Nazis Accieve the Atom Bomb, Now What?

The Germans will probably use the thing in the east on Russian soil. Moscow maybe a target as kill strike for Stalin.

The use of this weapon will guarantee Germany being utterly destroyed by the Americans and British with nuclear weapons in 1945.

I agree that using it on the Eastern Front is most likely. But as for British and American retaliation, I'm not so sure. If the Germans get one (1) nuke, and use it on Moscow, would the WAllies be so upset about that they would pound Germany with nukes in return? Or would they just shrug their metaphorical shoulders, describe it as a tragedy, use it as evidence at Nuremburg, and effectively continue as normal? I suspect there would be some people in the West who would be privately relieved at Stalin being taken out, and would shed few tears about the USSR being put even further on the back foot in the post-war period.
 

Insider

Banned
If they use it, expect Britain to use Vegetarian in response.

Bio weapons together with use of gas were banned from use by international conventions. There were no conventions in place regarding use of nuclear weapons because they never existed, so far. In 1940's nuclear weapons they were concidered just another bombs, powerfull yes, and with some nasty side effects, but bombs. It is ours perspective that is screwed by years of living under MAD. It would be as reasonable for British to use antrax after Nazis started to launch V weapons in them, just because they hadn't have anything comparable. They would be remembered as those who broke the tabu, and I am sure there would be some calls to judge those responsible.

The question is, even with this low yield bomb, what the allies know? This hits them out of the blue. They don't know how many bombs nazis have, they can only guesstimate how fast they can produce them. If it is before Normandy, the invasion might be postponed. Imagine that somebody nukes the beachheads, or worse... Mulberies
 
Yes but since the OP simply wants to snap their fingers and give the Nazis a bomb that is ASB. If the OP can't offer a plausible scenario for a Nazi nuke, and even admits it silly it really doesn't beling in post-1900.

A Nazi nuke may or may not be ASB. But it's not ASB for the Nazis to consider and plan on how they would use their projected future nukes.
 
would it have been possible, with right team, to have built multiple uranium hydride bombs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_hydride_bomb

(200t TNT yield from 7,400 lb. bomb)

A 200t weapon is not a big enough yield to really induce terror, and given a night attack on Moscow would be pretty inaccurate so the damage would not be so severe. by 1944 it is highly unlikely the Nazis could transport a 20kt size weapon to London, anything big enough to transport it would be shot down Moscow is potentially possible on a one way or almost one way trip.

experiments with the uranium hydride bomb were because it used little fissile material, the "expected" yield was 1kt so it was considered a failure. but if they had been able to manufacture multiple low yield bombs, even 200t deployed like landmines/booby traps? might be unclear for while to Allied side exactly how many they had stalling advances?

(meaning if they were able to build 4 -6)
 
If used against the Normandy invasion June 6th 1944, how would it be applied to be most devastating?

Could it have any significant effect at all, for that matter? :confused:

It could have taken out attackers on one beach, but only those there in that moment, and the defenders as well, while the forthcoming waves will meet radiation.

It could have taken out one ship, or several ships (now I remember some timeline where Churchill and other leaders were approached by a German boat that exploded ... :( ).
 
Because theoretically the Nazis could, with different management and a few lucky breaks, have got a nuke - singular. It'd be a double-gun pure-uranium device, with not much yield, but it would indeed be a nuke.

It's not likely, by any means, and they'd have ended up with it in very late 1944 at the absolute earliest.

No. I think this is really ASB because this would mean the nazis would not be nazis. This is the contradiction that mâles this "what if" impossible.

The nazis hated the modern science of particles physics. They called it a jewish science. They said that this "jewish science" was planning to destroy "german science".

At the beginning of the 20th century, german science was the most advanced and the most brillant of the world (Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, ... Etc). But nazism being nazism, which means stupidly criminal and criminally stupid, they called the breakthroughs of these geniouses "jewish science".
 
I agree that using it on the Eastern Front is most likely. But as for British and American retaliation, I'm not so sure. If the Germans get one (1) nuke, and use it on Moscow, would the WAllies be so upset about that they would pound Germany with nukes in return? Or would they just shrug their metaphorical shoulders, describe it as a tragedy, use it as evidence at Nuremburg, and effectively continue as normal? I suspect there would be some people in the West who would be privately relieved at Stalin being taken out, and would shed few tears about the USSR being put even further on the back foot in the post-war period.

How would the WAllies and Soviets know the Germans only had one bomb?
If the Germans built their one bomb in 1944 and managed to fly it to Moscow how would the British know the Germans didn't have more bombs they were planning to use on London? I would think they would devote a lot more resources to air defense to ensure not one bomber makes it across the channel. Also even if it wasn't technically possible how would the British know the Germans couldn't attach one to a V-1 or V-2 rocket. It might change the strategic air plan to an all out hunt for launch sites and nuclear facilities.
 

Deleted member 1487

No. I think this is really ASB because this would mean the nazis would not be nazis. This is the contradiction that mâles this "what if" impossible.

The nazis hated the modern science of particles physics. They called it a jewish science. They said that this "jewish science" was planning to destroy "german science".

At the beginning of the 20th century, german science was the most advanced and the most brillant of the world (Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, ... Etc). But nazism being nazism, which means stupidly criminal and criminally stupid, they called the breakthroughs of these geniouses "jewish science".

The real reason the Germans didn't get anywhere with nuclear research is that they only took tentative research steps up to 1942 and then told Speer that they'd need major resources to get a bomb by 1945 or 46, what was then thought too late to matter and too costly to even try, so the project was cut to nothing as a result:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapon_project#Second_Uranverein

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik
The movement did not actually go as far as preventing the nuclear energy scientists from using quantum mechanics and relativity,[14] but the education of young scientists and engineers suffered, not only from the loss of the Jewish scientists but also from political appointments and other interference. In 1938, Himmler wrote to Heisenberg that he could discuss modern physics but not mention Jewish scientists such as Bohr and Einstein in connection with it.[15]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik#Under_the_Third_Reich
Lenard[10] and Stark enjoyed the Nazi support because it allowed them to undertake a professional coup for their preferred scientific theory. Under the rallying cry that physics should be more "German" and "Aryan," Lenard and Stark, with backing from the Nazi leadership, entered on a plan to pressure and replace physics positions at German universities with people teaching their preferred theories. By the late 1930s, there were no longer any Jewish physics professors in Germany, since under the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 Jews were not allowed to work in universities. Stark in particular was also trying to get himself installed as the authority of "German" physics—not an entirely fanciful goal, given the Gleichschaltung (literally, "coordination") principle applied to other professional disciplines, such as medicine, under the Nazi regime, whereby a strict linear hierarchy was created along ideological lines.

They met with moderate success, but the support from the Nazi party was not as great as Lenard and Stark would have preferred. After a long period of harassment of the quantum physicist Werner Heisenberg, including getting him labeled a "White Jew" in the July 15, 1937, issue of SS's weekly, Das Schwarze Korps (The Black Corps), they began to fall from influence. Heisenberg was not only a pre-eminent physicist whom the Nazis realised they were better off with than without, however "Jewish" his theory might be in the eyes of Stark and Lenard, but Heisenberg had, as a young boy, attended school with SS chief Heinrich Himmler. In a historic moment, Heisenberg's mother rang Himmler's mother and asked her if she would please tell the SS to give "Werner" a break. After beginning a full character evaluation, which Heisenberg both instigated and passed, Himmler forbade further attack on the physicist. Heisenberg would later employ his "Jewish physics," in the German project to develop nuclear fission for the purposes of nuclear weapons or nuclear energy use. Himmler promised Heisenberg that after Germany won the war, the SS would finance a physics institute to be directed by Heisenberg.[11]

Lenard began to play less and less of a role, and soon Stark ran into even more difficulty, as other scientists and industrialists known for being exceptionally "Aryan" came to the defense of Relativity and quantum mechanics. As historian Mark Walker puts it, "despite his best efforts, in the end his science was not accepted, supported, or used by the Third Reich. Stark spent a great deal of his time during the Third Reich fighting with bureaucrats within the National Socialist state. Most of the National Socialist leadership either never supported Lenard and Stark, or abandoned them in the course of the Third Reich."
 
No. I think this is really ASB because this would mean the nazis would not be nazis. This is the contradiction that mâles this "what if" impossible.

The nazis hated the modern science of particles physics. They called it a jewish science. They said that this "jewish science" was planning to destroy "german science".

At the beginning of the 20th century, german science was the most advanced and the most brillant of the world (Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, ... Etc). But nazism being nazism, which means stupidly criminal and criminally stupid, they called the breakthroughs of these geniouses "jewish science".

The Nazis were never as unified or coherent as you make them sound. Nazism is whatever people Hitler tolerated could get away with. Nazism didn't just make room for lots of unprincipled exceptions to the ideology. The ideology was unprincipled exceptions.
 
Because theoretically the Nazis could, with different management and a few lucky breaks, have got a nuke - singular. It'd be a double-gun pure-uranium device, with not much yield, but it would indeed be a nuke. It's not likely, by any means, and they'd have ended up with it in very late 1944 at the absolute earliest.

