What if the germans...

[Charles Gray]

had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
on say two or three fighter designs.
For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.

Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
a few months?

[tadaa]

> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> a few months?

They should have known what projects are the one's that are going to
succeed. What if the jet engine would have been a dead end and no FW-190 or
better versions of ME-109 would have not been developed?

[Denyav]

> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
>a few months?
>

It would not change anything,actually Germans did many things right but late,if
they had more time, a couple months only,the outcome of WWII might be very
different.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
(Denyav) wrote:

> > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> >a few months?
> >
>
> It would not change anything,actually Germans did many things right but
> late,if
> they had more time, a couple months only,the outcome of WWII might be very
> different.


Their biggest problem was that they had Hitler for a leader. He got them
into the mess and all his actions afterward got them further embroiled.

[tim gueguen]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> >a few months?
> >
>
> It would not change anything,actually Germans did many things right but
late,if
> they had more time, a couple months only,the outcome of WWII might be very
> different.

On what basis do you make this claim? I can think of nothing the Germans
could have gotten their hands on with just a couple more months of WW2 that
would have made any sort of difference. If the European war lasts only a
month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.

tim gueguen 101867

[Chad Irby]

In article <efqMb.67031$JQ1.43117@pd7tw1no>,
"tim gueguen" > wrote:

> "Denyav" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > It would not change anything,actually Germans did many things right
> > but late,if they had more time, a couple months only,the outcome of
> > WWII might be very different.
>
> On what basis do you make this claim? I can think of nothing the Germans
> could have gotten their hands on with just a couple more months of WW2 that
> would have made any sort of difference.

Well, they *were* starting to ramp up production on the He-162, and a
couple of months would have given them a thousand or so more fighters
(really - the things were pretty darned cheap and easy to make) with a
hundred MPH speed advantage. Not good for Allied bombers. Admittedly,
they would have lost a *lot* of them due to pilot inexperience (the
Germans were deeply short on experienced pilots by that stage of the
war, and the He-162 wasn't exactly a cinch to fly well), and a lot more
due to materials problems (they never did quite get the hang of good
wood glue for their planes), but it would have been a real issue in
getting the war over by the end of 1945.

> If the European war lasts only a
> month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.

The big tipping point for German fighters was years earlier, when the
high command decided to build a lot more prop fighters to fight on the
Eastern Front, and put off jets for a while. If they'd waited a year or
so, consolidated, and moved in with better equipment and more
consolidation, the Russian campaigns would have been much different.

This would also have made some big differences in Japan, as well, since
the Japanese would have had working jets a year or more faster (from the
plans they got from the Germans), which would have given them some
serious bomber defenses over the home islands. They were only a couple
of months away from ramping up production of their own version of the
Me-262.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Charles Gray]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 05:27:38 GMT, "tim gueguen" >
wrote:

>
>"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
>> > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
>> >a few months?
>> >
>>
>> It would not change anything,actually Germans did many things right but
>late,if
>> they had more time, a couple months only,the outcome of WWII might be very
>> different.
>
>On what basis do you make this claim? I can think of nothing the Germans
>could have gotten their hands on with just a couple more months of WW2 that
>would have made any sort of difference. If the European war lasts only a
>month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.
>
>tim gueguen 101867
>
And the German industry, egven at the end was...screwball. I have
books that mention that STRATEGIC bomber projects were still under
some form of development in 1944-45. That was long after the time
that any intelligently run program would have put everything into
fighters.
That's the big thing-- there really seems to have been no rhyme or
reason to German R&D-- in the U.S. and England there was some over all
coordination, insuring that company A. didn't re-invent the same dead
end that B, C, and D did...but I've not been able to find anything
like that in Germany.

[Denyav]

>difference. If the European war lasts only a
>month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.
>

With a bomb "Assembled in US from German components"?
Real reason of Normandy landings is occupation of Germany before it becomes
nuclear (and more),not saving Stalin.

[Dave Kearton]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
| >difference. If the European war lasts only a
| >month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.
| >
|
| With a bomb "Assembled in US from German components"?
| Real reason of Normandy landings is occupation of Germany before it
becomes
| nuclear (and more),not saving Stalin.




That doesn't make sense.


It implies that the Allies wouldn't have re-taken Europe, nor
occupied Germany if the Germans didn't have a nuclear program.
There's no way that Roosevelt or Churchill would allow the Russians access
to all of Europe.



Suggest that you get more of your info from the reality channel.





Cheers


Dave Kearton

[robert arndt]

"tadaa" > wrote in message >...
> > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
> >
> > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> > a few months?
>
> They should have known what projects are the one's that are going to
> succeed. What if the jet engine would have been a dead end and no FW-190 or
> better versions of ME-109 would have not been developed?

You're not thinking like a German nor of the Nazi distrust of rivals
that led to duplicity in designs.
When the Luftwaffe saw the first jet, the He-178, fly 4 days prior to
WW2 they were not impressed. Why should they suddenly produce a
tempermental untried machine when they had the Me-109?
When the war did start they were winning and all such jet projects
were delayed. Again, who needs a jet when you have the Fw-190?
As the war situation turned and deteriorated the Germans began to
experience round the clock bombing. This in turn led to almost every
concievable design proposal from the major aircraft producers, which
didn't like each other. Heinkel was despised by the Nazis while
Messerschmitt was praised. That's why the He-280 was rejected while
the Me-262 was selected instead. And to complicate matters worse, the
SS Scientific Branch had their own facilities and unconventional
aircraft- disc aircraft that sucked up a lot of manpower and
resources.
Then came the V-2 in 1944 and all chances for producing 20,000 more
fighters desperately needed to fight the increasing air battles was
lost. German pilots were not rotated and were forced to fight ever
increasing amounts of Allied material superiority in the skies over
the Reich. It was a gallant effort but no-win situation.
The jet engines then developed lacked better building materials and
needed overhauled or were ruined in 20 hrs. Advanced powerplants were
years away from proper introduction. Selection of a suitable fighter
jet took years as well as Hitler tried to turn all jet fighter
aircraft into bombers. And the fighters that did make it into combat
had to develop new strategies for fighting the escorts and still
manage to destroy the bombers.
The answer is No... even with the head start the German system,
Hitler, the SS, and engine technology couldn't have delivered anything
better sooner.

Rob
Sorry.

[Denyav]

> That's the big thing-- there really seems to have been no rhyme or
>reason to German R&D-- in the U.S. and England there was some over all
>coordination, insuring that company A. didn't re-invent the same dead
>end that B, C, and D did...but I've not been able to find anything
>like that in Germany.

At a first glance it looks like that,many organizations and
instutitions,including unassuming ones like Post Office,working indepedently
for the same R&D effort,but if you dig a little bit more then you see a
different picture,all German S projects are under absolute control of SS,more
precisely Kammlers SS Advanced weapons directorate,with their own research and
production facilities as well as SS controlled facilities in German
universities and factories which were off limits for others.
Name of Hans Kammler,who was a devoted Nazi and one of the main architects of
the "final solution" is still the key to understand what really happened in
closing days of WWII.
But the name Kammler was a taboo in post WWII world and all documents about him
has been put under lock for 75 years by US gov't.
I think this fact alone tells something.

[Denyav]

>It implies that the Allies wouldn't have re-taken Europe, nor
>occupied Germany if the Germans didn't have a nuclear program.
>There's no way that Roosevelt or Churchill would allow the Russians access
>to all of Europe.

Nazi Germany was the current challenge and SU was already ID by western allies
as next challenge.
Allies would have retaken Europe later and much more easily and would face a
much more weakened Stalin.
If Eisenhower were alive,I would love to ask him only one question,why he
thinks (in his book "Crusade in Europa") that if they were only a couple
months late,human kind would have possibly faced the greatest disaster of
history?
Lets remember the fate of NaziGermany was sealed in 1942,so,what kind of
disaster could possibly come from Germany in 1945?

>Suggest that you get more of your info from the reality channel.

I am sure you mean the "official" channel.

[machf]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:56:40 GMT, Charles Gray > wrote:

>had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
>instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
>of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
>on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
>in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
>improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
>a few months?

Hmmm, this looks like this would be appropiate material for soc.history.what-if,
rather...

--
__________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke
\_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
_H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com
'-_____|(

remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

[Keith Willshaw]

"Charles Gray" > wrote in message
...
> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> a few months?

There are a number of issues here

1) They couldnt just push on with the initial design
it was no more a workable fighter than the original
Gloster prototype

2) The bottleneck for German (and to an extent allied)
jet fighter production was developing an engine that
could be mass produced and have an accceptable
service life. This problem was exacerbated by the
shortage of high temperature alloying elements such
as chrome, nickel and tungsten. The Germans never really
solved this problem. The Jumo engines had a rated life
of 25 hours, which was rarely achieved, at a time when
Rolls Royce jet engines had exceeded 2000 hours

3) Germany never had a shortage of airframes and their
fighters were as good as contemporary western designs and
better than most soviet ones. They did however lack
pilots and fuel. As a result thousands of aircraft were
captured on the goround by the end of the war.

The wind tunnel designs and studies didnt really tie up
much in the way of resources. The really wasteful
project was the V-2/A4 which used colossal amounts
of strategic material, manpower and industrial resources
to produce a weapon that had essentially zero military
usefulness.

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Chad Irby" > wrote in message
...

> > On what basis do you make this claim? I can think of nothing the
Germans
> > could have gotten their hands on with just a couple more months of WW2
that
> > would have made any sort of difference.
>
> Well, they *were* starting to ramp up production on the He-162, and a
> couple of months would have given them a thousand or so more fighters
> (really - the things were pretty darned cheap and easy to make) with a
> hundred MPH speed advantage. Not good for Allied bombers. Admittedly,
> they would have lost a *lot* of them due to pilot inexperience (the
> Germans were deeply short on experienced pilots by that stage of the
> war, and the He-162 wasn't exactly a cinch to fly well), and a lot more
> due to materials problems (they never did quite get the hang of good
> wood glue for their planes), but it would have been a real issue in
> getting the war over by the end of 1945.
>

But as you say they had no pilots and precious little fuel. An earlier
German introduction of jet fighters would doubtless have resulted
in increased priority for the allied jet fighter production and
we'd have seen more Meteors, Vampires etc

Keith

[Bernardz]

In article >,
says...
> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.

WW2 jets were short range, it was suitable for defence against bombers
and V1. Hitler did not need such technology in 1940.

Certainly in hindsight Hitler could have used much earlier eg improved
submarines, better coding equipment and sub-machine guns. Similarly a V1
would have been very useful in battle of Britain. Note the Allies did
not have them either so one cannot blame his lack of U.S. style R&D.



>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> a few months?
>

A few months, the Allies would be dropping hundreds of nuclear bombs.


--
Should the government be responsible for individual's stupidity?

30th observation of Bernard

[Keith Willshaw]

"Bernardz" > wrote in message
news:MPG.1a6d20cd1ed6e5fe98983e@news...
> In article >,
> says...
> > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> WW2 jets were short range, it was suitable for defence against bombers
> and V1. Hitler did not need such technology in 1940.
>

The range of WW2 jets wasnt that bad in comparison to most
european fighter aircraft in use at the time

The Meteor Mk III and Me262 had a range of around 1000km which
was about the same as the Spitfire and Me-109

> Certainly in hindsight Hitler could have used much earlier eg improved
> submarines, better coding equipment and sub-machine guns. Similarly a V1
> would have been very useful in battle of Britain. Note the Allies did
> not have them either so one cannot blame his lack of U.S. style R&D.
>

Certainly higher priority to submarines would have helped, as for
coding machines the problem was more to do with german
signalling practise than the technology used. As one
Bletchley Park codebreaker pointed out the tendency of
certain groups to end all messages with a Heil Hitler
made it much easier to break their codes. Lazy operators
also tended not to chose truly random start letter combinations
but would instead use their initials, girl friends names etc

As for the V-1 this would hardly have helped win the BOB.
You dont win air superiority by scattering HE across most
of southern England.

The critical developments that Germany failed tomake IMHO
are less obvious large scale projects. A reliable proximity
fuse could have made allied aircraft losses much heavier.
Better attention to production factors in weapons design
could have radically improved productivity in the arms
plants. As an example consider the tolerances required
to produce a German Panther versus a Soviet T-34
adn you realise why the Soviets could outproduce
German tank factories 3-1

Keith

[David Windhorst]

Denyav wrote:

>>It implies that the Allies wouldn't have re-taken Europe, nor
>>occupied Germany if the Germans didn't have a nuclear program.
>>There's no way that Roosevelt or Churchill would allow the Russians access
>>to all of Europe.
>>
>>
>
>Nazi Germany was the current challenge and SU was already ID by western allies
>as next challenge.
>Allies would have retaken Europe later and much more easily and would face a
>much more weakened Stalin.
>If Eisenhower were alive,I would love to ask him only one question,why he
>thinks (in his book "Crusade in Europa") that if they were only a couple
>months late,human kind would have possibly faced the greatest disaster of
>history?
>Lets remember the fate of NaziGermany was sealed in 1942,so,what kind of
>disaster could possibly come from Germany in 1945?
>
>
Do you suppose that, just maybe, he had at least some small concern for
those Jews, Slavs, Poles, factory slaves, etc. that were saved from the
ovens by VE Day?

[Bernardz]

In article >,
says...
>
> "Bernardz" > wrote in message
> news:MPG.1a6d20cd1ed6e5fe98983e@news...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> > > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> > > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> > > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> > > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> > > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
> >
> > WW2 jets were short range, it was suitable for defence against bombers
> > and V1. Hitler did not need such technology in 1940.
> >
>
> The range of WW2 jets wasnt that bad in comparison to most
> european fighter aircraft in use at the time
>
> The Meteor Mk III and Me262 had a range of around 1000km which
> was about the same as the Spitfire and Me-109

Which is fine for an interceptor. What Hitler needed were long range
fighters such as a P-51 which had a range of 1600km and if a drop tank
was added this was more than doubled.


>
> > Certainly in hindsight Hitler could have used much earlier eg improved
> > submarines, better coding equipment and sub-machine guns. Similarly a V1
> > would have been very useful in battle of Britain. Note the Allies did
> > not have them either so one cannot blame his lack of U.S. style R&D.
> >
>
> Certainly higher priority to submarines would have helped, as for
> coding machines the problem was more to do with german
> signalling practise than the technology used. As one
> Bletchley Park codebreaker pointed out the tendency of
> certain groups to end all messages with a Heil Hitler
> made it much easier to break their codes. Lazy operators
> also tended not to chose truly random start letter combinations
> but would instead use their initials, girl friends names etc

In reality it almost always bad habits like this that allow codes to be
broken.

So the Germans too had their share of successes in code breaking for
similar reasons. They had cracked several high level British naval
codes, US military codes and several Soviet ones. During WW2 code
breaking technology could crack most codes.

Taking away nothing from the guys at Bletchley Park, another rotor and
some decent security and frequent changes in rotors would have made it
almost impossible to break.


>
> As for the V-1 this would hardly have helped win the BOB.
> You dont win air superiority by scattering HE across most
> of southern England.

I did said help not win.

>
> The critical developments that Germany failed tomake IMHO
> are less obvious large scale projects. A reliable proximity
> fuse could have made allied aircraft losses much heavier.
> Better attention to production factors in weapons design
> could have radically improved productivity in the arms
> plants.

Instead of sending so much money on V2 it could have been better spent
on air to air missiles or developing SAMs.

Another thing that would have worked well was better German pilot
training by the end of WW2.


> As an example consider the tolerances required
> to produce a German Panther versus a Soviet T-34
> adn you realise why the Soviets could outproduce
> German tank factories 3-1
>
> Keith
>
>
>

--
Should the government be responsible for individual's stupidity?

30th observation of Bernard

[Keith Willshaw]

"Bernardz" > wrote in message
news:MPG.1a6d71e35858d65d989841@news...
> In article >,
> says...
> >

> >
> > The range of WW2 jets wasnt that bad in comparison to most
> > european fighter aircraft in use at the time
> >
> > The Meteor Mk III and Me262 had a range of around 1000km which
> > was about the same as the Spitfire and Me-109
>
> Which is fine for an interceptor. What Hitler needed were long range
> fighters such as a P-51 which had a range of 1600km and if a drop tank
> was added this was more than doubled.
>

Only if he had long range bombers to escort, if defence of the
reich was the mission the aircraft range as built was fine.

>
> >
> > > Certainly in hindsight Hitler could have used much earlier eg improved
> > > submarines, better coding equipment and sub-machine guns. Similarly a
V1
> > > would have been very useful in battle of Britain. Note the Allies did
> > > not have them either so one cannot blame his lack of U.S. style R&D.
> > >
> >
> > Certainly higher priority to submarines would have helped, as for
> > coding machines the problem was more to do with german
> > signalling practise than the technology used. As one
> > Bletchley Park codebreaker pointed out the tendency of
> > certain groups to end all messages with a Heil Hitler
> > made it much easier to break their codes. Lazy operators
> > also tended not to chose truly random start letter combinations
> > but would instead use their initials, girl friends names etc
>
> In reality it almost always bad habits like this that allow codes to be
> broken.
>

Properly applied procedural rules can largely prevent this,
one reason the Kriegsmarine codes were harder to penetrate
were they largely applied the rules. Another source of weakness
is when the same messages are transmitted in a different code
that has been broken or in clear. For example the Japanese
transmitted weather data both in the naval code JN-25
and the merchant navy code which was weak. Thus by
taking the message in the easily broken merchant code
you got a crib for JN-25

> So the Germans too had their share of successes in code breaking for
> similar reasons. They had cracked several high level British naval
> codes, US military codes and several Soviet ones. During WW2 code
> breaking technology could crack most codes.
>
> Taking away nothing from the guys at Bletchley Park, another rotor and
> some decent security and frequent changes in rotors would have made it
> almost impossible to break.
>

Depends on the time frame, by 1944 4 rotor codes were
breakable and bby late 45/45 the much more secure
Lorenz codes were being broken regularly on the
Colossus machine. This was of course a programmable
electronic computer.


>
> >
> > As for the V-1 this would hardly have helped win the BOB.
> > You dont win air superiority by scattering HE across most
> > of southern England.
>
> I did said help not win.
>
> >
> > The critical developments that Germany failed tomake IMHO
> > are less obvious large scale projects. A reliable proximity
> > fuse could have made allied aircraft losses much heavier.
> > Better attention to production factors in weapons design
> > could have radically improved productivity in the arms
> > plants.
>
> Instead of sending so much money on V2 it could have been better spent
> on air to air missiles or developing SAMs.
>

Air to air missiles only help if you can put fighters in the air
and given the scale of the task it seems unlikely that
SAM's would have been available in a timely manner or
in sufficient quantities and they would have been vulnerable
to jamming. These are actually the sort of complex
developments the Nazis went in for. Less radical
developments such as improved gyroscopic gunsights,
prosximity fuses and predictors were pursued by the
allies to great efect.


> Another thing that would have worked well was better German pilot
> training by the end of WW2.
>

Trouble is they lacked the resources to do that. To train 20 pilots
you not only need instructors and planes but virtually the same
level of ground staff as an operational squadron and a
safe flying location. Britain could get its pilots trained
in South Africa, Australia, Canada and the USA, Germany had
no such luxury.

Keith

[Charles Gray]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:30:48 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
> wrote:

>
>"Bernardz" > wrote in message
>news:MPG.1a6d71e35858d65d989841@news...
>> In article >,
>> says...
>> >
>

>>
>> >
>> > The critical developments that Germany failed tomake IMHO
>> > are less obvious large scale projects. A reliable proximity
>> > fuse could have made allied aircraft losses much heavier.
>> > Better attention to production factors in weapons design
>> > could have radically improved productivity in the arms
>> > plants.
>>
>> Instead of sending so much money on V2 it could have been better spent
>> on air to air missiles or developing SAMs.
>>
>
>Air to air missiles only help if you can put fighters in the air
>and given the scale of the task it seems unlikely that
>SAM's would have been available in a timely manner or
>in sufficient quantities and they would have been vulnerable
>to jamming. These are actually the sort of complex
>developments the Nazis went in for. Less radical
>developments such as improved gyroscopic gunsights,
>prosximity fuses and predictors were pursued by the
>allies to great efect.
>
>
>Keith
>
I get the distinct impression that many german projects were
designed to appeal to higher ups who really had no business making
such decisions. Continued design work on the H series of Battleships,
the V2 projects, etc.
But Keith is right-- imagine what would have happened if they'd had
one directing authority that could say: "Right. Let's pull all the
eggheads off this bloody stupid V2 project and put them on the
proximinty fuse. Those that can't do the fuse, send them to figure
out how to improve our production speed on vital components, etc."

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)

<snip>

>Name of Hans Kammler,who was a devoted Nazi and one of the main architects
>of
>the "final solution" is still the key to understand what really happened in
>closing days of WWII.
>But the name Kammler was a taboo in post WWII world and all documents about
>him
>has been put under lock for 75 years by US gov't.
>I think this fact alone tells something.
>

I didn't realize the U.S. government had control over Nazi documents in 1929.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[tim gueguen]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >difference. If the European war lasts only a
> >month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.
> >
>
> With a bomb "Assembled in US from German components"?

And what "German components" would those be? The Germans were never close
to building an A bomb.

tim gueguen 101867

[Simon Robbins]

"Charles Gray" > wrote in message
...

> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII,

Then it would have taken them twenty years to commission the aircraft! :^)

Si

[Alan Minyard]

On 12 Jan 2004 07:48:59 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

>>It implies that the Allies wouldn't have re-taken Europe, nor
>>occupied Germany if the Germans didn't have a nuclear program.
>>There's no way that Roosevelt or Churchill would allow the Russians access
>>to all of Europe.
>
>Nazi Germany was the current challenge and SU was already ID by western allies
>as next challenge.
>Allies would have retaken Europe later and much more easily and would face a
>much more weakened Stalin.
>If Eisenhower were alive,I would love to ask him only one question,why he
>thinks (in his book "Crusade in Europa") that if they were only a couple
>months late,human kind would have possibly faced the greatest disaster of
>history?
>Lets remember the fate of NaziGermany was sealed in 1942,so,what kind of
>disaster could possibly come from Germany in 1945?
>
>>Suggest that you get more of your info from the reality channel.
>
>I am sure you mean the "official" channel.

The Soviets. Had they made it to the Channel, all of Europe would have
been under Stalin's heel. THAT would have been a great disaster.

Al Minyard

[Bernardz]

In article >,
says...
>
> "Bernardz" > wrote in message
> news:MPG.1a6d71e35858d65d989841@news...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > >
>
> > >
> > > The range of WW2 jets wasnt that bad in comparison to most
> > > european fighter aircraft in use at the time
> > >
> > > The Meteor Mk III and Me262 had a range of around 1000km which
> > > was about the same as the Spitfire and Me-109
> >
> > Which is fine for an interceptor. What Hitler needed were long range
> > fighters such as a P-51 which had a range of 1600km and if a drop tank
> > was added this was more than doubled.
> >
>
> Only if he had long range bombers to escort, if defence of the
> reich was the mission the aircraft range as built was fine.


I can think of several theatre where long range planes with drop tanks
could be a big plus eg the battle of Britain and Russia.


>
> >
> > >
> > > > Certainly in hindsight Hitler could have used much earlier eg improved
> > > > submarines, better coding equipment and sub-machine guns. Similarly a
> V1
> > > > would have been very useful in battle of Britain. Note the Allies did
> > > > not have them either so one cannot blame his lack of U.S. style R&D.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Certainly higher priority to submarines would have helped, as for
> > > coding machines the problem was more to do with german
> > > signalling practise than the technology used. As one
> > > Bletchley Park codebreaker pointed out the tendency of
> > > certain groups to end all messages with a Heil Hitler
> > > made it much easier to break their codes. Lazy operators
> > > also tended not to chose truly random start letter combinations
> > > but would instead use their initials, girl friends names etc
> >
> > In reality it almost always bad habits like this that allow codes to be
> > broken.
> >
>
> Properly applied procedural rules can largely prevent this,
> one reason the Kriegsmarine codes were harder to penetrate
> were they largely applied the rules. Another source of weakness
> is when the same messages are transmitted in a different code
> that has been broken or in clear. For example the Japanese
> transmitted weather data both in the naval code JN-25
> and the merchant navy code which was weak. Thus by
> taking the message in the easily broken merchant code
> you got a crib for JN-25
>
> > So the Germans too had their share of successes in code breaking for
> > similar reasons. They had cracked several high level British naval
> > codes, US military codes and several Soviet ones. During WW2 code
> > breaking technology could crack most codes.
> >
> > Taking away nothing from the guys at Bletchley Park, another rotor and
> > some decent security and frequent changes in rotors would have made it
> > almost impossible to break.
> >
>
> Depends on the time frame, by 1944 4 rotor codes were
> breakable and bby late 45/45 the much more secure
> Lorenz codes were being broken regularly on the
> Colossus machine. This was of course a programmable
> electronic computer.


Obviously some dramatic improvements in coding technology are needed.

>
>
> >
> > >
> > > As for the V-1 this would hardly have helped win the BOB.
> > > You dont win air superiority by scattering HE across most
> > > of southern England.
> >
> > I did said help not win.

I find this an absolutely fascinating weapon system. Very cheap. Nothing
the British had during the battle of Britain could deal with them. If
Hitler would have had them earlier the Germans could keep bombing
Britain till late 1944. The Allies would have to spend heaps to defend
against the V1s compared to what the Germans spent building and
launching them. Not a war winner but certainly very effective.




> >
> > >
> > > The critical developments that Germany failed tomake IMHO
> > > are less obvious large scale projects. A reliable proximity
> > > fuse could have made allied aircraft losses much heavier.
> > > Better attention to production factors in weapons design
> > > could have radically improved productivity in the arms
> > > plants.
> >
> > Instead of sending so much money on V2 it could have been better spent
> > on air to air missiles or developing SAMs.
> >
>
> Air to air missiles only help if you can put fighters in the air

Yep. Although the Germans did use them late in the war and they did
prove to be quite effective effective against bomber streams.

Introduced in mass in 1943 and they could have been devastating against
the bombers.

> and given the scale of the task it seems unlikely that
> SAM's would have been available in a timely manner or
> in sufficient quantities and they would have been vulnerable
> to jamming.

They actually built a few Enzian missiles but too late to have an
effect. I doubt that the Allies could have jammed them.


> These are actually the sort of complex
> developments the Nazis went in for. Less radical
> developments such as improved gyroscopic gunsights,
> prosximity fuses and predictors were pursued by the
> allies to great efect.

All this would help.

>
>
> > Another thing that would have worked well was better German pilot
> > training by the end of WW2.
> >
>
> Trouble is they lacked the resources to do that. To train 20 pilots
> you not only need instructors and planes but virtually the same
> level of ground staff as an operational squadron and a
> safe flying location. Britain could get its pilots trained
> in South Africa, Australia, Canada and the USA, Germany had
> no such luxury.

In 1944 I would agree, in 1940 I would disagree.

>
> Keith
>
>
>

--
Should the government be responsible for individual's stupidity?

30th observation of Bernard

[machf]

On 12 Jan 2004 20:32:40 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>From: (Denyav)
>
><snip>
>
>>Name of Hans Kammler,who was a devoted Nazi and one of the main architects
>>of
>>the "final solution" is still the key to understand what really happened in
>>closing days of WWII.
>>But the name Kammler was a taboo in post WWII world and all documents about
>>him
>>has been put under lock for 75 years by US gov't.
>>I think this fact alone tells something.
>>
>
>I didn't realize the U.S. government had control over Nazi documents in 1929.
>
I guess he means those 75 years aren't over yet...

--
__________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke
\_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru
_H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com
'-_____|(

remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

[The Enlightenment]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Charles Gray" > wrote in message
> ...
> > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper)
dozens
> > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and
focused
> > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter
design
> > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.

I don't think the German R & D program was so bad. The Germans had
less resources and had to cull more projects.
Their support of jet engine development was infinitely superior to
what Whittle received. Apart from Heinkels sponsorship of von Ohain
Junkers, BMW, Bramo all had been lead to jet engine development on
the basis of



> >
> > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out
by
> > a few months?
>
> There are a number of issues here
>
> 1) They couldn't just push on with the initial design
> it was no more a workable fighter than the original
> Gloster prototype

True, but the He 280 was far in advance and had two engine choices.

von Ohain says Ernest Heinkel looked like he was going to cry when the
HeS 006 was cancelled. The engine was brilliant but its was further
away from production and Heinkel was told it was his own fault when
the RLM was trying to run a national program.


> 2) The bottleneck for German (and to an extent allied)
> jet fighter production was developing an engine that
> could be mass produced and have an accceptable
> service life. This problem was exacerbated by the
> shortage of high temperature alloying elements such
> as chrome, nickel and tungsten. The Germans never really
> solved this problem. The Jumo engines had a rated life
> of 25 hours, which was rarely achieved, at a time when
> Rolls Royce jet engines had exceeded 2000 hours

Actually the Jumo 004B had a mean time between scheduled overhaul of
25 hours. The is different from saying an engine service life of 25
hours.

At 25 hours the engine needed two main tasks: A/ the 6 carbon steel
combustion chambers were replaced. This task could have been avoided
if they were made out of refractory alloys or stainless steel; as it
was they were mad out of mild steel with aluminum oxide coating. B/
The turbine was removed, x rayed and replaced if necessary or refitted
for another 10 hours.

The British engines had plentiful nickel and were made of nimonic
alloy which was 80% nickel and 20% chromium.

The Germans had to make do with Tinadur (15% chrom 14% nickel, 4%
Titanium balance steel) or Cromadur ( 18% Chrome, 10% manganese
balance Steel) and then only on the Blades and Turbine Stator nozzles.

(Both Blades materials were used as neither could be manufactured in
sufficient quantity)

Nickel is essential to limit creep and fatigue in the blades. Without
this material the British engines would not have lasted minutes as
they lacked the German cooling techniques.

The Germans were thus well ahead in blade root cooling, hollow cooled
blades, film cooling and were making progress in ceramics for the
stator blades. (Anthony Kay In his History of German Gas Turbines
estimates early 1946 for ceramic turbine stators)

The BMW003 A/E used on the Ar 234 and He 162 shows what they could
have achieved in service life: The BMWs combustion chamber lasted 200
hours and its turbine could be removed, inspected and replaced in 2
man hours with the engine remaining on the wing.

The final Jumo 004C and Jumo 004D rated at a 60 hour a blade life.
These engines gave 1000kg and 1050kg thrust and a Me 262 in combat
trim was recorded at 578mph with these engines.

In the very firsts pre production jumo 004 engines the blades could
give between 100 to 6 hours service. 25 hours was a very reasonable
engine life but upon manufacture away from skilled trades personnel
the quality dropped (the annealing process and heat treatments had to
be done correctly as did turbine balancing and initially manufacturing
quality was quite poor which meant that the engines were given
overhauls at about 10 hours) Eventual quality drifted up again.

The Jumo 004D would also have benefited greatly from throttle
limiting. If the throttle was moved to fast the inrush of fuel would
increase turbine and combustion chamber temperatures by 200C before
the compressor had a chance to spool up and this lead to premature
failure.

The British Engines suffered from this as well.

Note also that the dull performing Mk 1 Meteor suffered protracted
development because its engines had such a large diameter that
integrating them in the airframe was a huge head ache. The Germans
purposefully avoided this issue by choosing axial.


>
> 3) Germany never had a shortage of airframes and their
> fighters were as good as contemporary western designs and
> better than most soviet ones.

I believe the Germans were forbidden to engage La 5 and Yak 9s below
4000 meters because the Russians at that altitude were unbeatable by
anyone German or Allied.

> They did however lack
> pilots and fuel. As a result thousands of aircraft were
> captured on the ground by the end of the war.

Also good materials: 30% of Me 262 losses were to collapsing nose
wheels caused by faulty materials.

The syn Fuel was always of slightly lower grade necessitating heavier
engines. The Me 109 was a tiring airframe that was kept on because
the Jets were expected in 1943 not 1944 and because disruption to
production was not possible. Nevertheless It was still capable of
suprises; eg the Me109K extraordinary climb rate.

The Jets would have solved the German fuel crisis as they are
indifferent to octane number. At wars end me 262s were operated on
centrifuge refined crude oil that was simply heated and pumped in.
The Jumo 004 was designed to run on diesel so this was not too
difficult.

>
> The wind tunnel designs and studies didn't really tie up
> much in the way of resources. The really wasteful
> project was the V-2/A4 which used colossal amounts
> of strategic material, manpower and industrial resources
> to produce a weapon that had essentially zero military
> usefulness.

Within 12 months the LEV-3 strap down single axis guidance system
would have been replaced with the more accurate 3 axis gimbaled SC-66.

The accuracy while still not stunning would have meant that an attack
by a dozen of these missiles on a bridgehead or airfield would be
quite damaging.

Additionally the beacon controlled guidance system might have improved
as well. The weapon had potential.





>
> Keith
>
>

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Charles Gray" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> > > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper)
> dozens
> > > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and
> focused
> > > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter
> design
> > > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> > > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> I don't think the German R & D program was so bad. The Germans had
> less resources and had to cull more projects.

But they used their resources extremely inefficiently on occasion
and simply didnt cull enough projects or rationalise the ones
they were running.

The classic example was their nuclear research project. There was
a period in late 44 when both Heisenberg and Diebner were
running parallel programs and both required heavy water.
There was only enough for one or the other but the German
reaction was to give each a portion of the water available.

This ensured that neither could succeed.

> Their support of jet engine development was infinitely superior to
> what Whittle received. Apart from Heinkels sponsorship of von Ohain
> Junkers, BMW, Bramo all had been lead to jet engine development on
> the basis of
>

Which is a classic example of the German approach, you have
BMW, Daimler Benz, Focke-Wulf, Henkel, Junkers and Sanger
running competing programs in an environment where a combined
development was much more likely to succeed.

In Britain the government realised the limitations of Whittle
small team and rather ruthlessly handed the whole shebang
over to Rolls-Royce with an instruction to make this thing
suitable for mass production


>
>
> > >
> > > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out
> by
> > > a few months?
> >
> > There are a number of issues here
> >
> > 1) They couldn't just push on with the initial design
> > it was no more a workable fighter than the original
> > Gloster prototype
>
> True, but the He 280 was far in advance and had two engine choices.
>
> von Ohain says Ernest Heinkel looked like he was going to cry when the
> HeS 006 was cancelled. The engine was brilliant but its was further
> away from production and Heinkel was told it was his own fault when
> the RLM was trying to run a national program.
>

Never hear of the HeS 006, the HE-280 was initilaly powered by
an HeS008 which was dropped in favours of the He S011 due
to its design limitations which meant it could only produce
around 1100lbs. Similarly the HeS30 was suspended in 1942 to
free resources to develop the HeS 011

The most advanced Heinkel engine was the HeS 011 which
was rated at 3,500 lbs thrust, only 19 were ever complete and
the first air test was 1945

>
> > 2) The bottleneck for German (and to an extent allied)
> > jet fighter production was developing an engine that
> > could be mass produced and have an accceptable
> > service life. This problem was exacerbated by the
> > shortage of high temperature alloying elements such
> > as chrome, nickel and tungsten. The Germans never really
> > solved this problem. The Jumo engines had a rated life
> > of 25 hours, which was rarely achieved, at a time when
> > Rolls Royce jet engines had exceeded 2000 hours
>
> Actually the Jumo 004B had a mean time between scheduled overhaul of
> 25 hours. The is different from saying an engine service life of 25
> hours.
>
> At 25 hours the engine needed two main tasks: A/ the 6 carbon steel
> combustion chambers were replaced. This task could have been avoided
> if they were made out of refractory alloys or stainless steel; as it
> was they were mad out of mild steel with aluminum oxide coating. B/
> The turbine was removed, x rayed and replaced if necessary or refitted
> for another 10 hours.
>

They had to be made from CS as the Germans didnt have the alloys available.

> The British engines had plentiful nickel and were made of nimonic
> alloy which was 80% nickel and 20% chromium.
>
> The Germans had to make do with Tinadur (15% chrom 14% nickel, 4%
> Titanium balance steel) or Cromadur ( 18% Chrome, 10% manganese
> balance Steel) and then only on the Blades and Turbine Stator nozzles.
>
> (Both Blades materials were used as neither could be manufactured in
> sufficient quantity)
>
> Nickel is essential to limit creep and fatigue in the blades. Without
> this material the British engines would not have lasted minutes as
> they lacked the German cooling techniques.
>

The point is moot as they had the nickel

> The Germans were thus well ahead in blade root cooling, hollow cooled
> blades, film cooling and were making progress in ceramics for the
> stator blades. (Anthony Kay In his History of German Gas Turbines
> estimates early 1946 for ceramic turbine stators)
>
> The BMW003 A/E used on the Ar 234 and He 162 shows what they could
> have achieved in service life: The BMWs combustion chamber lasted 200
> hours and its turbine could be removed, inspected and replaced in 2
> man hours with the engine remaining on the wing.
>

The initialWelland's were rated at a conservative 180 hours between
overhauls,
Wellands ran for 2000 hours continuously on the testbed in 1944

> The final Jumo 004C and Jumo 004D rated at a 60 hour a blade life.
> These engines gave 1000kg and 1050kg thrust and a Me 262 in combat
> trim was recorded at 578mph with these engines.
>
> In the very firsts pre production jumo 004 engines the blades could
> give between 100 to 6 hours service. 25 hours was a very reasonable
> engine life but upon manufacture away from skilled trades personnel
> the quality dropped (the annealing process and heat treatments had to
> be done correctly as did turbine balancing and initially manufacturing
> quality was quite poor which meant that the engines were given
> overhauls at about 10 hours) Eventual quality drifted up again.
>
> The Jumo 004D would also have benefited greatly from throttle
> limiting. If the throttle was moved to fast the inrush of fuel would
> increase turbine and combustion chamber temperatures by 200C before
> the compressor had a chance to spool up and this lead to premature
> failure.
>
> The British Engines suffered from this as well.
>

They were slow in throttle response and could flame out but
would rarely catastropically fail as did the German engines.

> Note also that the dull performing Mk 1 Meteor suffered protracted
> development because its engines had such a large diameter that
> integrating them in the airframe was a huge head ache. The Germans
> purposefully avoided this issue by choosing axial.
>

The Meteor actually entered squadron service a week before the Me-262
and the Meteor III which entered service in jan 1945 had many
of the problems that plagued the Mk 1 fixed and was capable of
speeds of around 560 mph

>
> >
> > 3) Germany never had a shortage of airframes and their
> > fighters were as good as contemporary western designs and
> > better than most soviet ones.
>
> I believe the Germans were forbidden to engage La 5 and Yak 9s below
> 4000 meters because the Russians at that altitude were unbeatable by
> anyone German or Allied.
>

Allied test pilots such as Eric Winkle Brown who flew
the La-5 and Yak-9 didnt rate them that highly. They were
agile but lightly armed and built in comparison to the
contemporary British and American aircraft. Its performance
was rather better than the Me-109G at low altutude by poorer
above 3500m IRC



> > They did however lack
> > pilots and fuel. As a result thousands of aircraft were
> > captured on the ground by the end of the war.
>
> Also good materials: 30% of Me 262 losses were to collapsing nose
> wheels caused by faulty materials.
>

And opeerating from rough strips since the Luftwaffe airfields had
P-51's orbiting them by day and Mosquito NF's after dark
ready to knock down any pilot foolish enough to try to fly.

> The syn Fuel was always of slightly lower grade necessitating heavier
> engines. The Me 109 was a tiring airframe that was kept on because
> the Jets were expected in 1943 not 1944 and because disruption to
> production was not possible. Nevertheless It was still capable of
> suprises; eg the Me109K extraordinary climb rate.
>
> The Jets would have solved the German fuel crisis as they are
> indifferent to octane number. At wars end me 262s were operated on
> centrifuge refined crude oil that was simply heated and pumped in.
> The Jumo 004 was designed to run on diesel so this was not too
> difficult.
>

Hardly, they surely could run on lower grade fuel but by 1944
even that was in short supply. By early 1945 Me-262's were
ordered not to taxi around the fields but were hauled into
position by draft animals.

> >
> > The wind tunnel designs and studies didn't really tie up
> > much in the way of resources. The really wasteful
> > project was the V-2/A4 which used colossal amounts
> > of strategic material, manpower and industrial resources
> > to produce a weapon that had essentially zero military
> > usefulness.
>
> Within 12 months the LEV-3 strap down single axis guidance system
> would have been replaced with the more accurate 3 axis gimbaled SC-66.
>
> The accuracy while still not stunning would have meant that an attack
> by a dozen of these missiles on a bridgehead or airfield would be
> quite damaging.
>

No sir, the explosion of 12 warheads in an area the size of the
Normandy bridghead is insignificant militarily, the post war Scud
is about as accurate as an upgraded V-2 and was essentially
useless except as a terror weapon aimed at cities.

> Additionally the beacon controlled guidance system might have improved
> as well. The weapon had potential.
>

Beacon guidance systems were jammed from early 1941 onwards.

Keith

[Peter Stickney]

In article >,
Charles Gray > writes:
> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> a few months?

They may have ended up with fewer prototypes - but it wouldn't have
made much difference.
From about 1936 on, teh German arms buildup was curtailed by a lack of
raw meteriels. The Luftwaffe decision to concentrate on Medium
Bombers and Short-range fighters was much more heavily influenced by a
lack of Aluminum, Rubber, and Steel than a cocentration on Tactical
vs. Strategic airpower. The Kreigsmaraine was never able to get
U-Boat production up to the levels that they knew they needed for the
same reason. (Well, that, and their foolishness of fiddling around
with a Surface Navy that would never be more than a small Task Force,
adn which made no materiel contribution to the war effort.)
The Heer wasn't able to build the tanks it really needed, and went to
war with the Panzer Divisions equipped not with the preferred Pz IIIs,
woth a useful level of armor and firepower, but with light tanks
barely suitable for use in training.

Germany produced either none, of very little, of the raw materiels
needed for large-scale production. They needed to be able to import
materiel from Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

This situation didn't get any better in 1939. When the war broke
out, the Royal Navy interdicted all sea traffic going into Germany.
This was fairly easy - The German seaports are fairly easily
bottlenecked, and they didn't have much of a merchant fleet to begin
with. So, really, the question's an interesting one, but, in the long
run, irrelevant. They wouldn't have been able to do much with a
U.S. style R&D effort, since they couldn't back it up with a U.S>
style production effort.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

[The Enlightenment]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in
message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Charles Gray" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII,
and
> > > > instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper)
> > dozens
> > > > of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and
> > focused
> > > > on say two or three fighter designs.
> > > > For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter
> > design
> > > > in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on
incremental
> > > > improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
> >
> > I don't think the German R & D program was so bad. The Germans
had
> > less resources and had to cull more projects.
>
> But they used their resources extremely inefficiently on occasion
> and simply didnt cull enough projects or rationalise the ones
> they were running.

At one point they culled too effectively: an order given (I don't know
when) was to cull all projects which could not come to fruition in 2
years or less with exceptions granted only by Hitler. It seems that
unofficially some of these projects continued but they seem to have
crushed some promising projects: (perhaps even their microwave team.)


>
> The classic example was their nuclear research project. There was
> a period in late 44 when both Heisenberg and Diebner were
> running parallel programs and both required heavy water.
> There was only enough for one or the other but the German
> reaction was to give each a portion of the water available.
>
> This ensured that neither could succeed.

I'm not an expert on the nuclear effort. I don't think the full story
is out yet as many of the people ended up in the USSR

>
> > Their support of jet engine development was infinitely superior to
> > what Whittle received. Apart from Heinkels sponsorship of von
Ohain
> > Junkers, BMW, Bramo all had been lead to jet engine development
on
> > the basis of
> >
>
> Which is a classic example of the German approach, you have
> BMW, Daimler Benz, Focke-Wulf, Henkel, Junkers and Sanger
> running competing programs in an environment where a combined
> development was much more likely to succeed.




The German programs started privately at airframe and engine
manufacturers. They were trying to get more jet thrust. Junkers had
excellent expertise in diesels that worked well with trubos. Bramo
(latter absorbed into BMW) made excellent reliable turbo chargers that
operated at 850C. (unfortunately scaling up turbines doesn't work)
Focke Wulf had their own ducted reheated fan concepts.

A Merlin provided 140kg Jet thrust: so I think at least 30% additional
thrust of an engine would be coming from the exhaust not the propeller
at speeds of 440mph Increasing this jet thrust is what everyone was
after.

They all concluded independently that the pure gas turbine was the way
to go just as Whittle did.

The ambitious airframe maker Ernest Heinkel got an early jump in and
as a private venture got von Ohains engines running and in the air.

By this time the RLM and Techniches Amt of the Luftwaffe were already
interested. Heinkel demonstration simply accelerated the Germans
effort and they set up a national program to run over 10 years to get
things moving faster. I think it had 4 stages labeled type I (BMW
003A/E, Jumo 004B), Type II ( HeS11, Jumo 004G/H), Type III and Type
IV which lead to Daimler Benz designing The Rolls Royce Olympus thrust
009-016.

The Technocrat Helmuth Schelp mapped out an ambitious 10 year program.
They sought to exclude airfram manufacturers as a waste of resources
and this placed Heinkel in a bad position. Heinkel's solution was the
buy the Hirth Motoren works when Hirth died at twice market price to
legitimise himself and gain access to the engineers some of whom were
turbo experts.

Heinkel continued to be a maverick and his 006 (centrifugal compressor
and turbine) and 030 engines (Ex Junkers Engineer Muellers axial
engine with axial variable startor engine) all worked though the 006
was too small and the 030 needed to be reengineered with less nickel.
The 030s performance was not exceded till 1947 anywhere.


>
> In Britain the government realised the limitations of Whittle
> small team and rather ruthlessly handed the whole shebang
> over to Rolls-Royce with an instruction to make this thing
> suitable for mass production

More or less correct however you forgot to mention "rover" and the
fact that by this time Rolls Royce had seen the error of their ways.

Power Jets -> Rover -> Rolls Royce. Compared the Helmuth Schelps
program the British program was belated and initially pathetic with
much energy exhausted at the ill equipped Rover.

I admire Whittles will power but British Infustry: eg Rolls Royce and
the RAF and Defence Ministry let him languish to long.

By comparison the German industry was receptive and able to give an
upstart like von Ohain a go.


> >
> > > >
> > > > Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it
out
> > by
> > > > a few months?
> > >
> > > There are a number of issues here
> > >
> > > 1) They couldn't just push on with the initial design
> > > it was no more a workable fighter than the original
> > > Gloster prototype
> >
> > True, but the He 280 was far in advance and had two engine
choices.
> >
> > von Ohain says Ernest Heinkel looked like he was going to cry when
the
> > HeS 006 was cancelled. The engine was brilliant but its was
further
> > away from production and Heinkel was told it was his own fault
when
> > the RLM was trying to run a national program.
> >
>
> Never hear of the HeS 006, the HE-280 was initilaly powered by
> an HeS008 which was dropped in favours of the He S011 due
> to its design limitations which meant it could only produce
> around 1100lbs. Similarly the HeS30 was suspended in 1942 to
> free resources to develop the HeS 011
>
> The most advanced Heinkel engine was the HeS 011 which
> was rated at 3,500 lbs thrust, only 19 were ever complete and
> the first air test was 1945

These 19 engines were bench testing at somewhat 1100 kg thrust which
is bellow the target of 1300kg but enough for prototypes.

This engine was Brilliant. Heinkel had been given the engine by
Schelp who wanted Heinkel to work on centrifugal compressors while
everyone else worked on axials. von Ohain thought that axials were
the way to go by this stage but Heinkel took on the engine because he
wanted the work and had to conform to the National program.

It could handle extremely turbulent airflow just like the british
centrufugal engines however unlike the British engines the He S11 was
of a small axial like diameter. Thus it could not only be fitted
inside a wing with a minimal bulge (unlike the big diameter British
engines) but it could draw in air via intakes that were simply slits
along the leading edges of the wing (unlike the axial engines which
needed circular intakes).

The secret was the diagonal compressor. First stage was an inductor
fan without a stator, then a smoothing gap, then a diagonal compressor
and then a 3 stage axial unit, then an anular combustion chamber and
then a 2 stage zero strategic material turbine.

The diagonal compressor looks like a single sided centrifugal
compressor however unlike the centrifugal compressor the air exits
axialy (hence the name diagonal flow). The exiting air is impinged
upon a stator thus both centrifugal effects and axial compression
effects.

Its efficency was 0.80 which was better than the 0.79 of the BMW003A/E
and jumo 004B which operated at 0.79 at somewhat lower pressure
ratios.

Its efficiency was however less than the 0.85 that the HERMESO II
compressor of the planed 1100kg BMW003D was achieving at a very high
pressure ratio of 5.5: 1. By this time the Germans were converting
from impulse type axial compressors to the more efficient reaction
type axial compressors. About 13% more efficient for the same
pressure ratio (0.91 versus 0.79) and required 25% less stages.


>
> >
> > > 2) The bottleneck for German (and to an extent allied)
> > > jet fighter production was developing an engine that
> > > could be mass produced and have an accceptable
> > > service life. This problem was exacerbated by the
> > > shortage of high temperature alloying elements such
> > > as chrome, nickel and tungsten. The Germans never really
> > > solved this problem. The Jumo engines had a rated life
> > > of 25 hours, which was rarely achieved, at a time when
> > > Rolls Royce jet engines had exceeded 2000 hours
> >
> > Actually the Jumo 004B had a mean time between scheduled overhaul
of
> > 25 hours. The is different from saying an engine service life of
25
> > hours.
> >
> > At 25 hours the engine needed two main tasks: A/ the 6 carbon
steel
> > combustion chambers were replaced. This task could have been
avoided
> > if they were made out of refractory alloys or stainless steel; as
it
> > was they were mad out of mild steel with aluminum oxide coating.
B/
> > The turbine was removed, x rayed and replaced if necessary or
refitted
> > for another 10 hours.
> >
>
> They had to be made from CS as the Germans didnt have the alloys
available.

Not in sufficient quantity anyway. About 5kg of chromium per engine
and either the same of less of the more scarce Nickel (depending on
cromadur or tinadur) was allowed for.)

>
> > The British engines had plentiful nickel and were made of nimonic
> > alloy which was 80% nickel and 20% chromium.
> >
> > The Germans had to make do with Tinadur (15% chrom 14% nickel, 4%
> > Titanium balance steel) or Cromadur ( 18% Chrome, 10% manganese
> > balance Steel) and then only on the Blades and Turbine Stator
nozzles.
> >
> > (Both Blades materials were used as neither could be manufactured
in
> > sufficient quantity)
> >
> > Nickel is essential to limit creep and fatigue in the blades.
Without
> > this material the British engines would not have lasted minutes as
> > they lacked the German cooling techniques.
> >
>
> The point is moot as they had the nickel


Indeed. Had they not have had it the belated British program would
have been delayed enormously by the need to develop low nickel alloys
and cooling systems.

The British Metallurgist DO deserved credit however. The alloys they
came up with were excellent despite the fact they had the advantge of
devote their energies to producing super alloys rather than overcoming
shortages.

However lack of nickel and chormium tide one of the hands of the
German development program.

>
> > The Germans were thus well ahead in blade root cooling, hollow
cooled
> > blades, film cooling and were making progress in ceramics for the
> > stator blades. (Anthony Kay In his History of German Gas Turbines
> > estimates early 1946 for ceramic turbine stators)
> >
> > The BMW003 A/E used on the Ar 234 and He 162 shows what they could
> > have achieved in service life: The BMWs combustion chamber lasted
200
> > hours and its turbine could be removed, inspected and replaced in
2
> > man hours with the engine remaining on the wing.
> >
>
> The initialWelland's were rated at a conservative 180 hours between
> overhauls,
> Wellands ran for 2000 hours continuously on the testbed in 1944


In real life with combat usage, a tense pilot and engine serviced and
made to mass production standards that would drop I expect.

Much British development of post war jet engines was done at German
Jet engine chambers. Von Ohain had selected centrifugal compressors
and turbines because they by nature match characteristics. The German
engine program however needed large scale benches and refrigerated
high altitude test chambers to match axial compressor to turbines.
After the war the UK/US used these excellent and massive facilities.

The German technicians helping out on the Goblin were quite surprised
when they inquired whether they should open the test chamber to
service the engine after about 30 hours running they were told that
this wouldn't be necessary: they had never seen such a thing.





>
> > The final Jumo 004C and Jumo 004D rated at a 60 hour a blade life.
> > These engines gave 1000kg and 1050kg thrust and a Me 262 in combat
> > trim was recorded at 578mph with these engines.
> >
> > In the very firsts pre production jumo 004 engines the blades
could
> > give between 100 to 6 hours service. 25 hours was a very
reasonable
> > engine life but upon manufacture away from skilled trades
personnel
> > the quality dropped (the annealing process and heat treatments
had to
> > be done correctly as did turbine balancing and initially
manufacturing
> > quality was quite poor which meant that the engines were given
> > overhauls at about 10 hours) Eventual quality drifted up again.
> >
> > The Jumo 004D would also have benefited greatly from throttle
> > limiting. If the throttle was moved to fast the inrush of fuel
would
> > increase turbine and combustion chamber temperatures by 200C
before
> > the compressor had a chance to spool up and this lead to premature
> > failure.
> >
> > The British Engines suffered from this as well.
> >
>
> They were slow in throttle response and could flame out but
> would rarely catastropically fail as did the German engines.
>
> > Note also that the dull performing Mk 1 Meteor suffered protracted
> > development because its engines had such a large diameter that
> > integrating them in the airframe was a huge head ache. The
Germans
> > purposefully avoided this issue by choosing axial.
> >
>
> The Meteor actually entered squadron service a week before the
Me-262
> and the Meteor III which entered service in jan 1945 had many
> of the problems that plagued the Mk 1 fixed and was capable of
> speeds of around 560 mph


It would seem then that the aircraft were fairly well matched at that
time of the Meteor III thought the Meteor I didn't exceed piston
engined aircraft.

The He S11 was also have been installed in the Me 262 either in the
traditional area or mounted in the 'armpit' position because of its
turbulence tolerance.

The BMW003D engine with 1100kg thrust would have pushed the aircraft
to over 600mph and increase range about 15% to 20%.




>
> >
> > >
> > > 3) Germany never had a shortage of airframes and their
> > > fighters were as good as contemporary western designs and
> > > better than most soviet ones.
> >
> > I believe the Germans were forbidden to engage La 5 and Yak 9s
below
> > 4000 meters because the Russians at that altitude were unbeatable
by
> > anyone German or Allied.
> >
>
> Allied test pilots such as Eric Winkle Brown who flew
> the La-5 and Yak-9 didnt rate them that highly. They were
> agile but lightly armed and built in comparison to the
> contemporary British and American aircraft. Its performance
> was rather better than the Me-109G at low altutude by poorer
> above 3500m IRC
>
>
>
> > > They did however lack
> > > pilots and fuel. As a result thousands of aircraft were
> > > captured on the ground by the end of the war.
> >
> > Also good materials: 30% of Me 262 losses were to collapsing nose
> > wheels caused by faulty materials.
> >
>
> And opeerating from rough strips since the Luftwaffe airfields had
> P-51's orbiting them by day and Mosquito NF's after dark
> ready to knock down any pilot foolish enough to try to fly.


Takeoff was less of an issue than landing when the Luftwaffe Pilots
could seen the *******s coming but because of the slow response of
their engine were commited to land and thereby shot up.





>
> > The syn Fuel was always of slightly lower grade necessitating
heavier
> > engines. The Me 109 was a tiring airframe that was kept on
because
> > the Jets were expected in 1943 not 1944 and because disruption to
> > production was not possible. Nevertheless It was still capable of
> > suprises; eg the Me109K extraordinary climb rate.
> >
> > The Jets would have solved the German fuel crisis as they are
> > indifferent to octane number. At wars end me 262s were operated
on
> > centrifuge refined crude oil that was simply heated and pumped in.
> > The Jumo 004 was designed to run on diesel so this was not too
> > difficult.
> >
>
> Hardly, they surely could run on lower grade fuel but by 1944
> even that was in short supply. By early 1945 Me-262's were
> ordered not to taxi around the fields but were hauled into
> position by draft animals.

They could run on just about anything.

There are several reports of Me 262s with fuel and arms not flying
simply because of the failure to be given the order to intercept. The
command structure had broken down completely by this time and personal
initiative was gone because of fears of recriminations.





>
> > >
> > > The wind tunnel designs and studies didn't really tie up
> > > much in the way of resources. The really wasteful
> > > project was the V-2/A4 which used colossal amounts
> > > of strategic material, manpower and industrial resources
> > > to produce a weapon that had essentially zero military
> > > usefulness.
> >
> > Within 12 months the LEV-3 strap down single axis guidance system
> > would have been replaced with the more accurate 3 axis gimbaled
SC-66.
> >
> > The accuracy while still not stunning would have meant that an
attack
> > by a dozen of these missiles on a bridgehead or airfield would be
> > quite damaging.
> >
>
> No sir, the explosion of 12 warheads in an area the size of the
> Normandy bridghead is insignificant militarily, the post war Scud
> is about as accurate as an upgraded V-2 and was essentially
> useless except as a terror weapon aimed at cities.

