B-29s over Germany

The control of the X-4 missile must be difficult from a single-seat Fw-190, while trying to fly the plane in a combat zone. And while you're controlling the missile, do your wingmen protect you? Because you're flying straight and level with many dozens of Mustangs aiming to kill you. You would be the worst position possible, except maybe low and slow.

Since this thread I started has gone all over the place (not necessarily a bad thing except for some of the personal attacks), I want to throw out another "what-if" scenario. Whereas the B-29 being introduced in the ETO was possible, this scenario would have to have had the war extended.

What if the B-42 Mixmaster could have been deployed? Closing speeds with this bomber would have been interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XB-42_Mixmaster

I think a deployment of B-42s would reduce the losses of the US bomber force drastically, but twice the payload of the Mosquito is not the payload of the B-17, B-24 or B-29. The B-42 would have probably used in the same role as the Mosquito rather than the heavy bomber role.

The B-32 and B-36 should be more considered in a 'what-if' - the B-36 especially. The 17,600 lbs of the B-17 would be limp compared to the 86,000 lbs of a B-36!

The B-42 can carry a 8,000 lb load. That is twice that of a B-17 on a long mission.

The B-17 carried 6,000 lbs on a long mission, and 17,600 lbs (possible) on a short mission. The B-42 carries twice the Mosquito, it's a small fast bomber.

Intersting scenereo. As you said though, this would mean the war being extended and then it would have had to contend with Ta-183s and P.1011's. I dont think it would have changed much.

With only 250 mp/h cruising speed (jetmaster with jetengines), I see no decisive advantage for the B42. The question is what the top speed would be with 8000 lbs of bombs. However, as an attack plane it could be great.

The B-17 carried 6,000 lbs on a long mission, and 17,600 lbs (possible) on a short mission.

Click to expand...

Whilst 17,600 lbs might have been theoretically possible, I've never heard of a B-17 carrying more than 8,000 lbs on an operational mission, and even that was for attacks on invasion beaches at very short range.

B-17 loads averaged just under 5,000 lbs, B-24s just over 5,000 lbs. The USAAF heavy bombers in Europe dropped 714,719 tons (1,429,438,000 lbs) from 274, 921 effective sorties (ie those which bombed). That's an average per bomber of 5,199 lbs.

Uh, oh...

Nobody told me that there would be math on this forum....

Please don't try to make guided ordnance like the X-4 a negative thing. Many other weapons from many countries guided from the cockpit were used successfully in combat like the SD 1400 X, Hs 293, BV 246, Glomb, Gargoyle, GB, Mistels, BQ-7 8 and the VB- 2,3,5,7 8s.

Since the X-4s speed was in the order of 520 MPH the time of vulnerable exposure while guiding was minimal. Why would the guiding craft be required to fly straight and level anyhow. There was also an X-7 made for anti-tank activities.

You're not going to be able to perform any kind of violent movement while the missile is still attached to your plane. Plus, the pilot controlling the missile would have to be concentrating on it hitting the target. He wouldn't be able to do that and control his plane. All the guided ordnance of World War II was guided by a crew member that wasn't the pilot of the plane.

The X-4 wouldn't go from 0 - 520 MPH in a nano-second. The plane firing the missile would be vulnerable for a couple of seconds at least. And when the sky is full of Mustang escorts, a couple of seconds is a long time.

would the Me-262 have been able to carry one? although they already were successful with R4Ms

The missile would go 0-520 in 0 sec. Take the airspeed of the carrierplane (Me-262) into account. 520 mp-h is a reasonable approach speed for this plane.
Plans called for two - four X-4 in this plane. However, my personal opinion is that this weapon wouldn´t be very effective at all. As already pointed out, the guidiance is a bit problematic in the heat of combat.

nad they murdered enough already with their R4Ms

Del, for the sake of argument the Me-262 plane releases the X-4 at 520 MPH ground speed. This means that the X-4 upon release is travelling at the same speed. However, in terms of ground speed the X-4 can only go 520 MPH which would mean the missile would stay under the plane and this is silly.
In reality, the X-4 is going 0 MPH compared to the plane when attached. Upon release the X-4 will start to slow down until the rocket motor sets in. Once the rocket motor sets in, the missile will accelerate away up to a ground speed of 800 - 1,000 MPH to make it move beyond the carrier plane. It's the planes speed plus the rocket speed. I always think of the missile at 0 MPH when on a plane.

