SC2 - Atomic Bomb Option

[Edwin P.]

Historically Germany tried to invent the atomic bomb but was foiled when a transport from Japan carrying Korean uranium was intercepted at sea.

Here's an option for Reflecting this Option:

Condition: Germany is Allied with Japan, If Germany did not decide to ally with Japan and declare War in on the USA in Dec 1941 this option does not appear.

When: Jan 1943

What Happens: Pop-up Window appears to Axis Player, Japan offers to trade Uranium for Heavy Water. Germany can accept or decline.

If Germany accepts they must buy 2 chits in Atomic Research by cashing in 4 Research Chits in other areas; however, the maximum research level is 0 until the Korean uranium arrives in Germany.

A Japanese Transport appears in the South Atlantic in 4 turns. This Transport must be moved safely to an Axis Controlled Port. Then the 2 chits invested in Atomic Research activate and Germany has a 9% per turn of Inventing the Atomic Weapon.

If the allies sink this Transport the Axis investment in Atomic Research is wasted.

If Invented, Germany can build an Atomic Weapon for 500 MPP. This bomber unit may be used once to destroy any resource or units contained within any hex within range. The resource/city may not be rebuilt. The Atomic bomber is destroyed after it is used.

If used on a Capital City (London, Moscow, Washington) of an Allied Country that Country has a 40%(?) to immediately surrender to the Axis.

[Liam]

Was it possible for the German's to have built a Nuclear Aircraft without that particular resources? That's quite a weapon, not sure the imbalance it would make in the game. It would be everyone's aim to end the game...

In Japan the regular heavy US bombers did more damage than the nukes...ultimately...totalling those cardboard houses into smitherines

[xwormwood]

Edwin P:

This germany didn't build an A-Bomb because a japanese Sub with korean uranium was sunk is something what i call a new story.

I found an interesting webpage about the german a-bomb, try a look (and write back where you dicovered your "germany couldn't build the a-bomb because of s sunken jap-sub-tale").

http://www.thirdreich.net/German_A_Bomb.html

[ March 22, 2003, 06:00 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

[disorder]

xwormwood regardless of the sunken transport, should there be a chance for oh..lets say the US to develop a doomsday type weapon? why just the US?

quote from page

Why didn't they?(germany) Answers - low priority, lack of organization, lack of leadership (pick some of the above). It was not a matter of needing time to accumulate materials, they simply didn't put out the effort.

this is the way it is in every sc game. do you want to try for at or hvy bombers? YOU decide what is important to you. where are all the "has to be historical" sc players comments?

if overlord had bought the farm, and the war stretdched until 1946 would the us have nuked berlin? better than 50-50 in my opinion.

nuther quote from page

Although German production of a fission bomb was not soon forthcoming, the German production of deadly radioactive materials was within reach of German technology and production. Conventional explosive warheads enhanced with deadly radioactive nuclear materials mounted on the the A-3 or A-4 missiles and U-boat weapons could have devastated armies in Europe and cities throughout Europe and parts of the United States with radioactive contamination.

edwin has a good point. why are these doomsday weapons banned? US did it and germany had the possibility to.

LIAM SAID

Was it possible for the German's to have built a Nuclear Aircraft without that particular resources? That's quite a weapon, not sure the imbalance it would make in the game. It would be everyone's aim to end the game...

that very uncertainty would ENHANCE the game. if you were killing germany you would wonder if somehow they had a "secret" weapon that you didn't know about. and if it was tied to "delivery" of a weapon, so much the better!

as for the normal bombing(dresden) doing more damage, that would be a given. the a-bomb terror would effect every man , woman and child, and lower their preparedness to fight. a firestorm is a somewhat natural occurance(impressive yet man-made), but a single bomb, dropped from a single plane....if the enemy can do that, why what else do they have up their sleeve? lets give up!

used to play tactics2 with a nuclear option. it usually ended up that each player would just take out the others nukes with it. but that wasnt a HISTORICAL game.

[Edwin P.]

Thanks for all of your comments.

I will check my resources/facts on the Axis Atom Efforts, but I believe that Japan needed Heavy Water and Germany needed higher grade uranium ore (the uranium they had available was a low grade). I will check my facts on this and let you know.

I believe reading that at the end of WWII Germany sent a sub to Japan with Heavy water but it failed to reach Japan. I will confirm this.

I do agree that the German efforts were disorganized and of low priority. However, as disOrder says, what if they decided focus on building that Atom bomb.

I attempted to reflect by making this option doable but also quite difficult to achieve;

1. Limit the Event to Late in the War

2. Having it only become available if Axis declared war on the US in Dec 1941.

3. Making it dependent on the Axis securing control of the Atlantic by requiring them to move a Japanese sub from the South Stlantic to an Axis controlled port. (making subs & siezure of Spain more important)

4. Requiring the Axis to cash in 4 research chips to finance atomic bomb research. Reflecting a new focus on Atomic research.

5. Even after all of this you only have a 9% per turn to discover the Atomic bomb. And then it costs you another 500 mpp to build the Strategic Bomber to Deliver It.

If you are losing the war it might make sense to take a gamble and go after the Atomic bomb option.

If Axis has secured the Continent but faces a Fortress Britain and North America it might make sense to go after this option.

Most players will ignore it, but it should be an option that a player like Rambo can pull out of his bag of tricks.

And as disorder says - It is a weapon of Terror that collapses the morale of a nation. If used their should be a popup window that displays a picture of destroyed Hiroshima and an appropiate quote (50% each one);

"The British people are in total shock with the total destruction of London, the death of 100,000 people, and the Royal Family. The surviving goverment has decided to sue for peace to preserve the lives of the British people".

or

"The British people are in total shock with the destruction of London and the death of 100,000 people. Churchill has vowed that we have our revenge against these Axis devils and orders a mobilization of all all able bodied men."

[Edwin P.]

---------------------------------------------

"that very uncertainty would ENHANCE the game. if you were killing germany you would wonder if somehow they had a "secret" weapon that you didn't know about. and if it was tied to "delivery" of a weapon, so much the better!" Disorder

---------------------------------------------

I strongly agree, and "if tied to the delivery of a weapon" - via a Strategic Bomber (which can be intercepted) or a Rocket (which can not be intercepted)

Not knowing if your opponent has this weapon would make it of the highest importance to target any Bombers or Rocket units within range of your capital.

This might also make the importance of AA research more important. Why? AA15 and Jets 15 might be able to down a bomber before it has a chance to drop its bomb. Just a thought.

[Edwin P.]

----------------------------------------

this is the way it is in every sc game. do you want to try for at or hvy bombers? YOU decide what is important to you. where are all the "has to be historical" sc players comments?

if overlord had bought the farm, and the war stretdched until 1946 would the us have nuked berlin? better than 50-50 in my opinion." Disorder Disorder

----------------------------------------------

RE:American Atomic Bomb

If SC2 is a Europe only game I would give the USA a 50% to automatically obtain the Atomic bomb technology in 1945 along with a Free Strategic Bomber. Additional Chits in Atomic Bomb Research would increase this chance, but the bomb could not appear earlier than xx/XXXX.

Of course, to use this bomber effectively they would have to get it in range of Berlin or Rome.

This increases the importance of;

1> Holding GB or

2> Liberating the Nordic countries or

3> Convincing a still neutral Sweden or Norway to allow the US to base a bomber in their country.( Thus increasing the value of diplomatic points and neutral countries).

[SpitfireMarkX]

Bad idea here, Germany was nowhere near A-bomb, and even if they had it, probably would have been scared of it. They were scared of gas, if in some VERY weird way they got an A-bomb, used it, with the DISMAL Luftwoffe these are some possibilities.

-Bomber not make it over the channel

-Allied inteligance would have found it and blown it in occupyed Europe, and if this happend, Britain, allies would have gassed every German city.

By the way Germany had a bigger load of Uranium then there was in the Manhattan project. So that whole Jap sub making it would have done nothing.

Edwin P. Why dont you just make one forum to put all your ideas in?

[JerseyJohn]

Brad/Edwin

Regarding the single forum, as there are already numerous forums and you'll no doubt be starting more, you might want to consider an index forum with URLs linking to your other forums.

The A-bomb is an interesting subject. Unfortunately we had a very intense discussion about it under Liam's What If thread. After much debate we reached the same conclusion that was reached much more quickly, and with less ill-feelings, in this thread.

[Jergan88]

I remember reading a great book named Third Reich Victorious (an alternate-history book of WW2). The scenario it set up was that the SS had taken control of the nuclear weapons program in Germany and forced (literally) scientists such as Heisenberg (sp?) to create the atomic bomb. After Hitler attained two, he dropped them in in unison on Moscow and London.

I think some people's ideas of random events would be great. Instead of atomic bombing London and seeing the message, "Government moves to Manchester", it could have a pop up message with a picture of a bombed-out Parliament building: British government destroyed, Montgomery takes temporary control of country (or something to that effect). Morale and HQ leadership would take a hit.

In the book, Stalin goes into hiding after the bombing of Moscow, and Zhukov is left to coordinate the evacuation effort. Before Hitler can get another bomb, the Allies use their atomic bomb on Berlin and kill the Fuhrer and the Nazi rule of Germany.

[disorder]

brad t said--"Bad idea here, Germany was nowhere near A-bomb, and even if they had it, probably would have been scared of it."

as respectfully as i can, i would like to point out that this is not the discussion point here. we start out our game at 1939. now all of you historical gamers (and everyone else)leave reality at that point. hard to believe, but any SC game that was ever played did not go exactly as it happened in WW2.

BRAD SAID "if in some VERY weird way they (germany)got an A-bomb,"

i think the US got "it" in a weird way. untold funds funneled secretly into it for YEARS. a collection of non-citizens that we wouldn't even let vote in our country, we allowed to threaten the world! no one from the VP on down even KNOWS about it. and to the day the first one went off, they conceded the fact that the earths atmosphere could actually be ignited and all life on our planet destroyed!

some past comments by JERSEYJOHN

"Interesting discussion. There was a substitute the Germans could have used for uranium conversion instead of heavy water. I think it was shale or some other solid substance. Werner Heisenberg, the head of their program knew this but steered the program toward using heavy water instead, lending credence to the idea that he was deliberately delaying or preventing his own program"

JERSEYJOHN, what conclusion has been reached?

i've searched through that what if, and evidently didn't see it.

IMHO, there are many,many possibilities available in an SC game, and if someone is going to tout the HISTORICAL stance, then he should STAY with the historical stance. historically there would have been a slim chance of the italians becoming as powerful as they became in the famous RAMBO-WACHMEISTER game. but it was possible. and it did happen. would this be any more far-fetched than the germans with a nuclear weapon. enquiring minds want to know.

ps- the real weird thing was synthetic rubber, not a nuclear weapon

[Edwin P.]

Perhaps,

A simple way to resolve this difference of opinion would be for the game designer to make A-Bomb development a user selectable option.

You can turn it on or off.

(That is if Hubert decides to add this option to SC2)

[xwormwood]

Edwin P.

I believe reading that at the end of WWII Germany sent a sub to Japan with Heavy water but it failed to reach Japan. I will confirm this.

It was U-234, carrying 560 kg Uraniumoxide. This sub started its journey to Japan on 04/16/45 in Kristiansand/Norway and capitulated on 05/17/45 to the USS "Sutton" (sneaked & sliped away from the British Navy because all prefered to capitulate to the US). The sub reached Portsmouth, New Hampshire 05/17/45. Bad luck for Japan: Robert Oppenheimer built from the captured material "Little Boy", which hit Hiroshima (the US felt free do "deliver" what Japan ordered in Germany). Without the captured german Uraniumoxid the US would have had only one A-Bomb to drop on Japan...