A V2 has only niche uses but consider an absolute maximum error of
+/-2km (4km) diameter with say a Gausian distribution about target
dead center. A dozen missiles that made (200 ft craters I think)
would tend to cluster around the target and make things messy at an
airfield or Bridge Head and might even get a direct hit.

( A true Russian SCUD as opposed to the the non Genuine derivatives
also has much higher accuracy incidently. Some had electronic sytems
some had imaging systems for enhanced accuracy. The gyroscope/PIGA
system developed for the MX had less than 30cm error over its
intercontinental flight due to the instruments themselves: the 100ft
error came from gravitation variation. )


>
> > Additionally the beacon controlled guidance system might have
improved
> > as well. The weapon had potential.
> >
>
> Beacon guidance systems were jammed from early 1941 onwards.


Not all equally well and hard enough to do with a horizontal flying
aircraft but in an upward arcing missile a much harder thing. A
sufficiently focused beam with even without much encoding would be
hard to jam or mislead.

X-Gerate was jammed but Y-Gerate was never really jammed effectively
those bombing raids that Churchill had advanced warning of from Enigma
decrypts simply couldn't be misdirected since jamming simply was
marginally effective.



>
> Keith
>
>
>

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
...
>

>
> I'm not an expert on the nuclear effort. I don't think the full story
> is out yet as many of the people ended up in the USSR
>

Nope must ended up at Farm Hall in England, their conversations were bugged
and their reactions on hearing of the Hiroshima bomb reveal
just how far behind they were

http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/1992/s92/s92.goldberg.html

<snip>


> >
> > The initialWelland's were rated at a conservative 180 hours between
> > overhauls,
> > Wellands ran for 2000 hours continuously on the testbed in 1944
>
>
> In real life with combat usage, a tense pilot and engine serviced and
> made to mass production standards that would drop I expect.
>

Actually the maintenance interval rose from the initial figure
as the reliability of the engines was proved.

<snip>

> > >
> >
> > Beacon guidance systems were jammed from early 1941 onwards.
>
>
> Not all equally well and hard enough to do with a horizontal flying
> aircraft but in an upward arcing missile a much harder thing. A
> sufficiently focused beam with even without much encoding would be
> hard to jam or mislead.
>
> X-Gerate was jammed but Y-Gerate was never really jammed effectively
> those bombing raids that Churchill had advanced warning of from Enigma
> decrypts simply couldn't be misdirected since jamming simply was
> marginally effective.
>
>

The contrary is true, Y-Gerat turned out to be on virtually the same
frequency as the BBC pre-war TV system and was jammed on
its very first combat use in Feb 1941.

http://www.vectorsite.net/ttwiz7.html#m3

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Denyav]

>The classic example was their nuclear research project. There was
>a period in late 44 when both Heisenberg and Diebner were
>running parallel programs and both required heavy water.
>There was only enough for one or the other but the German
>reaction was to give each a portion

Diebner did not require any heavy water in late 44,that the reason why he
succeded and why British troops seized more than 10t heavy water in a warehouse
in Hamburg.
You also forgat to mention Houtermans and von Ardenne.

[Dan Shackelford]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:41:43 +0000, Denyav wrote:

>>The classic example was their nuclear research project. There was a
>>period in late 44 when both Heisenberg and Diebner were running parallel
>>programs and both required heavy water. There was only enough for one or
>>the other but the German reaction was to give each a portion
>
> Diebner did not require any heavy water in late 44,that the reason why he
> succeded and why British troops seized more than 10t heavy water in a
> warehouse in Hamburg.
> You also forgat to mention Houtermans and von Ardenne.
Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
sailed to the Americas)

[Steve Hix]

In article m>,
Dan Shackelford > wrote:
>
> Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
> the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
> (later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
> sailed to the Americas)

Heyerdahl was in involved in stopping the production of heavy water at
Vemork?

I just finished reading about the German atom bomb effort, which
includes a lot about heavy water issues, and several Norwegians enter
the narrative, but Heyerdahl isn't one of them.

[John Mullen]

Steve Hix wrote:
> In article m>,
> Dan Shackelford > wrote:
>
>>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
>>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
>>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
>>sailed to the Americas)
>
>
> Heyerdahl was in involved in stopping the production of heavy water at
> Vemork?
>
> I just finished reading about the German atom bomb effort, which
> includes a lot about heavy water issues, and several Norwegians enter
> the narrative, but Heyerdahl isn't one of them.

I think he was joking. Humour is so hard to convey in this medium, isn't it?

John

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
John Mullen > wrote:

> Steve Hix wrote:
> > In article m>,
> > Dan Shackelford > wrote:
> >
> >>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
> >>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
> >>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
> >>sailed to the Americas)
> >
> >
> > Heyerdahl was in involved in stopping the production of heavy water at
> > Vemork?
> >
> > I just finished reading about the German atom bomb effort, which
> > includes a lot about heavy water issues, and several Norwegians enter
> > the narrative, but Heyerdahl isn't one of them.
>
> I think he was joking. Humour is so hard to convey in this medium, isn't it?

Heyerdahl's chief radio operator (Knut Haugland) *was* part of the team
that parachuted into the German heavy water plant and blew it up.

<http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/03/05/1/?nc=1>

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[John Mullen]

Chad Irby wrote:

> In article >,
> John Mullen > wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Hix wrote:
>>
>>>In article m>,
>>> Dan Shackelford > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
>>>>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
>>>>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
>>>>sailed to the Americas)
>>>
>>>
>>>Heyerdahl was in involved in stopping the production of heavy water at
>>>Vemork?
>>>
>>>I just finished reading about the German atom bomb effort, which
>>>includes a lot about heavy water issues, and several Norwegians enter
>>>the narrative, but Heyerdahl isn't one of them.
>>
>>I think he was joking. Humour is so hard to convey in this medium, isn't it?
>
>
> Heyerdahl's chief radio operator (Knut Haugland) *was* part of the team
> that parachuted into the German heavy water plant and blew it up.
>
> <http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/03/05/1/?nc=1>
>
Interesting! Thank you.

John

[Steve Hix]

In article >,
Chad Irby > wrote:

> In article >,
> John Mullen > wrote:
>
> > Steve Hix wrote:
> > > In article m>,
> > > Dan Shackelford > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
> > >>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
> > >>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
> > >>sailed to the Americas)
> > >
> > >
> > > Heyerdahl was in involved in stopping the production of heavy water at
> > > Vemork?
> > >
> > > I just finished reading about the German atom bomb effort, which
> > > includes a lot about heavy water issues, and several Norwegians enter
> > > the narrative, but Heyerdahl isn't one of them.
> >
> > I think he was joking. Humour is so hard to convey in this medium, isn't it?
>
> Heyerdahl's chief radio operator (Knut Haugland) *was* part of the team
> that parachuted into the German heavy water plant and blew it up.
>
> <http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/03/05/1/?nc=1>

Him I've read about, and now the connection with Heyerdahl is clearer.

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
says...
> >difference. If the European war lasts only a
> >month past mid July 1945 Berlin is nuked sometime in early August.
> >
>
> With a bomb "Assembled in US from German components"?
> Real reason of Normandy landings is occupation of Germany before it becomes
> nuclear (and more),not saving Stalin.
>


You mean assembled in the USA from US componants with help for people
driven from their home countries by facists that would have killed them.

How was Germany going to "become nuclear" ?


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >The classic example was their nuclear research project. There was
> >a period in late 44 when both Heisenberg and Diebner were
> >running parallel programs and both required heavy water.
> >There was only enough for one or the other but the German
> >reaction was to give each a portion
>
> Diebner did not require any heavy water in late 44

Yes he did. His experimental reactor at Stadtilm was a
heavy water moderated design and his job tiltles included
Commissioner for Norwegian HeavyWater Production

> ,that the reason why he
> succeded

He failed, the reactor never achieved criticallity, ironically
however they did accidentally discover that they got
greater neutron miltiplication amongst the graphite blocks
sourrounding the reactor than with the uranium assembly
in the reactor itself. At last in March 1945 they had
stumbled on the fact that graphite could be used as a
moderator, far too late to use that fact since US troops
arrived only days later.

> And why British troops seized more than 10t heavy water in a warehouse
> in Hamburg.

No such seizure was made and the maximum production during the
war was around 140 kg per month

> You also forgat to mention Houtermans and von Ardenne.

No their period of original work came after the war when they
worked in the Soviet nuclear program.

Actually the only German researcher who could have produced
a bomb was Paul Harteck who attempted to develop the
centrifuge enrichment process with virtually no official
backing.

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[WaltBJ]

German fighter endurance was a sore spot, jet or piston-engined. I
remember seeing Guntar Rall on TV ruefully stating that the LW
fighters had ninety minutes fuel whereas the Mustangs had eight hours
worth. (At least he still had a sens of humor.) When the red light
comes on you head for home or prepare to bail out. If Mustangs or
Tbolts are camping over your home drome and you have ten minutes fuel
left - gentlemen, that is a problem. So are the 1000 fighters the
Allies could put in the air at once - a target-rich environment is not
a good thing, especially if the targets are looking for you so they
can another coup.
Walt BJ

[Denyav]

>I guess he means those 75 years aren't over yet...

Yup, 75 year period will expire in 2020.

[Denyav]

>Houtermans and von Ardenne.
>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
>sailed to the Americas)

1) In spite of Allied bombings and efforts or Norwegian resistance Germans
transferred enough Heavy water to Germany over land route.
2)In summer of 44 Germans started to use graffit moderation and heavy water
moderation was put to back burner.
3)They did not even need to use their heavy water stocks.

[Denyav]

>Heyerdahl's chief radio operator (Knut Haugland) *was* part of the team
>that parachuted into the German heavy water plant and blew it up.
>
><http://www.arrl.org/news/features

Do you mean "ferryboat"?,plant itself was attacked by USAAF and RAF
previously,which proved to the Germans that allies were fully aware of german
intentions.(BTW Norwegian chief engineer of the plant was a British operative)

[Denyav]

>Yes he did. His experimental reactor at Stadtilm was a
>heavy water moderated design and his job tiltles included
>Commissioner for Norwegian HeavyWater Production

He was the scientific leader of Heavy water production in Norway and according
to his own testimony enough amounts of Heavy water arrived in Germany in
Aug/Sep 44 from Norway.
By the time the Heavy water from Norway arrived,it was no longer needed.>He
failed, the reactor never achieved criticallity, ironically

>however they did accidentally discover that they got
>greater neutron miltiplication amongst the graphite blocks
>sourrounding the reactor than with the uranium assembly
>in the reactor itself. At last in Marc
>1945 they had
>stumbled on the fact that graphite could be used as a
>moderator, far too late to use that

Strange,von Ardenne team reported as early as in Sep.42 that graphite could be
used as moderator alternative!.

>No such seizure was made and the maximum production during the
>war was around 140 kg per month

Yeah right,no such seizure ever made and also Saddam was about to build a
nuclear arsenal,German scientists forgat in 1945 what they knew in 1941,NV
Patrol boats attacked USS Maddox,Communists burned down Reichstag etc,etc.

>No their period of original work came after the war when they
>worked in the Soviet nuclear program.

No they were two of three most important scientists of German nuclear effort.
Guess what who has been ordered to built Soviet Bomb in Aug.45 by the Beria,A
soviet scientists or von Ardenne?.
(Obviously NKVD boss knew something about German bomb and its creators)
von Ardenne,knowing that he could never see Germany again if he accepted
Berias'offer and built a bomb for SU,diplomaticaly argued that soviet
scientists not germans should have leading role (federfuehrung) in making of
the soviet bomb,and germans should support them.That the reason why the soviet
bomb was built under sobiet management.

BTW ,Houtermans was a devoted Communist and anti-Nazi activist,he was in Soviet
Union before WWII and was put into jail during Stalins cleansing campaign.
When he (a German citizen) was arrested by Stalins henchmen,British gov't
protested and requested his immediate release,British protest was accompanied
by a threat of suspending commercial relations with SU.
After British protest he was released and went back to Germany,or more
precisely to Gestapo HQ.
Have you any idea why British gov't acted so for a German citizen and communist
jailed in Soviet Union?,

>Actually the only German researcher who could have produced
>a bomb was Paul Harteck who attempted to develop the
>centrifuge enrichment process with virtually no official
>backing.

Surely Harteck is one of founders of centrifuge enrichment technology and his
published studies are among thr best ,but in centrifuge technology Germany was
decades ahead of the rest of the world,there were many talents in this field
Zippe and Steenbeck for example.
Might be a little bit subjective,but I consider Dr.Zippe as the most important
contributor to centrifuge technology .

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Houtermans and von Ardenne.
> >Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
> >the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
> >(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
> >sailed to the Americas)
>
> 1) In spite of Allied bombings and efforts or Norwegian resistance Germans
> transferred enough Heavy water to Germany over land route.
> 2)In summer of 44 Germans started to use graffit moderation and heavy
water
> moderation was put to back burner.

All the reactors captured used heavy water moderation, including those
built in 1945

http://www.haigerloch.de/stadt/keller_englisch/EVERSU.HTM

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Yes he did. His experimental reactor at Stadtilm was a
> >heavy water moderated design and his job tiltles included
> >Commissioner for Norwegian HeavyWater Production
>
> He was the scientific leader of Heavy water production in Norway and
according
> to his own testimony enough amounts of Heavy water arrived in Germany in
> Aug/Sep 44 from Norway.

For his use but half was allocated to Heisenberg

> By the time the Heavy water from Norway arrived,it was no longer needed.

Then why ship it when shipping is critically short ?

>He
> failed, the reactor never achieved criticallity, ironically
>

Quite so.

> >however they did accidentally discover that they got
> >greater neutron miltiplication amongst the graphite blocks
> >sourrounding the reactor than with the uranium assembly
> >in the reactor itself. At last in Marc
> >1945 they had
> >stumbled on the fact that graphite could be used as a
> >moderator, far too late to use that
>
> Strange,von Ardenne team reported as early as in Sep.42 that graphite
could be
> used as moderator alternative!.
>

But then concluded it could not after test with impure material

> >No such seizure was made and the maximum production during the
> >war was around 140 kg per month
>
> Yeah right,no such seizure ever made and also Saddam was about to build a
> nuclear arsenal,German scientists forgat in 1945 what they knew in 1941,NV
> Patrol boats attacked USS Maddox,Communists burned down Reichstag etc,etc.
>

Evasion noted

> >No their period of original work came after the war when they
> >worked in the Soviet nuclear program.
>
> No they were two of three most important scientists of German nuclear
effort.
> Guess what who has been ordered to built Soviet Bomb in Aug.45 by the
Beria,A
> soviet scientists or von Ardenne?.

Academician I.V. Kurchatov

> (Obviously NKVD boss knew something about German bomb and its creators)
> von Ardenne,knowing that he could never see Germany again if he accepted
> Berias'offer and built a bomb for SU,diplomaticaly argued that soviet
> scientists not germans should have leading role (federfuehrung) in making
of
> the soviet bomb,and germans should support them.That the reason why the
soviet
> bomb was built under sobiet management.
>

Hardly, there were hired hands working on designs fed
to them from Soviet agents at Los Alamos

> BTW ,Houtermans was a devoted Communist and anti-Nazi activist,he was in
Soviet
> Union before WWII and was put into jail during Stalins cleansing campaign.
> When he (a German citizen) was arrested by Stalins henchmen,British gov't
> protested and requested his immediate release,British protest was
accompanied
> by a threat of suspending commercial relations with SU.
> After British protest he was released and went back to Germany,or more
> precisely to Gestapo HQ.
> Have you any idea why British gov't acted so for a German citizen and
communist
> jailed in Soviet Union?,
>

This is fiction. Houtermans married physicist Charlotte Riefenstahl in
August 1931, he left Germany in 1933 at the insistent request of Charlotte,
and worked in Great Britain, near Cambridge. But in 1935, he agreed to a
proposal of Alexander Weissberg, a Russian communist childhood friend,
for an appointment at the Institute of Physics of Kharkhov, USSR

His wife and their two small children managed to escape and get to the
United States. In prison, Houtermans was tortured until he confessed
to be a "trotskyist plotter" and a German spy, then he was imprisoned in
Moscow.

However, after the Hitler-Stalin pact of August 1939, he was handed over to
Gestapo by NKVD and imprisoned in Berlin in May 1940. He was discharged in
August 1940 thanks to Max von Laue, who found a job for him at the
industrial
lab of Manfred von Arden (in November 1940).

> >Actually the only German researcher who could have produced
> >a bomb was Paul Harteck who attempted to develop the
> >centrifuge enrichment process with virtually no official
> >backing.
>
> Surely Harteck is one of founders of centrifuge enrichment technology and
his
> published studies are among thr best ,but in centrifuge technology Germany
was
> decades ahead of the rest of the world,there were many talents in this
field
> Zippe and Steenbeck for example.
> Might be a little bit subjective,but I consider Dr.Zippe as the most
important
> contributor to centrifuge technology .
>
Perhaps but their work was given no priority by the Nazis
and failed to enrich more than a few grams of material.

Keith

[running with scissors]

Charles Gray > wrote in message >...
> had actually put a U.S. style R&D system in place during WWII, and
> instead of coming up with (however pretty they look on paper) dozens
> of designs that never made it beyond wind tunnal designs and focused
> on say two or three fighter designs.
> For example, if they'd pushed through the first jet fighter design
> in 1940 (I forget what it was called), and focused on incremental
> improvmeents instead of always running to the next design.
>
> Would this have had a major impact on WWII, or just drawn it out by
> a few months?


what if the British Air Ministry had listened to Frank Whittle's
proposal for the jet engine when he presented it to them before 1932

[Alan Minyard]

On 17 Jan 2004 01:03:41 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

>>Houtermans and von Ardenne.
>>Not to mention that the German nuclear program was crippled severely by
>>the lack of heavy water, thanks to sabotage efforts of Thor Heyerdahl
>>(later famous for his Kon-Tiki raft showing the Egyptians could have
>>sailed to the Americas)
>
>1) In spite of Allied bombings and efforts or Norwegian resistance Germans
>transferred enough Heavy water to Germany over land route.
>2)In summer of 44 Germans started to use graffit moderation and heavy water
>moderation was put to back burner.
>3)They did not even need to use their heavy water stocks.

Yes, when you are incapable of achieving criticality duterium
is really not needed. By the way, there was no "land route"
from Norway to Germany available at the time.

Al Minyard

[Denyav]

>Yes, when you are incapable of achieving criticality duterium
>is really not needed. By the way, there was no "land route"
>from Norway to Germany available at the time.

Or when you use graphite for Moderation,The "Land route" in Deibners account
refers to the alternative route to the much publicized lake crossing with
ferry,not an open sea route.

[Alan Minyard]

On 17 Jan 2004 17:29:59 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

>>Yes, when you are incapable of achieving criticality duterium
>>is really not needed. By the way, there was no "land route"
>>from Norway to Germany available at the time.
>
>Or when you use graphite for Moderation,The "Land route" in Deibners account
>refers to the alternative route to the much publicized lake crossing with
>ferry,not an open sea route.

OK, I am aware of the ferry sinking. But the Germans were no where
near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
was inconsequential.

Al Minyard

[Denyav]

>But the Germans were no where
>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
>was inconsequential.

Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was in
Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki could
not be bombed anytime in 1945.
Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document that
were classified for 75 years?.

[tim gueguen]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >But the Germans were no where
> >near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
> >was inconsequential.
>
> Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them
was in
> Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
could
> not be bombed anytime in 1945.

And your basis for the latter claim is what exactly?

tim gueguen 101867

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>Date: 1/18/2004 10:31 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>But the Germans were no where
>>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
>>was inconsequential.
>
>Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was
>in
>Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
>could
>not be bombed anytime in 1945.
>Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
>div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document that
>were classified for 75 years?.
>

Where did you get that idea?

Are you suggesting the U.S. had not developed uranium and plutonium enrichment
facilities prior to May 1945?

Are you suggesting the U.S. had not built any form of reactor or pile prior to
May 1945?

The Little Boy bomb and Trinity were just waiting for uranium and plutonium
respectively.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >But the Germans were no where
> >near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
> >was inconsequential.
>
> Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them
was in
> Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
could
> not be bombed anytime in 1945.

Cite please

There are no references in the literature to any German reactor
ever reaching criticallity so please provide the evidence for ths
claim.

Keith

[robert arndt]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (Denyav)
> >Date: 1/18/2004 10:31 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >>But the Germans were no where
> >>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
> >>was inconsequential.
> >
> >Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was
> >in
> >Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
> >could
> >not be bombed anytime in 1945.
> >Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
> >div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document that
> >were classified for 75 years?.
> >
>
> Where did you get that idea?
>
> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not developed uranium and plutonium enrichment
> facilities prior to May 1945?
>
> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not built any form of reactor or pile prior to
> May 1945?
>
> The Little Boy bomb and Trinity were just waiting for uranium and plutonium
> respectively.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Captured German uranium was used in the construction of the US atomic
bombs, seized from the Belgian Congo stocks Germany possessed. Germany
also had seperate atomic research facilities, Haigerloch being only
one. Another was working on a spherical reactor for power project as
well as the two radiological weapons found under construction at the
end of the war. Although Germany did not build a bomb itself it did
technology transfer uranium to Japan's program in occupied Korea
(Japan's Genzai Bakudan bomb)... which we still have little
information about (classified).
Further still, Germany also knew about the possibilities of a
thermonuclear weapon in 1944 and nuclear power for submarines.
One can only wonder what would have happened if Hitler had not
persecuted the Jews nor regarded the German atomic research project as
"Jewish Physics" with little funding and no Fuhrer directive to build
such a weapon (Hitler was preoccupied with the wasteful V-weapons
programs). Had the SS Scientific Branch harnassed the mindpower and
manpower of Europe for an official German bomb project there is little
doubt the Germans would have had the bomb first and used it, probably
in 1944.
Say what you want, but both Germany's and Japan's wartime atomic
projects are still not complete as "sensitve material" is still
classified for both. What we are being fed is the same old stale
stories of "they were way behind and we succeded because of our fears
of a Nazi bomb" when all they really had was a small unorganized
research program and impure graphite.
That is just not accurate enough...but makes good official US history.

[Keith Willshaw]

"robert arndt" > wrote in message
om...
> (B2431) wrote in message
>...

>
> Captured German uranium was used in the construction of the US atomic
> bombs, seized from the Belgian Congo stocks Germany possessed.

Certainly that uranium was sent to the USA and likely was
incorporated into the stocks from which later weapons were built
BUT its highly unlikley that any of that material found its way into
the weapons dropped on Japan. The uranium used in the
Hiroshima bomb had been undergoing enrichment since 1944
and the plutonium in the Nagasaki bombs had been produced
in Hanford before the Belgian material even arrived in the USA


> Germany
> also had seperate atomic research facilities, Haigerloch being only
> one. Another was working on a spherical reactor for power project as
> well as the two radiological weapons found under construction at the
> end of the war. Although Germany did not build a bomb itself it did
> technology transfer uranium to Japan's program in occupied Korea
> (Japan's Genzai Bakudan bomb)... which we still have little
> information about (classified).

All they got was a little uranium. The Japanese had made little
progress towards building of a weapon but their
theory was rather better and they had managed to make
a number of cyclotrons for enrichment and built a thermal
diffusion separation plant.

The bottom line though is that neither Japan nor Germany had anything like
the industrial resources committed to bring such a program
to fruition and given the fragility of their wartime economies.

The reason that Britain chose to throw in its lot with the USA
was that it was recognised that the industrial resources required
to build the reactors , produce the plutonium, extract it and
turn it into working weapons was such that a timely development
was impossible. Even with the knowledged of how it was
done it took the USSR several years to duplicate these
efforts even with the absolute priority on Soviet resources
it had and with Beria wielding the whip with a will.


> Further still, Germany also knew about the possibilities of a
> thermonuclear weapon in 1944 and nuclear power for submarines.
> One can only wonder what would have happened if Hitler had not
> persecuted the Jews nor regarded the German atomic research project as
> "Jewish Physics" with little funding and no Fuhrer directive to build
> such a weapon (Hitler was preoccupied with the wasteful V-weapons
> programs). Had the SS Scientific Branch harnassed the mindpower and
> manpower of Europe for an official German bomb project there is little
> doubt the Germans would have had the bomb first and used it, probably
> in 1944.


If Hitler hadnt held the views he did there would likely
have been no war to start with.


> Say what you want, but both Germany's and Japan's wartime atomic
> projects are still not complete as "sensitve material" is still
> classified for both. What we are being fed is the same old stale
> stories of "they were way behind and we succeded because of our fears
> of a Nazi bomb" when all they really had was a small unorganized
> research program and impure graphite.
> That is just not accurate enough...but makes good official US history.


No its what the German physicists themselves and German records
say. Who else should we listen to if not men like Diebner, Heisenberg
etc.

David Irving is scarcely noted for his critical views with regard to
the 3rd Reich , and certainly doesnt produce history that fits the
official line. I suggest you read his book on the subject.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/VirusHouse/

Keith

[Alan Minyard]

On 19 Jan 2004 04:31:21 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

>>But the Germans were no where
>>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
>>was inconsequential.
>
>Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was in
>Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki could
>not be bombed anytime in 1945.
>Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
>div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document that
>were classified for 75 years?.

So the Germans built the A bombs that the US dropped on Japan???
That is an interesting (but stupid) statement. The Nazis never managed
to attain criticality.

Al Minyard

[Alan Minyard]

On 19 Jan 2004 05:04:50 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

(B2431) wrote in message >...
>> >From: (Denyav)
>> >Date: 1/18/2004 10:31 PM Central Standard Time
>> >Message-id: >
>> >
>> >>But the Germans were no where
>> >>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
>> >>was inconsequential.
>> >
>> >Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was
>> >in
>> >Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
>> >could
>> >not be bombed anytime in 1945.
>> >Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
>> >div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document that
>> >were classified for 75 years?.
>> >
>>
>> Where did you get that idea?
>>
>> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not developed uranium and plutonium enrichment
>> facilities prior to May 1945?
>>
>> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not built any form of reactor or pile prior to
>> May 1945?
>>
>> The Little Boy bomb and Trinity were just waiting for uranium and plutonium
>> respectively.
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>Captured German uranium was used in the construction of the US atomic
>bombs, seized from the Belgian Congo stocks Germany possessed. Germany
>also had seperate atomic research facilities, Haigerloch being only
>one. Another was working on a spherical reactor for power project as
>well as the two radiological weapons found under construction at the
>end of the war. Although Germany did not build a bomb itself it did
>technology transfer uranium to Japan's program in occupied Korea
>(Japan's Genzai Bakudan bomb)... which we still have little
>information about (classified).
>Further still, Germany also knew about the possibilities of a
>thermonuclear weapon in 1944 and nuclear power for submarines.
>One can only wonder what would have happened if Hitler had not
>persecuted the Jews nor regarded the German atomic research project as
>"Jewish Physics" with little funding and no Fuhrer directive to build
>such a weapon (Hitler was preoccupied with the wasteful V-weapons
>programs). Had the SS Scientific Branch harnassed the mindpower and
>manpower of Europe for an official German bomb project there is little
>doubt the Germans would have had the bomb first and used it, probably
>in 1944.
>Say what you want, but both Germany's and Japan's wartime atomic
>projects are still not complete as "sensitve material" is still
>classified for both. What we are being fed is the same old stale
>stories of "they were way behind and we succeded because of our fears
>of a Nazi bomb" when all they really had was a small unorganized
>research program and impure graphite.
>That is just not accurate enough...but makes good official US history.

None, rpt none, of the yellow cake captured from Germany was used
in the US nuclear program. As for "radiological weapons" that is
a complete lie. Without an operating reactor you are not going to
build "radiological" weapons. Germany was nowhere near building
a reactor, much less a bomb. Japan was no closer.

Der Fuhrer is dead, get over it.

Al Minyard

[Keith Willshaw]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
> On 19 Jan 2004 05:04:50 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:
>

>
> None, rpt none, of the yellow cake captured from Germany was used
> in the US nuclear program. As for "radiological weapons" that is
> a complete lie. Without an operating reactor you are not going to
> build "radiological" weapons. Germany was nowhere near building
> a reactor, much less a bomb. Japan was no closer.
>
> Der Fuhrer is dead, get over it.
>
> Al Minyard

While sympathising with the general tenor of your argument
and agreeing that none of the Uranium found its way into
the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs its is known that it
was added to DOD stocks and likely did indeed up in later weapons.

Keith

[B2431]

>From: (robert arndt)

>
(B2431) wrote in message

>> >From: (Denyav)

>> >
>> >>But the Germans were no where
>> >>near building a reactor, much less a bomb. Thus the choice of moderator
>> >>was inconsequential.
>> >
>> >Germans had not one but two graphite moderated reactors and one of them was
in Thuringer Forest,if Germans had no working reactor Hirosima and Nagazaki
could not be bombed anytime in 1945.
>> >Did you ever wonder why the entries made to log book of 89.th Infantry
>> >div.between 4;8. 45 1,35 PM and 4.11.45 7,35 PM are also among document
that were classified for 75 years?.
>>
>> Where did you get that idea?
>>
>> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not developed uranium and plutonium
>enrichment facilities prior to May 1945?
>>
>> Are you suggesting the U.S. had not built any form of reactor or pile prior
>to May 1945?
>>
>> The Little Boy bomb and Trinity were just waiting for uranium and plutonium
>> respectively.
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>Captured German uranium was used in the construction of the US atomic
>bombs, seized from the Belgian Congo stocks Germany possessed. Germany
>also had seperate atomic research facilities, Haigerloch being only
>one. Another was working on a spherical reactor for power project as
>well as the two radiological weapons found under construction at the
>end of the war. Although Germany did not build a bomb itself it did
>technology transfer uranium to Japan's program in occupied Korea
>(Japan's Genzai Bakudan bomb)... which we still have little
>information about (classified).
>Further still, Germany also knew about the possibilities of a
>thermonuclear weapon in 1944 and nuclear power for submarines.
>One can only wonder what would have happened if Hitler had not
>persecuted the Jews nor regarded the German atomic research project as
>"Jewish Physics" with little funding and no Fuhrer directive to build
>such a weapon (Hitler was preoccupied with the wasteful V-weapons
>programs). Had the SS Scientific Branch harnassed the mindpower and
>manpower of Europe for an official German bomb project there is little
>doubt the Germans would have had the bomb first and used it, probably
>in 1944.
>Say what you want, but both Germany's and Japan's wartime atomic
>projects are still not complete as "sensitve material" is still
>classified for both. What we are being fed is the same old stale
>stories of "they were way behind and we succeded because of our fears
>of a Nazi bomb" when all they really had was a small unorganized
>research program and impure graphite.
>That is just not accurate enough...but makes good official US history.
>
The Manhattan team also had theories about nuclear power and thermonuclear
devices.

I know you have managed to convince yourself the Nazis, especially your beloved
SS, were the source of all modern technology but ask yourself why you feel the
need to constantly refer to classified documents that only you know the
contents of.

As for uranium the U.S. did capture a U-boat that contained either uranium
oxide or enriched uranium depending on whom you believe. Big deal. The U.S. had
ample uranium supplies and had been enriching uranium for at least a year. Your
Nazi buddies had no enrichment facilities aproaching the scale of Hanford and
Oak Ridge. If the captured Nazi uranium was used in the Little Boy bomb you
can't prove it.

As for your contention the SS pigs would have been able to produce a bomb by
1944 you need to provide some evidence. The Nazis did have the "mindpower" they
just never had the massive funding and man power Manhattan had. Had the pigs
put as much money into the bomb project as the U.S. did I would venture to say
Germany would have been bankrupt by 1942 and probably been defeated or forced
to sue for peace. There is now way the could have funded the war and the bomb
at the same time.

I believe the Nazi atom scientists were in thoroughly bugged quarters in
England at the time the bombs were dropped. They were shocked at how far off
they were in their estimations. They knew how far behind the curve they were.

I'm sorry your faith in the Nazi pigs is so blind that you have to rely on
mysterious classified documents to back up your claims. I put that in the same
dustbin I put the captured UFO garbage. What will you do when those mysterious
classified documents are declassified and they don't back you up? Did it ever
occur to you those documents may be classified simply to protect sources and
methods?

Question, do you celebrate Hitler's bithday by chanting "six million more?"

Dan, U. Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: (robert arndt)

>
> I believe the Nazi atom scientists were in thoroughly bugged quarters in
> England at the time the bombs were dropped. They were shocked at how far
off
> they were in their estimations. They knew how far behind the curve they
were.
>

Perfectly true, their reaction to the news of the Hiroshima
bomb was initially disbelief. They firmly believed they
were in the lead and since they 'knew' a bomb was years
away there was no way the western allies could have done this.

Keith

[Denyav]

>None, rpt none, of the yellow cake captured from Germany was used
>in the US nuclear program. As for "radiological weapons" that is
>a complete lie. Without an operating reactor you are not going to
>build "radiological" weapons. Germany was nowhere near

Actually Germans even tested a Nuclear Bomb,but the name "neutron bomb" has
been invented much later.

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>Date: 1/19/2004 10:42 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>None, rpt none, of the yellow cake captured from Germany was used
>>in the US nuclear program. As for "radiological weapons" that is
>>a complete lie. Without an operating reactor you are not going to
>>build "radiological" weapons. Germany was nowhere near
>
>Actually Germans even tested a Nuclear Bomb,but the name "neutron bomb" has
>been invented much later.
>
Prove it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Denyav]

>I know you have managed to convince yourself the Nazis, especially your
>beloved
>SS, were the source of all modern technology but ask yourself why you feel
>the
>need to constantly refer to classified documents that only you know the

The favorite SS man of US,USSR,Germany and Israel seems to be Hans Kammler,co
architect of final solution and killer of tens of thousands of forced laborers.
THis top Nazi has not been charged with anything up to now and his name only
once appeared in allied documents (by mistake I guess)

>As for uranium the U.S. did capture a U-boat that contained either uranium
>oxide or enriched uranium depending on whom you believe. Big deal. The U.S.
>had
>ample uranium supplies and had been enriching uranium for at least a year.
>Your

At the beginning of april 45 Manhattan project was going nowhere,within two
weeks everything suddenly changed.
>Nazi buddies had no enrichment facilities aproaching the scale of Hanford and
>Oak Ridge. If the captured Nazi uranium was used in the Little Boy bomb you
>can't prove it.
>
German centrifuge technology was decades ahead of the rest of the world in
45,so the energy guzzling plants like Hanford and Oak Ridge were already
obsolete in 1945,moreover because of their energy saving centrifuge technology
Germans did not need big energy supporters like TVA.
Little Boy did not only use German uranium it was a bomb "Assembled in USA from
German components"

>As for your contention the SS pigs would have been able to produce a bomb by
>1944 you need to provide some evidence. The Nazis did have the "mindpower"
>they

#1 SS pig was undoubletely Hans Kammler but he is only top Nazi that has not
been charged anything up to now.
He was responsible for german S weapon development and he was co-architect of
final solution.
I am pretty sure he went to US,instead of gallows.

>Had the pigs
>put as much money into the bomb project as the U.S. did I would venture to
>say
>Germany would have been bankrupt by 1942 and probably been defeated or forced
>to sue for peace. There is now way the could have funded the war and the bomb

US had to select wrong technology to produce nuclear for a reason,US was a
backward country as far as centrifuge technology concerned,problems in
development gas centrufuges in US continued even after post WWII so in fifties
US research instutitions launched a campaign to bring Dr.Zippe,developer of
German and later Soviet centrifuges to US.
Serious US centrifuge development startted with the arrival of Dr.Zippe.
He is generaly considered as the father of centrifuge development in both
Germany,Soviet Union and US (in historical order)

>you up? Did it ever
>occur to you those documents may be classified simply to protect sources and
>methods?
>
Maybe but more likely to avoid loyalty and patent fees.

[Denyav]

>Perfectly true, their reaction to the news of the Hiroshima
>bomb was initially disbelief. They firmly believed they
>were in the lead and since they 'knew' a bomb was years
>away there was no way the western allies could have done this.

Farm Hall was a well the part of misinformation campaign of the victors.

First message they want convey was "German Scientist were unable to calculate
critical mass"
But they had a problem namely according Wehrmact documents a Wehrmact physicist
(Deibner)calculated critical mass exactly and reported it to Wehrmact in
Feb.42.
So apparently German scientists forgat in Farm Hall what they knew in Feb42!!.
So this misinformation campaign collapsed but another one launched to replace
it namely "Good German scientists (Heisenberg)sabotaged evil Nazis nuclear bomb
making plans"
This could be good starting point for a Hollywood movie but licht years away
from the reality.Heisenberg could not sabotage anything because he was wrong in
41 as he was in 45.
Only key person in German nuclear program who might have a reason to sabotage
program was Houtermans but his background was very well known,anything less
than success would mean sure death for Houtermans and probably for his family.

BTW according to pre Farm Hall planning,only two of Farm Hall Guests supposed
to leave Farm Hall as free man.,but none of them got jailed.
Food for thought.

[Denyav]

>Further still, Germany also knew about the possibilities of a
>thermonuclear weapon in 1944 and nuclear power for submarines.
>One can only wonder what would have happened if Hitler had not
>persecuted the Jews nor regarded

Nazis looked down Einsteinian general relativitivity as Jewish science,but on
other hand they considered QM as an Aryan science and supported it pretty well.
Nazis attitude towards Jewish physics started to change after Hahn and Meissner

splitted atom mainly due efforts of Ohrensorge,who was a true believer of
nuclear power both in military and civilian uses and more importantly,could
speak directly to Hitler.

[Denyav]

>No its what the German physicists themselves and German records
>say. Who else should we listen to if not men like Diebner, Heisenberg
>etc.

All Farm Hall transcripts are edited,even in no portion of edited and
carefully selected transcripts you cannot find anything that suggests that
Deibner is unaware of A-Bomb.
Only conclusion you can draw from transcripts that the relationship between
Heisenberg and Diebner must be terrible,they probably hated each other.

Who else should you listen other than Deibner ?for example other fathers of
German bomb von Ardenne and Houtermans? But they had unfortunately no time to
participate in PR efforts of western allies,they were building the Soviet
Bomb.
Or you might want to check Daily Mail dated 8.9.45

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...

>
> #1 SS pig was undoubletely Hans Kammler but he is only top Nazi that has
not
> been charged anything up to now.

