Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Drawing uncovered of 'Nazi Nuke'

samzenpus posted more than 9 years ago | from the too-close-for-comfort dept.

Technology 639

ninjee writes "Historians working in Germany and the US claim to have found a 60-year-old diagram showing a Nazi nuclear bomb. It is the only known drawing of a "nuke" made by Nazi experts and appears in a report held by a private archive. The researchers who brought it to light say the drawing is a rough schematic and does not imply the Nazis built, or were close to building, an atomic bomb. But a detail in the report hints some Nazi scientists may have been closer to that goal than was previously believed. The report containing the diagram is undated, but the researchers claim the evidence points to it being produced immediately after the end of the war in Europe. It deals with the work of German nuclear scientists during the war and lacks a title page, so there is no evidence of who composed it. One historian behind the discovery, Rainer Karlsch, caused a storm of controversy earlier this year when he claimed to have uncovered evidence the Nazis successfully tested a primitive nuclear device in the last days of WWII. A number of historians rejected the claim. The drawing is published in an article written for Physics World magazine by Karlsch and Mark Walker, professor of history at Union College in Schenectady, US."

cancel ×

639 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Forget it. (5, Informative)

FTL (112112) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702701)

First, if you look at the diagram [bbc.co.uk] , you'll see that it plainly shows a plutonium core. Problem, Nazi Germany did not have an operational nuclear reactor. Thus they had no ability to create kilograms of plutonium. This makes the diagram a pipe-dream at best.

Second, if you look at the diagram you'll see that it is initiated a gun-type trigger, something that is impossible for Pu. This makes the diagram look like the work of someone that doesn't know what they are doing. Maybe this was deliberate (though rather obvious) misinformation by a scientist who didn't want Hitler to get the bomb.

Third, it is undated, and unnamed, from an unknown source. Not worth even reading.

In any event, Germany had no means of effectively delivering such a weapon. They lacked the heavy aircraft which the USA used. The V2 rocket only had a fraction of the payload capacity needed. The best they could have done is load it on a cargo vessel and attempt to sail into someone's harbour. Or leave it behind in a city like Paris after retreating. Neither of which would have been terribly impressive, since they would be ground-bursts and not much different from a few tons of dynamite.

Re:Forget it. (2, Interesting)

Netsensei (838071) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702734)

Maybe not a classic atomic bomb. But I remember reading somewhere that the Nazi bomb would have been something closer to a "dirty bomb". Which spreads radioactive material with conventional explosives.

The effect would be more local. Instead of flattening an entire city, it would pollute a small area. But the demoralising on troops would be quite effective I guess.

Re:Forget it. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702785)

If all you want to do is build a dirty bomb, why go to all that trouble to design a gun-type bomb with a speherical Pu core? A dirty bomb would simply consist of something like Cesium packed around some high-explosives.

I agree with the OP. The drawing is fake. No nuclear physicist would ever have designed a gun-type Pu bomb on the basis that it doesn't work, and even the most preliminary math would have shown that.

Re:Forget it. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702878)

dirty bombs are completly ineffective though. the us military has looked into their use. the radiation from one is confined to too small an area. ensuring, with a large enough explosion that a larger area is covered just lessens the amount of radioactive material in a given area, lessening the effect. either way it is a simple cleanup operation.

Re:Forget it. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702900)

Yes, we can be sure the USians only use the best, most effective weapons for killing the maximum number of people.

Re:Forget it. (4, Insightful)

Derleth (197102) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702736)

Neither of which would have been terribly impressive, since they would be ground-bursts and not much different from a few tons of dynamite.

If dynamite caused radiation sickness and cancer, this would be exactly right. As it stands, however, even a Nazi dirty bomb would have had at least a huge psychological effect, if not a very large military one.

It might have opened our eyes to the true dangers of radiation sooner, but I don't think so. It could be an interesting jumping-off point for an alternative history story: What if it gave other groups the idea to make their own dirty bombs in the unsettled postwar years?

Re:Forget it. (2, Insightful)

bloodredsun (826017) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702830)

You're also talking about an era where governments (US, UK and AUS amongst them) exposed their own soldiers to nuclear tests to see how they would react, so I'm not sure about the psychological effects being that profound.

Mind you, we also had radioactive toothpaste and people bought it!

Re:Forget it. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702842)

As it stands, however, even a Nazi dirty bomb would have had at least a huge psychological effect, if not a very large military one.