There are plenty of books written about this german sub and its delivery (Germany's Last Mission to Japan: The Failed Voyage of U-234 -Joseph M. Scalia). The german TV made a movie about this journey as well, but it is far away from the "Das Boot"-experience.

[Edwin P.]

Xwormwood

Many thanks for the historical information.

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

These are just a few of the links that were quoted in that thread. You've been quoting me out of context: go back and look at the entries of other people such as Wachtmeister and SeaWolf and you'll get the rest of the story as I don't bother repeating what other people said in adjoining entries!

For example, in one of his entries Wachtmeister corrected my speculation as to shale being a substitute for heavy water; it was actually graphite. I saw no need to mention it in one of my postings nor to go back and correct my earlier posting. All the entries everyone posted need to be read and quoted to get the full line of information.

To my knowledge, having consistently taken the historical line, I have never left an issue dangling. Occasisionally I've admitted to being wrong, and have no doubt been wrong a few times when I didn't realize it, but I've never walked away from a topic.

In that particular thread it was demonstrated conclusively that Germany was nowhere near being able to produce an Atomic Bomb. Even if they'd discovered how to build one they didn't have all the requisite resources to actually build it; and in 1945 they most assuredly did not know how to build one!

The Manhattan Project succeeded primarily because it was such a gigantic undertaking. The U. S. didn't only put many more great scientists into it (several of them Noble Prize Winners) but also devoted resources Germany couldn't match. Heisenberg realized this. He actually came right out and said it!

Everything I had to say on this subject is in that thread. As I said, if you read the connecting entries posted by other people you'll get the full story. Having been through this topic once, interesting though it is, I don't intend to rehash it all again.

Unless there is new material to be examined, which so far, there hasn't been.

Regarding the rest of the thread, I don't understand what I'm supposed to be answering. Nor do I get the part about an historical stance; does it mean I'm somehow limited to always and only looking for exactly what happened historically? I've never taken that line. What I do is say whatever I have to offer and mention whatever I may know historically that is pertinent to the topic.

I can't figure why I should have anywone tell me what my stance on Italy is supposed to be and why I need to go through life having others assumptions imposed on me. For the record I've always felt the best Axis strategy was for Germany to assist Italy in taking Yugoslavia and Greece. From there Italy should take Vichy and dominate the Mediteranean, including the taking of Egypt and Iraq, while Germany goes after the UK and USSR. It just happens that this was pretty much the pre-war Axis strategy. Of course Mussolini made all of that impossible with his imbecillic meddling but I don't feel we should have to play the game that way, going through some sort of endless pergatory of premade and unalterable decisions. Aside from which the possiblility that Italy would have been strong is much more plausable than the possiblility that any nation would have developed an atomic bomb.

Also, I never said the Germans couldn't develop an atomic bomb. What I said was in 1945 they were nowhere near developing one. Anyone who wants to live in their own version of history is free to do so and say nazi Germany had A-bombs hidden away somewhere and destroyed all the evidence of how they built them.

I have no desire to defend the over 1500 posts I've made to date, nor do I feel any need to do so, when proven wrong I've always admitted it. But to suddenly be bound to some assumed stance that I'm supposed to automatically take, or to answer for long defunct threads that I somehow failed to answer definitively -- what's all that nonsense about! If I find myself in that sort of ridiculous position then making these entries will cease being enjoyable and I'll just cease posting. Anyone who'd do otherwise would have to be a lover of self-serving tedium, which I don't happen to be.

link to A-Bomb Info

link to German A-Bomb Program, "Virus House"

link to more info on Germany's A-bomb Program

Link to Werner Heisenberg Biogrophy

[ March 22, 2003, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[disorder]

jerseyjohn --

what i was looking for from you JJ was a direction as to what "point" you wanted to get across on the german a-bomb thing.

as i stated, i had not had any luck finding your opinion on this in the archive. perhaps i did not get this across in my post.

