Potential and causes of failure: anti-aircraft missile Wasserfall (Germany)

68
Potential and causes of failure: anti-aircraft missile Wasserfall (Germany)
Test launch of the Wasserfall rocket, September 1944. Photo of the Bundesarchiv of Germany


During the Second World War, Nazi Germany tried to develop advanced anti-aircraft missile systems. At the same time, several similar projects were created with different features and capabilities. So, a few months before the end of the war, they managed to test the new Wasserfall missile. Despite high marks and hopes, this development had a number of serious shortcomings and dubious prospects.



Short story


Work on the future project Wasserfall ("Waterfall") began in 1941 at the initiative of Walter Dornberger, one of the leaders of the rocket research center at the Peenemünde test site. It was proposed to create a liquid-propellant rocket with radio command control, capable of hitting enemy bombers in service. According to forecasts of that time, already in 1944 Germany could receive missile defense of key cities and regions.

The preliminary study of the project continued until the autumn of 1942, when the technical requirements for the new air defense system were released. By this time, the main design features, the composition of the units, the principles of operation, etc. had been determined. Based on these ideas, the rocket itself and auxiliary units were developed. In the spring of 1943, the first laboratory tests began.

However, the project faced serious difficulties. There was no workable control system, the development of some other systems was required. With all this, the project was hampered by a lack of resources and constant competition, and the missile center and related organizations were regularly subjected to Allied airstrikes.


The layout of the rocket version W-5. Luft46 graphics

As part of the Waterfall project, three variants of the rocket were successively developed under the designations W-1, W-5 and W-10. The tests used products of all three versions. The last modification was supposed to go into the series and go into service.

Flight tests of experimental missiles could only be started in the summer of 1944. The development of the propulsion system and other systems was delayed. Thus, the first supersonic flight was carried out only in February 1945. At the same time, work continued on the control system, which was planned to be tested on a rocket in the near future.

As part of flight tests, according to various sources, 35-40 launches were performed. Full-fledged tests with guidance and defeat of a real target were not carried out. However, the simplified launch program showed the need for improvements. No more than 15 starts were recognized as successful.

Nevertheless, in the spring of 1945, the project developers and the military-political leadership of the Third Reich highly appreciated the new missile and made optimistic plans. Over the next few months, they planned to begin production of a new air defense system, and then put it on duty. Naturally, these plans were not carried out. All materials for the project, manufactured samples and infrastructure went to the Allies.


Diagram of the W-5/10 missile from a US report. United States Air Force graphics

Technical features


When developing the Wasserfall rocket, they took the design of the ballistic A-4 (V-2) as a basis. The hull was halved and built on the basis of load-bearing tanks. At the same time, the original contours and a pair of sets of planes on the outer surface were preserved. In addition, the same layout solutions were used. As the project developed, the design changed slightly.

The rocket received a specially designed single-chamber liquid-fuel engine. The so-called was used as fuel. vizol from the group of fuels on a vinyl base. The use of liquid oxygen was abandoned. Instead, red fuming nitric acid was chosen as the oxidizing agent. Such components could be stored in tanks for a sufficient time without the risk of leakage and damage to the structure. On board there were 450 kg of fuel and 1500 kg of oxidizer, which should have been enough for 42 hours of engine operation.

A high-explosive fragmentation warhead weighing 235 kg was placed in the head compartment, which included charges of solid and liquid explosives. Undermining was carried out by a radio-controlled fuse. In the future, it was planned to develop and implement an autonomous proximity fuse. It was assumed that such combat equipment would allow hitting several bombers, or at least compensate for a miss.

For the "Waterfall" several options for the control system were developed, and in the end they chose one of the simplest ones. The missile used radio command control. On board there were a command receiver and the simplest actuators. Flight control was carried out using gas (at low speeds) or aerodynamic rudders.


Schematic diagram of the Wasserfall complex in position. Luft46 graphics

The late W-10 rocket had a length of 6,13 m with a body diameter of 720 mm and a stabilizer span of 1,6 m. The mass of the product reached 3,5 tons. The design speed was more than 790 m / s. Range - 20-25 km, target engagement height - up to 18 km.

The ground part of the air defense system included a launcher and auxiliary equipment, two radars, an operator console, a command transmission radio station, etc. A curious method of control and guidance was proposed, based on already known ideas. Two radars were supposed to simultaneously track the target and the missile. Labels from them were displayed on the general screen. The operator, using a joystick, had to combine two marks, bringing the rocket to the line of sight. The computing equipment converted the movements of the control element into commands for the rocket. The operator was also responsible for undermining the warhead.

Objective assessment


All materials on the Waterfall project in the spring of 1945 went to the winners. Soviet and American specialists carefully studied this development and even conducted their own tests. They used both captured rockets and products assembled independently according to German documentation. All this made it possible to determine the real possibilities and potential of the German rocket.

Based on the results of the study, only solutions in the field of engine and fuel system received high marks. Unlike other liquid propellant rockets of the time, the Wasserfall could remain fueled for some time without any risk. The selected fuel components and engine design were of interest for study.


US missile testing, 1946. US Air Force photo

Attention was drawn to the calculated flight characteristics of the rocket. A range of up to 25 km and an altitude of 18 km made it possible to fight against any aircraft of that time. In this regard, the Wasserfall project was ahead of all other developments of that time.

Otherwise, the German rocket could not surprise foreign experts in any way. In addition, the characteristic shortcomings of both the ammunition and the ground facilities of the complex were quickly found. The main problem of the entire project was the chosen method of target tracking and missile control.

Two radar stations and a command transmission station, due to technical imperfections, were subject to interference. If the Wasserfall air defense system had reached combat duty, jamming stations would have appeared on the Allied bombers. With their help, pilots could disrupt the detection, tracking and guidance of missiles, as well as the timely undermining of their warheads.

The Waterfall rocket and the complex as a whole were based on early technologies, which is why they were not distinguished by ease of production and operation, as well as low cost. At the same time, not all such shortcomings could be corrected by introducing new materials and solutions. In fact, it required the development of the project from scratch.


Partially disassembled Wasserfall product in one of the American museums. US Air Force photo

As a result, scientists and designers of the winning countries, having studied the captured German developments, drew conclusions and took only individual ideas and components for further development. Other developments were abandoned due to the lack of any prospects for them and the availability of more effective solutions.

Useful failure


In the last years of its existence, the Third Reich tried to simultaneously develop several promising anti-aircraft missiles at once. Five similar projects, incl. complex with a heavy rocket Wasserfall, reached flight tests. However, none of these missiles reached the series, deployment and combat duty in the troops.

A number of factors prevented the successful completion of all projects. It was the lack of required technologies and the need to create them from scratch, the overall complexity of projects, constant competition for limited resources, etc. In addition, constant air strikes on factories contributed to the deterioration of the situation, and new air defense systems were created to counter them.

As a result, all projects, including "Waterfall", turned out to be too complicated and took too much time. It was not possible to complete them before the end of the war, and the Nazi regime fell without receiving a fundamentally new air defense system. At the same time, the resources needed by other industries and areas were spent on virtually useless projects, which to some extent accelerated the collapse of the Nazis. And as a result, all the useful developments on the projects went to the winners and, to one degree or another, influenced the further development of anti-aircraft systems.
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    9 October 2022 07: 03
    As for the "virtually useless" air defense systems - it's very debatable! Here "Fau" without a nuclear warhead was useless.
    1. +2
      9 October 2022 07: 10
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      A number of factors prevented the successful completion of all projects. It was the lack of required technologies and the need to create them from scratch, the overall complexity of projects, constant competition for limited resources, etc. In addition, constant air strikes on factories contributed to the deterioration of the situation, and new air defense systems were created to counter them.

      If the rocket is more expensive than the bomber, then it will obviously be useless, especially given the difference in the economy, which has only grown rapidly.
      1. +9
        9 October 2022 07: 59
        Quote: BlackMokona
        If the rocket is more expensive than the bomber, then it will obviously be useless, especially given the difference in the economy, which has only grown rapidly.

        Firstly, where do the numbers about "more expensive" come from?
        Secondly, they also take into account the value of what is protected on earth.
        In the third, bomber crews of 9-10 people.
        And fourthly, their air defense fighters, which will no longer need to break through the ranks.
        Krprche transferring funds from useless Fau to Reintochters and Wasserfalls, the Germans would greatly complicate the Victory over them. Luckily, that's how it was.
      2. +3
        9 October 2022 14: 15
        Quote: BlackMokona
        If the rocket is more expensive than the bomber, then it will obviously be useless

        You need to compare with the amount of damage caused by the bomber when he completed the task.
        Secondly, the lives of pilots who are as simple as Private Ryan cannot be prepared.
        Thirdly, SAMs made cover-escort fighters useless. And consequently all spending on an escort is a net loss.
        So, ZUK is serious and very dangerous.
    2. 0
      9 October 2022 07: 11
      According to some sources, they planned to use the FAA for radiation contamination of the territory, so the Germans lacked something ...
      1. +2
        9 October 2022 08: 00
        Quote: aleks neym_2
        According to some sources, they planned to use the FAA for radiation contamination of the territory, so the Germans lacked something ...

        I won’t argue, but I only read this from Heinlein ...
        1. Alf
          0
          9 October 2022 19: 12
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          but I only read this from Heinlein ...

          What exactly ? May I have a name?
          1. +2
            10 October 2022 03: 36
            The story "Useless decision", but there is not Germany, but against Germany. Well, the hellish USSR at the end. Perhaps the earliest description of a radiological weapon, and, of course, not even in the project.
            1. Alf
              +1
              10 October 2022 19: 50
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              The story "Useless decision", but there is not Germany, but against Germany. Well, the hellish USSR at the end. Perhaps the earliest description of a radiological weapon, and, of course, not even in the project.

              Thanks, I will read.
  2. +7
    9 October 2022 07: 09
    Abridged and slightly corrupted retelling of the Wikipedia article. Although there are interesting materials on the topic in the memoirs of Kisunko, Chertok, Mozzhorin.
  3. +2
    9 October 2022 07: 45
    Somewhere I read that by 1943, due to a lack of resources, the warring Germany was faced with the question of developing strike missiles or air defense missiles. We chose shock missiles ...
    1. Alf
      +1
      9 October 2022 19: 14
      Quote: Luminman
      We chose shock missiles ...

      In general, they did the right thing. If it were possible to bring the strike means, the allies would not be up to the bombing.
  4. +8
    9 October 2022 08: 07
    Speer regretted in his memoirs that he agreed to the persuasion and gave priority to the V-2 over the Falls.
    It would be interesting to see if the Germans were able to destroy the American bomber formations with missiles, creating much more favorable conditions for their fighters.
    1. +3
      9 October 2022 11: 03
      It would be interesting to see if the Germans were able to destroy the American bomber formations with missiles,
      They could not do this even with the much more advanced Me-163, created to counter the bombing.
      1. +5
        9 October 2022 12: 26
        These are different things
        Wasserfall were to be used by the hundreds in a single raid. And me-163 were combat-ready units.
        1. +3
          9 October 2022 13: 50
          Wasserfall were to be used by the hundreds in a single raid. And me-163 were combat-ready units.
          Whether it is not enough that there should be. Well, there were no combat-ready Wasserfalls at all.
        2. +1
          9 October 2022 17: 17
          Quote: Engineer
          And me-163 were combat-ready units.

          Me-262?
          Quote: Engineer
          It would be interesting to see if the Germans could

          When exactly? In the 45th they could have collapsed, it would not have changed anything.
          1. +1
            9 October 2022 17: 32
            We're talking about comets, not swallows.
            If it’s just a reminder that there were others, then it’s still different weapons
            Even in the 44th, it would hardly have changed anything.
            Just wondering
            1. 0
              9 October 2022 17: 47
              Quote: Engineer
              We're talking about comets, not swallows.

              So I specified. There were few comets, but quite a lot of swallows.
              Quote: Engineer
              Just wondering

              It's hardly that interesting. Radio command guidance against the unconditionally strongest countries in radio warfare. How much have you heard about German anti-ship missiles after Roma? And they were, and there were many.
              Quote: Engineer
              Even in the 44th, it would hardly have changed anything.

              Usually alhistoricists formulate it like "10 (100) waterfalls instead of one V-2". But V-2 is the autumn of the 44th, after the formation of the Western Front from sea to sea. In fact, the nullification of the bombers would mean the defeat of the Spaats / Arnold / Harris duets and, accordingly, the strengthening of the tactical Air Force (Eisenhower, Quesada).
              In my opinion, this would only make the Allied Air Force stronger. Plus it would help.
              escape the post-war atomic madness when the Americans defeated their army.
              1. 0
                9 October 2022 18: 13
                And I clarified that it's still apples and oranges.
                I don’t believe in victory over 8 VA, no matter what the input. But it would be more interesting.
                Well, no switching to tactical Air Force. 8VA does what no one else can. She alone does things.
                1. +1
                  9 October 2022 18: 17
                  Well, you can only defeat 8BA by reaching at least Britain. But of course you can reduce its usefulness. But if resources decrease somewhere, then somewhere they will arrive. And 8VA, and even more so the RAF bomber command, were far from the most useful waste of these resources, after the end of the fuel program, for sure. So from the redistribution of resources to other areas, the result could well be better than the real thing.
                  1. 0
                    9 October 2022 18: 33
                    And 8BA, and even more so the RAF bomber command, were far from the most useful waste of these resources.

                    I have already spoken about this. The Mighty Eight is the greatest air force in history. ITS optimize-only spoil. We are not talking about island homeless people at all.
                    1. 0
                      9 October 2022 19: 54
                      )))
                      Didn't follow your posts very much.

                      20 Liberators or 10 Douglas A-26s + 10 Pershing tanks?
                      1. +1
                        9 October 2022 20: 05
                        Explained just to a person "resembling the Prosecutor General" (c)
                        20 Liberators or 10 Douglas A-26s + 10 Pershing tanks?

                        Fantasies with Pershings, please save. There will be nothing but Shermans.
                        The strategists and their cover cleared the skies, bombed out the gasoline production, weighed down the tank industry.
                        A-26 as an attack aircraft is the same wastefulness as four-engine. That's just an order of magnitude less exhaust. For him, there are simply not enough goals on the Western Front.
                      2. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 07
                        Quote: Engineer
                        There will be nothing but Shermans.

                        )))
                        Again you with your determinism.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        For him, there are simply not enough goals on the Western Front.

                        Uh-uh. And for 8VA, it means that there are enough goals.

                        Well, OK. Recently, it has not been too tempting to discuss alhistory.
                      3. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 10
                        And there are no althistory here.
                        And for 8VA, it means that there are enough goals.

                        Enough for the whole of 1944.
                        not too drawn to discuss alhistory.

                        Exactly. There would also be a Corsair as the backbone of the Air Force to fight and storm, otherwise some kind of crap from Douglas
                      4. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 14
                        Quote: Engineer
                        full-time. There would also be a Corsair as the backbone of the Air Force

                        Basically, it's okay too. But as an attack aircraft, a skyrader is better, and it cannot be mass-produced in 44 due to problems with engines. So Douglas is fine.
                        By the way
                        Fantasies with Pershings, please save. There will be nothing but Shermans.

                        I declared and declare that a seriously modernized Sherman is potentially stronger than any Pershing at an equal technical level. The T20 series tanks were a design failure.
                      5. +2
                        9 October 2022 20: 18
                        Skyrader cannot fight. This is a plane of clear skies, but it was not clear until October 1944. In general, the old dispute of information security against an attack aircraft.
                        So Douglas is fine.

                        Normal, but pointless.
                        The achievements of the strategists and their cover are known - the total defeat of the Luftwaffe. Douglas couldn't do that.
                        I declared and declare that a seriously modernized Sherman is potentially stronger than any Pershing at an equal technical level.

                        Alas, there is neither a "seriously modernized" Sherman nor Pershing in commercial quantities. And not at all because they spent everything on four-engine strategists.
                      6. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 30
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The achievements of the strategists and their cover are known

                        Fuel program and backlash destruction including an emergency fighter program through the imposition of combat in unfavorable conditions.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Douglas couldn't do that.

                        I do not think that it makes sense to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative options. Too special a conversation.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Alas, there is neither a "seriously modernized" Sherman nor Pershing in commercial quantities. And not at all because they spent everything on four-engine strategists.

                        Well, either we are discussing the real, or the altpositive of the allies, or the altpositive for the Reich. I am personally sure that if not "Pershings instead of Liberators", then certainly "Centurion a year and a half earlier instead of Lancasters" is a very strong alt-positive.
                      7. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 34
                        Fuel program and backlash destruction including an emergency fighter program through the imposition of combat in unfavorable conditions.

                        I do not think that it makes sense to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative options. Too special a conversation.
                        It's just that Douglas would hardly have succeeded in this most "imposing a battle in unfavorable conditions."
                        for sure "Centurion a year and a half earlier instead of Lancasters" is a very strong alt-positive.

                        Still would. Who is mom's main fool and who needs altpositive, we both know laughing
                      8. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 43
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Who is mom's main fool and who needs altpositive, we both know

                        Well, you see. I don't like the bombing of civilians, so I drown for any altpositives with their cancellation. Le May is no less concerned.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        It's just that Douglas would hardly have succeeded in this most "imposing a battle in unfavorable conditions."

                        I would have to work more at the front, of course.
                      9. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 49
                        I would have to work more at the front, of course.

                        And there are goals at the front ...
                        The Jags chase the cyclist messengers and thank heaven for the train. And then there's a horde of twin-engine
                      10. 0
                        9 October 2022 20: 57
                        So the entire fighter program is at the front if 8VA was canceled.
                      11. 0
                        9 October 2022 21: 01
                        So redundant. Britons also work there. And thousands and thousands of B-25s and 26s hit communications.
                      12. -1
                        9 October 2022 21: 12
                        Quote: Engineer
                        So redundant.

                        Well, you know, altpositives for the Americans are a kind of genre. It's nice to be healthy and rich, heh heh.
                      13. 0
                        9 October 2022 21: 18
                        Americans, even in a poor state, usually drag.
                        They learn fast enough, they plan well, they can resist.
                      14. 0
                        9 October 2022 21: 26
                        Yes, there are benefits. But there is a lot of chaos, and, accordingly, accidents. Chaffee died of cancer - the tank troops are in complete disarray. If McNair had cancer instead of Chaffee, everything would have gone differently. Marshall needs at least someone who understands Philippine affairs - and quite by accident, MacArthur's former adjutant, Lieutenant Colonel Eisenhower, appears. Roosevelt and Marshall are afraid of the Germans - and apparently the best American General Krueger leaves to fight in the Philippines.
                      15. 0
                        9 October 2022 21: 35
                        With frames, they are still better than the Angles in any case.
                      16. -1
                        9 October 2022 21: 41
                        Well, you know, not ready to criticize the British. There are a lot of questions for Monty, but perhaps much less for Alexander than for the others. If the Americans have a service discrepancy at the very top is simply striking, then the British have both minuses and pluses. In terms of the quality of military leadership, perhaps in second place.
                      17. +1
                        10 October 2022 07: 31
                        Well, you know, not ready to criticize the British

                        I'm ready. Alexander fled Burma, leaving the rest of his troops behind. Monty is a fucking bastard. Slim is considered the most talented. But he vegetated on a third-rate front, plus overlooked the beginning of the Imkhal offensive.
                        Cunningham at Matapan illuminated the Italians with searchlights and the Italian destroyers were not detected. The Angles were lucky that they hurried to get away instead of attacking. For the Yap, this is just a bun with raisins. Or is it sashimi, I don't know.
                      18. 0
                        10 October 2022 07: 59
                        Quote: Engineer
                        I'm ready

                        I had no doubt.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        For the Yap, this is just a bun with raisins.

                        Battleship South Dakota listens intently.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        fled Burma, leaving the remnants of the troops.

                        Each country has its own Admiral Oktyabrsky.
                      19. +2
                        10 October 2022 12: 38
                        hi
                        Like the discussion! good

                        Reminds me of the good old days.... good good

                        It remains to read about IL2, MacArthur "from the Philippines to Korea" and who is better / worse - Spruance or Halsey ... maybe tomorrow ...
                        Pure thrill...

                        And I'll go until Timokhin is cheered up with the help of Trident ICBMs, GAO and Airborne Forces.
                        There, the landing and counter-landing on Anadyr freezes. request
                      20. 0
                        10 October 2022 14: 02
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        I will cheer up Timokhin with the help of Trident ICBMs, GAO and Airborne Forces.

                        Where is it?
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        better / worse - Spruance or Halsey ..

                        Both are worse. The best Yarnell, from the real ones - Fletcher.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        MacArthur "From the Philippines to Korea"

                        Shoot.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        It remains to read about IL2

                        Cancel.

                        Nothing changes in alhistoria, as you can see.
                      21. 0
                        10 October 2022 14: 21
                        hi
                        Where is it?

                        https://topwar.ru/202693-reforma-vdv-v-svete-opyta-boev-na-ukraine-i-predshestvujuschih-vojn-zadachi-tehnika-oruzhie.html

                        Summary: the Americans created the 11th airborne division in Alaska, and since the Americans will have decayed nuclear ammunition by 2030, they will attack earlier (see previous episodes of the series "trash, waste and alhistoria").
                        A US landing is being considered (the 11th airborne troops of the US, do not forget about it) on Tiksi, Anadyr, Pevek and other places rich in walrus ivory and valuable fur. We will respond with a counter-landing force of the Airborne Forces (for which we are reforming the Airborne Forces), and we will uncover our faithful loaf of vigorous loaf.
                        All this is "Reform of the Airborne Forces in the light of the experience of fighting in Ukraine and previous wars" - I'm not kidding, even the article is called that.

                        Nothing has changed since 2018: "The author has a very strange way of writing articles.
                        The first half of the text is trash, fumes, altistoria.
                        The second half of the text, when it comes to the glands, is a relatively realistic overview of the situation." request
                      22. +1
                        10 October 2022 17: 52
                        Like the discussion! good
                        Reminds me of the good old days...

                        Come on. There is no fire. The arguments of the parties are known, they exercised their wit, as if inadvertently hurting sore calluses.

                        And I'll go while Timokhin cheer up

                        Is it worth it? Shiza Timokhin only becomes more obvious over time. It's even creepy to read how much he believed in his global understanding without getting out of the Internet.
                        Even Kaptsov has matured and left his battleships of the 21st century, and this one ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  5. +5
    9 October 2022 08: 50
    Well, why scold the German "test of the pen" now? All these shortcomings are, basically, inevitable for an innovative, at that time unusual design, "childhood illnesses"! Which would have been eliminated if the Germans had taken the design seriously earlier! 1. Is the radio controlled fuse bad? So in Germany, several proximity fuses were developed ... but they didn’t have time (!), Although the Kakadu proximity radio fuse was produced in small quantities! In addition, the radio-controlled fuse has not lost its relevance today! It can be used as an alternative to the so-called programmable fuse using the difference-range method! 2. And the radio command control was taken by the Nazis not from a good life! It was just that it was a simpler solution and promised a faster (earlier) creation of a workable design, and the Germans then had "running short" and they understood this! And at the beginning they were going to create a missile defense system guided by a radio beam, and even with an IK.GOS in addition! They also thought about the solid propellant rocket engine for "Wasserfall" ... In general, as our beloved Gorby once said: The main thing is to start!
  6. 0
    9 October 2022 11: 01
    The operator, using a joystick, had to combine
    What prevented the author from writing the modern term joystick instead of the German term "knüppel" (literally - club)? Repost article from Wiki.
    1. +1
      9 October 2022 12: 35
      modern term - joystick
      Joystick literally (from English) - stick of pleasure laughing .
      1. 0
        9 October 2022 13: 51
        Joystick literally (from English) - stick of pleasure
        In light of the latest trends in Western society? laughing
        1. 0
          9 October 2022 13: 56
          It was called before Freddie Mercury Yes .
      2. Alf
        +1
        9 October 2022 19: 16
        Quote: Bolt Cutter
        modern term - joystick
        Joystick literally (from English) - stick of pleasure laughing .

        But then the lieutenant came and vulgarized everything ... laughing
    2. 0
      9 October 2022 14: 04
      Quote: Aviator_
      What prevented the author from writing the modern term joystick instead of the German term "knüppel" (literally - club)? Repost article from Wiki.

      In general, the word "joystick" is still used today - it is a joystick (multi-way button) on a joystick.
    3. AAV
      0
      9 October 2022 20: 58
      What's so special about the term "joystick"? This term can be found, for example, in one of the books of the operating manual of the Soviet air defense system "KUB" ....
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. 0
    9 October 2022 11: 22
    Quote: Engineer
    Speer in his memoirs regretted

    All of them are strong in hindsight. He planned to kill Hitler too...

    Quote: Aviator_
    modern term - joystick

    Then use the term more understandable to the people - a manipulator ... wink
  9. +1
    9 October 2022 13: 02
    Here, the author of the rights, the Germans tried to jump above those. level, what to say, having German developments and calmer conditions, combat-ready anti-aircraft missiles appeared almost ten years later.
  10. +1
    9 October 2022 13: 55
    Computing equipment converted the movements of the control element into commands for the rocket
    Seriously? Computing equipment on the battlefield in 1945?
    1. AAV
      0
      9 October 2022 21: 02
      Computing equipment does not have to be electronic. At that time, and even earlier, there were electromechanical computers. So, in general, there is no error.
      1. 0
        9 October 2022 21: 55
        Quote: AAV
        Computing equipment does not have to be electronic.
        This I am aware of. I also know about mechanical POISOTs. But just remember what size and power consumption Eniac or the first calculators on the relay had. I am sure that there was an analog control, without a digital calculator.
        1. +1
          10 October 2022 00: 24
          an analog system may well be a computational, AVM. TsVM- it already went later.
          As a student, I remember, I started with MN-7. And this is what I remember.
  11. 0
    9 October 2022 13: 57
    Oversized rocket. Heights of 18 km were definitely not needed, V-17s and Lancasters flew 8-10 km, and the cost of the bomber was not very high. Of course, the damage done on the ground was heavy. Nevertheless, the nemchura in many types of weapons was ahead of the rest - jet fighters already in 1944, ballistic and cruise missiles, guided bombs, submarines with a VND, etc. They were not lucky with the leader of the country.
    1. Alf
      0
      9 October 2022 19: 16
      Quote: Glagol1
      the cost of the bomber was not very large

      And the pilots?
      1. 0
        9 October 2022 21: 36
        There were tens of thousands of pilots, the training took 3-6 months. Well, those who have already flown before.
  12. -1
    9 October 2022 14: 05
    Did the author discover Wikipedia and, out of delight, decided to introduce the readers of the site to it?
  13. 0
    9 October 2022 16: 12
    It was proposed to create a liquid rocket

    mass use implies low cost, which is incompatible with a liquid rocket
    Why wouldn't the Germans make cheaper solid fuel or powder engines? At that time, there were already inexpensive MLRS, it just begs to make missiles based on their principle. To increase the range and altitude - two-stage.
    1. 0
      9 October 2022 18: 16
      In LRE, high pressure is only in the HP and the combustion chamber. In a solid propellant rocket engine, the entire engine body must hold the full pressure of the gases, so it must be wound from fiberglass, the production of which in the Reich was underdeveloped, since there was not enough tungsten for dies and some other details.
      1. 0
        9 October 2022 21: 56
        The Germans had the technology to produce cheap Nebelwerfers. The fact that the speed is low - for manual radio command control at relatively low target speeds, this was even a plus, increased the accuracy of guidance. Moreover, they were used as unguided air-to-air missiles, it was necessary to bring them to a logical result - make them manageable, optimize them for flying in a straight line and arm them with two-seat fighters (or make two-stage versions for ground installations)
        as there was not enough tungsten for dies and some other details.

        I don’t think it was a problem, if it really was needed, there is a little bit of tungsten needed there.
  14. 0
    10 October 2022 09: 18
    The article is missing a paragraph comparing Vodopad with S-25.
  15. 0
    11 October 2022 19: 49
    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
    You need to compare with the amount of damage caused by the bomber when he completed the task.

    There is nothing to compare here. The raids were carried out not by piece machines, but by hundreds, and primitive missiles would be powerless against them. Well, yes, it might have been possible to shoot down a dozen bombers, but such air defense would not be able to fulfill its function of protecting the object.