He was never found , its hard to try a prisoner you dont have.

<snip>
>
> US had to select wrong technology to produce nuclear for a reason,US was a
> backward country as far as centrifuge technology concerned,problems in
> development gas centrufuges in US continued even after post WWII so in
fifties

As they did in all countries, Urenco a joint Dutch, German and UK firm
only perfected the technology in the 1960's

Prior to that everyone used a combination of diffusion and
cyclotron technologies

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Perfectly true, their reaction to the news of the Hiroshima
> >bomb was initially disbelief. They firmly believed they
> >were in the lead and since they 'knew' a bomb was years
> >away there was no way the western allies could have done this.
>
> Farm Hall was a well the part of misinformation campaign of the victors.
>
> First message they want convey was "German Scientist were unable to
calculate
> critical mass"
> But they had a problem namely according Wehrmact documents a Wehrmact
physicist
> (Deibner)calculated critical mass exactly and reported it to Wehrmact in
> Feb.42.

No he guessed rather inaccurately that it was between 10 and 100 kg


> So apparently German scientists forgat in Farm Hall what they knew in
Feb42!!.
> So this misinformation campaign collapsed but another one launched to
replace
> it namely "Good German scientists (Heisenberg)sabotaged evil Nazis nuclear
bomb
> making plans"

That may be Heisenberg's motivation

> This could be good starting point for a Hollywood movie but licht years
away
> from the reality.Heisenberg could not sabotage anything because he was
wrong in
> 41 as he was in 45.
> Only key person in German nuclear program who might have a reason to
sabotage
> program was Houtermans but his background was very well known,anything
less
> than success would mean sure death for Houtermans and probably for his
family.
>

Houtermans was scarcely a key player, he was in an industrial
lan for most of the war

> BTW according to pre Farm Hall planning,only two of Farm Hall Guests
supposed
> to leave Farm Hall as free man.,but none of them got jailed.
> Food for thought.

Many German were interned after the war, few were charged and most released.

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >No its what the German physicists themselves and German records
> >say. Who else should we listen to if not men like Diebner, Heisenberg
> >etc.
>
> All Farm Hall transcripts are edited,even in no portion of edited and
> carefully selected transcripts you cannot find anything that suggests that
> Deibner is unaware of A-Bomb.
> Only conclusion you can draw from transcripts that the relationship
between
> Heisenberg and Diebner must be terrible,they probably hated each other.
>

They did, a result of the competition for resources

> Who else should you listen other than Deibner ?

No one , he is clear that Germany was never even close to developing
a nuclear weapon.

> for example other fathers of
> German bomb von Ardenne and Houtermans?

Nope, there was no bomb.

> But they had unfortunately no time to
> participate in PR efforts of western allies,they were building the Soviet
> Bomb.

Using information from Los Alamos

> Or you might want to check Daily Mail dated 8.9.45

I doubt it.

Keith

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>
>
>>Perfectly true, their reaction to the news of the Hiroshima
>>bomb was initially disbelief. They firmly believed they
>>were in the lead and since they 'knew' a bomb was years
>>away there was no way the western allies could have done this.
>
>Farm Hall was a well the part of misinformation campaign of the victors.
>
>First message they want convey was "German Scientist were unable to calculate
>critical mass"
>But they had a problem namely according Wehrmact documents a Wehrmact
>physicist
> (Deibner)calculated critical mass exactly and reported it to Wehrmact in
>Feb.42.
>So apparently German scientists forgat in Farm Hall what they knew in
>Feb42!!.
>So this misinformation campaign collapsed but another one launched to replace
>it namely "Good German scientists (Heisenberg)sabotaged evil Nazis nuclear
>bomb
>making plans"
>This could be good starting point for a Hollywood movie but licht years away
>from the reality.Heisenberg could not sabotage anything because he was wrong
>in
>41 as he was in 45.
>Only key person in German nuclear program who might have a reason to sabotage
>program was Houtermans but his background was very well known,anything less
>than success would mean sure death for Houtermans and probably for his
>family.
>
>BTW according to pre Farm Hall planning,only two of Farm Hall Guests supposed
>to leave Farm Hall as free man.,but none of them got jailed.
>Food for thought.
>

OK, good theory, a bit flawed here and there, but a good theory. Now prove it.
While you are at it prove your assertion the swine tested an a-bomb. Where was
it tested? What was its yield? Why did they not make a second one?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Denyav]

>He was never found , its hard to try a prisoner you dont have.

Nobody has ever made an attempt find him or launched an investigation to find
out his whereabouts at the first place.
Dare to compare this with the efforts to catch very low key Nazi criminals like
simple concentration camp guards.
Even his name appeared only once in allied documents.

>As they did in all countries, Urenco a joint Dutch, German and UK firm
>only perfected the technology in the 1960's
>
>Prior to that everyone used a combination of diffusion and
>cyclotron technologies

Almost all German centrifuge experts together with the most of intact equipment
of Skoda,Degussa and Auer companies were transferred to soviet union,thats the
reason why Soviet Union became suddenly world leader in centrifuge technology
after WWII,while centrifuge development elsewhere stalled.
In western world serious centrifuge develepment started to accelerate only in
mid mid to late fifties when Germans started to leave Soviet Union with their
wealth of experience.

[Denyav]

>No he guessed rather inaccurately that it was between 10 and 100 kg

Actually he calculated the exact amount used in Hirosima bomb.
Actually I recommend to anyone to check out all released (vast majority of them
are not released) Farm Hall transcripts,You will be surprised to see the level
of their knowledge about ignition mechanism used in Hirosima bomb.
A very bad editing job of CSDIC officials.

>That may be Heisenberg's motivation
Or his assigned post WWII role.

>Houtermans was scarcely a key player, he was in an industrial
>lan for most of the war

Houtermans was the developer of German and soviet plutonium bomb.

[Denyav]

>They did, a result of the competition for resources

More likely ideological,Deibner was a hard liner,Heisenberg not.

>No one , he is clear that Germany was never even close to developing
>a nuclear weapon.

Really,then go to your local library and check out Washington Post dated
10.9.45 ,apparently days right after VE day were more open society type days
than we have today.
What does "close" mean?,they have even tested it.(and killed thousands of
German citizens,slave laborers etc).


>Nope, there was no bomb.
>

There were two partially complete bombs AND they both were used.

>Using information from Los Alamos

But US and USSR designs were very similar not surprisingly because they were
designed by the same Germans,but some had to die for a cover up story.
Without occupation of Germany Manhattan Project would be one of biggest and
most expensive failures in the human history.

>I doubt it.
Then check out WP referred above.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >He was never found , its hard to try a prisoner you dont have.
>
> Nobody has ever made an attempt find him or launched an investigation to
find
> out his whereabouts at the first place.
> Dare to compare this with the efforts to catch very low key Nazi criminals
like
> simple concentration camp guards.
> Even his name appeared only once in allied documents.
>

Bull****

A quick google search will turn up dozens of references to him


His name appears no less than 6 times in the opening statements
of prosecuting counsel at the Nuremburg trial where it was made
clear that he was high on the list of criminals being sought for
prosection.

Walter Dornberger who loathed Kammler reported that Kammler had ordered
his adjutant to shoot him so as not to fall into Russian hands.
Its is known for certain that he was NOT anongst the group
that surrendered to the Americans.

> >As they did in all countries, Urenco a joint Dutch, German and UK firm
> >only perfected the technology in the 1960's
> >
> >Prior to that everyone used a combination of diffusion and
> >cyclotron technologies
>
> Almost all German centrifuge experts together with the most of intact
equipment
> of Skoda,Degussa and Auer companies were transferred to soviet union,thats
the
> reason why Soviet Union became suddenly world leader in centrifuge
technology
> after WWII,while centrifuge development elsewhere stalled.

Crap !

The first Soviet enrichment plant (unit D-1) was a gaseous diffusion plant,
building began in 1946 and the plant went on line in 1948. Three newer and
larger gaseous diffusion plants - D-3, D-4 and D-5 - were brought into
operation by 1953

The first Soviet centrifuge plant was built at Sverdlovsk-44 in 3 stages
between
1962 and 1964 and the Gaseous Diffusion plants remained in production
well into the 70's

> In western world serious centrifuge develepment started to accelerate only
in
> mid mid to late fifties when Germans started to leave Soviet Union with
their
> wealth of experience.
>

Which would make it 10 years before it happened in the USSR.

This is of course another of your fairy tales. The simple reality
is that serious post war development started in 1964 in West Germany
with the founding of a state owned company called
"Gesellschaft fuer Kernverfahrenstechnik" (GKT) at Juelich.


On March 1, 1970 the company was privatised. After several
changes in the 70's, Hoechst AG (25 %), RWE (37.5 %) and
PreussenElektra (Veba, 37.5 %) became shareholders of the
newly founded Uranit GmbH.

On March 4, 1970, Germany, The Netherlands and the United
Kingdom signed the "Treaty of Almelo" for the development
and industrial exploitation of centrifuge technology to enrich uranium.

In 1971, the three industrial partners: British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL),
Ultra-Centrifuge Nederland N.V. (UCN) and Uranit GmbH founded
the jointly-owned Urenco Ltd in Marlow to market their enrichment services.

It was Urenco that jointly developed centrifuge technology to industrial
maturity during the mid-1970's. The first uranium enrichment plants were
built at Almelo in the Netherlands and at Capenhurst in the United Kingdom.

The German uranium enrichment plant at Gronau went into operation in 1985.

Stop making stuff up Denyav.


Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >No he guessed rather inaccurately that it was between 10 and 100 kg
>
> Actually he calculated the exact amount used in Hirosima bomb.
> Actually I recommend to anyone to check out all released (vast majority of
them
> are not released) Farm Hall transcripts,You will be surprised to see the
level
> of their knowledge about ignition mechanism used in Hirosima bomb.
> A very bad editing job of CSDIC officials.
>

Bull**** Denyav

The unedited Farm Hall Transcripts are available for around
$35

Operation Epsilon : The Farm Hall Transcripts, with an introduction
by Sir Charles Frank (Bristol and Philadelphia: Institute of Physics
Publishing; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993).


> >That may be Heisenberg's motivation
> Or his assigned post WWII role.
>

His post war role was the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute
for Physics in Gottingen

> >Houtermans was scarcely a key player, he was in an industrial
> >lan for most of the war
>
> Houtermans was the developer of German and soviet plutonium bomb.

That he was not

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >They did, a result of the competition for resources
>
> More likely ideological,Deibner was a hard liner,Heisenberg not.
>
> >No one , he is clear that Germany was never even close to developing
> >a nuclear weapon.
>
> Really,then go to your local library and check out Washington Post dated
> 10.9.45 ,apparently days right after VE day were more open society type
days
> than we have today.
> What does "close" mean?,they have even tested it.(and killed thousands of
> German citizens,slave laborers etc).
>
>
> >Nope, there was no bomb.
> >
>
> There were two partially complete bombs AND they both were used.
>
> >Using information from Los Alamos
>
> But US and USSR designs were very similar not surprisingly because they
were
> designed by the same Germans,but some had to die for a cover up story.

They are the same because Klaus Fuchs sent the designs to Moscow
via the Rosenbergs.

A cover up would require the active co-operation of

1) The Entire Los Alamos team
2) The entire German Nuclear development team
3) The entire Soviet team
4) The entire British Nuclear team
5) The German leaders tried at Nuremburg including
Hermann Goering
6) Joseph Stalin
7) Harry Truman
8) Winston Churchill
9) Nihls Bohr
10) Klaus Fuchs
11) Nikita Khruschev
12) Lavrenti Beria
13) Academician Ivan Kurchatov
14) Andrei Sakharov (a famous dissident)

Thats enough to be going on with I think

> Without occupation of Germany Manhattan Project would be one of biggest
and
> most expensive failures in the human history.

Newspapers arent the best source of history, especially in war time
when they are heavily censored and have little real data to publish

Keith

[Denyav]

>Bull**** Denyav
>
>The unedited Farm Hall Transcripts are available for around
>$

There is NO unedited Farm Hall,transcripts .
Would you please explain for what CSDIC stands for?
Farm hall "guests" were actually prisoners without any rights.
Even if you read "edited" Farm Hall documents carefully you will be amazed to
see that German scients were pretty informed about ignition mechanism of Little
Boy as if they designed it.


>> Houtermans was the developer of German and soviet plutonium bomb.
>
>That he was not

He was the master of plutonium bomb development,and he is the Communist German
citizen that His Majesty's goverment risked a confrontation with Stalin just
before WWII for his safe return to Nazi Germany from stalins prison.
Why British gov't intervened for a German citizen jailed in Stalins' Soviet
Union?
Any Ideas?

[Denyav]

>They are the same because Klaus Fuchs sent the designs to Moscow
>via the Rosenbergs.
>
>A cover up would require the active co-operation of

Well,Keith, Moscow got plans in 1942 and they did not come from Los Alamos,they
came from LONDON.
Interestingly in feb.42 Deibners report was submitted to Wehrmact and German
scientists trying to persude Wehrmacht to give them 18 months not 9 months.

>A cover up would require the active co-operation of
>
>1) The Entire Los Alamos team

All big shots of Los Alamos team were in Jonastal area on 4.7.45.
Some of them later said that first bombs were of German origin and lost
everything(Oppenheimer)

>2) The entire German Nuclear development team
All key players of German team,Deibner,von Ardenne and Houtermans lived in Iron
Curtain Countries and continued to work for Soviet Union and GDR.
After Hirosima bomb exploded Stalin called Beria and unmistakenly asked him to
use "his Germans" and their knowledge for tthe building of the soviet bomb.
Beria called a meeting with top soviet and German nuclear scientists and gave
the job of building soviet bomb to von Ardenne.
(Because NKVD boss was aware of the origins of bomb and its creator)
von Ardenne,for the reasons I gave in previous posted persuaded Beria that a
soviet led bomb effort would be the best choice,so soviet scientists got the
leading role.

>3) The entire Soviet team
Virtually Impossible with Soviet System,NKVD/KGB was responsible for the
information gathering and all important information went thru Berias
desk,technicaly very important but very complicated for the average NKVD man
type info,like nuclear bomb plans from 1942 could never reach the experts,even
if they allowed experts to see info,tthey made sure they could not get clues
about sources.

>4) The entire British Nuclear team

This is the key of whole A-bomb making story

>5) The German leaders tried at Nuremburg including
>Hermann Goering
Only three of German leaders might have known it Hitler,Bormann and Himmler.
Like their CEO of advanced weapons development,Kammler, none of then has been
tried.period.

>6) Joseph Stalin

I am pretty sure he knew,otherwise he would not give orders to Beria to appoint
Germans to develop soviet bomb.
>Newspapers arent the best source of history, especially in war time
>when they are heavily censored and have little real data to publish
>

But officials tasked with spreading mis or disinformation are?(or as You said
before officialls tell us what they told to tell us?)

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Bull**** Denyav
> >
> >The unedited Farm Hall Transcripts are available for around
> >$
>
> There is NO unedited Farm Hall,transcripts .

Yes there are, go an buy a copy or access the originals which have
been declassified and are available from the PRO or the US
under the freedom of information act.

The reference is
National Archives II, College Park, Maryland, in Record Group 77, Manhattan
Engineer District.

This is the copy sent to General Groves in 1945

> Would you please explain for what CSDIC stands for?

Combined Services Detailed Interrogation Centre


> Farm hall "guests" were actually prisoners without any rights.

Quite so

> Even if you read "edited" Farm Hall documents carefully you will be amazed
to
> see that German scients were pretty informed about ignition mechanism of
Little
> Boy as if they designed it.
>

What ignition components ?

>
> >> Houtermans was the developer of German and soviet plutonium bomb.
> >
> >That he was not
>
> He was the master of plutonium bomb development,and he is the Communist
German
> citizen that His Majesty's goverment risked a confrontation with Stalin
just
> before WWII for his safe return to Nazi Germany from stalins prison.


No he was antifacist German who moved to the Ukraine and as thrown in
prison in 1937.

He was returned to Nazi Germany in 1940 as part of the deal between
Stalin and Hitler. There was no intervention from HMG

> Why British gov't intervened for a German citizen jailed in Stalins'
Soviet
> Union?

They didnt

> Any Ideas?
>

Yes - you are clueless

Houtermans being fully aware of what the Soviets were like
did NOT go to the USSR after the war , he taught alongside
Heisenberg at Gottingen until 1952 after which he moved to Berne

Keith

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)

>
>>They are the same because Klaus Fuchs sent the designs to Moscow
>>via the Rosenbergs.
>>
>>A cover up would require the active co-operation of
>
>Well,Keith, Moscow got plans in 1942 and they did not come from Los
>Alamos,they
>came from LONDON.
>Interestingly in feb.42 Deibners report was submitted to Wehrmact and German
>scientists trying to persude Wehrmacht to give them 18 months not 9 months.
>
Hey, genius, the general "plans" for atom bombs had been around since the
1930s. The devil was in the details.

>>A cover up would require the active co-operation of
>>
>>1) The Entire Los Alamos team
>
>All big shots of Los Alamos team were in Jonastal area on 4.7.45.
>Some of them later said that first bombs were of German origin and lost
>everything(Oppenheimer)
>
Cite please?

>>2) The entire German Nuclear development team All key players of German
team,Deibner,von Ardenne and Houtermans lived in Iron Curtain Countries and
continued to work for Soviet Union and GDR.
>After Hirosima bomb exploded Stalin called Beria and unmistakenly asked him
>to use "his Germans" and their knowledge for tthe building of the soviet bomb.

So?
>
>>3) The entire Soviet team
>Virtually Impossible with Soviet System,NKVD/KGB was responsible for the
>information gathering and all important information went thru Berias
>desk,technicaly very important but very complicated for the average NKVD man
>type info,like nuclear bomb plans from 1942 could never reach the
>experts,even
>if they allowed experts to see info,tthey made sure they could not get clues
>about sources.
>
>>4) The entire British Nuclear team
>
>This is the key of whole A-bomb making story
>
>>5) The German leaders tried at Nuremburg including
>>Hermann Goering
>Only three of German leaders might have known it Hitler,Bormann and Himmler.
>Like their CEO of advanced weapons development,Kammler, none of then has been
>tried.period.

Hitler and Himmler suicided and Bormann was killed excaping from the bunker.
How convenient. They must have been part ofthe cover up.
>
>>6) Joseph Stalin
>
>I am pretty sure he knew,otherwise he would not give orders to Beria to
>appoint
>Germans to develop soviet bomb.
>>Newspapers arent the best source of history, especially in war time
>>when they are heavily censored and have little real data to publish
>>
>
>But officials tasked with spreading mis or disinformation are?(or as You said
>before officialls tell us what they told to tell us?)
>
Despite several requests you have yet to prove your contention the Nazis had
built and tested an atomic bomb and had built a second. You have yet to explain
how 3 bombs at the time of the fall of the Nazi sewage pit were successfully
detonated a few months later when they had weapons grade fuel.

When can we expect you to tell us about the yield of the tested Nazi atom bomb,
the date of the test, the location of the test and why the second one was never
used? You have been throwing out wild claims and have yet to back any of them
up.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)

>
>>Bull**** Denyav
>>
>>The unedited Farm Hall Transcripts are available for around
>>$
>
>There is NO unedited Farm Hall,transcripts .
>Would you please explain for what CSDIC stands for?
>Farm hall "guests" were actually prisoners without any rights.
>Even if you read "edited" Farm Hall documents carefully you will be amazed to
>see that German scients were pretty informed about ignition mechanism of
>Little
>Boy as if they designed it.
>
>

No fooling? The principles of gun type bombs were developed prior to WW2. Any
competent physicist with an interest in atomic bombs knew that.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >They are the same because Klaus Fuchs sent the designs to Moscow
> >via the Rosenbergs.
> >
> >A cover up would require the active co-operation of
>
> Well,Keith, Moscow got plans in 1942 and they did not come from Los
Alamos,they
> came from LONDON.

Make your mind up old boy.

Was the bomb a German invention or a British one ?

> Interestingly in feb.42 Deibners report was submitted to Wehrmact and
German
> scientists trying to persude Wehrmacht to give them 18 months not 9
months.
>

Cite please

The army ordnance report prepared after the conference gives
no time line and warns

" the plutonium alternative could only be tested once we have a
functioning atomic pile and that at present they knew
neither the concentration in which plutonium would be produced
nor its properties in sufficient detail to make any definite
predictions."

see
(NARS microfilm T-175, roll 125).

> >A cover up would require the active co-operation of
> >
> >1) The Entire Los Alamos team
>
> All big shots of Los Alamos team were in Jonastal area on 4.7.45.
> Some of them later said that first bombs were of German origin and lost
> everything(Oppenheimer)
>

Thats incorrect

We know Oppenheimer was in Los Alamos overseeing the
critical implosion tests at the time.



> >2) The entire German Nuclear development team
> All key players of German team,Deibner,von Ardenne and Houtermans lived in
Iron
> Curtain Countries and continued to work for Soviet Union and GDR.

No sir its a matter of public record that Houtermans lived
and worked in Gottingen from 1946 to 1952 and Berne
after 1952

> After Hirosima bomb exploded Stalin called Beria and unmistakenly asked
him to
> use "his Germans" and their knowledge for tthe building of the soviet
bomb.
> Beria called a meeting with top soviet and German nuclear scientists and
gave
> the job of building soviet bomb to von Ardenne.

No sir that job was give to Academician Ivan Kurchatov
Von Ardenne was a high ranking employee but the Soviets
were not about to trust any Germans in 1945 and Beria
trusted nobody.

In any event Kurchatov had been running the Soviet nuclear
project since 1942

See
Stalin's Captive; Nikolaus Riehl and the Soviet Race for the Bomb, by N.
Riehl and F. Seitz, American Chemical Society and Chemical Heritage
Foundation, Washington, DC, 1996


> (Because NKVD boss was aware of the origins of bomb and its creator)
> von Ardenne,for the reasons I gave in previous posted persuaded Beria that
a
> soviet led bomb effort would be the best choice,so soviet scientists got
the
> leading role.
>

Beria wouldnt know a good physicist if he tripped over his corpse,
which with Beria was highly likely.

> >3) The entire Soviet team
> Virtually Impossible with Soviet System,NKVD/KGB was responsible for the
> information gathering and all important information went thru Berias
> desk,technicaly very important but very complicated for the average NKVD
man
> type info,like nuclear bomb plans from 1942 could never reach the
experts,even
> if they allowed experts to see info,tthey made sure they could not get
clues
> about sources.
>

They got the data , Kurchatov was briefed on the plutonium bomb
in July 1945 based on information passed from Klaus Fuchs routed
via Harry Gold

> >4) The entire British Nuclear team
>
> This is the key of whole A-bomb making story
>

In your eye perhaps

> >5) The German leaders tried at Nuremburg including
> >Hermann Goering
> Only three of German leaders might have known it Hitler,Bormann and
Himmler.
> Like their CEO of advanced weapons development,Kammler, none of then has
been
> tried.period.
>
> >6) Joseph Stalin
>
> I am pretty sure he knew,otherwise he would not give orders to Beria to
appoint
> Germans to develop soviet bomb.

In fact Stalin gave that job to Molotov who consulted Kaftonov, in charge of
keeping
tabs on science for the State Defense Committee and Ioffe and selected
Kurchatov in 1942

Kurchatov set up the new program and was passed information about
Fermi's reactor in Chicago (by the NKVD) . By 1944 he had
a 100 physicists in his team (more than the Germans) but was frustrated
by the low priority he was getting compared to the US effort and
taking an enormous risk went over Molotov's head and wrote to Beria

"Some 3,000 pages of new intelligence materials show the enormous
effort abroad. Might you offer some suggestions for our work corresponding
to our great state?"

even then the program was a low level one until the Hiroshima
bomb was dropped and everone realised the true power
of Nuclear weapons.

At this point Kurchatov was summoned before Stalin himself
who said

"Comrades. Make us atom bombs quickly. Ask anything you need.
If a child doesn't cry, his mother doesn't know what he wants."
He also told Kurchatov to push ahead "with a Russian scale."

> >Newspapers arent the best source of history, especially in war time
> >when they are heavily censored and have little real data to publish
> >
>
> But officials tasked with spreading mis or disinformation are?(or as You
said
> before officialls tell us what they told to tell us?)
>

And the people that were there later tell us what really happened
which thet have in the 60 years since those events transpired.

A blind faith that only German can invent stuff doesnt make
it so.

Keith

[Denyav]

>Bull****
>
>A quick google search will turn up dozens of references to him

Sure,my posts or your posts about Kammler will also show up in Google too,but
it does not mean that we are making an attempt to find him,we are not US,German
or Israeli governments,Nick Cooks book will also appear in Google in connection
with Kammler,guess what why?

>His name appears no less than 6 times in the opening statements
>of prosecuting counsel at the

Only once in connection with Speer prosecution.

>Nuremburg trial where it was made
>clear that he was high on the list of criminals being sought for
>prosection.

Surely he was one of the most powerful but least known Nazis,which makes the
resistance or reluctance of Allies to the proposals about launching an
official investigation about his whereabouts and prosecuting him like Bormann
even less understandable.>Walter Dornberger who loathed Kammler reported that
Kammler had ordered
>his adjutant to shoot him so as not to fall into Russian hands.
>Its is known for certain that he was NOT anongst the group
>that surrendered to the Americans.
>
There are four different death locations and also four different death times
for Kammler,all of them carefully planned to make a possible investigation to
go nowhere.
So,even more than half century after his magical disappearing act,we still only
have preplanned hearsay info,and nothing else.
>The first Soviet centrifuge plant was built at Sverdlovsk-44 in 3 stages
>between
>1962 and 1964 and the Gaseous Diffusion plants remained in production
>well into the 70's

The first batch of "soviet" centrifuges was ready for serial production in 1952
after completion of exhaustive testing.

>This is of course another of your fairy tales. The simple reality
>is that serious post war development started in 1964 in West Germany
>with the founding of a state owned company called
>"Gesellschaft fuer Kernverfahrenstechnik" (GKT) at Juelich.

I think you must update your information.
Federal German Government classified all documents connected with centrifuge
development in 1961 upon requests from US government.
FRG already in 50s was at least as advanced as the Soviets,if not more.
A small footnote:Zippe returned to (West) Germany in early 50s and in late 50s
he was in Virginia.


>Stop making stuff up Denyav.
>

So,why US pressurized Germany in 1960to classify all their post WWII
centrifuge development work and why Germans bowed to US pressure?

[Denyav]

>es there are, go an buy a copy or access the originals which have
>been declassified and are available from the PRO or the US
>under the freedom of information act.

There is NO unedited Farm Hall transcripts

>This is the copy sent to General Groves in 1945

Even if they sent it to Truman.

> Combined Services Detailed Interrogation Centre
>

Correct,and this is one of the reasons why
Farm Hall transcripts do not reflect whole truth.

>> Farm hall "guests" were actually prisoners without any rights.
>
>Quite so
>
Thats another reason.

[Denyav]

>Make your mind up old boy.
>
>Was the bomb a German invention or a British one ?

Well,as far I know a British citizen lost his well deserved pension in late
80s for leaking very detailed drawings and calculations used in A bomb making
in 1941 and 42 to NKVD.
But the trouble is that almost identical documents were also found in the
luggage of two German engineers killed by Soviets near Taganrog in Feb.42 and
sent to Kaftanov but he never sent them to experts.
Is it not pretty interesting that Brits and Germans had similar and much more
advanced drawings and calculations than previously assumed in 41/42 time period
and both English and German versions arriving in Soviet Union thru different
channels?
I dont know if the bomb is British or German invention,but I am pretty sure
without the occupation of Germany in 1942,US would not be worlds second nuclear
power.

>We know Oppenheimer was in Los Alamos overseeing the
>critical implosion tests at the time.
Yeah right,I guess this should be like one of Elvis apperances,not only him
also Groves and 17 were were flown in on 4.7.


>No sir that job was give to Academician Ivan Kurchatov
>Von Ardenne was a high ranking employee but the Soviets
>were not about to trust any Germans in 1945 and Beria
>trusted nobody.

You are again missing many points,Kurchatov got the job on 3,10,43,obviously
war was still going on and von Ardenne and all others were still in Germany.
Von Ardenne and others were "invited" to Soviet Union not before VE day but
after.
After Hirosima bombing,Stalin called a meeting with the leaders of Uran program
in Kuntsevo,Kurchatov was not even invited to this four day long meeting
marathon,which indicates the level Stalins (dis)satisifaction
There are only oral recollections from these meetings and according to Vannikof
Stalin asked Beria to use his Germans to produce the Soviet Bomb.
But the concrete result of meeting was the creation of so called atomic
politburo under leadership of Beria on 8.20.45
Kurchatow met with Stalin on 1.25.46 and following is an excerpt from his notes
about the meeting
"Its utmostly neccesary above everything else to use German
people,experience,equipment and factories,its what needed,Genosse Stalin too
was very interested in works of Germans"
But back to August 45,soon after the creation of atomic politburo,its head
Beria called a meeting with the Germans,in the middle of august acc.to
Ardenne,and told von Ardenne that must build for a bomb for soviet union too.
The rest is the history

>They got the data , Kurchatov was briefed on the plutonium bomb
>in July 1945 based on information passed from Klaus Fuchs routed
>via Harry Gold

NKVD had documents since 1942 and they came from London,and they were available
to Kurchatov after March 10,43 this was the main reason of Stalins fury.

>In your eye perhaps
>

surely

>In fact Stalin gave that job to Molotov who consulted Kaftonov, in charge of
>keeping
>tabs on science for the State Defense Committee and Ioffe and selected
>Kurchatov in 1942

As this proved very ineffective(Soviets could not make any significant advances
even though they had almost all neccesary documents) a new organization under
leadership of Beria was formed with Stalins degree Nr9887 on 8.20.45

>Comrades. Make us atom bombs quickly. Ask anything you need.
>If a child doesn't cry, his mother doesn't know what he wants."
>He also told Kurchatov to push ahead "with a Russian scale."

After Hirosima bomb Kurchatow summoned before Stalin only twice,first one was
on Jan.25.46.
His impressions about this meeting is above.

>And the people that were there later tell us what really happened
>which thet have in the 60 years since those events transpired.

If documents closely connected with this issue are still under lock and at
least for another 20 years will be under lock,60 years should not be
considered a long period of time to forget.

>A blind faith that only German can invent stuff doesnt make
>it so.

Blind faith and orthodoxy should and could not replace objective and
investigative thinking,but as far as could remember we all were railroaded to
think blindly that only one country could have built first bomb during last 60
years.

[B2431]

Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one. Several
of us asked you to provide evidence. You have not.

You are hereby banished to the Island of Lost Frauds along with tarver, teuton
and a few others.

Dan, U.S Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Bull****
> >
> >A quick google search will turn up dozens of references to him
>
> Sure,my posts or your posts about Kammler will also show up in Google
too,but
> it does not mean that we are making an attempt to find him,we are not
US,German
> or Israeli governments,Nick Cooks book will also appear in Google in
connection
> with Kammler,guess what why?
>
> >His name appears no less than 6 times in the opening statements
> >of prosecuting counsel at the
>
> Only once in connection with Speer prosecution.
>

So that makes 7 and yet your claim that his name
only appeared once in ALL documents. I take it that
you admit you were wrong

> >Nuremburg trial where it was made
> >clear that he was high on the list of criminals being sought for
> >prosection.
>
> Surely he was one of the most powerful but least known Nazis,which makes
the
> resistance or reluctance of Allies to the proposals about launching an
> official investigation about his whereabouts and prosecuting him like
Bormann
> even less understandable.

However its clear you were incorrect in claiming he was not wanted

>>Walter Dornberger who loathed Kammler reported that
>> Kammler had ordered
> >his adjutant to shoot him so as not to fall into Russian hands.
> >Its is known for certain that he was NOT anongst the group
> >that surrendered to the Americans.
> >
> There are four different death locations and also four different death
times
> for Kammler,all of them carefully planned to make a possible investigation
to
> go nowhere.

Four starting points is trivial for an investigation

> So,even more than half century after his magical disappearing act,we still
only
> have preplanned hearsay info,and nothing else.
> >The first Soviet centrifuge plant was built at Sverdlovsk-44 in 3 stages
> >between
> >1962 and 1964 and the Gaseous Diffusion plants remained in production
> >well into the 70's
>
> The first batch of "soviet" centrifuges was ready for serial production in
1952
> after completion of exhaustive testing.
>

Cite please, I have the read the record of the Soviet developments
and this contradicts your claim

> >This is of course another of your fairy tales. The simple reality
> >is that serious post war development started in 1964 in West Germany
> >with the founding of a state owned company called
> >"Gesellschaft fuer Kernverfahrenstechnik" (GKT) at Juelich.
>
> I think you must update your information.
> Federal German Government classified all documents connected with
centrifuge
> development in 1961 upon requests from US government.

Cite please - this is ANOTHER claim for which you show no evidence

> FRG already in 50s was at least as advanced as the Soviets,if not more.
> A small footnote:Zippe returned to (West) Germany in early 50s and in late
50s
> he was in Virginia.
>

FRG had no working centrifuge, you just claimed the Soviets
did. A clear contradiction

>
> >Stop making stuff up Denyav.
> >
>
> So,why US pressurized Germany in 1960to classify all their post WWII
> centrifuge development work and why Germans bowed to US pressure?

Provide proof for either claim.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >es there are, go an buy a copy or access the originals which have
> >been declassified and are available from the PRO or the US
> >under the freedom of information act.
>
> There is NO unedited Farm Hall transcripts
>

Your wilfull ignorance is noted

> >This is the copy sent to General Groves in 1945
>
> Even if they sent it to Truman.
>

I see you wish to ignore evidence while offering none

> > Combined Services Detailed Interrogation Centre
> >
>
> Correct,and this is one of the reasons why
> Farm Hall transcripts do not reflect whole truth.
>

On the contrary thats why they contain the truth, thats
what interrogations are for.

> >> Farm hall "guests" were actually prisoners without any rights.
> >
> >Quite so
> >
> Thats another reason.
>
>

Nonsense, those present have had 50+ years to amend
the record. Not one has seriously challenged their veracity.

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Make your mind up old boy.
> >
> >Was the bomb a German invention or a British one ?
>
> Well,as far I know a British citizen lost his well deserved pension in
late
> 80s for leaking very detailed drawings and calculations used in A bomb
making
> in 1941 and 42 to NKVD.

Quite so

> But the trouble is that almost identical documents were also found in the
> luggage of two German engineers killed by Soviets near Taganrog in Feb.42
and
> sent to Kaftanov but he never sent them to experts.

Cite please

> Is it not pretty interesting that Brits and Germans had similar and much
more
> advanced drawings and calculations than previously assumed in 41/42 time
period
> and both English and German versions arriving in Soviet Union thru
different
> channels?

Hardly, the Germans arrived on top of a tank

> I dont know if the bomb is British or German invention,but I am pretty
sure
> without the occupation of Germany in 1942,US would not be worlds second
nuclear
> power.
>

So you now believe the US occupied Germany in 1942 !

That figures

> >We know Oppenheimer was in Los Alamos overseeing the
> >critical implosion tests at the time.
> Yeah right,I guess this should be like one of Elvis apperances,not only
him
> also Groves and 17 were were flown in on 4.7.
>

The voices in your head told you right ?

>
> >No sir that job was give to Academician Ivan Kurchatov
> >Von Ardenne was a high ranking employee but the Soviets
> >were not about to trust any Germans in 1945 and Beria
> >trusted nobody.
>
> You are again missing many points,Kurchatov got the job on
3,10,43,obviously
> war was still going on and von Ardenne and all others were still in
Germany.
> Von Ardenne and others were "invited" to Soviet Union not before VE day
but
> after.

So they didnt found the program as you claimed

> After Hirosima bombing,Stalin called a meeting with the leaders of Uran
program
> in Kuntsevo,Kurchatov was not even invited to this four day long meeting
> marathon,which indicates the level Stalins (dis)satisifaction

I told you this remember ?

> There are only oral recollections from these meetings and according to
Vannikof
> Stalin asked Beria to use his Germans to produce the Soviet Bomb.

No there are written records


> But the concrete result of meeting was the creation of so called atomic
> politburo under leadership of Beria on 8.20.45
> Kurchatow met with Stalin on 1.25.46 and following is an excerpt from his
notes
> about the meeting
> "Its utmostly neccesary above everything else to use German
> people,experience,equipment and factories,its what needed,Genosse Stalin
too
> was very interested in works of Germans"

Again a far cry from your claim that German's ran the projects

> But back to August 45,soon after the creation of atomic politburo,its
head
> Beria called a meeting with the Germans,in the middle of august acc.to
> Ardenne,and told von Ardenne that must build for a bomb for soviet union
too.
> The rest is the history
>

Under the control of Kurchatov

> >They got the data , Kurchatov was briefed on the plutonium bomb
> >in July 1945 based on information passed from Klaus Fuchs routed
> >via Harry Gold
>
> NKVD had documents since 1942 and they came from London,and they were
available
> to Kurchatov after March 10,43 this was the main reason of Stalins fury.
>

Yet according to you the allies made no progress

> >In your eye perhaps
> >
>
> surely
>
> >In fact Stalin gave that job to Molotov who consulted Kaftonov, in charge
of
> >keeping
> >tabs on science for the State Defense Committee and Ioffe and selected
> >Kurchatov in 1942
>
> As this proved very ineffective(Soviets could not make any significant
advances
> even though they had almost all neccesary documents) a new organization
under
> leadership of Beria was formed with Stalins degree Nr9887 on 8.20.45
>

It proved that like Hitler they didnt appreciate the true power
of Nuclear weapons

> >Comrades. Make us atom bombs quickly. Ask anything you need.
> >If a child doesn't cry, his mother doesn't know what he wants."
> >He also told Kurchatov to push ahead "with a Russian scale."
>
> After Hirosima bomb Kurchatow summoned before Stalin only twice,first one
was
> on Jan.25.46.
> His impressions about this meeting is above.
>
> >And the people that were there later tell us what really happened
> >which thet have in the 60 years since those events transpired.
>
> If documents closely connected with this issue are still under lock and at
> least for another 20 years will be under lock,60 years should not be
> considered a long period of time to forget.
>

So you claim those who built the bomb forgot about it ?

BWHAHAHAHAH

> >A blind faith that only German can invent stuff doesnt make
> >it so.
>
> Blind faith and orthodoxy should and could not replace objective and
> investigative thinking,but as far as could remember we all were
railroaded to
> think blindly that only one country could have built first bomb during
last 60
> years.

On the contrary we all require which nation expended the
efforts to do so.

Keith

[Denyav]

>Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one. Several
>of us asked you to provide evidence. You have not.

Its interesting that the evidence loving people do not care much when all
Jonastal and Olga documents,all Kammler documents as well as the portions of
the log book of a regular US infantry division remain under lock for 75 long
years (at least!).
(BTW you make a reality check for yourself and file a claim under Freedem of
Inf.Act)
Let me start with the newspapers and books that you can find in your local
library.
1)Eighth Army news dated 10.28.45
2)OSS Intelligence officer Ladislas Faragos book about Bormann
3)NYT Journalist Paul Mannings book "Frank Bormann,a Nazi in the Exile"
4)William Stevensons book "The Bormann Brotherhood"
5)Carter Hydrics "critical mass"
6)Washington Post dated 10.9.45
7)Von Ardennes "erinnerungen"
8)Zippes "Historical Review"
9)Chertoks "Rakety I Ljudi" (russian)
10) US Army Col. Allans book "Lucky Forward"
11)NYT dated 8.27.45
12)London Times dated 8.28.45
13)Nick Cooks book "The Hunt for Zero point"
14)Washington Post 10.10.45
And many more

Photos.
1)Photos of Zippe centrifuge cascades working in von Ardennes plant
2) Photos of first German test on island Ruegen taken from Stralsund.
3) Photo of Fat man ( German markings visible)

Eyewitness testimonies
Check out in 2001 published book "Das Geheimnis der deutchen Atombombe"
(The secret of German A-bomb)



>You are hereby banished to the Island of Lost Frauds along with tarver,
>teuton
>and a few others.
>

I think Leslie Grove was the man tthat deserved this distinction,he is the one
who used 2 billion dollars AND did not deliver anything in anytime in 1945.
He is the one who turned MP and ALSOS missions into cover up missions.

[Denyav]

>Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one. Several

Actually two not one.
First on island Ruegen in late 44 the second over TUP Ohrendorf in Jonastal,I
was not aware of the first one.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...

> 13)Nick Cooks book "The Hunt for Zero point"


Ah yes the claim that not only did the Nazis have atomic weapons
but also antigravity drives as well !

And they still lost the war, what a bunch of incompetent
losers they were :)

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one.
Several
>
> Actually two not one.
> First on island Ruegen in late 44 the second over TUP Ohrendorf in
Jonastal,I
> was not aware of the first one.

Sure Denyav when they wanted to test a nuclear weapon they did it
on a small densely inhabited island in the Baltic and somehow none
of the thousands of people who lived there never saw a thing and
there are absolutely no signs of any such test ever having happened.

This is really believable NOT !

Keith

[Denyav]

>Ah yes the claim that not only did the Nazis have atomic weapons
>but also antigravity drives as well !
>
>And they still lost the war, what a bunch of incompetent
>losers they were :)

If they had only a little bit more time they would not lose the war.
If a small country wanted to colonize the rest of the world ,this country would
definitely need much more than jet planes,rockets guided weapons,tigers MG42s .
Even Mike Tyson could get beaten up if he faced 14 average Joes.

>And they still lost the war, what a bunch of incompetent
>losers they were :)

Their work was enough to elevate two countries to superpower status and keep
them there for a half century.(without paying any loyalties and patent fees of
course)

[Denyav]

>Sure Denyav when they wanted to test a nuclear weapon they did it
>on a small densely inhabited island in the Baltic and somehow none
>of the thousands of people who lived there never saw a thing and
>there are absolutely no signs of any such test ever having happened.

Yeah right,except photos taken from stralsund and eyewitness testimonies.

[Pete]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Sure Denyav when they wanted to test a nuclear weapon they did it
> >on a small densely inhabited island in the Baltic and somehow none
> >of the thousands of people who lived there never saw a thing and
> >there are absolutely no signs of any such test ever having happened.
>
> Yeah right,except photos taken from stralsund and eyewitness testimonies.

....awaiting references to these supposed confirmations....

Pete

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Sure Denyav when they wanted to test a nuclear weapon they did it
> >on a small densely inhabited island in the Baltic and somehow none
> >of the thousands of people who lived there never saw a thing and
> >there are absolutely no signs of any such test ever having happened.
>
> Yeah right,except photos taken from stralsund and eyewitness testimonies.
>
>

So lets get this straight, the thousands of people who live on the
island never noticed it and you think this is credible ?

Wow

Keith

[B2431]

>From: "Keith Willshaw"

<snip>

>> >A blind faith that only German can invent stuff doesnt make
>> >it so.
>>
>> Blind faith and orthodoxy should and could not replace objective and
>> investigative thinking,but as far as could remember we all were
>railroaded to
>> think blindly that only one country could have built first bomb during
>last 60
>> years.
>
>On the contrary we all require which nation expended the
>efforts to do so.
>
>Keith

The simplest proof of who built the first atom bomb is who used it first. If
the Nazis had 2 bombs and denyav has stated they would have used at least one
even if they had to tansport it by boat or truck. Same for the Soviets.

If the Germans had the bomb and transported one to Antwerp, for example, and
lit it there it would have had an effect on the war. How much or in what way
can be debated as nasuem.

We are talking about a Germany that was so deperate as to train people to fly
piloted V-1s on suicide missions. They didn't even use those either.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)

>>Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one.
>Several
>>of us asked you to provide evidence. You have not.
>
>Its interesting that the evidence loving people do not care much when all
>Jonastal and Olga documents,all Kammler documents as well as the portions of
>the log book of a regular US infantry division remain under lock for 75 long
>years (at least!).
>(BTW you make a reality check for yourself and file a claim under Freedem of
>Inf.Act)
>Let me start with the newspapers and books that you can find in your local
>library.
>1)Eighth Army news dated 10.28.45
>2)OSS Intelligence officer Ladislas Faragos book about Bormann
>3)NYT Journalist Paul Mannings book "Frank Bormann,a Nazi in the Exile"
>4)William Stevensons book "The Bormann Brotherhood"

In the mid 1970s Borman's bones were found in a Berlin dig. He never left
Berlin and died within a day or two of Hitler.

>5)Carter Hydrics "critical mass"
>6)Washington Post dated 10.9.45
>7)Von Ardennes "erinnerungen"
>8)Zippes "Historical Review"
>9)Chertoks "Rakety I Ljudi" (russian)
>10) US Army Col. Allans book "Lucky Forward"

No mention of atomic bombs, brief mention of an incomplete reactor.

>11)NYT dated 8.27.45
>12)London Times dated 8.28.45
>13)Nick Cooks book "The Hunt for Zero point"

Yes, in a book of fantasy about antigravity.

>14)Washington Post 10.10.45
>And many more
>
>Photos.
>1)Photos of Zippe centrifuge cascades working in von Ardennes plant
>2) Photos of first German test on island Ruegen taken from Stralsund.
>3) Photo of Fat man ( German markings visible)

Provide a verifiable cite for these pictures please.

>Eyewitness testimonies
>Check out in 2001 published book "Das Geheimnis der deutchen Atombombe"
>(The secret of German A-bomb)
>
>
>
>>You are hereby banished to the Island of Lost Frauds along with tarver,
>>teuton
>>and a few others.
>>
>
>I think Leslie Grove was the man tthat deserved this distinction,he is the
>one
>who used 2 billion dollars AND did not deliver anything in anytime in 1945.
>He is the one who turned MP and ALSOS missions into cover up missions.
>

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>
>
>>Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one.
>Several
>
>Actually two not one.
>First on island Ruegen in late 44 the second over TUP Ohrendorf in Jonastal,I
>was not aware of the first one.
>
This is getting better and better. OK, the pigs had the atom bomb in late 1944
and had tested one either as an underground shot or surface shot and the other
was an air burst and no one seems to have noticed. No known radiation deaths or
illnesses down range? Neither bomb was tested over Antwerp, Paris or London?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Denyav]

>The simplest proof of who built the first atom bomb is who used it first. If
>the Nazis had 2 bombs and denyav has stated they would have used at least one
>even if they had to tansport it by boat or truck. Same for the Soviets.

You forget that they were "incomplete" in april 45,what Germans needed a couple
of more weeks or like Eisenhower implied in his book "Crusade in Europa" a
couple of more months.
For the Hirosima and Nagazaki bombs I always used term "Assembled in US from
German components.
I agree if they were complete in early april Nazis would use them even in
Berlin.
In April 45 Soviet were far behind Germans,the same for Manhattan project
>We are talking about a Germany that was so deperate as to train people to fly
>piloted V-1s on suicide missions. They didn't even use those either.
>
They were trying to delay the advance of allies for a couple of weeks by all
means till their S weapons,A bombs was only one component of S weapon
development program,were ready.

[Denyav]

>This is getting better and better. OK, the pigs had the atom bomb in late
>1944
>and had tested one either as an underground shot or surface shot and the
>other
>was an air burst and no one seems to have noticed. No known radiation deaths
>or
>illnesses down range? Neither

Contrary to your assertions there are hundreds of deaths and also witnesses,but
their testimonies which include even almost whole population of a small town
Bitburg were not found credible,because all witnesses were either Germans or
forced laborers.
Ohrendorf test on March 4th has even been observed by a US plane crew but even
their testimony found not to credible.

If you are out there to cover up your 2 Billion dollar blunder instead of
finding truth,you can always find ways to manufacture your desired truth.

[John Keeney]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Denyav" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >Denyav, you stated the Germans built two atomic bombs and tested one.
> Several
> >
> > Actually two not one.
> > First on island Ruegen in late 44 the second over TUP Ohrendorf in
> Jonastal,I
> > was not aware of the first one.
>
> Sure Denyav when they wanted to test a nuclear weapon they did it
> on a small densely inhabited island in the Baltic and somehow none
> of the thousands of people who lived there never saw a thing and
> there are absolutely no signs of any such test ever having happened.
>
> This is really believable NOT !

Heck, Keith, he never said they were *successful test*.
Or did he? I quite reading his post so long ago I really can't say.

[Denyav]

>No mention of atomic bombs, brief mention of an incomplete reactor.
>
Each book or Newspaper article usually emphasizes only one aspect or one event
in history of nuclear weapon development,you have to read all of them digest
information and need find new sources to complete the puzzle.
For example "critical mass" contains very good (but not full) info about U234
and her cargo.
So we learned that cargo of U234 contains more than 500kgs "enriched" weapon
grade uranium U235,not U238 or unenriched U235,as the spin doctors of Leslie
Groove wanted to make us believe.

Then next question is: how Germans produced over 500k weapon grade uranium in
44/45 ? with incomplete reactors,faulty centrifuges and incompetent scientist?

I think Eisenhower was right,a couple of months delay in occupation of Germany
would surely mean the greatest disaster mankind ever seen.

[tim gueguen]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >This is getting better and better. OK, the pigs had the atom bomb in late
> >1944
> >and had tested one either as an underground shot or surface shot and the
> >other
> >was an air burst and no one seems to have noticed. No known radiation
deaths
> >or
> >illnesses down range? Neither
>
> Contrary to your assertions there are hundreds of deaths and also
witnesses,but
> their testimonies which include even almost whole population of a small
town
> Bitburg were not found credible,because all witnesses were either Germans
or
> forced laborers.
> Ohrendorf test on March 4th has even been observed by a US plane crew but
even
> their testimony found not to credible.
>
> If you are out there to cover up your 2 Billion dollar blunder instead of
> finding truth,you can always find ways to manufacture your desired truth.

You've been asked to produce sources for this claim. Put up or shut up.

tim gueguen 101867

[tim gueguen]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >The simplest proof of who built the first atom bomb is who used it first.
If
> >the Nazis had 2 bombs and denyav has stated they would have used at least
one
> >even if they had to tansport it by boat or truck. Same for the Soviets.
>
> You forget that they were "incomplete" in april 45,what Germans needed a
couple
> of more weeks or like Eisenhower implied in his book "Crusade in Europa" a
> couple of more months.
> For the Hirosima and Nagazaki bombs I always used term "Assembled in US
from
> German components.
>
I asked you to provide a source for this claim several dozen post ago. So
where is it?

tim gueguen 101867

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>Date: 1/23/2004 10:29 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>This is getting better and better. OK, the pigs had the atom bomb in late
>>1944
>>and had tested one either as an underground shot or surface shot and the
>>other
>>was an air burst and no one seems to have noticed. No known radiation deaths
>>or
>>illnesses down range? Neither
>
>Contrary to your assertions there are hundreds of deaths and also
>witnesses,but
>their testimonies which include even almost whole population of a small town
>Bitburg were not found credible,because all witnesses were either Germans or
>forced laborers.

Next time I go to Bitburg I will take a geiger counter to see if your
implication of a nuke test there is valid.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Denyav]

>Next time I go to Bitburg I will take a geiger counter to see if your
>implication of a nuke test there is valid.
>

But please visit Bikini with your counter first!.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >The simplest proof of who built the first atom bomb is who used it first.
If
> >the Nazis had 2 bombs and denyav has stated they would have used at least
one
> >even if they had to tansport it by boat or truck. Same for the Soviets.
>
> You forget that they were "incomplete" in april 45,what Germans needed a
couple
> of more weeks or like Eisenhower implied in his book "Crusade in Europa" a
> couple of more months.

Yet you claim they tested one in 1944

Hmmm

Keith

[Presidente Alcazar]

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 00:46:15 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
> wrote:

[Nazi nuclear tests in the Baltic]

>So lets get this straight, the thousands of people who live on the
>island never noticed it and you think this is credible ?
>
>Wow

Please don't interrupt creative genius at work. This is the most
amusement I've been given by a usenet thread in months. Don't stop
the rock, dude. Although grateful thanks are due to you for
discovering and promoting this guy's talent, Keith.

Gavin Bailey

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>Date: 1/24/2004 1:49 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>Next time I go to Bitburg I will take a geiger counter to see if your
>>implication of a nuke test there is valid.
>>
>
>But please visit Bikini with your counter first!.

The difference is there really were nuclear devices lit off in Bikini and there
is more than ample evidence of it.

You implied an atomic bomb was tested in Bitburg. That is why I made the geiger
counter comment.

So, exactly where were those two tests? Based on verifiable evidence if the
bombs were tested they failed which shoots down your entire claim about the
U.S. needing Nazi research to complete their bombs.

You said one of the tests was an air burst. There is no way on God's Earth you
could get everyone who saw, heard or had knowledge of such an event to remain
silent on the matter.

I ask again, where were the two tests? What were the results?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Denyav]

>Yet you claim they tested one in 1944
>
>Hmmm

Yes,Ruegen test apparently took place in late 44,but information about that
very sketchy,but there is even a photo of it taken from stralsund,I did not
know anything about that before.
Much publicized test took place on 4.3.45 in Ohrendorf TUP.
Germans apparently built a w54 style low yield bomb (15-20 t yield range)for
testing purposes only.

[B2431]

>From: (Denyav)
>Date: 1/25/2004 5:26 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>>Yet you claim they tested one in 1944
>>
>>Hmmm
>
>Yes,Ruegen test apparently took place in late 44,but information about that
>very sketchy,but there is even a photo of it taken from stralsund,I did not
>know anything about that before.
>Much publicized test took place on 4.3.45 in Ohrendorf TUP.
>Germans apparently built a w54 style low yield bomb (15-20 t yield range)for
>testing purposes only.
>
Can you possibly be more vague? How did they produce sufficient plutonium for
one "w54 style" device let alone two? Even if the reactor Paton's army found
was fully functional at one time, which it wasn't, it was too small to produce
enough plutonium.

You say "much publicised" and I ask you for proof of that.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >Yet you claim they tested one in 1944
> >
> >Hmmm
>
> Yes,Ruegen test apparently took place in late 44,but information about
that
> very sketchy,but there is even a photo of it taken from stralsund,I did
not
> know anything about that before.

So how come the people in the dozen or so towns and
villages on the island didnt notice ?

I'd have thought 3/KG200 might have been a trifle
discomfited too, they were after all based there at
the time.

Keith

[Denyav]

>The difference is there really were nuclear devices lit off in Bikini and
>there
>is more than ample evidence of it.
>
>You implied an atomic bomb was tested in Bitburg. That is why I made the
>geiger
>counter comment.
>

But you should not expect to measure much higher radiation levels than Bikini
in Jonastal.
There is a big fundamental difference between Bikini and Jonastal namely US did
everything possible so that every soul on this planet could learn what was
going on in Bikini whereas the same US did everything (and still doing)
possible to make sure that no one on the planet could learn what really
happened in Jonastal.
>So, exactly where were those two tests? Based on verifiable evidence if the
>bombs were tested they failed which shoots down your entire claim about the
>U.S. needing Nazi research to complete their bombs.

According to hundreds of eyewitness accounts which includes crew of a USAAF
plane,Jonastal bomb exploded.
Eyewitness accounts are consistent with 15-20t yield nuclear explosion.
Also deaths occurred in this region later are also consistent with high levels
of radiation associated with low yield nuclear explosions.
If you discredit hundreds of eyewitnesses just because they were Germans or
forced laborers ,if you attempt to discredit US aircrew by saying they were
hallucinating of course you can not find anybody to verify.
I am pretty sure even if FDR had seen the test with his own eyes,Grooves would
find something to discredit him.

>You said one of the tests was an air burst. There is no way on God's Earth
>you
>could get everyone who saw, heard or had knowledge of such an event to remain
>silent on the matter.

This event has been eyewitnessed by the population of three small towns in the
area and hundreds of forced laborers (many of them died days after) and their
testimonies as well as the testimony of US pilot have been documented well
documented,in various books on this subject.

But apparently everybody,US,Germans,Soviets and everbody else wanted to forget
this issue till late 80s,in other words till collapse of Soviet Union.
This issue reappered with a high profile documentary of German TV channel ZDF
in 1992.
ZDF documentary was the product of almost ten years research conducted on three
continents and was a very expensive production.
But most importantly this ZDF production was financed by US private entities
acting as proxies of US gov't.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Denyav" > wrote in message
...
> >The difference is there really were nuclear devices lit off in Bikini and
> >there
> >is more than ample evidence of it.
> >
> >You implied an atomic bomb was tested in Bitburg. That is why I made the
> >geiger
> >counter comment.
> >
>
> But you should not expect to measure much higher radiation levels than
Bikini
> in Jonastal.

And Bikini Atoll is still too contaminated for continuous habitation,
shorts visits are possible but raising crops and living there permanently
is still impossible

DOH

Keith

[Alan Minyard]

On 25 Jan 2004 23:26:45 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

>>Yet you claim they tested one in 1944
>>
>>Hmmm
>
>Yes,Ruegen test apparently took place in late 44,but information about that
>very sketchy,but there is even a photo of it taken from stralsund,I did not
>know anything about that before.
>Much publicized test took place on 4.3.45 in Ohrendorf TUP.
>Germans apparently built a w54 style low yield bomb (15-20 t yield range)for
>testing purposes only.

The Germans never even managed to achieve criticality, much less a
workable device. You are completely, utterly wrong. I will be nice and
assume that your stance is a result of very poor information.

Al Minyard