Why? A dirty bomb is simply conventional explosives used to scatter radioactive material.

Knowledge about the harmful effects of radiation was not nearly as ubiquitous back then as it is today.

If the dirty bomb used a standard amount of explosives ( 1000 kg) then as far as any soldiers witnessing it were concerend it would simply be an ordinary bomb. Not like they were marching across Europe carrying Geiger counters and wearing dosimeters back then.

Re:Forget it. (3, Insightful)

Xner (96363) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702739)

Agreed, it looks more like someone's fantasy about what a 1940s era atomic weapon should look like than a real one.

Is it possible it was a design "speculated" from spy reports from the allies? It does capture two crucial design decisions (gun assembly and plutonium core), but manages to mix them up in a single entity. Which would be an easy mistake to make if one was relying on shaky intelligence from someone close to the Manhattan project, but not too close.

The design still looks approximated though, and does not take into account the scale or space requirements of a v2-type rocket.

Re:Forget it. (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702744)

Hittler was a spitefull little bastard , I have no doubt he would of set several of these up across germany and surrounding countrys they still inhabited to leave a little suprise for the allies when his defeat was imminent .
on the tops of large buildings etc i imagine , Wiping out a fair few places and soldier and most likely half of germany rather than letting it fall into allied hands .

Re:Forget it. (0, Offtopic)

EpsCylonB (307640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702852)

He used to eat puppies and bunny rabbits for breakfast too.

Re:Forget it. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702877)

He did actualy eat rabbits , Quite a commen Dish in Germany

Re:Forget it. (0)

The Ur-Grue (145015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702909)

Somehow I doubt that.

The man was a vegetarian, after all.

Re:Forget it. (-1, Offtopic)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702911)

Rabits Yes, Dogs No. Hitler liked dogs. sooo...
If Hitler then you like dogs.
There forth
If you like dogs then you must be hitler.

Ah, the converse error. A politions primary tool. Even today.

If you are a terrorest then you hate America.

So Thereforth

If evendence shows that you hate America then you must be a terrorest.

Re:Forget it. (0)

eclectro (227083) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702748)

Second, if you look at the diagram you'll see that it is initiated a gun-type trigger

Not necessarily. It could be a different design. But I won't go into detail because there might be Korean old people [wikipedia.org] reading, not that it's a big secret anymore.

Re:Forget it. (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702884)

Not necessarily. It could be a different design.

Come on. It's a gun-type trigger.

Re:Horten Flying Wing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702757)

"Germany had no means of effectively delivering such a weapon"

Oh dear you obviously didn't watch Indiana Jones and The Raiders of The Lost Ark:

http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation% 20history/jet%20age/flying%20wings.htm [freeola.com]

Oh yeah and that 'borrowed' design was used for the Stealth Bomber.

Re:Forget it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702760)

the thing about the plutonium is absolutely right what you say

but nevertheless there is contaminated soil from what i understand in schleswig holstein and ruegen, so something must have happend there

Hitler meets Priory of Sion? (1)

Christian Engstrom (633834) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702775)

Am I the only one who thinks this sounds an awful lot like a combinations of Hitler's Diaries [typepad.com] from the eighties and the more recent Priory of Sion hoax [wikipedia.org] ?

Top secret documents mysteriously discovered in forgotten archives! History as we know it must be revised! Read all about it, etc.

For all I know, the document found could of course be both genuine and significant. But when it sounds a little to good to be true,...

Re:Hitler meets Priory of Sion? (1)

BigBadBus (653823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702844)

I agree. Someone could have requested some documents from an archive a couple of months ago, planted the diagram, and waited for the furore to start in a few months or years when someone else inspected the files...

Re:Forget it. (1)

bloodredsun (826017) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702787)

I agree. This seems to be very much along the lines of 2+2=5. The difficulty in refining the uranium and/or plutonium required meant that germany was many months from creating a bomb. The amount of credence given to an undated and unsigned diagram seems disproportionate considering that there is little or no surrounding and supporting evidence.

That Karlsch can claim that the Nazi's managed a nuclear test from a single diagram and a reactor design seems a little premature (okay it seems ridiculous but I'm trying to be objective).

Unfortunately, the coverage seems to stem more from the ego of a single scientist propounding a different and contraversial view rather than scientific fact.

Re:Forget it. (0)

91degrees (207121) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702838)

I disagree about delivery.

