Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
No cigar I'm afraid! Things are never so simple. There was no impact fuse on the nose tip. The extremity of the nose was occupied by the airlog veeder counter assembly behind which sat the wooden compass sphere. Moreover, there wasn't 'a' fuse; there were (initially) two and later, a third mechanical 2-hour time delay fuse. One of the first two was a belly-impact fuse -and, by the way, probably more susceptible to handling damage than the other. The latter's location I haven't been able to precisely determine but by now I think that you're getting the gist that a mere, single 'bucket' isn't going to suffice nor provide a satisfactory explanation.Its a shipping container covering electrical impact fuses
Photographic 'artefact' -or maybe not??
The following is a well recycled picture of a V-1 ground-crew man-handling a V-1 flying bomb on it's ground trolley. Unless my eyes deceive me the characteristic nose profile of the usual V-1 we're all used to seeing is distinctly lacking the normal ogival shape and instead, it looks for all the world like a bucket-shaped protective shield has been placed over the nose. ....or perhaps the factory made design changes to the previous nose-cap? Obviously, at this point in the pre-lauch procedures the Veeder-counter propeller has not been installed until just prior to locking the V1 to the launch ramp.
View attachment 604331
Compare this picture to the more common pictures one usually sees of similar pre-flight ground manoeuvres:
View attachment 604332
So, the first obvious question: protective nose-cap 'bucket', or not? ....followed by; if "Yes, it's a bucket!" then what was its purpose? Was it purely to prevent mechanical collision damage to the Veeder counter odometer/compass or could it be more subtle, like inhibiting inadvertent magnetisation from the impingement of stray magnetic fields thus preventing rogue deflection of the directional compass-disc achieved by constructing the bucket as a shield made out of Mu-metal? ...and, if this was the case, then when was this procedural change introduced since this is just about the only photo that shows this cover installed, every other picture of a V1 on the ground shows the nose uncovered: early handling procedure subsequently found to be of no merit, then quickly omitted or else found to be necessary and therefore instituted late in the V1 campaign? Anyone know??
As a brief diversion, that mention of de-magnetisation (above) prompts me to comment on the German practice for demagnetising the V1's steel fuselage. How many of you know what this 'process' entailed? Well, just prior to launch the missile was hauled into a wooden building containing no iron within its structure and the de-magnetisation team applied the super-sophisticated, high-tech process of frantically attacking the beast with wooden mallets! Seriously, that's how it was done which also neatly explains why you will see quite a number of pictures of V1's with numerous indentations which heretofore you may have just passed off as handling, transit damage. As but one example, there is a well-known picture of a V1 Having just left the end of the launch pad which displays what appears to be a large longitudinal cleft just behind the nose. The moral of the story: when press-ganging the locals into the de-magnetisation crew don't include the village black-smith!
View attachment 604333
However, "Bucket" is easier to say than "standard blue protective cover for shipping"...but by now I think that you're getting the gist that a mere, single 'bucket' isn't going to suffice nor provide a satisfactory explanation.
However, "Bucket" is easier to say than "standard blue protective cover for shipping"...
OK, fine but any source documents or diagrams? However, the bucket still doesn't account for the second belly-impact switch. How was the latter protected in transit?Owning a propeller with contact mechanism and, behind it, a pin pointing backwards to my nose impact fuse I can insure you that there was such a thing in the very front of the nose.
Perhaps examine the illustration in post #8 to better understand the protective cover that was in place during transit from the manufacturer and the point of deployment to protect the nose of the Feisler.OK, fine but any source documents or diagrams?
I posted from the v-1 manual.OK, fine but any source documents or diagrams? However, the bucket still doesn't account for the second belly-impact switch. How was the latter protected in transit?
Also, for all respondants to my post in order not to detour into the swamp I think we need to make an important point of clarification. Some are erroneously referring to fuses as one and the same. They are NOT. The elements requiring protection and which trigger the fuses to detonate the warhead are the impact electrical switches whilst the actual fuses (two) that explode the charge reside in vertical pockets atop the warhead.
Too much speculation however reasonable the guesses may be. What would be nice to have is an Fi-103 pre-launch procedure operational manual. Anyone have one they can up-load? What about the equivalent American one for the Loon?Perhaps examine the illustration in post #8 to better understand the protective cover that was in place during transit from the manufacturer and the point of deployment to protect the nose of the Feisler.
You may also note that there will be assembly needed in order to make the aircraft serviceable and it would be reasonable to think that at THIS point, fragile components would be installed while the wings and engine were being fitted...
Do you have the rest of the manual from which this diagram is extracted?
How big is the manual? Does it detail the pre-launch procedures?I posted from the v-1 manual.
Do you have the rest of the manual from which this diagram is extracted?
YesHow big is the manual? Does it detail the pre-launch procedures?