The Nuclear decision...what if?

[The Basket]

America may have developed the bomb but in which time frame...without the rush of war then it may have taken years.

The issue is that maybe the right decsions were taken at the right time but turned out to be historically wrong.

 

[Soren]

Without the absolute crucial help from the fleeing German scientists the US would've never gotten the A-bomb. Quite simple.

Remember the German nuclear research was boycotted by Hitler, so they never really got the time or money to ever be able to compete with the highly prioritized Manhattan Project which was a cooperation between many countries, the major contributions coming namely from German British scientists.

As to wether the the Germans would've (had the Greman nuclear program been funded) been able to launch rockets with nuclear warheads , yes they most certainly would've. The V-2 carried a ~1 ton warhead across the sky at 800 m/s, so I think it completely possible that the Germans could've built a rocket capable of carrying a warhead in excess of 4 tons - esp. since they wouldn't need many. As to the accuracy of the V-2, well considering the slave labor used to construct it and rush to launch them it was remarkably accurate - and there's no doubt that a "V-3" (Lets call it that) carrying a nuclear warhead would've been constructed with the outmost care by professionals to ensure nothing going wrong, which would ensure a safe and accurate delivery of the warhead - like I said not many direct hits were needed

 

[Civettone]

Their development of a nuclear reactor was hindered by a mistaken belief that graphite was no use as a moderator. That meant they needed lots of very pure heavy water, which was expensive and difficult to make (I'm not sure they ever got enough). Graphite is actually an excellent moderator, still used in most reactors today. It's cheap and easy to produce.

They also appear to have been unsure how much enriched uranium or plutonium they would need for a critical mass, with Heisenberg at times believing it would take several tons, rather than the tens of kilos actually needed.

Well, that's not really the same as saying they had the principles wrong.
The heavy water would have been produced and the amounts of plutonium needed would also have been found out given some more research.

Kris

 

[syscom3]

Soren, given the genocidal tendencies of the Nazi's towards the Jews, none of the scientists would have stayed in Germany to help them develope an atomic weapon.

So yes, the German scientists helped the allies in developing the bomb. Your loss, our gain.

Another thing to ponder about the development and construction of the bomb..... you need a huge industrial plant to work on the various components of the bomb. All of which would be known to allied intelligence and bombed.

And then there is the issue of the Soviets allowing the Nazi's to build a bomb.

 

[delcyros]

They had developed finally a sound understanding of a nuke and the necessary technologies behind (breed reactor formulated by Heisenberg 1942, recyclotrons build by v. Ardenne and others, gaseous centrifuges installed in Hamburg, Bad Saarow and elsewhere, infrared fuze designed and builded by Trinks). But as Syscom noted, not the industrial background, necessary to invoke building nukes.
Graphite was, contrary to popular believe, utilzed as a moderator in Heisenbergs Haigerloch pile.
Diebners G IV, a shortliving pile got critical in 1944 using heavy water as a moderator.
Seriously, the V-2 IS NO SUITABLE CARRIER.

 

[Hop]

Graphite was, contrary to popular believe, utilzed as a moderator in Heisenbergs Haigerloch pile.

The Haigerloch reactor used heavy water as the moderator. Graphite was used around the core as shielding, not as the moderator.

From an interview with Heisenberg:

ERMENC: Why wasn't there more interest in graphite knowing that heavy water was very scarce ?

HEISENBERG: It was because of the experiment of Bothe's on graphite which was not correct. Bothe had made a measurement of the neutron absorption coefficient of pure carbon and an error had slipped into his experiment. His values were too high but we assumed they were cor-
rect and so we did not think carbon could be used.
Afterwards we knew what his error probably was. He had
built a pile of graphite pieces but in between the graphite pieces there was always some air and the nitrogen of the air has high neutron absorption. Somehow he must have forgotten this. I don't know why but it's understandable .

We intended in the later development of the thing
to use carbon for shieldinq around the reactors.

ERMENC: This is what you did at Leipzig?

HEISENBERG: No, we did this at Haigerloch in South Germany.
There we wanted to get carbon as shieldinq for the outside
because we realized that carbon was much better than light
water.

But then there was not enough carbon and it was difficult to
get. So not much was done with it. The carbon line was really ruled out by the experiment of Bothe.

It's worth pointing out that the Haigerloch reactor never worked, and never would have. It was too small to achieve criticality.

 

[delcyros]

While it is correct that Haigerloch used water as moderator, the graphite shielding of the core contributed to neutron reflection on a measurable scale and was recognized as such. Any later projects therefore would return to graphite (indeed even Ardenne, who didn´t participated in Haigerloch knew this and suggested graphite as moderator to the soviets, who refused to accept his proposal and build their first pile with heavy water as moderator).

