
Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded - junto
https://archive.today/94EKG
======
dirktheman
It always amazes me how seemingly careless they were with these nuclear
devices back then. To know that such a devestating bomb was handled by a
sultry, shirtless youngster, in a shed on a small island in the Pacific...

It reminds me of the Slotin Incident ([http://www.damninteresting.com/bitten-
by-the-nuclear-dragon/](http://www.damninteresting.com/bitten-by-the-nuclear-
dragon/)) where dr. Louis Slotin accidently slipped the screwdriver he used to
separate two plutonium/uranium hemispheres:

"Immediately, all eight scientists in the room felt a wave of heat accompanied
by a blue glow as the plutonium sphere vomited an invisible burst of gamma and
neutron radiation into the room. As the lab's Geiger counter clicked
hysterically, Louis used his bare hand to push the upper plutonium hemisphere
off and onto the floor, which terminated the supercritical reaction moments
after it began."

Big oopsie.

However gruesome the goal of these bombs, the rate of advancement in such a
short timespan is nothing short of amazing. From the very first successful
test (Trinity) to bombing Hiroshima: just 21 days. They were great days for
science, but a shame to mankind that it had to come this far.

~~~
theoh
It is not clear that dropping the bomb was necessary to end the war. Was it
even necessary to develop it?

Eisenhower said "it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

At the time Truman said Japan had been "repaid many fold" for Pearl Harbor. In
these new images there is a bit of graffiti on the bomb allegedly written by a
Rear Admiral: "a second kiss for Hirohito". It seems to me like the mood in
the US camp was "let's hit them hard, teach them a lesson." rather than a more
considered or balanced calculation.

Edit: in the documentary "The Fog of War" on McNamara, there is discussion of
Curtis LeMay's decision to firebomb Tokyo. In that case there was apparently a
degree of cool-headed calculation.
[http://www.errolmorris.com/film/fow_transcript.html](http://www.errolmorris.com/film/fow_transcript.html)

Some discussion of the nuclear bomb decision here:
[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/it-wasnt-necessary-to-
hit-...](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/it-wasnt-necessary-to-hit-them-
with-that-awful-thing-why-dropping-the-a-bombs-was-wrong/article/2534018) (I
have no idea what the politics of that paper are, caveat lector)

~~~
Tombone5
"The use of the atomic bomb would have to be done with visual targeting, not
by use of radar. [...] The targets should be 'large urban areas of not less
than 3 miles in diameter existing in the larger populated areas… between the
Japanese cities of Tokyo and Nagasaki… [and] should have high strategic
value.' A list of possible targets that met this criteria was given [...] Of
these, Hiroshima was noted as 'the largest untouched target not on the 21st
Bomber Command priority list.' Tokyo, on the other hand, was 'now practically
all bombed and burned out and is practically rubble with only the palace
grounds left standing.' It was further noted that they had to take into
account that the policy of the 20th Air Force was now 'systematically bombing
out' cities 'with the prime purpose in mind of not leaving one stone lying on
the other,' and that they would not likely reserve targets just for the
Manhattan Project."

"Stimson left the meeting thinking Truman completely understood the matter,
and the final target order — with Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, and Nagasaki
(the latter added only then) — was sent out.

But what did Truman take away from this meeting? We can look at Truman’s own
diary entry from July 25th:

" This weapon is to be used against Japan between now and August 10th. I have
told the Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use it so that military objectives and
soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the
Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the
world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital
or the new.

He and I are in accord. The target will be a purely military one and we will
issue a warning statement asking the Japs to surrender and save lives. I’m
sure they will not do that, but we will have given them the chance. It is
certainly a good thing for the world that Hitler’s crowd or Stalin’s did not
discover this atomic bomb. It seems to be the most terrible thing ever
discovered, but it can be made the most useful. "

This passage reflects an incredible misconception. Truman appears, here, to
believe that Hiroshima was 'a purely military' target, and that 'soldiers and
sailors' would be killed, 'not women and children.' But of course every city
on that list was inhabited primarily by civilians. And by the calculus of war
being waged, every city on that list had a military connection — they produced
weapons for the military."

[http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2014/08/08/kyoto-
misconceptio...](http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2014/08/08/kyoto-
misconception/)

~~~
the_rosentotter
He was clearly writing this for posterity.

Japan was beaten. They had already offered a complete surrender, conditional
only on keeping the emperor, which was rejected by the U.S. Their utter defeat
and the hopeless state of their armed forces was well-known by the allies,
since their communication encryption had been cracked months earlier.

The real issue was likely that the Soviet Union, positioned to become a
formidable power in the post-war theater, had promised to enter the war
against Japan on August 6. The Americans needed to make sure that Japan had
been defeated by that point and that the U.S. would occupy Japan, not Soviet
Russia. Hence the rush to drop the bombs before that.

Also, there was no uncertainty about the lack of military significance of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the contemporary reports state this clearly, they even
warn about the presence of American POWs in the area (which was ignored and
they were incinerated along with the hundreds of thousands of Japanese
civilians).

~~~
dmm
> They had already offered a complete surrender, conditional only on keeping
> the emperor, which was rejected by the U.S.

Are you saying the Japanese offered to surrender, with the only condition
being maintaining the emperor, prior to the bombing of Hiroshima? My
understanding is that was the terms accepted after the atomic bombings and the
declaration of war by the USSR.

~~~
the_rosentotter
Yes. According to documents from Roosevelt's office, the Japanese had
previously offered surrender on roughly the same terms that the U.S.
ultimately accepted after the bombings:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8390436](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8390436)

------
qwerta
There were amazing (and deadly) alternatives to a-bomb. Most interesting was
Bat bomb:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_bomb](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_bomb)

~~~
dirktheman
That's hilarious! Imagine sitting in the mess hall, overhearing two men
discussing their day: "I'm working on a cunning plan. It involves bombs,
strapped to bats. What are you working on?" "Oh, just a nuclear fission
device. When it goes supercritical it's.. oh well, never mind. Tell me more
about the bats!"

~~~
pavel_lishin
... and then reporting them for flagrant breaches of security, as well as
being quarantined yourself for knowing too much.

Whee, wartime is fun!

------
Icybee
I found out a few weeks ago they made a bunch of those bombs, minus the
nuclear elements, for training. They even dropped some on Japanese targets and
found they were fairly effective just from the explosive content.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpkin_bomb](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpkin_bomb)

~~~
mendort
They cost between 13k and 26k a piece in 2014 USD. That is truly amazing.

EDIT:

Even more amazing when you consider that they weighed about 10k pounds.

~~~
jonknee
It's amazing/depressing how cheap bombs are when they don't have to be smart.

~~~
bd_at_rivenhill
Actually, it's amazing how much they charge for bombs that are smart.

~~~
hollerith
Actually, most smart bombs (JDAMs) are just old, dumb bombs with a new "tail
kit" containing a GPS and guidance electronics.

~~~
mendort
A tail kit that costs almost 10 times as much as the bomb.

~~~
samplonius
Hey, this is Hackernews, not Reddit. You can't just completely make shit up
here.

~~~
mendort
A mark 84 bomb, one of the largest conventional munitions in frequent use,
costs about 3k a piece. The mark 84's smaller cousins are cheaper. JDAM kits
costs about 27k a piece. How am I making things up?

------
pseudometa
Here is a mirror for the site:
[https://archive.today/94EKG](https://archive.today/94EKG)

~~~
dang
Thanks. We changed the url from
[http://www.alternatewars.com/Bomb_Loading/Bomb_Guide.htm](http://www.alternatewars.com/Bomb_Loading/Bomb_Guide.htm)
because the latter is down.

~~~
junto
I feel a bit bad for being the cause of their site suspension. Thanks for
changing the URL.

------
dabeeeenster
For those that have not read it, the Richard Rhodes book is one of the finest
pieces of science/engineering writing I have read:

[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Making-Atomic-Bomb-Richard-
Rhodes/dp...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Making-Atomic-Bomb-Richard-
Rhodes/dp/1471111237)

~~~
easytiger
I'm in the midst of it. Quite long but the background stuff is one of the best
overviews of 20th century physics you can read anywhere.

------
LiveTheDream
Cache that has most of the images:

[http://web.archive.org/web/20140930151228/http://www.alterna...](http://web.archive.org/web/20140930151228/http://www.alternatewars.com/Bomb_Loading/Bomb_Guide.htm)

(Original site exceeded its traffic quota and was suspended)

------
yitchelle
It strikes fear into me that these folks are loading a device that is design
to kill thousands of lives, the madness in this thing call war.

~~~
sillysaurus3
Actually, the purpose of the bomb was to save many thousands more lives than
it ended. An invasion of Japan would've cost an enormous number of lives. It
would've also had a catastrophic effect on the civilian population, because
they were being told that the American troops were there to enslave them. It
has even been said that the propaganda being told to the Japanese civilians
included the idea that the troops would kill and cannibalize their families.
I'm not sure whether that latter part is true, but what is true is that the
civilians were extremely incentivized to be as hostile as possible to any
American invasion army, even to the extent of whole families committing
suicide out of fear of being enslaved or tortured, as on Okinawa.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Okinawa](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Okinawa)

 _Simultaneously, 42,000–150,000 local civilians were killed or committed
suicide, a significant proportion of the local population._

Human affairs are sometimes terrible, but they often take the least terrible
path out of all terrible paths. This is evidenced by the fact that the cuban
missile crisis didn't result in an all-out nuclear war, and also that these
bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki rather than Americans invading
Japan, which would have been far more devastating.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall)

 _Casualty predictions varied widely but were extremely high. Depending on the
degree to which Japanese civilians resisted the invasion, estimates ran into
the millions for Allied casualties._

I upvoted you because I agree that everyone should be terrified at the
prospect of war, because war only happens when people aren't terrified of it.

~~~
shabda
While there are many people who subscribe to your view, there are an equal
number who believe that Japan would have surrendered within months/weeks with
no ground invasion.

The allies had complete air and naval superiority and Russia had joined the
the Japanese war theatre.

If you have read the ethics of atomic bombings in any detail you are already
aware of the details, so I would refrain from linking to wikipedia. To push
your POV that the bombing was entirely necessary and entirely morally right is
immoral.

[Edit]

As requested below: here are the detail about the military unneccesity of the
atomic bombings.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary)

There are other debates around this, but this discusses only if Japan would
have speedily surrendered without the Atomic bombing.

~~~
sillysaurus3
I'm not aware of the ethical details, so feel free to correct me. It's my
understanding that invasion was imminent at the time of the bombings, so
America's choice was either to send bombs or soldiers. If that was truly their
choice, it seems hard to argue that the bomb was the less ethical.

It's fine to say that Japan would have surrendered without invasion, but such
a strong assertion needs to be backed by equally strong evidence.

EDIT: An excerpt from your link:

 _This conclusion assumed conventional fire bombing would have continued, with
ever-increasing numbers of B-29s, and a greater level of destruction to Japan
's cities and population._

It seems hard to argue that literally firebombing an entire civilization into
stoneage living conditions was more ethical than forcing a quick political
decision to surrender and stop the madness. Can you imagine trying to live
without basic necessities? Even if nobody was dropping bombs on you directly,
you, your family, and everyone around you would be the definition of misery
for the duration of the firebombing. The firebombing didn't simply destroy
military targets. It also decimated infrastructure that we take for granted,
such as the ability to deliver drinkable water, or to seek medical treatment
at hospitals. How many were to die a miserable death due to the firebombing
before Hiroshima and Nagasaki could objectively be called the more ethical
decision?

Also, the above analysis assumes both sides had perfect information. But
information during wartime is asymmetric. It's entirely possible that America
had no knowledge of the Japanese political framework at the time the decision
to drop the bombs was made. If the Japanese were broadcasting their intention
to surrender before the bombs were dropped, that would be different, but it
doesn't seem like that was the case.

Would you mind helping me understand why firebombing was more ethical than the
destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

~~~
the_rosentotter
> It's fine to say that Japan would have surrendered without invasion, but
> such a strong assertion needs to be backed by equally strong evidence.

This was shown by post-war inquiries. Japan had already offered a complete
surrender, contingent only on preserving the emperor. They had been trying to
surrender since April, according to documents leaked by the president's Chief
of Staff, on roughly the same terms that the Americans ultimately accepted.

The rush to drop the bombs was that the Soviet Union had promised to join the
war against Japan on August 10, giving the Western allies only a few days to
make sure that they would be the ones occupying Japan, not the Soviets.

A cynic might also suspect a bit of enthusiasm among U.S. military to field
test the power of their new weapon.

------
agumonkey
archived => [https://archive.today/94EKG](https://archive.today/94EKG)

------
lutusp
There are a number of errors in the photo captions, so for the record:

1\. The "Little Boy" device, cylindrical in shape, was a U-235 gun-type device
that was so simple in its design that it was dropped -- on Hiroshima on August
6, 1945 -- without having been tested first. The U-235 was extraordinarily
expensive to produce, taking up a large percentage of the Manhattan Project
budget and several years. Two independent programs using different methods
were designed to produce sufficient U-235, which needs to be separated from
the much more abundant and non-fissioning U-238 isotope. The expense of
extracting U-235 is the reason that only one such bomb was used, and only a
few were ever built.

2\. The "Fat Man" bomb design used an isotope of plutonium (Pu-239) that was
bred in fission reactors in Hanford, WA and Oak Ridge, TN over a relatively
short time and at much lower cost. This bomb was tested at the Trinity site on
July 16, 1945, in advance of its use on Nagasaki (August 9, 1945) because its
implosion design was much more complex than the uranium bomb.

3\. All modern fission weapons, and the trigger devices in fusion weapons, are
design descendants of the Pu-239 "Fat Man" device that was dropped on
nagasaki.

------
tonteldoos
I wonder if any of the guys in the photos realised to what extent they were
(helping) rewriting history that day...

~~~
pwg
Given the secrecy surrounding the bombs, it is highly likely that not one of
them had any idea what it was they were assembling/loading into the plane. All
they likely knew was that it was "some kind of new, secret, bomb". It is
questionable whether the "high ranking officials" referenced in the plane
alignment photo caption even had much knowledge of just what this "new,
secret, bomb" really was.

~~~
rjsw
At least one of them [1] knew exactly what it was, I would guess that the
others were working for him and had a pretty good idea too.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sterling_Parsons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sterling_Parsons)

~~~
marktangotango
I think most of them had an idea about atomic bombs back then, and what they
were doing could end the war. Robert Heinlien was investigated by the FBI in
the late 30's due to a description of atomic bombs in a story he'd written. So
the idea was out there so to speack.

What they were ignorant of, I'm pretty sure, was the actual magnitude of the
destruction caused by the devices. My father was about 10 yrs old at the time,
he was deeply effected by news reels at the time. The tragedy was horrific.

~~~
nwatson
The atomic bombs were not more devastating to Hiroshima and Nagasaki than were
conventional bomb campaigns to other similar cities in Japan toward the end of
World War II. The damage from atomic bombs did not stand out as extraordinary
to the Japanese leadership at the time. What forced Japan to surrender was
Russia's declaration of war.
[http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/05/29/the_bomb_di...](http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/05/29/the_bomb_didnt_beat_japan_nuclear_world_war_ii)

" ... But if you graph the number of people killed in all 68 cities bombed in
the summer of 1945, you find that Hiroshima was second in terms of civilian
deaths. If you chart the number of square miles destroyed, you find that
Hiroshima was fourth. If you chart the percentage of the city destroyed,
Hiroshima was 17th. Hiroshima was clearly within the parameters of the
conventional attacks carried out that summer. ..."

~~~
ceejayoz
> Hiroshima was clearly within the parameters of the conventional attacks
> carried out that summer.

