Hitler 'tested small atom bomb'

Azadre

One more turn...
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
3,224
Hitler 'tested small atom bomb'
By Ray Furlong
BBC News, Berlin

A German historian has claimed in a new book presented on Monday that Nazi scientists successfully tested a tactical nuclear weapon in the last months of World War II.

Rainer Karlsch said that new research in Soviet and also Western archives, along with measurements carried out at one of the test sites, provided evidence for the existence of the weapon.

"The important thing in my book is the finding that the Germans had an atomic reactor near Berlin which was running for a short while, perhaps some days or weeks," he told the BBC.

"The second important finding was the atomic tests carried out in Thuringia and on the Baltic Sea."

Mr Karlsch describes what the Germans had as a "hybrid tactical nuclear weapon" much smaller than those dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

'Bright light'

He said the last test, carried out in Thuringia on 3 March 1945, destroyed an area of about 500 sq m - killing several hundred prisoners of war and concentration camp inmates.

The weapons were never used because they were not yet ready for mass production. There were also problems with delivery and detonation systems.

"We haven't heard about this before because only small groups of scientists were involved, and a lot of the documents were classified after they were captured by the Allies," said Karlsch.

"I found documents in Russian and Western archives, as well as in private German ones."

One of these is a memo from a Russian spy, brought to the attention of Stalin just days after the last test. It cites "reliable sources" as reporting "two huge explosions" on the night of 3 March.

Karlsch also cites German eyewitnesses as reporting light so bright that for a second it was possible to read a newspaper, accompanied by a sudden blast of wind.

The eyewitnesses, who were interviewed on the subject by the East German authorities in the early 1960s, also said they suffered nose-bleeds, headaches, and nausea for days afterwards.

Karlsch also pointed to measurements carried out recently at the test site that found radioactive isotopes.

Scepticism

His book has provoked huge interest in Germany, but also scepticism.

It has been common knowledge for decades that the Nazis carried out atomic experiments, but it has been widely believed they were far from developing an atomic bomb.

"The eyewitnesses he puts forward are either unreliable or they are not reporting first-hand information; allegedly key documents can be interpreted in various ways," said the influential news weekly Der Spiegel.

"Karlsch displays a catastrophic lack of understanding of physics," wrote physicist Michael Schaaf, author of a previous book about Nazi atomic experiments, in the Berliner Zeitung newspaper.

"Karlsch has done us a service in showing that German research into uranium went further than we'd thought up till now. But there was not a German atom bomb," he added.

It has also been pointed out that the United States employed thousands of scientists and invested billions of dollars in the Manhattan Project, while Germany's "dirty bomb" was allegedly the work of a few dozen top scientists who wanted to change the course of the war.

Karlsch himself acknowledged that he lacked absolute proof for his claims, and said he hoped his book would provoke further research.

But in a press statement for the book launch, he is defiant.

"It's clear there was no master plan for developing atom bombs. But it's also clear the Germans were the first to make atomic energy useable, and that at the end of this development was a successful test of a tactical nuclear weapon."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4348497.stm

Published: 2005/03/14 17:33:01 GMT

© BBC MMV
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would this have destroyed British morale had the 'mini-nuke' been used on London?
 
It would have probably worked just like us nuking Japan.
 
From my studies, Germany had nothing near to the USA's development in the atomic field.

In 1944, the USA put something like an entire 40% of her war effort into the bomb program.

The 3rd Reich simply could not match such a feat, especially in her perilious war situation at that time.

...
 
Gif Warrior said:
It would have probably worked just like us nuking Japan.

Doubly doubtful.

First, it is doubtful that a mere single tactical nuclear weapon would have had any real effect on the course of the war in 1945. At that point, you basically have two steamrollers coming into Germany from two sides; they can be slowed, but not stopped.

Second, it is doubtful that the nuking of Japan was what caused surrender. If it did, then it almost certainly did so only in an indirect manner.
 
CurtSibling said:
Well, it would have ruined D-Day if dropped on 4/6/1944...

And Warsaw or Moscow would have been first.

.

Thats an interesting alt-hist scenario. hmmnn, what might have been if something like that hapened. Wouldn't have changed the outcome, unless it could have allowed time for a real nuke to be built, then... then you have something :lol:
 
Very interesting. Of course, the man could be wrong. The BBC is reporting that someone has claimed it and has evidence, not that it is truth.
 
Yom said:
Very interesting. Of course, the man could be wrong. The BBC is reporting that someone has claimed it and has evidence, not that it is truth.
Yeah, it's about his book. That's why the title has the quotes.
 
They would have nuked New York, London :p, Moscow, Stalingrad (possibly), and DC. Most likely targets because New York is a large US city, They always bomb London, Moscow because it is the Russian Capital, Stalingrad to insult Stalin, and DC because FDR might be there.

That's me guessing though.
 
Bluemofia said:
They would have nuked New York, London :p, Moscow, Stalingrad (possibly), and DC. Most likely targets because New York is a large US city, They always bomb London, Moscow because it is the Russian Capital, Stalingrad to insult Stalin, and DC because FDR might be there.

That's me guessing though.

1) They had nothing capable of reaching New York or DC.
2) Their bomb being tactical, it would not have had much of an effect. It would have caused less damage than conventional bombings sustained by all of those cities (except New York and DC) for years.
 
Even if Germany had detonated a bomb, would Hitler have used it on the Western front? I imagine that Hitler would use the bomb as leverage for a peace with the West.
 
I imagine if Hitler had deployed such a thing most of Europe would be a radioactive wasteland right now.
 
Azadre said:
Would this have destroyed British morale had the 'mini-nuke' been used on London?

The bomb is supposed to have flattened an area of 500 square metres.
London has an area of 368 square miles which is approximately 550 square kilometres. The question is not whether it would have it destroyed British morale. It is would we have noticed it? :lol:

Why do you ask anyway? Are your Iranian friends planning to dirty bomb London?

Moderator Action: Warned for trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
It also depends on how many he had. If he just had one he might be able to bluff but there wouldnt be a waste land. If he had a lot I think he would have used them.
 
Don't downplay the importance of 500 meters.

If you talk about flattening 500 square meters of Manhattan Island or Washington D.C., you're talking very serious damage.
 
rmsharpe said:
Don't downplay the importance of 500 meters.

If you talk about flattening 500 square meters of Manhattan Island or Washington D.C., you're talking very serious damage.

London is sprawling though and that's what he asked about.
 
If believe He would nuke all the major cities of Russia, UK, America, etc. (assuming he had the range and enough nuclear devices) The war would be lost, and Germany, Italia, and Japan wouloud control most of the world, although most of it would be wasteland. Again, this is just if he had enough nukes.

Edit: and if the allies started winning, he would just nuke the Russian troops just entering Warszawa, or the Anglo-American forces at DDay. For Hiteler, It doesn't matter when it happens in Poland, or France. :mischief:
 
rmsharpe said:
Even if Germany had detonated a bomb, would Hitler have used it on the Western front? I imagine that Hitler would use the bomb as leverage for a peace with the West.

Using the bomb as leverage for peace would uncharctoristic of him. Instead, he would a-bombed a total symbolic and statagitical useless target -- Paris or Warsaw would be good guesses.
 
is this nutcase day?

first the faith healing thread where there's people saying they believe in it.
Then people deny plate tectonics

And now some nutcase says Hitler tested a nuke :lol: :crazyeyes:

Azadre, I just hope for your sanity that you do NOT believe this and jsut posted it out of amusement! :)
 
Top Bottom