Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Would the atomic bomb had been used against Germany (and what would the consequences have been) ?

Discussion in 'What If - Other' started by Justin Smith, Feb 22, 2014.

  1. Justin Smith

    Justin Smith Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    7
    What would have happened if the allies had developed the atomic bomb whilst the Germans were still fighting strongly ?
    Would they have used the atomic bomb on Germany ?
    If they had what would have been the consequences ?

    Bear in mind that Hitler was the undisputed leader of Germany and he wasn`t exactly rational at the best of times. By the end of the war he`d gone off into his own little world and, in fact, was quite happy for Germany to go down in flames with him. If Hitler wouldn`t have surrendered, and there were quite a few of his henchmen who were equally ruthless and extremist, how many atom bombs would they have had to use......
     
  2. Victor Gomez

    Victor Gomez Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,292
    Likes Received:
    115
    Perhaps I cannot answer directly but I do have an answer. The bombing of Germany decimated many towns and manufacturing centers inflicting much more damage than a few atomic bombs could do (of the size that may have been available in atomic bombs). It was the repeated efforts of allied fliers and their command that inflicted this highly damaging blow to Germany. The bombs that were dropped on Japan signaled our new and powerful capability to increase the damage we could do to an enemy with our new bombs and larger airplanes, much larger in ability to deliver either atomic or conventional bombs over a greater distance. This bombing that was done to Japan was not greater than the total we could inflict with conventional bombs but was such a strong signal that it was regarded in awe. This demonstration of nuclear power actually served to reduce the total kill of people when used in this demonatration. If we had bombed Japan with conventional bombs with our new airplanes that could deliver more....how great the loss of life would have been on both sides of the conflict as time would increase both the enemies and the allies losses to an unbeleivable number.........as had been experienced by Germany with conventional bombing that occurred there. Perhaps others would be better at imagining Germany being hit with atomic bombs but I have studied how much our conventional bombs destroyed and you should read a lot of those details.....hopefully you will soon understand how great the loss of life and property is to any long term conventional bombing.....and of course one would have to imagine atomic bombing of a large scale and that is very difficult for me to fathom indeed.....if you are broken and dead how do you end up more so than that? Of course it may be possible but hard for me to imagine. Oh and I would say Hitler's last actions were not as honorable as a surrender would have been so I would simply say he took the coward's way out by killing himself rather than face the consequences of his actions like many other men have done after long wars and battles.
     
  3. Brian Smith

    Brian Smith Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    527
    Likes Received:
    57
    Location:
    Bridlington East Riding Yorkshire England
    Which bit of Germany had you in mind? You could have taken out parts of France, Poland, Belgium, Holland, Denmark or another country in close proximity to where your bomb dropped. Where do you want to start!

    Brian
     
  4. Markus Becker

    Markus Becker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    30
    That ship had sailed by the end of 1944. The Allies were already at the German border precisely because the German military could not stop them. It was correctly assumed that the German resistance would become weaker in the future, not least because now any fighter bomber could easily reach wide stretches of Germany.
     
  5. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Germany was the planned target of the bomb from the beginning so if they had still been any sort of viable opponent they likely would have been the target.

    As for the effect I suspect it would depend a lot on when and where it was dropped. The greatest impact might have been if Hitler was at the loation when the event occured.
     
  6. KJ Jr

    KJ Jr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,148
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    New England
    I echo Victor's post above. The bombing raids throughout Germany from 1944-45 were unbelievably debilitating to German industry and morale. If the bomb was ready I doubt it would have been dropped. There was no need. In 1944 alone the RAF and USAAF combined to drop roughly 915,000 tons of explosives on Germany. In 1945, approx. 381,000 tons were dropped. I do understand that USAAF involvement improved with the landings in France. Regardless, during the entire war alone, the RAF expended around 965,000 tons. Coupled with this was the fact that the Allied noose was beginning to tighten up on the Nazi sandwich. The atom bomb was not essential to victory.
     
  7. Justin Smith

    Justin Smith Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    7
    I accept that conventional bombing of Japan (e.g. the fire raids on Tokyo) killed far more than the Atom bombs did but that (and the fact it was obvious that Japan could not win) did not persuade them to surrender. It took the seismic shock of the Atom bombs to do that. Similarly with Nazi Germany. By the end of 1944 the RAF and USAAF could devastate any German city, and it was obvious to anyone sane that Germany was going to lose, yet Hitler and the upper echelons of the Nazi party never even considered surrender. Thus, for the sake of the argument, if Germany had taken a bit longer to beat, and/or the Atom bomb was developed a bit earlier, the question is, would it have been used on Germany ? And if so how many would they have had to drop before Hitler would have surrendered or been overthrown ?
     
  8. LRusso216

    LRusso216 Graybeard Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Messages:
    14,288
    Likes Received:
    2,605
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The short answer is yes, the bomb would have been used. Even though we thought Germany was finished, the military was unwilling to concede (read Kershaw's The End for data). The bomb was meant for Germany if no surrender was imminent.
     
  9. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    The thing to remember is that the approach to WW2 was always "Europe First". When the buckets of sunshine were diverted from Europe to the Pacific is anyone's guess and researching "Operation Silverplate" might shed some light
     
  10. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Well by the time the first bomb had been built Germany had already surrendered. Japan was still fighting so it was rather obvious at that point.
     
