Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

SF Hydro

SF Hydro was a Norwegian steam-powered railway ferry that operated on Lake Tinnsjø in Telemark from 1914 until its deliberate sinking on 20 February 1944. The vessel facilitated rail transport across the lake as part of the Tinnsjø railway line, connecting the ports of Mæl and Tinnoset to support industrial shipments, including from the nearby Vemork hydroelectric plant. During the Nazi occupation of Norway in World War II, SF Hydro became a target for Allied sabotage efforts aimed at disrupting Germany's nuclear weapons program, which relied on heavy water produced at Vemork for moderating nuclear fission. On the day of its sinking, the ferry carried approximately 500 kilograms of in sealed barrels destined for , along with passengers and freight; Norwegian resistance operatives, trained by British , infiltrated the ship and attached explosives to the hull, causing it to capsize and sink in the lake's deepest section at around 460 meters. The operation resulted in the loss of 18 lives—14 Norwegian civilians and 4 German guards—while successfully denying the Germans this critical shipment, complementing prior raids on the facility that had already curtailed heavy water output. Postwar investigations and dives confirmed the presence of heavy water barrels aboard the wreck, underscoring the sabotage's effectiveness in delaying Nazi atomic research, though the broader impact on the German program remains debated among historians due to parallel production efforts elsewhere. The event has been commemorated in Norwegian history and media, including the film Kampen om tungtvannet, highlighting the resistance's role in Allied strategic objectives.

Construction and Design

Building and Launch

The SF Hydro was constructed in 1914 by A/S Akers Mekaniske Verksted in Kristiania (present-day ) as a purpose-built railway ferry for the Tinnsjø crossing, integral to the transport system linking 's industrial facilities. Commissioned by through its transport subsidiary, the vessel featured a steel hull and double-screw to handle the demands of shuttling railway wagons, passengers, and cargo across the 30-kilometer expanse of Lake Tinn, a prone to variable weather and depths exceeding 400 meters. Designed with an 88-meter rail track accommodating up to 12 standard wagons and a 300-tonne deck load capacity, the SF Hydro prioritized stability and load distribution for safe transfer between the Rjukan Line terminus at Mæl and the Tinnoset Line at Tinnoset. Its engineering emphasized durability in an inland freshwater environment, with provisions for 120 passengers and speeds of 8 to 9.5 knots to ensure reliable operations despite the lake's navigational challenges. The ferry entered service that same year, enabling efficient onward shipment of fertilizers from hydroelectric plants like to global markets via and the Telemark Canal.

Technical Specifications

SF Hydro was constructed as a steel-hulled, steam-powered railway with dimensions of 53 in length overall, a of 9.6 , and a draft of 3.2 . The vessel displaced approximately 494 gross register tons, enabling it to navigate the confined waters of Lake Tinn while accommodating across its double-track deck configuration spanning roughly 50 . Propulsion was provided by two steam engines, each developing 186 kW (equivalent to 249 indicated horsepower), driving twin screws for a maximum speed of 8 knots under laden conditions suited to the lake's variable weather and depths. These engines operated on coal-fired boilers, with exhaust systems designed for efficiency in short-haul service; no specific cylinder configuration such as triple-expansion is documented in primary records, though contemporary ferries of similar vintage commonly employed such designs for fuel economy. The power output supported reliable operation without auxiliary , emphasizing over high velocity. Cargo capacity included up to 10 standard-gauge railway cars on parallel tracks, totaling around 300-400 tonnes of freight depending on wagon types, alongside provisions for 120 passengers in enclosed saloons. General cargo hold space supplemented rail loading for mixed transport of industrial goods, fertilizers, and passengers. Safety features comprised a double-bottom hull for stability and buoyancy, multiple lifeboats sufficient for full complement (rated for over 140 persons including crew), and basic watertight bulkheads; minor pre-war refits in the 1930s focused on boiler maintenance and deck reinforcements to enhance reliability amid increasing traffic demands, without major structural alterations.

