AHC/WI: The US Navy launches Project Danny

Project Danny was a plan to use Marine Corps F4U Corsairs to bomb V1/V2 launching sites with Tiny Tim rockets. The Corsairs were to be launched from Escort carriers in the North Sea. The plan was briefed to George Marshall in the summer of 1944. General Marshall shot the plan down when he declared that no US Marines would fight in the ETO. The Navy then went with Operation Anvil using radio controlled bombers. That operation resulted in the death of Joe Kennedy Jr.

Would Project Danny have done damage to the German rockets or would it have resulted in a lot of shot down planes and dead pilots?

What would it take to get the plan approved?
-Project Danny becomes a pet project of Admiral King. When Marshall says no King Says the Navy will do it anyway.

-Political pressure. Maybe by luck a V-1 hits the American Embassy in London and kills the ambassador or the British find out the project like it and demand that the Americans do something about the rockets.
 
Maybe the British decide that if the Americans won't we will?

If my memory is correct the Brits thought they were using the best available to attack the sites. The Brits had been carrying out a bombing campaign vs the V1/V2 since their intelligence service first made the danger clear. At times the the USAAF bombers in Britain participated in this.

Triva note: The airfield just south of Appeldorn Holland was one of the objectives of the Market-Garden operations. There were several reasons which included the airfield was a launch site for V2 & the adjacent woods & commercial buildings storage sites for the mobile launchers, missiles, and support material.

At the time the Navy/USMC leaders in the Pacific were wrestlling with providing effective tactical air support from carriers. Diverting the Marine squadrons to Europe would have complicated that PTO problem.
 
Well the German V1 was largely a nuisance - particularly as MI5 and the XX system was feeding the Germans with disinformation with regards to the impact points for the missiles. The Germans were unable to carry out effective reconnaissance over the UK, they relied on agent reports who told them the V1's were overshooting prompting them to under fuel. This resulted in the missiles falling short into South Eastern suburbs of London and North Kent and not the centre of London.

Besides I suspect that the Marines would have had little impact, they were not familiar with the areas the V1 and V2 operated from nor were they trained for interdiction which is a lot different from CAS under tight control from a ground observer. I also suspect both the RAF and US 9th Airforce would have been unhappy at someone else horning in on their action.
 
Besides I suspect that the Marines would have had little impact, they were not familiar with the areas the V1 and V2 operated from nor were they trained for interdiction which is a lot different from CAS under tight control from a ground observer. I also suspect both the RAF and US 9th Airforce would have been unhappy at someone else horning in on their action.

I suspect the Marine squadrons would have been under close supervision of the Brits. The 9th AF was during its participation in the V1 bombing campaign in the winter of 43-44. Not that my father saw a bunch of RAF officers hanging out around the Group HQ, but the Brits were deep into target selection and post mission analysis at the 9th AF HQ level.

As for the 9th AF being unhappy. They regarded the V1 raids as a distraction from the transportation attacks & related targets they had on their to do list. Not that they regarded the V1 campaign as a waste, they understood the threat. But, at the top they would have not been disappointed to see someone else pick up the V1 missions. At my fathers level they were indifferent outside of mission risk.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Only way the operation happens is if Marshall literally drops dead. The Corps was getting into the ETO over his dead body, and that not a figure of speech.

King could bluster all he wanted, but he was not the senior officer, not in debate and not in the Navy. King knew damned well he as SOL, that was why he complained as much as he did.

Beyond Marshall's blind spot regarding the Marines, and even beyond service rivalries in general, there were other, far more important considerations, both political and military to consider. These started with the potential for losses, both to the attacking aircraft as well as to the launching ships, the relative difficulty in getting an F4U off of a 20 knot escort carrier compared to a 33 knot fleet carrier, especially in the restricted waters of the North Sea (a body of water justly reviled for lousy flying condition), the reaction when (not if) the Chicago Tribune, or some other anti-FDR paper starts to beat the drum about the extra danger American troops were under in the Pacific due to the loss of 100 ground support aircraft, and the simple fact that anything the Corsair could carry a B-25 could carry, except the bomber could carry twice as much pay load (the USN used its version of the Mitchel, the PBJ-1 as a launch aircraft).