  11. Markus Becker

    Markus Becker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    30
    What is it with the bombers? The ground troops were defeating the Germans, the bombers made nice bait for fighters. AFAIK German production peaked towards the end of 1944(when the ground troops were at the border) and then collapsed. I bet the precious heavy bombers had far less to do with that than the unsung fighter bombers who could and did interdict movement at daylight.

    And dropping 300k tons on Germany in 1945? Pu-lease, like that had any other effect than to make the rubble bounce.
     
  12. KJ Jr

    KJ Jr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    3,148
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    New England
    I'm sure they had some outhouses left.
     
    green slime likes this.
  13. Victor Gomez

    Victor Gomez Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,292
    Likes Received:
    115
    I always have trouble with the "what ifs" and I elected not to answer what some may think of as the obvious as it is steered by the conditions of the question at hand. It could be important to consider that we did not have an unlimited number of bombs and indeed some scientists argued that the most experimental of the bombs had not been battle field tested well enough to be considered a weapon and insisted in referring to it as a "device" instead. Of course if questioners consider this then they could conceivably ask the question in a new way to consider if we had already developed a large number of atomic bombs and used them.....what would have been the result. Personally I would rather give information according to what happened and not according to what "might" have happened. As to the effectiveness of the air battle vs. the land battle.....each bravely served their part in my opinion earning the respect of all who have studied the brave efforts and many lives lost in this epic war in Europe. Personally I have great respect for the fliers as I imagine that in death it would be harder to face death while high above the ground with a few people around vs. death on the ground where many may be present. Such is my personal bias and I have no claim other than my imagination to know much about this.....however considering it and the bravery of those who served I am in awe at their service and am forever indebted to their dedication that provided me the freedom to think about it at all! Certainly this should drive all of us to learn the details and spend less time on speculations that cannot be anyway.
     
  14. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    well Duh, but there was more to planning and target selection than just waiting on the bomb to be operational. There was a series of events which had to be taken into consideration for any target; especially one of this magnitude. There were several cities in Germany which had not been bombed that were excellent candidates.
     
  15. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    I don't think they started the target selection until after Germany had surrendered. For some reason June comes to mind. Before that there may have been some thoughts but I doubt any serious discussion. The criteria for Germany may well have been considerably different. Remember they tried to avoid killing Hirihito as they thought doing so would be counter productive. Killing or even incapacitating Hitler on the otherhand ...
    Certainly picking a time where they thought he would be in the target city would have made sense. That makes Berlin a strong candidate.
     
  16. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    The things I have read tell that both the B-29 and the Avro-Lanc were both being modified and tested for dropping "Fat Man" and "Little Boy" the "Little Boy" was designed with the consideration of the Lanc being the delivery system.

    From what I have read about "Project Silverplate" the Lanc direction was dropped in January of 1945; so my guess would be that in December 1944 the were viable German targets in consideration.

    when I get home I'll dig a little deeper and cite some sources, just to keep things gentlemanly and prevent hypocrissy.
     
  17. LRusso216

    LRusso216 Graybeard Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Messages:
    14,288
    Likes Received:
    2,605
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Brad, I think you're correct. Here's a portion of a review of The Silverplate Bombers,
    It was a display of nationalism by US General Leslie Groves who thought it “beyond comprehension to use a British plane to deliver an American A-bomb” (he wrote his own book, Now It Can Be Told, still in print in many different versions, even a Kindle edition) that tipped the scales in favor of the B-29 being selected over the British Avro Lancaster. While the B-29 was sophisticated for its day—fully pressurized crew compartments, trick bombing radar, remote-controlled gun turrets with computing sights—it cost a staggering five times as much as a Lanc, over $500,000 apiece, which also would have been much easier to modify. It may well be said, and this book certainly leans in that direction, that the Silverplate program redeemed an otherwise problematic (in terms of performance, safety, bombing accuracy) aircraft that had failed to live up to expectations in its role as conventional high-altitude daylight strategic bomber and had been only provisionally successful as a low-altitude nighttime fire bomber.
    http://speedreaders.info/2457-the-silverplate-bombers

    I know this is wiki, but it briefly identifies the same thing:
    Prior to the decision to use the B-29, military officials had given serious consideration to using the British Avro Lancaster to deliver the weapon, which the Royal Air Force had used to deliver the 5-ton Tallboy bombs developed in 1944. The Avro Lancaster would have required much less modification, but Major General Leslie Groves, the commander of the Manhattan Project, and General Henry H. Arnold, the Chief of United States Army Air Forces, wished to use an American plane.
    http://www.atomicheritage.org/mediawiki/index.php/Project_Silverplate
     
  18. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    Here is a pretty interesting discussion on another forum about a B29 in England:

    http://forum.armyairforces.com/B29-in-England-m104788.aspx

    After reading that, and noting the dates, I would almost wonder if the Germans could have surmised that the Allies were close enough to a working Bomb that they were exploring delivery options.
     
  19. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    9,021
    Likes Received:
    1,816
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    How deep was the Fuhrer Bunker? Would the force of the blast cause the intended damage?
     
  20. Markus Becker

    Markus Becker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    30

Share This Page