Okay, we all know about the Manned V-1s; but were there any other "paper projects" done for bigger, larger, faster, further ranged V-1s?
Fieseler Fi-103 (V 1) development, variants and derivatives
- Thread starter RyanC
- Start date
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,880
- Reaction score
- 9,007
nice joke pometablava
back to V-1
Not much Document survive the War
and WWW is full of Wacky Ideas Wat-if V-1 that fiction only
there was vague plans of use of V-1 on U-Boat. (Projekt Amerika ???)
or Use Bombers as Mobil Air launch platform for Fiesler 103
to Manned V-1 Fieseler Fi.103R Reichenberg
who don't know. the SS officer Otto Skorzeny had the idea of a piloted version of the V-1
Selbstopferflugzeug (self-sacrifice aircraft) for Point attack.
the Original Idea was that Pilot bail out befor impact (chance to survive that is ZERO%)
until Himmler hears of Selbstopferflugzeug and Declare: the Mission has to be fly by suicidal, Sick, criminal!
Fiesler 103 flugtorpedo by Gotha http://www.luft46.com/oddities/v1boat.html
the firma Gotha proposal to use the V-1 for lowlevel attack on Battleship or Dams
by the way as i look for V-1 Data in my books i found article (with Picture) of a Me163 as Torpedo Bomber ! intrest ?
back to V-1
Not much Document survive the War
and WWW is full of Wacky Ideas Wat-if V-1 that fiction only
there was vague plans of use of V-1 on U-Boat. (Projekt Amerika ???)
or Use Bombers as Mobil Air launch platform for Fiesler 103
to Manned V-1 Fieseler Fi.103R Reichenberg
who don't know. the SS officer Otto Skorzeny had the idea of a piloted version of the V-1
Selbstopferflugzeug (self-sacrifice aircraft) for Point attack.
the Original Idea was that Pilot bail out befor impact (chance to survive that is ZERO%)
until Himmler hears of Selbstopferflugzeug and Declare: the Mission has to be fly by suicidal, Sick, criminal!
Fiesler 103 flugtorpedo by Gotha http://www.luft46.com/oddities/v1boat.html
the firma Gotha proposal to use the V-1 for lowlevel attack on Battleship or Dams
by the way as i look for V-1 Data in my books i found article (with Picture) of a Me163 as Torpedo Bomber ! intrest ?
- Joined
- 22 January 2006
- Messages
- 4,114
- Reaction score
- 1,694
yes, please.
I think the Me 328 also has a Torpedo Bomber version (I could try to find this info in my library).
For V-1 improved variants, Ryan, you could read this info from Andreas Parsch:
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/ltv-n-2.html
Michel Van said:nice joke pometablava
back to V-1
Not much Document survive the War
and WWW is full of Wacky Ideas Wat-if V-1 that fiction only
there was vague plans of use of V-1 on U-Boat. (Projekt Amerika ???)
or Use Bombers as Mobil Air launch platform for Fiesler 103
to Manned V-1 Fieseler Fi.103R Reichenberg
who don't know. the SS officer Otto Skorzeny had the idea of a piloted version of the V-1
Selbstopferflugzeug (self-sacrifice aircraft) for Point attack.
the Original Idea was that Pilot bail out befor impact (chance to survive that is ZERO%)
until Himmler hears of Selbstopferflugzeug and Declare: the Mission has to be fly by suicidal, Sick, criminal!
Fiesler 103 flugtorpedo by Gotha http://www.luft46.com/oddities/v1boat.html
the firma Gotha proposal to use the V-1 for lowlevel attack on Battleship or Dams
by the way as i look for V-1 Data in my books i found article (with Picture) of a Me163 as Torpedo Bomber ! intrest ?
