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
Post Reply
witcher
Member
Posts: 95
Joined: 18 Aug 2005, 02:16
Location: North Houston

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#76

Post by witcher » 19 Mar 2009, 02:33

Hi, I have been away for a while.

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archi ... attan.aspx

I posted this on another zine here...$20b less $76million "off budget"
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &start=120
Excludes $76 million spent by the Army Air Forces on Project SILVERPLATE from September 1943 through September 1945 (Project SILVERPLATE covered the modification of 46 B-29 bombers in support of the Manhattan Project, trained the personnel of the 509th composite bombing group, and provided logistical support for units based at Tinian Island, launching point for the attacks on Japan).
$76 million and this is the bomb dolly? No answer has been proposed that makes sense.
Photo is only 43k so I'll post it again. Beast regards.
Attachments
littleboydelivered.jpg
littleboydelivered.jpg (43.03 KiB) Viewed 1037 times

User avatar
Simon K
Member
Posts: 1425
Joined: 19 Jul 2008, 20:25
Location: London U.K

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#77

Post by Simon K » 19 Mar 2009, 02:58

Whats your point? It obviously was.
This was Tinian Island. A forced, frenetic base.
Yes many aspect of the 509ths operation now seem amazingly primitive/slipshod.
That was its support, in its dugout.
Do you want NAZI anti grav devices?


witcher
Member
Posts: 95
Joined: 18 Aug 2005, 02:16
Location: North Houston

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#78

Post by witcher » 19 Mar 2009, 03:43

I wonder what $76 million 1945 dollars are worth today? As I said, no answer given has made any sense.
I might agree with you on the saucers.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#79

Post by Takao » 19 Mar 2009, 10:04

You should check your sources first Witcher. That's in 1996 US Dollars, not 1945 US Dollars.
http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archi ... attan.aspx

What would 46 B-29s and complete crews and logistical support cost? 76 million dollars seems cheap for 46 B-29s even in 1996 dollars. Especially since the B-29 was around 1 million a copy in 1945. Somebody's facts don't add up.

witcher
Member
Posts: 95
Joined: 18 Aug 2005, 02:16
Location: North Houston

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#80

Post by witcher » 19 Mar 2009, 11:57

"modification of 46 B-29 bombers "
Bombers not in the $20B budget.
Sorry, even with my errors the dolly does not add up. I've designed ground support equipment for the airline industry and can say for sure that a local Seebee welder put that item together on the spot without any drawings.
It is a dolly, note the wheels.

Still no viable explanation.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#81

Post by LWD » 19 Mar 2009, 14:15

Todays airline industry is a long way from a remote WWII airfield. Dollies are exactly the sort of thing that would have slipped through the cracks. Especially as field expediants were readily available.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#82

Post by Takao » 19 Mar 2009, 21:06

The Silver Plate Project, later shortened to just Silverplate encompassed not just the modification of the B-29s, but the training and operational aspects of the Manhattan Project as well. A good overview of Silverplate is here: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Silverplate

Now, if absoluteastronomy's source is correct and the extensive bomb bay modifications took 6000 man hours to complete, your looking at 276,000 man hours worth of work for 46 aircraft. That does not include the modification of the engines, the Curtiss reversible pitch propellers, or any of the other modifications made to the B-29s. This does not even cover the training and operational aspects.

Given all that was covered by Silverplate, I fail to understand why you are so fixated that this single dolly allegedly cost 8.7 million dollars in 1945 or 76 million in 1996. Even breaking the cost down on a per aircraft basis. The cost of Silverplate, in 1945, would amount to 189,130 dollars per aircraft.

Maybe now, you can see why I find you claim highly dubious.

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#83

Post by Mark V » 07 Apr 2009, 22:14

stellung wrote:The Russians allowed their Germans to return in the 1950s. Odd, to say the least. You should look up the Australian program. It went by the acronym ESTEA.
Hi.

Not at all strange. By late 40s / turn of decade, it was pretty clear that rocketry would had strategical importance of highest order in near future.

Soviets wanted to be in that game. Logical way was firstly to reverse engineer and legacy improvement current German rocket designs for initial weapon capability, training of rocket forces, and same time built up their manufacturing / designing capability to offer robust domestic capability in the mid term. Their aim was to make "outsiders" redundant as soon as possible.

German designers were used to "pace" Soviets own design teams. If Germans came up with more advanced design than them, it was studied, and good parts were used for further development in their own design teams. Avoiding NIH syndrome of fielding "German" rocket, and speeding the learning curve of their own men.

Americans worked basically same way. Building their own capability, with the difference that top Germans did rose to high positions and enjoyed long careers, with some public recognition. After all - these were von Brauns men, many of them dreamed of conquest of space even during wartime. Their loyalty and dedication in that work was beyond any doubt, not that they had any problems taking part with military programs as they had learned already in 30s !! that to get the space rocket, it must be developed/funded with military pretext :-)

Mark V

rak64
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 20 Mar 2009, 19:22

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#84

Post by rak64 » 11 Apr 2009, 00:03

Hello,

this is my first post here, excuse my writing, English is not my mother's tongue.

I learned in school time about the gun principle, it's like a dogma. But more i think about, more i can't thrust in that design.
If enemies conquerer such a bomb, it could be detonated by using explosive, just to move both under-critical parts togetherwith explosives. Secondly the design missing the primary bomb. Even the implosions type don't wear a primary bomb.

As mentioned before they consisted from primary and secondary bomb. First i heard about the primary bomb in Georges Clooneys movie Peacemaker.In that movie they damaged a church by ignite the primary bomb, i know its only a movie. Than i read a book about Khan, that the Pakistani Forces separate the primary bombs from the rest during air-transport. Than i learned. it is common to do cold atomic tests. the explanations varying, sometimes only conventional explosive is used, or U235 is replaced by U238.

In 1942 Flügge published his Book Kerntabellen. He and mentioned about Kernumwandlung (nucleus transformation), even he mentioned often K-Einfang, which means the the capture of electrons (from the K- Orbit) by the atom nucleus. Today scientists tell because the low probability of neutrinos, it is not possible to used by technology. But in my understanding Neutrinos are produced by the union of electrons with Protons, they are a result of the reaktion not a precondition. Today it is common knowledge that Germans don't discovered the laser. That is hardly to believe, even they know about the Maser. A device like a laser could be used as primary bomb. Chemically lasers threated as military used, why? Metalldampflaser don't need mirrors, having a good effectiveness.

Even the phenomena of chain reactions are deeply discovered as biological science. It is normal in biological cases that chain reactions easily and spontaneously stopping. And they should stop if Neutrinos are developed, because it drop the energy from the core. The chain could develop to a explosion if the primary drop a huge numbers of active parts to the bomb, what is an other explanation of primary....
With google books you could find a book from Pauli. He tell a different story about the 30 years. He discovered neutrinos at roughly the same time than neutrons. Read the part about Heisenbergers and Fermis response in the first chapter.

So i start to understand that a lot of therms from the post war time, so chain reaction, nuclear fission, plutonium. Even the present owner have a very good reason to hide the mechanics.

The germans had a specific behavior in developing stuff, just giving contract away to institutes. Success are not the key to get the follow-up order. Thats why a lot of development seems to waste in a nowhere. But it is a effective way to push thinks ahead and keep the secrets. Couldn't't be the Ultrazentrifuge more effective to separate the Element 94? Questions over questions, but i can't belive in the "winter sleep".
Attachments
lehr.jpg
lehr.jpg (82.81 KiB) Viewed 838 times

stellung
Member
Posts: 198
Joined: 04 Oct 2005, 04:52
Location: USA

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#85

Post by stellung » 11 Apr 2009, 05:02

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.

rak64
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 20 Mar 2009, 19:22

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#86

Post by rak64 » 11 Apr 2009, 12:15

stellung wrote: it appears that additional heavy water production was done at the IG Farben Leuna ammonia plant. Physics and National Socialism.
agree stellung,

i've red a doc from the beginning of 44 what stated that Norsk Hydro needs a maintenance, it would better to use the connectors / electrodes in Germany. Any chemical process what deals with hydrogen, could used for the separation of deuterium from hydrogen. I personally suspect the Fischer-Tropsch-Process for making synthetic fuel from coal and hydrogen was used by Germany for retrieval of deuterium. I found a comment about "alcohol not deuterium", not sure if i'm right. In the western sector the usage of the synthetic fuel production was forbidden by the Americans, despite the shortage of fuel in Germany.
Last edited by rak64 on 11 Apr 2009, 14:07, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#87

Post by LWD » 11 Apr 2009, 13:57

rak64 wrote:.... Any chemical process what deals with hydrogen, could used for the separation of deuterium from hydrodenium. ...
That's a rather all encompassing statement. Do you have anything to substantiate it? I'm assuming "hyddrodenium" is normal Hydrogen.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#88

Post by LWD » 11 Apr 2009, 14:00

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.
And your point is?
Last edited by LWD on 13 Apr 2009, 14:33, edited 1 time in total.

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#89

Post by Mark V » 13 Apr 2009, 01:18

Hi.
rak64 wrote:But more i think about, more i can't thrust in that design.
If enemies conquerer such a bomb, it could be detonated by using explosive, just to move both under-critical parts togetherwith explosives.
In some scenarios even once exploded gun type bomb could be used - kinda second time. :)

In every gun type U bomb there is enough HEU for several implosion type weapons. IF detonated deep enough (actual containment of explosion is not needed), the vast majority of HEU from gun type U bomb would be contained within soil - it is possible to extract and separate it. Nuclear explosion itself would consume only an minuscule amount of original material. It demands vast amount of excavating in dangerous enviroment ofcourse, but U would be separable with chemical methods. There would be some enrichment dilution from natural U from soil that has to be processed, but end product would still be weapons grade HEU. No need for high technology isotope separation. I am remembering that this was taken account in some gun-type bunker buster type weapons, by carrying an auxiliary payload of depleted or natural U insode bomb casing, but outside nuclear assembly to "dilute" target area after explosion to U-235 content less what is needed to "rebuild" the bomb with imposion technology.


Regards

rak64
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 20 Mar 2009, 19:22

Re: The German Atomic Device - The Evidence

#90

Post by rak64 » 13 Apr 2009, 13:57

Hi Mark V
I am remembering that this
mens that you have seen an example of gun type with your own eyes?

@ LWD

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

Post Reply

Return to “Other Equipment”