Earlier Manhattan Project

I’ve seen several threads discussing the consequences of a Nazi atomic bomb in WWII (Which IMO is very implausible, w/o different basic ASB physics or radical POD). But surprisingly, I haven’t seen anyone discuss the far more realistic possibility, given just a few tweaks in science history, that the US might have developed an earlier Manhattan project, with A-bombs secretly available early in WWII. The US’s non-interventionist stance might lead to a lack of initiative for the project, but it might have been justified by top leadership precisely as a “just to be safe” expenditure. Since it doesn't produce any easily-identifiable military hardware, neither US civilians nor outsiders would perceive it as any kind of threatening militarism. Yet it would provide a strategic weapon available for an emergency—which of course soon presents itself….

Some possible consequences:

If ready prior to 1942: the US delivers some to Britain; A-bombs landing in Germany lead to a rapid end of the European war and the downfall of Hitler (possibly assassinated if he tries, madly, to continue the war). If this happens before Hitler invades the Soviet Union, the latter never gets involved with the war at all, and perhaps retains control of parts of Poland; if somewhat after this, democratic revolutions quickly restore order in Eastern Europe. Japan never attacks Pearl Harbor, and pulls back from British zones; it may cease its expansion but militaristic leaders remain in power, perhaps only gradually ceding occupied areas of China back after long negotiation. A slightly stronger British empire survives the war. There’s no massive American military build-up but it still comes through as the dominant military power. Germany reforms, united. A few years later, the Soviets develop the bomb, and a cold war begins, but with less power in Europe. What might be the effect on China and the Communist revolution? How else might this play out?

If ready in early 1942: The first bombs are sent west, as the Dolittle raid goes atomic. As IOTL, Tokyo is bypassed but 1-2 mid-sized cities are flattened. Japanese leaders are shocked, the public is horrified, as all realize much more quickly what a ghastly mistake they’ve made. Even if the military managed to retain power for a while, they’d pull forces back massively to the homeland, making the Pacific war go much faster. Tactical nukes may be used in island hopping. After a while wiser heads see the futility of going on like this and sue for peace, and their empire rapidly collapses. Meanwhile Hitler madly scrambles to make his own bombs. He hasn’t the resources for it but a lot of industrial production is tied up in this futile project; the Soviets and British start turning the tide of war. If it goes on, eventually bombs are readied for Europe and something similar to the first scenario plays out, but on an already weakened Germany. How else might this be different from the first scenario?
 

stalkere

Banned
Scott,
Interesting idea, but hell, the B29 was BUILT to carry the nuclear weapons. The first nukes were 10,000 lbs. Only the B29 or the Lancaster could carry such a thing - and the Lanc didn't have the legs to hit Japan,even from Iwo Jima.
I'd have to research some, but IIRC, the tactical nukes you'd need to fit in a B25 - i.e 2000 lbs or less, weren't available until 1953 or so.something like the W9 warhead. Yes, Wiki says the max bomb load on a B25 was 6000 lbs, but IIRC, the Doolittle raiders carried four 500 lb bombs,
 
Interesting. An Atomic Doolittle Raid would have interesting effects on the course of World War II. After Yokohama, Kobe and Nagoya are obliterated, the Japanese may very well sue for peace. Hitler, on the other hand will most likey, dismiss the Doolittle Raid as American propoganda. However, now that the Americans have the Bomb, the British will say and do anything to get them join the war on their side. If that happens, then Germany can be contained and Hitler can removed from power.
 
Given that fission was first recognized in 38-39, it would be tough to bring the bomb forward much. We have had the discussion of 'earliest a-bomb' before, and 1 year advance is probably do-able, partly a matter of the US team being on the ball. It gets exponentially harder the earlier you want to push it. A-bomb by '42 would require such a different set of priorities on the part of the US that they could have built enough Aircraft carriers, planes, etc. to stop Japan in its tracks (if those dollars had been spent on obvious things instead of a maybe/could be superweapon).
 
Scott,
Interesting idea, but hell, the B29 was BUILT to carry the nuclear weapons. The first nukes were 10,000 lbs. Only the B29 or the Lancaster could carry such a thing - and the Lanc didn't have the legs to hit Japan,even from Iwo Jima.
I'd have to research some, but IIRC, the tactical nukes you'd need to fit in a B25 - i.e 2000 lbs or less, weren't available until 1953 or so.something like the W9 warhead. Yes, Wiki says the max bomb load on a B25 was 6000 lbs, but IIRC, the Doolittle raiders carried four 500 lb bombs,

