Would the WWI Powers even use nuclear weapons against civilian (aka “strategic”) targets?

Considering that the number of estimated dead civilians from chemical weapons are around 100 000-200 000 i think its safe to say that they wouldn't hesitate.

Stqz27n.jpg
 
Delivery systems for a World War 1 nuke.
The super gun, moved up to the front or constructed in a secure fortification well within your own territory or mounted on a specially-constructed ship.
A airship set on autopilot carrying a nuke, the crew can evacuate in a aircraft all small airship that was docked with the original airship.
I was always partial to the super gun with a range of a couple hundred miles and a diameter of around 50 in, built into a massive fortress within your own territory.
 
Last edited:
Why nukes - fuel air bombs would be much easier to develop and deliver.

Because the biggest of those, has a 44 ton blast yield, and weighs 15,650 pounds, heavier, 1.5X as much as Fatman

The smallest nuke, Davy Crockett, with the The W54 warhead, weighed fifty-one pounds and had an yield of .02 kilotons of TNT, 20 tons.
 
On having nuclear weapons in WWI beyond even the need for several breakthroughs in physics of the time and industrial process’ that are unlikely to take place you have another major stumbling block: chemical explosives.
Randy

I will quote myself from post #33:
Try this POD. In the 1790's, Antoine Lavoisier decides to flee to England before he is executed. He continues his work, making many discoveries in electrochemistry that were attributed to Michael Faraday in OTL. Faraday, as a boy, develops his keen interest in science and eventually gets instruction from Lavoisier. So, Faraday gets a head start, moving 19th century science forward, faster, earlier. Faraday lives until 1867 and many elements of science are a good generation ahead.
By advancing chemical science from 1790 forward, there is no telling how much farther ahead we would be in the late 1800's. It means setting a POD more decades back, but it does not qualify as ASB. The discovery of oxygen is credited to Joseph Priestly (1774), but Antoine Lavoisier was just as important in the debunking of phlogiston theory. Given the speed with which scientists advanced quantum physics in the twenties, earlier discoveries in the nineteenth century will stimulate different minds forward. At issue, major advances in chemistry and electricity are likely to change the time line for conventional explosives, warfare and perhaps the politics that drove to the first world war.
 
Top