Does the fixation with IR-equipped Tiger IIIs or Super Panthers ever bug you?
Here’s an inconvenient truth for our Axis brethren that they like to ignore when considering scenarios of Germany in 1946.
Wanna see Berlin in 1946?
Courtesy of the USAAF and some B-29s. How about some post nuclear apocalyptic panzers? Now that’d be a hoot!
Nice one Roy! Too true about the 1946 “what-ifs”…never much got into those personally although I understand the attraction/appeal. I have no doubt whatsoever that if the war in Europe was still going on by August 1945 the A-bombs would’ve been used. Think about how different our modern world would be if that had actually happened…
Very true, Roy. It was about ending the war, which down to only one theater by then, but had it still been two…it may have been Dresden or Bremen instead of Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
I think the appeal is the idea of taking something that only exists on paper and the Germans had a lot of neat stuff on paper. There are areas, like spacecraft and US aircraft, where kits exist of concept only stuff, but there isn’t the variety, but I’m not sure if it is the limited intrest means limited kits or guys building what they can get. Anigrand, Fantastic Plastic, and a few others have, Brit, Jap, or Ruski planes that were concept only, but no armor or ships, well the I-400 maybe counts, but that’s it.
As a self confessed and proud to admit Germaholic, i am interested in the German 46 idea. A large part of it for me is that much of it, most only on paper but a few items build and some even used, was so far advanced that it shapped much of the 20th century.
As for the A-Bomb on Berlin, that is of course assuming that the Germans had not pre-empted that with one of their own on London or new York dropped from a stealth flying wing or on the tip of an ICBM.
Poke away. But would the USA have landed on the moon in 69 without German rocket scientists and the V-2. Would you have had the F-86 or the Russians the MiG-15 without the Ta-183. Would you have the B-2 bomber without the Horten IX. Would the Russians have had the AK-47 or you the M-16 without the StG 44.
This is meant to be a fun thread. Bish wrote: “As for the A-Bomb on Berlin, that is of course assuming that the Germans had not pre-empted that with one of their own on London or new York dropped from a stealth flying wing or on the tip of an ICBM.”
I would posit that the German nuclear weapon or flying wing or any missile capable of carrying the 9000 pound warhead were in the realm of impossibility in 1945 whereas a B-29 dropping an ABomb on to a German city was definitely a possibility had the land war gone worse. (no missile with that kinda payload would be developed for a few decades)
The ABomb was planned for Europe and Japan both. If the US had developed the weapon, say in August of '44 versus late '45, I would daresay the picture above would have definitely happened.
I wonder if the Americans would have devestated Berlin. Berlin and Germany were all important to the recovery of Europe or the Allies wouldn’t have expended so much time and money into aiding her recovery. Could you imagine a Berlin that was erased off the map?
Perhaps Moscow would have gotten the next one. Muhahahahaha
Good thread Roy, I personally like a lot of the paper panzers/1946. I even like Luft '46 stuff. I must say that the theme of your point about the nuke is more than plausible there are more logical points like the state of german industry and its capability to produce this stuff…
Although many prototypes existed putting them into production would have been another thing.
Again thanks for a good thread.
Terry.
I agree this started as a humorous idea, but it also conjured up some serious thoughts. We know when the US had this technology. When could the Germans (those most likey to have developed the AB) could have deployed it.
If we want to do a serious discussion what if regarding German missile ability, let’s look at the numbers.
With the A-4/V-2, the Germans could send 1654 lbs of payload 220 miles in June 1942.
The A-8 was to be U-Boot launched and could have hit New York.
The A-9/A-10 on paper had a range of 2500 miles, no idea on payload. It was suposed to home in on the radio beacon the Elster operation was going to place in the Empire State, but it failed in November 1944.
The A-9 stage was supposedly operational January 1945, after its funding was cut in October 1942 and it was resumed Sep. 1944. Taking that gap out the timeline and the upper stage would be ready Feb. 1943.
The A-10 would have used V-2 engines, but it had no funding to even get off board when it was canceled with the A-9’s 10/42. The V-2 was in serious production in 1943. The engine was proven so it was all in the design of the A-10. This would have the A-10 tested and ready by Aug 1943 or so. Take several months to mate the two stages with no bugs and you have conventional rocket bombing on parts of the East coast by Jan 1944.
The idea of the A-11 was planned as a satellite launcher so a good sized payload would have a reality say June 1945 at the latest. Possibly by the end of the previous year.
The question is where were they on atomic weapons? Anyone want to weigh in or shall I dig?
Doesn’t much matter what the Germans invented post-1945. Once they lost the Caucus oil fields, they couldn’t run any of it anyway.
Unless they invented ethanol,…[<:o)]
The whole “'46 thing” is fun. I did a Pershing for the “Endgame '46” GB a while ago that was a blast, just to counter all those paper panzers. But it’s kind of like that saying, “If my aunt had #*!!$, she’d be my uncle”, ya know?
Doogs comment sparked a memory.
I read a book titled “What If?” The book takes a look at what the world would be like today if certain battles had gone the other way. One chapter specifically dealt with Hitler’s strategy and the oil issue. It essentially said that had Hitler ordered a push into Iran/Iraq for the oil, instead of invading Russia, a whole lot of stuff could have changed.
Granted this is all speculation, and we could “what if” this to death, however think of the 1946 scenario. With funding and the oil to make it go, rockets could have been falling on the east coast just like Cassibill wrote.
Think we’d have nuked them then?
The German industry was quite a lot closer to nuclear weaponry than we thought. Bombing the heavy water plant, and other key installations, helped delay the aquisition of nuclear warheads by the Nazi government.
Think this through and it will scare the [cnsod] out of ya.
your post gets around as it’s the third time I’ve seen it. I have gave the first viewing some thought, and you really wouldn’t like to hear my personal thoughts on it. So that’s that.
But in my thoughts on this subject I came to this:
*you ain’t gonna drop an atomic bomb of the caliber used on Japan in the middle of Europe and have the slightest dream of winning a war. You see it becomes a no win thing unless you want to die like so many of our folks did after the war in Japan (note: Roy I just buried one). In otherwords nobody would be left east of Berlin on anyside.
*The United States Army War College made a comment about a similar subject matter a few years back. In it the tthought came up about actually demonstrating the atom bomb to the Japanese before using it on the home island. In so doing they would not have been able to put together enough material to even build one more bomb till well into the fall of 1945. So once again it ain’t gonna happen.
*Now lets just say we bring over a couple B29’s to have tea and crumpets with the English folks (I don’t thing there’s anyway your gonna put one in a B17 or B24). First thing you have to do is pull all those troops out of the A.O. With Germans on their tails (you don’t really think anybody is that stupid do you?) Now with the luck B29’s had over Japan I think it’d be a nasty surprise over Germany for them (all you gotta do is ask a guy from the 8th airforce). You bring one plan down and the other drops the bomb. You win! No you didn’t! You just gave the other guys the one piece they lacked to the puzzle. The triggering device. (by the way the Japanese had that part figured out long before we did) This I might add has been documented by the Russians several times over.
*but you are taking action into 1946. If you waited that long the Russians would have owned France! We had nothing to stop them if they’d wanted to in 1945. But lests just say that somehow the Germans held out till sometime in 1946. Could they, or would they have also had the bomb? Maybe so, and then again maybe not. I betting on the afore. But could they have delivered the package (or would they have). They would have. But you say the B29’s would get the job done; right? Well I don’t think the Germans would have just sat on their can with their heads between their knees. How long do you think it would have taken the Germans to put a nuke inside a V2? Or worse yet inside one of the glide bombs that were proven to be so accurate.
In ending this, be glad that the Russians did as well as they did. Otherwise there would not be a London or New York
gary
Roy,
do you know a crew member from a B29? I know a couple, and they had a different view point on flying into Europe (one guy was at onetime a Bombadier on a B24 out of Africa as well). The very thought of flying over Europe scared them to death.
Bombing Berlin would have ment nothing but killing off the civilian population just like a bomb on New York City. There’s nothing funny about an atom bomb
gary
Gary: I agree w/you that there’s nothing funny about nuclear weapons inherently. My post was meant to poke a little fun at our fellow modellers who build 1946-type scenarios. Frankly, I think some great work comes out of that genre – both in armor and in aircraft.
However, we shouldn’t doubt the momentum that existed at the time of the Manhattan project. A Bombs were going to be used on Europe had the Germans held out longer or better. The atomic weapons should be seen in their context. They were a super weapons system – one with the potential to bring destruction efficiently onto the enemy. The thinking was:“We built it, we got 'em, we use 'em”
If by some quirk that instead of possessing 3 warheads in Sept, Aug of 1945, that the US was able to assemble TEN warheads, I daresay that Nagasaki would not have been the last city hit. The US would have used them one after another until Japan surrendered or we ran out and had to produce more. Some of Japan’s victims had wished this were so, frankly.
