Could proximity fuses have halted the bomber offensive against Germany in 1944?

[ThomasP]

Hey Wuzak,

OK, I understand.

I was thinking that the loss rate to AAA was only 5% on average, hence doubling the effectiveness of the AA rounds would result in 10% losses. IIRC by mid-1944 the amount of AAA had more than tripled from mid-1943, and the number of rounds fired had more than tripled (I think it was actually more like 6 times the number of rounds but I do not remember for sure. Maybe someone else has better numbers for this?). Had the number of US bombers flying over the defended targets increased to the ratio point that you are thinking? I do not know. I have never seen a detailed report on the number of rounds fired at the bombers - i.e. how many vs the US daytime raids, as opposed vs the UK night time raids, how many bombers were in the air per number of rounds fired, etc. It would be interesting to find out.

 

[gordonm1]

This thread raises my interest in what proximity fused weaponry was used on infantry in WWII and what effectiveness it had. Any links are appreciated.
I don't have much knowledge base but for my .02 $, I think Germany was going to get rolled over on the ground no matter what happened so only timing would be affected by more use of proximity fuses. They would be helpful in torpedoes too but I doubt enough to affect the outcome.

The revolutionary fuse that won World War II

Artillery Proximity Fuses

Edit: A couple links found with general discussion fit for newbys like me.

 

[Zipper730]

What was the typical loss rate to night-fighters?

 

[bbear]

This thread raises my interest in what proximity fused weaponry was used on infantry in WWII and what effectiveness it had. Any links are appreciated.
I don't have much knowledge base but for my .02 $, I think Germany was going to get rolled over on the ground no matter what happened so only timing would be affected by more use of proximity fuses. They would be helpful in torpedoes too but I doubt enough to affect the outcome.

The revolutionary fuse that won World War II

Artillery Proximity Fuses

Edit: A couple links found with general discussion fit for newbys like me.

Here's a few links
8 minute introduction places and faces
http://www.bombfuzecollectorsnet.com/userimages/radio proximity vt fuzes.pdf authorised version of events facts and figures
Proximity Fuze History Southwest Museum of Engineering,Communications and Computation# history context
https://www.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/views/pdfs/V02_N1_1962/V2_N1_1962_VTfuze.pdf history with a telling picture on p22*
https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/monographs/Introduction/Proximity_Fuzes.pdf post war discussion from ally. see Section 1.7 A Striking Combat Success


effectiveness: not measured in the field in period as far as I know,

your next resources may be to consult "The Deadly Fuze" [by Ralph B Baldwin


* if you look at the photo on page 22 you can estimate that VT fuzes that worked detonated at designated height +/-a few feet. At say 600m/sec flight speed that's about equivalent of a timed fuze with perhaps 10ms standard error (+/-6ft). Typically I believe that the best mechanical timed fuze could only achieve +/- 0.1 sec or +/- 60 meters.

That's what makes the VT fuze interesting to me. It did with accuracy and common c;lay troops, an artillery job that any fully educated experienced artillery man would be proud of.

 

[ThomasP]

Hey guys,

(from 'The Bombing War: Europe 1939-1945' by Richard Overy)

During the Battle of Britain and The Blitz, over the night campaign from July 1940-June 1941, the UK AA guns were considered to have shot down 170 aircraft with another 118 damaged.

In September 1940 alone over 260,000 AA rounds were fired. The Air Ministry estimated that the number of AA shells per shootdown began at about 6,000 per aircraft in the autumn of 1940, reducing gradually to 3,195 to April 1941. Improved radar, improved/increased searchlight units, and improved organization and methodology further reduced the number to 1,830 per shootdown in the spring of 1942 (the best for the UK prior to the introduction of the proximity fuse).



(from 'Archie, Flak, AAA, and SAM' by Kenneth P. Werrell which can be found on the dtic website)

(https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a421867.pdf)

(re UK AA effectiveness)

Starting in October 1940 the UK began deploying radar for aid in shooting at night. The rounds per shootdown went from 30,000 in September 1940 (when German night bombing began), to 11,000 in October 1940, to 4,199 in January 1941.

Against the V-1, the proximity fuse was considered 5x more effective than timed or contact fuse.

(re German AA effectiveness)

In the ETO the USAAF credited the German AA with shooting down 7,821 out of 18,418 aircraft lost on combat sorties, with 6,800 lost to enemy fighters, and 2,179 lost to operational or unknown causes.

After the war the US did a study that found if the Germans had used proximity fuses, the heavy FlaK would have been 3.4x as effective. This would have made operations by the B-24* "impractical" and operations by the B-17 "very hazardous".

*My note. The 88mm FlaK 18/36/37 made up ~60% of the German heavy AA during WWII. The effective ceiling of this gun was considered ~26,000 ft, about equal to the the practical operating altitude of the B-24.



(from 'German Ground-Based Air Defenses, 1914-1945' by Edward Westermann.)

The Germans estimated ~3,000 rounds per shootdown in 1943.

 

[bbear]

A "new" original source, for comments. I rate this highly as it is from government authority, near contemporaneous and gives a clear account of the function of the circuit which is precious as no one nowadays can really confidently say they know enough about Vacuum Tube design to be able ton criticize Butement's design. At least you would struggle to find one such. I think.

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/sp958-lide/059-062.pdf
the circuit explanation starts at the top of Page 60 (the second page in this document)

the authortative work it cites Radio Proximity Fuzes for Fin-Stabilized Missiles appears to be seminal as when I use that string in a search pattern a wealth of 'new' material appears. New to me that is - for comment as I say.

one such "new work" published 1946 has a thorough treatment of the electronics in chapter 9. I have s yet not read it. I'm just a bit excited.
VT Fuzes For Projectiles and Spin-Stabilized Rockets - OP 1480