It would be a LOT easier to modify a squadron or two of 9th AF B-25H (or even build them to suit right off the assembly line), hook them up with a heavy fight escort and off you go. Considering the max range of the V-1 was only 160 miles, the potential is there to simply fit some P-47s (a close cousin to the F4U, at least in ruggedness and carrying capacity)

The Tiny Tim was an interesting weapon, sort of a baby step into "stand-off" weapon tech, but it wasn't magical. It was an unguided 11.75" rocket that was very much a "point & shoot".
 
... the relative difficulty in getting an F4U off of a 20 knot escort carrier compared to a 33 knot fleet carrier, especially in the restricted waters of the North Sea (a body of water justly reviled for lousy flying condition), ... ... that anything the Corsair could carry a B-25 could carry, except the bomber could carry twice as much pay load (the USN used its version of the Mitchel, the PBJ-1 as a launch aircraft).

... Considering the max range of the V-1 was only 160 miles, the potential is there to simply fit some P-47s (a close cousin to the F4U, at least in ruggedness and carrying capacity)

The Tiny Tim was an interesting weapon, sort of a baby step into "stand-off" weapon tech, but it wasn't magical. It was an unguided 11.75" rocket that was very much a "point & shoot".

All that waives away any logic in using Corsair squadrons from CVE. The technical reasons not to are far more important to putting this proposal aside than Marshals opinion.
 
Well the German V1 was largely a nuisance
I bet the USA would not have seen it as just a nuisance if someone were landing 3/4 ton of amatol around the Washington area several times a day for several months. The good folk of Antwerp might also differ.

Nevertheless I am baffled why this should be a chosen method of dealing with the problem and why a carrier based launch should necessary. Corsairs have the range, loaded, to reach any V1 site and most V2 from a UK or (later) French airfield.
 
I bet the USA would not have seen it as just a nuisance if someone were landing 3/4 ton of amatol around the Washington area several times a day for several months. The good folk of Antwerp might also differ.

Nevertheless I am baffled why this should be a chosen method of dealing with the problem and why a carrier based launch should necessary. Corsairs have the range, loaded, to reach any V1 site and most V2 from a UK or (later) French airfield.

There are other fighter aircraft capable of carrying 2 x 1000 Pound bombs (the assumption being that they could carry a pair of Tiny Tims) at this time in the ETO so Im a bit baffled why Aircraft from PTO would need to be sent?

Also while the Warhead is very large is 2 of these weapons equal to or greater than the effect a brace of 8 x RP3 Rockets with 60 pound warheads would have on a given target?
 
It was a nuisance in that the chosen German target was central London. There were virtually no strategic military or economic targets in the impact point and none at all where the V1 eventually ended up landing thanks to MI5. To be blunt, if central London was hammered into rubble over several months there would have been virtually no negative impact on the conduct of the war, all the important departments would have been evacuated or continued operating from the outskirts of the city. The only issue would have been one of morale.

Also V1's were very vulnerable to fighters and AAA with proximity fuses.

V2's were more of an issue, however they were so inaccurate they did not really have a negative effect on the war effort.
 
Far better to launch B-25s or Mosquitos from dry land.
USN did not figure out how to land-on F4U Corsairs until late in WW2. Operating them off escort carriers would have caused too many crashes.

The real challenge is to pick some WALLY aircraft that was under-utilized in 1944. For example, with the Luftwaffe almst destroyed, the RAF fielded hundreds of Spitfires and Typhoons for gorund-attack in Normandy, the same way the USAF re-purposed P-47 Thunderbolts for straffing. None of those single-engiend fighters killed significant numbers of Tiger tanks, but they ruined the Whermacht's ability to move beans and bullets forward. End result: Tigers were abandoned for lack of fuel.

Similarly, comparitively light bombs or even machine guns could cause enough leaks to ruin V-1s and V-2s on the launch pad.
 
Can someone point out any advantage, any advantage at all, over using ground-based bombers out of England aside from the Navy air arm feeling like they're getting a piece of the action?
 
B25H's

B25H's would be perfect for taking on the V1 or V2 sights. Armed with both rockets and the 75mm cannon it would take them out easily.
 
Top