6 August 1945 - Little Boy explodes over Berlin

Lets discuss this little what if.


ETA:

Its the standard fanboy revisionist meme'.
Superior German Herren slow the war down with the Battle of the Bulge and the war drags on into 1946 when superior Wunderwaffe flow out of German factories to bring victory to the Nazis.

But the forget Enola Gay gets an invite to the Partys party
 
Last edited:
Lets discuss this little what if.
Lots of allied soldiers are killed in Berlin as the war in Europe ended a few months earlier.
 
Ceasefire with Western allies, regroup to kick the shit out of the Russians, Little Boy explodes over Moscow.
Patton made honorary Gauleiter of Leningrad (that'd learn 'em).
 

Maple

LE
B-29s all in the wrong place, they're in The Mariana Islands. So are the weapons and troops.
Nope, the plan was to nuke Germany then Japan, it's just they threw in the towel first

Hamburg and Dresden are my suggestions.....For a start
 
I think if the war dragged on the first target was Hannover.
The last time I went to Hannover, I went to the new town hall, they have four models of the city, one sometimes in 1600s, 1939, 1945 and in the 1960s.
The 1945 one looked like an atom bomb had been dropped on the city.
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
Bus tours in Berlin ' On your left there is such and such, rebuilt after 1945'. Interspersed with, 'The original was destroyed during the war'.
It stopped being funny after a while.
 
Would the atomic bomb have been used against Germany?
Some thoughts here on the 'what if'. Basically Germany was never a serious target for a number of reasons including the movement of B29s and their protection, whether a joint US bomb and Brit aircraft could be used and the most telling, the bomb failing to explode and being recovered by the Germans to be used in their own programme:
The point of use of the first bomb was discussed and the general view appeared to be that its best point of use would be on a Japanese fleet concentration in the Harbor of Truk. General Styer suggested Tokio but it was pointed out that the bomb should be used where, if it failed to go off, it would land in water of sufficient depth to prevent easy salvage. The Japanese were selected as they would not be so apt to secure knowledge from it as would the Germans.
General Groves in the original linked article:
REPORTER: General Groves, could we go back for a minute. You mentioned in your book [Now it Can Be Told] that just before the Yalta Conference that President Roosevelt said if we had bombs before the European war was over he would like to drop them on Germany.3 Would you discuss this?

GROVES: At the conference that Secretary Stimson and myself had with President Roosevelt shortly before his departure, I believe it was December 30th or 31st of 1944, President Roosevelt was quite disturbed over the Battle of the Bulge and he asked me at that time whether I could bomb Germany as well as Japan. The plan had always been to bomb Japan because we thought the war in Germany was pretty apt to be over in the first place and in the second place the Japanese building construction was much more easily damaged by a bomb of this character than that in Germany. I urged President Roosevelt that it would be very difficult for various reasons.

The main one was that the Germans had quite strong aerial defense. They made a practice, as every nation does, that when a new plane came into the combat area, that they would run any risk that they could to bring such a plane down so that they could examine it and see what new ideas had come in so that they could make improvements and also would know the characteristics of the plane so that they could prepare a better defense against it. We had no B-29’s in Europe. If we had sent over a small squadron or group as we did against Japan of this type, everyone of them would have been brought down on the first trip to Germany. If they hadn’t been, it would have been through no lack of effort on the part of the Germans.

The alternative would be to bring a large number of B-29’s over to to England and that would have been a major logistical task and the other possibility would have been to have used a British plane which would not have been a bit pleasing to General Arnold and also would have created a great many difficulties for our general operation because then it would be an Allied operation with the United States furnishing the bombs and everything connected with it but using a British plane and a British crew to actually drop the bomb and it would have raised a tremendous number of difficulties.
Who General Groves was: Leslie Groves
 
Last edited:
The last time I went to Hannover, I went to the new town hall, they have four models of the city, one sometimes in 1600s, 1939, 1945 and in the 1960s.
The 1945 one looked like an atom bomb had been dropped on the city.
I think the idea was that the flash and some effects would be noticed both on the Ruhr (where presumably the Allies expected to be held up) and in Berlin.
 
Lets discuss this little what if.


ETA:

Its the standard fanboy revisionist meme'.
Superior German Herren slow the war down with the Battle of the Bulge and the war drags on into 1946 when superior Wunderwaffe flow out of German factories to bring victory to the Nazis.

But the forget Enola Gay gets an invite to the Partys party
 
D

Deleted 20555

Guest
Nope, the plan was to nuke Germany then Japan, it's just they threw in the towel first

Hamburg and Dresden are my suggestions.....For a start
Show us where you got this information or if you just made it up.

There was no reason to nuke Germany.

Edit
For those that "Disagree" stick to Facebook - where uneducated opinions abound.

The first concrete discussion of targets came in the spring of 1945. These are the famous “Target Committee” meetings at Los Alamos which discussed what kind of target criteria they were using, what cities might fit it, and so on. Grim business, but entirely focused on Japan, in part because by that point it was clear that Germany’s defeat was imminent.
There was no plan to use the A-Bomb on Germany from the start - this moron just makes shit up to look well informed.

Would the atomic bomb have been used against Germany?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lets discuss this little what if.


ETA:

Its the standard fanboy revisionist meme'.
Superior German Herren slow the war down with the Battle of the Bulge and the war drags on into 1946 when superior Wunderwaffe flow out of German factories to bring victory to the Nazis.

But the forget Enola Gay gets an invite to the Partys party
Whatever happened on the western front, the Russians would still have over-run Berlin around April/May 1945. The Allies would have met up somewhere around Hamburg or Hanover, the post-war map would have had a bit more red on it and the Cold War would have been a slightly different kettle of fish.

I read recently that in 1945, 45% believed Russia won the war in Europe (USA 30%, UK 25%), compared with 2016 - USA 70%, Russia 15% and UK 15%). All bawlocks probably - but that's Hollywood for you. Back then we were grateful for the Russian front.
 

syrup

LE
My view is it would have been towards the east as a warning or show of force to Stalin (as many claim Dresden was)
It would be a relatively undamaged city no point dropping it somewhere that was already reduced to rubble.
The leaders of Britain and the USA would have been dammed in history for ever.
Look at the pushback against the Dresden raid people claiming that Germany was finished and on her knees.
Despite the fact V2's were still hitting London in March 45.
 

W21A

LE
Book Reviewer
There was some thought about the Avro Lancaster dropping the A bomb. But it was always going to be against Japan,

'In the latter half of 1943, Navy Capt. William S. Parsons, who headed the project’s ordnance group, chose the B-29 as the bomber the United States would use, if it could be appropriately modified. [6] According to Hewlett and Anderson, the choice of the B-29 indicated that Japan was already the target. “Had Germany been the primary target, the choice would hardly have fallen on an aircraft never intended for the European theater.” [7]

That conclusion is supported, at least indirectly, by the technical facts. British Lancasters could have been modified for the atom bomb. The four-engine Lancaster had a normal payload of 14,000 pounds, but some had been modified to carry the “Grand Slam”—at 22,000 pounds, the heaviest bomb produced in the war. The chief technical advantage the B-29 had over the Lancaster was its great range—3-4,000 miles. That made it the only bomber suitable for use in the Pacific. [8]

Another advantage of the B-29 was its made-in-USA label. In a March 1944 meeting between Groves and Gen. Henry H. “Hap” Arnold, commander of the Army Air Force, Groves said the first choice was the B-29, but the Lancaster had to be considered as a back- up. That “displeased Arnold, who stated emphatically that an American-made airplane should carry the bombs.” [9]

In any event, that Japan would be the target of the atom bomb, if it were used at all, was affirmed in September 1944, when President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Churchill met at Roosevelt’s Hyde Park home. A summary of the meeting makes no mention of the possible use of atomic bombs against Germany, but it says that when the bomb was ready “it might perhaps, after mature consideration, be used against the Japanese, who should be warned that this bombardment will be repeated until they surrender.” '

"Always” the target?: While U.S. bomb scientists were racing against Germany, military planners were looking toward the Pacific - Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
 
My view is it would have been towards the east as a warning or show of force to Stalin (as many claim Dresden was)
It would be a relatively undamaged city no point dropping it somewhere that was already reduced to rubble.
The leaders of Britain and the USA would have been dammed in history for ever.
Look at the pushback against the Dresden raid people claiming that Germany was finished and on her knees.
Despite the fact V2's were still hitting London in March 45.
I was going to suggest nuking Peenemünde then, but I suppose the thought had already occurred that putting a nuke on a V2 would be quite persuasive in the postwar years.
 

goodoldboy

MIA
Book Reviewer
Lets discuss this little what if.


ETA:

Its the standard fanboy revisionist meme'.
Superior German Herren slow the war down with the Battle of the Bulge and the war drags on into 1946 when superior Wunderwaffe flow out of German factories to bring victory to the Nazis.

But the forget Enola Gay gets an invite to the Partys party
The theoretical first atomic bomb would not have been used over Berlin, for the same reasons that it wasn't used on Tokyo in reality. That's just my opinion. I also believe that it would depend on the whereabouts of the Soviet front line at the time.

Bear in mind that the ground war (such as the Battle of the Bulge) had no effect whatsoever on the utter devastation that was being meted out to Germany by the RAF and USAAF and that the last decent effort by the Luftwaffe was on 1 January 1945. From that date onwards the allied air forces were destroying the German infrastructure almost at will.

For a more realistic war game involving atomic weapons being used on Germany, you would need to go right back to the evacuation of Dunkirk and assume that events from that point were very different, including the assumed development of Germany's own atomic weapons programme.

Even so, my thoughts are that an eastern industrial centre such as Leipzig would have been first, followed probably by Hamburg because it is a seaport. The next event would most likely be the same as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, capitulation followed by a massive aid programme from outside. The first generation born after the nuclear events would display genetic defects, there would be an Army of occupation - the same as in the Cold War - and the Soviets would remain a threat. Not much change from what happened in reality!
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top