Earliest Tube Alloys bomb

[fastmongrel]

If the US had stayed neutral (Hitler and Japan had been sensible and had done everything possible to keep the US neutral) No Manhattan project at all seems unlikely but without Pearl Harbour it doesnt get the Billions it got.

What is the earliest that the Tube_Alloys project could build a bomb to drop on Germany without any help (or at least nothing overt) from the US.

Would it have been a Uranium Gun type Little Boy or a Plutonium Implosion type Fat Man. Gaseous Diffusion for Uranium was done in 1940 by ICI I cant find out if Uranium 238 production was done in Britain during the war.

Where would the Empire get its Uranium from.

Where would the labs and major manufacturing centres be.

Where would the test site be.

 

[Admiral Halsey]

IIRC The Manhattan Project had been given the go ahead before the Pearl Attack.

 

[Gunnarnz]

This subject has come up before. Short version: a lucky guess might have the program take the quickest route to a bomb, without having to pursue all the avenues the OTL Manhattan Project did. Canada and Australia could both supply uranium, and I think it's likely the program would be located in Canada. They might not even bother with a test program if they use a suitably simple design. And, if everything goes well, they might have a bomb ready to drop by 1943.

Note that finding a suitable aircraft to drop said bomb is not exactly going to be a trivial task. The Lancaster can carry it easily enough, but might not be able to fly fast or high enough to survive the blast. Specially modified versions might do the trick, or perhaps an alternative carrier would have to be developed. In the latter case, the expense and time required goes up considerably.

 

[marathag]

Gaseous Diffusion is far more efficient than Electromagnetic, but still was a huge energy hog.

K-25 only enriched to 20% by the end of the war, it only got to 93% when sister plants were added in postwar, K-27, K-29,K-31 and K-33 that almost doubled the number of enrichment stages to a total of 5098.

The smaller (1812 stage)[FONT=&quot][/FONT] Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Kentucky, had a peak power load of 3040 MWe.

Hoover Dam is able to generate around 2080

There is nowhere in the UK to do this, would have to be Canada.

Then you need to get large amounts of DuPont Freon Refrigerant and Teflon for seals.

Plutonium is an easier road to go, but you still need Frank Spedding of ISU Uranium Metal process that took costs from $1000 a pound to 30 cents

Once that is done, you could do reactors in the UK, google on Windscale for why they had to go with aircooled reactors, and how close that almost became a Chernobyl.

 

[fastmongrel]

IIRC The Manhattan Project had been given the go ahead before the Pearl Attack.

No Manhattan project at all seems unlikely but without Pearl Harbour it doesnt get the Billions it got.

No war for the US means no war budget. The 1940 budget for the uranium Committee was peanuts and the 1941 budget was less than Ford spent on chrome plating for cars.

 

[ObssesedNuker]

IIRC The Manhattan Project had been given the go ahead before the Pearl Attack.

By a single day.

 

[TFSmith121]

Britain did not have money to spare for major R&D/production efforts;

If the US had stayed neutral (Hitler and Japan had been sensible and had done everything possible to keep the US neutral) No Manhattan project at all seems unlikely but without Pearl Harbour it doesnt get the Billions it got.

What is the earliest that the Tube_Alloys project could build a bomb to drop on Germany without any help (or at least nothing overt) from the US.

Would it have been a Uranium Gun type Little Boy or a Plutonium Implosion type Fat Man. Gaseous Diffusion for Uranium was done in 1940 by ICI I cant find out if Uranium 238 production was done in Britain during the war.

Where would the Empire get its Uranium from.

Where would the labs and major manufacturing centres be.

Where would the test site be.

Britain did not have money to spare for major R&D/production efforts beyond what they did historically, any more than it had excess funding for war production of anything at all beyond what they did; there's a reason the US passed Lend-Lease to keep the British in the fight after the cash and carry period ended...because the British no longer had all that much cash.

If the US is not in the war as of December, 1941, the immediate question(s) are:

1. Do the Japanese attack the British and Dutch territories in SEA? If so, the British will have to bear the entire burden of the Pacific War (in the case, the Asian War, presumably) so they have even less resources for R&D and special weapons production. No, no British bomb.

2. Are the Germans and Soviets still fighting, and how long does that last? Obviously, this has a tremendous impact on what resources the British (and Germans, and Soviets) may have for R&D etc.

3. In December, 1941, the British had just won their first army-sized offensive against the Axis in Libya (CRUSADER) and were all of five months away from a severe defeat at Gazala; if the Japanese attack the British and Dutch, it is likely that the desert war will go as poorly in the first half of 1942 as it did historically, or even worse, which means even less in terms of excess resources for British R&D.

It took US industry, running flat out, more than three and half years to deliver operational weapons and the weapons systems to deliver them, historically, and that was with Allied assistance; absent US resources and the possibility the British are fighting the Germans, Italians, and Japanese by themselves, even with (to be charitable) L-L at 1941 levels that is sustained for (say) the remainder of FDR's 1941-44 term of office, the liklihood Britain alone, even with assistance from the Commonwealth, can develop anything close to a useful weapon before the 1950s is extremely remote.

Given the British ability to produce chemical and biological weapons, it seems unlikely they would even try, until or at least some sort of 1940s version of the Peace of Amiens occurs.

Best,

 

[alfredtuomi]

considering that the british figured Germany was developing a nuclear bomb I am sure they would have found/diverted the resources to bring tube alloys to a successful conclusion.simply put if Germany got one first all other weapons would be moot.

 

[Mike Stearns]

considering that the british figured Germany was developing a nuclear bomb I am sure they would have found/diverted the resources to bring tube alloys to a successful conclusion.simply put if Germany got one first all other weapons would be moot.

Agreed. If the Germans get to nuclear weapons first, they will use them.

 

[TFSmith121]

Except the OP has the British (apparently) fighting

considering that the british figured Germany was developing a nuclear bomb I am sure they would have found/diverted the resources to bring tube alloys to a successful conclusion.simply put if Germany got one first all other weapons would be moot.

Except the OP has the British (apparently) fighting Germany, Italy, and Japan. What are the British going to divert resources from, exactly?

Fighter Command?
The Royal Navy?
Bomber Command?
The British Army in the UK?
The Mediterranean Theater?
The Southeast Asia Theater?
India?
The Pacific?
Trying to help keep the Soviets in the war through the North Russia convoys and Persian Corridor?

Come on - in 1938, in terms of total relative industrial potential (100 percent being the UK in 1900), the numbers are:

UK - 181 percent (of UK in 1900)
Ge - 214 percent
SU - 152 percent
Japan - 88 percent
Italy - 46 percent

Want to guess the figure for the US in 1938? 528 percent...

Figures are from Bairoch via Kennedy, page 201 of the 1980 paperback edition of The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.

Again, worth noting, if the British wanted or needed a deterrant, they had Bomber Command functioning (1,000 plane raids in 1942, after all) and they had development paths to biological and chemical weapons that were significantly less expensive as atomic weapons and, frankly, about as horrific as one would care to have them be...

Of course, Bomber Command needed L-L to function (POL from the US was much cheaper and easier to get to the UK than POL from, say, Iran - even after the Soviet-British invasion in 1941.)

An all-British atomic weapon in the 1940s with a starting point of 1941 and no US in the war is about as likely as, well, ZEELOWE in 1940.

Best,

 

[fastmongrel]

Japan is not in the war in this timeline, some sense has sneaked into Japanese thinking with the greater than OTL aid and advice from a magically more sane Germany who are desperate to keep the US on the left hand side of the Atlantic. Any attack by Japan into British, Dutch and Portugese Empire territory would mean the US goes to war, they cannot allow Japan free reign in SE Asia. Pearl Harbour was a late addition to the Japanese war plans because they knew that attacking South would mean a big Navyblue hammer was going to land on them via the Phillipines.

