What if Nazis have two or three "dirty" atomic bombs in March 1945?

The idea was most certainly not there at the time. More accurately, our current day appreciation for the hazards of radiation exposure were not even guessed at in the 1940s. The situation surrounding The Demon Core illustrates this neatly. Seeing as physicists at Los Alamos handled a critical mass of plutonium in such a cavalier manner, radiation hazards were obviously thought of very differently.

The hazards of very long term exposure to relatively high levels of radiation were known thanks to the fate of the Curies, radium workers, and others, but the hazards of sort and medium term exposure to what were thought of relatively lows levels of radiation were not appreciated until the mid-1960s.

The dirty bomb suggestions by both sides in WW2 were made with a chemical or gas mindset; i.e. the radiation dispersed works more by imposing a hindrance than by killing.


Bill
The British were worried about a German dirty-bomb attack on London- hence the raids in November 1943 (USAAF) and February 1944 (Norwegian saboteurs) on the Norsk Hydro plant at Vemork. A few American officers were trained to use Geiger counters in anticipation of a German dirty-bomb attack on the D-day landings, but the Americans took the threat less seriously- and probably the same sort of way as gas. Arthur Compton's report to Vannevar Bush might be similar- it talks about "production of violently radioactive materials... to be scattered as bombs over enemy territory" as the easiest military application of nuclear fission, as well as mentioning power for ships and atomic bombs as applications that would take longer.

As far as fallout goes, the Frisch-Peierls reports to the Tizard Committee say that a by-product of an atomic bomb would be radiation "fatal to living beings even a long time after the explosion" and that "owing to the spreading of radioactive substaces with the wind, the bomb could probably not be used without killing large numbers of civilians".

This suggests to me that the British were worried about long-term radiological contamination.
 
The British were worried about a German dirty-bomb attack on London- hence the raids in November 1943 (USAAF) and February 1944 (Norwegian saboteurs) on the Norsk Hydro plant at Vemork.


Alexius,

The attacks on Norsk Hydro had more to do with preventing fission weapon research than anything else.

A few American officers were trained to use Geiger counters in anticipation of a German dirty-bomb attack on the D-day landings, but the Americans took the threat less seriously- and probably the same sort of way as gas.

Teams of "specials" were landed very soon after D-Day to begin trying to identify German atomic weapons research. The US took the threat in the same manner their UK counterparts did, viewing the matter as akin to gas exposure; i.e. virulent, nasty, and short lived. US and UK expected troops to move through bombed areas within 48 hours with few if any effects just as could be done after gas attacks.

This suggests to me that the British were worried about long-term radiological contamination.

It would to the layperson.

Radiological control is part of my livelihood and our current appreciation of the long term health effects of what had initially been thought of as low levels radiation exposure dates from the 1960s. As I have in other threads of this type, let me suggest you read Permissible Dose: A History of Radiation Protection in the 20th Century by Samuel Walker for an overview of what was known and what was thought "safe enough" during different periods.

That radiation could kill was guessed early on, look at the Curies, and well known by the 1920s with the horrific fates of the "radium workers" of WW1. As early as 1934 the first industrial guidelines for exposure were suggested in the US. As with many similar issues like asbestos exposure, tobacco, hormone replacement therapy, and others a few scientists spoke out presciently that radiation exposure risks were grossly underestimated but the general consensus held that the limits in place were sufficient and risks manageable.

It was only after 1950 and large quantities of data from large quantities of people exposed to what were finally realized to be large quantities of radiation that the general consensus began to change. Before that, some scientists guessed correctly and spoke out, but that doesn't mean they were heeded or that their predictions were correct.

Did the Allies fear the deployment of dirty bombs by Nazi Germany? Yes.

Did they realize just how deadly and long lasting such an explosion would be? No.


Bill
 
As usual, Bill brings sanity to the discussion. At most a "dirty bomb" would be considered equivalent to gas or biological agents, which the Nazis never deployed.


Also, if (and that's a really big if) Germany had developed a couple of low yield atomic weapons, they completely lacked the means to deliver them to London, Moscow or Washington (Ha!) in the spring of 1945. The most likely scenario would be to hide the weapons together with a dedicated crew in a city as it was occupied by the Wallies or Russians, and detonate it then.
 
Top