Preconditions for dropping ABomb on Berlin.

Redbeard

Banned
Because the Soviets had far greater resources, and the Nazis didn't have complete schematics for the US bombs.
If the scenario is a German occupied Europe (and USSR defeated) Germany would have had far bigger resources than the Soviets ever were even close to.
 
By August 1945 the Japanese would have died even if no bombs fell - from starvation. That IMHO would not have stopped the Japanese leadership in ordering a mass suicide attack on an invasion but the nukes convinced enough to say "enough is enough". But what really brought Japan to its knees was not the nukes (or the conventional bombings) but being litterally cut off from any import, incl. food.

I.e. like Germany?
The real difference was another one you did not see, that Japan was finally facing the Soviets, too, in Manchukuo. Not only they knew their last army would be steamrolled, but also that the final, delusional hope that the Soviets would be, if not an ally, at least a sympathetic neutral, was gone.
But before saying that such a factor does not exist in this ATL, we would need to know how it is that Germany is "doing better" in this ATL. It is entirely possible that there is an eerily similar parallel here, too.

And regarding "not going to happen" - so they said at Tjernobyl or about Titanic - there is always a risk.

Oh, sure. Have you checked up the number of redundant fuses? There were four radar proximity altimeters, each able to work on its own, plus two pressure-based altimeters. in any case, impact with the ground would also be enough, for the Little Boy design, to push the two masses together, achieving criticality. I'm not sure this would happen at the intended speed, thus the yield might well be lower than expected - but the bomb still goes boom.
There always is a vanishingly small statistical chance. Is it worth our time discussing a 0.0001% scenario? Come on.


The Soviets started their nuke project way behind but it only took four years to have their nukes, and I don't see why the Germans not could do it much faster once the first had been tested or dropped.

Because you don't know that the Soviets had insider information, while, as mentioned, what the Germans would learn from the first bomb is that the principle, contrary to what they believed, did work.

Anyway, the German war production late war was so dispersed because of the conventional bombings that not even nukes would have impacted output significantly ...

Of course they would, in the same way that conventional bombing did affect dispersed production.

Conventional bombing targeting marshalling yards, rail lines, tunnels, bridges, and trains, as well as cities that were rail nodes, the Allies made sure that fighter engines built at tunnel plant A would not reach airframes built at secret factory B, and if they did, they still wouldn't receive instruments from remote workshop C or fuel from hidden hydrogenation plant D.
Now, nukes would work exactly like area bombing under this respect. You want to send parts by train along the main rail in the Ruhr valley, i.e. through Essen - oops.

Area bombing - and by that I mean both British city bombing and US "precision bombing" that happened to target marshalling yards in the midst of cities - also had another effect. Consider Dresden. There were many small factories, plants and workshop producing war materials, and they were spread out throughout the outlying residential areas and even in the immediate countryside. Many of those suffered light or no damage at all.
But guess what, after the bombing, they still did not produce a lot, because workers did not show up.

No offense intended, but as always, discussing alternate history is more satisfying when one knows actual history well.
 
Last edited:
A good list would be:

a) Bremen, easy to get to, if shot down likely over the sea. Good demo usage.
b) Essen, obvious the Ruhr is a high production area, close and easy to get to (than Berlin)
c) Berlin, i.e. we can bomb anything we want. Lots of leadership about to kill.
d) Back to the Ruhr until its done.

I wouldn't rule out Munich.
It's a large city; it's largely untouched by previous bombings, which is interesting for the scientists; the direction of attack is unexpected (from the new secret B29 base in Italy); it drives home the point that nowhere is safe; and it has the added bonus that the Bavarians still resent the Berliners.
 

Redbeard

Banned
I.e. like Germany?
The real difference was another one you did not see, that Japan was finally facing the Soviets, too, in Manchukuo. Not only they knew their last army would be steamrolled, but also that the final, delusional hope that the Soviets would be, if not an ally, at least a sympathetic neutral, was gone.
But before saying that such a factor does not exist in this ATL, we would need to know how it is that Germany is "doing better" in this ATL. It is entirely possible that there is an eerily similar parallel here, too.



Oh, sure. Have you checked up the number of redundant fuses? There were four radar proximity altimeters, each able to work on its own, plus two pressure-based altimeters. in any case, impact with the ground would also be enough, for the Little Boy design, to push the two masses together, achieving criticality. I'm not sure this would happen at the intended speed, thus the yield might well be lower than expected - but the bomb still goes boom.
There always is a vanishingly small statistical chance. Is it worth our time discussing a 0.0001% scenario? Come on.




Because you don't know that the Soviets had insider information, while, as mentioned, what the Germans would learn from the first bomb is that the principle, contrary to what they believed, did work.



Of course they would, in the same way that conventional bombing did affect dispersed production.

Conventional bombing targeting marshalling yards, rail lines, tunnels, bridges, and trains, as well as cities that were rail nodes, the Allies made sure that fighter engines built at tunnel plant A would not reach airframes built at secret factory B, and if they did, they still wouldn't receive instruments from remote workshop C or fuel from hidden hydrogenation plant D.
Now, nukes would work exactly like area bombing under this respect. You want to send parts by train along the main rail in the Ruhr valley, i.e. through Essen - oops.

Area bombing - and by that I mean both British city bombing and US "precision bombing" that happened to target marshalling yards in the midst of cities - also had another effect. Consider Dresden. There were many small factories, plants and workshop producing war materials, and they were spread out throughout the outlying residential areas and even in the immediate countryside. Many of those suffered light or no damage at all.
But guess what, after the bombing, they still did not produce a lot, because workers did not show up.

No offense intended, but as always, discussing alternate history is more satisfying when one knows actual history well.


I will not disturb you any more in your little determinist world...
 
I wouldn't rule out Munich.
It's a large city; it's largely untouched by previous bombings, which is interesting for the scientists; the direction of attack is unexpected (from the new secret B29 base in Italy); it drives home the point that nowhere is safe; and it has the added bonus that the Bavarians still resent the Berliners.

Oh that's a good one.
 
If Hitler dies, there will be a huge struggle for power. For better or for worse the army had their oaths as personal oaths to Hitler, not to the Nazi party, the German state or anything else. No Hitler, no oath they would conclude. What this means is generals who were on the fence with Valkyrie or similar plots because of (at least in part) the oath can now feel free to act. This could include an army coup or even senior generals surrendering large numbers of troops and territory to the western allies to try and prevent further atomic drops.
 
Problem Hitler will NOT surrender if he lives, and if he dies there is nobody who can?

That's why a well-targeted strike on Berlin is a good idea to start with. Failing that, the Allied planners may hope that there will be some Germans who take care of the problem of Hitler being alive. Or more than hope - they can try to support any opposition.

Interestingly, if the POD is "Germany doing better" somehow, then there probably isn't much reason for the July 1944 half-baked plot to take place at that time. This in turn means Hitler has less security measures surrounding him come the summer of 1945, and potential plotters are still alive and active.
 
If Hitler dies, there will be a huge struggle for power. For better or for worse the army had their oaths as personal oaths to Hitler, not to the Nazi party, the German state or anything else. No Hitler, no oath they would conclude. What this means is generals who were on the fence with Valkyrie or similar plots because of (at least in part) the oath can now feel free to act. This could include an army coup or even senior generals surrendering large numbers of troops and territory to the western allies to try and prevent further atomic drops.

Agreed. If Hitler is killed, large portions of the army are going to surrender fast to get the best deal they can. They'll be some idiotic hold outs, but much of the army will fold.
 
Top