earlier guided weapons WW2 "little Fritz-X"

[thaddeus]

what if Germany had developed wire guided version of SC-250 bomb instead of developing radio controlled Fritz-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_X

the difficulty of hitting ships was known during Spanish Civil War

(they later returned to wire guided for Henschel HS-293 after radio signal jamming became obstacle)

does not preclude 3,000 Fritz-X arriving circa 1943 as historically but would "little Fritz-X" be useful for commerce war and extend life of Condors and even DO-24?

 

[tomo pauk]

Thing with the guided ammo in ww2 is that one still needs air superiority to use it to a good effect, or at least air parity. Or use it where enemy is less likely to deploy significant anti-air assets that can interfere with the bomb carrier. So IMO the guided bomb might've been useful until the BoB in the west, and up until mid-war in the east. Above Atlantic perhaps until mid/late 1942?
The Fw 200/Do-24 with guided missiles does not need to go at risky low altitudes in order to kill a Merchant ship, but can stay at, say, 3000m and drop/launch the guided bomb/missile.

 

[thaddeus]

Thing with the guided ammo in ww2 is that one still needs air superiority to use it to a good effect, or at least air parity. Or use it where enemy is less likely to deploy significant anti-air assets that can interfere with the bomb carrier. So IMO the guided bomb might've been useful until the BoB in the west, and up until mid-war in the east. Above Atlantic perhaps until mid/late 1942?
The Fw 200/Do-24 with guided missiles does not need to go at risky low altitudes in order to kill a Merchant ship, but can stay at, say, 3000m and drop/launch the guided bomb/missile.

believe the Condors at least went thru some fairly ridiculous maneuvers for plane their size to achieve a hit? and also used multiple bombs.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

How are you guiding the bomb? With TV? What does THAT do to the cost of your bomb? If not, how? guessing where the bomb is relative to the ship you're aiming at 3km away/up? that's not going to work well - especially if there's smoke or fog or ...

 

[tomo pauk]

Manual command line-of-sight guidance - basically the aimer looks where the missile is (it has a pair of 'torches' on the fins that are lit after launch) vs. where the target is and tries to align the missile. Guidance signals can be transmitted to the missile either via radio signals, or through a wire that is releasing from the missile/bomb. Worked in ww2, eg. Italian battleship Roma was sunk by guided missiles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_battleship_Roma_(1940)#Loss
Same concept as with 1st generation of anti-tank missiles, also Applied on Tigercat/Sea Cat, Rapier and Seawolf anti-aircraft missle systems.

 

[Gunnarnz]

Same concept as with 1st generation of anti-tank missiles, also Applied on Tigercat/Sea Cat, Rapier and Seawolf anti-aircraft missle systems.

The first version of Sea Wolf had a secondary TV-tracked guidance mode, but it was never a manually commanded system. Later versions only kept the camera to provide a record of engagements.

 

[tomo pauk]

The first version of Sea Wolf had a secondary TV-tracked guidance mode, but it was never a manually commanded system. Later versions only kept the camera to provide a record of engagements.

Indeed you're right - the Sea Wolf is ACLOS: automatic, command, line-of-sight?

 

[The Wooksta!]

Henschel had a TV guided variant of the Hs 293.

 

[Garrison]

Exactly the wrong thing for the Germans to do. Yet another overly complex weapon that can only be rolled out in limited numbers and at a disproportionate cost in resources.

 

[thaddeus]

Exactly the wrong thing for the Germans to do. Yet another overly complex weapon that can only be rolled out in limited numbers and at a disproportionate cost in resources.

my scenario is to use widely produced SC-250 (kg) bomb and wire guidance (which was considered near the end due to jamming) as opposed to developing radio control and specially designed 1,360 kg bomb (weight and radio control both caused issues.)

harks back to the German FL-boats of WWI.

there was certainly a long list of overly complex (dead end) weapon developments but think this is a simpler solution than what was employed.

 

[Garrison]

my scenario is to use widely produced SC-250 (kg) bomb and wire guidance (which was considered near the end due to jamming) as opposed to developing radio control and specially designed 1,360 kg bomb (weight and radio control both caused issues.)

harks back to the German FL-boats of WWI.

there was certainly a long list of overly complex (dead end) weapon developments but think this is a simpler solution than what was employed.

Simpler than the Fritz-X doesn't automatically mean good or practical, just makes it a bit less wasteful than the OTL weapons. Also wire guidance requires a steady platform so the launching aircraft are highly vulnerable to flak and fighters.

 

[Just Leo]

So what would be involved in converting a common SC250 dumb bomb into a wire-guided bomb, and what would the requirements be for a carrier aircraft? Would it operate anything like the Tarzon?

 

[thaddeus]

Simpler than the Fritz-X doesn't automatically mean good or practical, just makes it a bit less wasteful than the OTL weapons. Also wire guidance requires a steady platform so the launching aircraft are highly vulnerable to flak and fighters.

not sure where you are thinking this is to be deployed?

the Condors were able to accommodate one bomb per engine nacelle, they would descend and attempt to "bracket" ship with three bombs hoping for hit. here they could continue level flight with (speculative) better accuracy against lightly armed commercial ships.

later use of OTL Fritz-X against warships are going to be no more or no less vulnerable to flak and/or aircraft only impervious to radio jamming.

 

[thaddeus]

So what would be involved in converting a common SC250 dumb bomb into a wire-guided bomb, and what would the requirements be for a carrier aircraft? Would it operate anything like the Tarzon?

"The Luftwaffe recognized the difficulty of hitting moving ships during the Spanish Civil War.[2] Dipl. engineer Max Kramer, who worked at the DVL, had been experimenting since 1938 with remote-controlled free-falling 250 kg bombs, and in 1939 fitted radio-controlled spoilers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_X

my scenario is that they continue with existing SC-250 bomb, equipped exactly as OTL Fritz-X, that size bomb is what FW-200 Condors could carry AND to not attempt radio control but go "back to future" with wire guidance. (believe on other experiments with wire guidance the bomb AND the launch platform had spools for redundancy)

 

[Just Leo]

"The Luftwaffe recognized the difficulty of hitting moving ships during the Spanish Civil War.[2] Dipl. engineer Max Kramer, who worked at the DVL, had been experimenting since 1938 with remote-controlled free-falling 250 kg bombs, and in 1939 fitted radio-controlled spoilers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_X

my scenario is that they continue with existing SC-250 bomb, equipped exactly as OTL Fritz-X, that size bomb is what FW-200 Condors could carry AND to not attempt radio control but go "back to future" with wire guidance. (believe on other experiments with wire guidance the bomb AND the launch platform had spools for redundancy)

Why wasn't the Fritz-X fitted for wire guidance before the end of the war, and what were the results of testing with remote control free-falling SC250s? Either there was no priority whatever, or Max was screwin' the pooch.

 

[Garrison]

not sure where you are thinking this is to be deployed?

the Condors were able to accommodate one bomb per engine nacelle, they would descend and attempt to "bracket" ship with three bombs hoping for hit. here they could continue level flight with (speculative) better accuracy against lightly armed commercial ships.

later use of OTL Fritz-X against warships are going to be no more or no less vulnerable to flak and/or aircraft only impervious to radio jamming.

Where are you envisioning this being used? The greatest successes of the OTL weapons seem to have been against ships at anchor and/or in the Mediterranean, even then the success rate isn't exactly stellar. They appear to need a slow/stationary target and excellent weather/calm seas, no air cover and minimum flak. Level flight in a straight line, to avoid losing sight of the target or tangling/snagging control wires, is gods gift to flak gunners and fighter pilots. I can't see this being much use against Atlantic convoys or British coastal shipping.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Manual command line-of-sight guidance - basically the aimer looks where the missile is (it has a pair of 'torches' on the fins that are lit after launch) vs. where the target is and tries to align the missile. Guidance signals can be transmitted to the missile either via radio signals, or through a wire that is releasing from the missile/bomb. Worked in ww2, eg. Italian battleship Roma was sunk by guided missiles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_battleship_Roma_(1940)#Loss
Same concept as with 1st generation of anti-tank missiles, also Applied on Tigercat/Sea Cat, Rapier and Seawolf anti-aircraft missle systems.

Of course, for an anti-tank missile, you fire it from where you are to where the tank is, and the missile travels pretty much in a straight line.

Launching a guided missile from an aircraft, guiding it with a Mark I eyeball, when the plane is travelling one direction, the target is travelling another, and you're trying to estimate geometries from a distance.... It's not going to work well or often, I can't imagine.

Didn't the first generation of anti-aircraft missiles need great masses of missiles for a single kill?

 

[tomo pauk]

The 2nd generation of AA missiles also needed masses of missiles for a single kill, and that is without the enemy doing the jamming. Perhaps the best documented use of 2nd gen AA missiles is at Falklands, where around 10% missiles launched (Sea Dart, Rapier) made a kill; Soviet missiles were even worse once the Western forces used jamming.
The guided anti-ship missile worked in ww2, nobody said they were ideal.

 

[thaddeus]

Why wasn't the Fritz-X fitted for wire guidance before the end of the war, and what were the results of testing with remote control free-falling SC250s? Either there was no priority whatever, or Max was screwin' the pooch.

think the shiny new object syndrome took over and they developed something that could (and did) sink a battleship? (at six times weight of SC-250)

have seen more references to development of HS-293, making a big assumption that weapon was more useful in latter stage of war?