I thought I would reply to a few posts.
SELECTOR said:
Berlin Nuked..London, Moscow Nuked in retaliation (Nazis would have had bomb by then.. with all the spies they had)
END QUOTE
BUZZ! Wrong.
According to that right wing pro-bomb group Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
at:
http://www.bullatomsci.org/issues/1992/s92/s92.goldberg.htmlQUOTE
As Heisenberg noted in his 1947 Nature article, in 1942 the state of research and knowledge concerning nuclear fission in Germany and in the United States was comparable. But knowledge is not sufficient to build a bomb. A very large, expensive, and far-flung industrial complex must be mounted and managed.
END QUOTE
and from The Critical Mass, Jonothan Logan
With the declassification of important wartime documents, it is now clear from private statements made by Werner Heisenberg, German's leading theorist, that Heisenberg and his colleagues made several key mistakes in calculating what would be needed for a bomb, contributing to pessimism and poor progress in their fission research.
END QUOTE
Germany had not the time, money or manpower to build the needed infrastructure to build bombs before, say ‘50 or ‘51 at best. And that is if they had not screwed up on the physics as bad as they did and were able to get the needed natural resources. And that would be with no Allied efforts to stop or delay them.
Quote from Selector:
England surrenders..
most of the Allied army in Europe on brink of starvation in winter of 45-46 .. British and US airforces supplies exhausted..German airforce attains air supremacy by January 46....German long-range bombers hit eastern US..Treaty signed between US and Germany..
END QUOTE
Nope to all of that, no bomb, Germany looses. No bomb England is still in the war.
RRAM Said:
in your wet dreams maybe. Hiroshima-like atomic bombs weren't exactly easy neither cheap to build...
mostly because plutonium is not found on the streets, you know...you have to create it. And it was not easy to create plutonium, much less in the quantity needed for a 9000kg bomb.
END QUOTE
BUZZ! Wrong. I quote from:
http://www.marshallnet.com/~manor/ww2/attacks.html Production was geared to seven per month with an expectation that 50 bombs would be required to assure that an invasion would not be required.
END QUOTE
So we say seven, not ten a month. Germany goes down hard.
While the bomb may have weighed “9,000kg”, the glow in the dark part was less than .1% of that.
You are right that it was not easy, that is why the U.S. spent about $50 Billion in todays money on building PRODUCTION lines for these items. In war don’t think small.
To OTTO,
Ever notice how few people talk about the Allied weapons of '46. All the ones I talked about are historic pre '46 projects.
And if we drop (
) the BOMB stuff, the Allies get that $50 Billion back to play with.