this was not a dangling issue on your part. i simply could not find your stance on it.

in your reply to me, you said a "conclusion" had been reached...then i said,

"JERSEYJOHN, what conclusion has been reached?

i've searched through that what if, and evidently didn't see it."

believe me i do appreciate your 1500+ posts. i would like to point out that i did not know i was taking you out of context, as i did not know your opinion on it. sorry for my ineptness in using the search engine, and i certainly do appreciate the links!

so back to the issue at hand. what i thought was a decent post by edwinp gets a reply from you of:

"The A-bomb is an interesting subject. Unfortunately we had a very intense discussion about it under Liam's What If thread. After much debate we reached the same conclusion that was reached much more quickly, and with less ill-feelings, in this thread."

from this we learn

1 been there, done that, nuff said

2 we reached a conclusion (good or bad?)

anyway ,great it's been all done said, and experienced before. no further conclusions could be reached on this point. PHEWW!

regarding the "historical" aspect on SC i did not ever claim you to be of historical-line only (is that how you'd say that.) i have followed your comments on neutrals, and enjoy them immensly, agreed with them, and participated in them. it begets realism.

i feel that your comments;

"Anyone who wants to live in their own version of history is free to do so and say nazi Germany had A-bombs hidden away somewhere and destroyed all the evidence of how they built them." nothing like this was inferred.

but address the issue of 1939.in 1939 with resources available it was possible that by 1945 it might have worked.

you also do not address the issue of the us it was just as possible that they would have messed it up.

i believe you cant decide what happened in 1939 by what happened in 1945. you need to look at 1939. that is just my opinion.

comments regarding the italians was only an illustration regarding historical "accuracy", and it's flimsiness at any given time.

perhaps we could try this conversation again sometime.

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

Okay, now I understand the remark a little better.

If you want to make a direct quote it's best to do it within the quotaion marks so the entire thread comes up to page one. The person you're quoting will see everything, including his own entries, and won't be disoriented, as I was. What I meant about the 1500 post remark was this, at a certain point you've written too many things to be able to keep it all at your finger tips. If someone wants to question an entry they have to bring up the entire thread. It would be like me asking you about something you said during your third day of grammer school -- unless I have a film clip to show you it's a bit of a moot point.

When the original thread is taken out of context it becomes confusing and leaves the other person wondering where the quote came from.

As for the original question you asked, a better answer would be that we'll never know where the German bomb research stood in 1945. Little was found in the way of documentation or a testing facility or radioactive refining apparatus or refined materials. Nothing like an A-bomb was located by anyone. Neither Werner Heisenberg nor any of his associates said very much about it after the war so all we're left with now is speculation.

The Allied scientists who went through the ruins of Germany were as amazed by what they didn't find as what they did find. What they didn't find was any evidence that the German A-bomb program, for all it's propaganda hoopla had not gotten very far. They didn't even have the capability of loading radio active material in a V-2 and firing it off, which would have been a much more modest achievment than having a bomb itself.

What we know for sure is the German scientists were secretly taped making very accurate conclusions about the two bombs America dropped on Japan. That's probably as much as we'll ever know about it.

Supposedly some French units claimed to find a pair of bombs submersed in water which they destroyed with explosives. No radiation was ever found at the site and it's obvious those Frenchmen had no idea of what they'd stumbled upon, but they definitely weren't A-bombs.

As for Italy winning the war . . ..

[ March 22, 2003, 11:07 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[disorder]

JERSEYJOHN -

(i liked your unedited version better ) we'll be more careful on the quotes, i promise!

yes we can agree completely and wholeheartedly on this issue.germany never had it(nuke possibility). probably weren't close at any time.

they did however have a better shot at it than the rest of the world did at having jet power!(or rockets).

something would have had to give in the nazi economy before it was possible though. the dedication wasnt there.

in "the dam busters" it talks of a tunnel dug a 100 or so feet into a mountain and it was going to be used to lob HUGE shells at england on a regular basis. some "earthquake" bombs caved it in, before they had a chance though. they had way too many irons in the fire!needed to pick a good one(like me-262) and GO with it!