Building a bigger aircraft was well within german capabilty. I'm fairly sure an He-177 could have carried the hiroshima bomb, and even if they couldn't, it would have been well within their technological ability. As for rocketry - How hard is it to make a bigger rocket? It can't be rocket science:)

Re:Forget it. (1)

the_raptor (652941) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702879)

Actually according to Wikipedia you could make a gun type weapon with Pu. However it would need to use highly enriched Pu and need to be 19 feet long to prevent pre-detonation.

Re:Forget it. (1)

mog007 (677810) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702885)

Odd, because that drawing looks like a little boy style bomb, which as we all know, contains no Plutonium at all. Just a Uranium pellet being accelerated into a much larger mass of Uranium, achieving maximum density.

Wow, godwin's law.. (1, Funny)

rylin (688457) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702704)

Godwin's Law invoked PRIOR to the first post!
Amazing!

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702746)

For all those who are like me, please see the following wikipedia link to understand this post:

Godwin's Law [wikipedia.org]

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702779)

People like you are fags. Piss off, n00b.

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (0, Redundant)

squidinkcalligraphy (558677) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702772)

From the Godwin's law FAQ [faqs.org] :
2. What happens if we're actually talking about Nazis?

Then you've already invoked Godwin's Law, and the chances are that your thread isn't going to last all that much longer as a sane discussion. Them's the breaks.
This, however, assumes that it is possible to have a sane discussion on /. in the first place.

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702805)

The guy's name is GANDHI. GANDHI. GANDHI. Get it straight if you're quoting him, Bill Clitoris, George Washingmachine, Richard Stillawoman. Fucking hell.

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (0, Offtopic)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702860)

Well, that's the problem with non-violent resistance isn't it... If Gandhi had gone round beating the living shit out of people who mis-spelled his name, and shouting "I'm Mohandas Gandhi, bitch. G-A-N-D-H-I" while he did it, more people would be able to spell it today.

Re:Wow, godwin's law.. (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702782)

Godwin's Law invoked PRIOR to the first post!
Amazing!


And there are still people to post even now that the whole thread is over !..

It's Goodwin and it's slightly different (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702841)

The law has been twisted to mean that "anyone who mentions Nazis looses the debate" - but it was intended to smack down trolls who would compare other people to Nazis.. It's not that the Nazis were evil - they were just bad for the rest of the world (well, that could be the definition of Evil .. but yeah). This is exactly what makes me apprehensive about the world politics right now. Well, read about Krikkit [wikipedia.org] , to get an idea of what Xenophobic patriotism is.

And I am an speling nazi (*narf*)

Re:It's Goodwin and it's slightly different (-1, Redundant)

tarunthegreat2 (761545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702855)

But clearly not a a grammar nazi. It's I am a spelling nazi. 'a' before consonants, and 'an' before vowels...unless that was a typo, in which case you're not a very good spelling nazi :-p

Re:It's Goodwin and it's slightly different (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702870)

So you missed "speling", did you?

Re:It's Goodwin and it's slightly different (0, Offtopic)

kyojin the clown (842642) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702882)

FIRE UP THE BEHEMOTH GRAMMAR NAZI CANNON!

actually, 'an' can also appear before consonants, when they are silent. take, for instance, 'an honour'.

;D

FAQ (1)

BobPaul (710574) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702873)

Godwin's Law invoked PRIOR to the first post!

This is incredible! Someone obviously has the FAQ [faqs.org]
--
Don\'t fight Firefox! Let FireFox fight YOU! [bobpaul.org]

The FA godwined itself! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702705)

That was fast...

Maybe in 60 years... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702706)

This is great! There might be hope after all! Maybe in 60 years the US will find diagrams of WMD in Iraq!

Re:Maybe in 60 years... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702720)

I know for certain that in 60 years time when people look back through my school notes, they will find doodles of teleporters, aliens, spacemen firing with space guns.

All of which giving first proof that the UK was already a vengeful island full of vindictive alien hating super scientists.

Re:Maybe in 60 years... (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702758)

Yep , probbably with a little "Made in the USA" sticker on the bottom

Don't worry! (1)

cloudkj (685320) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702707)

Don't worry everyone, Indiana Jones probably had came and saved the day. Haven't you all seen "Raiders of the Lost Ark"?

Godwin's Law (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702708)

This thread hasn't even started and already Godwin's Law has proved true.

In SOVIET Russia ... (-1, Offtopic)

cablepokerface (718716) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702713)

... this would have toasted Stalingrad.

Good thing it never happened.

Re:In SOVIET Russia ... (0)

madaxe42 (690151) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702897)

OTOH, my great-uncle might have not been the sole survivor of his regiment of several thousand men - yes, he was a Nazi, but he was a field medic, got hepatitus, and got evacced... Lucky!

What a shame (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702714)

They were so close!

Scary to think (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702716)

If the Nazis had completed work on the nuclear bomb / rocket nuke then the world would be a very difrent place than it is today .
They most likely would have still lost the war , but the face of europe would be a very difrent one than it is today.
I suppose it is about time for another "What if " ww2 movie

No, thank you (1)

Udo Schmitz (738216) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702765)

They most likely would have still lost the war , but the face of europe would be a very difrent one than it is today.

I really don't think so. The US would have tested their A-bombs on Hamburg and Bremen instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. War ends, a few years pass, Germans and US-Americans are best buddies. (Cue Bob Dylans "With God On Our Side")

I suppose it is about time for another "What if " ww2 movie

Thanks, but no, thanks.

Kind regards, Udo Schmitz, Bremen, Germany

Re:No, thank you (0, Offtopic)

Ham_belony (820906) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702793)

The US wouldn't have A-Bombs to test.

Re:No, thank you (1)

The Ur-Grue (145015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702809)

Indeed, because by '45 there were so many means at Germany's disposal to hit Los Alamos. And because they knew all about its location and its significance. That's why there were constant V2 strikes and bombing raids over New Mexico late in the war.

Oh, wait.....

Re:Scary to think (1)

Suchetha (609968) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702766)

the face of europe would be a very difrent one than it is today
yeah, for one thing it would be a lot less inhabitable, and a lot more filled with strange mutant humans [crossingeurope.at]

Suchetha

Re:Scary to think (2, Insightful)

The Ur-Grue (145015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702792)

Different how, exactly? They WOULD have still lost the war. There's no 'likely' about it. One atomic bomb would have made remarkably little difference.

The material and manpower advantage of the allied armies and the Soviet Union in particular was utterly overwhelming by 1945.

Re:Scary to think (-1, Redundant)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702822)

These were dirty bombs(well would have been) the contamination would have made alot of areas uninhabitable-I imagine if they had of completed the work on it they would have made several and when the troops started moving into German soil the spitfull little git that hittler was would have taken thm with him .
I am fairly sure Hittler would have rather destroyed Germany than see it fall into Non-Germanic hands.
After all this is just conjecture as it didn't happen

Re:Scary to think (1)

The Ur-Grue (145015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702859)

Hitler did indeed feel that Germany had failed him, and thus was worthy only of destruction. At the end he was pretty far gone.

However, I tend to doubt the plausibility of the creation of a bomb that only spreads radiation when radiation was so poorly understood. If they just wanted to sear the land and leave horrible lingering effects for years they had the means. They used them in WWI at Verdun and elsewhere. They were called chemical weapons.

One 'Hiroshima'-style bomb, designed to do damage with a massive explosion, changes nothing. There simply weren't any targets that the Germans could have hit to change the course of the war by '45. A detonation in Berlin would also have changed remarkably little. The city was quite effectively destroyed by the Red Army in the last days. It would have been rebuilt, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki were.

Re:Scary to think (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702886)

I guess its part of the Human condition to wonder "What if" , my inlaws are from Germany so it just kind of made me think where i would be now.
I dont think it would of intentionaly been to spread radiation , only to wipe out a few troops as some last ditch vengance , but considering the way the bomb was going to be made its likely that it would of had the side effect of radiation poisoning .
Definantly wouldnt have changed the outcome of the war (i worded that badly in my origional post) ,but it may have changed the landscape for years to come ... well it is all just conjecture thankfully we will never know what would have hapend.

Evidence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702718)

Rainer Karlsch, caused a storm of controversy earlier this year when he claimed to have uncovered evidence the Nazis successfully tested a primitive nuclear device in the last days of WWII. A number of historians rejected the claim. Hell, that's still more plausible than the evidence produced about about WMDs in Iraq. I say we invade Germany (again), just to be on the safe side.

Re:Evidence (1)

tarunthegreat2 (761545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702866)

I call shotgun on the Tank. I've always wondered what those Autobahn things were all about. That and the beer. Mmmmm... beer......And I'm sure the Germans will gladly accept us as they're benevolent overlords who will gift them some democracy and freedom..... oh.....wait....

Ok I will then (-1, Offtopic)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702722)

Somebody set us up ze bomb

Rainer Karlsch discovered an other PR coup (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702723)

and blew it out of proportion.

So really, nothing to see here, move along.

Heisenberg (4, Informative)

Underholdning (758194) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702729)

It's no secret that Heisenberg [wikipedia.org] worked on a nuclear weapon during the WWII. However, some claim that he deliberately didn't make any real progress. There's plenty of more information here. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Heisenberg (4, Informative)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702752)

Trying or not (and some certainly were) there's little doubt that Nazi scientists were a long way from the bomb. Indeed, due to a widely circulated (and accepted) mistake in a calculation about the mass of Uranium required for a chain reaction, many believed it impossible.

There are transcripts and tapes of British debriefings at Farm Hall [nybooks.com] after captured German scientists were informed about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and most express complete incredulity that the US scientists had succeeded.

Re:Heisenberg (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702798)

Yes, and it is widely thought that Heisenberg delibertly made the "mistake" in the calculations to impeed Nazi efforts to create the bomb. If he did, it was a brilliant move. It made the concept of a bomb far more difficult in the design, the amount of material apparently required (Ten times as much as the US needed for Little Boy) and deployment (A Nazi bomb would have been huge, if it had ever worked. The US Little Boy wasn't exactly small as it was.)

Re:Heisenberg (2, Interesting)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702865)

Well, ten times or not, the draft designs of "hopefully workable" bomb were devices weighting about 200 ton. NOT transportable by plane. At best by a ship/train (but if by train, then in parts, to be assembled at the detonation site.)

By all accounts Nazis were closer to developing a working flying saucer [unrealaircraft.com] than a working nuclear bomb...

Re:Heisenberg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702894)

Wasn't Hiesenberg the dude who was uncertain about his principles? Badump-Ching! *ducks*

What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (2, Interesting)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702737)

Several unexploded WW2-era bombs [unit.org.uk] are apparently being uncovered in east London. Supposedly the plan was for them to remain unexploded for a long period, then detonate, to act as Hitler's revenge long after the war was lost. Nasty.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702759)

Informative?!

see this conspiracy theorists site for more info:
http://www.whoisdoctorwho.co.uk/ [whoisdoctorwho.co.uk]

RE: What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (2, Informative)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702761)

remain unexploded for a long period, then detonate

Like land mines in Vietnam and Cambodia?

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702769)

All sides in WW2 used delayed action bombs which exploded some hours or days after dropped. Also both sides dropped a lot of bombs that were simply duds. In Germany as well as London, dud bombs are uncovered. I see no evidence of the bombs being recovered in London being deliberately designed to remain inactive for such a long period - corrosion and degradation of the explosive would make it impossible to plan a 60 year detonation window.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702780)

"Supposedly the plan was for them to remain unexploded for a long period, then detonate, to act as Hitler's revenge long after the war was lost. Nasty."

Must have been the same plan the allieds had, as this is the only explanation why unexploded but still dangerous bombs are discovered frequently in Germany.
Oh wait, it isn't the only explanation at all, in fact your explanation doesn't make a lot of sense and there is nothing to back up your assertion.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (0, Offtopic)

gowen (141411) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702813)

Well, it wouldn't. It's a site set up by the BBC to promote the latest series of Doctor Who.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (1)

Ford Prefect (8777) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702856)

Well, it wouldn't. It's a site set up by the BBC to promote the latest series of Doctor Who.

Either that, or the United Nations Intelligence Taskforce [unit.org.uk] is using a terribly effective Javascript-based [unit.org.uk] password system.

I would appear to have hacked into the site. Wahey!

(Goes off to launch some ICBMs...)

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (3, Interesting)

rapiddescent (572442) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702796)

several? hundreds of UXB's (Unexploded bombs) have been found in east London and the old industrial areas of the UK after blanket bombing during WWII.

If you drop hundreds of thousands of various types of ordnance onto an industrialised area then as much as 20% will not explode. Even ordnance flung into Baghdad some 60 years later didn't all explode on impact.

