The Rosetta stone for discovering the truth of Nazi nuclear efforts comes from Prof Kurt Diebner, whom in 1956 under the nom de plume Werner Tautorus, published in Atomkernenergie, pp 368-370 and pp.423-425 catalogue of 228 German wartime reports on their atomic research, giving their dates.
Another valuable resource is a postwar account by ultracentrifuge inventor Dr Erich Bagge and Prof Kurt Diebner (formerly HWA) published in Von der Uranspaltungbis Calder Hall (Rowohlt, Hamburg, 1957).
Zen, your line of logic is wrong because you are assuming incorrectly that the only path to a nuclear bomb is through a nuclear reactor (to make Plutonium).
It was the path most obvious back then, this was all cutting edge science back then, with LOTS of gaps in their knowledge.
Line of logic is clear insofar as the reactor would kill a lot of people.
Not entirely so Zen. Houtermanns was brilliant. Far more so than Heisenberg whom history reveres as the leading nazi nuclear scientist. Houtermanns not only figured out the theory by 1941 but also published it. The fact that Houtermanns published so much which it is accepted post war which Heisenberg is not supposed to understand calls into question either Heisenberg's competency or honesty.
Verifiable references to Houtermanns’ research on developing Plutonium weapons:
Houtermanns’s August 1944 paper “Zur Frage der Auslösung von Kernhettenreaktionen” (found in Oak Ridge file box G-267)
Jentschke and Lintner’s paper: Schnelle Neutronen in Uran (found in Oak Ridge file box G-227)
Volz and Haxel paper (found in Oak Ridge file box G-118)
Prof J Schintlmeister’s report (element 94 Plutonium) is given in Oak Ridge file box G-111)
Verifiable references to Prof Kurt Diebner’s separate Uranium bomb project:
Diebner’s report “Experiments on the Initiation of Nuclear Reactions by Means of Exploding Substances.” ALSOS files
Herrmann, Hartwig, Rackwitz, Trinks and Schaub, report entitled:
“Versuche über die Einleitung von Kernkettenreaktionen durch dieWirkung explodierender Stoffe, 1944 (found in Oak Ridge file box G-227)
Prof Kurt Diebner’s review of the experiments, “Fusionsprozesse mit Hilfe konvergenter Stosswellen,” published in Kerntechnik, March 1962, pp 89-93
Dr Erich Bagge’s wartime diaries
ALSOS report Vdk 339
Dr Erich Baage developed the gaseous Uranium centrifuge at Kiel Unavernin in 1942 which he called the Isotope Sluice. It is nowadays called the Harteck process after another Nazi scientist Dr Paul Harteck who developed the centrifuge to an industrial scale during WW2. In early 1944 a huge contract was let to HWA for the industrial scale development of Uranium centrifuges. The budget for this was ten times greater than the entire budget available to Heisenberg's KWA team (Virus House)
How many centrifuges?
Unclear however after bombing of the Hellage ultracentrifuge factory in Freiburg on 27 November 1944 it was noted by ALSOS that "several" were put into dispersed storage around Hamburg. Essau the administrative plenepotentiary for Nazi nuclear science set aside a 600,000 Reichsmark budget for ten double unltracentrifuge machines to be manufactured by Kiel firm Anschütz & Co.
Its not a trivial effort to get thousands of centrifuges working reliably for long enough to produce enriched uranium. For a military effort we're talking many thousands. Thats a lot of metal to machine and assemble. Which in turn means a lot of production capacity taken out of use for other more pressing needs at the time.
Correct it wasn't a trivial effort however... to say it required many thousands of centrifuges is I would say an over statement.
As for detracting from other wartime production, this was a high priority project to produce a weapon which might have won the war and Nazi leaders were aware of the importance. Given the massive slave labour force and the sheer scale of for example U-boat production at Kiel where Anschütz & Co was based, it was a drop in the bucket to manufacture these centrifuges.
Hang on...'44?
What evidence is there for the actual completion of the contract to produce these centrifuges?
In answer to your question may I suggest you read
Report on Uranium centrifuge plants at Kandern & Freiburg (found in Oak Ridge file box G-330)
The Keil firm Anschütz & Co. established a general workshop, then a mass-production line for Mark III-B centrifuges at a disused Linen factory in Kandern near the border with Switzerland. The factory code name was “Angora Farm.” Mark III-B centrifuges were being mass produced at the Hellage factory in Freiburg which was destroyed in an air raid on 27 November 1944.
Other more general references to Nazi development work on Uranium centrifuges from 1942 to 1944 are found in:
Dr Wilhelm Groth’s diary and reports (found in Oak Ridge file box G-146, 149, & 158)
Speer, April 17 April 1942, NARS microfilm T-175, roll 125
Unidentified diary seized by ALSOS (found in Oak Ridge file box G-355)
Published Report: The Ultracentrifuge, 1940 by Theo Svedberg & Dr Kai Pedersen Stockholm University
Following a conference on nuclear research in October 1944 Goering’s private office wrote to Walter Gerlach enquiring of realistic chances to develop a nuclear weapon in the near future? Gerlach wrote back detailing progress mentioning heavy water production amongst which he also said:
“ The development of the ultracentrifuge is complete and a working plan for the production of uranium with the necessary U-235 isotope enrichment is under construction. Other processes are being developed to the same end, to lead to simpler plants. The production of the necessary uranium compounds and experiments to produce suitable compounds are in hand.”
(Goering's secretary Gonnert’s correspondence with Gerlach on microfilm Alexandria, Virginia - Military Records Center).
The German Atomic Project was actually three separate projects. One with the Army (HWA) led by Heisenberg, the Reichspost, led by Houtermans with von Ardenne, and the SS.
Three seperate projects, three seperate project leaders?
How very NAZI indeed, probably in competition I would imagine, and thus detracting from what should have been a singular effort.
Or perhaps in ways which we may not appreciate now, a more effective comparmentalisation of different approaches?
In any case, I have attempted to answer criticisms by citing some verifiable sources which seems to be the common complaint. It is over to you gentlement to spend hours poring over these archives mainly in German.
