Atomic bomb a year earlier: used on Germany?

Might even justify going a month early with a reduced four beach landing plan. Knowing these super weapons would be available to use late summer or autum I'd want to be better positioned to take advantage of a German collapse if this bomb causes it.
 
Last edited:
People keep talking about the B29 which wouldn't really be ready in time. Since we're talking about Europe here, its massive range isn't necessary, and you could use a modified Lancaster, which were in mass production at that point.
 
Assuming the bugs being worked out include the casing design getting fixed, one runs into the issue of whether the B-29 can be modified in time. Standard B-29's first saw combat in June 1944, but modifications need to be done to deploy nukes.
YB-29 at Horsham in 1944

b29-87.jpg

Now Silverplate for Germany is much easier. You don't need to carry as much fuel, so full armament can be carried, and aren't flying into the Jetstream

Run a 'small' Raid on the target area with B-17s/Lancasters/whatever

Then just as in Japan, run a three element Photo-Recon YB-29 to check results. That way, the Luftwaffe is used to what they do, fly very fast at 35,000 feet, take pictures, and retreat fast.
Then one day, all three aren't taking pictures.
 
True.

But the risk would not be zero.

And comments by Leslie and others after the war suggest this was a very real concern.

Yeah. But the risks weren't zero with Japan either. Others have already observed how the US could have easily kept them minimal (like start using the '29 months before the bomb becomes available). So a bomb probably would make it too it's target.
 

PlasmaTorch

Banned
I did a few searches with various terms and couldn't find anything specifically on this.

Suppose several small butterflies ( unforeseen breakthroughs in their work) gives the Manhattan Project greater success, and we have Fat Man and Little Boy in August 1944 ( rather than OTL's Aug 45).

Would it have been used on Germany?

Yes, atomic bombs would have been used against germany. But they wouldn't be as effective as they were when deployed against japan. The germans had much better flak, more interceptors, and solidly constructed buildings.

The B-29 that delivers the a-bomb will require a long level approach to the target, something which is only safe when the citys air defenses were reduced. During their bomb run on Hiroshima, one of the crew members of the enola gay noted that if they had tried this approach over germany, they would have been shot out of the sky.

"Japan was more urbanized than Germany, its cities were more vulnerable to fire, and its active defenses at the time of the campaign were of a low order of effectiveness, being almost confined to antiaircraft guns." -Strategy in the Missile Age, by Bernard Brodie.

"Homes were made of wood, shoji (paper) screens separated rooms, and tatami mats lay on the floor like sawdust. Japan's cities were far more combustible than those in Germany, and for the most part they were poorly defended." -Conduct Under Fire, by John A. Glusman.

What about the Atlantic Wall? JN1's point about the U.S. knowing at least by May that the bomb would be available raises the possibility of delaying D-Day until the German fortifications in Normandy can be smashed with uranium. Similar uses were considered for the invasion of Japan.

I wonder if a nuclear-tipped invasion might not allow the Western Allies to reach the Elbe by December, even with a late start to the invasion.

Actually, a low yield atomic bomb is of limited use against fortified structures. The fat man bomb had a yield of 20 kilotons, and if it is detonated at an optimum height, it would have a blast radius of 752 meters. So you've got a diameter of only 1500 meters where the blast wave is at 20 psi... Thats what you need to destroy reinforced concrete structures, like those found on the atlantic wall or siegfried line.
 
The B-29 that delivers the a-bomb will require a long level approach to the target, something which is only safe when the citys air defenses were reduced. During their bomb run on Hiroshima, one of the crew members of the enola gay noted that if they had tried this approach over germany, they would have been shot out of the sky.

Eh?

8thAF Bomber Boxes did exactly that over Germany though, a long level approach towards the drop zone
 

PlasmaTorch

Banned
Eh?

8thAF Bomber Boxes did exactly that over Germany though, a long level approach towards the drop zone

The bomb run on Hiroshima and Nagasaki each lasted three minutes, including a one minute auto-release sequence. The enola gay only needed one bomb run, but the bockscar made three runs without success due to bad weather. They eventually received attention from japanese flak and fighters, which led to the bockscar abandoning Kokura and making its way to Nagasaki. You can read more about it here.
 
...
Actually, a low yield atomic bomb is of limited use against fortified structures. The fat man bomb had a yield of 20 kilotons, and if it is detonated at an optimum height, it would have a blast radius of 752 meters. So you've got a diameter of only 1500 meters where the blast wave is at 20 psi... Thats what you need to destroy reinforced concrete structures, like those found on the atlantic wall or siegfried line.

1500 meters of full 'destruction' would cover 20% of Omaha Beach= slightly under 8000 meters. However as a former artillery guy with some experience in planning fires against many types of targets I can say the full destruction effect is only a minority of the consideration. The concussion, blinding light flash, and morale effect is going to extend the full length of the beach, and thousands of meters inland. Judging from the effects on military personal at Hiroshima and Nagasaki any soldiers outside the bunkers would be hors combat out to 3000 to 4000 meters radius for the remainder of the day. At 05:00 most of the defenders were outside bunkers. On the beach a portion of the infantry and AT gun Crews had been released for breakfast & were walking to the field kitchens. others were patrolling between the resistance nests, standing sentry. The mortar and artillery crews inland were fully exposed, as were working parties and patrols out looking for paratroops. I'm estimating at least a third, perhaps half the defenders inside a 5000 meter radius of ground zero would be directly exposed outside a bunker or masonry building. The reserve regiment for the infantry division in the O Beach area was marching on the road to Caen to deal with a reported paradrop. What are they going to think when they witness a airburst some ten kilometers away? Nearly all the defenders on the Calvados & Cotientin coasts are going to be able to see this air burst & feel the over pressure wave as it passes.

Drop a second bomb mid morning inland over one of the panzer divisions & you are likely to see a collapse of German morale across the board in Normandy.
 
How concentrated were was the German armoured reserve force prior to D-Day. It could make a potentially more lethal target for the A Bomb. If that force can be eliminated then when the Allies break into France from the beaches there would be little the German army could do to resist other than garrison a few strong points while surrendering the initiative entirely to Ike. France could possibly be largely liberated (barring fortified strongpoints) by the end of June despite the foul weather. This of course is dependant on the Panzers being concentrated enough to be taken out with one or two simultaneous strikes.
 
I am guessing only one division could have been covered by any single airburst. Perhaps not even that. Allied air attacks had already caused the Germans to revise their distribution pattern on the ground. ie: at the end of May some artillery units started removing the ammunition stock piled in the battery positions & returning it to protected storage.

A airburst that catches parts of the SS Pz Div enroute in the Brit 2d Army late morning could greatly assist the Commonwealth. It would also catch the columns of infantry & other columns jamming the roads.

The effect of the EMP on German (Allied ) communications that morning is also a unknown. The death of a German corps commander early 6th June greatly aided the US 1st Army in the initial 48 hours. If a detonation takes out the German 7th Army HQ the existing confusion among the defense would rise several orders of magnitude.
 
Last edited:
Ignoring the whole HEMP discussion for a moment '40s communications use valves. They're known to be pretty much uneffected by HEMP.
At the sort of burst height a bomb would be used against troops the distance at which HEMP would damage electronics is around the same as the other effects - I.e your radio is either melted or blown to bits anyway.
 
1500 meters of full 'destruction' would cover 20% of Omaha Beach= slightly under 8000 meters. However as a former artillery guy with some experience in planning fires against many types of targets I can say the full destruction effect is only a minority of the consideration. The concussion, blinding light flash, and morale effect is going to extend the full length of the beach, and thousands of meters inland. Judging from the effects on military personal at Hiroshima and Nagasaki any soldiers outside the bunkers would be hors combat out to 3000 to 4000 meters radius for the remainder of the day. At 05:00 most of the defenders were outside bunkers. On the beach a portion of the infantry and AT gun Crews had been released for breakfast & were walking to the field kitchens. others were patrolling between the resistance nests, standing sentry. The mortar and artillery crews inland were fully exposed, as were working parties and patrols out looking for paratroops. I'm estimating at least a third, perhaps half the defenders inside a 5000 meter radius of ground zero would be directly exposed outside a bunker or masonry building. The reserve regiment for the infantry division in the O Beach area was marching on the road to Caen to deal with a reported paradrop. What are they going to think when they witness a airburst some ten kilometers away? Nearly all the defenders on the Calvados & Cotientin coasts are going to be able to see this air burst & feel the over pressure wave as it passes.

