"Why is there a Bucket on your nose Mr. DOODLEBUG??"

[Koopernic]

The Re4 version was not going to be used just like any missile. It was going to be used only for high value targets and thus would have a special warhead and a different nose.

While it did not have the autopilot and air log device, it did have an electrically powered gyrocompass. I can only imagine that visual pilotage navigation given that tiny canopy and the limited view allowed past that long nose and wings ideally situated to interfere with seeing the ground would have been all but impossible in that fast moving little nightmare. So the gyrocompass was essential.

The two seat version would have offered not only opportunities for training but also a more cost effective way to get rid of fanatical Nazis.

Notice that only the manned versions had ailerons; the stock unmanned missiles did not.





View attachment 604779View attachment 604780View attachment 604778

I think the Fi-103R pilot was to be issued a parachute and that there was a autopilot to control the final phase of flight. The possibility of escape would be slim and not expected.
It should be noted that German documents NEVER use the term suicide (selbst-mord or self-murder in German) they use the term selbst-opfer (self sacrifice). This linguistic distinction is important to understand.

I wonder if the He 162 ejection seat could be fitted?

 

[MIflyer]

Oh, theoretically they were to bail out but I don't know if anyone took it seriously. If they were serious about having the pilot escape they would have made the warhead detachable, kind of like they did with the Natter.

Look at Post #29. There was really not even enough room for a pilot with a chute and a Mae West; no way the a bang seat could be installed.

 

[xylstra]

Not in the manuals i have.

It's true though. The Germans attempted a clever ploy to extract impact location data by including lettersfrom POW's. This incident was related in several books I've read. Suffice to say, British intelligence weren't taken in by that one!

 

[xylstra]

It seems there were a couple of different designs for the Bucket and the manned version did not have one, since it used a plywood nose cap with the fuse added later.
Note that in one case the protective cap is located on the warhead BEFORE the outer shell is installed. View attachment 604677View attachment 604678View attachment 604679View attachment 604680

Does anyone know what the Americans used (if any) on their LOON rip-off of the V-1?

 

[xylstra]

Not just a bomb with wings it had radio. FuG 23 sender (march 1944 manual.) See also "Why is there a Bucket on your nose Mr. DOODLEBUG??"

View attachment 604661

Yes, installed in the rear tail-cone but not for every missile, just a statistical sampling quantity. Does anyone knowhow many FuG23-equipped V-1's were launched? Was it also used in the Antwerp V-1 campaign?

 

[GrauGeist]

Does anyone know what the Americans used (if any) on their LOON rip-off of the V-1?

You mean the JB-2, which was a copy of the V-1, which was a rip-off of the Kettering Bug?

The JB-2 was planned to be used against Japanese defenses during the invasion of the home islands (being launched from modified LSTs) which of course didn't happen. There was some testing after the war, but the Loon was never used in combat.

 

[xylstra]

You mean the JB-2, which was a copy of the V-1, which was a rip-off of the Kettering Bug?

The JB-2 was planned to be used against Japanese defenses during the invasion of the home islands (being launched from modified LSTs) which of course didn't happen. There was some testing after the war, but the Loon was never used in combat.

Now, now. you're putting words in my mouth! ...and are you in for a surprise: the 'Kettering Bug' was a belated rip-off of Sperry's pioneering pilotless missile work and moreover in that time period there were about 3 such bug projects. None that I recall used the V-1's pneumatically-driven gyro flight controls - and certainly not pulse-jet propulsion!
Still, the question remains: did the LOON have a bucket nose-cap? Out of interest, does anyone know the total LOON production quantity and between which dates?

 

[MIflyer]

I went to the Smithsonian ASM in 2002 and did some research on the Loon, They did air launch experiments with it after the war, and those were of interest for some studies we were doing for the USAF. I'll look and see what I have on it.

 

[GrauGeist]

If memory serves right, Ford produced a little over 1,000 JB-2 (and derivitives) before it was cancelled.

 

[MIflyer]

Speaking of fuses for the Loon, here is a little something. I also did some research on the USN Bat missile and have thought how we could have combined the two missiles to produce a long range air launched fire and forget missile.

 

[Koopernic]

Speaking of fuses for the Loon, here is a little something. I also did some research on the USN Bat missile and have thought how we could have combined the two missiles to produce a long range air launched fire and forget missile.

A couple of issues. The vibration of the pulse jet was severe and not only a threat to electronics but degraded the compass and odometer on the Fi 103. This is one reason (as well as range) that a disposable turbojet was being developed.

Neverthless it could be done. The BAT needed to be manually locked on to a target prior to release. There is however nothing stopping a TV transmission of the oscilloscope being developed plus remote control of the antenna and lock functions. That could be installed on loon as well as BAT. My understanding is that high accuracy versions of loon were tracked by SCR-584 and sent course Corrections so the were very accurate.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Interstate TDR-1 was remotely guided by the pilot (in the rear of a TBM) via television.

 

[SaparotRob]

You mean the JB-2, which was a copy of the V-1, which was a rip-off of the Kettering Bug?

The JB-2 was planned to be used against Japanese defenses during the invasion of the home islands (being launched from modified LSTs) which of course didn't happen. There was some testing after the war, but the Loon was never used in combat.

You got a "winner" for reminding me of the Kettering Bug.

 

[GrauGeist]

...and are you in for a surprise: the 'Kettering Bug' was a belated rip-off of Sperry's pioneering pilotless missile work and moreover in that time period there were about 3 such bug projects.

Um...no.
Sperry was brought into the project by Kettering (who founded Delco) because of Sperry's gyroscope invention.
Just the same as Kettering had Orville Wright over-see the design and manufacturing of the "Bug" (through Wright's company) and had Ford Motor company manufacture the engines.

The Kettering Bug was the world's first cruise missile and the V-1 concept and guidance system were a result of Kettering's invention.

 

[MIflyer]

The Bat radar needed to be locked onto the target but there was no correlation between the PB4Y-2 search radar and the Bat radar, which meant they did not know exactly which target they were shooting at. For a cruise missile application I assume you would radio control the Loon to the target area and then command the radar to lock onto whatever it found. For a battle in a broad ocean area without confusing shorelines nearby you might not get the enemy capital ships but the way you handle that is just launch enough Loons to hit everything.

 

[Koopernic]

Um...no.
Sperry was brought into the project by Kettering (who founded Delco) because of Sperry's gyroscope invention.
Just the same as Kettering had Orville Wright over-see the design and manufacturing of the "Bug" (through Wright's company) and had Ford Motor company manufacture the engines.

The Kettering Bug was the world's first cruise missile and the V-1 concept and guidance system were a result of Kettering's invention.

I suspect you can trace the development of the Fi 103 to other concepts independent of Kettering though you can't rule out that they looked at it.

Firstly there is a very strong heritage of wire guided and radio guided glide bombs and glide torpedoes going back to WW1 when Siemens set about developing these for use from Zeppelins and giant Zeppelin-Staaken R.IV bombers.

The Fi 103 (aka V1) traces its lineage to a piston engine drone bomber, I think with an Argus engine of about 400hp, that was meant to return to base in some manner. For whatever reason that system was rejected in favour of the fully disposable Fi 103.

The drone bomber was probably a good idea in that it would allow in investment in guidance systems.

Control, automation and Remote Control engineers were in limited supply.

 

[xylstra]

Um...no.
Sperry was brought into the project by Kettering (who founded Delco) because of Sperry's gyroscope invention.
Just the same as Kettering had Orville Wright over-see the design and manufacturing of the "Bug" (through Wright's company) and had Ford Motor company manufacture the engines.

The Kettering Bug was the world's first cruise missile and the V-1 concept and guidance system were a result of Kettering's invention.

Not by my reading of the thoroughly comprehensive biography on Sperry. There was much cross-fertilisation between the three American drone projects due to the personnel involved but either way, you can be sure the V-1 designers didn't reference Kettering's work. They had inspiration much closer to home originating in WW1 drone missile work with Zeppelin's as the carrier.

 

[Blixie]

The nose distance measuring turbine could be used to drive an odograph to provide navigation. I imagine the pilots weren't going to be great navigators and would use the auto-pilot most of the way.

Is there anything in the manual about the compartments that could discharge propaganda leaflets? Ive always though the V1 would be a useful way of discharging windows/chaff

I recieved a nice german wartime drawing of the leaflet container part from a developer of the Bodengerät. I tried to put it up here but the attach files button don't work. Any clue?

 

[Koopernic]

I recieved a nice german wartime drawing of the leaflet container part from a developer of the Bodengerät. I tried to put it up here but the attach files button don't work. Any clue?

You may need to start a new post and attach there. I found I couldn't attach in an edit on occasion. Maybe close and reopen your browser and make sure you are logged in.

 

[xylstra]

I recieved a nice german wartime drawing of the leaflet container part from a developer of the Bodengerät. I tried to put it up here but the attach files button don't work. Any clue?

Like you, I've encountered similar problems in the past. What is annoying is that it seems inconsistent, occasionally, as if by 'magic' fixing itself by trying later. If worse comes to worst, up-load it to imgur and post the link to us.