Some of the pics were on Le Fana article I've mentioned before
According to the book Peenemünde West by Botho Stüwe (Augsburg, Munich 1998) there were plans for at least three types of improvement to the unpiloted version of the Fi 103 (pages 678 - 681):
A long range version, to be called Fi 103 F-1. It was to have an enlarged fuel tank, but a smaller warhead, whose weight was to be reduced to about 530 kilogrammes. To compensate for the smaller size of the warhead, its filling was to consist of "Trialen", which was considered a more powerful explosive than the original filling (some of the ingredients of Trialen were TNT and aluminum powder). The enlarged tank was to contain 1025 litres of fuel.
The new range was to be 345 kilometers with "E1" fuel and 370 kilometers with "E2" fuel. A further improvement was planned with a range of 500 kilometers. Since the compressed air in the spherical storage tank was not sufficient to pump fuel and actuate control surfaces for this long distance, and since there was not enough room for an enlarged air tank, a crude compressor, driven by the pulsejet would have had to be installed on the 500 kilometer version.
Improved powerplants: An improved pulsejet from Argus, the type 044.
The firms Porsche and BMW were given orders to develop turbojets as powerplants. The Porsche engine was planned to weigh about 200 kilogrammes and was to give the Fi 103 a range of 700 kilometers and a top speed of 900 km/h.
An improved guidance system: a direction finding transmitter was to be installed in the Fi 103. At a predetermined period after launch, this was to send an impulse that was to be picked up by two separate direction finding receivers. From this impulse the position and speed of the missile could be calculated, which in turn helped to determine to correct any deviation from its ideal course and the necessary corrections, which were transmitted back to the missile.
A long range version, to be called Fi 103 F-1. It was to have an enlarged fuel tank, but a smaller warhead, whose weight was to be reduced to about 530 kilogrammes. To compensate for the smaller size of the warhead, its filling was to consist of "Trialen", which was considered a more powerful explosive than the original filling (some of the ingredients of Trialen were TNT and aluminum powder). The enlarged tank was to contain 1025 litres of fuel.
The new range was to be 345 kilometers with "E1" fuel and 370 kilometers with "E2" fuel. A further improvement was planned with a range of 500 kilometers. Since the compressed air in the spherical storage tank was not sufficient to pump fuel and actuate control surfaces for this long distance, and since there was not enough room for an enlarged air tank, a crude compressor, driven by the pulsejet would have had to be installed on the 500 kilometer version.
Improved powerplants: An improved pulsejet from Argus, the type 044.
The firms Porsche and BMW were given orders to develop turbojets as powerplants. The Porsche engine was planned to weigh about 200 kilogrammes and was to give the Fi 103 a range of 700 kilometers and a top speed of 900 km/h.
An improved guidance system: a direction finding transmitter was to be installed in the Fi 103. At a predetermined period after launch, this was to send an impulse that was to be picked up by two separate direction finding receivers. From this impulse the position and speed of the missile could be calculated, which in turn helped to determine to correct any deviation from its ideal course and the necessary corrections, which were transmitted back to the missile.
(Sorry for my english)
According to Roger Ford's book "Germany's Secret Weapons of WWII" the long-range V-1 (Fi-103F-1) was put into production in 1945 and used against UK from 3.March.1945, when the German army lost the territories, from where they can attack London with "standard" V-1.
Trialen 105 was a mixture of 70% TNT, 15% RDX and 15% aluminium powder.
According to Roger Ford's book "Germany's Secret Weapons of WWII" the long-range V-1 (Fi-103F-1) was put into production in 1945 and used against UK from 3.March.1945, when the German army lost the territories, from where they can attack London with "standard" V-1.
Trialen 105 was a mixture of 70% TNT, 15% RDX and 15% aluminium powder.
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,880
- Reaction score
- 9,007
Wat so special on version Fi-103R-III and Fi-103R-IV. ???
hole in the ground
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 6 August 2008
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 23
extra fuel tank/different warhead?
IV almost looks like an intake... but that is surely not its purpose. Shaped charge maybe?
IV almost looks like an intake... but that is surely not its purpose. Shaped charge maybe?
Tuomasn
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 5 January 2006
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 301
According to German Aircraft of the Second World War by Smith and Kay, the Fi 103R-I had ballast in place of the warhead, skids and landing flaps but no pulsejet and was used for the test programme; the R-II was similar but had a second cockpit in the nose section for training; the R-III had the pulsejet, skids and landing flaps but no warhead and was to be used for advanced training; and the operational R-IV had the pulsejet, warhead and no landing aids. This of course leaves the last variant in the picture with the different nose unidentified.
(sorry for my English)
I remember some years ago I've read something about V-1's warhead versions. There were mentioned a standard steel version, plywood-made version, a body of SB1000 bomb... I can't remember what was this publication or website.
Maybe someone have such detailed information about V-1 warheads as total warhead weight, explosive weight, kind of explosive etc.?
I remember some years ago I've read something about V-1's warhead versions. There were mentioned a standard steel version, plywood-made version, a body of SB1000 bomb... I can't remember what was this publication or website.
Maybe someone have such detailed information about V-1 warheads as total warhead weight, explosive weight, kind of explosive etc.?
- Joined
- 1 May 2007
- Messages
- 2,537
- Reaction score
- 1,752
I have a rather good book about the V-1, 'The Flying Bomb' by Richard Anthony Young.
I think there might be some info in that, trouble is, I'm staying with family over Christmas, and will be away from my library and PC for the next few days.
Will get straight on it when I return at the weekend.
Cheers,
Robin.
- Joined
- 1 May 2007
- Messages
- 2,537
- Reaction score
- 1,752
G
gery
Guest
Hallo piloten...
An interesting link....http://www.zenza.se/vw/
soon
gery
An interesting link....http://www.zenza.se/vw/
soon
gery
Besides the manned V1's - Reichenberg I to IV (1-4) - there
was also a V (5)version. This fuselage of this concept was much shorter in front of
the cockpit and it was seen as an alternate trainer for the He-162 instead
of the He-162S.
Source : Luftfahrt History - vol.2 'Die Geschichte der bemanten V1' Lautec.Siegen.Deutschland.
was also a V (5)version. This fuselage of this concept was much shorter in front of
the cockpit and it was seen as an alternate trainer for the He-162 instead
of the He-162S.
Source : Luftfahrt History - vol.2 'Die Geschichte der bemanten V1' Lautec.Siegen.Deutschland.
Tophe
ACCESS: Top Secret
A V-1 Zwilling (twin-fuselage, twin-pulse-jet) has been built, but maybe only as what-if model after the year 2000. I don't know if this has been industrially considered during WW2.
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,880
- Reaction score
- 9,007
Zizi6785 said:
I'm afraid the V-1 Zwilling is a Internet Fake ...
Boogey
B'Boomelang
- Joined
- 10 February 2009
- Messages
- 200
- Reaction score
- 37
hesham said:
In the Wiesław Bączkowski's book " Tajne Bronie III Rzeszy " ( The Secret Weapons of Third Reich )
I've got all five versions described :
1. Typical V1 ( Fieseler Fi 103 / FZG 76 ) ;
2. Reichenberg I ( reconstructed V1 ) ;
3. Reichenberg II ( engineless two-seat training version ) ;
4. Reichenberg III ( engined single-seat training version ) ;
5. Reichenberg IV ( fighting operational version ).
Datas :
span - 4,9 m ( FZG 76 ), 5,7 m ( R. II & R. IV )
lenght - 7,7 m ( FZG 76 ), 7,53 m ( R. II ), 8,0 m ( R. IV )
height - 1,5 m ( FZG 76 ), 1,1 m ( R. II ) 1,6 m ( R. IV )
wing area - 4,8 m2 ( FZG 76 ), 5,4 m2 ( R. II & R. IV )
empty weight - 675 kg ( FZG 76 ), 850 kg ( R. IV )
max. take-off - 2180 kg ( FZG 76 ), 2250 kg ( R. IV )
speed of start - 378 km/h ( FZG 76 & R. IV )
cruising speed - 575 km/h ( FZG 76 ), 645 km/h ( R. IV )
max. fighting speed - 800 km/h ( FZG 76 & R. IV )
service ceiling - 3000 m ( FZG 76 ), 2500 m ( R. IV )
range - 240 km ( FZG 76 ), 286 km ( R. IV )
engine - Argus As 014 ( FZG 76 & R. IV )
explosive load - 1000 kg ( FZG 76 ), 850 kg ( R. IV ).
Attachments
sagallacci
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 14 January 2009
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 10
Keep in mind that most of the published drawings of the various machines are badly inaccurate, either in small ways, like not showing that the fuselage just aft the fuel tank section has a stretch segment or that the fin and rudder have increased cord, or more major features. like the entirely speculative version of the two-seat machine, first appearing in Wm Green's "Warplanes of the Third Reich" and repeated in the posted drawing sets.
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,880
- Reaction score
- 9,007
there one think i don't understand
the Cockpit is in Part were in Fi-103 are the two Air pressure tanks for puls engine fuel feed.
so were are they in Fi-103R or are they replace by a fuel pump ?
the Cockpit is in Part were in Fi-103 are the two Air pressure tanks for puls engine fuel feed.
so were are they in Fi-103R or are they replace by a fuel pump ?
Wasp
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 11 January 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 12
How about the non-manned variants of the V-1?
For example has anyone some info on the so-called "short-nosed" V-1?
What was its designgoal?
I once saw a drawing and if I remember correctly the "Shortnose" was not only shorter, but had differntly shaped wings than the standard version.
Is this correct?
Also there is an enlarged probably nuclear warheaded V-1 project often named "Wotan" floating through the net and certain publications.
Does some hard facts about such a big V-1 (atomic or not) exist?
Or is it simply identical with the longe-range version mentioned earlier in the Peenemünde report?
For example has anyone some info on the so-called "short-nosed" V-1?
What was its designgoal?
I once saw a drawing and if I remember correctly the "Shortnose" was not only shorter, but had differntly shaped wings than the standard version.
Is this correct?
Also there is an enlarged probably nuclear warheaded V-1 project often named "Wotan" floating through the net and certain publications.
Does some hard facts about such a big V-1 (atomic or not) exist?
Or is it simply identical with the longe-range version mentioned earlier in the Peenemünde report?
sagallacci
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 14 January 2009
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 10
The short nose machines had a reduced size/weight warhead and larger mid-fuselage fuel tank for extended range. There was an alternate wooden wing of tapered shape, but not much info survives on what/where/when. Also, there was a wooden wing of standard shape and increased span intended for the long range versions and the Reichenbergs, but not much on them either.
There was a chemical and possibly radiological dispersing warhead designed. Since there were no serious atomic weapons in progress there were no atomic warheads for the V-1. However, the US did preliminary design work on a purpose-built atomic warhead for the JB-2 but didn't actually do any.
There was a chemical and possibly radiological dispersing warhead designed. Since there were no serious atomic weapons in progress there were no atomic warheads for the V-1. However, the US did preliminary design work on a purpose-built atomic warhead for the JB-2 but didn't actually do any.
Nik
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 15 July 2009
- Messages
- 1,241
- Reaction score
- 1,003
Given the V1 was *just* catchable by RAF interceptors, I must wonder why a bigger, twin-jet (pulse) was not tried...
Of course, by then, the V projects were a bit mired in issues like the RAF 'earthquake-bombing' the London Guns, quality control in the slave-labour factories etc etc...
Of course, by then, the V projects were a bit mired in issues like the RAF 'earthquake-bombing' the London Guns, quality control in the slave-labour factories etc etc...
- Joined
- 11 March 2006
- Messages
- 8,633
- Reaction score
- 3,489
A bigger, twin-jet V1 probably would have meant a design, with very few parts
unaltered and changes necessary for most steps in the production process and
certainly would have resulted in a temporary drop of production numbers. At least
for those of the German high command with some understanding it was clear, that
the only real value of the V1 was, that it absorbed quite a lot of fighters, AA guns
and effort, not actually the damage it did.
unaltered and changes necessary for most steps in the production process and
certainly would have resulted in a temporary drop of production numbers. At least
for those of the German high command with some understanding it was clear, that
the only real value of the V1 was, that it absorbed quite a lot of fighters, AA guns
and effort, not actually the damage it did.
sagallacci
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 14 January 2009
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 10
The pulse jets simply don't run all that much faster if you had two. The basics of it was both speed and altitude limited.
On the other hand, the small gain might be considered enough to try. But for an unmanned version, it would simply mean twice as big a bang that missed and for a manned version, twice the number of airframes taken out of useful stocks for a project that was never used operationally.
On the other hand, the small gain might be considered enough to try. But for an unmanned version, it would simply mean twice as big a bang that missed and for a manned version, twice the number of airframes taken out of useful stocks for a project that was never used operationally.
Wasp
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 11 January 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 12
Thanks for the info Sagallacci.
So no measures/angles on the short nose type and the alternate wings or even a drawing?
As for the twin V-1, I agree with your statement. The speedincrease wouldn't have been siginificant, only the payload or if they chose to increase the fuel amount instead of a second warhead i.e. the increased range (which would have been the only reasonable pro considering the lost or soon loosing of areas as starting points in reach of targets in Britain).
And although the building of a twin V-1 could have used most of the existing parts of the missile, all the ramps and starting mechanisms would have had to be adapted to this new types as well, which was probably a far more complicated matter than bashing the twin V-1 together itself.
So no measures/angles on the short nose type and the alternate wings or even a drawing?
As for the twin V-1, I agree with your statement. The speedincrease wouldn't have been siginificant, only the payload or if they chose to increase the fuel amount instead of a second warhead i.e. the increased range (which would have been the only reasonable pro considering the lost or soon loosing of areas as starting points in reach of targets in Britain).
And although the building of a twin V-1 could have used most of the existing parts of the missile, all the ramps and starting mechanisms would have had to be adapted to this new types as well, which was probably a far more complicated matter than bashing the twin V-1 together itself.
shockonlip
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 January 2008
- Messages
- 605
- Reaction score
- 50
A little tidbit here.
When I was working on my PDE piece that was published in AW&ST some years back,
one of my expert PDE scientists had a copy of Paul Schmidt's (inventor of the pulsejet
used in the V-1) technical diary. In it, according to my source, Schmidt mentions that
he realized that the pulsejet used in the V-1 had poor pressurization and that increased
pressurization caused by detonation would be better.
So this should be verified, but it's a little piece of interesting information for someone say
writing a book.
A PDE is of course one of the more efficient (due to increased pressure) and modern forms
of the old pulsejet.
When I was working on my PDE piece that was published in AW&ST some years back,
one of my expert PDE scientists had a copy of Paul Schmidt's (inventor of the pulsejet
used in the V-1) technical diary. In it, according to my source, Schmidt mentions that
he realized that the pulsejet used in the V-1 had poor pressurization and that increased
pressurization caused by detonation would be better.
So this should be verified, but it's a little piece of interesting information for someone say
writing a book.
A PDE is of course one of the more efficient (due to increased pressure) and modern forms
of the old pulsejet.
Similar threads
-
Fi-103 (V-1) missiles on Aircraft Carrier Impero
- Started by Temistocle
- Replies: 1
-
-
"Why is there a Bucket on your nose, Mr. DOODLEBUG??"
- Started by xylstra
- Replies: 14
-
-