There are other fairly late options for a Nazi nuke (1):

1. Missed opportunity to get better nuclear theory (OTL)

By April, Fredereric Joliot and his colleagues Hans von Halban and Lew Kowarski from the Collegede France in Paris had observed these secondary neutrons, and they measured the number producedin each fission. By August they found that blocks of uranium oxide showed increased activity when immersed in ordinary water. However, absorption of neutrons on hydrogen prevented a self-sustaining chain reaction.
Sometime in early summer, the Paris team alighted on the idea of using heavy water as a moderator. Deuterium was known to have a much lower absorption cross section for neutronsthan ordinary hydrogen[and its low mass makes it an almost ideal moderator. Use of heavy water would thus make a self-sustaining chain reaction more accessible. Halban and Kowarski did some simple modelling of neutron moderation and this was enough to suggest D2O as the best candidate. At the end of October Halban, Joliot and Kowarski deposited a sealed envelope with the Academy of Science. The paper shows the group had a very firm theoretical grasp of reactor physics and includes what we now know as the Fermi four-factor formula. Joliot chose to remain in France and began a difficult period in charge of the College de France cyclotron. Later in the war Joliot went underground and became a leader of the Resistance.


2. Missed opportunity for Nazis to obtain heavy water (OTL)

As the commercial and military potential of heavy water sank in, French military intelligence (the Deuxieme Bureau) learned that there was considerable German interest in not only obtaining existing Norwegian stocks, but in a contract for large and regular supplies. In March 1940, Lieutenant Allier of the Deuxieme Bureau left Paris for Oslo to negotiate with Norsk Hydro. Theresulting agreement ensured that France was to have not only the 185kg of heavy water then at Rjukan, immediately, but also a priority claim to the plant's entire output. Allier suspected he was a target for German agents, and took the precaution of double-booking himself and his cargo on both a flight to Scotland, and on one to Amsterdam. It seems his fears were justified, as Luftwaffeaircraft forced the Amsterdam flight to land in Hamburg, where it was thoroughly examined. Allier and his 26 cans of heavy water landed safely in Scotland; then he travelled to the French Military Mission in London, and eventually across the Channel. The heavy water was installed in a special air raid shelter in the College de France……
After smuggling the water out of France a team coalesced in Cambridge around Hans von Halban and Lew Kowarski. By 1941 their experiments with uranium oxide and the 185kg of heavy water had shown sufficient increase in neutron and fssion activity to predict that with 3-6 tons of heavy water, a self-sustaining chain reaction could be achieved.

3. Missed Opportunity/Priority to produce heavy water (OTL)

Karl-Hermann Geib (March 12, 1908 – July 21, 1949) was a German physical chemist, who is co-author of a widely used industrial method for heavy water producing by isotopic exchange between H2S and H2O (the Geib–Spevack (GS) process or Girdler sulfide process). After beginning of World War II (1940), Geib went to the chemical industrial complexes Leunawerke and proceeded under the Hartek's direction of the development process production of heavy water by a two-temperature isotopic exchange between hydrogen sulfide and water. The developed process was more effective than process with exchange in a hydrogen-water system, but its implementation was delayed. To create production capacity due to corrosion of hydrogen sulfide would take a lot of special alloys, which in time of war there is a shortage.

So lets say that the Nazis catch the right airplane and get the heavy water. Already suspicious, they toughly grill Joliot and find out about the sealed letter. Werner von Braun, dies in a car crash. Heisenberg ends up in charge of a much more grounded nuclear project. Hitler becomes intrigued with the uranium device as a Wunderwaffe and makes it his personal pet project. The Uranium device gets the insane budget and resources of OTLs V3. This should just be enough to get at least something like a Thin Man plutonium bomb.

Notes and Sources

(1) Technically, step one can probably be skipped but it is still an interesting avenue. Just having some good early pracitcal experiments with the captured heavy water should correct some of the German theoretical misconceptions.

There are of course other oppertunties like Manfred von Ardennes centrifuge research for uranium enrichment, etc.

Chris Waltham (2002): An Early History of Heavy Water

Wikipedia: Karl-Hermann Geib
 
Hell, if we're entertaining unlikely ideas let's shoot for the moon. What if an equally racist but more scientifically driven and far more calculating *Nazi party decides to pour enough money into military technology and nuclear physics research manages to develop the bomb (or at least get far enough in the process that they knew they'd have it within a year or so) before they start annexing countries left and right?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
If used against the Normandy invasion June 6th 1944, how would it be applied to be most devastating?

Against one of the Mulberry harbors, obviously. That would be a few days after the landing, not on June 6 itself.

If you're talking about the day of the invasion, then the best point at which to use the weapon would probably be the junction of Gold and Juno beaches. They're close enough together that it would probably take out the 50th Northumbrian Division and the 3rd Canadian division. This would leave three isolated beaches and an Allied command reeling in utter shock. In fact, Eisenhower might well commence an evacuation for fear of another weapon being used.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
My guess is that it'd be delivered to New York by submarine. As I understand it, Hitler was obsessed with hitting New York.
 
