|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 22, 2023 1:10:37 GMT
This alternate history challenge is to manipulate the operations of World War Two, the Manhattan Project, and their relative pace, so that the the first target the Americans strike with atomic bomb when ready, is the first one that Leslie Groves' committee settled on as feasible, suitable, and useful - the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon in the Japanese controlled Caroline Islands. For this target to be chosen, things need to be altered in such a way that when the atomic bomb and a suitable delivery aircraft are ready: a) Sufficient undamaged IJN assets remain at Truk for it to be a worthy military target, b) Truk is within striking range of US aircraft, c) a potentially more valuable military, command, or political target within the Japanese Home Islands or innermost core empire is out of reach of US aircraft, at least within the risk tolerances of this 'no fail'* mission, d) There is no German target that is potential more valuable and fits within the risk tolerances of this mission** * {risk tolerances/no fail definition}
*'No fail' in this case means = Any risk of the bomb being wasted by failing to hit the target, or, any chance of an unexploded bomb being recovered by an enemy salvage team. Closer-range allows greater fuel use for greater precision, and a deep sea target reduces the chances of salvage. ** {why Germany is a poorer atomic target than Japan}
**There is a decent argument that German air defenses throughout the war are of such superior robustness to Japanese, that the only "safe" atomic missions targets in German controlled space are tactical ones or cities/ports/facilities on the outer edge, not any 'strategic' targets deeper in Reich territory. IE, by the time an atomic mission on the Ruhr or Berlin is "safe" Allied ground forces must be close enough that Allied conventional seizure of the target is a foregone conclusion within mere weeks.
However, I do not think this challenge is easy. There were major, structural reasons, physical, economic, political, why the major events of WWII happened when they did. And these were not isolated from each other- changing one likely effects others. So can my challenge be plausibly met, working from a world identical to ours up to let's say, the signing of the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1936? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 22, 2023 12:45:21 GMT
This alternate history challenge is to manipulate the operations of World War Two, the Manhattan Project, and their relative pace, so that the the first target the Americans strike with atomic bomb when ready, is the first one that Leslie Groves' committee settled on as feasible, suitable, and useful - the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon in the Japanese controlled Caroline Islands. For this target to be chosen, things need to be altered in such a way that when the atomic bomb and a suitable delivery aircraft are ready: a) Sufficient undamaged IJN assets remain at Truk for it to be a worthy military target, b) Truk is within striking range of US aircraft, c) a potentially more valuable military, command, or political target within the Japanese Home Islands or innermost core empire is out of reach of US aircraft, at least within the risk tolerances of this 'no fail'* mission, d) There is no German target that is potential more valuable and fits within the risk tolerances of this mission** * {risk tolerances/no fail definition}
*'No fail' in this case means = Any risk of the bomb being wasted by failing to hit the target, or, any chance of an unexploded bomb being recovered by an enemy salvage team. Closer-range allows greater fuel use for greater precision, and a deep sea target reduces the chances of salvage. ** {why Germany is a poorer atomic target than Japan}
**There is a decent argument that German air defenses throughout the war are of such superior robustness to Japanese, that the only "safe" atomic missions targets in German controlled space are tactical ones or cities/ports/facilities on the outer edge, not any 'strategic' targets deeper in Reich territory. IE, by the time an atomic mission on the Ruhr or Berlin is "safe" Allied ground forces must be close enough that Allied conventional seizure of the target is a foregone conclusion within mere weeks.
However, I do not think this challenge is easy. There were major, structural reasons, physical, economic, political, why the major events of WWII happened when they did. And these were not isolated from each other- changing one likely effects others. So can my challenge be plausibly met, working from a world identical to ours up to let's say, the signing of the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1936?
I agree its difficult. You really need one [at least] of three things to happen. a) Completion of the bomb - plus delivery system by the allies about a couple of years earlier than OTL which barring some fairly dramatic breakthrough probably means a major project starting prior to WWII. This seems unlikely in the democratic states and given the mess Nazi Germany was in I think its unlikely the western allies defeating Germany earlier and taking over a nearly completed project.
b) Japan in a much better position by ~summer 45 so that it still has an active base at Truk and sufficient naval strength to make it a worthwhile target. Again this seems unlikely.
c) That for some reason the Pacific war starts some time later so Japan is still a significant force in the Pacific by the time the a nuclear weapon is available. Given pre-war allied production, especially by the US and how draining occupying China was for Japan this seems unlikely. I find it hard to see even the most extreme fanatical militarist getting Japan into a war with the western powers in say late 43/44 with the massive superiority of western forces by then and Germany clearly going down.
The best bet and I still think its unlikely without a pre-1936 POD would be some combination of a) and b).
I would say that I think the allies if they had it would be willing to use a nuclear weapon against a German target from say 1943 onward with relatively little fear of an intact bomb falling into German hands. Getting a delivery system and having it survive without launching it as part of a mass attack - which is likely to mean much of the bomber force is likely to be destroyed or damaged in the resultant explosion. The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 22, 2023 16:33:11 GMT
The best bet and I still think its unlikely without a pre-1936 POD would be some combination of a) and b). Well remember, the difficulty is why I gave everyone more time, back to 1936, to work with, and notably, that means that is early enough that Japan does not need to be stuck in all-out war in China (from '37), at least not as early as OTL. It also gives you time to shorten or lengthen or avoid the Spanish Civil War and change its butcher's bill, for whatever that does. Have an untimely FDR death and Garner Presidency in the laters. Worsened purges or a coup in the USSR, or lessened ones. The more one knows about WWII, generally the more one knows things that cannot be changed, especially about the final big picture outcome. However, whenever an alternate WWII challenge, or any wartime challenge, begins to look to hard or impossible making the fight appear totally deterministic, the first remedy I always recommend is to move the PoD further back, to gain more time to alter initial conditions. It is sort of like adjusting a difficulty level. |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 23, 2023 18:01:14 GMT
This alternate history challenge is to manipulate the operations of World War Two, the Manhattan Project, and their relative pace, so that the the first target the Americans strike with atomic bomb when ready, is the first one that Leslie Groves' committee settled on as feasible, suitable, and useful - the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon in the Japanese controlled Caroline Islands. For this target to be chosen, things need to be altered in such a way that when the atomic bomb and a suitable delivery aircraft are ready: a) Sufficient undamaged IJN assets remain at Truk for it to be a worthy military target, b) Truk is within striking range of US aircraft, c) a potentially more valuable military, command, or political target within the Japanese Home Islands or innermost core empire is out of reach of US aircraft, at least within the risk tolerances of this 'no fail'* mission, d) There is no German target that is potential more valuable and fits within the risk tolerances of this mission** * {risk tolerances/no fail definition}
*'No fail' in this case means = Any risk of the bomb being wasted by failing to hit the target, or, any chance of an unexploded bomb being recovered by an enemy salvage team. Closer-range allows greater fuel use for greater precision, and a deep sea target reduces the chances of salvage. ** {why Germany is a poorer atomic target than Japan}
**There is a decent argument that German air defenses throughout the war are of such superior robustness to Japanese, that the only "safe" atomic missions targets in German controlled space are tactical ones or cities/ports/facilities on the outer edge, not any 'strategic' targets deeper in Reich territory. IE, by the time an atomic mission on the Ruhr or Berlin is "safe" Allied ground forces must be close enough that Allied conventional seizure of the target is a foregone conclusion within mere weeks.
However, I do not think this challenge is easy. There were major, structural reasons, physical, economic, political, why the major events of WWII happened when they did. And these were not isolated from each other- changing one likely effects others. So can my challenge be plausibly met, working from a world identical to ours up to let's say, the signing of the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1936?
I agree its difficult. You really need one [at least] of three things to happen. a) Completion of the bomb - plus delivery system by the allies about a couple of years earlier than OTL which barring some fairly dramatic breakthrough probably means a major project starting prior to WWII. This seems unlikely in the democratic states and given the mess Nazi Germany was in I think its unlikely the western allies defeating Germany earlier and taking over a nearly completed project.
b) Japan in a much better position by ~summer 45 so that it still has an active base at Truk and sufficient naval strength to make it a worthwhile target. Again this seems unlikely.
c) That for some reason the Pacific war starts some time later so Japan is still a significant force in the Pacific by the time the a nuclear weapon is available. Given pre-war allied production, especially by the US and how draining occupying China was for Japan this seems unlikely. I find it hard to see even the most extreme fanatical militarist getting Japan into a war with the western powers in say late 43/44 with the massive superiority of western forces by then and Germany clearly going down.
The best bet and I still think its unlikely without a pre-1936 POD would be some combination of a) and b).
I would say that I think the allies if they had it would be willing to use a nuclear weapon against a German target from say 1943 onward with relatively little fear of an intact bomb falling into German hands. Getting a delivery system and having it survive without launching it as part of a mass attack - which is likely to mean much of the bomber force is likely to be destroyed or damaged in the resultant explosion. The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact.
See the wiki for operation Hailstone, the February 1944 conventional raid to disable Truk. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_HailstoneThe Conventional course of Pacific war basically needs to be no further along than it was then, and the Bomb ready, for Truk to be a relevant, top-tier target. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 23, 2023 18:07:59 GMT
This alternate history challenge is to manipulate the operations of World War Two, the Manhattan Project, and their relative pace, so that the the first target the Americans strike with atomic bomb when ready, is the first one that Leslie Groves' committee settled on as feasible, suitable, and useful - the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon in the Japanese controlled Caroline Islands. Why, by late 1944 Truk Lagoon was used as target practice for the United States Navy. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 23, 2023 21:59:05 GMT
I agree its difficult. You really need one [at least] of three things to happen. a) Completion of the bomb - plus delivery system by the allies about a couple of years earlier than OTL which barring some fairly dramatic breakthrough probably means a major project starting prior to WWII. This seems unlikely in the democratic states and given the mess Nazi Germany was in I think its unlikely the western allies defeating Germany earlier and taking over a nearly completed project.
b) Japan in a much better position by ~summer 45 so that it still has an active base at Truk and sufficient naval strength to make it a worthwhile target. Again this seems unlikely.
c) That for some reason the Pacific war starts some time later so Japan is still a significant force in the Pacific by the time the a nuclear weapon is available. Given pre-war allied production, especially by the US and how draining occupying China was for Japan this seems unlikely. I find it hard to see even the most extreme fanatical militarist getting Japan into a war with the western powers in say late 43/44 with the massive superiority of western forces by then and Germany clearly going down.
The best bet and I still think its unlikely without a pre-1936 POD would be some combination of a) and b).
I would say that I think the allies if they had it would be willing to use a nuclear weapon against a German target from say 1943 onward with relatively little fear of an intact bomb falling into German hands. Getting a delivery system and having it survive without launching it as part of a mass attack - which is likely to mean much of the bomber force is likely to be destroyed or damaged in the resultant explosion. The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact.
See the wiki for operation Hailstone, the February 1944 conventional raid to disable Truk. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_HailstoneThe Conventional course of Pacific war basically needs to be no further along than it was then, and the Bomb ready, for Truk to be a relevant, top-tier target.
that's one of the points that inspired my comments but while Hailstone disabled it and forced its abandonment I suspect you would need the nuke to be available earlier for it to be a worthwhile target. Possibly if Pearl and or Midway had gone worse than OTL and the US CV force had been pretty much totally destroyed. That might delay the US advance via the central Pacific route even starting until the Essex class enter service in numbers and if the IJN in response to this build up have the bulk of their forces at Truk to counter this and the US doesn't yet have overwhelming carrier air strength to be confident of victory in a conventional attack then its a logical target.
However you still need the bomb being ready a year or so earlier and also Germany not being the most obvious target. Possibly if Case Blue had gone even worse for Germany with the southern army group cut off and largely destroyed making the German manpower situation desperate even earlier? That would probably suggest a lot more of Europe ends up under the Soviet yoke as the allies without a major boost aren't really ready for invading northern Europe until 44.  |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 24, 2023 0:17:41 GMT
This alternate history challenge is to manipulate the operations of World War Two, the Manhattan Project, and their relative pace, so that the the first target the Americans strike with atomic bomb when ready, is the first one that Leslie Groves' committee settled on as feasible, suitable, and useful - the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon in the Japanese controlled Caroline Islands. Why, by late 1944 Truk Lagoon was used as target practice for the United States Navy. I outline the conditions in which it would still be relevant in the post above were yours above. If the Pacific is frontline if like it was in 1944 and the bomb only became available then, it would be too late for Truk to be a target, and a home island target for the bomb, or possibly Iwo or Chichi Jima would be viable and a superior target to Truk. But the fact is, this was the initial target Leslie Groves and his people came up with in 1943 when they spent started seriously considering targets and compared Germany and Japan. They did not have a perfect timeline for the completion of their own project, and they certainly did not have perfect timeline for the completion of the stages of the Pacific campaign. On average, contemporaries were estimating, during 1944 after the Normandy breakout, if not many months earlier, that the Germans might fall earlier than the historical, probably in 1944. In general contemporaries including US naval planners were estimating that the slog across the Pacific would not see the US back in the Philippines until 1946 or invading Japan until at least 1947. |
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470 
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on Jul 24, 2023 0:59:10 GMT
I would say that I think the allies if they had it would be willing to use a nuclear weapon against a German target from say 1943 onward with relatively little fear of an intact bomb falling into German hands. Getting a delivery system and having it survive without launching it as part of a mass attack - which is likely to mean much of the bomber force is likely to be destroyed or damaged in the resultant explosion. The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact. There are serious technical reasons why "LITTLE BOY" could not be delivered as a fail to function device. It was a GUN. Virtually nothing could go wrong once the propellant slammed the projectile into the target, however there was the chance the initiator would fail. Voila, one complete working atomic bomb in enemy hands. All they have to do, is look at it, duplicate the chemistry to make the fissionables and it becomes a different ballgame. Unlike Heisenberg, Yoshio Nishina KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING. |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 24, 2023 3:02:16 GMT
The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact. Hamburg, Bremen, Kiel, or something coastal like that seems like viable target, even within constraints. I would even wonder about Wolfschanze Wolf's Lair in Rastenberg, East Prussia, approached from the Baltic, as a leadership/C2 target. With that, there are still long-distance factors without a B-29, and unfortunate Denmark based air defenses to deal with, unless you can pull off a very high altitude approach. |
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on Jul 24, 2023 3:42:03 GMT
that's one of the points that inspired my comments but while Hailstone disabled it and forced its abandonment I suspect you would need the nuke to be available earlier for it to be a worthwhile target. Possibly if Pearl and or Midway had gone worse than OTL and the US CV force had been pretty much totally destroyed. That might delay the US advance via the central Pacific route even starting until the Essex class enter service in numbers and if the IJN in response to this build up have the bulk of their forces at Truk to counter this and the US doesn't yet have overwhelming carrier air strength to be confident of victory in a conventional attack then its a logical target.
1943 how do you deliver it, and Notice all the floating ships after ABLE? The USS Saratoga was 700 feet (200 meters) from the fireball. She was not even mission killed. Does that tell you something about the limitations of an atomic bomb circa 1946? USS Nevada, the AIMPOINT, was scorched but not mission killed. BAKER, the underwater burst would have better results from keel snaps and that big water hammer on close in ships, but again ships at some distance from the fireball were not mission killed. The conclusion was that general concussion was not enough. You had to either use a very dirty bomb to poison the targets, or score direct hits on enemy capital units or overlap the bursts closely in time and space to assure proximity effects. Four bombs instead of one. Probably double that number if you want to kill Chu'Uk as an anchorage. What works on a city, does not do so well against a fleet; even one at anchor... in 1946. CYNICAL Miletus |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 24, 2023 15:25:12 GMT
I would say that I think the allies if they had it would be willing to use a nuclear weapon against a German target from say 1943 onward with relatively little fear of an intact bomb falling into German hands. Getting a delivery system and having it survive without launching it as part of a mass attack - which is likely to mean much of the bomber force is likely to be destroyed or damaged in the resultant explosion. The most likely target might be a strike on a major port like Hamburg which would still have significant military and economic impact. There are serious technical reasons why "LITTLE BOY" could not be delivered as a fail to function device. It was a GUN. Virtually nothing could go wrong once the propellant slammed the projectile into the target, however there was the chance the initiator would fail. Voila, one complete working atomic bomb in enemy hands. All they have to do, is look at it, duplicate the chemistry to make the fissionables and it becomes a different ballgame. Unlike Heisenberg, Yoshio Nishina KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING.