Drop a second bomb mid morning inland over one of the panzer divisions & you are likely to see a collapse of German morale across the board in Normandy.

Is that a scenario you'd like to write? I'd love to read it. You know your stuff and it'd be quite fascinating.

However, a fly in the ointment--would the use of such bombs in France cause political problems with the Free French and give the (more Communist) in-country Resistance something to play on once fallout becomes apparent, if lots of French civilians are killed, etc.

20,000 French were killed in D-Day OTL and the French didn't complain (much), but we are dealing with a somewhat different situation.
 
Is that a scenario you'd like to write? I'd love to read it. You know your stuff and it'd be quite fascinating.

.....

20,000 French were killed in D-Day OTL and the French didn't complain (much), but we are dealing with a somewhat different situation.

If this action collapses the 7th Armies defense & waives away the battle of Normandy a lot fewer French are liable to die.

One of the persistent misunderstandings is neither device used at Hiroshima or Nagasaki produced significant amounts of fallout. They were air burst devices & while they momentarily irradiated everything in several kilometres with a high dose of very short term radiation there was no large long term effect.

Fallout is produced when the high temp portion of the detonation contacts the ground and turns solid material into dust irradiated with long half life particles. ie: The 1950s surface tests in the US, Siberia, Algeria, & elsewhere.

Not much interested in writing a story based on this. The technical bits are interesting & recall my training back in the 1980s. Wish I had been able to keep more of my references.
 
Last edited:
In the summer of 1944 how badly damaged was Magdeburg? Had the RAF attempted a fire storm there yet? The reason I am asking is I believe Magdeburg would make a "good" (no city deserves to be nuked) target. It is close enough to Berlin that the regime can't just hand wave away a nuclear attack. Casualties would be sent to Berlin hospitals and probably the capital would provide most of the aid.
 
I wonder if a Little Boy type bomb could be used to seal the Falaise Pocket. I can't imagine the German troops in the pocket would want to go very near where that huge mysterious bomb went off, or continuing to fight and risk another one being dropped on them.

Politically though using the bomb on occupied but allied soil is going to be, to say the least awkward.
 
Catching them as they concentrated on arrival in Normandy is another matter. On the 6th, 7th, 8th they suffered badly from conventional air attacks when moving to the assemblly sites.

By the time the it is clear the pocket cant be closed with ground forces the narrow neck would expose the Allied soldiers to the detonation. Pulling them back five or ten kilometers would allow a lot of Germans soldiers to rush out before the device can be deployed.

With the advent of nuclear artillery circa 1953 such a tactic would be practical. A local army or corps commander would be responsible for the exact timing and other coordination once the weapon is released for use by the theatre commander. The lower yeild artillery munition would not require a huge safety zone for the blue team.

How concentrated were was the German armoured reserve force prior to D-Day. ...

Probablly too dispersed. Conventional air attack in the previous months had forced increased dispersal. As I mentioned early some of the artillery battalions in Normandy were removing reserve ammunition from the battery positions - back to protected sites.

The mention of Falaise reminds me of another bit of trivia. The area near there was the primary cluster of supply depots for the 7th Army. IIRC most of the mechanized corps/divisions arriving were routed through the area to refuel and draw and ammunition or other shortages before heading into the battle zone. A nuclear detonation over this cluster of supply dumps lat on the 6th or on the 7th is going to disrupt the 7th Armys ammunition supply and possiblly catch a Pz Div refueling.

I dont think this is classified any longer, but here is a priority target list we used for choosing targets for nuclear weapons back in the 1980s. It is not set in stone & they varied from one situation to another. It is food for thought in discussing operational or tactical targets.

1. HQ, key communications centers, command knodes

2. Nuclear weapons, chemical or biological weapons

3. Supply dumps

4. Critical service or support sites

5. Combat reserves, attack forces assemblying

Command elements were invariablly at the top of the list, tho NBC weapons deployed for use would likely jump to the top for imeadiate action. The list is not much different from the priority list we used for conventional artillery or air attacks.
 
Last edited:
Here is a scenario:
The USAAF drops an atomic bomb on Germany on July 20th. As the Nazi government is trying to figure out what just happened to one of their cities word arrives from the Wolf's lair that the Fuhrer might be dead or someone just tried to kill the Fuhrer. Chaos reigns.
 
Top