[JerseyJohn]

disorder

Sorry about my grumpiness, it's the first (okay, the fourth or fifth ) sign of old age.

Great points comparing technologies. In the mid-thirties it was England who had the edge in jet technology and Germany in physics of all descriptions.

If Germany had, through some dark miracle, attracted people like Niels Bohr, Enrico Fermi, Max Planck and Zillard instead of sending them packing they'd have at least had the edge in raw talent. I don't think any of the scientists on either side of the Atlantic thought they were working on a project that would come to fruition.

Heisenberg and Oppenheimer were probably on opposite sides of the same dilemma. Oppenheimer in realizing that they'd actually be able to build one and Heisenberg in finding ways conduct Atomic research without having it tied directly into a project he no doubt detested. His part must have been easier than Oppenheimer's as he probably didn't think the Americans had developed one either.

Hitler, at some point, found out that the then Belgian Congo was rich in Uranium. I think Heisenberg thought he'd have to produce something in the post war if Germany ever came to occupy the Belgian colonies.

One issue that hasn't been discussed very much in these forums is whether or not the US would have used the bomb on Germany if the war had continued into 1946.

I've seen documentaries where such a prominent WW II historian as Steve Ambrose has done a flip flop on this. In a documentary on the Atlantic Wall he said that, if D-Day had failed and the Soviets been held or pushed back, the US would definitely have dropped A-bombs on Germany. In an earlier documentary on the Normandy Landings he said the US could still have lost the war even at that point. If the landings had been repulsed Germany would have sent a few hundred thousand men east, Stalin would have agreed to a negotiated peace and Germany would have held -- no mention of dropping A-Bombs. He's since had the good sense to die so we won't be able to pin him down on an answer.

Regarding the various technologies, I guess the only way to see which things would most likely have gone is to go back to the Spring of 1939 and look forward without the war starting till later.

Germany already had a jet prototype and England had put jet technology on the back burner. Germany was doing some work in rocketry and Britain was refining it's electronics.

So I think the trend was Germany would have opened a significant lead in Jet and Rocket Technology and the UK would have pulled farther ahead in electronics.

Italy was also working on Jet engines. Their very antiquated air force was deceiving; it had been the best in the world around 1930-34 and Mussolini thought he had a few years before a major war so instead of rebuilding it in 38 & 39 he was holding off till better technology had been developed. Industrially I don't know if they could have manufactured jets in 1941 or 42.

Ironically, nobody was researching an Atomic Bomb in 1939. There were theories, of course, most of them originating in Germany, and that's what Zillard brought to Einstein and what Einstein passed on to FDR. Interesting that such a devoted pacifist should (literally) have extended his hand in developing the Atomic Bomb.

That tunnel gun reminds me of Ball's never completed super gun project for our buddy Saddam.

Agreed entirely, Germany should have given first priority to it's Jet aircraft program in 1939 and stuck with it. They had three politicians running the show, Goering, Udet and Milch. All had considerable capabilities in various fields but none of them saw the importance of either jet aircraft or heavy bombers till it was too late. They also needed a visionary capable of keeping Hitler from ruining whatever project they came up with, and they didn't have one.

[ March 23, 2003, 03:25 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by JerseyJohn:

I have no desire to defend the over 1500 posts I've made to date, nor do I feel any need to do so, when proven wrong I've always admitted it. But to suddenly be bound to some assumed stance that I'm supposed to automatically take, or to answer for long defunct threads that I somehow failed to answer definitively -- what's all that nonsense about!

LOL!

Ah JJ, Lord love a Guppie,

You Sir, surely crack me up!

One can just picture you

(... perhaps, Walter Matthau,

in The Odd Couple will do)

Hunkered over spluttering, muttering,

in the official SC game-playing computer room,

a half-eaten green bologna sandwich

on a little plate decorated

with blooming blue flowers,

and hair sticking up every which-a-way

and here comes!!

