WI: Dirty Bombs During World War I

During a time where the use of chemical and biological weapons was quite liberal, at least by modern standards, what if the Central Powers or the Entente were able to develop "Dirty Bombs" sometime near the climax of the war?

Since they have never exactly been "tested", I am unsure as to how it would effect the soldiers at even the same level as the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs after those contaminates had been allowed to settle. I know for a fact, however, that such use would make the land infertile for quite some time, up to Chernobyl levels and beyond; think of it as salt that never goes away until it itself decides to leave. Applied on the battlefield, however, I am not sure how effective it would be.
 
During a time where the use of chemical and biological weapons was quite liberal, at least by modern standards, what if the Central Powers or the Entente were able to develop "Dirty Bombs" sometime near the climax of the war?


You'll need a much earlier appreciation of the dangers of radiation for a start. Seeing as nearly all the powers involved had industries which slowly and unwittingly poisoned workers with various radioactive compounds used in the production of various war materials, you've got a bit of a battle.

For example, scores of young women who had been painting watch dials using luminous compound which contained radium developed oral cancers in the 1920s. It seems they'd routinely put a point on their brush by putting it in their mouths and twirling it with their tongues...

Then there were the "canary girls" whose skin turned yellow because of the explosives they were ladling into artillery shells...
 
rather than nuclear (to a degree) why not chem/bio weapons - in the early yeras then the Zep's could deliver some, adding to the capability would be aircraft as they become more developed.

Mustard gas on Paris/London anyone?

Not a nice thought though, if that is even possible in WW1 (having a nice thought about it).
 
what if the Central Powers or the Entente were able to develop "Dirty Bombs" sometime near the climax of the war?

The sad thing is, in 1916 you probably could kill in a day of chemical or "ordinary" artillery more civilians than you would have with an experimental dirty bomb. Invest in heavier railguns like the "Grosse Bertha" which bombed Paris, or in primitive rockets (bigger versions of the Congreve rockets from the 19th century), or turn some planes into dumb, unguided missiles and you have your WW1-vintage WMDs.
 
Dirty bombs are only possible when you have access to artificial radioisotopes from nuclear reactors, or at least radioactive material from nuclear isotope separation. These systems would only be built in the context of a nuclear technology sufficiently advanced to produce actual nuclear weapons. As far as I'm aware, there are no naturally-occurring materials that could produce short-term radiation sickness; natural uranium, for example, is safe enough that Sam Cohen used a chunk of it as a paperweight.
 
Last edited:
Top