B-29s over Germany

ah but my young freind that is the point ..........assumptions/what-ifs and whatever we want to call it. usually the 88mm's did not fire all at once so from what I gather for SAMS there was to be apre-appointed time where a massive launch could take plae hoping that the explosions and fragmentation could possibly be on the scale 5-10 times broader than the effective 88mm round.

you can imagine if the lead or middle bomber group by chance ran into such firepower in the air what this would do to the following up squadrons and bomber groups and in late 44-45 and wars end the US bomber formations could run the gamet of some 10 miles or longer so picking out targets of oppourtunity would be quite easy.

obviously as we can easily see 5-6 SAM's are not going to do the trick, maybe 40-75 might be another story let all off within a minutes time schedule, this of course would have to be closelyw qtched with the bomber formations covering ground in that minutes time as well as weaving US fighter escorts which would be much harder to bring down

things to conisder in our on-going what-if §

Germany would have to divert a lot of resources to bring that kind of firepower to bare on the U.S formations. And they would need to be at least five times more effective as the standard AA round to make good on those resources.
I can only imagine the lead group feeling the force and being destroyed, but the following groups moving on as the missiles are reloaded. As it would take a lot longer than shells.
Germany would need to deploy a lot of SAMs to attack all the groups that would be attacking in a single day, on a variety of targets. And I believe Germany didn't have the proximity fuse, would these SAMs be manually exploded?

pressure principles were being worked on in 1945 for SAM's meaning basically again a preset height and the igniter within the unit fires off. I would of course have to peel back the internals of the rockets to see how they work to adequately prove this but it could not have been a visual sighting and then "trying" to trigger the rocket 30,000 or more feet off the ground. A following decoy A/C may have worked to radio in but late in the war anything with German markings would be pounced on.

Example one R4M = 1 8.8cm round Flak or larger and as the rockets were of larger caliber if want to call it that a massed barrage in the air would not have been unthinkable allowing they all exploded within a millisecond of one antoerh after firing at that determined height pattern.
Also yes midway in a bomber stream could of brought great destruction and chaos, usually for German day fighters in late war they were not attacking lead bomber formations but midway. Besides the US escorts could not be everywhere at once even with over 1000 STangs and T-bolts in the air, it just was not possible......sorry I am getting a little off stream-bed. you can see though had there been say as an example 6-7 batteries firing off at certain points in the airstream what type of chaos would of arisen, and a possible heyday for the German fighters even when mixing it up with Allied escorts ........... watch out a Ta 152 behind you !

§ E §

Had Germany got the proximity fuse, the idea of these SAMs being really effective would be more open to me. But without an effective detonation system that would bring the rocket into a zone within the formation to cause maximum damage it seems like a lot of expense for a little increase in destruction.

These rockets exploding at a pre-set height is obviously the best option. But being a 'what-if' we have no idea how many of these sites Germany could deploy. And with hundreds of bombers in the air, it would need to be a lot. Which is a lot of resources.

The problem I see with the follow-up interceptors is that the escorts would still be there. The Luftwaffe would have to be attacking the broken up formation to make them most effective, they didn't have the fighter strength to attack all groups. So the escort forces could concentrate their defence on the broken formation. And the lead group has gone through unscathed.

I can see the destructive force of a single rocket being massive, but the co-ordination of the whole system would be complex. Then the vectoring in of the fighters to the right group, while they avoid the concentrated escort defence. And the resources for this system would be massive.

I personally think that if this defence system were to be set-up, the Allies would answer with Typhoons, Mosqutios, Lightnings and Thunderbolts attacking the sites before the big raids. And the sites would be more vulnerable and harder to replace than normal FlaK36 cannon. Then with the few sites remaining attacking the mid-group of bombers, hopefully breaking it apart, to be attacked by Ta-152s and Fw-190Ds which would meet an opposition of P-51Ks and P-51Ns which would out-number them five to one at least. I think for the escorts it would be "Watch out, Ta-152 on your tail..." and then for interceptor "Watch out, there's four Mustangs on your tail!"

Had Germany got the proximity fuse, they wouldn't needed rockets. Can you imagine what Proximity Fuses would do to a daylight formation in their box's

ah but the Luftwaffe did have preset fuzes for the heavy Flak but for the most part were not necessairly in range most of the time, either too high or too low with anything in the middle.

in course the rocket batteries would be fiored off in one massive salvo with a good luck if you hit anything attitude. had short range and I mean ground to air of 30,000 ft been used like the nebelwerfer effect ........... well you can imagine the destruction and complete chaos isued.

when the BR 21cm came into effect and fired off by stafflen of Bf 110G-2's the first ops in November 43 had the same effect and thankfully US escorts of P47's and the 9th AF Stangs came to the rescue. Will say the bomber crew vets first impressions of this weapon were pretty overwhelming

Glider: you´ve got a little ostrich syndrome there. Congratulations.

Germany did have preset fuses, yes, but the proximity fuse would have made the AA defences of the Reich much more deadly. And these would have made the rockets a lot more deadly too.

Before we get the wrong idea, Erich, I'm not saying these rocket systems would be useless. The destruction of air-to-air rocket systems in the Luftwaffe were cause for dread. But I do not think the effectiveness of the SAM system would offset the resources it would take to build it. Plus, as you've said previously, the SAM sites would be vulnerable to Allied ground-attack craft.

Udet, you're acting like an attention seeking child. Congratulations.

pland, (mr. supreme wisdom),

don´t come to tell me about childish plese...take a tour throughout the forum and read your rants everywhere. you might re-discover the meaning of childish.

mr. glider asked for my response earlier on this thread which i gave.

now, if you don´t mind bugger off.

UDET
Ostrich calling, Ostrich calling.
First the basics. How would a B29 fare over ETO?
Awnser, a lot better than B17/B24. Its faster, has less time in the danger zone, and would receive fewer hits. It is also better defended, is more able to take care of itself and has a better payload range. Of course it will do better than a B17/B24, in the same way a B17/B24 is better than a Wellington.

Bouncing the Me262
If the Allies could catch and destroy a lot of the faster Me262's Why do you think they wouldn't be able to catch the slower TA152? I agree with our claims that the majority of losses happened at low altitude and not at height. However you cannot deny that losses of Me262's were high, in some cases more than the casualties that they incurred. So where they were caught is of interest but more important is that they were shot down.

Third your posting.
Climbing to Height.
You are of course correct a lot of time the Germans did get to height, but a lot of the time they didn't. In the same way that the Allies concentrated on the Me262 bases, I would concentrate on the TA152 bases. It worked on the Me262, so I don't see why it wouldn't work on the TA152. See note above re where most of the 262's were destroyed. Give some credit, I have always said this was the best tactic.

The Height of the B29
A number of the postings were about how high the B29 operated. In reality they could operate at whatever height they wanted, which is the point I was trying to make. Personally I think they would have cruised at height and droppped lower for the bombing run, its what they did in the Pacific, I see no reason why they shouldn't do it in the ETO should the need arise. At 25,000 ft all Germans would be effective, but then so would all the Allied planes. Take your pick.

TA152 was built in responce to the threat of the B29
I think you know that I have never said this and believe like you, that its a load of tosh. The Germans were losing the battle and couldn't rely on numbers therefore had to have quality to have a chance. Had the roles been reversed no doubt the Meteor, MB5 and Hornet would have been given a higher priority and deployed with more haste.

Fear of Bombers Defensive Fire
I think fear is the wrong word. I have read a number of comments about BOB pilots who thought that comments about the German bombers being poorly defended were greatly exagerated. As one put it, they shot me down twice and damaged me a third time, so how can they be that bad? Hard to disagree with that.
I think we smell the same smell and there is no doubt that without the Long Range Fighters the USAAF would have had to stop their raid.

That said though, there is no doubt that the German Fighters saw there losses climb in 1943 and by 1944 the period we are talking about, they were not sustainable.
In 1943 the average fighter pilot strength was 2105 pilots
In 1943 the Germans lost 2967 pilots ie 141% of the average strength
In June 1943 Germany built 772 new fighters (109 and 190)
In December 1943 Germany built 663 new fighters (109 and 190)
In May 1944 Germany lost 25% of its fighter Pilots

Can a 'normal' allied fighter take on a 262 or Ta152. the reply is no and I have never said they can. What I have said is that with the numbers involved and the odds in the Allied favour yes, the Ta 152 can be handled. It wouldn't matter if we lost 2 or 3 fighters to a Ta152. The allies had them to lose and the Germans didn't.
I simply do not believe that 10 of anything can take on 190 of anything and get away with it UNLESS THEY RUN ON CONTACT. The caps are there because if you are going to penetrate the defences to get to the bombers, you cannot run on contact.

If you stand back and look at it we agree on a number of points.

Look forward to your reply.

From what I understand, Germany had proximity fuzes for large warheads (SAM), such as EWM W10. They also had a copied proximity fuze to be deployed on AA grenades for the 128 mm KM40 / Flak 42 but nothing for smaller calibres as 105 mm and 88mm.
Good comments, Glider.

Where the allies aware of the Ta-152 being developed? If so (conjecture on my part), then its probable that the P47N (maybe even F4U-5) would have been sped up into production to counter it.

Syscom, I don't think the Allies knew about the Ta-152 being in a deployable stage. Otherwise Allied pilots would have been warned of it's presence in the skies over Europe. And I've never heard of that, while I've heard of warnings about the Fw-190 when it was discovered. I may be wrong though.

Glider makes all good points. The fact of the matter is Germany was in no state or situation to hold off B-17s, so it would be in even less of a state and situation to hold off B-29s which were better bombers.

Udet, Glider may well have asked for a response. I saw his request and it was in no way baiting you up with insults. You were seeking attention like a little child instead of having some patience and letting Glider get round to his response. But I'm sure you wouldn't understand that the world works for others aside from yourself. After all, you are so far up your own arse there is no light at the end of the tunnel.
Now, I'm sure you'll respond with something that you consider witty and intelligent that will just bore everyone. Or you could leave and reply to Glider with something other than "Germany was the best, the Allies lied and still lie.". Either way, I'll be looking forward to reading your dribble.

remember the SAM deployment is pure speculation. the mentions as I put down were thought of but the plans were not put into action obviously.

Yes the cost of rocket to air deployment would of been quite costly but you maybe surprised as to the amount of air to air missiles were captured intact in southern Germany in March/April and even May 1945 when the Allies overan the area. Problem for Germany was getting from point A to point B and then making it all happen.

I shall say that at least the RAF and the Soviets knew of the Ta 152H's potential due to the combat experinces and at least I would like to think that the RAF must have shared some of it's airborne knowledge with the US 8th AF fighter command staff in regard to a new long wing long nose Fw like craft

I have seen pictures of captured rockets, Erich. I wouldn't know if they were air-to-air or surface-to-air though. The difficulty would be in setting up the sites too. Do you have any production numbers for any of the SAMs ? Or are they another record that's been lost to time?

I know the RAF and VVS had a few scraps with the Ta-152, but did they have any idea of it before it was deployed? And what I've heard from the RAF side, at least, is that they weren't really in combat with the Ta-152 long enough to get a good picture of it's ability.

Well Erich do you have any pictures of those German SAMs or any other air-air rockets or anti-aircraft rockets.

plan I do think production of the SAM's is hidden away in some secret CIA archiv's. the stuff was so cutting edge back in 1945 that is was hidden and classified along with the creators/scientists of those said units.

your probably right about not thinking anyting of letting 8th AF command know about the Ta. So late in the war, hardly seen and probably mis-ID'd as some Fw 190Dora

plan_D said:

Syscom, I don't think the Allies knew about the Ta-152 being in a deployable stage. Otherwise Allied pilots would have been warned of it's presence in the skies over Europe. And I've never heard of that, while I've heard of warnings about the Fw-190 when it was discovered. I may be wrong though.

Glider makes all good points. The fact of the matter is Germany was in no state or situation to hold off B-17s, so it would be in even less of a state and situation to hold off B-29s which were better bombers.

Udet, Glider may well have asked for a response. I saw his request and it was in no way baiting you up with insults. You were seeking attention like a little child instead of having some patience and letting Glider get round to his response. But I'm sure you wouldn't understand that the world works for others aside from yourself. After all, you are so far up your own arse there is no light at the end of the tunnel.
Now, I'm sure you'll respond with something that you consider witty and intelligent that will just bore everyone. Or you could leave and reply to Glider with something other than "Germany was the best, the Allies lied and still lie.". Either way, I'll be looking forward to reading your dribble.

Click to expand...

Plan D your in danger of going too far here. If I thought that Udet comments were dribble I wouldn't have replied. I am sure that Udet knows I wasn't baiting him, its not my style.

The main reason for the delay was because my Anti Virus gave me a warning when I came onto this thread so for everyone's sake I kept away.

I wasn't refering to your dely, nor was I refering to your request for a response. I was refering to his baiting of you, which wasn't needed. I knew full well that you would reply eventually, so his impatience wasn't required nor was his childish attention seeking.

I've gone far enough in this case. I plan on going no further, and the reference to Udet's dribble is in his usual postings about Allied 'lies'. In my opinion this episode has already been sealed. I hope that his reply to you will actually be decent and worthy of your effort. His reply will only make me laugh over my morning tea.

this pland thing couldn´t be funnier.

why dont you go get some dictionary and see the meaning of childish. look at yourself in a mirror before discharging your nonsense.

childish? re-read the utterly ridiculous "Proud to be British?" thread you commenced, and get to further understand the meaning of childish. it was fun to read you were complaining about individuals such as yourself.

now, the fact being it´s been a good while since i understood the sort of individual you are. that´s probably the reason i have no further use of any of the comments you discharge here and there.

i do not know if you speak for all the member forums when saying "they get bored" while reading me here. Do you get bored? See how funny you are. Whether if you get bored reading my words is not even an issue, much less a concern. unlike you, i am not an entertainer.

i have fruitful exchanges with several members here. now i leave you. do not need to type this, you are very good at showing what you are all by your lonesome self.

im glad to see you are trying to improve your expressing manners though; be a good well behaved little child.



Mr. Glider: thank you for the response; i agree with all of your comments there. Nothing else to be added from my part.

Cheers!