Which means, in reality, the X-4 does not go from 0 - 520 MPH instantly, when it's released it will actually slow down and it will take time to accelerate to it's top speed. In that time, the carrier plane is vulnerable.

plan_D said:

Del, for the sake of argument the Me-262 plane releases the X-4 at 520 MPH ground speed. This means that the X-4 upon release is travelling at the same speed. However, in terms of ground speed the X-4 can only go 520 MPH which would mean the missile would stay under the plane and this is silly.
In reality, the X-4 is going 0 MPH compared to the plane when attached. Upon release the X-4 will start to slow down until the rocket motor sets in. Once the rocket motor sets in, the missile will accelerate away up to a ground speed of 800 - 1,000 MPH to make it move beyond the carrier plane. It's the planes speed plus the rocket speed. I always think of the missile at 0 MPH when on a plane.

Which means, in reality, the X-4 does not go from 0 - 520 MPH instantly, when it's released it will actually slow down and it will take time to accelerate to it's top speed. In that time, the carrier plane is vulnerable.

Click to expand...

I've heard this called "slew time" and is common with most air launched missiles. I seen Firebee drones launched from a C-130, when it drops it momentarily falls below and slightly behind the aircraft until the engine kicks in and then "woosh" it's gone! You barely could see this happen but I would imagine this would be the same situation for the X-4....

Quote:
Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet
You also assume alot as well and discredit others assuming. Why is that? Are your assumptions better than others?


Of course they are"


HAHAHA!!!!!

Can´t believe i had missed that part!

DerAdler, and you call me arrogant...? it´d appear mr. syscom3 has come to reinvent the definition of arrogance.

No syscom3 and me talk to each other like that and we know that we are kidding with each other.

Unlike you, Syscom3 does not actually think he is better than everyone here (atleast he does not show it that way).

Compared to you he is not arrogant. You are the most arrogant person I have ever seen type on here and I would hate to see how you are in person.

Jeez the X-4 was the 1st wire-guided unjammable missile in the world and it is being perceived as something negative! The 262 units were going to use it as well as others. In fact the missiles had arrived at those airdromes before the end of hostilities but were never used in combat.

Come on, as it was normal zerstroyer aircraft got through the escorts and fired heavy cannon, missiles, mortars and aerial bombs. The American escorts were not impenetrable. In fact they often got pulled away in running fights with regular fighters as diversions to allow zerstroyers to slide in.

Imagine a a couple squadrons worth of attackers each with a 2 or 4 X-4s coming in. Unless they were all halted more than 3.5 miles away their ordnance would most certainly be launched. And the part you probably don't know is that they had acoustic proximity fuses tuned to the B-17 engines so that after initial steering input they were on a doomsday course that couldn't be stopped. This fuse was going to be used in other unguided ordnance as well.

The Ruhrstahl X-4 air-to-air weapon was really sci-fi in April of 1944 when it was first tested. This was a wire-guided weapon, and as are today's descendants, un-jam-able. The SD 1400 Xs and Hs 293s were effectively diverted from targets by Allied jamming later in the Mediterranean. The X-4 received its course corrections through it 3.5-mile long cables as they un-spooled. No countermeasures were then or are now effective.

Sighting and steering was accomplished with a PKS-12 gun sight in conjunction with the Dusseldorf/Detmold command link's tiny joystick. The 242 lb. thrust BMW 109-448 rocket propelled the six foot long, 132 lb. missiles at 520 MPH to targets and the large 44 lb. warhead was detonated with a Kranich acoustic proximity fuse tuned to the frequency of the B-17's engines where it would explode at about twenty feet distant. The 2.8-foot wing fins gave stability. The fuel burned for seventeen seconds. It was SV-stoff and R-stoff or Tonka-250 mixing equal amounts of xylidine and triethylamine.

The BMW plant was destroyed in bombings and no X-4s were used by the Me 262 for which it was intended though some reached operational units.

The Hs 298 lost to the X-4 but had some merits. It was 200 lbs. with its 55 lb. warhead. Length of the oval fuselage was 6.6 feet while the wing spanned a rather large 4.3 feet. It had a twin fin tail for control with input from the Kehl/Colmar command link. This is where it lost out to the X-4 in that attack parameters specified a no more than a 30-degree variant from astern while being 15-degrees below. The X-4 could be guided in any direction or attitude from the launch aircraft.

The Hs 298 used a Schmidding 109-543 with 330 lbs. thrust for twenty-five seconds attaining 575 MPH. Another drawback was the Hs 298's short range of just one mile.

Man this is getting more and more off-topic by the minute.....

Suggestion: Lets make a new thread about these early guided misiles.

Good post btw Twitch.