And all that is in line with the description I've given. The spoiler is either up or down based on the voltage applied to the solenoid. Solenoids are all-or-nothing, they can't go halfway. That makes use of a variable signal worthless. Instead, the application of a DC voltage + or - would determine the direction of movement.
The description above is partially wrong. If, again, you watch the video where one is shown, the spoiler unenergized simply can flop up or down between the two energizing coils and would as the missile rotated. Application of a signal--closing the switch and applying voltage--would lock the spoiler in one of the two positions available (up / down or left / right).
I agree with the assessment that there would be a delay and creation of drag. I would say that those same problems would have been present with the Artemis rocket design, and even worse given only one spoiler being used. This means there is going to be a big issue related to this response delay and the accuracy of the missile. To overcome some of that, orders from the control aircraft could only be received when the missile was at an interval of 45 degrees to the zero axis as determined by the gyro. Thus, a slight delay could be imposed so the command was less likely to oversteer / correct the missile's course.
Again, the video makes the spoiler operation clear. On / off. Which spoiler(s) are activated depends on how you push the control lever and the switch closed as a result.
I'm not faulting the Germans here. It was, at least in theory, a workable system. In practice however against a fast-moving bomber, even one on a steady course, with parallax errors and the pilot's (or operator's) hand-eye coordination just wasn't going to cut it. For a proof look at ATGM's of the late 1950's through the 70's that used MCLOS. These against even a slow-moving tank have success rates on the order of 30% with operators who have practiced hundreds or more simulated launches.
All of that makes sense in a system that is operated on a DC voltage.