How many years would that take Japan, given that they would also need a delivery vehicle as well. Unless they try and use a sub into a target? Even if their doing distinctly better by early 1944 their still almost certainly on the back foot and will have limited resources. Not to mention as soon as the bomb fails to explode the allies will react to do everything they cam to make sure the Japanese get the minimal amount of actual information from the device.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 24, 2023 15:30:28 GMT
that's one of the points that inspired my comments but while Hailstone disabled it and forced its abandonment I suspect you would need the nuke to be available earlier for it to be a worthwhile target. Possibly if Pearl and or Midway had gone worse than OTL and the US CV force had been pretty much totally destroyed. That might delay the US advance via the central Pacific route even starting until the Essex class enter service in numbers and if the IJN in response to this build up have the bulk of their forces at Truk to counter this and the US doesn't yet have overwhelming carrier air strength to be confident of victory in a conventional attack then its a logical target.
1943 how do you deliver it, and Notice all the floating ships after ABLE? The USS Saratoga was 700 feet (200 meters) from the fireball. She was not even mission killed. Does that tell you something about the limitations of an atomic bomb circa 1946? USS Nevada, the AIMPOINT, was scorched but not mission killed. BAKER, the underwater burst would have better results from keel snaps and that big water hammer on close in ships, but again ships at some distance from the fireball were not mission killed. The conclusion was that general concussion was not enough. You had to either use a very dirty bomb to poison the targets, or score direct hits on enemy capital units or overlap the bursts closely in time and space to assure proximity effects. Four bombs instead of one. Probably double that number if you want to kill Chu'Uk as an anchorage. What works on a city, does not do so well against a fleet; even one at anchor... in 1946. CYNICAL Miletus
In terms of a delivery vehicle by early 44 say a Lanc can do it even if a B-29 can't be advanced quickly enough.
It may not be as destructive as expected but the allies won't know it until their tried and it will do a lot of damage to the ships, their crews and related shore features. It might be decided that the attack wasn't worthwhile after the event but its going to be a shock to the IJN.
|
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on Jul 24, 2023 16:03:28 GMT
1943 how do you deliver it, and Notice all the floating ships after ABLE? The USS Saratoga was 700 feet (200 meters) from the fireball. She was not even mission killed. Does that tell you something about the limitations of an atomic bomb circa 1946? USS Nevada, the AIMPOINT, was scorched but not mission killed. BAKER, the underwater burst would have better results from keel snaps and that big water hammer on close in ships, but again ships at some distance from the fireball were not mission killed. The conclusion was that general concussion was not enough. You had to either use a very dirty bomb to poison the targets, or score direct hits on enemy capital units or overlap the bursts closely in time and space to assure proximity effects. Four bombs instead of one. Probably double that number if you want to kill Chu'Uk as an anchorage. What works on a city, does not do so well against a fleet; even one at anchor... in 1946. CYNICAL Miletus
In terms of a delivery vehicle by early 44 say a Lanc can do it even if a B-29 can't be advanced quickly enough.
It may not be as destructive as expected but the allies won't know it until their tried and it will do a lot of damage to the ships, their crews and related shore features. It might be decided that the attack wasn't worthwhile after the event but its going to be a shock to the IJN.
1. Little Boy weighed 5 tons. 2. Trinity gave a fair indication of concussive effect. To predict a fleet event would be mathematics and physics. As for damage to ships and crews; radiation kills, but not right away. Think about why the Americans chose to hit cities instead of anchorages. They knew where the bombs would work best.. |
|
michelvan
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 488
Likes: 804
|
Post by michelvan on Jul 24, 2023 18:48:34 GMT
yes the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon, was one of Potential targets for Atomic bomb on Japanese.
but event in WW2 let to different outcome:
The Bomb got delayed
The US forces conquer the Caroline Islands with Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon.
The Third Reich gave up before the USAAF could drop a Nuke on city of Lübeck.
and yes the Pentagon had change target for Atomic bomb to enemies Cities.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jul 25, 2023 1:21:46 GMT
yes the Imperial Japanese Navy Anchorage at Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon, was one of Potential targets for Atomic bomb on Japanese. but event in WW2 let to different outcome: The Bomb got delayed The US forces conquer the Caroline Islands with Truk (aka Chu'uk) lagoon. The Third Reich gave up before the USAAF could drop a Nuke on city of Lübeck. and yes the Pentagon had change target for Atomic bomb to enemies Cities. Wait, you have seen something about Lubeck, of all places, having been specified as a target in Germany? Where did you see that and what was the rationale. |
|