Doggone if it don't! :eek:

CHAOS yet again!

to meddle most malign and malicious!

in your night and in your day...

... as knitting needles flip & fall

Clickety-clack, to the next-door floor,

And refrigerator magnets take wing & tear away!

And thumb-tacks crash from the bulletin board,

And Ying becomes Yang - and look!

Listen... crash-bang!

The plow-share hath replaced

The hasty harsh word

and the dull, puny sword...

Well,

NOW I can sleep soundly

And dream of pretty damsels & dames,

and winsome waifs a-dance in the rain, sure,

you bet!... since ol' JJ

Has set it all! ship-shape and straight!

Chaos has been fooled, schooled & befuddled

(... see, who says things've

gotta make sense... better by far

when the dish... DOESN'T... run away

with the spoon)

And ALL such-like scam & tomfoolery,

(... always! skulking oddly about)

Has at last! ... once and for all!

... been put to the rout!

[JerseyJohn]

Immer

You're right, the image of Walter Mathau in the Odd couple is perfect.

After writing something like that I go off to watch some TV (which I'm not crazy about doing), then wish I hadn't gone off the deep end and rush back intending to edit things out but, alas, it's always too late.

Thankfully things get smoothed over pretty easily and disorder didn't deserve that blast of irritability but is a good sport about it. My defence is a condition that develops called SC Posting Fatigue where all a person's past entries come back to hit him as an endless stream of incoherence, something like Jacob Marley's chain of past sins. :eek:

Anyway, always a pleasure to be on the receiving end of an Immer Etwas masterpeice. It's like being a pitcher who gives up a Babe Ruth homer and, watching it sail high into the bleachers, knows he's looking at his own moment of immortality.

I think there's just something about nuclear weapons and discussing them that makes me irrascable.

Looking forward to Belmondo's next appearance.

[ March 23, 2003, 05:11 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Desert Dave]

Well JJ,

I appreciate the reference to Babe Ruth,

But, truth be told,

I more accurately resemble

Wally Pipp,

or Walter Mitty... also very true

That you are an old ball-playing Adept,

Closely akin to... Walter "Big Train"

Johnson... and more likely that I have

Quite accidentally connected

With a dipsy-doodle oofus pitch

From Satchel Paige (... don't look!

Back, somethin' might be

Gaining on you!...)

The thing is,

ANYONE can become too immersed, at times,

In anything at all... but, not a problem,

Since this mostly happens when you CARE

About it... and it is very apparent

That you do indeed care about SC

And all of the folks who post here... :cool:

Sometimes I just take a little time off

From the board, to catch up on other projects,

And that seems to help me

Keep a necessary perspective.

(... but, for the love of Dance-Man Bojangles,

THROW AWAY that half-eaten

green bologna sandwich!)

[JerseyJohn]

Immer,

Today Wally Pipp would be a Super Star!

His remark "I was beaned on the Yankees and opened my eyes on the Cincinnati Reds!" will always be a classic and he was one hell of a good player even in those golden years.

Being on the receiving end of any Satchel Paige delivery must have been an adventure.

There's an old story about Walter Johnson I love. Ty Cobb could never hit him. Whenever he played against the Tigers he'd have a special signal for the catcher, when flashed the backstop would tell the Detroit batter, "Walter likes you today." The next pitch would look like a basketball and usually go for a double. Johnson likeed to look into the Tiger dugout and laugh at Cobb glaring resentfully at his teammate baserunner.

Things like that could never happen today, of course, because Cobb's agent would have had him off doing commercials between at bats.

[ March 23, 2003, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Edwin P.]

This has been a most interesting thread to follow and I think that everyone agrees that it was impossible that Germany could develop the A-Bomb with the resources it had "historicaly" devoted to it.

However, I do believe that it should be a strategic option, although a very expensive option.

