What would you do if you had six A-bombs?

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    The war is only over, if the enemy believes you still have LOTS of these bombs.


  • If I were Germany I would use these Weapons to wipe out a beach head. No Atlantic wall instead an “Atomic Wall”.


  • @rjpeters70:

    But remember, the bombs are small ones, only 10-15 Kt.  They wouldn’t cause that much destruction.  London, St. Petersburg, Moscow, etc., would still be very functional cities after they were used.  The wars would not be over at all.

    What makes you think that the war wouldn’t be over after the drop of a 15kT bomb?
    You most likley have no chance but to end the war.
    If your people dying like that you will be finding your self with your back on the wall. You are not a monster and willing to give in.
    It is not only the ability to kill so many people at once but also the the way to deliever this kind of death.
    In WW II. the saying was: it doesn’t matter death anymore, just the way it will happen.
    With the drop of those bombs, Amerika not only implemented  sovereignty and independency to the world ,but also create a lot of enemys who smiling in her face and just waiting for big shot!

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    If it were late in the war and I were on the winning side, I might use them as they actually were used, to force the enemy into capitulation and avoid many more victims on my side.
    If it were late in the war and I were on the losing, I might target large enemy troop concentrations to try and convince them that my new wonder weapon might yet turn the tide of war against them, and maybe negotiate some sort of peace settlement that would be better than unconditional surrender.

    But if it were early in the war, I would hand them to my scientists and engineers and say to them: “Don’t ask me how I got these. But I want more of them, and bigger ones. Funding is not a problem. Now get to work.”


  • @Herr:

    But if it were early in the war, I would hand them to my scientists and engineers and say to them: “Don’t ask me how I got these. But I want more of them, and bigger ones. Funding is not a problem. Now get to work.”

    Reverse engineering is practical for some forms of technology – the Soviets produced the Tupolev Tu-4 by reverse-engineering the Boeing B-29 – but there’s a catch to doing the same thing with nuclear weapons.  It would be relatively feasible to copy the mechanical components of a WWII-era atomic bomb, but the tough part would be to manufacture the required quantities of fissionable-grade uranium 235 or plutonium (without which the copied bomb would simply be a very expensive paperweight).  Analyzing the core of an A-bomb would quickly reveal what it was made of, but this wouldn’t say anything about how the fissionable material was derived from non-fissionable U-238 – for instance by building massive gaseous diffusion plants of the type used by the Mahattan Project.

  • 2024 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17

    Good point. But I’d say it would be a distinct advantage to know what to aim for, and that promoting a concerted effort at an early date could have delivered the bomb maybe in 1943. The original premise of having bombs without an indication of their origin makes it all a rather theoretical exercise anyway, but I’d be hesitant to use them knowing I’d run out of them.


  • @rjpeters70:

    Aequitas, as far as yields go, 15 kt is on the really, really low end.  It’s not going to vaporize a city made of steel and concrete and masonry.  It would wipe out a large neighborhood that size, and cause structural damage to buildings outside the initial blast zone, but we’re not talking megatons here.  We’re talking a handful of kilotons.  That’s not something that destroys a city.

    I’m aware of that and still think that these would have been the targets for Germany.

    @rjpeters70:

    And:  “With the drop of those bombs, Amerika not only implemented  sovereignty and independency to the world ,but also create a lot of enemys who smiling in her face and just waiting for big shot!” So, you think Japan, America’s closest Asian ally, is just biding it’s time for revenge against the United States?  You honestly think that?

    Is it impossible ?


  • @Herr:

    Good point. But I’d say it would be a distinct advantage to know what to aim for

    Which is how the Soviets were able to build them so quickly with a fraction of the resources available to the United States…

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    The date doesn’t matter.  I would use my 6 A-bombs to destroy the international financial system that is the root of all evil in the world today.  New York, Chicago, London, Geneva, Tokyo, Beijing.  Simultaneous detonations near the financial districts of those cities, no warning, maximum casualties, then I’d release my biological weapons (surprise I got those too :evil:).


  • If I were Germany early in the war, say in 1942 then I use them to destroy Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad…if Russia is still fighting after that, use them against the remaining industrial cities in the East (Chelyabinsk, Magnitogorsk, etc.).  In either case, the point is to decisively win in the East (where the vast majority of the German war effort was focused…).  In 1943 or 1944 (after the tide of the war has turned) use them tactically such at the battle of Kursk to increase my defensive capacity, the idea being to bleed the Russians into capitulation.  In 1945, the war is lost so hit London, Moscow, Leningrad, Stalingrad, New York and Washington DC (via submarine) to try to bluff a negotiated peace.

    If Russia, then Berlin and tactical use on the east front.

    If Japan, then the American West coast cities (Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco) the Panama Canal, Pearl Harbor, and probably Sidney, Australia.  For them, the war was against the USA and UK.

    If the USA, then I would pretty much do what they did, unless I had the A-bomb earlier in the war in which case I would bomb the larger cities of Japan and Germany (Tokyo, Osaka, Berlin, etc.) instead of Hiroshima and tiny Nagasaki.

    If Great Britain, I absolutely use them to destroy the U-boat pens and would probably bomb the larger cities and industrial areas of Germany with the remaining bombs.


  • Good post 221 Baker Street!

    I like that you remembered the Russian Industrial places and that you considered them as well.


  • Aequiteas,

    Yes, it goes unappreciated by most but the Russian industrial cities east of the Urals were extremely important to the Russians.  If I, as Germany, had only one A-bomb, I might destroy Magnitogorsk (or as much as 15 kT will) instead of any other target (perhaps including even Moscow).  Most of the Russian steel was produced in this relatively small city…without which there would be very few Russian tanks…without which, I don’t see how the Russians win the war.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    I would use Sarin gas in Northern Syria.

    I mean… wait. Wrong conversation. ;)


  • How would every nation delivered these bombs?
    Suggestions ?


  • So isn’t that a possibility??

    cuskloonv1.jpg

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Yeah it’s a possibility, so long as the rocket doesn’t veer off course, or explode on the deck like this.


  • The Germans worked allready on guided missles like the V-1 and V-2.
    Launching via Subs it would have meant that two Subs would have been needed to fire a V-1 or V-2,
    while the first Sub was firing the V-1, the second sub would have guided it via Radio.
    Since the German Navy ran allready successful tests with the new XXI boats as beeing a true SUBMARINE (U-Boat) it would have been an easy one to sneak up to any coast in the world.
    Working allready on Rocket launchers for subs and test to fire a V-1 by a sub would have been the next level to the end of 1945.


  • @rjpeters70:

    In 1945, the nuclear powers did not know enough about nuclear physics to produce weapons small enough to fit on ballistic missiles.  It would simply not have been possible to put an atomic warhead on a V1 or V2.Â

    Who are those power"s" you talking??


  • @rjpeters70:

    Ok, fair enough.  I should have written, “In 1945, no one knew enough about nuclear physics to produce weapons small enough to fit on ballistic missiles.”

    I guess another way of approaching the problem would be to try to build a ballistic missile big enough to carry the large atomic weapons of the time, though I don’t know if rocket technology in those days was sufficiently advanced to do the job.  The Germans did fool around with some large missile designs such as the A9/A10 (which in principle might have been able to reach New York), but these designs may have been optimized for range rather than payload-carrying capacity.  At any rate, the problem would be made a bit easier if a gun-type uranium-based bomb was used, since this design was more compact (though harder to produce in large quantities) than an implosion-type plutonium-based bomb.


  • This is a no brainer.  You got Hitler in 33 chomping at the bit to get in power so he can wage his war for “living space”, than suddenly he gets the weapon of his dreams…  IMO he nukes Paris and London.  He now knows his western flank is secured because they can not compete with that kind of weapon.  Than he goes after Russia with his last 4.  The war is over and all of us should invest in Roseta stone to learn German.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

37

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts