected from their nuclear birthplace.

Another more meaningful study with these samples would be to establish the ratios between Caesium 137 and Barium 137.



I am of the view that the blasts at Rugen and at Ohrdruf were fizzled nukes.

Readers may recall the test blast in north korea a few years ago which fizzled from too much Plutonium Pu240 contamination?

I think Rugen was a Uranium weapon which was sub critical when triggered. I suspect either the Uranium 235 was not enriched to high enough percentage, or that a critical mass was not obtained or both.

I suspect Harteck was hard pressed to obtain enough U235 from his Mark III-B ultracentrifuges which Gerlach had referred to in October 1944 in a letter to Goering's private secretary Gonnert.

I suspect even the Ohrdruf blast lacked critical mass, but used a large U238 tamper around the warhead to compensate.

In the Hiroshima blast even with sufficient critical mass (but an unknown level of U235 enrichement) only 1.16666 % of the entire U235 core was consumed by fission.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

You might want to move this discussion to email as it seems to have become a private conversation.

I have also received several complaints (as usual) and am suspending the topic for now.

 

[airman]

Guys i discovered an article about German Atomic Bomb on " Eserciti nella Storia " N.63 page 2-9 ( for who speak italian)

 

[pathology_doc]

Oh good God, hasn't this topic been done to death? : No offence, but I think the last time we brought this up, the topic ended up being locked by the moderators.

Unless of course you're talking about the arrangement by which West German (and other non-US/British/French) aircraft within NATO were tasked with nuclear strike, which would potentially be a very interesting starting point for discussion. (Didn't DamienB's TSR.2 book say that was one of the reasons the British were loath to sell the West Germans TSR.2? That they didn't want them to have an airplane that could reach Moscow from German soil with nukes aboard, in case old enmities turned a tactical nuclear exchange into a massive strategic one?)

I'm sure we could turn out trashy novels by the bucketload from all the "Nazi atomic bomb" stuff out there, but I seriously think that topic has run its course here. Unless of course you want to share outrageous claims upon which to base said novels! ;D In which case, give us all some time to find popcorn and we'll be right with you.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Maybe it's an article on design efforts in areas aside from the physics package, e.g. aerodynamics? Putting the horse before the cart I agree, but not unheard of.

 

[pathology_doc]

Dear Mr Havoc, I think you mean "cart before horse". ;D

In that case it'd definitely be worth seeing, maybe even running through Google Translator or babelfish or something, and seeing what we can pick out of the dog's breakfast such mechanisms sometimes produce. But IMO the less said here about Nazi Germany's ability to produce a nuclear explosion, the better.

ISTR seeing a picture of a He177 bomb bay - I think it was the He177 V10 - which was allegedly being set up to carry the "(Nazi) German atomic bomb", which would seem to indicate that they had a ballistic shape or at least a volume in mind within which the physics package would purport to fit. I can't remember the name of the book, which is a damn shame, but to their credit the author made it clear that an actual functional A-bomb was still more or less a pipedream when the picture was taken. Though with the 177's hideous reputation for engine fires, who in God's name would volunteer to use it to drop even a low-yield nuke on London, knowing that one (a) might not get there, (b) probably would not get back. Somewhere I'm sure there were Nazis who were fanatical enough to dare both but it's one thing dropping a nuke on a nation whose air defence capability is pretty much ruined and it's quite another trying to drop one on a nation guarded by large numbers of some of the best interceptor fighters in the world at the time, with an early-warning radar system to boot, and with God only knows how many Maquis and other Resistance informants ready to give their lives to let Churchill know that the thing was on its way and to scramble every Spitfire, Tempest, Thunderbolt, Meteor and Mustang that can get into the air in order to stop it. So even positing a world in which the Nazis had the Bomb, it's hard for me to imagine them making successful use of it.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Dear Mr Havoc, I think you mean "cart before horse". ;D

Arghhh! What is it with me these last few days!