I am asking questions because I am starting to make notes for a timeline that involves a UK and her industrialised Dominions building a bomb and a bomber to carry it. I reckon I have the bomber sorted in my notes it would be a slightly different B29 (Boeing were doing design work in iirc 1938) built by a joint Boeing, Canadian Boeing and Vickers-Armstrong company with aid from various British companies to RAF specifications with jointly designed by Rolls Royce UK and Avro Canada engines that look remakably like a sorted three stage supercharged big bore RR Vulture engine but called the Condor. The USAAC gets to buy the B29 at cost with their own engines, bomb sights, guns and a different bomb bay.

I am a bit stuck on the nuke side of things and need to work out times, production and testing.

I think some big new dams are needed in the western Rockies.

 

[fastmongrel]

considering that the british figured Germany was developing a nuclear bomb I am sure they would have found/diverted the resources to bring tube alloys to a successful conclusion.simply put if Germany got one first all other weapons would be moot.

THIS

Fear is what is pushing the development of Tube Alloys. The Manhattan project is also on the go but not on the boil as OTL as the US is isolationist but keeping an eye on the future. I dont know whether there will be co-operation between the MAUD committee and the Uranium Committee yet I am still thinking that one through. I want this to be a Britain and its industrialised Domions timeline as far as sensibly possible. Canada, South Africa, India, Australia and New Zealand are going to be boosted as hard as I can without using Handwavium. Canada in particular will be a technical powerhouse at the end of the timeline. Doughnuts and Maple Syrup on the Moon maybe.

 

[TFSmith121]

Um, who is providing Japan with POL?

Japan is not in the war in this timeline, some sense has sneaked into Japanese thinking with the greater than OTL aid and advice from a magically more sane Germany who are desperate to keep the US on the left hand side of the Atlantic. Any attack by Japan into British, Dutch and Portugese Empire territory would mean the US goes to war, they cannot allow Japan free reign in SE Asia. Pearl Harbour was a late addition to the Japanese war plans because they knew that attacking South would mean a big Navyblue hammer was going to land on them via the Phillipines.

I am asking questions because I am starting to make notes for a timeline that involves a UK and her industrialised Dominions building a bomb and a bomber to carry it. I reckon I have the bomber sorted in my notes it would be a slightly different B29 (Boeing were doing design work in iirc 1938) built by a joint Boeing, Canadian Boeing and Vickers-Armstrong company with aid from various British companies to RAF specifications with jointly designed by Rolls Royce UK and Avro Canada engines that look remakably like a sorted three stage supercharged big bore RR Vulture engine but called the Condor. The USAAC gets to buy the B29 at cost with their own engines, bomb sights, guns and a different bomb bay.

I am a bit stuck on the nuke side of things and need to work out times, production and testing.

I think some big new dams are needed in the western Rockies.

Who is providing Japan with POL?

The U.S. embargoed Japan because of the Japanese war in China; the British and Dutch needed everything they could produce themselves and wanted L-L, which they would not have received if they were supplying the Japanese economy.

And the Japanese could not sustain their own economy with the energy sources they controlled; they had to make peace or go to war with the British and Dutch.

Even with a 1938 start (mighty prescient of Chamberlain) the British are in the midst of a major re-armament program, for all three services - something must be cut to free up resources for a) atomic research; and b) aircraft R&D in the U.S., of all places - which in 1938 is completely a-historical, on the parts of both the U.S. and the UK.

Best,

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Fact: Tube Alloys preceded US entry into the war, and especially before the Manhattan Project. And when they were fighting the Nazis single handedly, ie before the US and USSR joined.

While it might seem obvious to some people in this thread that Britain couldnt afford such a project, they had ALREADY started it, so real life disagrees with your theories.

Would any such project have been much smaller than the Manhattan Project? Definitely. But a focussed project to build a plutonium bomb, breeding the Pu in heavy water moderated reactors would have been eminently feasible. Unlike the US which was about to scale up production to 3-7 bombs a month within 6 months of the first test, a British project would likely be months per bomb rather than bombs per month. My gut feeling is the first British bomb wouldnt be ready until at least '46, probably '47.

Uranium. Canada is, an was, a major producer. Its true that the 'radium' mine was closed due to lack of demand for radium, but iOTL it was reopened quickly, and there was masses of unrefined ore lying around in the meantime.

Iotl, the US got into the bomb businesss and bought that ore out from under the noses of the Brits/Canadians. Here, even if the US tries that, the ore will be declared a strategic resource, and kept in Canada.

The bulk of the worrk will be in Canada - a decent team was already assembled in Montreal and working on the project before they got absorbed by the Manhattan Project.

 

[TFSmith121]

In the middle of a war with Germany, Italy, and Japan?

Fact: Tube Alloys preceded US entry into the war, and especially before the Manhattan Project. And when they were fighting the Nazis single handedly, ie before the US and USSR joined.

While it might seem obvious to some people in this thread that Britain couldnt afford such a project, they had ALREADY started it, so real life disagrees with your theories.

Would any such project have been much smaller than the Manhattan Project? Definitely. But a focussed project to build a plutonium bomb, breeding the Pu in heavy water moderated reactors would have been eminently feasible. Unlike the US which was about to scale up production to 3-7 bombs a month within 6 months of the first test, a British project would likely be months per bomb rather than bombs per month. My gut feeling is the first British bomb wouldnt be ready until at least '46, probably '47.

Uranium. Canada is, an was, a major producer. Its true that the 'radium' mine was closed due to lack of demand for radium, but iOTL it was reopened quickly, and there was masses of unrefined ore lying around in the meantime.

Iotl, the US got into the bomb businesss and bought that ore out from under the noses of the Brits/Canadians. Here, even if the US tries that, the ore will be declared a strategic resource, and kept in Canada.

The bulk of the worrk will be in Canada - a decent team was already assembled in Montreal and working on the project before they got absorbed by the Manhattan Project.

In the middle of a war with Germany, Italy, and Japan? And without Lend-Lease?

There's only so much to go around, and by 1940-41, the British had spent almost everything they had...

As far as R&D programs go, there are all sorts of programs that were created and even given significant resources that fail because of conflicting priorities - as witness anything from Airborne Nuclear Propulsion to Apollo XVIII through XX.

Or CVA-01 and her sister... Or the CF-105.

Best,

 

[Michel Van]

On Uran from Canada and Australia
right they have that stuff under the ground during WW2
you need to mine it, refined it and and enrich it or even transform it into plutonium. what take time !

there was one nation who got refined Uranium in large amount in stock, as waste product of Mining operation in there colony
Belgium !
the Admnistration of Belgium Congo sell the USA all there stock of Uranium, enough to build 7~9 atomic bombs
they would sell that also to British if it help some how against the NAZI

Heavy Water
it's a isotope of water is needed for Nuclear Reactors and plutonium production.
The Germans had Norway as Source for it but the British special forces make sure nothing of that arrive in Third Reich
in same time in Canada they start to refine Heavy Water under "Tube Alloys" program then for Manhattan project

Avro Lancaster
so good this bomber was it got major problem as Atomic bomber
It's bomb bay got no access for crew to get to Atomic bomb
what is necessary to primed the warhead before drop

If you no concern that bomber take off with a primed atomic bomb. (or the British engineer find a Fail save system for that).
take the Avro Lancaster B I Special right tool for job.

Impact on WW2
what for rude shaken up for Hitler, if he is tell that British destroy Berlin with ONE Bombe
and Churchill threaten with to drop more of those weapons on the Third Reich if Germans not surrender
Hitler refuse to believe it's real, while some of his officers deliberate about, how to kill him...

