Very true as well.
Your idea for Bomber killing weapons in WWII
- Thread starter Amsel
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Very true as well.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
A rather unorthodox approach was considered in 1944.
A radio guided and unmanned Ta-154 packed full with high explosives
should be maneuvered into a combat box before detonation. The destructiveness was based entirely on the blast effects.
A number of them was build as Ta-154+Fw-190 Mistel combination but none used in this capacity.
A radio guided and unmanned Ta-154 packed full with high explosives
should be maneuvered into a combat box before detonation. The destructiveness was based entirely on the blast effects.
A number of them was build as Ta-154+Fw-190 Mistel combination but none used in this capacity.
- Thread starter
- #23
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Like maybe a Hs 293? Could it be rigged with a timed fuse or a triggered fuse? Maybe a frag payload?
HellToupee
Banned
- 90
- May 30, 2007
Why bother with that tho when they had the wasserfall, it would likely have devastated bomber formations better than interceptors since escorts would have been able to do little about it.
KrazyKraut
Banned
- 337
- Apr 21, 2008
All these weapons (area effect bombs, early ground to air rockets) involve technology that imo wasn't ready back then or are simply impractical.
So for me, dumbfire R4M in salvos from every fighter attacking.
So for me, dumbfire R4M in salvos from every fighter attacking.
red admiral
Senior Airman
- 479
- Mar 24, 2005
Its interesting that both the British and Germans came up with the same solutions to the bomber problem, the British solutions coming around 1940/41 for the BoB and the German ones later in 1944/45 when the Allied bomber offensive had taken off.
As an example, the Ram pilotless interceptor from 1935. A small propeller driven aircraft laden with high explosives that would be guided into a bomber formation by two other aircraft (for elevation and position). It used the same radio control system as the Queen Bee drone. A further development added radio direction finding equipment to home in on radar emissions.
Later on there were a whole host of ground launched missiles with various guidance methods, photoelectric being the simplest, up to various beam riding types. By the end of the war the focus was on providing protection to ships and the missiles eventually became Sea Slug.
I'm not optimistic about the effectiveness of wartime SAM projects given that it took until the mid 1950s to field actual weapons. Its easier to hit a box of B-17s flying at 200mph and 25,000ft than a single aircraft at 500mph and 40,000ft, but its probably still a jump too far.
An air launched Hs 293 was trialled, carried dorsally on a Do 217. The main problems were low speed of the missile, manual guidance, large size and large weight making a very vulnerable platform.
My favourite is the British Artemis air to air missile which was a semi-active radar guided missile. It had an offset seeker and either thrust vectoring or aerodynamic controls and would follow a looping trajectory to the illuminated target. The main advantages are it's small size, low weight and simplicity as it was based on the 3" UP rocket. Stand off about 1500-2000yds back and launch a couple at a time.
R4M unguided rockets and more effective gun armament are easier solutions though.
As an example, the Ram pilotless interceptor from 1935. A small propeller driven aircraft laden with high explosives that would be guided into a bomber formation by two other aircraft (for elevation and position). It used the same radio control system as the Queen Bee drone. A further development added radio direction finding equipment to home in on radar emissions.
Later on there were a whole host of ground launched missiles with various guidance methods, photoelectric being the simplest, up to various beam riding types. By the end of the war the focus was on providing protection to ships and the missiles eventually became Sea Slug.
I'm not optimistic about the effectiveness of wartime SAM projects given that it took until the mid 1950s to field actual weapons. Its easier to hit a box of B-17s flying at 200mph and 25,000ft than a single aircraft at 500mph and 40,000ft, but its probably still a jump too far.
An air launched Hs 293 was trialled, carried dorsally on a Do 217. The main problems were low speed of the missile, manual guidance, large size and large weight making a very vulnerable platform.
My favourite is the British Artemis air to air missile which was a semi-active radar guided missile. It had an offset seeker and either thrust vectoring or aerodynamic controls and would follow a looping trajectory to the illuminated target. The main advantages are it's small size, low weight and simplicity as it was based on the 3" UP rocket. Stand off about 1500-2000yds back and launch a couple at a time.
R4M unguided rockets and more effective gun armament are easier solutions though.
drgondog
Major
I guess because none of them worked, practically speaking, except for cannon fire (flak or fighters) - until the very end when R4M's were introduced.
HellToupee
Banned
- 90
- May 30, 2007
Well in the case of the wasserfall it would have been using technology that was proven, using guidance similar to that of the hs293, and it was far more practical investment than the various rocket interceptors.
Well they still only had to hit a slow moving large box of bombers, well atleast in the case of the wasserfall which was just a guided V2, massive warhead. Guidance was only simple manual control vs the more complicated self guiding and radar guided types post war.
red admiral
Senior Airman
- 479
- Mar 24, 2005
Wasserfall's target is moving slower and at lower altitude than the postwar SAMs but still presents a difficult target to hit as you've got to lead the target by quite a way. The manual guidance system is worse than postwar beam riding and radar homing weapons. As it is far easier to jam. And what happens when it's cloudy and can't see the target?
It was hardly using proven technology given the large number of rocket failures. A 40% failure rate even before you've come close to hitting a target does not make an effective weapon.
It was hardly using proven technology given the large number of rocket failures. A 40% failure rate even before you've come close to hitting a target does not make an effective weapon.
- Thread starter
- #32
johnbr
2nd Lieutenant
For me it is a air fuel bomb.Cary it up by a He 277 a set it off in the formation.
I'm not familiar with the tale. Care to relate it for the new guy?
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Attachments
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I'm not sure it it was ever used, but the IJNS Yamato's 18" had some type of a special round that could be used against aircraft. IIRC it would explode in a middle of a formation.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Burmese Bandit
Senior Airman
- 474
- Dec 5, 2008
That was funny Njaco...
My idea:
Take a Ju 88. Redesign her with a solid. pointed nose, and streamline her cockpit to a teardrop. No rear gunner, only a radio operator facing rearward to warn of attacks.
Put 8 (YES, EIGHT) Mk 108 in the nose. This will make the plane nose heavy. Counterbalance it by putting a HUGE solid rocket motor into a redesigned tail.
Put in the most powerful engines available.
Protect the 88 Uber Zestorer with a cloud of 109s till it gets into position above and behind the box.
Now point your nose at the box, redline your engines, open up the rocket, and DIVE!
The momentary speed of your heavy aircraft, redlined engines, and rocket boost should shoot you past the escorts and give the defensive gunners a very hard target to aim at.
With that speed you will have only about four seconds to fire when you get into range.
But with eight Mk 108, four seconds is more than enough.
My idea:
Take a Ju 88. Redesign her with a solid. pointed nose, and streamline her cockpit to a teardrop. No rear gunner, only a radio operator facing rearward to warn of attacks.
Put 8 (YES, EIGHT) Mk 108 in the nose. This will make the plane nose heavy. Counterbalance it by putting a HUGE solid rocket motor into a redesigned tail.
Put in the most powerful engines available.
Protect the 88 Uber Zestorer with a cloud of 109s till it gets into position above and behind the box.
Now point your nose at the box, redline your engines, open up the rocket, and DIVE!
The momentary speed of your heavy aircraft, redlined engines, and rocket boost should shoot you past the escorts and give the defensive gunners a very hard target to aim at.
With that speed you will have only about four seconds to fire when you get into range.
But with eight Mk 108, four seconds is more than enough.