So even positing a world in which the Nazis had the Bomb, it's hard for me to imagine them making successful use of it.

Submersible version of the old fireship concept, perhaps?

 

[pathology_doc]

Provided that Doenitz and Goering could sort out the turf war over who got to use it, and provided you had a U-boat crew which was prepared to sacrifice itself, you would have a point!

 

[alertken]

path: He.177: it's @ P.287 of the Putnam German A/c WW2: V38 to Letov, 1942. "Work stopped 8/44". I guess 3.5m x2m. May I suggest this was for a dirty irradiating isotope-device?

 

[pathology_doc]

path: He.177: it's @ P.287 of the Putnam German A/c WW2: V38 to Letov, 1942. "Work stopped 8/44". I guess 3.5m x2m. May I suggest this was for a dirty irradiating isotope-device?

Aha, yes, that sounds familiar. I'm almost sure that WASN'T the book, but in retrospect the Versuchs number sounds right. It's slowly coming back to me now.

 

[Nico]

Hi friends,
as I already wrote in my recent post about the July-August publication in Italy in 'The Bar':
"...For the magazine "Eserciti nella Storia" (Armies in the History) No. 63 there is a feature (I strongly disagree with the conclusions) about the infamous German atomic bomb, with some picture of the Heinkel He 177 V38 and, obviously, others; perhaps new is a page about the Guzzi Motoblinda, a curious prototype of Italian three-wheels armoured car of 1928, a more in-depth feature about German lorries of WW II, a concise profile of the British Matilda tanks and other features with less relationship with the matter we usually deal with in this forum.".
About the so-called He 177 'atomic bomber' there are sources indicating that at Letov plant in Praga-Ruszin there were, during the last months of WW II, three He 177A-5 (the aircraft V37, V38 and V39). The three bombers were partly dismantled to be converted to the He 177A-7 standard, allegedly to be sold to Japan.
There are indication that the He 177 would be the Japanese 'atom bomber' but I disagree also with that statement.
In my opinion only the Americans are seriously working to a nuclear programme and the other belligerent powers had only a vague idea of the capabilities of the nuclear weaponry and perhaps Japan was less advanced than any other in that field.
There are various 'testimonies' of nuclear testing in Germany and Japan but with different dates and locations and if would be hardly credible a single explosion of an atomic device in Germany (and/or Japan), the hypothesis of various tests is simply ludicrous!
I Think we could only accept the theory of some explosion of very large calibre conventional bombs (something like British Blockbusters) or the testing of very fast and powerful conventional high explosive.
Nothwithstanding, as we know, the 'what if' remains a fascinating conversation piece.
Nico

 

[Grey Havoc]

Provided that Doenitz and Goering could sort out the turf war over who got to use it, and provided you had a U-boat crew which was prepared to sacrifice itself, you would have a point!

I was thinking more along the lines of the smallest possible submersible built around the bomb, with a two or three man crew. Perhaps using a regular U-boat as a mothership or towing vessel to increase range.
The crew sneaks the sub into a harbor or anchorage, bottoms their craft, set the timer and backups, exits via airlock (assuming a 'dry' crew compartment) and swims back out using diving gear, hopefully to be picked up out to sea by a friendly unit later).

Of course, using one of the older, smaller U-boats suitably modified for a suicide mission would be another option. Although I doubt if the SS (they would almost certainly have been entrusted with such a mission) would have had any suitable trained personnel on hand for the job!

Not to mention the fact it would have been much harder to sneak even a small U-boat into a defended harbor late in the war than it would be with a purpose built 'sneak craft'.

 

[airman]

The articles report about test on Germany of 100 ton of Tnt power ( very little with atomic bomb of Hiroshima, Nagasaki where there are a power a 10000 about of Tnt) exactly an radiologic bomb .

 

[Artie Bob]

A 100 ton (metric) nuclear weapon makes very little sense. A basic fission bomb is not extremely difficult to design and build, the real effort is producing fissionable quality material (just ask the Iranians). The Israelis were a "special" case and took a shortcut. Having tracked this story for over 40 years, there does not seem to be any creditable evidence that the Germans were able to separate their stocks into fissionable quality material. without that there could be no nuclear bomb in the real sense. If you have enough radioactive material, you could of course disperse it with conventional explosives, but the effect would be more of a nuisance than a weapon that could make a decisive military difference and represents zero technology. The Germans were aiming much higher than that, but they didn't assign enough resources and were progressing at a much slower rate than the USA and GB. IMHO, this is another of those Nazi era myths, that keep resurfacing, with no substantial evidence to support most of the elements. The British, Russians and Americans did a very thorough job of collecting and analyzing German technical information at the end of the war. No real evidence of German success in successfully producing a nuclear bomb appears in this mass of information.

Best Regards,

Artie Bob

 

[pathology_doc]

A 100 ton (metric) nuclear weapon makes very little sense.

It does make sense in the AAM context. I can also envisage circumstances in which one might want to put a couple hundred tons of HE blast warheads and incendiaries down on a point target (e.g. a nerve gas or germ warfare factory) without completely obliterating an entire city and its suburbs for tens of miles. Increased terminal accuracy of delivery systems could make reduced-yield nukes an attractive proposition.

 

[Artie Bob]

"It does make sense in the AAM context." I believe you are taking my statement out of context which was concerning the usefulness of 100 ton equivalent nuclear weapons for WW II Nazi Germany, where a decisive weapon was needed. The resources needed to produce any size first generation nuclear weapon IMHO are sort of incremental, based upon the need to reach critical mass. Not quite as true with more developed devices.
In other scenarios, smaller yield weapons might indeed have their uses. For example, if rumors are true, the US Navy Seals had nuclear backpacks at one time (my feeling the yield of such a device might not have been too large).

Best Regards,

Artie Bob

 

[Orionblamblam]

In other scenarios, smaller yield weapons might indeed have their uses. For example, if rumors are true, the US Navy Seals had nuclear backpacks at one time (my feeling the yield of such a device might not have been too large).

That's not a "rumor," that's the Special Atomic Demolitions Munition. Included the same basic W54 warhead as was used on the Davy Crockett, which had a reduced yield of 20 tons. The SADM version of the W54 could be dialed up to about 1 kiloton, IIRC.

These were advanced late 1950's technology bombs. A German atomic bomb with a yeild in the range of 100 tons would indicate a bomb that had gone horribly, horribly wrong and not lived up to its potential. The German atomic bomb programs, crappy and chaotic as they were, were looking at physically big and massive bombs that had yields enough to level cities. A bomb that took a whole He 177 to carry and only yielded 100 tons would be a massive waste of rare uranium resources.

 

[pathology_doc]

Saw this on a blog:

Folks overlook that Germany was working flat-out on an atomic bomb of its own. In a recent doco it was suggested the uranium for it, which was captured by the Americans from a submarine on its way to Japan when Germany surrendered, likely ended up in the Hiroshima bombs. Oh, the irony.

Any truth in this, at all, or is this just fabrication which someone thought would look good on Discovery Channel? I know the theory that they actually built and tested one has been pretty much done to death here, but I want to be sure all my bases are covered before I open my mouth (lest I fit my feet in).

 

[Orionblamblam]

Saw this on a blog:

Folks overlook that Germany was working flat-out on an atomic bomb of its own. In a recent doco it was suggested the uranium for it, which was captured by the Americans from a submarine on its way to Japan when Germany surrendered, likely ended up in the Hiroshima bombs. Oh, the irony.

Any truth in this, at all,

Well, now, let's just apply some common sense:
1) U-boat U-234 carrying 560 kg of uranium oxide surrendered to the US Navy on May 14, 1945.
2) The uranium projectile was shipped from Los Alamos to Tinian on July 14, 1945
3) The uranium "targets" were shipped from Kirtland AFB to Tinian on July 26, 1945
4) Hiroshima was nuked on August 6, 1945

So for the U-234 U-235 to have been used in Little Boy, it would have had to have been unshipped from the sub, catalogued, recognized, shipped to somewhere like Oak Ridge, analyzed, processed, isotopically separated and turned into weapons components in less than two months.

 

[pathology_doc]

"So for the U-234's U-235..." LOL if only they could have picked just a slightly different U-boat.

I actually DID think it was crap; I just wanted to be sure. ;D Thanks.

 

[royabulgaf]

The general theory on the "U-235" crates is that was meant to the the U-boat number, but was stenciled wrong.

 

[edwest4]

Please read the New York Times obituary for John Lansdale Jr, head of security for the Manhattan Project:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/31/obituaries/31LANS.html





Ed

 

[pathology_doc]

I do not doubt his account that the uranium ended up where it did. What he cannot have been expected to know is the detail of whether that uranium could have been processed in time to take part in WW2.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Please read the New York Times obituary for John Lansdale Jr, head of security for the Manhattan Project:

No, read the *interview* the obituary mentions:

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/31/us/captured-cargo-captivating-mystery.html?scp=2&sq=%22John%20Lansdale%20%22&st=cse

Most specifically, read the *actual* *quotes,* as opposed to the journalists mangling of what's actually been said:

But Mr. Lansdale, the former official of the Manhattan Project, displayed no doubts in the interview about the fate of the U-234's shipment. "It went to the Manhattan District," he said without hesitation. "It certainly went into the Manhattan District supply of uranium."

I have zero doubt that if the U-boat had uranium, that uranium would have gone to the Manhattan District. Who else would it go to? But going to the project is different than going into Fat Man/Little Boy.

And then of course there's this:

Mr. Lansdale added that he remembered no details of the uranium's destination in the sprawling bomb-making complex and had no opinion on whether it helped make up the material for the first atomic bomb used in war.

Note that lansdale not only *didn't* say that the U-235 went into Little Boy, he said that he had no opinion on whether it did or not. But how does the journalist spin it?

Now, however, a former official of the Manhattan Project, John Lansdale Jr., says that the uranium went into the mix of raw materials used for making the world's first atom bombs.

Gah.

 

[Orionblamblam]

More on the Little Boy uranium. A partially declassified letter to Oppenheimer from Mahattan staff describing the plan to cast the projectile rings (uranium) on or about June 26th, 1945.
http://www.doeal.gov/FOIADocs/RR00139.pdf

About six weeks from the U-234 getting nabbed to the casting of the uranioum weapons componants.

 

[ninjamode]

Me being fan of conspiracy theories, I think all the countries are probably working towards a nuclear weaponry system, which is really annoying, given the present situation with resources has been lately - instead of spending money on a good cause, they develop weapons. The other thing is spending millions for Nasa and looking for life on another planet and water and probably oil as well, while the life on this planet is being destroyed more and more every single day...

 

[pathology_doc]

instead of spending money on a good cause, they develop weapons.

Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will pull the plough for those who don't. If that doesn't make weapons a good cause, I don't know what does.

 

[Lauge]

Me being fan of conspiracy theories, I think all the countries are probably working towards a nuclear weaponry system...

Including Denmark, Luxembourg, Barbados and the Vatican? Well, OK, the Vatican I could probably believe...

The other thing is spending millions for Nasa and looking for life on another planet and water and probably oil as well, while the life on this planet is being destroyed more and more every single day...

Which is actually a pretty good reason for space exploration and colonization: more space and more resources.

And where in the name of the Great Spirit did you get the idea that NASA is looking for oil in space ???

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

 

[Lauge]

Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will pull the plough for those who don't.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

 

[ninjamode]

And where in the name of the Great Spirit did you get the idea that NASA is looking for oil in space ???

Just a funny discussion the other day with a friend.

Why, do you think they're looking for water?

Oh, and the Vatican - definitely!

 

[Jemiba]

Two topics about the theme of the “German A-Bomb” were locked for good reasons, and I don’t want to start
another one. But those, who were left unsatisfied with those discussions perhaps should read the results of the
research by Manfred Popp.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bewi.201601794/abstract

Unfortunately, the detailed version is in German, so, if someone find it in English, please give us a clue.

http://www.spektrum.de/news/hitlers-atombombe-warum-es-sie-nicht-gab/1423529

For short:
Until the end of the war, German nuclear scientists had no realistic idea about the way a nuclear bomb had to be built
and they weren't able to calculate the critical mass needed for a bomb, an indispensable detail. And research for a bomb
was much less intensive, than represented in several publications.

The theme of the German nuclear bomb was explored by several other scientists, but Manfred Popp had a big advantage:
He is nuclear scientist by himself, the others were historians, without deeper insight into the field of nuclear sciences.
So the probability for the alleged nuclear explosions in Thuringia at the end of WW II, or the fitting out of a special version
of the He 177 as an atom bomber has dropped considerably, I think !
Popps results may shatter several embosomed assumptions. For example, that the bomb was “around the corner” and
would just have needed more money and resources. Or that the German scientists acted as covered resistance fighters,
not wanting to give that weapon to the Nazi regime.
But it clearly shows, that for historical research a deeper insight into the field of interest is absolutely important.
What other assumptions may still be taken for granted, although they are based on similar misinterpretations ?

 

[royabulgaf]

When I saw the title, my first reaction was "because they didn't know how and couldn't afford it" Bingo. Another thing to consider-Just look at the size and scope of the Manhattan project, both in Washington and Tennessee. And this allowed them to crank out about one bomb per month. I don't know of any book on the history of the Axis war industry, but it would be interesting.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The Popp article is downloadable in English from the Wiley site - paid access or via OpenAthens etc.

It's very interesting, and confirms that German scientists had no idea how to make a bomb, and hadn't even thought about it much except in the broadest terms. Previous analysis by historians was hindered by them not understanding the technology enough to judge the source documents correctly and conclusions were biased by the author's own opinions.

 

[CNH]

Well, you need several kgs of either Pu239 or U235.

And they hadn't even got grams of the stuff.

 

[Michel Van]

A very fascinating Artikel by Manfred Popp

It show clearly what happen wen brilliant mind have to leave Germany,
because a Little Annoying Austrian wanted to murder them!
And what left are "Amateurs" in nuclear physics like Heisenbergs or von Weizsäcker

about Heisenbergs, i know stories were he ignored every advice and critic on his concept.
like Burkhard Heim proposal for a implosion working Nuke, A concept what was used in first US Atomic bomb test.
Heisenbergs dismiss the idea as "adolescent idiocy" and tell young Heim return to chemical experiments...

In Mean time in USA were jewish scientist already cooking Plutonium out Belgium uranium !

 

[Foo Fighter]

I wonder how many projects over the last few years, were just for show, keeping staff out of the front line and safe. It strikes me quite a lot were just paper shuffling rather than realistic projects for the time. I would at least like to have that thought for the day.

 

[riggerrob]

I wonder how many projects over the last few years, were just for show, keeping staff out of the front line and safe. It strikes me quite a lot were just paper shuffling rather than realistic projects for the time. I would at least like to have that thought for the day.

I suspect that many zanny Notzi Wonder-weapon concepts were published simply because they were captured.
WALLIED propagansists were eager to publish then just to demonstrate how desperate and crazy Notzis were.

Meanwhile the UK, USA, USSR, etc. toyed with similar concepts but never revealed their archives. Some WALLIED concepts like the canard Curtiss Ascender were as bungled as the Japanese Shinden canard.