• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Radiation and the atomic bombing of Japan.

Gawdzilla Sama

121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
Gawdzilla Sama
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
42,549
Location
Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
On use of radiation effects as a force multiplier for atomic bombs used on Japan. Citing Truman and the Hiroshima Cult, by Robert P. Newman, page 119.


Plans for tactical use of atomic bombs in proximity to American troops show complete disregard for radioactive effects of early bombs. Barton Bernstein and Mac Gallicchio have reconstructed General Marshall's plans for battlefield us of bombs that were to be ready in November for the invasion of Kyushu. One bomb would be exploded at a height of 1,800 feet. It could "wipe out resistance over an area 2000 feet in diameter ... paralyze it seriously over an area five miles in diameter..." Damaging effects of radiation?None: " ... we think we could send troops through the area immediately, preferably by motor but on foot if desired."[15]

There was consideration of tactical use of atomic bombs right up the the Japanese surrender. General Marshall recalled in 1957 that he had planned to use nine atomic bombs, three for each of the three army corps scheduled to land on Kyushu. [This in addition to the one already dropped. OP] One bomb was to dropped in each crops area right in the path of the American invaders, shortly before they wen ashore [16]. ..."
Click to expand...

[15] Barton J. Bernstein, "Eclipsed by Hiroshima and Nagasaki" International Security 15 (Spring 1991): 161; Marc Gallichio, "After Nagasaki: General Marshall's Plan for Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Japan," Prologue 23 (Winter 1991): 396-404.

[16] Bernstein, Barton, ed. The Atomic Bomb: The Critical Issues. Boston: Little, Brown, 1976. Page 168.
 
Last edited:
:confused: Yes the plans for Downfall involved employing upwards of a dozen nuclear bombs in tactical support or theatre/operational roles.
As Wellerstein says the detailed knowledge of radiation effects simply wasn't there.
 
I was just wondering who you'd started the thread, there didn't seem to be a specific trigger.
Newman's book is generally excellent, an antidote to many of the more nonsensical claims regarding the decisions around the use of the atomic bombs
 
catsmate1 said:
I was just wondering who you'd started the thread, there didn't seem to be a specific trigger.
Newman's book is generally excellent, an antidote to many of the more nonsensical claims regarding the decisions around the use of the atomic bombs
Click to expand...

I'm on several history boards and the question came up about Marshall's plans, so I pulled my copy and posted that reply, then decided to spread it around to other top forums.

It tends to freak people a little to realize that we would have used ten atomic bombs on Kyushu alone, and that by the time we landed on the Kwanto Plain we could have been producing a bomb a week for combat usage.
 
Gawdzilla, it's not clear to me from the cited passages that radiation was intended to be used as a force multiplier (rather than the blast of the detonation itself), nor is it clear that Marshall and his staff were aware of the radiation hazards but chose to ignore them. Did you mean to cite other passages that make these points more obvious?
 
To clarify: Marshall knew that radiation was dangerous;that was common knowledge (in 1942 Robert Heinlein wrote a story called "Blowups Happen"about what amounts to a meltdown in a nuclear power plant) but they really underestimated how dangerous and long lasting radiation was.
 
dudalb said:
To clarify: Marshall knew that radiation was dangerous;that was common knowledge (in 1942 Robert Heinlein wrote a story called "Blowups Happen"about what amounts to a meltdown in a nuclear power plant) but they really underestimated how dangerous and long lasting radiation was.
Click to expand...

There was a short called "Nerves" where they cured radiation sickness with one shot and contained a melt down with relative ease.
 
Gawdzilla said:
I'm on several history boards and the question came up about Marshall's plans, so I pulled my copy and posted that reply, then decided to spread it around to other top forums.
Click to expand...
Ah right. I was wondering, your OP seemed "reactive" to me and I wondered if I'd missed someone talking rubbish about the bombings and/or Downfall again.
Gawdzilla said:
It tends to freak people a little to realize that we would have used ten atomic bombs on Kyushu alone,
Click to expand...
With a few in reserve...
The original production sequence [As described in the Hull-Seaman memorandum of August 1945], to support Downfall in tactical use, was
· one MK 3 by 19AUG1945
· a second MK 3 by 01SEP1945
· three more MK 3 (mix of MOD0 and MOD1 configurations) by 30SEP1945
· three or four additional MK 3 weapons in OCT1945
· an additional MK 3 every ten days for the remainder of the year
· an additional MK 1 available before the end of 1945, too late for the initial Olympic/Coronet landings
Click to expand...
Gawdzilla said:
and that by the time we landed on the Kwanto Plain we could have been producing a bomb a week for combat usage.
Click to expand...
Nitpick, it'd have been one MK3 every 9.5 days until mid-January 1946 when additional capacity came on-line and it increased to one per 6.5 days, along with design improvements. After twenty or so bombs the design would be fully switched to a more powerful (by about 50%) design, somewhat comparable to the MK3MOD2 with some MK4 features.
 
I guess it's still not clear to me that Marshall intended to use radiation as a force multiplier. Or that he was aware of the real risk to his own troops, and chose to ignore it in his planning.
 
It sounds like they intended to use the bomb to create a wave of radiation to cause acute radiation poisoning, but didn't realize the lingering effects of the radioactive material left. Is that correct?
 
dudalb said:
To clarify: Marshall knew that radiation was dangerous;that was common knowledge (in 1942 Robert Heinlein wrote a story called "Blowups Happen"about what amounts to a meltdown in a nuclear power plant) but they really underestimated how dangerous and long lasting radiation was.
Click to expand...

He also wrote a story called 'Solution Unsatisfactory', about using radioactive dust as a weapon to end the war - this was written before Pearl Harbour.

ETA: In this story he also foresaw a version of the arms race that developed when other countries also developed the same weapon.
 
Last edited:
Gawdzilla said:
No. They were going on blast and fire.
Click to expand...

It seems I got confused by the phrase "use of radiation as a force multiplier" in your OP. Did Marshall knowingly plan cause radiation sickness in the enemy, and put his own troops at risk of same, as part of his strategy for using nuclear weapons? Or did you just mean that Marshall planned to use nuclear bombs against the enemy, and saw little or no risk to his troops once the blast and fire had occurred?
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
It seems I got confused by the phrase "use of radiation as a force multiplier" in your OP. Did Marshall knowingly plan cause radiation sickness in the enemy, and put his own troops at risk of same, as part of his strategy for using nuclear weapons? Or did you just mean that Marshall planned to use nuclear bombs against the enemy, and saw little or no risk to his troops once the blast and fire had occurred?
Click to expand...

The repetitive claim that the US dropped the bombs despite the Japanese wanting to surrender just to test the effects of residual radiation on human beings came up in another forum and I responded with the information in the OP. Then I thought I would pass it along to a few other forums where the topic has come up before.

Marshall and most other Allied commanders saw the atomic bombs as just big fire bombs, "Tall Boys" and "Grand Slams" writ large. Radiation was not an understood thing and "fall-out" wasn't even a term yet. It would be a few years before we even considered the after-effects of an atomic bomb to be long lasting, except among specialists. The Japanese, being an interested party, were quicker on the uptake, as this quote from "Gojira" illustrates.

l
 

Attachments

  • Godzilla haunts Japan.jpg
    Godzilla haunts Japan.jpg
    26.7 KB · Views: 10
As it happens, the prompt gamma and neutron radiation from a Hiroshima-sized atom bomb is heavily attenuated by the air; of the order of a factor of ten for every 500 m you are from ground zero. If you are close enough to receive a lethal radiation dose, the heat pulse and the blast wave have already killed you. Thus, to a first approximation, ignoring prompt radiation effects was the proper thing to do.
Ignoring, or being unaware of, the effect of the later fallout was a big mistake.
 
Didymus said:
As it happens, the prompt gamma and neutron radiation from a Hiroshima-sized atom bomb is heavily attenuated by the air; of the order of a factor of ten for every 500 m you are from ground zero. If you are close enough to receive a lethal radiation dose, the heat pulse and the blast wave have already killed you. Thus, to a first approximation, ignoring prompt radiation effects was the proper thing to do.
Ignoring, or being unaware of, the effect of the later fallout was a big mistake.
Click to expand...
How bad were the effects if the person was shielded from the direct effects of the bomb, say inside a building or shelter?
 
TubbaBlubba said:
It sounds like they intended to use the bomb to create a wave of radiation to cause acute radiation poisoning, but didn't realize the lingering effects of the radioactive material left. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

No, they wanted to use the nukes as high explosive on steroids.
 
They knew that radiation was dangerous,what they did not know was how long lasting it was.
The "We used the bomb on Hiroshima to test the effects of residual radiation" is pure crap.
The amount of nonsense on the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki stagger the mind,and a lot of it is driven by ideology, frankly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom