A
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
delcyros said:Dear RG,
There have been at least 10 subtypes of C-2W (W-1 - W-10) SAM, W-8 and W-10 exlusively with approximation fuzes (abandoned by Speer). The reason for this was the competition of SAM-projects to choose the best SAM for further development in september 1944 by 2. Batterie FLAK Lehr- und Versuchsabteilung. During these tests WITHOUT approximation fuzes 50% of the fired C-2 hit the target plane in 40.000 ft physicly. All SAM have been remotery controlled. The "what if" scenario doesn´t take working fuzes into account, I rated that 20-30% of the SAM would hit the target, only (physicly). One of the conclusions of the competitive shots in september was that a working approximation fuze is needed. Moreso because of the large HE warhead, which caused fatal blast effects at distances up to 100 ft. You are completely right if you underline that such a fuze wasn´t ready in time (I believe that the acustic approximation fuze haven´t worked properly at any time...). There have been two major directions in approximation fuzes, the acustic one, I have already mentioned and an Funkmeß (radar)-based, but none of them have been produced in numbers for the C-2W project by wars end (call it Luftwaffe´46, if needed), I even doubt that R&D have been finisched.
There is also some evidence that C-2W have been used against bombers on at least one time. Nowarra, based on statements of Speer, mentioned that around 50 C-2W have been succesfully used in february and march 1945 against heavy bombers. (H.J. Nowarra, die deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1945, vol. 4 (Koblenz 1993), page 65.)I tried to find any confirmations about it, but there is no proof beside of an article by Gröger in a local newspaper, who said to be member of Flarak Versuchsabteilung and who claims that C-2W and Hs-Schmetterling have been desperately used by this unit in the closing months of ww2 against heavy bombers in small numbers. He also claims that they succeed in downing bombers with these weapons. However, he didn´t wrote any concrete times and specifc local positions, so I cannot verify them. Gröger faded away in the late 90´s.
RG_Lunatic said:find it very hard to believe remote controlled SAM's could successfully kill such a high flying target with any reliablility. How would the ground observer know when the SAM was within 100 feet of the target - there would be no effective depth/range perception. Actually physically hitting the target would be even more difficult, there are so many factors involved in plotting such an intercept.
Arguably the finest bomber produced in Italy during World War II and fully a match for any medium bomber produced by Germany or the Allies, the Leone (lion) appeared too late to influence Italy's fate in the war and was therefore built only in very modest numbers. The design was the last by Filippo Zappata before he left CANT for Breda, and also his first airplane of all-metal construction. The Z.1018 embodied the lessons of all of Zappata's previous warplanes for CANT. The Z.1018 was a very clean design of the classic cantilever low-wing monoplane type with two wing-mounted engines, tailwheel landing gear incorporating main units that retracted into the rear of the engine nacelles, and a glazed nose incorporating the bombardier station. The first prototype was basically an aerodynamic test machine, and differed from its successors in being of all-wood construction with a tail unit that comprised a dihedraled tailplane carrying endplate vertical surfaces.
The prototype made its maiden flight in 1940 and was soon followed by five more prototypes of all-metal construction with lengthened fuselage, the cockpit moved forward from the original position over the wing, and a revised tail unit incorporating a single vertical surface. These prototypes were used for the evaluation of a number of power plants including: two 1,500-hp Piaggio P.XII RC.35 radials, two 1,400-hp Piaggio P.XV RC.45 radials, two 1,400-hp Alfa Romeo 135 RC.32 Tornado radials and two 1,475-hp Fiat RA.1050 RC.58 Tifone inverted-Vee engines.
It was clear from the beginning of the flight test program that the performance of the Leone was so high that a production order was certain. This materialized in 1941 in the form of a contract for 300 aircraft to be powered by two Alfa Romeo 135 RC.32 or Piaggio P.XII RC.35 engines, depending on availability. In the event that the Alfa Romeo radial engine was available in larger quantities, and production started in 1943 with a powerplant of two such engines. By the time of the Italian armistace in 9/43 however, deliveries had reached only 10 pre-production and five production warplanes, and a few of these machines saw limited service with the 101st Bombardment Group. Such was the potential of the basic design that two important derivatives were proposed. The first of these was a heavy fighter was a fixed forward armament of 7 20mm cannon as well as a defensive outfit based on three 12.7mm trainable machine guns. The second was a night-fighter with German Lichtenstein SN-2 radar with the antenna in the nose. Both these fighter models had an estimated maximum speed of 395 mph, but neither reached the hardware stage
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:RG_Lunatic said:find it very hard to believe remote controlled SAM's could successfully kill such a high flying target with any reliablility. How would the ground observer know when the SAM was within 100 feet of the target - there would be no effective depth/range perception. Actually physically hitting the target would be even more difficult, there are so many factors involved in plotting such an intercept.
Why do you find it so hard to do? It is done today still, I have actually seen it done and it was quite easy. If the Germans used a camara mounted to it then I dont see why it was so hard. It is the same idea in the UAV program and they have even shot down things fired from the UAV using remote control.