WI: Delayed nuclear weapons?

Gan

Banned
After watching Alternate History Hub's video on Operation Downfall, I was left wondering what the long-term consequences of nukes being delayed? Let's say that the Manhattan Project suffers enough of a setback that the United States doesn't test its first atomic bomb until late 1946 or 1947. For the post-war let's say that the Soviets managed to take Korea and Hokkaido.

Would the United States publicly announce the existence of the bomb to deter the Soviet Union, or would they keep it a secret until an actual war broke out? If the former, how likely is a war when the world hasn't seen the effects of nuclear weapons yet? If the latter, how soon would a war break out, and how soon would the Soviets develop their own bomb as opposed to OTL?
 
Last edited:
Most likely the USA would have just blockaded and starved Japan out rather than invaded it. Also, it is unlikely that the soviets could have gotten much of mainland Japan. They could get Korea, and maybe have gotten Hokkaido, but there is no way that they would get any of Honshu.
 

Gan

Banned
Most likely the USA would have just blockaded and starved Japan out rather than invaded it. Also, it is unlikely that the soviets could have gotten much of mainland Japan. They could get Korea, and maybe have gotten Hokkaido, but there is no way that they would get any of Honshu.

Changed the Soviet gains.
 

trurle

Banned
After watching Alternate History Hub's video on Operation Downfall, I was left wondering what the long-term consequences of nukes being delayed? Let's say that the Manhattan Project suffers enough of a setback that the United States doesn't test its first atomic bomb until late 1946 or 1947. For the post-war let's say that the Soviets managed to take Korea and Hokkaido.

Would the United States publicly announce the existence of the bomb to deter the Soviet Union, or would they keep it a secret until an actual war broke out? If the former, how likely is a war when the world hasn't seen the effects of nuclear weapons yet? If the latter, how soon would a war break out, and how soon would the Soviets develop their own bomb as opposed to OTL?
The Soviet knowing the about delay of nuclear project would show less restraint in Europe. It likely mean Soviet Greece and even may be Soviet Italy. Japanese are going to surrender on schedule, so no butterflies here.
 

Delta Force

Banned
After watching Alternate History Hub's video on Operation Downfall, I was left wondering what the long-term consequences of nukes being delayed? Let's say that the Manhattan Project suffers enough of a setback that the United States doesn't test its first atomic bomb until late 1946 or 1947. For the post-war let's say that the Soviets managed to take Korea and Hokkaido.

Would the United States publicly announce the existence of the bomb to deter the Soviet Union, or would they keep it a secret until an actual war broke out? If the former, how likely is a war when the world hasn't seen the effects of nuclear weapons yet? If the latter, how soon would a war break out, and how soon would the Soviets develop their own bomb as opposed to OTL?

It would be quite the secret to maintain going into peacetime given the expense of the project and also the fact that 14,700 tons of silver valued at $300 million (in 1940s dollars, at today's prices almost $14.7 billion worth of silver) were loaned from the United States Treasury for use in the magnets at the Y-12 electromagnetic isotope separation plant (source). People are going to investigate where all the money and silver went.
 
Top