That's like saying we'd treat a shooting incident where 500 people died the
same as 500 individual murders.

~~~
Someone
Its more like saying that a single bomb that kills 500 is on par with an
attack by an army in which 500 are shot dead.

I agree with that idea. Apart from the fact that they were single-plane
attacks, there was little that set the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings apart
from what happened to almost every city in Japan. Yes, radiation sickness is
awful, but so are napalm burns on half your skin.

One thing that I wonder about whenever this subject comes up is whether it
would have been cheaper to deploy use conventional bombs against those
targets. It would have been fairly easy to send a thousand bombers with
conventional payloads (or just 200 that made 5 sorties each)

------
RankingMember
D'oh. Anyone know of a mirror of this? Site is down.

~~~
junto
Courtesy of @symetricasaurus elsehwere in this thread:
[https://archive.today/94EKG](https://archive.today/94EKG)

------
eltoozero
For anyone truly interested in Little Boy and Fat Man, do yourself a favor and
pick up Atom Bombs by John Coster-Mullen.

It's self-published, and he's a great fellow; he'll email you and offer to
sign your copy, as well as answer any questions you've got.

[http://www.amazon.com/Atom-Bombs-Secret-Inside-
Little/dp/B00...](http://www.amazon.com/Atom-Bombs-Secret-Inside-
Little/dp/B0006S2AJ0)

This next year is the 70th anniversary of the Trinity test, which is open to
the public once a year:
[http://www.wsmr.army.mil/PAO/Trinity/Pages/default.aspx](http://www.wsmr.army.mil/PAO/Trinity/Pages/default.aspx)

Edit: He's also the guy who deduced the most probable internal configuration
of Little Boy, and built an inert 1:1 scale model which was presented to and
signed by the living members of the 509th Bomb Wing.

------
symmetricsaurus
Really intereresting photos.

It is a bit unfortunate that many of the captions and the sequence of photos
are inaccurate. There are many misses regarding which bomb was which and on
which plane it was loaded and on which city it was felled.

So, look at the pictures and ignore the captions and then read up on Wikipedia
to understand the bigger picture.

------
jcfrei
Cached version - though some pictures are still missing:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:aKemgW6...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:aKemgW6roesJ:www.alternatewars.com/Bomb_Loading/Bomb_Guide.htm+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ch)

------
BuildTheRobots
Looks like HN has blown the sites quota out of the water... though as it
redirects to [http://www.alternatewars.com/cgi-
sys/suspendedpage.cgi](http://www.alternatewars.com/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi)
you've gotta wonder what the cgi is written in.

~~~
scott_karana
Remember that for Shellshock, it _doesn 't matter_ what language the CGI is
written in, depending on how your server is configured to pass on environment
variables... :-)

------
kghose
Wikipedia has Fat Man over Nagasaki and Little boy over Hiroshima. This
archive has it the other way. Which is correct?

------
nmridul
Wondering why the staff are not wearing any protective clothing while handling
nuclear devices ?

~~~
creativityhurts
I find it weird that most of them aren't wearing shirts at all.

~~~
tokenadult
Most of the local people on Tinian and the other northern Mariana islands
historically haven't worn shirts, male or female, although standards of dress
on those islands have of course westernized somewhat since Western
colonization. The climate there is very suitable for going shirtless at many
times of the year.

~~~
creativityhurts
Nice and reasonable explanation, thanks!

------
vixin
Implosion Sphere for Fat Man nearly assembled and about to be placed inside
it's casing.

"Its casing". Why do people have such a problem with it's and its?

~~~
ryandvm
Because English is like Javascript - it's weird and is riddled with vestigial
design errors, but since it's everywhere, we're all forced to use it.

~~~
scrollaway
Part of why English is everywhere is because it is extremely flexible,
malleable and very lax about its own rules. Otherwise we'd all be speaking
French.

I prefer to see English like I see Python. Younger, easier, more flexible and
more self-aware than the languages it draws its roots from, and fun enough
that it has a lot of influence on every other language.

~~~
angersock
Python? More flexible?

English is more like Ruby than anything else.

------
black_
I see shirts were out of fashion back then.

