bomb mechanism
Can you imagine those maniacs with an A-bomb?

Virus House German A-Bomb project Luft ’46 entry. You have to wonder why New York City has been a candidate for a nuclear bomb for so long. Here are the best details you’ll find regarding the WWII German A-bomb. Target: Manhattan. They were also hoping to perfect the V-4 rocket to actually deliver the bomb. Good reading.

  1. Thomas says:

    When I was in High School, I had to take history from an uber-lefty teacher. She spent a month on Gandhi and two days on WWII. When I questioned why we weren’t spending more time on the most cataclysmic event of our century she responded that the Germans had no hope of winning after we entered the war in 1941. Wrong.

    John’s article is one of many examples of just how close we came to losing that war. Without an unknown Polish kid using math instead of linguistics to break codes we would have never known that we could break the German codes (Project Ultra). Had Hitler finished off Britain the war, we might not have been able to get a foot hold in Europe. Had Hitler waited to invade the Soviet Union, his hold on Europe would have been unbreakable. Had the Germans finished the Messerschmitt we would have eventually lost air superiority. The list goes on. The more you learn about WWII, the more you realize that it was far closer that people like to believe.

  2. John C. Dvorak says:

    While on the subject, have you been reading the analysts who now believe that Hitler had a fast progressing form of Parkinson’s? Thus the rush.

  3. Mike Voice says:

    amazing stuff!

    I was in the Nuclear Propulsion field, when I served in the US Navy. I was a reactor operator, with tours on four submarines: Patrick Henry (SSBN599), John Marshall (SSN611), Alabama (SSBN731), and Florida (SSBN728).

    I was always amazed at the enrichment process used to separate U-235 from U-238. (Navy reactors use highly-enriched uranium, to reduce/eliminate the need to refuel during a ship’s lifetime).

    How do you separate two atoms, whose chemical properties are the same (based on electrons, and their orbits around the nucleus) – and the only physical difference is the mass of three neutrons?

    Homeland Security has probably removed that info from the web. 🙂

  4. Mike Voice says:

    If you want a good read on our nuclear weapons (assuming you live in the US) – take a look at U.S. Nuclear Weapons by Chuck Hansen. 1988. ISBN 0-517-56740-7

    Lots of previously classified material, and some of it – info & photos (!!) – declassified specifically for this book.

    Since the author had helped stop a 1979 govenment lawsuit against publishing nuclear-weapons information which had been previously released (a magazine called The Progressive – in Madison, Wisconsin) – he lists numerous footnotes and endnotes to document his source for every fact and photo in the book – just to make sure the government couldn’t sue him for releasing “classified” material.

    You can tell it was the pre-9/11 era when this was published. Ashcroft and Ridge would nip that sh#t in the bud, nowadays. No wonder they want to know what we are checking-out at the local Library!:)

    I’m surprised they haven’t jumped on the site John links to – since WWII-era technology should be low-tech enough for today’s terrorists. Or, is it just that the worries have shifted to “dirty” bombs (and rightly so – IMHO) which require no technology?

  5. Major says:

    I shut your reactor down for the last time. (728) she is a good ship. Hopefully the coming years treat her well.
    (ET1 Major)


Bad Behavior has blocked 6325 access attempts in the last 7 days.