BTW, Haigerloch WOULD have worked incase:

A) Heisenberg would have gotten access to the remaining heavy water and uranium stored in Stadtilm /Thuringia, or
B) Heisenberg would have allowed a change into spherical arrangement of the core according to Diebners G III and G IV results. Heisenberg perhaps was the most conservative of the german nuclear physics by this time. Either intended or not remains debatable.

 

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Even a German nuclear warhead going off in a Vermont wheat field might scare a couple people!

 

[syscom3]

Look at the industrial capacity needed to build an atomic weapon. The Manhattan project involved 10's of thousands of skilled workers needed to build the massive infrastructure. And thousands of scientists and technicians were needed to research, design and build the weapons.

Its lucky that the US had enough manpower and excess industrial capacity to do it. Now consider the implications for Germany in which vitally needed resources would have to be diverted to a nuclear weapon program that might or might not work.

And then factor in the British and Russian bombardments on these plants and the resultant delays.

 

[Civettone]

If it's true that the V2 rocket project costed as much as the Manhattan project it would also mean it would have been possible for the Germans to collect the resources to build a nuke. Also remember that there is no reason to believe that the Germans would have needed as much resources as the Americans. The Germans usually designed and build new weapons with much less personnel and resources than the allies.

Kris

 

[syscom3]

If it's true that the V2 rocket project costed as much as the Manhattan project it would also mean it would have been possible for the Germans to collect the resources to build a nuke. Also remember that there is no reason to believe that the Germans would have needed as much resources as the Americans. The Germans usually designed and build new weapons with much less personnel and resources than the allies.

Kris

Go read the history of the Manhattan Project and then tell me Germany could have accomplished the same thing with less. The US and the UK had a bigger population, was far richer, had the advantage of having the key scientists and technicians.

Plus there was nothing the Nazi's could have done to bomb the industrial plants spread about the continental US.

 

[Civettone]

I already gave my answer. The Germans usually accomplished the same as the Americans with less. So I'm using the same logic for the nuke program.

The costs for both projects was about the same, close to US$2 billion.

It's true that Germany was being bombed. But yet the V 2 program succeeded.

Perhaps you're also underestimating the size of the German V 2 project. It was by far the largets German undertaking. It took years for the allies to get to their standard, even with the full cooperation of the German scientists. Just to give you an idea on how advanced the project was. It was no less impressive than the Manhattan one.

Kris

 

[delcyros]

My vote for the more impressive project goes to the US Manhatten project.
The V-2 is interesting but it would require an enlarged A-10 to carry a nuke intercontinentally via ballistic missile. this almost certainly was beyond german possibilities.

Germany also lacked proper funding of the nuke project. Mainly because Heisenberg refused to assure that it could be done in this war ( a statement he made in 1942!).

As it turned out, they at least had the prime ressources: Uranium. Germany was No. 1 producer of Uranium in prewar times and produced enough Uranium in ww2 to fuel the most of the soviet nuclear projects well into the late 50´s (without the material captured in Berlin, Viennes and Thuringia, the SU could not hope to agglomerate enough Uranium to start a pile in the 40´s according to Kurchatov).
They also had a number of enrichment facilities, betatrons and cyclotrons, altough compared to the Manhatten project these aren´t competetive in quantity.

So if the question is could they have done it, I have to say yes. But if the question is Could they have afforded the project in a briefer time than the Manhatten project the answer has to be NO-and that´s what counts finally. The one who has the bomb in possesion as first will win.

 

[Civettone]

That doesn't make sense. They spent as much money on the V 2 project as the Americans on the Manhattan project. So in terms of resources they definitely could have had their own Manhattan project. Of course they would have had to give up on their rockets completely.

Kris

 

[david johnson]

Even a German nuclear warhead going off in a Vermont wheat field might scare a couple people!

they grow wheat in vermont?

dj

 

[syscom3]

The V2 program might have been big by German standards, but it couldn't come close to how big and complex the Manhattan Project was.

How many people know that the B29 program turned out to be even bigger than the Manhattan Project?

 

[Civettone]

The B-29 program bigger than the Manhattan project?

I'm sorry but that makes me feel that the Manhatten project wasn't all that gigantic.

In any case, what do you base your claim that the MP was bigger and more complex than the V 2 project?
Kris

 

[Graeme]

The making of the atomic bomb had been a prodigious enterprise, by far the most sophisticated large-scale effort ever made by man. According to Groves the cost was $2,000,000,000, and the workforce was more than 600,000. For comparison, the Great Pyramid, Herodotus relates, required a continuous force of 100,000 men working for twenty years; and the Great Wall of China may have involved 1,000,000 men.

From 'The Oxford Companion to the Second World War' edited by Dear and Foot, 1995.

 

[Civettone]

And yet the B-29 program was bigger??


Kris

 

[syscom3]

And yet the B-29 program was bigger??


Kris

Yes, the B29 program cost more and ended up using more workers.

But the difference was the B29 was an technological push of existing technologies that was then mass produced.

The Manhattan Project was pushing a brand new science and developing totally new technologies.