---------------------------------------------

Kirkus Reviews -

In history that reads like a great thriller, award-winning former Washington Post reporter Kurzman (Left to Die: The Tragedy of the USS Juneau, 1994, etc.) tells the story of the Allied effort to derail the Nazi quest to develop a nuclear bomb. In the war's early stages, Kurzman relates, Nazi Germany's atomic research program, which included many of the world's greatest physicists, was more advanced than those of the Allies. However, the German effort was crippled by a dependence on heavy water to facilitate a chain reaction. For a long time Norsk Hydro in Norway, a factory seized by the Germans, was the only producer of heavy water in the Third Reich. At the urging of General Leslie Groves, the military leader of the Manhattan Project, the plant quickly became the target of British commando raids and American bombing attacks...

Kurzman quotes OSS official (and later CIA chief) William Casey as estimating that at war's end the Germans were 700 liters of heavy water short of developing an effective nuclear reaction.

---------------------------------------------

As to whether William Casey was accurate in his perception I have no idea and many people will disagree.

Axis A-Bomb Option:

1> IMHO the Production of an A-Bomb would require Atomic Tech Level 5 and occupation of Norway.

2> A-bomb research can not advance if Norway is not occupied by the Germans and there are any allied troops in-country (this would reflect the effort of allied commando raids on the heavy water facility).

3> Atomic Techs Levels 1-4 would offer no usable technology, Just Pop-ups saying "Scientist have.."

4> Delivery could only be done via an A-bomb equipped Strategic Bomber or Rocket unit.

5> Use of an A-Bomb on a Capital City would cause the defending nation to surrender 50% of the time due to the morale effect of dropping the bomb.

6> The A-bomb Tech Option would be user selectable (on/off - standard: off)

7> The Allied Player would be advised that the German Player is pursing the A-bomb option when Germany Reaches A-Bomb Tech Level 3.

Just my opinion.

PS: Although this may be an option, I believe that any player who devoted substantial resources to developing this weapon would be quite foolish or very desperate. If they choose this option the Allies would have time to stop it with an invasion of Norway or the landing of cammandos (ie Corps).

Just my closing opinion on this matter.

[JerseyJohn]

EdwinP.

It all sounds very feasable.

There would also need to be a provision for the use of U.S. atomic bombs.

What effect would dropping a bomb have -- on cities, troops, HQs and naval or air units?

What happens if the delivering aircraft is interceped? How much of the strategic bomber unit is lost in the failed mission?

In speculation of what would have happened late in the war if similar situations had developed there are the following things to consider:

1) The U. S. was planning to send B-29s to England and was also developing an even larger, longer ranged high altitude bomber capable of making a round trip across the Atlantic.

-- To counter this possibility, as the B-29 could fly higher than most German interceptors could operate, Germany was designing heavier, more efficient jet interceptors. These aircraft were intended to not only have a high ceiling and hard punch, but to have a long range capable of intercepting American bombers on their approach west of England, over the Atlantic.

2) Aside from plans to mount A-bombs on V-2s and subsequent larger rockets, Germany was finally developing a truly long range bomber, a large flying wing jet being developed by the Hortten brothers. This aircraft would not only have been capable of making a round trip of the Atlantic, but also had considerable stealth capability.

-- How is this taken into account.

3) Germany, of course could only have these things if the Eastern Front were stabilized far east of the starting European borders, i.e., Germany would have to avoid it's 1943 and 44 Eastern Front fiascos.

4) The war would have to be into 1946 or 47, I believe the current time limit is Spring 1947.

5) Is it a given that the U. S. develops an atomic bomb or does the it start out with a high nuclear research level etc. ....

<It seems evident that branching out into this field also means going into a true jet category as oppossed to combining jets and props, and also a category for super heavy bomber/nuclear delivery systems. Germany couldn't simply place a nuclear device in a rocket, the proceedure needs to be worked out, otherwise you get a nuclear explosion over your own territory!>

[ March 24, 2003, 04:55 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]