Stalin is in shock about What Britain has for a Weapon and screams "Bring me a nuclear Scientist"

in USA after news Britain got Atomic Bomb, start in White House Pentagon and State Department
a wild search and destroy operation to find a certain War Plan documents, the Pentagon envision some years ago...

 

[pdf27]

Britain did not have money to spare for major R&D/production efforts beyond what they did historically, any more than it had excess funding for war production of anything at all beyond what they did; there's a reason the US passed Lend-Lease to keep the British in the fight after the cash and carry period ended...because the British no longer had all that much cash.

Err.. no, you're making the erroneous assumption that money=dollars. Not true - the British were quite capable of borrowing money (in many cases from the Bank of England which created the money to lend out) and spending it overseas in Sterling. The problem was that the US - and only the US - insisted on payment in dollars and refused to allow unsecured loans. That meant by early-1941 the UK was unable to continue ordering from US factories - and would either have to make mass cancellations or export a great deal more to pay for it.
This would be bad news for both the US and UK - a reduction in US exports to the UK or the rest of the world would be a result, along with the UK being less effective in fighting the war. This was bad for both sides, and Lend-Lease (which imposed some pretty onerous conditions on the UK postwar economy) was the result. Get rid of it, and Britain keeps fighting but less effectively - and a LOT less cash goes into the US economy.

As for Tube Alloys, any plausible UK project pretty much has to be in Canada. That was in the Sterling zone, and was a net lender to the UK as well. So any project will be done at the expense of production in Canada - but as the money will be recycled around the economy with very little being sent abroad the impact on the overall economy will be small. Victory Aircraft, for instance, might be somewhat smaller.

 

[Ingsoc]

IIRC Britain lucked out on the route to the bomb and had guessed the correct way to go about a gun-type straight out the box, rather than trying one of everything a la Manhatten Project. Handy, as Britain obviously couldn't afford to spend like the Manhatten Project did.

So the bomb would take longer to make, and be less powerful, than the Manhatten project, but we're probably only talking about a delay of max 18 months.

(My personal view is that often these threads end up getting a bit silly. For example here, we're supposed to believe that Japan has declared war on Britain and attacked the DEI and Burma, but that still hasn't provoked US involvement. Hmmm)

 

[pdf27]

Reading the MAUD Report is a good place to start here - that gives you some idea what the British knew in 1940/early 1941. Compare that to the Manhattan project, and the only major issue is that the plant they had planned really couldn't produce enough material for more than a handful of gun-type bombs per year (as in, several months per bomb - their estimate was 3 bombs/month, but this doesn't allow for several factors that later became known).

Essentially, the British had invented the gaseous diffusion process for Uranium, and ICI had built a small pilot plant (lab scale) in the UK. Critically, much of the delay to it was as a result of getting the US involved - it isn't at all implausible for them to have their first bomb at around the time the US did. The real problem is that the US was capable of massively scaling up production based on the facilities built during the war to tens or even hundreds of bombs per month, as well as much bigger bombs. The UK wouldn't be for a while - they really don't have the cash or the infrastructure, nor really the need until the Soviet Union gets the bomb. Worse, replicating Teller-Ulam can only really be done once they figure out how the US did it - they really don't have the bodies to do it themselves, and even implosion (which will work quite happily with Uranium) is going to be taxing.

 

[TFSmith121]

Just trying to work out the strategic situation

IIRC Britain lucked out on the route to the bomb and had guessed the correct way to go about a gun-type straight out the box, rather than trying one of everything a la Manhatten Project. Handy, as Britain obviously couldn't afford to spend like the Manhatten Project did.

So the bomb would take longer to make, and be less powerful, than the Manhatten project, but we're probably only talking about a delay of max 18 months.

(My personal view is that often these threads end up getting a bit silly. For example here, we're supposed to believe that Japan has declared war on Britain and attacked the DEI and Burma, but that still hasn't provoked US involvement. Hmmm)

Just trying to work out the strategic situation, since the OP left much unsaid.

Best,