Against one of the Mulberry harbors, obviously. That would be a few days after the landing, not on June 6 itself.

If you're talking about the day of the invasion, then the best point at which to use the weapon would probably be the junction of Gold and Juno beaches. They're close enough together that it would probably take out the 50th Northumbrian Division and the 3rd Canadian division. This would leave three isolated beaches and an Allied command reeling in utter shock. In fact, Eisenhower might well commence an evacuation for fear of another weapon being used.

Being able to identify the various Junctions of each landing zone in a timely fashion on D-Day to use a bomb is even more ASB than actually having the bomb

Then what - order the defending forces to fall back or just let them burn?

And actual delivery of the weapon?

Bomber - good chance it wont make it to the target

Rocket - not accurate enough

By land as a big land mine - again this would take time and involve freindly units retreating from the area - what if the allies follows up the retreating enemy and the bloody thing doesn't work?

Basically the weapon is not mature enough to be a tactical weapon and not powerful enough to overcome the accuracy issues imposed by lack of intel and bombing methods of the day.

I think the best method would be to use it as a mine in the path of a Russian Spearhead - in a valley were its effects can be multiplied and the enemy would be concentrating

Otherwise attempt to use it strategically

But the area of effect for a 15 KT weapon (which is what I imagine this weapon to be) is not all that great
 
Bio weapons together with use of gas were banned from use by international conventions. There were no conventions in place regarding use of nuclear weapons because they never existed, so far. In 1940's nuclear weapons they were concidered just another bombs, powerfull yes, and with some nasty side effects, but bombs. It is ours perspective that is screwed by years of living under MAD. It would be as reasonable for British to use antrax after Nazis started to launch V weapons in them, just because they hadn't have anything comparable. They would be remembered as those who broke the tabu, and I am sure there would be some calls to judge those responsible.
Which did f*** all to stop the Italians and Japanese using the stuff (poison gasses, which were also banned), and both sides had large stockpiles, so everyone was prepared to use them. The agreement was as important to the parties as the Munich Agreement.

The question is, even with this low yield bomb, what the allies know? This hits them out of the blue. They don't know how many bombs nazis have, they can only guesstimate how fast they can produce them. If it is before Normandy, the invasion might be postponed. Imagine that somebody nukes the beachheads, or worse... Mulberies
They couldn't have nuked every city quick enough to stop the Allies retaliating.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
Being able to identify the various Junctions of each landing zone in a timely fashion on D-Day to use a bomb is even more ASB than actually having the bomb

Then what - order the defending forces to fall back or just let them burn?

And actual delivery of the weapon?

Bomber - good chance it wont make it to the target

Rocket - not accurate enough

By land as a big land mine - again this would take time and involve freindly units retreating from the area - what if the allies follows up the retreating enemy and the bloody thing doesn't work?

Basically the weapon is not mature enough to be a tactical weapon and not powerful enough to overcome the accuracy issues imposed by lack of intel and bombing methods of the day.

I think the best method would be to use it as a mine in the path of a Russian Spearhead - in a valley were its effects can be multiplied and the enemy would be concentrating

Otherwise attempt to use it strategically

But the area of effect for a 15 KT weapon (which is what I imagine this weapon to be) is not all that great

Could it be adapted for use as ordnance? Would the German High Command be mad enough to demand this?
 
They probably try to detonate it on Moscow or, failing that, Leningrad. If they're successful, it would be a huge blow to the Soviets. If it's done in 1942 (no idea how they would get it that early, but I guess we're throwing plausibility out the window), the Soviets are crippled and have a long upwards battle to take back land that they did IOTL. Just speaking from a transportation standpoint, they can no longer easily get troops from Siberia back into Europe. All their logistics are screwed with. Case Blue goes from a pipe dream to a possible success. The And that's not even mentioning the loss in leadership and coordination. That being said, the Allies will still of course win, but the WAllies will really be the ones saving the Soviets.

If it's done in 1943, it will also be a huge blow to the Soviet war machine. The Nazis won't be able to push forward, but the Soviets will have a hard time making huge gains like IOTL.

If it's done in 1944 or 1945 (I'm assuming on Leningrad, not Moscow), the Soviets will press on just as hard as IOTL. There will just be a whole lot more dead Russians (and by extension Germans). It might affect the Cold War, but not World War Two.

It will certainly affect the cold war because the nazis using an A bomb by late 1944 or early 1945 against the soviets may imply retaliations even tougher than Morgenthau Plan against the german people. The soviets may slaughter any german they can reach and decide it's time to kill at least as many germans as people of the soviet union died because of the nazi agression.
 
Top