Was there a contingency plan in place if Little Boy failed to detonate?What was the plan for an abort of the Enola Gay's mission to drop the atomic bomb?What kind of atomic bombs were anticipated after Nagasaki?Was Casablanca a “safe” place for the Allies to hold a global conference in January, 1943?Was there a plan “B” for the D-Day?Why is there less public attention on the firebombing of Japan compared to its atomic bombing?What was going to be Hitler's next plan after taking Russia?Was there a plan to use nuclear weapons for terrain modification in North America?Why was Hiroshima selected to be the city in Japan on which the first atom bomb was dropped?Why were there no nuclear detonations in 1959?Did Truman really believe that Hiroshima was a military base?Was there an official name for the bomb detonated in the Manhattan ProjectAt Pearl Harbor was a Japanese Third Wave of attack in the original plan or was Nagumo expected to improvise?
Longest Text in Latin
Effects of ~10atm pressure on engine design
How to cope with regret and shame about not fully utilizing opportunities during PhD?
On studying Computer Science vs. Software Engineering to become a proficient coder
Non-deterministic Finite Automata | Sipser Example 1.16
return tuple of uncopyable objects
Can a tourist shoot a gun in the USA?
Can I say: "When was your train leaving?" if the train leaves in the future?
How do I interpret improvement in AUC ROC from the business perspective?
Smallest Guaranteed hash collision cycle length
Tikz draw contour without some edges, and fill
Ito`s Lemma problem
What episode was being referenced by this part of Discovery's season 2 episode 13 recap?
If current results hold, Man City would win PL title
How can a layman easily get the consensus view of what academia *thinks* about a subject?
Is there any good reason to write "it is easy to see"?
On what legal basis did the UK remove the 'European Union' from its passport?
Counterexample for "continuous image of closed and bounded is closed and bounded" (in normed spaces).
Program which behaves differently in/out of a debugger
Why are solar panels kept tilted?
How exactly does artificial gravity work?
Where to find every-day healthy food near Heathrow Airport?
How can dragons propel their breath attacks to a long distance
Earliest use of "rookie"?
Was there a contingency plan in place if Little Boy failed to detonate?
What was the plan for an abort of the Enola Gay's mission to drop the atomic bomb?What kind of atomic bombs were anticipated after Nagasaki?Was Casablanca a “safe” place for the Allies to hold a global conference in January, 1943?Was there a plan “B” for the D-Day?Why is there less public attention on the firebombing of Japan compared to its atomic bombing?What was going to be Hitler's next plan after taking Russia?Was there a plan to use nuclear weapons for terrain modification in North America?Why was Hiroshima selected to be the city in Japan on which the first atom bomb was dropped?Why were there no nuclear detonations in 1959?Did Truman really believe that Hiroshima was a military base?Was there an official name for the bomb detonated in the Manhattan ProjectAt Pearl Harbor was a Japanese Third Wave of attack in the original plan or was Nagumo expected to improvise?
It's August 6th, 1945. The first atomic bomb ever dropped hurtles to the ground. Its fuse fails and with a thunk it buries itself in the ground. The Enola Gay flies home, its crew worried they did something wrong.
Now the brass back in Washington have a problem; they just hand delivered an atomic bomb to their desperate enemies, and it might be easy to repair.
I couldn't find any contingencies about it, but I'm also not a professionally trained historian with access to primary sources. I did find plans, which were abandoned, for building a giant concrete containment vessel around the Trinity device in case that failed to completely detonate, so they could save the uranium.
My question is, what, if anything was their plan for this situation?
world-war-two nuclear-weapons
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
|
show 4 more comments
It's August 6th, 1945. The first atomic bomb ever dropped hurtles to the ground. Its fuse fails and with a thunk it buries itself in the ground. The Enola Gay flies home, its crew worried they did something wrong.
Now the brass back in Washington have a problem; they just hand delivered an atomic bomb to their desperate enemies, and it might be easy to repair.
I couldn't find any contingencies about it, but I'm also not a professionally trained historian with access to primary sources. I did find plans, which were abandoned, for building a giant concrete containment vessel around the Trinity device in case that failed to completely detonate, so they could save the uranium.
My question is, what, if anything was their plan for this situation?
world-war-two nuclear-weapons
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
19
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
44
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
9
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
12
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
6
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54
|
show 4 more comments
It's August 6th, 1945. The first atomic bomb ever dropped hurtles to the ground. Its fuse fails and with a thunk it buries itself in the ground. The Enola Gay flies home, its crew worried they did something wrong.
Now the brass back in Washington have a problem; they just hand delivered an atomic bomb to their desperate enemies, and it might be easy to repair.
I couldn't find any contingencies about it, but I'm also not a professionally trained historian with access to primary sources. I did find plans, which were abandoned, for building a giant concrete containment vessel around the Trinity device in case that failed to completely detonate, so they could save the uranium.
My question is, what, if anything was their plan for this situation?
world-war-two nuclear-weapons
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
It's August 6th, 1945. The first atomic bomb ever dropped hurtles to the ground. Its fuse fails and with a thunk it buries itself in the ground. The Enola Gay flies home, its crew worried they did something wrong.
Now the brass back in Washington have a problem; they just hand delivered an atomic bomb to their desperate enemies, and it might be easy to repair.
I couldn't find any contingencies about it, but I'm also not a professionally trained historian with access to primary sources. I did find plans, which were abandoned, for building a giant concrete containment vessel around the Trinity device in case that failed to completely detonate, so they could save the uranium.
My question is, what, if anything was their plan for this situation?
world-war-two nuclear-weapons
world-war-two nuclear-weapons
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
edited May 9 at 14:04
Ryan_L
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
asked May 8 at 15:01
Ryan_LRyan_L
49549
49549
19
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
44
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
9
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
12
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
6
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54
|
show 4 more comments
19
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
44
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
9
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
12
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
6
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54
19
19
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
44
44
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
9
9
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
12
12
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
6
6
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54
|
show 4 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
If the bomb failed to explode in any way (which was unlikely, see comments and Mark's answer), the USA still would not have to worry about it (too much).
They would win the war anyway within a few months, and pick up the wrecked bomb from wherever the Japanese had stored it.
Even if Japan could figure out what that bomb was supposed to be doing and repair it, they didn't have any delivery system that could reach mainland USA (with any degree of certainty).
More importantly, the USA knew Japan did not have the capacities to build a second bomb, so even the microscopic chance that Japan could deliver the salvaged bomb to some target would not have changed the outcome.
The USA had both the delivery system and the production capacity to build a second, third, fourth bomb (of the Fat Man design), quite aside from having the strategic upper hand so firmly that they did not actually need the A-bomb to win the war. Not even in the very, very unlikely scenario of a major city, Pearl Harbor, or any other single location taken out by the salvaged Little Boy.
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
|
show 1 more comment
The primary contingency plan was the design of the bomb itself. Little Boy was not a safe design: any number of unplanned events could cause a detonation. Foremost among these is impact: a 500 g impact, such as would happen after a 15,000-foot (4.5 km) fall, is sufficient to bring the bullet and target together, detonating the bomb. If the bomb hit water instead of land, the water would act as a neutron moderator, causing a criticality event and severe radioactive contamination. In the event of an airplane crash, any resulting fire will trigger the explosives, setting off the bomb.
In short, once the bomb is fully assembled, it's very hard to keep it from going off. In the event that the crew of Enola Gay had to abort their mission, they had no intention of trying to land with the bomb still aboard.
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
|
show 6 more comments
Adding to the above mentioned facts that the bomb would go off very easily and would be useless even after a fizzle, and that Japan was in no position to get a nuclear weapons programme off the ground, the U.S. didn't really need a contingency plan.
Japan had already started overtures for a general surrender before the bomb was dropped. The excuse the U.S. used for dropping the bomb was that they didn't like one of the conditions of the surrender, namely that the emperor would remain Japan's head of state. If the bomb hadn't gone off, the U.S. would have simply accepted Japan's surrender with the condition and leave the emperor on the throne, which the U.S. ended up doing anyway.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "324"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52517%2fwas-there-a-contingency-plan-in-place-if-little-boy-failed-to-detonate%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If the bomb failed to explode in any way (which was unlikely, see comments and Mark's answer), the USA still would not have to worry about it (too much).
They would win the war anyway within a few months, and pick up the wrecked bomb from wherever the Japanese had stored it.
Even if Japan could figure out what that bomb was supposed to be doing and repair it, they didn't have any delivery system that could reach mainland USA (with any degree of certainty).
More importantly, the USA knew Japan did not have the capacities to build a second bomb, so even the microscopic chance that Japan could deliver the salvaged bomb to some target would not have changed the outcome.
The USA had both the delivery system and the production capacity to build a second, third, fourth bomb (of the Fat Man design), quite aside from having the strategic upper hand so firmly that they did not actually need the A-bomb to win the war. Not even in the very, very unlikely scenario of a major city, Pearl Harbor, or any other single location taken out by the salvaged Little Boy.
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
|
show 1 more comment
If the bomb failed to explode in any way (which was unlikely, see comments and Mark's answer), the USA still would not have to worry about it (too much).
They would win the war anyway within a few months, and pick up the wrecked bomb from wherever the Japanese had stored it.
Even if Japan could figure out what that bomb was supposed to be doing and repair it, they didn't have any delivery system that could reach mainland USA (with any degree of certainty).
More importantly, the USA knew Japan did not have the capacities to build a second bomb, so even the microscopic chance that Japan could deliver the salvaged bomb to some target would not have changed the outcome.
The USA had both the delivery system and the production capacity to build a second, third, fourth bomb (of the Fat Man design), quite aside from having the strategic upper hand so firmly that they did not actually need the A-bomb to win the war. Not even in the very, very unlikely scenario of a major city, Pearl Harbor, or any other single location taken out by the salvaged Little Boy.
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
|
show 1 more comment
If the bomb failed to explode in any way (which was unlikely, see comments and Mark's answer), the USA still would not have to worry about it (too much).
They would win the war anyway within a few months, and pick up the wrecked bomb from wherever the Japanese had stored it.
Even if Japan could figure out what that bomb was supposed to be doing and repair it, they didn't have any delivery system that could reach mainland USA (with any degree of certainty).
More importantly, the USA knew Japan did not have the capacities to build a second bomb, so even the microscopic chance that Japan could deliver the salvaged bomb to some target would not have changed the outcome.
The USA had both the delivery system and the production capacity to build a second, third, fourth bomb (of the Fat Man design), quite aside from having the strategic upper hand so firmly that they did not actually need the A-bomb to win the war. Not even in the very, very unlikely scenario of a major city, Pearl Harbor, or any other single location taken out by the salvaged Little Boy.
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
If the bomb failed to explode in any way (which was unlikely, see comments and Mark's answer), the USA still would not have to worry about it (too much).
They would win the war anyway within a few months, and pick up the wrecked bomb from wherever the Japanese had stored it.
Even if Japan could figure out what that bomb was supposed to be doing and repair it, they didn't have any delivery system that could reach mainland USA (with any degree of certainty).
More importantly, the USA knew Japan did not have the capacities to build a second bomb, so even the microscopic chance that Japan could deliver the salvaged bomb to some target would not have changed the outcome.
The USA had both the delivery system and the production capacity to build a second, third, fourth bomb (of the Fat Man design), quite aside from having the strategic upper hand so firmly that they did not actually need the A-bomb to win the war. Not even in the very, very unlikely scenario of a major city, Pearl Harbor, or any other single location taken out by the salvaged Little Boy.
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
edited May 9 at 10:44
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
answered May 8 at 15:35
DevSolarDevSolar
7,2192648
7,2192648
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
|
show 1 more comment
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
17
17
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
Well, they didn't really have enough uranium to build a second, third, fourth Little Boy.
– Vladimir F
May 8 at 20:09
20
20
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
@Vladimir F: But the US certainly had the resources to build many atomic weapons within a few years. We know this because it did just that.
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:25
14
14
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
Probably the most devastating thing the Japanese could have done with a captured bomb would be to send a submarine on a suicide mission to the Okinawa, to detonate it at the staging area for Operation Olympic. As the Crossroads Baker test showed, this would likely have contaminated the ships so severely that the invasion of the home islands would be put off for six months or more. Of course, this wasn't known until after the Crossroads Baker test...
– Mark
May 9 at 4:29
7
7
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
Perhaps, when the Japanese analyzed that bomb, to realize what it was and what little problem made it fail, in other words, the Americans have the bomb (and it was pure luck that it didn’t explode) and could easily come up with a next one that does work, they surrendered just as they did when experiencing the working bomb. After all, the message is almost the same.
– Holger
May 9 at 9:36
2
2
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
Plus - in the chaos of war why would the Japanese think that dud bomb was any different than any other dud bomb, many of which already littered their landscape?
– mxyzplk
2 days ago
|
show 1 more comment
The primary contingency plan was the design of the bomb itself. Little Boy was not a safe design: any number of unplanned events could cause a detonation. Foremost among these is impact: a 500 g impact, such as would happen after a 15,000-foot (4.5 km) fall, is sufficient to bring the bullet and target together, detonating the bomb. If the bomb hit water instead of land, the water would act as a neutron moderator, causing a criticality event and severe radioactive contamination. In the event of an airplane crash, any resulting fire will trigger the explosives, setting off the bomb.
In short, once the bomb is fully assembled, it's very hard to keep it from going off. In the event that the crew of Enola Gay had to abort their mission, they had no intention of trying to land with the bomb still aboard.
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
|
show 6 more comments
The primary contingency plan was the design of the bomb itself. Little Boy was not a safe design: any number of unplanned events could cause a detonation. Foremost among these is impact: a 500 g impact, such as would happen after a 15,000-foot (4.5 km) fall, is sufficient to bring the bullet and target together, detonating the bomb. If the bomb hit water instead of land, the water would act as a neutron moderator, causing a criticality event and severe radioactive contamination. In the event of an airplane crash, any resulting fire will trigger the explosives, setting off the bomb.
In short, once the bomb is fully assembled, it's very hard to keep it from going off. In the event that the crew of Enola Gay had to abort their mission, they had no intention of trying to land with the bomb still aboard.
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
|
show 6 more comments
The primary contingency plan was the design of the bomb itself. Little Boy was not a safe design: any number of unplanned events could cause a detonation. Foremost among these is impact: a 500 g impact, such as would happen after a 15,000-foot (4.5 km) fall, is sufficient to bring the bullet and target together, detonating the bomb. If the bomb hit water instead of land, the water would act as a neutron moderator, causing a criticality event and severe radioactive contamination. In the event of an airplane crash, any resulting fire will trigger the explosives, setting off the bomb.
In short, once the bomb is fully assembled, it's very hard to keep it from going off. In the event that the crew of Enola Gay had to abort their mission, they had no intention of trying to land with the bomb still aboard.
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
The primary contingency plan was the design of the bomb itself. Little Boy was not a safe design: any number of unplanned events could cause a detonation. Foremost among these is impact: a 500 g impact, such as would happen after a 15,000-foot (4.5 km) fall, is sufficient to bring the bullet and target together, detonating the bomb. If the bomb hit water instead of land, the water would act as a neutron moderator, causing a criticality event and severe radioactive contamination. In the event of an airplane crash, any resulting fire will trigger the explosives, setting off the bomb.
In short, once the bomb is fully assembled, it's very hard to keep it from going off. In the event that the crew of Enola Gay had to abort their mission, they had no intention of trying to land with the bomb still aboard.
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
edited yesterday
Jonas Stein
1032
1032
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
answered May 8 at 20:43
MarkMark
3,7081737
3,7081737
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
|
show 6 more comments
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
11
11
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
Michael MacAskill, the 500g impact would be the sudden stop upon hitting the ground. I have no idea what the actual acceleration would be, but that's what he's talking about.
– Haakon Dahl
May 9 at 4:29
12
12
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
@Michael MacAskill: (Sigh) It would have accelerated to terminal velocity as it fell. When it hit the ground, it would have decelerated rather quickly. Think bug on a windshield :-)
– jamesqf
May 9 at 4:32
10
10
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
@MichaelMacAskill just because the accelerations involved in a collision are very time-sensitive doesn't mean they aren't meaningful. If the detonation mechanism depends on a force between two internal components exceeding a certain magnitude then the local acceleration must pass the threshold to develop this force inertially. Accelerating at 90% of the rate for 10 times the duration would dissipate much more energy, but not in a way that would disturb the mechanism.
– Will
May 9 at 10:08
4
4
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
@MichaelMacAskill There's no discontinuity. The object deforms as it hits the ground.
– David Richerby
May 9 at 12:56
8
8
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
@MichaelMacAskill Discontinuities do not exist in nature except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. The acceleration spikes sharply upon impact, but that doesn't make it discontinuous or non-differentiable.
– Nuclear Wang
May 9 at 13:22
|
show 6 more comments
Adding to the above mentioned facts that the bomb would go off very easily and would be useless even after a fizzle, and that Japan was in no position to get a nuclear weapons programme off the ground, the U.S. didn't really need a contingency plan.
Japan had already started overtures for a general surrender before the bomb was dropped. The excuse the U.S. used for dropping the bomb was that they didn't like one of the conditions of the surrender, namely that the emperor would remain Japan's head of state. If the bomb hadn't gone off, the U.S. would have simply accepted Japan's surrender with the condition and leave the emperor on the throne, which the U.S. ended up doing anyway.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Adding to the above mentioned facts that the bomb would go off very easily and would be useless even after a fizzle, and that Japan was in no position to get a nuclear weapons programme off the ground, the U.S. didn't really need a contingency plan.
Japan had already started overtures for a general surrender before the bomb was dropped. The excuse the U.S. used for dropping the bomb was that they didn't like one of the conditions of the surrender, namely that the emperor would remain Japan's head of state. If the bomb hadn't gone off, the U.S. would have simply accepted Japan's surrender with the condition and leave the emperor on the throne, which the U.S. ended up doing anyway.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Adding to the above mentioned facts that the bomb would go off very easily and would be useless even after a fizzle, and that Japan was in no position to get a nuclear weapons programme off the ground, the U.S. didn't really need a contingency plan.
Japan had already started overtures for a general surrender before the bomb was dropped. The excuse the U.S. used for dropping the bomb was that they didn't like one of the conditions of the surrender, namely that the emperor would remain Japan's head of state. If the bomb hadn't gone off, the U.S. would have simply accepted Japan's surrender with the condition and leave the emperor on the throne, which the U.S. ended up doing anyway.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Adding to the above mentioned facts that the bomb would go off very easily and would be useless even after a fizzle, and that Japan was in no position to get a nuclear weapons programme off the ground, the U.S. didn't really need a contingency plan.
Japan had already started overtures for a general surrender before the bomb was dropped. The excuse the U.S. used for dropping the bomb was that they didn't like one of the conditions of the surrender, namely that the emperor would remain Japan's head of state. If the bomb hadn't gone off, the U.S. would have simply accepted Japan's surrender with the condition and leave the emperor on the throne, which the U.S. ended up doing anyway.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
answered May 9 at 22:21
AnonymousAnonymous
271
271
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Anonymous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52517%2fwas-there-a-contingency-plan-in-place-if-little-boy-failed-to-detonate%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
19
What questions do you have that are not answered here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-type_fission_weapon "Even a "fizzle" would have completely disintegrated the device, while the multiple redundancies built into the "Little Boy" design meant there was negligible if any potential for the device to strike the ground without detonating at all."
– AllInOne
May 8 at 15:37
44
@AllInOne: Ryan is asking what, if any, contingency plan there was if the "negligible, if any" chance turned out to be non-zero after all. I think it is a fair question (albeit about a very unlikely event).
– DevSolar
May 8 at 15:39
9
What did your research reveal? (Please edit the answer into the question - questions should show evidence of prior research, and nobody should have to read comments to understand the question).
– Mark C. Wallace♦
May 8 at 15:44
12
Conjecture, the Fat Man would have been dropped on the same site as quickly as possible with an aim of destroying any remains before it could be moved and hidden. The "third bomb" was several weeks delayed link: warbirdforum.com/third.htm
– Criggie
May 8 at 23:31
6
Remember, Japan's surrender was already imminent at that time.
– forest
May 9 at 5:54