German mini nuke

Status
Not open for further replies.
German historian Rainer klasch claimed in he's book 2005 Hitler bombe and classified paper suggests that Germans where developing it at range of 5_6 kg of plutonium
 
tank expert said:
What
Click to expand...
Last I checked the research, WW2 German interest in fission was for power reactors, not bombs.

Also, 5-6kg of fissionables is really marginal for 1940s design. Yes, Fat Man aka Mk3 bombs had ~6.2kg, but that's basically the minimum viable quantity until the 1960s. A Uranium device would take 10x more by mass.
 
tank expert said:
And sorry for miss spell geeman I didn't notice that
Click to expand...
For a self professed "tank (gas, septic, or otherwise?) expert", your "geeman" (are you trying to refer to being an FBI agent?) self assigned moniker raises a whole lot of questions. I really wish there was a way to administer (of course completely and utterly consensual) lie detector tests on line...
 
Last edited:
tank expert said:
And sorry for miss spell geeman I didn't notice that
Click to expand...
This forum offers the option to change the title of a thread you have created yourself, as well as the option of deleting your own replies or comments to existing threads. Click on <Edit> or <Delete> as appropriate.
If you access the forum from a mobile device (phone, tablet) you may have to rotate your device a quarter turn before the options become visible.
 

Attachments

  • SPF n.png
    SPF n.png
    134.9 KB · Views: 8
  • SPF q.png
    SPF q.png
    144.1 KB · Views: 6
  • SPF q e-d.png
    SPF q e-d.png
    153.4 KB · Views: 7
Scott Kenny said:
Last I checked the research, WW2 German interest in fission was for power reactors, not bombs.
Click to expand...
Their scientists actually were reluctant to talk about atomic bomb as anything other than pure theory. They were (quite reasonably) afraid, that if they suggested that atomic bomb might be practically possible, Nazi leadership would immediately order it to be created in some ridiculous timeframe - like, six month - and after inevitable failure of such efforts, the scientists would be blamed. So they only talked about atomic bomb as some attractive, but purely theoretical idea - attractive just enough so Nazi leadership would fund the atomic research, but not too attractive.
 
… and this forum offers the option to search for key words/-phrases, always recommended before starting a new thread. So just typing in "german nuclear bomb" into the search function window and looking through the results gives a pretty good idea of the general opinion about this theme here.
1745490947259.png

And, at least to me, the question about "mini nuke" implies, that of course there would have been normally sized nukes around in Germany around 1945 ... :confused:
 
Last edited:
Jemiba said:
And, at least to me, the question about "mini nuke" implies, that of course there had been normally sized nukes around in Germany around 1945 ... :confused:
Click to expand...
- Why was professor Shnitzelkicken, head of atomic project, arrested by Gestapo?
- He offended Furher by insisting that Aryan atoms could degenerate to lesser elements.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:

  • Posts on alien UFOs, speculative Nazi wunderwaffen/flying saucers/atomic bombs, general conspiracy theories, alien crashes, moon landing denial and the like are specifically discouraged and would be better posted elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. I guess you've never bothered to read Friedwardt Winterberg, who got his PhD in 1955 under Werner Heisenberg and Kurt Diebner of the "nonexistent" WWII German nuclear weapons program.


I mean really, sir, why do you call your site "Secret Projects" and then do nothing but sneer down your nose at any evidence for....wait for it....actual secret projects? Would you kick people off a "kittens dot com" website if they dared to come on and post photos of kittens?

No doubt this will be my swan song around here, but I thought that point ought to made with you. Have a great day, though, okay?
 
Last edited:
williamjpellas said:
Uh huh. I guess you've never bothered to read Friedwardt Winterberg, who got his PhD in 1955 under Werner Heisenberg and Kurt Diebner of the "nonexistent" WWII German nuclear weapons program.



I mean really, sir, why do you call your site "Secret Projects" and then do nothing but sneer down your nose at any evidence for....wait for it....actual secret projects? Would you kick people off a "kittens dot com" website if they dared to come on and post photos of kittens?

No doubt this will be my swan song around here, but I thought that point out to made with you. Have a great day, though, okay?
Click to expand...
How is an article on a theoretical mini nuke from 2004 in any way relevant to the topic "WW2 mini nukes'?

In regard to the site name, it came from the "Secret Projects" series of books published by Midland on unbuilt aircraft projects and had precisely nothing to do with imaginary WW2 Nazi mini nukes. I would have thought the descriptions and rules make that perfectly clear.
 
Yeah, that's nice and all, but maybe you shouldn't allow topics like this one where you clearly don't know your rear end from a hole in the ground. But no, you have to sneer and snark and equate interest in nuclear weapon black projects with---and I quote---"alien UFOs, speculative Nazi wunderwaffen/flying saucers/atomic bombs, general conspiracy theories, alien crashes, moon landing denial and the like".

As for Winterberg, his history with fusion-fission devices goes back much further than his 2004 paper. Which you would know if you know one thing about this topic. Which you don't. Adios.
 
This theory emerged after 1955 when Italian diplomats from the Mussolini government claimed to have been taken to a mud island where they were shown a small nuclear explosion by the Third Reich.
 
If you mean nuclear weapons, then no. They did have a nuclear program and even managed to construct a nuclear reactor, but were nowhere close to actual nuclear weapons. Now there was the SC2500, which was a conventional bomb of very large size that people, including historian Mark Felton, call the "mini nuke" as testament to its strength. Perhaps it was the SC2500 that you talk about?

Here's Felton's video, really recommend it.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt1mSO9b2iA
 

Attachments

  • 1745540318698.png
    1745540318698.png
    408.7 KB · Views: 2
Scott Kenny said:
Last I checked the research, WW2 German interest in fission was for power reactors, not bombs.

Also, 5-6kg of fissionables is really marginal for 1940s design. Yes, Fat Man aka Mk3 bombs had ~6.2kg, but that's basically the minimum viable quantity until the 1960s. A Uranium device would take 10x more by mass.
Click to expand...
Building a "nuclear pile" large enough to reach critical mass - and be self sustaining - is one of the steps in learning how to build nuclear bombs. See the nuclear Pile 1 built at the University of Chicago in 2 December 1942 became the first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. The Chicago pile was part of the bigger Manhattan Project which produced the first nuclear bombs during the summer of 1945.
 
riggerrob said:
Building a "nuclear pile" large enough to reach critical mass - and be self sustaining - is one of the steps in learning how to build nuclear bombs. See the nuclear Pile 1 built at the University of Chicago in 2 December 1942 became the first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. The Chicago pile was part of the bigger Manhattan Project which produced the first nuclear bombs during the summer of 1945.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's actually true, but I'm not enough of a nuclear engineer to say with certainty.

You can certainly demonstrate criticality (and give your doctors radiation poisoning) without building a pile/reactor.

Note that that's using uranium for weapons, not if you're trying to make a sub 10,000lb plutonium device.
 
Dilandu said:
- Why was professor Shnitzelkicken, head of atomic project, arrested by Gestapo?
- He offended Furher by insisting that Aryan atoms could degenerate to lesser elements.
Click to expand...
The h in Fuehrer is misplaced,and you missed the umlaut e after the u, but otherwise you're doing absolutely great - one big lead star for correct German spelling to you, my dearest Dilandu!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom