Military Review

70 years ago the Germans first used the V-1 projectile

55
The German development of an aircraft-projectile (cruise missile) "V-1" was the first such unmanned aerial vehicle, which was used during the Second World War. V-1, also known under the designations V-1, A-2, Fi-103, was in service with the German army in the final part of the war. The name of this rocket comes from the German word Vergeltungswaffe (weapon retaliation). A projectile with a warhead weighing up to a ton could hit targets at a distance of up to 250 km, and the latest missiles - up to 400 km.


The project of this weapon was a joint development of German designers Fritz Gosslau (company Argus Motoren) and Robert Lusser (employee of the company Fieseler). In July 1941, the fruit of their joint work, which received the Fi-103 code, was approved by the German Ministry aviationheaded in those years by the Führer's closest associate (Nazi No. 2, as he was often called) Reich Marshal Aviation German Goering. The industrial production of the V-1 projectile was launched at the end of 1942.

The launch of the rocket was launched on the island of Usedom, located opposite the mouth of the Oder River in the Baltic Sea. During the Second World War, the “Usedom” concentration camp was located on this island. The prisoners held in this camp were used by the Germans in factories that produced Fau-1 projectiles. At the same time, the production of “miracle weapons” in the form of V-1 and V-2 missiles was delayed for several months due to the fact that 17-18 of August 1943 of the year British aircraft conducted a large-scale air operation against objects located on the island.

70 years ago the Germans first used the V-1 projectile

The bombing of the island became possible after the intelligence of the Army of the krayovoi (AK) conducted one of its most successful operations. The Poles were able to develop a German research center in Peenemünde, where they assembled Fau-1 projectiles and V-2 missiles. The first information about this strategic object appeared in AK in the autumn of 1942 of the year, and in March of 1943 of the year a detailed report was sent to England, which allowed the British to organize an air operation against the island.

For the first time, the Fau-1 13 was massively used on June 1944 of the year against Great Britain, exactly one week after the Allied forces landed on the beaches of Normandy, opening the Second Front in Europe. On that day, an air strike was struck at London. Later, the Germans began to use projectiles to bombard the cities of Belgium and Holland that had been liberated by Anglo-American troops. In addition, several V-1s were fired around the capital of France, from where German troops were knocked out by the Resistance forces even before they reached the base of a part of the Allied forces.

In all, during the war years, the German military industry managed to assemble about 30 thousands of V-1 airplanes. By 29 March 1945, about 10 thousands of them were used for shelling the UK. However, only 3200 missiles were able to reach the British Isles. The 2419 missiles struck the English capital, the losses from their use amounted to 6184 killed and 17 981 wounded. At the same time, about 20% of missiles failed at the start, 42% managed to shoot down anti-aircraft artillery and British aircraft, and 7% broke up into pieces, colliding with aerostats of an air barrier.


Use of Fau-1 Projectiles

The main targets for the German Fau-1 projectiles were the big cities London and Manchester, and later their targets became Antwerp, Liege, Brussels and even Paris.

In the evening of 12 June, 1944 German long-range artillery, which was located in the Calais region in northern France, conducted an unusually heavy shelling of the British Isles. This shelling was conducted with a diversionary purpose. At 4 in the morning of June 13, the shelling came to an end, and after some time, British observers stationed in Kent noticed a kind of “airplane” that made uncharacteristic sounds, and a bright glow was noted in its tail. The observed apparatus continued its flight over the Downs, after which it swooped down and exploded near Gravesend in Swanskoum. It was the fall of the first VW 1 rocket that exploded on the territory of the British Isles. Over the next hour, more 3-like missiles fell at Cacfield, Bethnal Green and Platte. Then the Germans began daily systematic raids on English cities using V-1 projectiles. Residents of the British capital nicknamed them "flying bombs", as well as "buzzing bombs" - for their characteristic loud sound of engines.

After the first raids, the British urgently began to develop a plan for the defense of cities against new German weapons. According to their plan, it was necessary to build a defense line 3: air defense fighters, anti-aircraft artillery and aerial barrage balloons. To detect the V-1, it was decided to use the already deployed network of observation posts and radar stations. At the same time, the British placed the barrage balloons right behind the line of anti-aircraft guns, in the number of 500 pieces. The number of anti-aircraft artillery was urgently increased. 28 June 1944 of the year 1 light and 522 heavy anti-aircraft guns were used to repel the V-363 air attack on London.


Soon, to repel raids, the British began to use self-propelled anti-aircraft installations and only rocket launchers began to appear, and the number of balloons was also doubled. Moreover, the royal navy sent ships to the French coast that were to detect missile launches. These ships were located in 7 miles from the French coast with an interval between ships in 3 miles. Not far from the ships, English fighters were on duty. When an air target was detected, the ships gave a signal to fighters using lighting or signal flares. At the same time, the task to shoot down the projectile was not the easiest because of its relatively high flight speed. The fighter pilot had no more than 5 minutes to shoot down the V-1. During this time, the German projectile passed from the French coast to the zone of action of the British anti-aircraft artillery, and after another minute it hit the zone of the location of the airborne balloons.

In order to achieve the most effective defense against German missile shells, the British military moved anti-aircraft artillery from their cities directly to the coast. August 28 1944 of the year was a turning point for the new German wonder weapon. Of the 97 Fau-1 projectiles that crossed the English Channel, the British were able to shoot down 92 units, only 5 missiles reached London. The last V-1 rocket fell in England only in March of the 1945 year, shortly before the complete surrender of Nazi Germany.

At the same time, the German V-1 missiles managed to cause great damage to the UK. The 24 491 building was destroyed by rockets, and the 52 293 buildings were damaged to such an extent that they became uninhabitable. Civilian casualties amounted to 5 864 people killed, even 17 197 people were seriously injured, 23 174 people got off light injuries. On average, for every V-1 that was able to reach the English capital or its environs, there were about 10 killed and seriously wounded British. In addition to London, Manchester, Portsmouth, Southampton and several other cities were bombarded with V-1 rockets. Despite the fact that only half of all missiles reached their intended goal, these attacks had a great moral and psychological effect on the population of the British Isles.


After the Allies landed in France and quickly pushed the Western Front deep into the mainland, freeing France and Holland, the Germans redirected their attacks on Liege and Antwerp. At the same time, the Fau-1 launchers themselves were initially located on the northern coast of France and in the territory of Holland.

Since the Fau-1 projectiles failed to hit point targets, as well as medium-sized objects, including factories or British naval bases, at the end of 1944, it was decided to work on the manned V-1 version. Also, such missiles could be used against Allied ships in British ports. New development received the designation "Reichenberg." The cockpit was located in the middle part of the rocket, the Germans were going to use the Condor and Non-200 bombers as carriers of such missiles. After the rocket was separated from the carrier aircraft, the pilot carried out its piloting. Having found the necessary target, he directed the V-111 to it, then, dropping the cockpit cap, ejected.

Naturally, the pilots had little chance of surviving, and in the case of a successful ejection, the pilot was almost guaranteed to be captured. Despite this, the Germans quite easily managed to recruit the 250 first volunteers, among whom was the famous German female pilot Hannah Reich. She even managed to successfully test the manned version of the V-1. In total, until the end of the war, the Germans created 175 manned versions of the Fow-1, but none of them were used in battle.


Tactical and technical characteristics of the aircraft Fau-1:
Overall dimensions: length - 7,74 m, height - 1,42 m, wingspan - 5,3 m, diameter of the fuselage 0,85 m.
Curb weight - 2160 kg.
The power plant is one Argus As 014 pulsating jet engine, 2,9 kN thrust.
The maximum flight speed is from 656 km / h (full refueling) to 800 km / h (when approaching the target).
The maximum range is 286 km.
Practical ceiling - 2700-3050 m (in practice, from 100 to 1000 m).
The mass of the warhead - 800-1000 kg, ammatol.
Fuel tank capacity - 570 liters of gasoline.
Circular Probable Deviation - 0,9 km.
The cost of a cruise missile (project) is 10, thousand Reichsmarks, at the end of the war, 3,5, thousand, using the free labor of concentration camp prisoners.

Information sources:
http://dasreich.ru/armaments/aviacia/raketi/fau-1.php
http://www.calend.ru/event/4039/
http://www.weltkrieg.ru/aircrafts/259-v1.html
http://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/36/142.html
Author:
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Denis
    Denis 12 June 2014 07: 57 New
    +3

    At the same time, German Fau-1 missiles managed to inflict really serious damage on Great Britain
    The British were lucky that these missiles were still imperfect, say "raw"
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 12 June 2014 08: 39 New
      +2
      Quote: Denis
      The British were lucky that these missiles were still imperfect, say "raw"

      They never became “dry”, after the war Chelomei spent years and a lot of folk remedies to make the V-1 at least a little accurate, but hell didn’t work, he covered his failure with false test data and tried to cram his army crafts but was exposed and if it were not for the death of Stalin, then his fate would have been sad ... And so, thanks to kinship with Khrushchev, he got out. In the end, everyone forgot the V-1, and she received no continuation ...
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 12 June 2014 09: 55 New
        +3
        Well then, no one could create a normal guidance system. It’s just that there weren’t technical capabilities yet. Yes, and PuVRD turned out to be a dead end branch on the tree of jet engines.
        Although the funniest, the first version of this machine was offered by the Luftwaffe as far back as 1936, as an unmanned target for training anti-aircraft calculations. But then Goering was not interested. But the FAU-1 could well have appeared not in 1944, but in 1940 ...
        1. Voronbit
          Voronbit 15 June 2014 14: 08 New
          -2
          PuVRD is not a dead end. A promising branch of the taxiway
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 15 June 2014 21: 49 New
            -2
            looking for what and from what materials
            The pilots of Soviet aircraft designed by Chelomei and Lavochkin, in fact - manned by "Storms", could not withstand vibrations for more than 20 minutes in the cockpit
            at the “Storm” the raised cockpit, having converted into its unmanned one, did not even clean.
          2. Voronbit
            Voronbit 16 June 2014 00: 44 New
            0
            like that1111 .... that he spat. you can and calculate ---- the law of conservation of momentum
      2. Kassandra
        Kassandra 13 June 2014 07: 10 New
        -2
        true true? in fact, it was copied by both the Americans and the councils, mainly for delivering WMD from submarines, and the Americans did this during the war http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_JB-2_Loon
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 13 June 2014 07: 46 New
          0
          The funniest thing is the truth. You see, PuVRD is practically not scalable, has low fuel efficiency, and does not allow to obtain a flight speed of more than 800 km / h. The FAU-1 scheme is also not optimal for high-speed flights. I’ll keep silent about the guidance system, because I don’t have to worry about sad things ... Both in our country and in the USA we played around with copies of the FAU-1 until around the mid-50s, after which they began to build completely different CDs that had only one thing in common with the German prototype concept, namely a jet engine and wings, as a means of creating aerodynamic lift.
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 13 June 2014 11: 43 New
            -1
            the truth is that even with such a WFD, the Americans copied it, as was the link.
            It is quite scalable and they are different. those pulse-jet which valveless after acceleration turn into RAM jet
            at least 10 years in service for the Kyrgyz Republic before its obsolescence, this is a lot
            1. anomalocaris
              anomalocaris 13 June 2014 14: 16 New
              0
              Just then there were no options.
              The Chelomeevsk creations have never really been accepted into service. Neither 10X, nor 14X, nor 16X. The Americans also riveted the analogs of the FAU-1, but in the Second World War they did not have time to use them and as a result, they were gradually written off smoothly. More than ever, no one returned to the topic of the Kyrgyz Republic with PuVRD. Because, on the one hand, this power plant did not allow to achieve a guaranteed breakthrough in air defense, and on the other hand, the turbojet engine and liquid propellant rocket engine that developed very quickly in the 40s and 50s, by the mid-50s left all models of pulsating engines far behind.
              But the FAU-1 appeared on 4 years earlier, which was quite possible, and then who knows how the battle for Britain would end ...
              1. Kassandra
                Kassandra 14 June 2014 02: 09 New
                +1
                And that even the Americans from the very beginning did not accept their own and not a seamless German?
                Chelomeevsky had a lot of things in service, more than many, he was generally classified as a person in the USSR and was not openly mentioned anywhere. but there were a lot of questions why there are significant gaps in the indices of the Salyut orbital stations.
                The battle for Britain in 1940 did not set itself terror against cities as such. The raids were on airfields, docks and military plants. They began to use v-1 only when there was a risk of losing their launchers in Normandy, and after two years of air terror against the civilian population of Germany.
                In fact, V-1 appeared long before its first use, they simply were not used and their number was accumulating. As well as the amount of sarin and soman. These CDs were sharpened primarily for the possible use of chemical weapons. Then they and even the V-2 began to shoot with conventional warheads. The peak of the shooting of the latter occurred in March when Germany did not dare to use either nuclear or chemical and decided to separately surrender its territory to the Anglo-Americans. Because the SA would crush them anyway.
                From V-1 with conventional warheads, a tool was quickly found as shells with radio fuses. Gloucester Meteors actually chalked up just 11-14 buzz bombs. At the end of the V-1, anti-aircraft guns with radar guidance intercepted up to 90% of the issued V-1s. And from V-2, if they had time to launch it, there was no means, it was guaranteed delivery and the Germans had uranium like dirt. But not time.
                1. anomalocaris
                  anomalocaris 14 June 2014 06: 31 New
                  0
                  Listen, do you know how to read?
                  1. Kassandra
                    Kassandra 14 June 2014 06: 46 New
                    -3
                    and you?
                    I can still do such things, though for a long time I did not hold checkers in my hands.
                    1. anomalocaris
                      anomalocaris 14 June 2014 07: 24 New
                      0
                      Oh, not like that.
                      1. Kassandra
                        Kassandra 14 June 2014 08: 09 New
                        -2
                        It happens, I won’t convince.
                2. Alex
                  Alex 13 July 2014 19: 49 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Kassandra
                  when Germany did not dare to use either nuclear or chemical

                  The passage on German nuclear weapons was particularly impressive.
                  1. Kassandra
                    Kassandra 13 July 2014 20: 20 New
                    -4
                    and it’s nothing that the Manhattan project began in the USA after Einstein fled there from the University of Berlin (where he worked as a laboratory assistant) and wrote a letter to the American prezik that the Germans were developing the “uranium bomb”?
                    the heavy water factory here still in norway had to be blown up urgently ...
                    What's so complicated about her? especially in gun assembly?
              2. Alex
                Alex 13 July 2014 19: 17 New
                +3
                Quote: anomalocaris
                But the FAU-1 appeared on 4 years earlier, which was quite possible, and then who knows how the battle for Britain would end ...

                Due to its useless accuracy, the Fau-1 could only be seen as a weapon of terror. And Germany lost the “battle for England” only because Hitler began to rely on the terror of Londoners. After all, it’s no secret that another week and a half, and only memory would have remained from RAF ...
                1. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 13 July 2014 20: 14 New
                  0
                  the first terrorists began to engage the British
  2. Professor
    Professor 12 June 2014 08: 08 New
    +5
    The German-developed Fau-1 projectile (cruise missile) was the first such unmanned aerial vehicle that was used during World War II.

    More like a cruise missile than an UAV.

    Since the Fau-1 shells were not able to hit point targets, as well as medium-sized objects, which include factories or British naval bases, at the end of 1944 it was decided to work on a manned version of the Fau-1.

    Remotely controlled, not manned. Here are some Japanese KR supposed to make actually manned.

    Since the Fau-1 shells

    Immediately call them cruise missiles, or else a plane-projectile, a flying bomb, a carpet-plane ... it's kind of not from here. laughing
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 19 June 2014 04: 20 New
      -1
      google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#newwindow=1&q="planes- shells "
    2. alex86
      alex86 20 June 2014 22: 45 New
      0
      Professor, sorry for repeating ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. alex86
      alex86 20 June 2014 23: 06 New
      0
      This is still being produced in Kazan
      1. alex86
        alex86 20 June 2014 23: 09 New
        0
        Tired of inserting a picture. So I want to say, find ten differences (from V-1). And it flies well, although it makes a lot of noise ...
  3. ICT
    ICT 12 June 2014 10: 15 New
    +3
    Quote: Professor
    not manned.

    Well, they also tried
  4. svp67
    svp67 12 June 2014 10: 27 New
    0
    Purely technically, the FAA 1 was made quite original, especially its pulsating engine ... And it might be worth saying “thank you” to God that the Germans were not able to bring these missiles to perfection ... even the Germans launched an air launch almost in the very end ...
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 13 June 2014 07: 15 New
      -3
      what does it mean to not bring? these missiles were killed more than in Blitz (Battle of Britain). it’s fortunate that they didn’t screw in any other warheads instead of TNT ones.
      1. Alex
        Alex 13 July 2014 19: 53 New
        +3
        Quote: Kassandra
        it’s fortunate that they didn’t screw in any other warheads instead of TNT ones.

        And what else could, except for chemical ones? Come on, mutter about nuclear.
        1. Kassandra
          Kassandra 13 July 2014 20: 33 New
          -4
          you mutter here ... in the GDR the uranium was like mud (Bismuth SAD), the Natsiks did not have to go to him to any Gabon.
          for mass use of nuclear weapons they did not have enough for less than a month, and this is known to anyone who visited Germany a WWII veteran, as well as the fact that the Germans had a 2,5M plane flying on coal at the end of the war
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvtxjSrImHw
          PS. in order to grind this area of ​​technology, I had to quickly invent a combination so that the USSR for MiGs bought some kind of kerosene engines in England, because it is "so complicated"
          The Mi-1 helicopter is also a slightly reworked Lippish helicopter (FW)
          1. Alex
            Alex 13 July 2014 23: 46 New
            +3
            Quote: Kassandra
            you mutter here
            Well, I didn’t actually switch to “you” with you and I have the right to count on appropriate restraint, because rudeness and transition to personalities are not evidence of rightness.

            in the GDR, uranium was like dirt
            Not so very much, in the Czech Republic there was much more than in Saxony. But Europe is by no means a leader in this rating (the most powerful of the European deposits is located in Zheltye Vody in Ukraine).

            they didn’t have enough for less than a month for mass use of nuclear weapons, and this is known to any WWII veteran who visited Germany,
            Before the use of nuclear weapons, Germany needed not a month, or even a year, but as much as it was necessary to realize the stubbornness of its development path, the construction of a uranium enrichment plant after that, and the beginning of the process of extracting uranium-235 (it took two or three years ) and a reactor for the production of plutonium from uranium-238 (this is much faster). As for veterans of the Great Patriotic War, their opinion about the uranium problem of Germany will interest me only if his last name is Ioffe, Kurchatov, Kapitsa, Aleksandrov, Landau or Flerov. All the rest, excuse me, past - I've seen enough and heard enough of some of today's "eyewitnesses" ...

            As for the MiG, I don’t own the information and therefore I don’t mess with my “authoritative” opinion. On helicopters: the idea did not fall into the hands of the Nazis and the first flight, EMNIP, was completed in 1907, and the first stable flight - in 1922 in the USA. And there, Sikorsky, from 1939, began mass production of helicopters with an automatic rotary screw. So there is no reason to shout at every corner about the "genius of the Germans" (if you are not paid for this, of course). The fact that they experimented with these (and other) technical solutions is a medical fact, as they say. As well as the fact that nothing good came of them and could not come out in the foreseeable future.

            You have specific FACTS (and not fabrications like the "Black Sun of the Third Reich") - I will be grateful if you provide, after which I will eat my own keyboard. If not - alas ...
            1. Kassandra
              Kassandra 14 July 2014 05: 25 New
              -4
              “mutter” was it really polite? now don't count ...

              Uranium as a chemical element was discovered in Germany in 1789; before the occupation of the eastern zone, the USSR did not have its explored deposits.

              is it possible, before someone eats the keyboard, to find out where he came up with the fabrication of the impasse of the German development path?
              the Germans did not develop the plutonium branch of the project at all.
              it’s “good” that you don’t respect WWII veterans, will they really forgive you ...
              Germans had reactors, two out of three are still of technical interest, heavy water was needed for them. the American reactor was a primitive pile of graphite.

              before the Americans in Algeria got into the trophies of the first serial German helicopter, the Sikorsky experimental helicopter had as many as three tail rotors and could not fly forward (only back and sideways). it was quite medically suggested that they score and simply deploy a pilot's seat on it back to front.
              1. Alex
                Alex 14 July 2014 15: 05 New
                +3
                Quote: Kassandra
                now do not count ..
                Yes, actually, it’s already clear.

                Uranium as a chemical element was discovered in Germany in 1789; before the occupation of the eastern zone, the USSR did not have its explored deposits.
                And what does this prove? Helium was also first discovered, but what to do with it, only recently it became clear.

                Quote: Kassandra
                where did he come up with the fabrication of the impasse of the German path of development?
                There is no desire to develop this topic now. especially in dealing with boors. I’ll write a publication and talk. But not with you, but with specialists or just adequate people.

                At the expense of veterans ...
                Here we have one veteran next door. Tashkent front. But "so smart, already scary" (c).
                But I actually didn’t talk about this, although distorting the facts for trolls like you is a common thing. It was about which of the veterans (with all due respect, people without a physical education diploma) can make judgments about the purpose of these or those structures and their affiliation with atomic programs. Now, if it was a question of the intensity of battles for Berlin or of tank attacks near Prokhorovka - believe me, they would hardly have found a more attentive listener than me. The only pity is that every day there are fewer and fewer of them.

                Your knowledge in the field of natural sciences, I'm sorry, a mixture of the Internet and your own fantasies, you have already been repeatedly carried around in the shop like a naughty kitten. I continue to communicate with you below my dignity.
                1. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 15 July 2014 09: 12 New
                  -3
                  all the same, it’s incomprehensible to you - to be rude with a “bubbly”, etc. you started. and now you continue with your friends ... (and before that it turns out, just sat, looked, collected bile).

                  And what should be proved? What Einstein allegedly invented a nuclear bomb? No dear, he did not invent it; he worked as a laboratory assistant at the University of Berlin, and she spied her there! after which he dumped in Amerika (as usual) and wrote a letter to the American president stating that the Germans were developing new weapons of terrifying destructive power, and what kind of conflict.
                  after which similar work also began in the USA
                  as it were, the Masons seemed to have better faith than Werner von Braun, who had been walking with his models for several years, and before getting into NAZA, he enlisted the support of this stupid obscenity in rotary clubs, which can only “twist” and spin ...
                  and at the University of Berlin no one made a secret of the obvious principle of the operation of nuclear weapons - everyone believed that this miracle weapon would end all wars. before that they also considered dynamite and machine guns.

                  Uranium fission and chain reaction were discovered by whom and when? And where?

                  What does the Tashkent front have to do if Russian was written in white and white about WWII veterans who visited Germany?
                  What does the diplomas of this Zionist university (PhysTech) have to do with it if almost everything in fact was done in weapons by people from the Moscow Technical University? Who, with such diplomas, will generally allow anything serious for them to harm or transcendentally screw up there?

                  They tried to use helium for its intended purpose, it is just rare and fluid. And for a long time, its only known deposit was in the USA, from where it was not exported as strategic material for airships.

                  You have no knowledge whatsoever. You are the usual primitive "hardcoded" troll from the same trolley bus that your stupid friends from under the baseboard.
                  1. BM-13
                    BM-13 17 July 2014 19: 02 New
                    +2
                    I don’t know what you didn’t divide there, but rudeness, ignorance and anti-Semitism just whip from you. You may be right, but reading this is just disgusting.

                    Sorry if I hurt you either.
                    1. Kassandra
                      Kassandra 17 July 2014 20: 59 New
                      -2
                      if you don’t know, don’t write.
                      these are not my disgusting things, and if you equate anti-Semitism with the truth, then it is clear who you are, apologizing in such an “original” way.
                    2. Kassandra
                      Kassandra 17 July 2014 22: 40 New
                      -2
                      "educated" to you here:
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_chain_reaction
                      "After nuclear fission was discovered by Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann in December 1938, Szilárd and Enrico Fermi in 1939 searched for, and discovered, neutron multiplication in uranium, proving that a nuclear chain reaction by this mechanism was indeed possible. [3] This discovery prompted the letter from Szilard [not in citation given] and signed by Albert Einstein to President Franklin D. Roosevelt warning of the possibility that Nazi Germany might be attempting to build an atomic bomb. [4] [5] "
                      about "neutron multiplication in uranium" they bent to stick, because it was known from the very beginning. I am also the provers of German experiments
                      call Otto Ghana losers it must be able to.
                      a certain “looking after” the Germans at the University of Berlin, suffering from dyslexia and showing everyone his language, the laboratory assistant could not even write a letter to the Amer’s president - he just put his signature under it (this was in English above), Leo Szilard wrote to him
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C3%B3_Szil%C3%A1rd
                      he is nee Leo Spitz (Hungarian: Szilárd Leó; German: Leo Spitz)
                      who, unlike Otto Gan, just didn’t succeed
                      back to you in the same paragraph, a little higher
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_chain_reaction
                      In 1936, Szilárd attempted to create a chain reaction using beryllium and indium, but was unsuccessful.
                      Been dreaming of a uranium bomb since the time of Skłodowska Curie, and Gerhard Karl Schmidt
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Carl_Schmidt
                      who actually discovered radioactivity! now they even write about it. recycle 8 tons of uranite for the convincing conviction of its priority and does not poison it like Curie and his wife had enough conscience and mind. or maybe the demon didn’t push in the rib.
                      this is generally the end of the 19th, beginning of the 20th century.
                      It’s just that plutocrat propaganda ripened as always - just like all the way with German nuclear weapons and German physics, now this bunch of critters brazenly but stupidly smears dirt on the websites of Soviet engineers, Russia and the Yak-141 from which F35 was copied giving priority (! ) in this area to Amerique because the Yak-141 turns out to be so ill-fated .. well, so ill-fated. Although I flew to Farnborough 25 years ago, there is still no F-35B (and we won’t give you a visa either ... well, a bald dog with your buy-in). bully bully bully
                      already every 5th Negro on the Island, it’s easier to go to Kenya or Tanzania, at least the weather whispers there.
    2. Kassandra
      Kassandra 14 June 2014 10: 11 New
      -3
      pulsating motor Argus by the way the beginning of the twentieth century, French. no
  5. pinecone
    pinecone 12 June 2014 11: 33 New
    +1
    The launch was launched on the island of Usedom, located opposite the mouth of the Oder River in the Baltic Sea

    Prototypes were created on the island of Usedom (Peenemuende), while the FAU-1 industrial production was scattered across a number of German enterprises, including the largest Dora research and production complex in Nordhausen (Thuringia) located underground.
  6. Aryan
    Aryan 12 June 2014 12: 08 New
    0
    in this regard, it is noteworthy why the Germans did not use fau on the eastern front
    1. Zymran
      Zymran 12 June 2014 12: 24 New
      +1
      So she has no accuracy, and in general it is not a weapon of war, but of terror.
      1. Kassandra
        Kassandra 13 June 2014 07: 24 New
        +1
        retaliation for the aerial terror of the Anglo-Americans.
        1. Alex
          Alex 13 July 2014 19: 55 New
          +3
          Kassandra, I have the impression that you are one of those who are "not a day without praising the Third Reich."
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 13 July 2014 20: 44 New
            +1
            I have the impression that you are one of those who approve of the massacre of the population by bombing.
            1. Alex
              Alex 13 July 2014 23: 52 New
              +3
              Quote: Kassandra
              I have the impression that you are one of those who approve of the massacre of the population by bombing.
              About "you" I have already said. Essentially komenta - why, let me find out, such conclusions? Since I always condemned (not here, but in life) the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (Just for God's sake, do not start this thread yet !!!). Or the fact that I can’t stand our spirit “allies” precisely for their methods of warfare and “timely” and “fraternal” help? Like the Nazis with their racial theories and methods of their embodiment.
              Strange conclusion ...
              1. Kassandra
                Kassandra 14 July 2014 04: 49 New
                -4
                did not speak but wrote. normal conclusion.
                Zymran has already started
        2. BM-13
          BM-13 14 July 2014 22: 52 New
          +3
          Quote: Kassandra
          retaliation for the aerial terror of the Anglo-Americans.
          You, seemingly, simply will not fall asleep if you do not exalt the Germans.
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 15 July 2014 09: 18 New
            -4
            the truth was written above - it does not suit you.
    2. svp67
      svp67 12 June 2014 19: 39 New
      +4
      Quote: Aryan
      in this regard, it is noteworthy why the Germans did not use fau on the eastern front
      There simply weren’t as much area targets as London ... Then, initially the launch was carried out from a stationary site, and the front in the East was very mobile ... And when the Germans worked out the air launch, they used it along Antwerp, the city - the port through which Allied forces were supplied ... On the Eastern Front, there were no such key points ... For this they widely used the "Mistel" ...
      1. Denis
        Denis 14 June 2014 12: 30 New
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        . For this, they widely used "Mistel" on the Eastern Front ...

        Mixed up nothing?
        Or misinterpreted?
        About 250 Mistel was released during the Second World War, but they were used only in the fight against the invasion of the Allied fleet during the battle of Normandy.
        As part of the Iron Hammer operation, at the end of 1943 - beginning of 1944, Mistels were supposed to be used to destroy industrial enterprises of the USSR, in particular, power plants that supply electricity to Moscow. But by that time, the Soviet offensive approached Germany itself, and the Iron Hammer operation was canceled
        Discovery, albeit enticing, but breaches, do not watch it
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 14 June 2014 16: 45 New
          +2
          For this, they widely used "Mistel" on the Eastern Front ...

          Mixed up nothing?

          Really used. To undermine bridges in front of the advancing Red Army. That's just the breadth and effectiveness of the use of these semi-experimental units, and even with the dominance of the enemy in the air, is more than doubtful.
          1. Kassandra
            Kassandra 14 June 2014 23: 46 New
            -3
            they were repeatedly destroyed, for example, crossings over the Oder in January-February 1945, which led to a delay of 3 months.
    3. Alex
      Alex 13 July 2014 19: 54 New
      +3
      Quote: Aryan
      why the Germans did not use fau on the eastern front

      With its accuracy ...
  7. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 12 June 2014 16: 22 New
    +2
    V-1 - the first successful cruise missile. She got ahead
    its time, because in the 40s there were no guidance systems and GOS.
    But to defeat the cities, its accuracy was decent.

    She greatly accelerated the development of air defense: radars
    and jet aircraft.
    In the summer of 44th, for the interceptions of the V-1 began patrolling
    English jet interceptors "Meteor" (Gloster Meteor).
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 13 June 2014 11: 51 New
      -3
      The guidance system for them was about her real abduction by prisoners of war during their escape from a German training ground in the USSR in the 70s, they even shot a movie, in my mine there was the first light of a jet Me-262.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 13 June 2014 14: 24 New
        +3
        Escape Devyatayev from Usedom. A real but absolutely fantastic escape. No one else has done anything similar.
        As for the homing heads in the Third Reich. Well, there were none! There were inertial guidance systems, adjustable systems, guidance systems on the drive beacon. There were no homing systems! Although the Germans worked very actively in this direction, the level of technology of the mid-40s did not allow creating such systems. Only ten years later, something more or less digestible appeared that could be crammed into a rocket or bomb and that, at the same time, would be able to direct a projectile.
        1. Kassandra
          Kassandra 14 June 2014 02: 21 New
          -4
          in the USSR, they worked tightly on captured RVV. the radio illumination of the target actually turns it into a drive beacon.
          all of the Atlantic bunkers were pierced by passive anti-ship infrared devices. on IR missiles, there was a clone of this until Sidewinder got into the USSR.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzian
          1. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 14 June 2014 06: 27 New
            0
            And in what year was it? By the way, give me at least one sample of homing weapons from WWII.
            1. Kassandra
              Kassandra 14 June 2014 06: 45 New
              -1
              everything is written on the link. in Russian, however, there is no Wikipedia article.
              1943, Enzian, active radar or passive infrared seeker at the terminal site. the first missile with infrared seeker.
              the reduced Enzian was a B-B rocket suspended under fighter bombers.
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 14 June 2014 07: 22 New
                0
                Baby, don’t read Wikipedia, especially at night. Entzian did not have a homing head. She was planned, but not in a very definite future. And so she had the usual radio command guidance. Until the end of the war 38 launches were made, 16 with a guidance system. Yes, in principle, read for yourself, http://pvo.guns.ru/other/germany/Enzian.htm.
                You see, the creation of a homing system is an order of magnitude more complicated than the creation of an adjusted system. At the level of technology of the 30s-40s it is not solvable in principle (although they tried). The first GOS, suitable for practical use, appeared only in the mid-50s. This is such a banal historical fact. And this is subject to the use of the legacy of the Third Reich, including scientists and engineers. By the way, homing heads that work adequately for ground targets, and at the same time have reasonable cost, appeared only 20-30 years ago (RCC is a separate issue).
                1. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 14 June 2014 07: 56 New
                  -2
                  Zaunkoenig may also not have?
                  at least use a google translator ... by the mid-50s a 10 times simpler and 5 times worse sidewinder appeared
                  such a historical fact.
                  in the USSR all this time engaged in Enzian.
                  the Germans simply had problems with the availability of rare materials for the ICG seeker
                  1. anomalocaris
                    anomalocaris 14 June 2014 09: 10 New
                    0
                    Put a minus. For the porridge in my head.
                    1. Kassandra
                      Kassandra 14 June 2014 09: 39 New
                      -3
                      take care of your education better. and self-education.
            2. Kassandra
              Kassandra 14 June 2014 07: 09 New
              -2
              an article about Entzian in German also mentions the presence of an acoustic seeker
              Germans had torpedoes with acoustic seekers ...
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 14 June 2014 07: 28 New
                0
                There were developments of acoustic FUSES for anti-aircraft missiles, in general, as well as flashing, radar, electromagnetic fuses ... The impossibility of creating an acoustic homing system for an anti-aircraft projectile was immediately obvious, the comparison with the torpedo was completely incorrect. You see, the physical properties of liquid and gas are somewhat different, nicht war?
                Z.Y. Well, do not read Wikipedia, it has an extremely negative effect on the brain.
                1. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 14 June 2014 07: 47 New
                  -1
                  at subsonic speeds - not really at all
                  on supersonic only difficulties with pointing to the front hemisphere and not to catch-up.
                  1. anomalocaris
                    anomalocaris 14 June 2014 07: 55 New
                    0
                    All. To school, baby, teach physics. Further communication with you I recognize as meaningless.
                    1. Kassandra
                      Kassandra 14 June 2014 08: 05 New
                      -3
                      kid - don't be rude. in a Soviet school, many of you at the physics lessons got their brains twisted in the right direction, so some things are already understood ...
                      1. Denis
                        Denis 14 June 2014 12: 41 New
                        0
                        Quote: Kassandra
                        in a Soviet school, then many of you in the physics lessons have brains and twisted in the right direction

                        And you, g ... creation, finished another school, where did you study fagot-sex education?
                        So know that in physics lessons there was a lot of physics, but no politics
                        And if the Soviet school graduated, then twice ... for lying and for biting the hand that fed you
                      2. Kassandra
                        Kassandra 15 June 2014 00: 15 New
                        -5
                        not your business what. in physics lessons, especially since the 1970s, you have invested such Kikoin feces, as a result of which what has grown out of you has grown. clogged_mental_impotents in one word. and they taught their children from other books.
                        and where could only get away from such a hand ...
                      3. anomalocaris
                        anomalocaris 15 June 2014 01: 24 New
                        0
                        Ek, you poor little, not blinkered up. You look, do not choke on saliva.
                      4. Kassandra
                        Kassandra 15 June 2014 03: 07 New
                        -3
                        and so, you cuttlefish mean you have something to do with this twisting of brains in Soviet schools to goyim children ...
                2. BM-13
                  BM-13 14 July 2014 22: 56 New
                  +3
                  About the Soviet school, those who studied in it, and not victims of the USE, have the right to speak out.
                3. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 15 July 2014 09: 20 New
                  -3
                  had the misfortune to study in it for a while. about the exam is not in the know.
            3. Kassandra
              Kassandra 14 June 2014 08: 30 New
              -2
              PS. and did it very carefully. and when you start explaining them, you fall into banal rudeness ... then what's the point?
              1. Professor
                Professor 14 June 2014 08: 36 New
                +2
                Quote: Kassandra
                PS. and did it very carefully. and when you start explaining them, you fall into banal rudeness ... then what's the point?

                Sorry, but you didn’t explain anything, but only carried utter nonsense. Your opponent is absolutely right, there were no GOS then.
              2. Kassandra
                Kassandra 14 June 2014 09: 38 New
                -3
                bully o5 some people don't like gloomy german genius?
              3. Professor
                Professor 14 June 2014 09: 41 New
                +1
                Quote: Kassandra
                o5 some people don't like gloomy german genius?

                What is the connection? The German engineers created many breakthrough products, but the GOS did not.
              4. Kassandra
                Kassandra 14 June 2014 10: 08 New
                -2
                how did not create? why not create? google the first photos of Soviet subsonic MiGs with URO, they are not with sidewinders at all, but with entzians. Egypt, by the way, used such antiquities. AA-1 in my opinion
                the sidewinder is worse, but simple as a cork and cheap to operate and in mass production.
                probably heard about a German homing torpedo? the algorithm is generally the same as that of the IR entsian, only the detector materials are different.
              5. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 14 June 2014 11: 43 New
                +1
                Baby, you clearly overestimate the power of Soviet (as well as any other) fighters of the mid-50s. Not a single fighter of that time could lift an almost two ton rocket, and even in the plural.
                As I look, you don’t even know how to google (although what can you expect from the USE victim?), Because if you could, you knew that under the wings of Soviet fighters since 1956, K-5 family missiles were quite in their rightful place. They were standard weapons of the MiG-17, MiG-19, Su-9 ...
                But they have never been homing. They were guided by a radar beam. I explain the difference for the alternatively gifted. They did NOT HAVE on board devices that determined the position of the target, respectively, did not independently aim at it. The control equipment on board the missile tracked only the direction of the radar beam of the aircraft and kept the projectile in the zone of maximum signal. All. The fighter pilot served as the "guidance point".
              6. Kassandra
                Kassandra 14 June 2014 22: 53 New
                0
                boy, it was written above that the Germans put "reduced entzian" on fighter bombers. fighter bombers are twin-engine Me-410, Me-110
                High-altitude SAM does not happen small, it must gain height, for this you need fuel. For RVV it has already done the carrier.
                The Entsian homing missiles from the USSR before the sidewinder were.
                if a missile homing along the beam tracks the maximum of the beam itself, then a homing target, illuminated by it, tracks the maximum of the reflected signal from the target itself,
                What are the fundamental differences in the logic of the computing device of both types of GOS? so I understand that it’s exactly in this your terrible school gag, since you mentioned the brains of the pilot as GOS.
              7. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 15 June 2014 01: 31 New
                0
                Well, whoever calls me a girl runs the risk of being without teeth, baby.
                What kind of beast is this: "reduced Enzian"? To be surrendered to me, you again used some kind of chemistry ...
                Baby, and you catch the difference between the adjustable and homing missiles? By the way, what tasks should the homing system solve?
              8. Kassandra
                Kassandra 15 June 2014 03: 00 New
                -1
                you didn’t understand ... like a repetition - what are the fundamental differences in the logic of the computer of both types of GOS? that rocket that goes along the beam is also aimed at the maximum signal in its alignment itself.
              9. Kassandra
                Kassandra 15 June 2014 03: 30 New
                0
                PS. it is not the joystick who corrects the gunner, like the Fritz-X or the anti-tank / anti-helicopter Baby, giving direct control commands to the steering cars.
                and well for your work such that you did not know such things?
                or forgot?
                and so in your opinion it will turn out that you and the RVV with the passive radar seeker are also not the seeker, but correctable, because "the pilot serves as the seeker" which illuminates the target with the radar of the aircraft.
              10. Kassandra
                Kassandra 15 June 2014 06: 09 New
                0
                unfold the radio receiver in the missile body of the next radar beam so that it does not look back at the targeting radar of the aircraft that emitted it (as an option), but forward at the target illuminated by it, and you get a missile with a passive radar seeker.
                the big entsian (SAM) was definitely active, there was a lot of space for it in the radio emitter, they were thrown higher than the bombers, so the foil coming down from the bombers pressed against the interference not so much
                but even among the “allies”, progress did not stand still and jammers began to shoot tubes with foil up.
                Now you can tie a bow on something :-)))
        2. Professor
          Professor 15 June 2014 08: 29 New
          0
          Quote: Kassandra
          how did not create? why not create? google the first photos of Soviet subsonic MiGs with URO

          Do not google me send. Give your materiel. Which GOS were created by the Germans?
        3. Kassandra
          Kassandra 15 June 2014 09: 31 New
          0
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzian
          http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzian
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaunkoenig_T-5
          clever words about specific products, process physics and concepts were already here
          not many comments can read them all
          other details in google or Yandex or else where to look for someone who is not interested
          Professor, be more polite to me, I already looked at these two meshugenov almost decided to grow fierce, just a little more and would go look for scissors, and then you came ...
        4. Professor
          Professor 15 June 2014 09: 37 New
          0
          Quote: Kassandra
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzian
          http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzian
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaunkoenig_T-5
          clever words about specific products, process physics and concepts were already here
          not many comments can read them all
          other details in google or Yandex or else where to look for someone who is not interested

          Do not bore me. From your link: The missile, which strongly resembled the Me 163 (with swept wings and elevons) [8] would be guided primarily under radio control from the ground.- radio control from the ground.

          Torpedoes as well as dogs with mines on their backs are not discussed here. Not an article about them.

          I come back to the question: Which GOS were created by the Germans?
        5. Kassandra
          Kassandra 15 June 2014 09: 45 New
          0
          What does the dog have to do with it? dogs do not have GOS, torpedoes have one.
          Do not want about torpedoes with GOS, then do not read the third link, but only the first two.
          the second link is given because not all types of GOS are in the first
        6. Professor
          Professor 15 June 2014 10: 55 New
          0
          Quote: Kassandra
          What does the dog have to do with it? dogs do not have GOS, torpedoes have one.
          Do not want about torpedoes with GOS, then do not read the third link, but only the first two.
          the second link is given because not all types of GOS are in the first

          Do we communicate in the same language? On the third link is a torpedo, and in the article is not an anti-tank system with GOS in the form of a dog and not a torpedo, but a KR.

          Last time I parachute: Which GOS were created by the Germans? Specifically, please.
        7. Kassandra
          Kassandra 15 June 2014 12: 43 New
          0
          apparently not. I found scissors, but I won’t even sharpen.
          you have some kind of painful fixation on dogs and not on cats and not on GOS but on products with them. although you asked about the first and not about the second.
    2. Kassandra
      Kassandra 15 June 2014 09: 50 New
      0
      PS. and read the first paragraph? or before getting tired just did not get enough sleep?
      on the terminal portion of the infrared guidance trajectory, or alternatively an active radar seeker or acoustic.
    3. Kassandra
      Kassandra 15 June 2014 10: 07 New
      -1
      If, like some, believe the Russian Hansa more than the English Wikipedia (that the GOS was not there), then from the wiki article a link to its main source,
      and in "See Also" the AIM-9 Sidewinder is indicated (this may not be casual),
      In the source: http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/enzian.html
      the introductory note states that this is not only a missile defense system but also
      DESCRIPTION: The Enzian was conceived as a ground to air flak weapon. It's secondary purpose was that of an air-to-air weapon.
      even see "INTELLIGENCE AND CONTROL SYSTEMS"
      The IR device, "Madrid," developed by Kepka of Vienna, an acoustic device developed by Telefunken and Messerschmitt, or an electronic device were projected for use as homing heads.
      the Austrians then worked for Matra and for SAGEM, only two of these firms succeeded in repeating Entzian, and then according to a simplified scheme.
    4. Professor
      Professor 15 June 2014 11: 05 New
      +1
      I read the first paragraph and from it gave you a quote. I repeat again: The missile, which strongly resembled the Me 163 (with swept wings and elevons) [8] would be guided primarily under radio control from the ground.- radio control from the ground. Clear? radio control from the ground

      Further, at this link http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/enzian.html
      The IR device, "Madrid," developed by Kepka of Vienna, an acoustic device developed by Telefunken and Messerschmitt, or an electronic device were projected for use as homing heads. These articles had been laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as seperate entities.
      GOS were developed, however, it flew on radio control:
      Initial planning provided for the Enzian's use of one of several types of homing devices and proximity fuzes currently being developed or combinations of the above. Tests had not progressed beyond operation with the standard German radio control, the 6-meter "Strassburg-Kehl", developed by Telefunken and Strassfurt Rundfunk. The "Kogge" designed by Telefunken to operate on a 24-cm wave length was destined for use in the production Enzians.
      Total Germans created, but did not create. Thank you for the attention. hi
    5. Kassandra
      Kassandra 15 June 2014 12: 41 New
      0
      always please ... where is it written that they created it and did not create it?
      Professor, do not be stupid:
      1. it is impossible to laboratory test what is not created,
      2. The entire product is already being tested at the test site.
    6. Professor
      Professor 15 June 2014 12: 45 New
      0
      Quote: Kassandra
      always please ... where is it written that they created it and did not create it?
      Professor, do not be stupid:
      1. it is impossible to laboratory test what is not created,
      2. The entire product is already being tested at the test site.

      For those who read poorly. Once again: Tests had not progressed beyond operation with the standard German radio control- Tests did not go beyond working with standard German radio control. Do you understand? Radio control. No GOS. That's clearer? Fish learning materiel.
    7. Kassandra
      Kassandra 15 June 2014 13: 00 New
      0
      For those who have languages ​​like metropolitans a meter and brains are bad - what kind of "no" GOS? Those who were tested in the laboratories of the development companies?
    8. Professor
      Professor 15 June 2014 13: 42 New
      0
      For those who have languages ​​like metropolitans a meter and brains are bad - what kind of "no" GOS?

      Young man, you do not be rude to adults. OK?

      Those who were tested in the laboratories of the development companies?

      No, not "tested", but only tested. And it is not known how raw they were. That's what is known that the product was not tested with them, but with radio control. Do you understand? As a child, I also experienced a perpetual motion machine, but ...

      you yourself highlighted with a bolde above "These articles had been laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as seperate entities".
      PS. maybe all the same, in your opinion, the whole Entzian should have been spinning right after the target at the telefunken at the stand, and not just his GOS?

      It’s not just “you”, but “you”. That's right, they were tested only as separate blocks (as seperate entities). About the same as my perpetual motion machine. Nevertheless, the rocket was tested only with radio control, and not with GOS, which did not go further than laboratory tests as separate blocks.

      Tie up a troll. GOS on missiles appeared many years later, and the Germans do not have primacy in this despite their technical genius.
    9. Kassandra
      Kassandra 15 June 2014 23: 30 New
      0
      Professor, do not bother ... if things were like you wanted it, then each entity by its separate units / component parts would be written.
      your huttspa my knowledge of English is unhappy.

      missiles with GOS appeared in Germany 15 years earlier than in the rest of the world, and the German technical genius is not bad, but it is not exceptional at all - nothing similar to the Yak-141 from which the lokhid licked its F35, even he could not create, although the Germans worked on it in the 50-70s it’s extremely persistent, until you get tired of banging your head up the wall,
      and the Americans with their “own” seamless f35 still after 22g (and not just 15 years as everyone with Enzian) did not finish, what is there to be surprised.
    10. Professor
      Professor 16 June 2014 08: 29 New
      0
      your huttspa my knowledge of English is unhappy

      Be afraid go to another place. Here it is written in black in English that they only tested fuel and lubricants as a separate element in the laboratory and they never stood on rockets, and the rockets themselves were tested only with radio control. Gag and fantasies are not necessary.

      Professor, if you think, then in which case what problem did they encounter that they supposedly did not have enough brains to solve?

      For example, the microprocessor did not pull the signal processing of the GOS or the SNR of the GOS was terrible or it was necessary to carry a portable nuclear station for their power or weighed 500 kg each ... Continue to fantasize? The fact remains that the rocket flew with radio control.
      With respect.


      PS
      Your fantasies are not interesting to me, but with the materiel you are not getting along. There will be something to share. hi
    11. Kassandra
      Kassandra 17 June 2014 03: 52 New
      -1
      not fuels and lubricants and gos, butting and and .. mosk it is in your part.

      in the GOS of the same Sidewinder there is no processor, there is a German with a slide rule.
      the link in English in white says that they developed them, not developed.
      the fact that it was not used in the war, and after the war it was mastered only by the French

      gag you here child know the calculator
      while covering up a stupid shitting 15 years to the USSR Research Institute, or even two.
  8. Kassandra
    Kassandra 15 June 2014 23: 49 New
    0
    no not ok. because you are worth it. and they themselves are busy with just this + stupidity of the flock as your language-showing avatar,

    if you don’t know then don’t write ...

    entity is not a block, but a whole. and some real existing whole. see google translator
    entities (types of GOS from different companies) were many.

    Professor, if you think, then in which case what problem did they encounter that they supposedly did not have enough brains to solve?
    if with the problem of “intellectual detection and search of the target, as well as combining it with the crosshair of the sight with the effort of thought” (well, or will there) lol , then in the German homing torpedo, the dog (or Japanese) was not inside ... as I understand it, you also have this plug in it, since you mentioned the dog as GOS (like the brains of the pilot on the other page).

    Mr. "anomalocaris" wrote above on June 13, 2014 14:24 something about the fact that the Germans had "guidance systems for the drive beacon", and so in the rocket going to the beacon, its seeker is engaged in bringing the beacon to the beacon (on-board control unit + detector radio emissions from the lighthouse), and not a dog or operator from the bomber or from the bunker from the ground combining the rocket and target marks remotely steers into the lighthouse, and German saboteurs were taken by the Americans when they tried to install such lighthouses on New York skyscrapers.
    Well, somehow they don’t send saboteurs (especially people) to a dangerous mission to the very den of the enemy, to Brighton Beach when not everything is ready to use weapons to bring which these beacons are intended.
    V-1 is still somehow stupid to manually point at the lighthouse, but the two-stage V-2 or one-stage launched from the submarine that does not fly up to it.
  9. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris 16 June 2014 11: 48 New
    0
    Baby I'm not "Mr." Mr. is you.
    A torpedo is not a rocket. In Tsaunkönig, the electro-mechanical circuit of the solver was used. For a rocket moving in three-dimensional space, this was very weak.
  10. Kassandra
    Kassandra 17 June 2014 03: 56 New
    0
    Aw, and in AIM-9 I wonder what it costs? and much simpler.
  11. Kassandra
    Kassandra 15 June 2014 13: 17 New
    0
    you highlighted with a bold above "These articles had been laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as seperate entities".
    PS. maybe all the same, in your opinion, the whole Entzian should have been spinning right after the target at the telefunken at the stand, and not just his GOS?
  12. Kassandra
    Kassandra 15 June 2014 13: 01 New
    0
    The Enzian (named for a genus of mountain flower, in English the Gentian) was a German WWII surface-to-air anti-aircraft missile that was the first to use an infrared guidance system. During the missile's development in the late stages of the war, it was plagued by organisational problems and was canceled before becoming operational.
    ===
    that’s what, by the way, is actually written in the first paragraph, for color blind people, as in the original, it is highlighted in blue.
  13. Kassandra
    Kassandra 16 June 2014 00: 36 New
    0
    .... and generally "The IR device," Madrid, "developed by Kepka of Vienna,"
    developed is a past tense, as it were. that is, this device was developed, but not developed ...
  14. Kassandra
    Kassandra 14 June 2014 10: 26 New
    -3
    moreover, in Egypt, this parsley also fell by the humanitarian aid of the USSR, directly with the fugitive Nazis,
    Soviet pilots who saw Egyptian clones of German Entsians under the wings of Soviet MiGs (instead of Soviet clones, and besides showing the best characteristics) were unpleasantly surprised and did not pinch the export of RVVs anymore.
    the GDR engines had also wiped out about the same time when they made a powerful civilian air-propelled airframe with a half kick earlier than in the USSR and in America they made a military, and then he flew in the GDR aeroflot and the pride did not allow the USSR to ask him for his bombers and fighters, and the reparations were already over.
    from the Entsian, Matra tore off their GOS and French missiles much better than American ones.
  15. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris 14 June 2014 11: 59 New
    0
    I advise you to finish with heavy drugs. Gerych is not doing well.
  16. Kassandra
    Kassandra 14 June 2014 22: 59 New
    -3
    so finish it. and read on the Internet not only in Russian.
    I could not fully understand the Entsian of the Soviet school, because people who were not baptized were engaged in it, but they did it in Germany — baptized.
    but in the sidewinder which the GOS “twists” they figured out quickly enough (the truth before that they didn’t think of making such a seeker themselves).
    then removed from the work of these idiots, which only twist-twirl and not do business.
  17. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris 15 June 2014 01: 33 New
    0
    And you really are a rare shit.
  18. Kassandra
    Kassandra 15 June 2014 03: 03 New
    -3
    don’t need from a sick head to a healthy one.
    your internal impurity prevents you from behaving decently and seeing things clearly
    .
  19. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris 14 June 2014 11: 56 New
    0
    Tried, however, like the Soviet, and English, and American. But at that time no one had grown up yet.
  20. Kassandra
    Kassandra 14 June 2014 23: 00 New
    -1
    yeah, but the Germans have somehow grown ...
  • Kassandra
    Kassandra 14 June 2014 09: 44 New
    -2
    Well, since you didn’t hold out here, and again opened up, can you explain why it is suddenly fundamentally impossible to create an acoustic seeker, although an acoustic fuse is possible?
    if you can, put a plus.
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris 14 June 2014 11: 53 New
      +1
      Baby, take a physics textbook, if my memory doesn’t bother me, for the 6th grade. The properties of liquids and gases are listed in the corresponding chapters. Next, take a physics textbook for Grade 8, there is a section: “Acoustics”. Read it, especially the chapters on the propagation of acoustic waves in gaseous and liquid media. If it doesn’t reach you, what’s the difference, then alas, medicine is powerless here, and I didn’t engage in lecturing you for a school physics course.
      Do you understand the difference between the GOS and the fuse? If so, then your question is at least stupid. By the way, the Germans failed to create an adequate acoustic fuse for the air. It turned out to be too unpredictably anisotropic.
      1. Denis
        Denis 14 June 2014 12: 49 New
        0
        Quote: anomalocaris
        Baby take a physics textbook

        it did not read physics textbooks
        Quote: anomalocaris
        in a Soviet school, then many of you in the physics lessons have brains and twisted in the right direction

        only fagot-sex education, here:
        Quote: anomalocaris
        although an acoustic fuse - is it possible?

        from farting when the engine is off?
        another troll

        PS anomalocaris, not your quotes, so the computer highlights
        I hope they understood without the postscript
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 14 June 2014 15: 21 New
          0
          Got it.
          Such types are just inferred. And at work, and in the grid,
        2. Kassandra
          Kassandra 14 June 2014 23: 10 New
          -3
          Yes live the fool ku with you. I saw a lot of these, you are already about 100-3,14 here.
      2. Kassandra
        Kassandra 14 June 2014 23: 09 New
        -2
        from farting of an airframe rolling through the air and feathering screws, or
        do you even know what a hassle to start back even just one engine, and that from such maneuvers the bombers would simply break their tight formation?
        next to you probably never even a small belligerent mine flew, or its simulator.
    2. Kassandra
      Kassandra 14 June 2014 23: 03 New
      -1
      about to automatically take into account the doppler by adjusting for the rocket’s known own speed, obviously your physics textbooks are bothering you.
      1. Voronbit
        Voronbit 16 June 2014 00: 59 New
        0
        you cho7 .... at 200 km-h as extra effect
      2. Kassandra
        Kassandra 16 June 2014 01: 26 New
        0
        it was about another
  • Alex
    Alex 13 July 2014 23: 55 New
    +1
    Quote: Kassandra
    The guidance system for them was about her real abduction by prisoners of war during their escape from a German training ground in the USSR
    Specifically, WHO, WHEN and WHAT stole and from WHAT polygon Soviet prisoners of war stole this completely unique and probably secret device.
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 14 July 2014 04: 46 New
      -2
      "... a movie was shot in the USSR."
      what do you need?
      google escape Devyatayev.
      1. Alex
        Alex 14 July 2014 15: 07 New
        +3
        Quote: Kassandra
        what do you need? google escape Devyatayev.

        Devyatayev did not steal anything from the Germans, except for the Henkel, on which he escaped. Read his recollections, for example, "Vtech z Usedom Island" (in Ukrainian).
        1. Kassandra
          Kassandra 15 July 2014 09: 16 New
          -2
          ... except for Heinkel in which this system stood.
          anomalocaris'u above your fables tell.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Voronbit
    Voronbit 16 June 2014 00: 55 New
    -3
    what are you 7 dudes7777 ... fau-1 is a global breakthrough ... for bees to list ...
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 16 June 2014 01: 25 New
      -1
      V-2
      the French had such a v-1 unit at the end of WWI, but then they didn’t attach their own French Argus engine to it (this is a French patent and not German at all), instead they put resource-based rotational “gnomon” from airplanes.
      Argus appeared later, and then there was no task to improve this type of weapon.
      1. Voronbit
        Voronbit 16 June 2014 02: 56 New
        -1
        LYALYA-poplar .... self-propelled guns .................. and everything is not comp ..... crap subject to winds .... what accuracy 7 .... but gyroscopes have already tried to apply .... and self-propelled guns are not only the toilet
        1. Kassandra
          Kassandra 19 June 2014 04: 17 New
          0
          gyro was V-2
          The ISN of most V-1 was mainly on pendulums.
  • vietnam7
    vietnam7 16 June 2014 13: 01 New
    0
    Well, as always, the comments on the article slowly grew into the brainchild of “smart people”, even the professors caught a crossfire :) Was the photo of the rocket at the start in some museum? Who knows, tell me where it is located, thanks to the author everything is readily outlined, I would add to the illustrations of the description.
    1. Kassandra
      Kassandra 17 June 2014 04: 16 New
      -4
      your professor is like that white sacred chicken which is twisted over your head or what? in this subject, he does not understand any% era, but he is constantly trying to cheat, even with English.
      and all because then the Entsianovskaya GOS was later owned by one French company (Matra) for its Mirages, and through it the Israeli company (Rafael, well, something like that) already owned it. and mats are much better than sidewinders - they could not create or copy anything like that in the pinndostan, and in the USSR progress in this direction was constantly artificially slowed down.
      1. Professor
        Professor 17 June 2014 08: 58 New
        0
        Quote: Kassandra
        your professor is like that white sacred chicken which is twisted over your head or what? in this subject, he does not understand any% era, but he is constantly trying to cheat, even with English.

        Well of course cheat. Once again, you have to translate in bold where it was said that the GOS did not go beyond laboratory samples (like my perpetual motion machine) and the rocket flew ONLY on the radio control? Or will you again start wagging like, but what could the GOS prevent them from doing? wink
        1. Kassandra
          Kassandra 17 June 2014 09: 39 New
          -1
          they transferred you. that GOS were developed and not under development.

          if you didn’t succeed then these are your problems,
          and IMI Rafael inherited the GOOS Matra Magic, which inherited them from Enzian.
          skizdit someone and then broadcast that he did not succeed, this is a trump card.

          By the way, the nuclear bomb, by the way, is also not the one who shows the language invented, but the Germans for whom he worked as a laboratory assistant before leaving, and the fact that Hiroshima was not even tested by the Americans in the laboratory (only Nagasaki was tested).

          GOS were, before the military use of the Enzians, it did not come to their attention - it was written why. they were not very upset about this because they had it on the way
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13b
          1. Professor
            Professor 17 June 2014 10: 00 New
            +1
            Quote: Kassandra
            they transferred you. that GOS were developed and not under development.

            Young man, keep up appearances and do not poke.
            Materiel for you (again and again) with your own links:
            These articles had been laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as seperate entities. Tested in the laboratory. Do you understand? Just tested like my perpetual motion machine.

            Initial planning provided for the Enzian's use of one of several types of homing devices and proximity fuzes currently being developed or combinations of the above. Tests had not progressed beyond operation with the standard German radio control ... It was planned to install various GOS, but the rocket flew ONLY with radio control because they did not have a GOS, the Germans could not cope with their development.

            So the young man has less emotion and flooding about Rafael and the atomic bomb, and closer to the materiel-cruise missiles.
            1. Kassandra
              Kassandra 17 June 2014 10: 10 New
              -3
              professor, learn english! well. and put your tongue back in ...
              the processor (CPU) for the GOS is not needed

              PS. and from what they managed to do and test in battle - a full-size Me-163 with an array of short missiles mounted at the root of the wing and when flying from any angle, the bomber automatically shot up to the bomber.
              unlike Entzian (who was still the same but halved by the Comet) he was reusable and guaranteed to “bring” 1-2 bombers for each flight
              when this is, well, especially not to ruin the surviving bunkers of the coastal defense of the Atlantic Wall for rare infrared optics.
              1. Professor
                Professor 17 June 2014 10: 20 New
                0
                Quote: Kassandra
                professor, learn english! well. and put your tongue back in ...

                Is that all you have to say when you are poked with your nose into your own link? Not much. It’s clear that I’m having problems with English, but here’s what the Google translator writes about this:
                These articles had been laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as seperate entities.-These products were laboratory tested by their manufacturers only as individual entities.

                Initial planning provided for the Enzian's use of one of several types of homing devices and proximity fuzes currently being developed or combinations of the above. Tests had not progressed beyond operation with the standard German radio control ... Initial planning is intended for use by Enzian in one of several types of homing and contactless fuses currently under development or combinations above. The tests did not go beyond working with standard German radio control ...

                Contact, I will always teach an amateur. hi
                1. Kassandra
                  Kassandra 17 June 2014 10: 51 New
                  0
                  Professor, do you know what gerund is? and how and when do the British use it? apparently no .... again you cheat when quoting, because serial error is simply unrealistic.

                  in the first quotation, had been laboratory tested again was translated as long-term and not as accomplished, etc.
                  and, about GOS "Madrid" and other GOS Entziana on a link
                  http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/enzian.html
                  it was written without being, but simply "developed". already developed, completely developed! finally developed ... bully
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 17 June 2014 12: 22 New
                    0
                    Quote: Kassandra
                    Professor, do you know what gerund is? and how and when do the British use it? apparently no .... again you cheat when quoting, because serial error is simply unrealistic.

                    in the first quotation, had been laboratory tested again was translated as long-term and not as accomplished, etc.
                    and, about GOS "Madrid" and other GOS Entziana on a link
                    http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/enzian.html
                    it was written without being, but simply "developed". already developed, completely developed! finally developed ... bully


                    Young man
                    My English teachers roll over ... in bed. Did you remember the word gerund? laughing Let's talk about past perfect, perfect action.
                    tested - tested, tested or not it is not clear
                    had been tested- tested in the past and the action is incomplete, not tested
                    had tested - tested and tested, action completed

                    Now about developed:
                    developed- was developed, that is, they did, but it’s not clear whether they did
                    had developed- developed in the past, that is, the action is completed, done.

                    This is how you can write about my perpetual motion machine:
                    a) Professor Sokolov developed perpetuum mobile ...
                    b) Professor Sokolov is developing perpetuum mobile ...
                    c) Professor Sokolov had developed perpetuum mobile ...
                    d) Professor Sokolov had been developed perpetuum mobile ...
                    Which of the following suggestions indicates that Professor Sokolov developed perpetual motion machine?

                    And now, with his nose in ...
                    GOS was tested in the laboratory. The results are unknown to us, there is no evidence. The rocket flew exclusively with radio control. These are the facts, the rest is flood.
                    1. Kassandra
                      Kassandra 19 June 2014 04: 11 New
                      -1
                      Professor, your teachers, apparently at least native speakers have not once been taught this
                      had been laboratory tested is a fait accompli

                      being the link was about proximity fuzes, they were made for Enzian, and the GOS "Madrid" was already there. it was mentioned a little earlier.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 19 June 2014 08: 05 New
                        0
                        Quote: Kassandra
                        Professor, your teachers, apparently at least native speakers have not once been taught this
                        had been laboratory tested is a fait accompli

                        being the link was about proximity fuzes, they were made for Enzian, and the GOS "Madrid" was already there. it was mentioned a little earlier.

                        So you failed the exam without giving the correct answer. Keep clear, unfortunate and retake.
                        I repeat for you now for the last time:
                        GOS was tested in the laboratory. The results are unknown to us, there is no evidence. The rocket flew exclusively with radio control. Learn the materiel. hi
                      2. Kassandra
                        Kassandra 19 June 2014 09: 17 New
                        -2
                        Professor, you are facing re-certification, with the withdrawal of the diploma ... if of course you have it.
                        repeat to yourself, since you are an ostrich and you have a concrete floor
                        the fact that the GOS was created and tested. it was not used for combat in WW2, and the French got it after WW2, and this is a known fact.
                        thing the docks are just there. it is written about them. and with what a rocket flew there, this is another matter that was written with a pitchfork on water, and it’s smeared with shit like yours, since entire institutes (in general, no one except Matra) could not repeat this GOS in production for decades. neither in the USSR nor in the USA.
                        in the United States, the phantom operator on the AIM-7 Sparrow twisted the handles, and the Franco-Austrian was guided by itself somehow without it.
                        just like yours, after the war, they lied that the great Einstein invented the uranium bonbu, only the American reactor was a primitive pile of graphite, and for some reason the Norwegian heavy water plant in 1944 had to be blown up urgently

                        Therefore, there is no faith in you, in addition to shoving the dog or the processor in the GOS.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 19 June 2014 10: 57 New
                        +1
                        I won’t feed you anymore. Go learn materiel and English. Retake is canceled. You are expelled. hi
                      4. Kassandra
                        Kassandra 19 June 2014 11: 18 New
                        -2
                        teach you here.
                        you can shove your loess pass to yourself flat.
                        GOS is just a few LEDs - there are no dogs there. bully
                      5. supertiger21
                        supertiger21 20 June 2014 17: 06 New
                        +1
                        Dear yes moderators, why don’t you notice the trolling and its participants? When will the VO be freed from at least the main part of the troll yoke ?!
                      6. Alexander Romanov
                        Alexander Romanov 20 June 2014 17: 10 New
                        +2
                        Quote: supertiger21
                        moderators, why don’t you notice the trolling and its participants?

                        Well why, I noticed that your aipi is hidden, see you have already been banned yes?
                      7. supertiger21
                        supertiger21 21 June 2014 13: 24 New
                        0
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        Well, why, I noticed that your aipi is hidden


                        Hello, Dear Moderator Alexander! hi
                        I’m glad if you notice and delete inappropriate comments! And with the IP address I don’t know what’s going on, the RF flag, then the US flag, then there’s no flag at all ... request

                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        see you already banned yes?


                        No, thank God, and I hope they won’t! I didn’t insult anyone almost intentionally (of course there were ridicule at some Israeli comrades in VO, but no more). I really did borscht once, hitting the professor a lot, reminding him of a quote that spoke negatively about him . The first time he didn’t really react, but when I reminded him of it the second time, he immediately added to his Black List.
                        Regards Aslan! hi
                  2. BM-13
                    BM-13 14 July 2014 23: 09 New
                    +3
                    Cassandra , you are so smart, so smart ... And what have we been doing without your genius so far?
                  3. Kassandra
                    Kassandra 15 July 2014 09: 21 New
                    -3
                    probably missed ...
  • ICT
    ICT 16 June 2014 18: 10 New
    0
    it seems somewhere
    Fau Xnumx at Launcher Military Museum in Duxford UK
  • sds127
    sds127 1 November 2017 09: 56 New
    0
    Quote: anomalocaris
    And in what year was it? By the way, give me at least one sample of homing weapons from WWII.

    T-5. Torpedo. 3 Reich.