Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
We had ground radar even in the Vietnam era, Early 70's, they used them at firebases on the perimeter .
They could detect people, tell if they were armed or not. And sensitive enough that operators could tell people from water buffaloes.
When discussing stealth it is worth considering what on earth it would have been good for given the German's situation. It's only really going to be useful at night, which means area bombing. An expensive jet aircraft in 1945 will not be plentiful enough to make area bombing worthwhile.
Stealth is useful today because they can hit what they are aiming at. Most usefully to suppress air defenses so less stealthy and less expensive aircraft can come in behind. That was not possible in WW2.
There was a great deal of experimentation during the war. Some of the results were by chance and led to further developments.
Would it? The buzz bombs had minimal impact really. Would it be anything more than that? I don't seem them reducing the offensive against Germany to combat what could never be more than a small number of nuisance raiders. Sure, some attempt at interception would be made that's a given. But if the issue becomes pronounced then it is addressed by raids in the airfields.
I don't see the attraction folks have in trying to find a way for the Nazi thugs to have kept fighting. But that aside, the proposals are, like this one, fairly silly and don't take into account the scale of operations that were underway.
They may have had little impact in USA, because they didn't land there, you wouldn't want those ineffective buzz bombs falling on New York at any time since Columbus landed. They had a huge impact in London, the V2 even greater because it was in effect a permanent air raid with no warning, just explosions and casualties. Massive resources were put into countering the V1 from the Tempest and Meteor fighters to radar guided proximity artillery.Would it? The buzz bombs had minimal impact really. Would it be anything more than that? I don't seem them reducing the offensive against Germany to combat what could never be more than a small number of nuisance raiders. Sure, some attempt at interception would be made that's a given. But if the issue becomes pronounced then it is addressed by raids in the airfields.
I don't see the attraction folks have in trying to find a way for the Nazi thugs to have kept fighting. But that aside, the proposals are, like this one, fairly silly and don't take into account the scale of operations that were underway.
T Tkdog maybe it means more when you can reach some of the places involved on foot or by bicycle. Operation Gisela - WikipediaYES - Germany was still attempting to cause damage right up to the end, especially at night, last German raid was in March 1945.
There was no defence against an individual V2 but there was against the whole system. Not only were the launch sites and holding silos attacked, their information system was also, to progressively make them land further from the target, just about the last use of the double cross spy system in ww2.Additionally, the V2 gave zero warning of it's approach or target.
Once the V2 launched and aquired it's flight path, no one (but launch control) knew where it was going.
After it started it's descent, it became supersonic - technology of the day had no way to detect/track it, there was no sound of it's approach, only it's impact and explosion bore witness to it's arrival.
Of all the "wunderwaffe" weapons Germany had, this was actually a true terror weapon.
IndeedThere was no defence against an individual V2 but there was against the whole system. Not only were the launch sites and holding silos attacked, their information system was also, to progressively make them land further from the target, just about the last use of the double cross spy system in ww2.
And some more.. oops. the last images are of a high altitude intercept and then some concepts when he went to Argentina. A number of years before the F-86 and MIG-15.
Anyway in 1950 he says wooden aircraft have radar camouflage. He says "guided by these principles I designed the Ho IX."
My point is they would provide enough of a disruption to move valuable assets from the front to protect a civilian population, something that was actually done during WW2 with units like Group 12 being assigned to do nothing but intercept night intrusions by the Luftwaffe, and assets from 150 wing RAF, 3 Squadron that did nothing but intercept V-1s, you're talking dozens of fighters that could have been supporting the action across the channel.Minimal impact compared to the ongoing losses from the war. The argument above was that a few "stealth" bombers would disrupt the allies war fighting abilities as they scrambled to reply. My point is that the casualties from the V1, w could be intercepted, did not result in such a disruption. It would be difficult for a small number of these bombers to do more than that. So, why would the allies be disrupted?
And it was proportional, the "what if" of a near stealth aircraft would have upped the ante, especially if it was the British population facing the wrath of this.Tens of millions of people died in WW2, an incomprehensible tragedy. But the allies weren't going to prolong the war to divert resources to go after an attack that was threatening a few thousand people. There would be a response, but it would be proportional.