The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Discussions on the equipment used by the Axis forces, apart from the things covered in the other sections. Hosted by Juha Tompuri
User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8564
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby LWD » 13 Apr 2009 13:35

rak64 wrote:...My point is the Germans considering not to use Norsk Hydro as deuterium source.


But deuterium wasn't going to lead to a useful device in the WWII time frame. So it's source is immaterial.

rak64
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 20 Mar 2009 18:22

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby rak64 » 13 Apr 2009 22:22

I think Deuterium could count as usefull for a atomic devive or at least for atomic research.
I trieing to show that the reasoning, Germany lacking deuterium, for the reason of Hydro Norsk, is not conclusive.
Of course only a large-scale process would sufficient to separate it from hydrogenium.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8564
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby LWD » 13 Apr 2009 22:27

While it might be useful for some research it won't lead to a fission device and without a fission device you aren't going to get a fusion device so it's in many ways a dead end. Given a couple of decades that line of research might have paid off but it would likely have bankrupted Germany several times over. Of course Germany was going bankrupt anyway but ....

stellung
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 04 Oct 2005 03:52
Location: USA

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby stellung » 14 Apr 2009 19:23

Germany was going bankrupt? That statement is completely unsupported. In each of the conquered countries, personnel, raw materials and production facilities were immediately turned over to German war production. Free labor also cut costs.

Extensive atomic research was going on in Germany long after the supposed ending date in the popular histories. It is simply ignored.


http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... %26hl%3Den

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8564
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby LWD » 15 Apr 2009 00:48

stellung wrote:Germany was going bankrupt? That statement is completely unsupported. In each of the conquered countries, personnel, raw materials and production facilities were immediately turned over to German war production. Free labor also cut costs....

They were going bankrupt before the war and while the war did postpone some of the payments due it also increased the costs. So yes even though Germany looted the areas it conquered it was still going bankrupt the looting just postponed the day of reckoning. Check out the various threads in the economic forum if you don't believe me. Free labor may cut some costs but it also cuts productivity and as sabotage became more prevalent it may have reached the point of being counter productive.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8564
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby LWD » 15 Apr 2009 00:51



Let's see we have a new book with one glowing review claiming all sorts of German nuclear secrets revealed (all though I noted no claim about a bomb in the blurb). Think I'll wait until it's been reviewed by someone I trust before counting it as worth anything.

rak64
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 20 Mar 2009 18:22

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby rak64 » 15 Apr 2009 10:13

Hi LWD, Hallo Stellung,

Nagel is a good writer, another is Karlsch, Fäth or even Dornberger. All books unfortunate are in german language, hardly readable for you. :(

Some valuable googles are BZ (for Bernsteinzimmer) together with Conny. He is an historian found out that the BZ was used as a cover-story to carry the devices in cardanic lorries. Unfortunately he did not wrote his book.

Many wrong but i count it as the "max thinkable" is the writing of "the real blaze" in the nexusboard. Only that you get an idea about we talking.
If you start to take in account the need for a initial fuse, than everything fits organically together.

Because this story of the "Knallzeugs" is not history, it has consequences until today, thats-why it is heavily covered by certain agencies.

cheers

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby Simon Gunson » 22 May 2009 01:00

stellung wrote:The Americans are too busy writing other things to read the history.

"In August 1941, Houtermans completed The Question of Starting a Nuclear Chain Reaction, reporting that a reactor using natural uranium as a fuel could produce plutonium, which could then be removed by chemical means and used as an explosive." Spying on the Bomb, Richelson.

The work of Kurt Diebner in Gottow is ignored.

In Atomversuche in Deutschland, author Gunther Naegel reproduces one of the American documents from the Alsos Mission. Just as the Americans had widely separated components of their own atomic program, so did the Germans. Also, the fourth largest company in the world, the giant IG Farben chemical cartel, was part owner of Norsk Hydro. it appears that additional heavy water production was done at the IG Farben Leuna ammonia plant. Physics and National Socialism.


Nazi Germany had three heavy water sources; Norsk Hydro, Beck plant near Hamburg and the Leuna plant. Heavy water was only relevant to creating a heavy water moderated reactor for the production of Plutonium.

Fritz Houtermans who trained in nuclear physics inside the Soviet Union before the war and later returned to work for the Soviets after the war was undoubtedly a planted spy.

The whole proposition that the Nazis could build a Plutonium bomb in WW2 was in my opinion a craftily orchestrated diversion of Nazi war efforts. As noted it led to Kurt Diebner being ignored in 1941-42. Diebner however later became the single most significant person in the nazi A-bomb project by 1944, revealing a swing away from the projects of Houterman's and Heisenberg.

In any regard the debate has still not addressed the massive Uranium enrichment project by Dr Paul Harteck in 1944, nor the likelihood of U233 production from Thorium 232. These were two other avenues pursued.

It is interesting that two things happened in August 1944. Himmler took a sudden and passionate interest in Atomic weapons and all stocks of Thorium were confiscated by a German scientist whom Gen Leslie Groves identified as Jansen working for Auer Gesselschaft. The Thorium was seized from the French company Terres-Rares.

It's relatively easy to breed U233 from Thorium and it can be separated physically, or chemically. Making a U233 bomb is relatively simple. If the blast at Rugen was nuclear then U232 contamination would explain why it's yield was so low.

U232 can be excluded in the U233 breeding process by very short cycle breeding and removal of Proactinum 233 before it can degrade to U232.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8564
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby LWD » 22 May 2009 13:10

Simon Gunson wrote:...In any regard the debate has still not addressed the massive Uranium enrichment project by Dr Paul Harteck in 1944, nor the likelihood of U233 production from Thorium 232. These were two other avenues pursued.....


Th latter is problematic in WWII. From one web source I found this reaction was only realized in 1942. The US spent a great deal of time on it during the 50s and eventually gave up on it. There were also a number of tricks that made the reactor design non trivial.

stellung
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 04 Oct 2005 03:52
Location: USA

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

Postby stellung » 25 May 2009 03:28

To Simon,



My ongoing research shows the US Navy was more heavily involved than originally thought. Navy personnel participated in the ALSOS Mission as part of the Navy Technical Mission to Europe. One question I had was the origin of necessary cyclotrons. I found an answer titled "Cyclotrons Manufactured in Czechoslovakia." NARA RG 38, CNO (Chief of Naval Operations). Top Secret Reports of Naval Attaches 1944-1947. A company by the name of Vollmann. I hope you find this useful.


Return to “Other Equipment”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests