The "weapon of vengeance" that failed to save Nazi Germany from defeat

9 273 54
The "weapon of vengeance" that failed to save Nazi Germany from defeat

In almost every military conflict there comes a point when one of the opposing sides, especially the one suffering defeat, dreams of and takes steps to obtain the “perfect weapon", which will quickly allow you to change the course of the campaign in your favor.

Nazi Germany was no exception during World War II. The video will focus on the world's first ballistic missile. rocket long-range V-2, called by the Germans the "weapon of vengeance" (in German Vergeltungswaffe). In general, this is the name of a number of ambitious aviation and Nazi Germany's rocket and artillery projects to create weapons for more effective bombing of English cities and newly planned attacks on the United States as "retaliation" for Allied air raids.





Development of the rocket began in the spring of 1942, when Berlin (and others) hadn't yet even considered the possibility of losing the war with the Soviet Union. But Hitler was a great admirer of all things grand, unique, even mystical, so the prospect of acquiring a Vergeltungswaffe (weaponry) unlike any other country in the world appealed to him.

As already mentioned, development of the V-2 (Aggregat-4) rocket began under the leadership of German designer Wernher von Braun in March 1941. The first combat launch took place on November 8, 1944. Testing was successful, and the rocket was accepted into service by the Wehrmacht. Although the number of combat launches of the rocket totaled 3225, it had no significant impact on the course of the war.

Partly because the V-2 was used primarily for intimidation, striking mostly civilians. It's known that Aggregat-4 strikes killed approximately 2700 people. Moreover, the Germans primarily struck Britain, most often London. Moreover, the missile entered service after the Allies had already opened a "second front."



The V-2 rocket is the first stories An object that completed a suborbital space flight, reaching an altitude of 188 km during a vertical launch. This occurred in 1944. After the war, the German rocket became the prototype for the further development of the first ballistic missiles in the USA, USSR, and other countries.



As for von Braun, the creator of the Vergeltungswaffe, at the end of the war, fearing capture by Soviet soldiers, he and his team of developers managed to escape to the Allies by deceiving the commander of the SS guarding him. On June 20, 1945, the US Secretary of State approved von Braun and his staff's relocation to America. Freiherr von Braun, Baron Magnus Maximilian, did not like working for the Americans—they treated him too disrespectfully.

Despite the fact that the group of developers led by von Braun surrendered to the Americans along with the documentation, this did not prevent Soviet engineers from reconstructing most of the V-1 rocket drawings from the remaining parts.

Moreover, many decades later, in the 21st century, it was the Russian Federation, the successor to the USSR, that became the developer and possessor of the most advanced hypersonic missiles. Meanwhile, the United States is still conducting less-than-successful hypersonic launch vehicle tests.

Things got to the point that just over a year ago, newly elected US President Donald Trump claimed in an interview with Fox News that Russia allegedly stole the Americans' hypersonic missile project during Barack Obama's presidency. However, according to Trump, the Americans have their own "wonder weapon" called the "discombobulator." But that's another story.

Learn more about the Third Reich's "weapon of vengeance," how the world's first non-nuclear ballistic missile from World War II worked, and why it failed to have a decisive impact on the Wehrmacht's military campaign—in this video.

54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    7 February 2026 20: 23
    Hello to Volodin and his chatter about weapons of vengeance.
    1. +6
      7 February 2026 20: 53
      ...Aha. Based on new physical principles.
    2. -5
      7 February 2026 21: 16
      The comment everyone came here for
    3. +4
      7 February 2026 22: 16
      Quote: Mikhail Nasharashev
      Hello to Volodin and his chatter about weapons of vengeance.

      "Weapons of Vengeance" is, at the ideological level, roughly about how as long as Putin exists, business can be done; if Putin is gone, then Volodin's business, and therefore Russia, is gone. lol
      1. +1
        8 February 2026 08: 11
        He needs to somehow distract them from the "business" of poisoning people with palm oil... Still not satisfied, he proposed abolishing pensions based on his mother's additional income.
        1. 0
          8 February 2026 14: 32
          Palm oil itself has already been proven to be healthy. The main thing is not to hydrogenate it like any other vegetable oil. I agree about pensions. Putin has taken at least 1 million rubles from every citizen by raising the retirement age.
          1. +4
            9 February 2026 04: 57
            These pensioners wanted to rob the state of 1 million rubles... In fact, a true patriot who loves his homeland should not live to retirement age!
          2. -2
            12 February 2026 08: 44
            Look at the retirement age in other countries, and it's been like that for a long time. In that same stronghold of democracy, it's 66 for everyone, and they're still trying to raise it to 67. Or is it something else? As for palm oil... Where do they sell it? I eat butter.
            1. -3
              12 February 2026 10: 17
              First, we need to look at and compare the average life expectancy. It's far from in Russia's favor.
              1. +1
                12 February 2026 15: 54
                So don't drink, don't smoke, and you'll live a long life. And who even did these calculations? It seems like the numbers were plucked out of thin air—the authors simply filled out the table based on their own, purely personal, opinions and preferences. It's like the happiness index or the democracy index.
  2. +4
    7 February 2026 21: 11
    But, if you believe Trump, the Americans have their own “miracle weapon” called the “discombobulator.”

    ...they have a miracle weapon called the trindobulator...
    "They sweep with their tongue like a broom" (c)
    1. Alf
      +7
      7 February 2026 23: 51
      Quote: Nexcom
      The trindobulator is their miracle weapon...

      No, they have one truly miracle weapon - His Majesty the Dollar... It recently worked in Venezuela...
    2. 0
      8 February 2026 04: 16
      They have 900 military bases around the world and the dollar is the world currency.
  3. 0
    7 February 2026 21: 15
    Hitler was a great admirer of everything great, unique, even mystical, so the prospect of acquiring a Vergeltungswaffe, which no other country in the world had, was to his liking.
    Luckily, he had something to spur the development of the atomic bomb. After all, the idea of ​​harnessing nuclear fission energy originated in Germany.
  4. +3
    7 February 2026 21: 22
    "Wunderwaffe" doesn't exist—by definition. And as the experience of all armed conflicts from ancient times to the present shows, relying on "technological superiority" always loses to simpler, yet more widespread, weaponry. And even now, it would seem, it's the technically primitive, yet cheap, home-brewed drones that rule the roost, not the not-at-all-high-tech, expensive "raptors" and "pacers." As Bonaparte said, "God is on the side of the big battalions."
    1. +4
      7 February 2026 22: 30
      Quote: Taoist
      Betting on "technological superiority" always loses... technically primitive, but at the same time cheap and home-made drones (c)

      It's easy to produce "cheap, home-brewed drones" using chips the size of a fingernail that outperform the supercomputers of the late 20th century....
    2. -1
      8 February 2026 07: 04
      Quote: Taoist
      "Wunderwaffe" doesn't exist—by definition. And as the experience of all armed conflicts from ancient times to the present shows, relying on "technological superiority" always loses to simpler, yet more widespread, weaponry. And even now, it would seem, it's the technically primitive, yet cheap, home-brewed drones that rule the roost, not the not-at-all-high-tech, expensive "raptors" and "pacers." As Bonaparte said, "God is on the side of the big battalions."

      Not at all.... Have you forgotten these lines: "No matter what happens, we have a Maxim machine gun, and they don't"? The problem is that the Maxim worked against natives armed with bows and arrows. It also worked against a more technologically advanced enemy, but, as it turned out, the enemy also had machine guns. And not only machine guns. :)
      ...A "wunderwaffe" becomes a "wunderfawle" not as a result of technical superiority over the enemy, but as a result of that enemy's technical inferiority. :) It's the same with these "V" weapons—they're certainly funny gadgets, but despite the fact that Germany's enemies didn't have them, Germany's adversaries weren't technically inferior either, and they had plenty of other interesting things. And no worse than that V. :)
    3. 0
      8 February 2026 08: 45
      Quote: Taoist
      "Wunderwaffe" doesn't exist—by definition. And as the experience of all armed conflicts from ancient times to the present shows, relying on "technological superiority" always loses to simpler, yet more widespread, weaponry. And even now, it would seem, it's the technically primitive, yet cheap, home-brewed drones that rule the roost, not the not-at-all-high-tech, expensive "raptors" and "pacers." As Bonaparte said, "God is on the side of the big battalions."

      It wasn't Napoleon who said this.
      Drones rule the roost until there's a global war. Once the battlefield is saturated with air defenses, drones won't be of any use. Iran, for example, inflicted its greatest destruction with ballistic missiles, not drones, which are slow-moving and carry few explosives.
    4. 0
      8 February 2026 11: 16
      I disagree. Right now, it's enough to bombard Ukraine with nuclear weapons, and no drones will be able to do anything. And the Starlink communications network can be wiped out by strikes on ground-based transmission and reception points. And the satellite constellation is vulnerable. The weaker players, even with the technological advantage, will lose.
    5. +3
      8 February 2026 11: 34
      Quote: Taoist
      "Wunderwaffe" doesn't exist—by definition. And as the experience of all armed conflicts from ancient times to the present shows, relying on "technological superiority" always loses to simpler, yet more widespread, weaponry.

      Can you give examples where high technology failed?
      I'll give you some counter-examples where armed countries, and these are just a few, win with weapons that were new at the time: the Crimean Campaign in the 19th century, the Russo-Japanese War in the 20th century, Desert Storm, and a very recent example, albeit controversial, is Venezuela.
      Of course, we can also analyze the SVO in terms of intelligence and communications, but this would require a separate topic.
      1. 0
        8 February 2026 16: 49
        You misunderstood me. It's not about "losing high technology"... It's about the fact that in a clash of roughly equal armies, the winner won't be the one who can create a one-off "superweapon," but the one who equips their troops with weapons that, while inferior in performance characteristics, are still produced in sufficient quantities and are reliable. Of course, if we're fighting the so-called "Zusuls," then "Iron Kaput" is a wonder weapon... And only until the fuel runs out.
        1. +1
          9 February 2026 10: 54
          Quote: Taoist
          You misunderstood me. It's not about "losing high technology"... It's about the fact that in a clash of roughly equal armies, the winner won't be the one who can create a one-off "superweapon," but the one who equips their troops with weapons that, while inferior in performance characteristics, are still produced in sufficient quantities and are reliable. Of course, if we're fighting the so-called "Zusuls," then "Iron Kaput" is a wonder weapon... And only until the fuel runs out.

          If we take the Crimean campaign, for example, the British had steamships in large numbers. Can we really say that they were a "superweapon" compared to the sailing fleet? Of course, yes. Another example is rifled weapons.
    6. -1
      12 February 2026 17: 59
      Along with the V-2, the Germans were close to developing an atomic bomb. Had they developed one, mounting it on a rocket and launching it at London would have caused a huge sensation. They would have lost the war anyway, but British losses would have been prohibitive.
  5. -1
    7 February 2026 22: 47
    As always, the British intelligence proved to be at its best. In 1944, the Polish underground managed to intercept one of the fallen missiles, disassemble it, and send detailed technical specifications to England. It was discovered that the V-2 was radio-controlled. Thanks to this information and the frequencies they identified, the British were able to set up jamming stations. The missiles simply deviated from their intended course and fell off course. So the "inaccuracy" of the V-2 is questionable.
    1. +2
      8 February 2026 06: 42
      The V-2 wasn't radio-guided. It had an inertial guidance system, and the British could have flown an icon around the targets instead of jamming them (as we do). The effect would have been the same.
      Quote: "One of the most revolutionary technological solutions was the automatic guidance system. Target coordinates were entered into the onboard analog computer before launch. Gyroscopes installed on the rocket monitored its spatial position throughout the flight, and any deviation from the specified trajectory was corrected by four graphite gas-dynamic rudders placed in the engine's jet stream along the periphery of the nozzle. By deflecting, these rudders deflected part of the jet stream, which changed the direction of the engine's thrust vector and created a torque relative to the rocket's center of mass, which served as the control action (this method significantly reduces engine thrust, and the graphite rudders in the jet stream are subject to severe erosion and have a very short service life)."
      Quote from gender-neutral WIKI.
      1. +1
        8 February 2026 06: 53
        Yes, the V-2's basic navigation principle was "fire and forget." But later variants began using radio directional signals for course correction.
        1. +2
          8 February 2026 07: 08
          As far as I remember, they wanted to use the radio signal in the "America Rocket" project. They wanted to place the radio signal source (the beacon) on skyscrapers... And who controlled the regular FAUs in England, or where were the guidance sources?
          1. 0
            8 February 2026 07: 27
            The F-2 did not use radio beacons. A ground transmitter generated a narrow radio beam directed toward the target. An onboard receiver on the missile analyzed the signal and adjusted its course if it deviated. The radio signal could also be used to shut off the fuel supply to the engine, thereby increasing the accuracy of the hit.
            1. 0
              8 February 2026 07: 42
              Quote: Glock-17
              The ground transmitter formed a narrow radio beam directed towards the target.

              I wonder what the accuracy of this design was?
              1. +3
                8 February 2026 08: 04
                According to Google, the deviation is 2-3 km. With such accuracy, it remained a weapon for destroying cities, but not for precision strikes. If the Germans had managed to develop atomic weapons, it would have been very bad. The course of the war would have changed significantly.
            2. +1
              9 February 2026 19: 18
              Quote: Glock-17
              It was also possible to cut off the fuel supply to the engine via a radio signal, thereby increasing the accuracy of the hit.

              Only to compensate for crosswind drift until the rocket has gained sufficient speed for the aero rudders to work.
              The Mischgerät "compared" the data from the gyroscopes, accelerometer and beam deflection, and issued a command to the graphite jet rudders (8 pieces, I think) in the nozzle.
              Here is the device (ray), it is stored in America.
              And the liquid propellant rocket engine was disabled in 1/2 of the combat ones: Brennschluss from Siemnens (initially, all of them should have been there), the speed was measured there using a Doppler.
        2. +1
          9 February 2026 19: 03
          Quote: Glock-17
          But later variants began to use radio guidance signals to correct course.

          👀 some kind of voluntarism.
          Tell me more about the V-2 seeker.
          1. How could they send "radio correction signals" 100-300 km away? And with what?
          2. How can one determine, while on the launch pad, that a course correction is needed for a missile flying at V=~3 km/s at an altitude of 80-100 km, 100-300 km away?
          3. What kind of onboard computer (even a vacuum tube one, which didn't exist yet) processed the correction signals and sent control signals to the steering servos?
          I suppose you've heard something about the "battle of the rays".
          For Germans it is:
          X-Gerät
          Y-Gerät
          Sonne / Elektro-Sonne (Consol).
          But this has nothing to do with the V-2.
    2. 0
      8 February 2026 09: 20
      I don’t understand, did you fly from Peenemünde to England via Poland?
  6. +2
    7 February 2026 22: 50
    The pursuit of miracle weapons always leads to one outcome: defeat. The USSR and the US's reliance on a mass of "middle-class" soldiers completely crushed the Germans' gamble with "elites" armed with miracle weapons.
    1. +4
      7 February 2026 23: 04
      The Germans simply didn't have the resources of the Allied powers to afford a war of attrition. For them, the war was lost with the failure of Operation Barbarossa. No one was even considering negotiating with Hitler. And the miracle weapon was purely for self-satisfaction: better to have some hope than utter despair.
  7. +1
    8 February 2026 06: 05
    The Germans wanted to do everything and scattered their forces.
  8. 0
    8 February 2026 11: 55
    The world was very lucky that at that time Germany was led by an arrogant corporal with a limited intellect, and not by a man with Stalin's intelligence, no matter how anyone felt about him.
    All the money went toward building the Atlantic Wall, leaving only a pittance for such promising developments as nuclear weapons, missiles, jet aircraft, new submarines, anti-tank missiles, and small arms. Even with such modest funding, the Germans were literally a year and a half short of putting all this into production.
    1. 0
      8 February 2026 20: 45
      What does luck have to do with it? And what about Stirlitz?
  9. +2
    8 February 2026 12: 51
    The Germans, caught in the quagmire of a flawed strategy, created astonishing technologies ahead of their time. The V-2 rocket and others were initially projects to develop long-range artillery, and General Drinberger commanded them all. He discovered von Braun (along with many young scientists, having thoroughly combed through all of Germany's educational institutions), who was initially a simple demolition expert, lighting fuses to launch primitive rockets. But we still owe the Germans our gratitude, because the conquest of space would have been impossible without the V-2.
    1. -2
      8 February 2026 17: 09
      Quote: geologist
      The Germans, caught in the quagmire of a faulty strategy, created amazing technologies that were ahead of their time.

      What technologies? What did the Germans have that others didn't?
      1. 0
        8 February 2026 20: 49
        Well, almost everything, if we're talking about rockets... We, of course, had Katyushas, ​​but that's a little different.
        1. -2
          9 February 2026 05: 06
          Quote: crown1992
          Well, almost everything, if we're talking about rockets... We, of course, had Katyushas, ​​but that's a little different.

          Well, that's right, a little... IMHO, the Americans could have made something similar to the V-8, but they didn't bother, because they realized such a gimmick without an A-Bomb would be a waste of money. That money would have been better spent building a ton of regular bombers, which is exactly what the Allies did... The V-8 isn't a "wonder weapon," it's just a gimmick. Otherwise, I don't see any particular technical superiority between Germany and the Allies.
      2. +1
        9 February 2026 20: 08
        Quote: Chack Wessel
        Quote: geologist
        The Germans, caught in the quagmire of a faulty strategy, created amazing technologies that were ahead of their time.

        What technologies? What did the Germans have that others didn't?

        Engineering school. The USSR spent half the war struggling to develop proper aircraft engines, radios for tanks and airplanes... The Germans synthesized gasoline and fats.
        1. 0
          11 February 2026 05: 42
          Yes, the Germans had a good engineering school. Comparing it to the engineering school in the USSR, which only embarked on the path to industrialization in the early 30s, is pointless. It's better to compare it to the engineering school in the United States.
    2. 0
      12 February 2026 09: 01
      Well, yes, without the V-2 there would be no space, and without the Schmeisser there would be no AK... We've heard these mantras about the engineering superiority of the Germans.
      Ours simply used resources more rationally during the war and didn't waste them on megaprojects like the Maus tank, the Dora cannon, or those V-2 missiles with questionable effectiveness, suitable for firing at city-sized targets. The only thing the R-7 and the V-2 have in common is that they're both missiles, and that's where their similarities end.
      Getting to know the V-2 gave our guys, well, maybe just a glimpse of what would happen if we did it the way the Germans did, and saved them, well, a year that wouldn't have been wasted on research. It's the same with the atomic programs—intelligence only provided data that saved our time.
      1. 0
        12 February 2026 10: 27
        Our best scientists, Kapitsa and Landau, flatly refused to build an atomic bomb, even with detailed intelligence reports in hand. They were already doing just fine. Young Soviet scientists, led by Kurchatov, took up the project, but the Germans contributed to future uranium enrichment technologies using gravity centrifuges and diffusion methods, even though we had enough uranium from the Czech Republic for many bombs. Subsequently, every geological team, in addition to their main activities, engaged in massive uranium prospecting, and radiometricians scanned the entire territory of the USSR...
  10. +2
    8 February 2026 13: 02
    If anyone is interested in the history of the V-2 (A-4), then you need to read two books
    The Mystery of Hunstville (Y.Mader)
    Rockets and People (Memoirs of B.E. Chertok)
    They have it all.
    ps
    Moreover, many decades later, already in the 21st century, it was the successor to the USSR, the Russian Federation, that became the developer and owner of the most modern hypersonic missiles.

    Hypersonic missiles have nothing to do with the V-2. The only reference here is to G.E. Lozino-Lozinsky's Soviet "Spiral" system.
  11. +2
    8 February 2026 13: 08
    Quote: geologist
    The Germans, caught in the quagmire of a faulty strategy, created amazing technologies that were ahead of their time.

    Yes, World War II became a powerful catalyst for scientific and technological progress – nuclear energy, jet and rocket engines, electronics, computers, metallurgy, chemistry, medicine and sanitation...
  12. +1
    8 February 2026 23: 04
    We should be happy that instead of real weapons, the Nazis wasted enormous sums on expensive and useless crap. But this is a warning to us too: we make and use $50 million worth of missiles, but we can't provide the front with $10 worth of communications equipment. At cost...
    1. +3
      9 February 2026 12: 24
      They had plenty of real weapons superior to ours and our allies: machine guns, assault rifles, heavy and medium tanks, jet aircraft, ballistic missiles... It's just that a war on two fronts with an enemy that outnumbers you and has good equipment is impossible to win.
    2. +2
      10 February 2026 14: 55
      we should be happy that instead of real weapons Enormous amounts of money were spent by the fascists on expensive and useless crap.

      If they had received their atomic bomb, then everything could have turned out differently: they had already created the delivery vehicles...
      How they spent their money is none of our business, look at how we spend it now - we...
  13. 0
    12 February 2026 09: 07
    Am I the only one who has associations with all sorts of Poseidons?
  14. 0
    9 March 2026 17: 28
    Before 1940, several thousand spies operated in the United States and Britain.
    By the mid-30s, numerous German communities had emerged in these countries, attracting German immigrants. Protecting these organizations, the Abwehr singled out anyone who could be useful and began to develop them. Soon, German intelligence agents were present in nearly every arms factory, every aircraft manufacturer, and almost every shipyard.
    Blueprints for aircraft, jet engines, pressurization systems, and military vessels reached the Germans straight from the drawing boards. The Abwehr sometimes learned of advances in the development of secret technologies before their clients. Secret maps from headquarters and blueprints for the latest instruments, as well as information about military bases and high-level government activities, were sent to Germany. In 1937, the Germans stole the American Norden bombsight—a secret guarded as highly as the atomic bomb.
    And the design of the V-2's components was effectively stolen from the US: the guidance systems, the fuel systems.
    No lengthy experiments. We took existing developments, scaled them up, and brought them into production.
    They even kept the American ballistic missile livery on the V-2.
  15. 0
    30 March 2026 10: 45
    Quote: Taoist
    "Wunderwaffe" does not exist - by definition.

    I didn't advise being so categorical. The invention of the stirrup signaled the end of ancient times with its mass infantry armies and the beginning of the Middle Ages with its thousand-year dominance of heavy cavalry. So...
    As for the Germans, it's true that God doesn't give horns to a butting cow. Many technical solutions proposed by the best minds of the Third Reich paved the way for humanity into the future, without in the least increasing Germany's military capabilities.