Stalkere raises a good point about a lack of an adequate delivery system for a nuclear weapon in 1942, so how about utilizing the US Navy Zeppelin Program, or perhaps a POD where the US Navy recognizes before the war, say in the mid 1930s, that it will need ships capable of launching and retriving heavy bombers starts doing prelimary design work on Habakuk and an accompanieing airplane?
 
i agree with the inatequite aircrafts to do an Atomic Dolittle.
but what gets to me is, do the allies figure out the dangers of Radiation earlier too?
Just imagine:
the Invasions of Guam, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, The Phillipines and possibly even D-day, nuked right before the Allied troops reach shore.
never mind how many causualties by the enemies, think about it!
each soldier kicking up radioactive sand, the Radiation poisoning crawling in to each injured soldier, making his death much more agonizing.
Imagine it! our glorious Heros, men who risked their lives for their mother countries, dying of a new, horrible weapon because of the dangers no one even bothered to think about.
 
Scott,
Interesting idea, but hell, the B29 was BUILT to carry the nuclear weapons. The first nukes were 10,000 lbs. Only the B29 or the Lancaster could carry such a thing - and the Lanc didn't have the legs to hit Japan,even from Iwo Jima.

There is always Barnes Wallis's Victory bomber, proposed in 1940 but dismissed by the air staff as it could only carry one large bomb, in this case one of his 20,000lb + earthquake bombs.

Now if they had known about the power of a single atomic bomb......

The plane itself would have used a lot of features already being developed or already developed by Vickers for its Wellington/Warwick bombers so shouldn't have had the problems the B29 did.

Vickers continued to look at it and by 1941/1942 the specs were.

Original Wallis design had a range of 3,600 miles

1941

Span(ft.in/m): 172/52.4
Length(ft.in/m): 96/29.3
Wing area(ft2/m2): 2675/248.8
Max Weight(lb/kg): 104,000/47,174
Engines: 6x Merlin RM.6.SM or Hercules
Max speed(mph/kmh) at height(ft/m): 352/566 at 32,000/9,754
Armament: 1x 10ton bomb, 4x defensive guns


1942

Span(ft.in/m): 172.1/52.5
Length(ft.in/m): 100.8/30.7
Wing area(ft2/m2): 2676/248.9
Max Weight(lb/kg): 113,500/51,484
Engines: 6x Merlin 60
Max speed(mph/kmh) at height(ft/m): 360/579 at 40,000/12,192
Armament: 32,000lb of bombs with fuel for 2,000miles+ or 16,000lb with fuel for 4,000 miles+, 2x 0.5" MGs

 
Please outline (without hand-waving) your thinking on how the W. Allies (not just the USA remember the British and Canadian inputs were both critical) could have a bomb substantially earlier. Particularly how this could happen without giving a corresponding boost to Germany's nuclear programme.
 
Last edited:
Please outline (without hand-waving) your thinking on how the W. Allies (not just the USA remember the British and Canadian inputs were both critical) could have a bomb substantially earlier. Particularly how this could happen without giving a corresponding boost to Germany's nuclear programme.

Roosevelt and Churchill both see the danger that Hilter represents in 1933 and see the clouds of war gathering on the horizon. They both begin looking for anything that might give them their respective countries an edge in the comming conflict. They pour money into all areas of weapons research across the board. With this infusion of cash, the pace of nuclear research is accelerated so that the atom is split in 1936 from there, development of an atomic bomb proceeds as in OTL until a prototype is detonated on March 3, 1941. Pearl Harbour happens as in OTL. The first working weapons are deploy against Japan early in 1942.
 
bomber capacity

Hm, you're all right, I had forgotten that the Dolittle planes could never have carried something as large as the first nuclear bombs. So the first atomic strikes would more likely have been tactical ones, either on outlying islands (to clear them, preliminary to ground forces landing and securing airstrips for attacks against the main islands) or against Japanese fleets at sea. I agree with Fenrir's suggestion that this might well have led to pervasive radiation sickness in the follow-up troops. There was certainly some awareness of the risk of radiation damage, but it was downplayed and uncertain, and military urgency would have led to neglecting it further, especially regarding exposure of several months to moderate levels of radiation. Nevertheless, this might have had a particularly interesting effect, since the Japanese might well have surrendered before the first bombs were used against civilian populations. This isn't entirely positive; nukes might be seen afterwards more as tactical weapons, possibly increasing the propensity to use them in such ways, in places isolated from civilian populations.

Dathi/Shimbo: I was more interested in what would be the historical significance of the suggested change than exactly how it might have occurred. Obviously this would involve some specific theorizing occuring just a few years before it actually did, but I see no reason in principle this couldn't have happened. It's largely a matter of certain mathematical calculations, certain chemical measurements, and certain conclusions being reached slightly earlier, so Einstein writes his famous letter to Roosevelt in, say, 1936. Perhaps such earlier discoveries would have led to greater awareness worldwide of the possibility of such a bomb, including in Germany, so they might've worked on it even before the possibility was proved in practice by an actual explosion; yet as has been well established, they could never have built one during the war. The Soviets, OTOH, might have stepped things up too...
 
Last edited:
Roosevelt and Churchill both see the danger that Hilter represents in 1933 and see the clouds of war gathering on the horizon. They both begin looking for anything that might give them their respective countries an edge in the comming conflict. They pour money into all areas of weapons research across the board. With this infusion of cash, the pace of nuclear research is accelerated so that the atom is split in 1936 from there, development of an atomic bomb proceeds as in OTL until a prototype is detonated on March 3, 1941. Pearl Harbour happens as in OTL. The first working weapons are deploy against Japan early in 1942.

This has been discussed before. Some relevant points:

1. Churchill was not in power in 1933.
2. The US could only build the bomb because of refugees from Europe and the free gift of all British atomic secrets including the research and the scientists.

No British government except one led by Churchill and facing the dangers of 1940/1 would ever hand over gratis the research, personnel and equipment that happened in OTL. The US was simply not equipped to start an atomic project without this knowledge. Not to mention the massive boost to US economic production that the almost give away prices of British industry and assets gave the country.

Who besides Rutherford could have split the atom before he did? Why would Eienstein write his letter earlier when the formulae that convinced him the bomb was possible had not been developed? Who could have developed the formulae earlier with no Rutherford to confirm the fundamental premise of the existence of a possible chain reaction?

To claim another set of personalties to develop and discover these things, a whole series of improbable PODs would need to be conjured up and this is leading to ASB territory.
 
i agree with the inatequite aircrafts to do an Atomic Dolittle.
but what gets to me is, do the allies figure out the dangers of Radiation earlier too?
Just imagine:
the Invasions of Guam, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, The Phillipines and possibly even D-day, nuked right before the Allied troops reach shore.
never mind how many causualties by the enemies, think about it!
each soldier kicking up radioactive sand, the Radiation poisoning crawling in to each injured soldier, making his death much more agonizing.
Imagine it! our glorious Heros, men who risked their lives for their mother countries, dying of a new, horrible weapon because of the dangers no one even bothered to think about.


this is creepy, do you figure the lasting impact in public opinin when news of thousand of radiation crippled veterans returns home?
If used in island hopping in the Pacific, figure how it will be the moral by the time D-day draws close....
Could it be a propaganda boomerang?
 
One point. While its true earlier US planes didnt have the range or payload to deliver an atomic bomb to Japan, there is nothing to stop then loading one on a ship and dropping it off in/next to a port city....
 
What about putting it in a Zepplin? What about a mission where the bomb is loaded into a Zepplin, flown to within a hundred miles of the Japanese coast where the crew bails out to be picked up by a waiting destroyer. Mean while, the Zepplin, with the bomb still aboard continues on to its target. I will admit that I don't know exactly how that you would ensure that the airship reaches its target though. But this at least a semi-plausible way to carry out a nuclearly strike mission against Japan early in the war.
 

MrP

Banned
What about putting it in a Zepplin? What about a mission where the bomb is loaded into a Zepplin, flown to within a hundred miles of the Japanese coast where the crew bails out to be picked up by a waiting destroyer. Mean while, the Zepplin, with the bomb still aboard continues on to its target. I will admit that I don't know exactly how that you would ensure that the airship reaches its target though. But this at least a semi-plausible way to carry out a nuclearly strike mission against Japan early in the war.

Well, there were flying carriers, so you could scale one of them up. You could evacuate the crew even closer to the target that way. Actually, I'm surprised that idea hasn't turned up in fiction by now!
 
Interesting thread but I would wonder from a political point of view, how Roosevelt could have gotten the necessary funding for an earlier Manhattan project? The Isolationist lobby would filibuster the fundings for the bomb for seeking an earlier Manhattan Project in the mid thirties would probably be impossible without a war underway.

I would think though that if we had the bomb, we would find a way to deliver the bomb if by nothing else by a one way mission.
 
this is creepy, do you figure the lasting impact in public opinin when news of thousand of radiation crippled veterans returns home?
If used in island hopping in the Pacific, figure how it will be the moral by the time D-day draws close....
Could it be a propaganda boomerang?

Definetly a propaganda bommerang. Imagian what Tojo and Goebbels would have to say about an enemy who uses their own weapons on their own soldiers.
Public outcry, Anti-atomic Vets, and Demoralized troops will defintly cause issues.
and when the people of England and the USSR get to hear this.....defintly not good. might even speed up the cold war.
 
Top