Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Mil-tech Bard
Member
Posts: 678
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 16:50

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#16

Post by Mil-tech Bard » 04 Feb 2016, 19:29

The 1st VT fuse was USN in the Pacific in Jan 1943.

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq96-1.htm
This test firing of proximity fuzed 5"/38 projectiles against drones was carried out in August 1942 aboard the cruiser [USS] Cleveland [CL-55]. Results of this test were entirely satisfactory and accordingly, full-scale production of proximity fuzes was initiated at the Crosley Corporation in September 1942. Early production was plagued with numerous difficulties but satisfactory material was finally produced. This fuze, which was designated the Mk 32, was delivered to the Fleet during November and December 1942, and the first Japanese plane was shot down with proximity fuzed projectiles by the cruiser [USS] Helena [CL-50] in January 1943.
and the second fuse that went into service was British Royal Navy in Sept 1943, place unspecified --
In general, all work on the British fuze paralleled the work on the Navy's Mk 32 fuze. About the fall of 1942 a contract was placed with the Radio Corporation of America for production of these fuzes, and shortly after the first of the year 1943, Eastman Kodak Company was also brought into the program on this fuze. Early work on the Mk 33 was rather unsatisfactory and although production was carried along at a small rate, acceptable material was not available for sometime. In about May 1943 an emergency program was set up to iron out the remaining difficulties in the Mk 33 fuze with the hope of obtaining satisfactory material before the end of the summer of 1943. By September of that year the fuze was in fairly satisfactory production and deliveries were commenced to the British. This fuze was designed specifically for the British 4".5 gun which was carried aboard aircraft carriers. In addition, it was contemplated that the fuze would also work in the British 5".25 Navy gun, but because of more severe treatment of the fuze in this gun, the fuze was not at that time satisfactory for use in the 5".25 British gun.

"APL and the VT FUZE," APL Technical Digest September-October 1962 pages 18-22 states further --
Early experience gained in the Pacific could be used to modify defects in the fuze, develop the most effective tactics for its use, and check out logistics and handling problems.

Successful introduction of the fuze The VT fuze on Iwo Jima in 1945. into the Atlantic and Mediterranean areas would be greatly aided by this
experience, especially if its safety and performance record proved to be all that was desired.

The Navy's indoctrination team arrived in the Mediterranean in the closing days of the North African campaign and had completed introductory
instruction for all concerned by the time the Sicilian operations got under way. Confidence in the new fuze was more easily built up because
action reports from the Pacific were available to bear out the claims of the instruction teams.
Short Form -- The proximity fuse could have been available to defend Britain in large numbers in 1943 with 4.5" heavy AA guns.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10063
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#17

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 07 Feb 2016, 00:59

I'm thinking in a different direction. The USAAF acquired a crashed test model of the V 1 via Sweden in 1942. Reproduction and testing went slowly, it was a low priority project. But, in 1945 5,000 of the JB Loon were on order for use vs Japan. I'm wondering if a earlier German introduction would have led to a accelerated US development. & in case anyone is wondering, yes the Army Air Force did test launch the Loon from bombers including the B17.


User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3568
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#18

Post by T. A. Gardner » 07 Feb 2016, 22:59

The USAAF acquired sufficient components of the V 1 that 60 days after the first one was fired on England they had completed a reverse engineered version, the JB-2 / Loon and test fired it. The US then initially considered mass producing the missile at the rate of 5,000 per month ordering Ford Motor Company to prepare to manufacture the engines and Willy's Overland to produce the airframes. This was pared back when it was obvious that Germany was finished and the firing range of this missile was insufficient to easily use it on Japan.
Instead, it became a cheap throw away missile for testing purposes such as firing them from ships and submarines, air launch, and trying out difference guidance systems.

More weirdly, there was an actual proposal to protect London from the V 1 by jamming its compass. The plan was to use existing rail track, adding in some bits in places as necessary to complete a 300 mile circumference ring around the city and then electrify the tracks using a 30 MW generating station to produce an enormous electromagnet. Luckily, saner minds nixed that project.

Mil-tech Bard
Member
Posts: 678
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 16:50

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#19

Post by Mil-tech Bard » 18 Feb 2016, 23:38

As far as the efficiency of the V 1 versus conventional bombing, The US War department G-2 saw it as more cost effective to use the V 1 as opposed to the German BLITZ with He 111 and other twin engine medium bombers.

See:
_T9A6696 -- V-1 vs the BLITZ (sml).jpg
US Army V-1 Damage Efficiency Assessment
_T9A6696 -- V-1 vs the BLITZ (sml).jpg (127.53 KiB) Viewed 347 times

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7051
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 01:58
Location: Mississippi

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#20

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 19 Feb 2016, 00:28

Mil-tech Bard wrote:As far as the efficiency of the V 1 versus conventional bombing, The US War department G-2 saw it as more cost effective to use the V 1 as opposed to the German BLITZ with He 111 and other twin engine medium bombers.

See:
Now you're have brought up a rather amateurish G-2 comparison of about 4 different animals, none of which have much in common.

Cost effective to damaging houses at less cost for a morale campaign maybe. Hardly either method was "conventional" except for not being atomic. The first was a reflex retaliation grown out of an off the cuff idea to use a tactical air force to perhaps force a peace. And even there what "Blitz" are they talking of, and the time-frame and of course not all German bombers/airplanes were just blind bombing "London" or "England" or what do they even mean there?.

The second again(V 1) was a retaliation against the same kind of bombing later(British night raids). At least there could be said they(the V 1's) were actually bombing "London" and not some specific target. And again there the same "cost effective" note could be made, as compared to British night bombing personnel casualties and German V 1 personnel casualties.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5868
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Early V 1 missile, how much could Britain take?

#21

Post by glenn239 » 23 Feb 2016, 19:12

stg 44 wrote:If the V 1 missile had been invented early, say entering service in August 1942, which is before the VT fuse and advanced gunnery radar systems that later countered it in 1944 were in significant service, how much of the missile attacks could Britain handle before having to call it quits?
The question that came to my mind is whether Roundup might happen, since the best defence against V-1's proved to be taking the landing sites.


Post Reply

Return to “What if”