I doubt this was intentional.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (2, Interesting)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702843)

Well, over 1/3 of bombs dropped during the Warsaw Insurrection on Warsaw by Nazis didn't explode, and that was perfectly intentional. Not intentional by Nazis though - bombs manufactured in Czech factories, by people forced to work there, were frequently sabotaged to be duds. Then the rebels would take them apart and build grenades from the explosives, using them against Germans - these "home-made" grenades were the most basic weapons for that fight, as thanks to constant supply of explosives from Czech they were more far more accessible than ammunition. It seems the bombings brought more losses than profits for Germans - deep cellars and sewers of central Warsaw were quite efficient shelters against bombs that did explode, and without supply of such weaponry the insurrection would die out much faster.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (0)

ratbag (65209) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702801)

Informative? Moderators should probably click the links in the stories before moderating. And read the sig of the poster. Or maybe they're in on it as well and I'm suffering from a sense of humour failure.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702802)

...What are you going on about? http://www.unit.org.uk/disclaim.html [unit.org.uk]

That article is bogus!!!!

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702827)

Do you think a guy with a Dalek sig might know that?

FFS (-1)

Udo Schmitz (738216) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702806)

Mod this shit down. This happens with bombs. Here in Germany they find WWII bombs in the ground every day. Just a few weeks ago my street was almost evacuated because the found one on a building site.

Re:What about the Schlechter Wolf bombs? (2, Informative)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702826)

Since the link in your post goes the website of a fictional organisation that Doctor Who belongs to [krysstal.com] , perhaps the moderation of your post as 'informative' was a little misplaced?

Germans had no nuke (1)

PsiPsiStar (95676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702740)

As mentioned elsewhere, the diagram is for a plutonium bomb (and according to the earlier poster, the diagram wouldn't have worked.) The Germans hadn't even gotten a fission reaction going by the end of the war, since they didn't know that purified sufficiently purified graphite could be used to produce slow neutrons, and they kept trying to use heavywater.

The German nuclear scientists were rounded up and kept for a few weeks at Farm Hall where they were secretly recorded. The transcripts of this were declassified less than a decade ago, and there's a lot of debate over whether Heisenberg was doing less than his level best to advance the Nazi nuclear project [wikipedia.org] , or whether he had just made mistakes.

When the allied forces let him hear the news of Hiroshiima and Nagasaki, he was able, (several days later) to give a good description of what happened, though he overestimated the amount of fissionable material required.

Historical debate on what Heisenberg knew beforehand tends to focus on the several days he required to figure out how the whole thing was done and whether or not that time span is relevant.

Re:Germans had no nuke (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702850)

There is something many WW2 historians have noticed.

Heisenberg was not an engineer and he did not get along with engineers. Typical of most European academentia at the time (and even now) . There were very few people to actually take the "ideas" and make them "tick" on the German nuclear team.

This is in sharp contrast with both American and Russian efforts which were done in a much more practical manner.

ob joke (1, Funny)

zatz (37585) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702773)

"Heisenberg was not aware of it," Dr Karlsch explained.

Yet he knew exactly how fast it was moving....

Germans didn't have a Nuke (1)

KrisCowboy (776288) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702774)

First of all, Hitler shrugged off nuclear physics as "Jewish Physics" and refused to have anything to do with it. And according to Albert Speer, Reichsminister for War and Armaments, the research to build a Nuclear bomb was in preliminary phases only. USSR knew that US was building an A-bomb and Stalin wanted one for himself too. That was the prime motive for Soviet Union's amazing drive towards Berlin. Anyway,let's be thankful that Hitler had no nukes or there would have been no Slashdot today :-)

Re:Germans didn't have a Nuke (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702804)

Schrägstrichpunkt.com .. no we most likely would still have won , it would of just been a whole lot more of a mess afterwards .. still rather scary to think about

Re:Germans didn't have a Nuke (0)

network23 (802733) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702819)


Anyway, let's be thankful that Hitler had no nukes or there would have been no Slashdot today :-)

Schrägstrich Punkt?

Re:Germans didn't have a Nuke (2, Insightful)

chrisblore (866716) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702888)

Hitler was able to shrug these things aside when it suited him. I mean, you've only got to look at the guy to see that he didn't fit into the Nazi ideal of an Aryan race!

That story is old and faulty (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702791)

That story circulated here ein Germany 3 months ago.
It has been rejected by all major historians in germany.

Mod Parent UP! (0)

Udo Schmitz (738216) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702854)

This is true [google.com] .

Germans (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702807)

Smartest in the world

Unlike dumb americans :-P
we spend all day refreshing slashdot!

Quoting anyone? (0, Offtopic)

Zzz (90782) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702820)

-sigh-

When quoting the article, maybe you can mention you are doing so? Or maybe the 'editors' failed to nitice the quote?

Translation of labels? (1)

Graham Clark (11925) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702825)

I don't suppose anyone who (unlike myself) has some German would care to translate the captions from the BBC's version of the drawing [bbc.co.uk] ?

Thanks.

Re:Translation of labels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702864)

Looks like the scan quality is too low to see the text clearly.

Or maybe it's time I upgrade my graphics card...

Re:Translation of labels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702903)

just for you

the picture though is badly scanned and difficult to read, but here is my try:

Uranbom type II (the text to the right of it is not readable by me)

then on the left side:
close and time fuse

then on the right side, top to bottom:
ripcord
some word with lead in the beginning, unreadable
parachuterope (actually rope holding parachute)
something unreadable for AE/17/44
special brace part
brace
special brace part
pipe as (unreadable)
something unreadable
again special brace part
brace
special brace part
cloak
plutonium
brace

i am sorry, but i really cant decipher all words, really bad scan

hope this helped

does anyone else wonder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702861)

...what the world might be like today if the Nazis had won WW2?

I find myself fantasizing about it all the time. They were so close. What would the world be like? Might it be a BETTER world today?

Who knows...

-Steve J

Re:does anyone else wonder (2, Informative)

madaxe42 (690151) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702906)

Read 'The Man in the High Castle' by Philip K Dick, it explores an alternate reality in which the combined Germano-Japanese forces won the war.

Excellent book

Germans or Japans didn't know a-bomb concept? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702876)

So, please someone tell me why in worst days of war, Germans send uranium to Japan in u234?

Also obvious, not secret that the cargo of u234 was used in Manhattan project.

(page picked random as text only it is)
http://www.ww2pacific.com/u-234.html [ww2pacific.com]

Re:Germans or Japans didn't know a-bomb concept? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702907)

(page picked random as text only it is)

Could someone please explain this sentence? This grammar seems strange to me.

Nuclear Armaments (5, Informative)

Hodge (530651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702891)

I am currently reading Gitta Sereny's biography of Albert Speer (Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth), who was Hitler's architect, then armaments minister during WW2.

He claims to have stopped the scientists from developing the bomb any further - not because he was opposed to the concept if such a weapon (he certainly wasn't). The reason was that it was clear it would need much more time than was available in order to complete the work.

What was considered feasible was the idea of an "energy producing Uranium motor" for use in vehicles, and research was switched in that direction around 1944.

Antony Beevor's excellent book on the fall of Berlin also makes it clear that the Germans' nuclear research facilities were well known to the Russian's and were a major influence on Stalin's tactical decisions regarding Berlin. He was determined to obtain the fruits of this research.

The book also makes clear that Heisenburg did not try to sabotage the programme but was eager to succeed. This view is also backed up by the famous meeting between Heisenburg and Nils Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941 and Hesinburg's views at that time.

Of course even though one new where Heisenburg was in 1941 you could never tell what direction he was taking at that time.

Obligatory Indy Quote. (0)

Guano_Jim (157555) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702896)

Nazis!

I hate these guys.

WAV file here. [wavsite.com]

Duke the bastard (0)

MasterB(G)ates (718264) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702898)

Duke Nukem is a Nazi? I suppose Fuzzy Wuzzy is a woman then too?

Da Bomb... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12702899)

In A.D. 1944
War was ending.

Captain: What happen ?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
Operator: We get signal.
Captain: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Captain: It's you !!
Hitler: Guten Morgen, Frauen und Herren !!
Hitler: Alle Seine baze are belongen to uns.
Hitler: Sie sind on der way zum deztrkzion.
Captain: What you say !!
Hitler: Sie have keine chance zum surviven mache seine zeit.
Hitler: Har Har Har Har ....
Operator: Captain !!*
Captain: Take off every 'Jew'!!
Captain: You know what you doing.
Captain: Move 'Jew'.
Captain: For great justice.

since everyone agrees (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 9 years ago | (#12702902)

that fascists with nuclear bombs is a bad thing...

how about a theocracy with nuclear bombs (tehran)?

or a tyrant with nuclear bombs (pyongyang)?

what will it take for the world to do something decisive about these regimes and their (soon to be) nuclear arsenals? a nuclear signature over los angeles or madrid?

i fear that to be the case
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>