What is the driver for the Germans to differ their approach from OTL. The Light sites were adopted as a response to allied attacks on the Ski sights so without a driver in this ATL, it is surely probable that something akin to the ski type launch site would be built. The biggest hurdle for a sustained V1 campaign in 1941 if the weapon is developed earlier will IMHO still be logistics.
V1 drones during the battle of Britain
- Thread starter bernardz
- Start date
Is there anything about Op CROSSBOW in that? From elsewhere it looks like that campaign set back construction in a large way, preventing many launchers from becoming operational at all and forcing a shift to a different launch system.
I doubt there would be much of a problem manufacturing. Probably the allies would be bombing much more in France.
When I went to the Wikipedia and looked here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb#Assessment
Then assumed that the V1 started in July 1940 and continued till Nov 1944, that is about 50 months. Now simply expanded the table so instead of 2 and 3/4months it went on for 50 months. Britain houses lost are 20 million, casualties are over 400,000, the allies are doing over 816,000 sorties to stop it, they lost about 6,300 planes and over 14,600 crew members. That is a lot of damage.
marathag
Banned
But there is diminishing returns. longer the campaign goes, the more likely an area that's been hit, gets hit again. Can't lose the same house twice, and without VT fuzes, the UK will rely more on on the low tech barrage balloon
This is one case where Professor Lindemanns much vaunted balloon necklace might actually achieve something!
Quite. At some point the Germans will switch targets. By the time they do, a more advanced version of the missile may be available, allowing comparatively smaller targets than London to be attacked with a decent CEP.
This situation probably accelerated the RAF towards a more effective bomber force. The methods of Harris & his supporters are liable to be judged ineffective much sooner, since they are not halting the drones. So a change in leaders and development of a better RAF counter strike capability, and sooner.
Deleted member 1487
Harris probably never even gets promoted if the V-1 is available in 1940-41. Harris was brought on to execute the bombing strategy he had been advocating, which was the only means of striking Germany as of 1942 and given that all the Germans had to threaten them with in the air was harassment raids against small cities. If there is a threat that needs to be seriously dealt with then whomever is offering a strategy for striking them (maybe Harris talking about production centers?) will get the job. Between V-1s and Uboats in 1941-42 BC would have their hands full.
Similar to what I was thinking.
Beyond that the situation forces the RAF to keep innovating an altering it's assumptions. ie: to drive home effective bombing attacks on the threat they need longer ranged interceptor. Fuel reserve and loiter time is helpful even when the battle is at short range. More efficient Intel gathering, distribution, and streamlined C3 would be necessary goals. The things the RAF achieved under other pressure elsewhere.
Deleted member 1487
The RAF would be quite different and probably Mosquito based ITTL; night bombing accurately wasn't even working on V-1 sites in 1944. But then IOTL in 1941-42 the Rhubarbs and Circuses were often getting through anyway, with the Germans only intercepting when they could do so favorably, so perhaps the RAF simply tries to do what it did IOTL in 1941-42, with a focus on the V-1 sites instead of various French targets.
http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/1941-royal-air-force-offensive.html/3
http://ww2today.com/28th-june-1941-circus-raids-are-stepped-up
Long range fighters aren't really needed for V-1 launch sites.
Intel gathering wouldn't be an issue, hitting and putting targets out of commission at acceptable cost would be. 1941-42 is going to be bloody for the RAF V-1 hunting especially if the Luftwaffe brings in more fighter groups and prevents RAF ops in other areas like the Mediterranean.
Hagelkorn is a great idea but then it was mainly for honing into WALLIE beacon directed bombing beams. If in fact this can be worked on, many V-I impact patterns on London appear to be line abreast. Even if 2/10 accuracy is achievable - that would be on top of poor CEP from the basic gyroscopic guidance system. If you remove the double agent effect of 1944 V-1 campaign , the basic CEP could be 4km @ 160km. Which is 2.5% of range...pretty good for the tech & era.
The RAF needs upgrading its fighters to be much faster such as with de Havilland D.H.103 Hornet, Hawker Typhoon, de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito and Westland Welkin. Probably all fighters will increase in speed.
The British early warning radars need dramatic improvement to handle the V1s low-level flights and its small size.
More radar controlled flak required.
More and earlier introduction of proximity fuses
Does anyone know how the V1 behaved on days of bad weather as it is flying below the clouds? If it could fly high during rain, it could be very serious.
The Germans will move into mass attacks in an attempt to overwhelm the defenders.
The British early warning radars need dramatic improvement to handle the V1s low-level flights and its small size.
More radar controlled flak required.
More and earlier introduction of proximity fuses
Does anyone know how the V1 behaved on days of bad weather as it is flying below the clouds? If it could fly high during rain, it could be very serious.
The Germans will move into mass attacks in an attempt to overwhelm the defenders.