As for fallout considerations, there was little. US personnel were quickly dispatched to both Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and their environs). They suffered radiation damage too. This was a subject unfamiliar. Therefore, the idea that a radiation cloud blowing eastward from a German target – was not in consideration.
The talk of a demonstration detonation speaks to two things that confirm my thinking 1) there was only a limited supply of material. therefore it had to count. But Germany was the first priority. If (by some stretch of imagination), planners felt Germany wasn’t going to buckle, I think an ABomb strike would have been on the table as a viable option for sure. 2) the demonstration argument has been postulated by post war examiners who wondered if the populations could have been spared. OK: it was an option and the results may have been fewer deaths. But hindsight is 20/20.
As for the logistics of bringing the B-29 to Europe – I can’t comment on that. I do know that it was the only capable delivery system and if push came to shove, they would have been brought over. More wild things were attempted (think Project Aphrodite). B-29s were brought to Europe after the war. It’s not as if this were an impossibility. And no V-2 missile could carry any where near the payload of the first atomic warheads. No missile launched nuclear warhead would be developed until 1962, I believe.
But enough of the heady stuff. I don’t take for granted the relatively peaceful world we live in now. May no nuclear clouds ever appear again.
it appears that there was just enough material (enriched uranium) to build three bombs. And as I said the B29 was the only viable means of delivery. Prhaps it wouldn’t have been a bad idea to deliver one bomb as it would probably have shown the rest of us fools that atomic warfare is unwinnable. It would have made Europe untenable for the next forty years or more. So we would have helped rebuild anything. But on the otherhand it might have been the single cataylist needed to force the Germans into the nuclear arms race with a means to deliver it. Just the thought of a glide bomb (they had a very good one) with a small atomic warhead just scares the daylights out of me!
The demonstration idea was a real thought, and was disgarded due to the lack of materials to built another two or three bombs. There’s been quite a debate over the results of invading Japan rather than dropping the bomb. Now te general thought is that the casualties would have been less than first thought of (maybe 30% or less). Hitler was nothing more than a symbol as late as the fall of 1944, and the Russians were knocking on the back door. Would they have needed it had the war gone into 1946? I seriously doubt it.
And while on the basic premise of WMD’s, lets never forget that the other guys had their own WMD’s. But chose not to use them. Ever heard of Taubin? It’s still to this very day the most feared nerve agent. Think of what might have happened had they used them in artillary rounds or even bombs. The Germans were not stupid because they knew it would only lead into something else. Yet I’m surprised they didn’t use them against the Russians. So in ending this I think we all should be glad neither one was ever used, and hopefully never used again on this planet.
gary
Gas agents are a scary thing indeed Gary. I recall reading in a GI’s memoirs about how a German soldier approached his unit in Normandy wishing to surrender his unit. He was an NCO and in charge of a detachment of soldiers who were guarding a huge store of nerve gas shells in France. When the Wehrmacht forces were withdrawing, they asked for volunteers among the married men to stay behind and guard the gas dump. They did this to prevent them from falling into the hands of French underground whom the Germans feared would release some gas, and blame it on the Germans. The unit and their charge was successfully surrendered to the Americans.
Hi Roy
Interesting post really. I read it also over at ML.
I read this sub-post http://www.atomica.co.uk/main.htm over there in its’ entireity and it kept me up all night!
Thanks Man!!![;)]
tread
Roy- very thought provoking topic.
Purely as a modeling project-
Have you ever built a wheeled vehicle because you were in the mood for a break from individual track links? or a factory fresh vehicle because you wanted a break from weathering?
I build a “What-If” when I want a break from researching, or from the rivet counters.
“What-If’s” are also great if you are trying to share conversion or scratch-building techniques. i get it that a lot of people dislike them - for a variety of reasons.
I like them- just as long as I don’t have to hear the fictional back-story and no one tries to pass them off as real with some BS photo-shopped “references”.
Steve
Maybe I’m missing something, but wouldn’t you rather have a fanatical single Nazi instead of a married one watching your secret stash?
The idea was to surrender it to the US Army and to keep the Resistence from getting it. These guys weren’t supposed to fight, just surrender and become POWs. They asked from among the married men because they had wives and probably children that needed to be supported after the war. The single men were more expendable.