Pre-War Operations

Commercial Service on Lake Tinn

SF operated as a steam-powered railway ferry on Lake Tinnsjø, providing essential connectivity between the ports of Mæl and Tinnoset from its entry into service in 1914 until the German invasion of Norway in April 1940. The 30-kilometer crossing linked the Rjukan Line at Mæl with the Tinnoset Line at Tinnoset, forming a critical segment of the transport chain for industrial output from the region. The ferry primarily transported loaded railway wagons carrying raw materials and products from Norsk Hydro's facilities in Rjukan, including ammonia and fertilizers essential for agricultural applications. Over its pre-war lifespan, the overall Rjukan railway system, inclusive of the ferry service, handled approximately 30 million tonnes of goods, equivalent to 1.5 million wagon loads, underscoring the scale of freight movement reliant on such operations. Mixed cargoes also included passengers and limited motor vehicles, supporting both industrial logistics and local mobility. Daily scheduled services ensured consistent throughput despite the lake's challenging conditions, such as frequent storms and in winter, which occasionally necessitated ice-breaking support from auxiliary vessels. No significant mechanical failures or accidents marred the vessel's routine operations prior to 1940, reflecting robust design and maintenance practices for the era's demands. This reliability bolstered the regional economy by enabling efficient export of fertilizers via the port of , contributing to Norway's position as a key supplier in global .

Role in Regional Transport

SF Hydro functioned as a vital component of Norway's intermodal transport infrastructure, bridging the Rjukan Line at Mæl with the Tinnoset Line at Tinnoset across the 30-kilometer expanse of Lake Tinnsjø. This railway ferry service enabled the efficient transfer of loaded wagons carrying Norsk Hydro's primary outputs, including fertilizers derived from phosphate processing at the plant, to southern rail networks for onward shipment to the export port of . By integrating lake crossing with rail, it circumvented the topographic barriers of the highlands, facilitating bulk commodity flows that were impractical via alternative overland routes. The ferry's operations underpinned Norsk Hydro's expansion as a of regional , directly supporting the export-oriented production that sustained thousands of jobs in , , and ancillary services within county during the . This transport linkage was instrumental in scaling fertilizer output from hydroelectric-powered facilities, contributing to Norway's emergence as a key supplier of agricultural chemicals to European markets and bolstering local economic resilience through reliable . Without such connectivity, the remote operations would have faced prohibitive costs, potentially stunting industrial growth tied to abundant local resources. To accommodate Lake Tinnsjø's seasonal freezing, the ferry system incorporated ice navigation measures; while earlier wooden vessels required towing by dedicated icebreakers like the tug Skarsfos during winter, SF Hydro's construction and independent propulsion allowed for more autonomous operations in marginal conditions. These adaptations minimized disruptions to the year-round , ensuring consistent delivery of raw materials inbound—such as phosphates for processing—and finished goods outbound, thereby reinforcing causal dependencies between transport reliability and sustained economic output in the region.

World War II Context

Norwegian Occupation and Vemork Plant

The German invasion of commenced on April 9, 1940, leading to the occupation of the country until May 1945, during which Nazi authorities seized control of key industrial assets, including the hydroelectric plant near in county. Originally constructed in 1911 for production, began (deuterium oxide) synthesis in December 1934 as a byproduct of electrolytic hydrogen generation for synthesis, marking the world's first industrial-scale facility for the substance with an initial capacity of approximately 12 tons annually. Under occupation, German forces prioritized 's expansion, recognizing 's potential as a in nuclear reactors essential for atomic research, thereby integrating the plant into the broader Uranverein (Uranium Club) effort to develop advanced weaponry. Heavy water output at Vemork escalated under German oversight, reaching about 100 kilograms per month by early 1943, with cumulative production exceeding prior peacetime levels through forced labor and resource allocation despite Norwegian resistance disruptions. This ramp-up supported experiments in , as facilitated sustained chain reactions in graphite-moderated designs pursued by German physicists, including , who consulted on the program's requirements and underscored the material's scarcity outside . Allied intelligence, informed by Norwegian expatriates and signals intercepts, identified as a linchpin in potential German atomic bomb development, prompting fears that its deuterium oxide—transported via rail and ferry across Lake Tinn—could enable production or reactor prototypes absent sufficient domestic alternatives in the . In response, British orchestrated in October-November 1942, deploying Norwegian-guided gliders carrying British engineers to sabotage the plant; harsh weather caused both gliders to crash short of the target, resulting in the capture and execution of most survivors by German forces. This setback preceded the successful Operation Gunnerside on February 27-28, 1943, when a team of six Norwegian commandos infiltrated , detonating charges on the cells and destroying roughly 500 kilograms of stock without alerting guards or firing shots. The raid halted production for nine months, compelling Germans to rebuild facilities and contemplate relocating operations to safer sites like or , though resumed limited output amid heightened security and plans to evacuate remaining reserves via Lake Tinn ferries to avoid Allied bombing risks.

Heavy Water Production and Allied Sabotage Efforts

, or deuterium oxide (D₂O), functions as a in reactors by slowing fast neutrons without significant absorption, enabling a sustained in fuel to produce , a for weapons. The German program, initiated under the Uranverein project in 1939, prioritized for this purpose due to impurities hindering alternative moderation methods, though overall resource constraints and technical hurdles limited scalability. At the hydroelectric plant in , —seized by German forces after the April 1940 invasion— scaled up production using , reaching approximately 100 kilograms per month by early 1942 via a German-optimized process, with output climbing to around 130 kilograms monthly by 1943. This facility supplied nearly all of Europe's , making it central to German efforts despite the material's inherent scarcity from energy-intensive production requirements. Allied intelligence, aware of Vemork's role through intercepted communications and refugee reports, coordinated via the Norwegian resistance organization and Britain's (SOE), training Norwegian commandos for precision strikes to avoid casualties and infrastructure damage. Multiple operations preceded the pivotal raid: Operation Grouse inserted a weather team in October 1942, while failed glider-borne in November cost 41 lives but informed tactics. Operation Gunnerside, executed on the night of February 27–28, 1943, saw six Norwegian SOE-trained commandos ski across the Hardangervidda plateau, link with the Grouse survivors, and infiltrate Vemork undetected. They placed explosives on 14 electrolysis concentration cells in the heavy water facility, destroying equipment and approximately 500 kilograms of near-pure heavy water without firing a shot or alerting guards, escaping via ski to neutral Sweden. This action halted production for six to nine months, as cell reconstruction demanded specialized parts unavailable amid Allied blockades. German authorities responded by fortifying with anti-sabotage measures, including minefields and additional troops, while dispatching engineers from to repair the cells within months, restoring partial output by summer 1943. Despite subsequent Allied bombings in that damaged auxiliary structures but spared core production, the Germans accumulated over 500 kilograms of stockpile by early 1944, prompting orders to relocate it to safer sites in the to evade further disruptions.

The 1944 Sinking

Loading the Heavy Water Cargo

In February 1944, following the disruption of production at the hydroelectric plant due to prior Allied and bombing, authorities decided to the remaining stockpile to for continued use in their nuclear research program. This necessitated shipping approximately 500 kg of across Lake Tinn, as the route required a crossing to connect the line with the main network toward . The cargo, stored in barrels loaded onto railway wagons, was shunted to the Mæl ferry terminal on the lake's edge, where it was prepared for loading onto the SF Hydro. To mitigate risks from ongoing Norwegian resistance activities targeting , the Germans placed the under armed guard, with at least eight soldiers accompanying the shipment to enforce . The barrels were integrated into the standard car loading process, alongside other freight, without explicit public disclosure of the cargo's nature to maintain operational secrecy amid heightened threats. This approach reflected a pragmatic shift to the ferry route, deemed less vulnerable than overland alone after previous incidents. On February 20, 1944, the SF Hydro took on the guarded rail cars containing the at Mæl dock, in addition to its routine complement of civilian passengers and crew. The vessel's standard operations included ferrying both passengers and rail traffic across the lake, with the special cargo adding to the mixed load of roughly a dozen regular civilian passengers reported on that voyage. Departure occurred around midnight, initiating the crossing toward Tinnoset on the lake's opposite shore.

Norwegian Resistance Operation


The Norwegian resistance operation targeting the SF Hydro was led by Knut Haukelid, an SOE-trained Milorg operative, who assembled a four-man team including Rolf Sørlie, Knut Lier-Hansen, and Alf Larsen. On the evening of 19 February 1944, the team infiltrated the unguarded ferry quay at Mæl by cutting through fencing and boarded the vessel undetected while two civilian guards were present. Lier-Hansen distracted a crew member, enabling Haukelid and Sørlie to access the below-deck area near the keel, where they positioned approximately 8.5 kilograms of plastic explosive in a circular pattern over two hours.
The charge incorporated two alarm-clock fuses designed for a 9- to 11-hour delay, timed to detonate mid-crossing on Lake Tinn the following morning. This received direct instructions from the British Special Operations Executive to interdict the shipment, depriving of deuterium oxide essential for its nuclear research program. The selection of the ferry as the target capitalized on the lake's maximum depth of 430 meters, intended to render salvage operations protracted and resource-intensive for German forces. Tactically, the operatives rejected scuttling the vessel at the dock to avert concentrated civilian in a populated area, opting instead for an despite the inherent peril to passengers and crew aboard. Haukelid's team leveraged local expertise and training to execute the placement without alerting onboard personnel or external , ensuring the operation's until activation. This approach reflected a calculated prioritizing strategic denial of the over absolute minimization of lives lost.

The Explosion and Sinking Event

On February 20, 1944, the SF Hydro departed from Mæl on Lake Tinn around 10:00 AM, laden with 39 steel drums containing approximately 150 kilograms of produced at the plant. Approximately 30 minutes into the crossing, at about 10:30 AM and just before reaching the Urdalen lighthouse, an explosion detonated in the bow hold, where operatives had placed roughly 8 kilograms of the previous evening. The blast ruptured the hull, causing immediate flooding and structural failure forward, which triggered a sharp list to starboard as water ingress overwhelmed the forward compartments. The vessel's heavy cargo—shifted by the and compounded by the ferry's paddle-wheel and the icy conditions of -9°C (16°F) with calm waters—exacerbated instability, leading to a rapid capsize. Within two minutes, the SF Hydro inverted and plunged stern-first to the lake bottom at a depth exceeding 430 meters (1,410 feet), the deepest section of Lake Tinn, preventing immediate salvage efforts by forces. Debris analysis from later expeditions confirmed the bow detonation's role in severing the and scattering wreckage across the , with the hull splitting amidships under the strain. Survivor accounts, including those from crew members, describe a deafening that hurled passengers from their feet, followed by decks and plunging machinery as the ship heeled over; some clung to rails or before the cold waters engulfed the vessel, with a few managing to reach nearby shores by swimming or flotation amid the narrow lake's confines. The event unfolded in the absence of visible external damage indicators prior to detonation, underscoring the covert placement of the charge below the .

Casualties and Immediate Rescue

The sinking of the SF Hydro resulted in 18 fatalities on 20 1944: 14 , consisting of 7 members and 7 civilian passengers including women and children, along with 4 soldiers acting as guards for the cargo. 29 individuals survived the explosion and subsequent capsizing in Lake Tinn. Local residents responded promptly to the , deploying small boats from nearby shores to survivors struggling in the frigid waters amid winter conditions. These efforts focused on those who reached the surface before set in, with survivors suffering from and injuries but receiving initial aid on . Body recovery proved challenging due to the vessel's rapid descent to approximately 430 meters in the lake's deepest section, compounded by icy surfaces and limited diving capabilities available in ; consequently, only a portion of the deceased were retrieved immediately, leaving many entombed in the wreck. German occupation forces, upon assessing the scene, voiced irritation at the cargo's destruction but initiated no documented reprisals against rescuers or locals during the acute response phase.

Post-War Aftermath

Wreck Location and Initial Assessments

The wreck of the SF Hydro came to rest on the bed of Lake Tinnsjø (also spelled Tinn), , in the vicinity of the deepest point where the explosives were detonated, approximately 430 meters (1,410 feet) below the surface. This location was selected by Norwegian resistance operatives to maximize the challenges of any potential recovery. German occupation forces conducted initial surveys of the site shortly after the February 20, 1944, sinking, confirming the ferry's position through basic locational data from the explosion and survivor accounts, but deemed salvage operations impractical due to the depth exceeding the limits of 1940s-era diving and recovery equipment. Efforts to retrieve the cargo—estimated at around 500 kilograms in steel drums—were abandoned, as the technical hurdles combined with pressing demands on resources amid deteriorating war conditions on multiple fronts rendered the operation unviable. Norwegian authorities under the regime documented the loss in official reports, attributing it to sabotage and noting the strategic impact on transport, but no contemporaneous records indicate environmental assessments or concerns regarding potential leakage, with attention instead fixed on immediate logistical disruptions to supply lines. priorities shifted to evacuating residual stocks from the plant via overland routes, which were later destroyed in an Allied raid near the Norwegian-Swedish border in March 1944.

Exploration and Diving Expeditions

In 2005, a collaborative expedition organized by NOVA, , and Norwegian firm Sperre AS deployed a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to survey the SF Hydro wreck at a depth of approximately 430 meters in Lake Tinnsjø. The investigation revealed a well-preserved upright on the lakebed, with visible railroad flatcars still loaded with steel drums consistent with the 1944 heavy water shipment of roughly 40-50 barrels. The team recovered one intact drum labeled "26" from the cargo hold; laboratory analysis of its contents confirmed high-purity deuterium oxide (heavy water), with isotopic enrichment matching wartime production records from the Vemork plant, thus verifying the sabotage's success in denying the cargo to German forces. No volatile or radioactive contaminants were detected, as heavy water poses no inherent hazard beyond its density. Additional footage captured personal artifacts, including luggage and uniform fragments from the 18 fatalities, alongside structural elements like deck fittings and rail components, providing direct evidence of the vessel's final voyage configuration. Follow-up ROV surveys in the , including ProMare-led efforts featured in documentaries, documented numerous barrels scattered across the site, with some showing signs of corrosion-induced rupture over seven decades of submersion in cold, low-oxygen freshwater. While intact drums retained concentrated heavy water traces suitable for isotopic confirmation, leaked contents had diluted into the surrounding lake volume, rendering negligible environmental concentrations given deuterium's natural occurrence and non-toxicity. These expeditions recovered select non-invasive artifacts, such as corroded rail ties and passenger effects, for archival purposes without disturbing the primary structure. Under Norway's Cultural Heritage Act, the wreck is designated a protected and historical monument, prohibiting salvage or major intervention; ongoing non-intrusive monitoring via and occasional ROV checks assesses corrosion rates and sediment stability, confirming the site's inaccessibility to unauthorized access as of 2023. No hazardous material recovery has been pursued, prioritizing preservation over extraction.

Environmental and Scientific Findings

In 2004, a joint expedition documented by recovered samples from intact steel barrels on the SF Hydro wreck at a depth of approximately 400 meters in Lake Tinnsjø, confirming remnants of through isotopic analysis revealing elevated concentrations consistent with wartime production levels at the facility. The oxide (D₂O) exhibited no radioactivity, as it consists solely of stable isotopes without involvement of fissile materials or byproducts. Heavy is chemically inert and non-toxic in dilute forms, with any potential biological disruption from 's kinetic isotope effects—such as altered enzymatic rates—dissipating rapidly upon mixing with the lake's vast volume exceeding 15 cubic kilometers. of the barrels has led to gradual leakage over decades, yet empirical assessments indicate negligible ecological impacts, as levels in the remain far below thresholds for observable effects on aquatic life. Norwegian environmental authorities have conducted periodic evaluations of Lake Tinnsjø's , finding no of significant from the wreck necessitating remediation or restrictions as of 2025. Ongoing natural dilution and the absence of further support the conclusion that the site's influence on the lake's is minimal.

Historical Significance

Impact on Nazi Atomic Program

The sinking of the SF Hydro on 20 February 1944 destroyed approximately 500 kilograms of en route from the plant to , representing a substantial portion of the remaining German stockpile after prior disruptions at the production facility. This loss exacerbated the shortages stemming from the 1943 Norwegian and Allied bombing of , which had already eliminated over 500 kilograms of inventory and damaged key equipment, compelling German physicists to ration supplies and pursue suboptimal alternatives like moderation, though they prioritized for their pile experiments. Declassified Farm Hall transcripts, recording conversations among captured German nuclear scientists in July-August 1945, document their recognition of the Norwegian operations' crippling effects; and others explicitly cited the sabotage and bombings as reasons for insufficient , which halted progress on achieving criticality in experimental s and forced reliance on limited, low-yield tests in facilities like . These setbacks, per the scientists' own assessments, delayed large-scale development by 6-12 months, as reconstructing production in yielded only marginal quantities insufficient for operational-scale work before the war's end. Allied evaluations, informed by intelligence on German nuclear constraints, credited the Hydro operation with preserving the Project's advantage by denying the a viable path to production via heavy-water reactors, thereby reinforcing the strategic denial of advanced fission weapons to .

Legacy in WWII Sabotage Operations

The SF Hydro operation of February 20, 1944, represented the final phase in the Norwegian resistance's heavy water disruption campaign, building on earlier raids against the facility in 1943 that had already curtailed production. Conducted by a six-man team under , the sinking prevented the transport of roughly 500 kilograms of —remnants of Vemork's output—to via the railway ferry across Lake Tinn. This action illustrated the cumulative impact of coordinated in targeting vulnerabilities in supply chains, where disrupting proved as decisive as direct attacks on production sites. Tactically, the operation highlighted the of rudimentary yet precise methods against fortified assets: saboteurs accessed the unguarded underside of the vessel during loading at Mæl station, affixing two 25-kilogram charges of with 40- and 60-minute pencil fuses to the hull below the amidships. This low-tech approach—requiring no advanced equipment, air support, or infiltration of heavily guarded —neutralized a with minimal manpower and risk to the perpetrators, who escaped undetected. Such innovations in covert placement and timing influenced broader Allied doctrine, emphasizing small-team interdiction over resource-intensive alternatives like bombing raids, which had previously failed or caused excessive . Participants received formal recognition postwar, with Haukelid awarded the British in 1945 for his leadership across multiple sabotage missions, including SF Hydro, and the Norwegian War Cross with Swords for exceptional bravery in occupied territory. The operation's role in resistance annals is chronicled in accounts like Neal Bascomb's The Winter Fortress (2016), which details the saboteurs' ingenuity without inflating strategic outcomes. Culturally, it features in depictions such as the 1965 film , starring , which compresses events for narrative but underscores the Norwegian commandos' resolve, and the 2015 miniseries Kampen om tungtvannet, drawing on declassified records to portray the tactical execution. ![Poster for Kampen om tungtvannet][center]

Debates and Alternative Viewpoints

The debate over the decisiveness of the operations, culminating in the SF Hydro sinking, centers on whether they critically disrupted a viable pathway or merely hindered an inherently flawed endeavor. Advocates for substantial impact, drawing from wartime Allied evaluations, assert that the destruction of roughly 500 kilograms of —the bulk of 's wartime output and essential for scaling tests—foreclosed any near-term acceleration toward a moderated , as physicists required tens of kilograms for initial experiments but lacked domestic production scalability. This view posits cumulative effects from prior raids and the 1944 ferry loss, which eliminated replenishment stocks shipped to support relocated research at sites like , thereby enforcing production shortfalls estimated at over 1 ton relative to experimental needs by mid-1944. Contrasting perspectives, advanced by historians including in analyses of the Uranverein project, emphasize that German setbacks arose predominantly from endogenous errors: a dogmatic commitment to moderation despite graphite's proven feasibility (pursued successfully by Allies), Werner Heisenberg's order-of-magnitude miscalculation of (initially estimated at tons rather than kilograms), and dispersed resource allocation favoring reactors over direct enrichment for weapons-grade . highlights how these choices, compounded by leadership skepticism toward "Jewish physics" and inadequate industrial mobilization, rendered the program incapable of bomb production by 1945 irrespective of interventions, with no empirical trace of breeding or assembly prototypes. Reconciling data reveals no approach to weaponization milestones—such as sustained criticality or kilogram-scale —post-sabotage, underscoring the operations' role in mitigating low-probability risks amid Allied uncertainty, though causal attribution remains indirect given the regime's parallel failures in handling and electromagnetic separation. Quantitative shortfalls, including the irrecoverable 1944 consignment amid bombed infrastructure, aligned with broader inefficiencies that confined output to grams-scale deuterium oxide domestically, yet skeptics note equivalent delays would not have bridged theoretical gaps evident by late 1942.

References

  1. [1]
    The Story of the Heavy Water War - Life in Norway
    Apr 24, 2025 · In 1944, it was discovered that the remaining heavy water was to be transported to Germany via the SF Hydro ferry across Lake Tinnsjø. What ...
  2. [2]
    TV show examines boat sinking that halted Nazi nuke program
    Sep 1, 2018 · Scientists find numerous barrels of heavy water aboard ferry destroyed by Norwegian resistance fighters.
  3. [3]
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Rjukan – Notodden Industrial Heritage Site
    The Rjukan-Notodden site is a nomination for UNESCO World Heritage, representing a groundbreaking industrial development and the transition to hydroelectric ...
  5. [5]
    SF Hydro | Military Wiki - Fandom
    SF Hydro was a Norwegian steam powered railway ferry that operated on Tinnsjø in Telemark. The ferry operated between Mæl and Tinnoset between 1914 and 1944.
  6. [6]
    Hydro Transport - Wikiwand
    From 1907 an unmotorized barge named Tinnsjø was completed; the steam ship Skarsfos was used to haul it between the two railways. The first self-propelled ferry ...
  7. [7]
    SF Ammonia - Wikipedia
    SF Ammonia is a steam-powered railway ferry on Lake Tinn in Telemark, Norway. The ferry was one of the four railway ferries on Lake Tinn that connected the ...Missing: specs draft
  8. [8]
    1929: Lifeline - Norsk Hydro
    Aug 18, 2020 · In 1909 the wooden ferry "Tinnsjø" started operation. During the ... When ammonia and fertilizer production was discontinued at Rjukan, the ...
  9. [9]
    UNESCO World Heritage in Telemark - VisitTelemark.com
    The Rjukan Line and ferry transport across Lake Tinnsjø connected the town to the railway network, enabling the export of artificial fertilizer to the global ...
  10. [10]
    Hydro ferry and heavy water sunk in Norway in 1944 - marpubs
    Feb 20, 2017 · On 20th February 1944 Norwegian resistance sank the ferry Hydro in Lake Tinnsjo. It was carrying barrels of heavy water, for the Nazi atomic ...Missing: SF builder
  11. [11]
    1929: Lifeline - Norsk Hydro
    May 15, 2024 · The Tinnsjø lake had to be crossed by railway ferry, and the last stretch - from Borgestad to Herøya - was by barge.Missing: SF 16 Tinn
  12. [12]
    The Norwegian Heavy Water Sabotage - Warfare History Network
    Prior to their occupation by the Germans on April 9, 1940, the Norwegian government contacted French military intelligence for the removal of the plant's total ...
  13. [13]
    Vemork Heavy Water Plant | World War II Database
    In Dec 1934, Vemork became the first heavy water production facility, producing 12 tons per year by a method called electrolysis.<|separator|>
  14. [14]
    Operation Gunnerside: The Norwegian Attack on Heavy Water That ...
    Feb 23, 2018 · The winter sabotage of the Vemork chemical plant in Telemark County of Nazi-occupied Norway was one of the most dramatic and important military missions of ...
  15. [15]
    The Heroes of Telemark | WildTelemark
    As World War II moved into 1943, heavy water production at Vemork was producing 100 kilograms per month - more than enough to fuel German research. By then, ...Missing: output | Show results with:output
  16. [16]
    Hunting the Nazi Nuclear Hoard | Science History Institute
    Sep 24, 2019 · ... Vemork heavy-water plant in occupied Norway (heavy water being ... Werner Heisenberg. Goudsmit's friend Heisenberg, in fact, was almost ...
  17. [17]
    Operation Gunnerside - Nuclear Museum
    Jul 28, 2017 · On February 27, 1943, nine Norwegian commandos sabotaged the German-held Vemork plant outside of Rjukan, Norway.
  18. [18]
    Operation Freshman: Norway, 1942 | Imperial War Museums
    Feb 2, 2024 · In July 1942, the British War Cabinet decided to try to destroy the heavy water production facilities at the Norsk Hydro factory at Vemork, ...
  19. [19]
    1943: The Heroes of Telemark - Norsk Hydro
    May 15, 2024 · The barrels of heavy water that were rolled out were sent to Germany, where they were used to control nuclear fission. Following the occupation ...Missing: SF | Show results with:SF
  20. [20]
    Heavy Water Reactors - Atomic Heritage Foundation
    Aug 2, 2017 · Heavy water is still a common moderator in nuclear reactors, most notably in the CANDU reactors and in other pressurized heavy water reactors.
  21. [21]
    Sabotaging heavy water in Norway - TracesOfWar.com
    Feb 9, 2017 · The 39 barrels, holding a total of 3,961.72 gallons of heavy water were to be transported by the ferry Sf Hydro across Lake Tinnsjö from Mäl to ...Missing: lengde | Show results with:lengde
  22. [22]
    The Peculiarities of the German Uranium Project (1939–1945) - MDPI
    The proclaimed main objective of the programme, the demonstration of a chain reaction, had to wait for sufficient deliveries of heavy water. As a consequence of ...
  23. [23]
    (PDF) It Was Not Possible For Germany To Build An Atomic Bomb ...
    Jan 26, 2016 · Technical and Conceptual Mistakes. The Germans were neither able to recognize Graphite as a moderator nor were able to get Heavy Water.<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    Heavy Water and the Norwegians - Damn Interesting
    Jun 19, 2007 · The nuclear Nazis identified Norway's heavy-water as one of the best candidates to act as this neutron moderator, so when German forces invaded ...
  25. [25]
    The Norwegian Milorg: A Pillar of Resistance in WWII - Spotter Up
    Nov 5, 2024 · Milorg, in collaboration with the British SOE, managed to infiltrate the heavily guarded facility and destroy the heavy water production cells.
  26. [26]
    [PDF] The Vemork Action - CIA
    It was because of the sabotage action in February 1943 against the heavy water production plant at Vemork. As long as the war lasted, however, people were not ...
  27. [27]
    Sinking of DF Hydro 70th anniversary events in Norway - GOV.UK
    Feb 25, 2014 · The Norwegian Resistance Movement sank DF Hydro on 20 February 1944, killing 14 Norwegians and 4 German soldiers.Missing: build date
  28. [28]
    Solemn commemoration of familiar war event - Hydro
    Feb 20, 2014 · The ferry had 47 people on board. Eighteen of them were killed – 14 Norwegians and four German soldiers. In 1994, on the 50th anniversary of the ...
  29. [29]
    Four high-risk operations - NIA - Norsk Industriarbeidermuseum
    Norsk Hydro's heavy water production at Vemork was an important part of the Nazis' nuclear project during World War II. So important that as many as four ...
  30. [30]
    Audacious Raids: Operations Grouse, Freshman, Swallow and ...
    Oct 2, 2020 · At 10:30, SF Hydro sank to the bottom of the lake, 430 metres deep. [00:24:53] The battle for heavy water had been won. Long after the end ...
  31. [31]
    Norwegian Resistance Disables Vemork Heavy Water Plant
    In February 1943's Operation Gunnerside Norwegian saboteurs temporarily crippled heavy-water production crucial to Germany's atomic weapons program.Missing: incidents | Show results with:incidents
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Hitler's Sunken Secret - PBS
    Nov 8, 2005 · recounts how the ferry was sabotaged on February 20, 1944, a sinking that resulted in the deaths of 14 Norwegian civilians and four German ...
  33. [33]
    NOVA | Hitler's Sunken Secret | TV Program Description - PBS
    Nov 8, 2005 · Intelligence had indicated that the Hydro would be transporting railroad flatcars loaded with barrels of heavy water produced by the nearby ...Missing: SF May 16 1931<|separator|>
  34. [34]
    Hitlers Sunken Secret – Lake Tinn - Promare
    The 1944 sinking of the Norwegian ferry Hydro, with its purported cargo of heavy water destined for the Nazis' secret atomic bomb project.Missing: SF May 16 1931 railway
  35. [35]
    NORWEGIAN HEAVY WATER RAIDS - War History
    Dec 13, 2024 · SF Hydro at the rail dock on Lake Tinnsjo. She would be later sunk by Norwegian operative in order to deny the Germans heavy water from the ...
  36. [36]
    Samlerhuset donates original WWII heavy water to the public
    Jan 31, 2018 · DF Hydro was sunk on February 20 1944, and now rests at 430 meters depth in Lake Tinn in Telemark, Norway. This was the last sabotage attack ...Missing: SF May 16 1931 railway
  37. [37]
    NOVA | Transcripts | Hitler's Sunken Secret - PBS
    Nov 8, 2005 · Find the complete program transcript, including credits, for the NOVA program Hitler's Sunken Secret originally broadcast on PBS on November ...
  38. [38]
    Heavy water toxicity via isotope effects: Stronger than high-dose ...
    ... toxicity disappears upon dilution, thereby offering crucial insights into environmental considerations. ... Mitotic arrest by deuterium oxide. Science. 1960;131( ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] The Norwegian river monitoring programme – water quality status ...
    Dec 9, 2019 · The sensor stations are located at the same spot as the manual sampling stations and are equipped with sensors that measure water temperature,.
  40. [40]
    U.S. B-17s Destroy Norsk Hydro Heavy Water Plant
    U.S. B-17 bombing of Norsk Hydro's plant in Telemark County, November 16, 1943, followed Norwegian commandos' successful Operation Gunnerside.
  41. [41]
    The Farm Hall Transcripts: The German Scientists and the Bomb
    Aug 13, 1992 · It was bombed and sabotaged throughout the war so that the Germans never had the amount of heavy water they needed. In February 1942 a ...
  42. [42]
    Farm Hall Transcripts - Heisenberg Web Exhibit
    Farm Hall Transcripts. The ten captured scientists interned at Farm Hall, England, included: Werner Heisenberg, Max von Laue, Otto Hahn, Walther Gerlach, ...<|separator|>
  43. [43]
    German Atomic Bomb Project - Nuclear Museum
    Oct 18, 2016 · The Norwegian Heavy Water Plant. Heisenberg's efforts were derailed ... Farm Hall Transcripts · Alex Wellerstein “Historical thoughts on ...
  44. [44]
    NOVA | Hitler's Sunken Secret | Norwegian Resistance Coup - PBS
    Learn about the daring sabotage of the German heavy water production effort in this passage from the book The Real Heroes of Telemark.<|separator|>
  45. [45]
    Operation Gunnerside: The most successful sabotage of WWII
    Aug 21, 2024 · The Operation Gunnerside mission. Operation Gunnerside heavy water The SF Hydro, which was sunk when ferrying stocks of Nazi Heavy Water.
  46. [46]
    Norwegian heavy water sabotage - Military Wiki - Fandom
    Norwegian resistance forces sank the ferry, SF Hydro, on Lake Tinnsjø, preventing the heavy water from being removed.Missing: engine | Show results with:engine
  47. [47]
    Why didn't the Nazis beat Oppenheimer to the nuclear bomb? - DW
    Aug 15, 2023 · They never achieved a successful chain reaction and had no method of enriching uranium. The nuclear weapons program was scrapped in July 1942, ...