answersLogoWhite

0

War and Military History

What is an A-Bomb?


Top Answer
User Avatar
Wiki User
Answered 2010-04-11 17:52:23

A- bomb stands for Atomic Bomb, first tested and used in WWII.

001
๐Ÿ™
0
๐Ÿคจ
0
๐Ÿ˜ฎ
0
๐Ÿ˜‚
0
User Avatar

Your Answer

Loading...

Still have questions?

Related Questions

Who or what is Blue Hulk aka Abomb?

Rick Jones, Hulk's former best friend.


In poptropica how do you blow up the cave?

you blow it up with abomb from china and then a torch whitch i dont know where it is yet


Who is Abomb aka Blue Hulk is he related to Bruce or Hulk?

A-bomb is Rick Jones, a long-time friend of Bruce Banner and Hulk.


How did the Allies won World War 2?

with the help of 2 important items: 1:RADAR 2:ABOMB ...is how the allies won WW2


Who did the atomic bomb?

China made the Atomic Bomb, no china did not make the atomic bomb. the united states made the abomb and it was called the mannhattan project


How do you blow up the cargo hold in Battlefield 2 Modern Combat?

first infultrate the area unseen and plant abomb on the cargo and then run away. make sure you have an escape route.


Who would jugernot be able to beat in the hulk family counting the thing red hulk and she hulk grey hulk green hulk and obomination also abomb aka blue hulk then out of them all who would win?

hulk


What is special about Einstein?

there a loads of things special about albert engstine! 1-he was an amazing zionist -devlped the thery of reletivity -in WW2 , he helped America anticipate the Germans devleopemnt of an abomb, and his equation e=mc2 helped build one. -my favorite, he was an amzing, brillant, vibrant, an indepent man.


How much heat is given off an atomic bomb ie 1kt?

Follow the link to the site below. It is the A-Bomb WWW museum. According to the data on this site the heat beneath the explosion center rose to approximately 7,000 degree F. For more info on the A-bomb go to the webpage listed below http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/data.html


If World War 2 ended and you lost the war would Harry Truman be tried as a war criminal?

yes especially since he had dropped the Abomb on japan. but then the allies wouldve won, right? He's not a criminal. The atomic bomb is a weapon, and it saved many American lives. There was no reason that it should not have been used. They might have tried him if we lost, but he didn't do anything wrong in my opinion.


Why did General George Patton want to fight the Soviets though the war was already over?

cuz Patton was smart and not cautious he new Stalin was planning on keeping land he conquerd and new if they didnt resolve this thing now ww3 would be inevitable but luckily(and this is based on your point of view) we invented the abomb and russia followed in '49 soneither side WA stupid enough to obliterate their own countries by starting ww3 from 45 to 91 if neither of us had nuclear capability their would almost certainly hav been a ww3 and maybe even a ww4


Was the dropping of the Atomic Bomb justified?

There's a ton of different ways people could think of this. On one hand, yes, we needed to get out of the war with Japan quickly before any more lives were lost. Others believe that they had it coming, as they decided to bomb Pearl Harbor. Yet some people still think that the atomic bomb was too much of a stretch and completely unnecessary to kill so many people. It should be noted that Operation Olympus The invasion of Japan judging from Okinawa's invasion would have cost several million deaths both Japanese civilians and Allied soldiers The allies could not afford so many deaths. So thank god for the atomic bomb. (P.S. The Japanese had been doing ABomb research but were not so advanced as us. The Allies Backup plan b if the atomic bombs did not work was to poison gas the whole island. Sweet Dreams


What would have happened if World War 2 didn't end when it did?

This is a pretty open ended question, and of course any answer will be entirely speculative. In Europe had the war not ended when it did makes the assumption that Germany was still in the war after May 1945. Thus Germany would have had to have stabilized the eastern front, possibly as far east as the Volga. It is highly unlikely that the Western Allies could have successfully invaded Europe under such a circumstance. Thus the war would have been become a technology race, since neither sides armed forces were sufficient to dominate the other. Germany clearly had the lead in many weapons systems such as submarines, tanks, small arms, mines, cruise missiles, rockets, nerve gas and a few others. The US/Britain armies had the advantage in various surface naval vessels, radar, heavy bombers, and nuclear. I disagree with many historians that the Abomb was an American trump card. Perhaps when flung against the small island nation of Japan - a nation without resources that had been defeated decisively on all front already - it was a determining factor. However German occupied Europe was not Japan. Germany's territory was much larger - we'd have to assume well over a million square miles. Germany's cities were plundered furiously during the war in any case, and that did not end the fighting. I could go on but the point is, five or ten nuclear bombs detonated against Germany would not likely have ended the war any more than the terror fire bombing of Dresden did. The German armed forces would have remained intact. So the outcome might have been that Germany looses a million or so civilians and 10% or 20% of her industrial base from the nuclear assault. Could Germany have withstood this assault and retaliated with her own nuclear bombs? It is well documented that the German nuclear program was run by men who did not support the Nazi regime. Would these persons have continued their creative incompetence had they seen German cities being ruined? If not I suspect Germany could have had a small number of bombs themselves by early 1946. And even if not, Germany certainly did have the capacity to produce 'dirty' nuclear devises (nuclear material encapsulating a conventional explosive) that would have made several of Englands cities uninhabitable. It is conceivable that such weapons might have been used directly against the USA eastern seaboard too. Would the western powers have continued fighting after seeing THEIR civilians massacred indiscriminately? Thus I think the war might have drug on to the end of 1946 and ended in stalemate with Germany the continents dominant power, Russia greatly reduced in strength, Britain totally depended on the USA, and the USA about as powerful as she was anyway. The colonial independence movements in S Asia and Africa would have happened even faster since the French, Belgians and Dutch would have been completely impotent and the British much weaker. In Asia it would have been interesting too, since if we are assuming Germany has stabilized the Russian front along the Volga, the Soviets would have been unable to invade China as they did Summer 1945. This invasion was very important to the USA as it meant the Soviets captured huge amounts of Japanese armaments, which they then gave to Mao, who quickly defeated the less well armed pro-west Nationalist forces, leading to a Communist China. Instead China would/should have been properly armed by the west and become a much more pro-west / pro-USA nation. Japan goes down either way....but with China out of the Soviet camp, there are no Korean or Vietnam wars. Another alternative is that Japan simply refuses all terms and goes on fighting. The Asian war thus continues until the Japanese home islands are completely occupied by Soviet/American forces sometime in 1946. The bloodbath would have been horrific - possibly numbering in the tens of millions for the Japanese, since neither the Americans or Russians had any compunction about killing civilians in mass quantities and both certainly had the means to do so. Japan comes out of the war in even worse shape than historically. The nation may have eventually recovered somewhat but would very unlikely have become the world economic powerhouse it is today.