Did Germany ever give thought to using V-weapons to attack Allied bomber bases, and had that happened, what effects on the Combined Bomber Offensive would that had? Knowing who was running the show, the whole thing is rather unlikely, but still interesting to think about.
V-Weapons vs. Allied Bomber Bases
- Thread starter gaiusjcaesar
- Start date
None of those systems had that capability so its not that interesting.
It wasn't a precision weapon.
space.stackexchange.com
How good was the precision of German V2 rockets?
I read somewhere that only 2/3 of the V2 rockets reached their target - but how good was their precision when they reached the target? ±100 m? ±1 km? ±10 km?
space.stackexchange.com
In some way the V-weapons were already pretty good in not directly attacking but indirectly in tying up allied fighter and bomber bases and taking them away from offensive missions: to counter the treath of V1's reaching the English cities, the allies kept a substantial part of their fighter wings on 'homeland defense' missions intercepting the V-1's. Likewise they mounted regular bombing raids against the V-1 launch sites in France, which again took the participating bombers away from the city-bombing campaign. For the V-2's the allies had a sizeable force of light bombers and ground attack aircraft searching and raiding the V-2'S mobile launch sites.
Considering the amount of aircraft already tied up by the V-weapons, directly engaging the allied airfields, even with improved and more accurate missiles and rockets would have a negligible effect on the overall outcome.
The only real impact I could see is if the Nazis somehow get a V-1 or V-2 to aim at a radio transmitter hidden near the airfields by spies. This would necessitate a massive counter-intelligence operation by UK and British spy agencies which again would take valuable resources away from their own offensive enterprises.
Considering the amount of aircraft already tied up by the V-weapons, directly engaging the allied airfields, even with improved and more accurate missiles and rockets would have a negligible effect on the overall outcome.
The only real impact I could see is if the Nazis somehow get a V-1 or V-2 to aim at a radio transmitter hidden near the airfields by spies. This would necessitate a massive counter-intelligence operation by UK and British spy agencies which again would take valuable resources away from their own offensive enterprises.
You would have first to make them more accurate, though, around 10% of V-2s were radio guided so perhaps they could give them a better guidance system (3 axis compared to the normal 2) and a more accurate radio beaming syste.
If the Germans somehow figure out how to make them accurate enough to reliably hit bomber bases, the Allies would use that tech back a thousandfold within the next two years.
How intact would they be in that case? After all, even if the warhead fails to detonate it is still a supersonic hollow steel body impacting the ground.
The V-1 traveled slow enough for regular fighters to bump it off course. I daresay the Allies would eventually gather enough fragments to glean useful information. And honestly, if the Germans figure out an accurate guidance system for the V-1, I daresay the Allies would have wind of it and pour resources in to match even before it's even in operation. After all, an accurate V-1 is a great boon to Bomber Command and Co. It basically solves the problem of high casualties and low accuracy.
Plus, on the side, I doubt Hitler would order them to focus on Allied airfields. More likely he'd target British parliament buildings and the Royal Residency. Historians have argued that a German air strategy focusing on defense instead of continuing useless terror bombings of Britain may well have stopped the Combined Bomber Offensive in its tracks, but that's not the Hitler we're talking about.
Last edited:
And how many of those would be needed, either on their own or in conjunction with another Baedeker-style campaign, to cause a serious disruption in the CBO?
Bomber Command alone was operating from over 60 airfields at it's peak, that's before considering training bases and the USAF. Germany couldn't build enough V weapons to knock out and keep knocked out more than a tiny percentage of those, especially when you factor in how many were outside of the range of the V weapons. The whole idea of a non starter. If they could achieve that level of accuracy they'd be much better going for key infrastructure targets like power stations and refineries.
I was thinking about the V-2 when I wrote that, and to be fair, they already copied and improved the V-1 OTL so there's no change from OTL.
Hitler was the one forbidding Goring and the Luftwaffe from bombing civilians during the early stages of the Battle of Britain. He also understood that the V-2 was an immature weapon, believing that Germany will have to launch hundred of thousands of missiles for it to be a decisive weapon, which, obviously was industrially impossible even if it was the correct assessment.
Hitler also doubled down on terror bombing England years after it had obviously failed, and continued to give Wernher von Braun funding for his useless pet project.
they didn;t have the accuracy to do that hence the whole ' tipping' V1s off course with the faster piston engined fighters or early jets so them them sprialling off into the countryside.
if you consider the effectiveness of the Black Buck convention bombing missions against the Port stanley runway with manned aircraft and 1970s/ 80s inertial nav ...
Last edited:
Ramontxo
Donor
Yes. Given when the Germans started firing them (first V1 fired against London in 13/6/44) the often asked question is why (like really what the fu**?) didn't the fired them against the invasion ports. And yes, most probably, they weren't precise enough to make an difference but...It wasn't a precision weapon.
How good was the precision of German V2 rockets?
I read somewhere that only 2/3 of the V2 rockets reached their target - but how good was their precision when they reached the target? ±100 m? ±1 km? ±10 km?
Also:
For V-weapon impact data, the Germans relied on their agent ARABEL (Juan Pujols Garcia), who was really a Double Cross agent for Britain (code name GARBO). He had actually got himself taken on by the Abwehr so that he could become a double agent, and was a key part of Operation FORTITUDE (the great D-Day deception).
Much to the surprise of the British, FORTITUDE did not "blow" GARBO; he was awarded the Iron Cross and then asked for the impact data.
Thanks to the misleading data provided by GARBO, the Germans gradually overshot their intended target area, saving thousands of lives.
While attempting to strike airfields would have been intrinsically futile, the impact data would have absolutely guaranteed complete failure.
In fact, one could argue that the Germans would have been better off if they had tried this strategy, as its complete failure would have been obvious very quickly, and they would have abandoned this immensely wasteful project.
For V-weapon impact data, the Germans relied on their agent ARABEL (Juan Pujols Garcia), who was really a Double Cross agent for Britain (code name GARBO). He had actually got himself taken on by the Abwehr so that he could become a double agent, and was a key part of Operation FORTITUDE (the great D-Day deception).
Much to the surprise of the British, FORTITUDE did not "blow" GARBO; he was awarded the Iron Cross and then asked for the impact data.
Thanks to the misleading data provided by GARBO, the Germans gradually overshot their intended target area, saving thousands of lives.
While attempting to strike airfields would have been intrinsically futile, the impact data would have absolutely guaranteed complete failure.
In fact, one could argue that the Germans would have been better off if they had tried this strategy, as its complete failure would have been obvious very quickly, and they would have abandoned this immensely wasteful project.
Last edited: