German Anti-Shipping Rocket

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Devi Deveraux" wrote in message
m...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Jukka O. Kauppinen"
wrote in
message ...
The Fritz X met with some success.



The newest book "Allied Secret:The Sinking of HMT Rohna" can be
purchased
he



http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...=9780806134185




Lets see up to now I know of the following books on the subject

"Allied Secret:The Sinking of HMT Rohna" by Carlton Jackson
'Forgotten Tragedy' also by Carlton Jackson
'The Rohna Disaster' by James Bennet
the section on the incident in 'Joining the War at Sea'

There was also a resolution passed in the House of representatives
about the incident

This must be some new definition of the words 'secret'
and 'forgotten'. If you want another 'forgotten' incident consider
the loss of HMT Lancastria which was bombed and sunk
off St Nazaire with the loss of 3000 troops and 1000 civilians
in 1940

(One book about this sinking was also called "The Forgotten
Tragedy", In fact this title seems a rather popular one with authors
as I got about 100 hits on a search)

Keith

The is also the Bari poison gas incident that was covered-up during
the war. In that incident in Dec 1943 a Luftwaffe strike in the
Italian harbor sunk 17 ships including a Liberty ship loaded with
mustard gas shells which killed both the crew (over 1000) and several

A Liberty ship crew of over 1000?

thousand civilians on land as the gas was released in the air.
The Bari strike was known at the time as the "mini Pearl Harbor" and
quickly covered up.
Got anything else to say, Keith? It may not be "secret" anymore, but
it is not well known. Yet you put the guy down for asking a good
question.

Rob

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
om...
(ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote in message
...
In article ,
robert arndt wrote:
(ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote in message
...
In article ,
Thomas W Ping wrote:
I could've sworn that a couple of years ago, I read somewhere of a
German rocket powered (don't *think* it was an air breather),
possibly

The Germans made a moderate amount of use of two types of ASM from
1943 to mid-1944, after which ECM and fighter opposition pretty well
ruled further use out. The teo types were the Henschel;193 (293?),
which was a rocket-assisted HE weapon, first used in 1943, with the

The Germans actually conducted tests with glide torpedos in WW1 with
the Siemens-Shuckert torpedo glider. They were testes from Zeppelins Z
XVIII, L25, and L35. They were to be launched from 1,500 m but the
airships proved too slow; instead, production of close to 100 glide
torpedos was intended for the aircraft Zeppelin-Staaken R IV... but
there is no record of any being tried in combat.

This wasn't unique - by the end of WW1 the RN was trialling ship-
launched guided weapons (essentially small, unmanned, radio-controlled
aeroplanes - I've seen a picture of a S- or T- class destroyer carrying
one on a foredeck catapult but I'm nuggered if I can remember where
it was I saw it..

IIRC the idea was dropped as it was thought that improvements in AA
weapons (probably the multiple pom-pom) made it obsolete, though
I'm sure I've read that there were similar proposals in the 1930s,
probably after the Queen Bee firing trials where it proved very hard to
actually hit an aeroplane (as opposed to putting the pilot off,
which was what most AA fire of that era did).

Problem with all of these radio-controlled devices was their extreme
vunerability to jamming.


The Germans never seem to have been overly concerned with Jaming of
the
Kehl-Strasbourg tramitter-Receiver pair used on Both Fritz-X and the
Hs-293 apparently thinking that modification to the systems was only
necessary if "jamming reached 50%". I don't know how they mesured
that but I have the impression that jamming of both systems was very
difficult from the target area ship/bridge becuase of what looks like
directional yagi style antena on the rear of the missiles to me.
effectve Jamming required the Jammers to be installed on an opposing
aircraft so that the jamming energy could be fed into the main lobe of
the antena.


This is incorrect, two types of jammers were in fact developed for use
by ships. The first was just a brute force transmission of white noise
(generated by an electric razor in the first instance) and the second
actually sent spoof signals to the receiver unit. The few HS-293A and
Fritz X weapons used against the Normandy invasion fleet were
succesfully jammed.

I also recall talk of some of the latter missiles being supplied and
used with wire guidence which was much more difficult to jam.


Correct, the HS-293B was wire guided

Keith

On 28 Oct 2003 20:41:23 -0800, (WaltBJ) wrote:

I have a vague recollection of reasding somehwere that a lash-up
jamming system involving tuning to the VHF guidance channel and using
an electric razor as the jamming source actually worked.

I read that elsewhere. Stories of men running to the decks armed with
razors to point at the incoming raid.


greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

Greg Hennessy wrote:

On 28 Oct 2003 20:41:23 -0800, (WaltBJ) wrote:

I have a vague recollection of reasding somehwere that a lash-up
jamming system involving tuning to the VHF guidance channel and using
an electric razor as the jamming source actually worked.

I read that elsewhere. Stories of men running to the decks armed with
razors to point at the incoming raid.

greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

I guess there was lot of tripping over the cords, and jostling to reach
all those 110 VAC outlets mounted on deck.............

Bob McKellar, who uses a cordless, but doubts they had any

On 28 Oct 2003 10:50:39 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Devi Deveraux" wrote in message
m...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...
The Fritz X met with some success.



The newest book "Allied Secret:The Sinking of HMT Rohna" can be purchased
he


http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...=9780806134185




Lets see up to now I know of the following books on the subject

"Allied Secret:The Sinking of HMT Rohna" by Carlton Jackson
'Forgotten Tragedy' also by Carlton Jackson
'The Rohna Disaster' by James Bennet
the section on the incident in 'Joining the War at Sea'

There was also a resolution passed in the House of representatives
about the incident

This must be some new definition of the words 'secret'
and 'forgotten'. If you want another 'forgotten' incident consider
the loss of HMT Lancastria which was bombed and sunk
off St Nazaire with the loss of 3000 troops and 1000 civilians
in 1940

(One book about this sinking was also called "The Forgotten
Tragedy", In fact this title seems a rather popular one with authors
as I got about 100 hits on a search)

Keith

The is also the Bari poison gas incident that was covered-up during
the war. In that incident in Dec 1943 a Luftwaffe strike in the
Italian harbor sunk 17 ships including a Liberty ship loaded with
mustard gas shells which killed both the crew (over 1000) and several
thousand civilians on land as the gas was released in the air.
The Bari strike was known at the time as the "mini Pearl Harbor" and
quickly covered up.
Got anything else to say, Keith? It may not be "secret" anymore, but
it is not well known. Yet you put the guy down for asking a good
question.

Rob

The release of Mustard gas (held in case retaliation for a German gas
attack) killed 69 people and injured 689 seriously enough to be
hospitalized. It was not "covered up".

Al Minyard

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:19:22 -0600, Alan Minyard
wrote:



The release of Mustard gas (held in case retaliation for a German gas
attack) killed 69 people and injured 689 seriously enough to be
hospitalized. It was not "covered up".


Just remember, in Ardntland, everything written in 'Signal' is true.


greg
--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

I also recall talk of some of the latter missiles being supplied and
used with wire guidence which was much more difficult to jam.


Correct, the HS-293B was wire guided

Keith


The Hs 293B came in two variants- one with trailing wire 12 km long
and a second wire version 16 km long. The FuG 207 "Dortmund"-FuGz 237
"Duisburg" transmitter/reciever was the guidance system. Around 200
were built and some tested in 1944.
As for the Hs 293D television guided missile, around 255 of them were
produced. The best version of that missile utilized the
"Tonne4a-Seedorf 3" guidance system which improved accuracy
considerably. None, however, saw action.

Rob

ANDREW ROBERT BREEN wrote:


This wasn't unique - by the end of WW1 the RN was trialling ship-
launched guided weapons (essentially small, unmanned, radio-controlled
aeroplanes - I've seen a picture of a S- or T- class destroyer carrying
one on a foredeck catapult but I'm nuggered if I can remember where
it was I saw it..


HMS Stronghold was featured in Andrew Toppans's mystery picture
quiz a couple of months ago, see :
http://www.hazegray.org/mysteries/oldmyst/ans158.htm

Philip Morten

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:51:50 +0000, Greg Hennessy wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:19:22 -0600, Alan Minyard
wrote:



The release of Mustard gas (held in case retaliation for a German gas
attack) killed 69 people and injured 689 seriously enough to be
hospitalized. It was not "covered up".


Just remember, in Ardntland, everything written in 'Signal' is true.


greg

Thanks, I needed that :-)))

Al Minyard

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
om...
SNIP


Problem with all of these radio-controlled devices was their extreme
vunerability to jamming.


The Germans never seem to have been overly concerned with Jaming of
the
Kehl-Strasbourg tramitter-Receiver pair used on Both Fritz-X and the
Hs-293 apparently thinking that modification to the systems was only
necessary if "jamming reached 50%". I don't know how they mesured
that but I have the impression that jamming of both systems was very
difficult from the target area ship/bridge becuase of what looks like
directional yagi style antena on the rear of the missiles to me.
effectve Jamming required the Jammers to be installed on an opposing
aircraft so that the jamming energy could be fed into the main lobe of
the antena.


This is incorrect, two types of jammers were in fact developed for use
by ships. The first was just a brute force transmission of white noise
(generated by an electric razor in the first instance) and the second
actually sent spoof signals to the receiver unit.

The Germans knew and used (elesewhere) several effective anti-jamming
techniques on select devices. I doubt that they had the resources to
mass produce and deploy these on the Fritz-X and Hs293 though
nevertheless the techniques of spread spectrum, chirping and frequency
hopping were known and used by them.

Even the USAAF/USAF in WW2 and Korea had trouble training technicians
and setting up the guidence systems of the azon and razon bombs
despite their effectiveness against bridges.


The few HS-293A and
Fritz X weapons used against the Normandy invasion fleet were
succesfully jammed.

While I am aware of the fact that allied fighter aircraft carried
jammers the reason I doubt that is that I don't believe any German
aircraft, not even photo-reconaisance aircraft made it into the
Normandy area at all let alone one lugging a massive Friz-X or Henchel
293.

The reconaisance problem was so severe that a prototype Arado 234 Jet
complete with test pilot (Erich Sommer I think) was modified and used
before series production or deployment of the type. Film of these
flights as I understand it were the first that the Germans had that
ascertained the size of the Normandy Bridgehead that the allies had
established.

A reputed German aircaft recognition joke of the time was
"if the aircraft are camaflaged green they are british,
if the aricraft are silver they are american,
if they are invisible they are German"

With effectve reconaisance assets the Germans would have probaby
detected the Normandy invasion much earlier and responded more
effectively.



I also recall talk of some of the latter missiles being supplied and
used with wire guidence which was much more difficult to jam.


Correct, the HS-293B was wire guided

I have weapon load sketches of the Arado 234C armed with a Fritz-X
(and several more advanced missiles as well). With a wire guided or
jam resistant version it should have been effective at least on a
cloudless day.



Keith