"David E. Powell" <
David_Po...@msn.com> wrote
>...
-I bet the US fuse could have been adapted to a 5-inch "Mickey Mouse"
-rocket, had the need been there. Though even in the 1950s the US
-interceptors with unguided rockets used volley tactics over the
-proximity fuse approach.
-In 1945 the need really wasn't there for allied planes to have that
-gear. Most allied air to air stuff was by fighters that used guns
-alone, and not many formations of heavy bombers to face. Over the
-Pacific the Japanese came in large formations, but I am not sure a
-proximity fused rocket would have been used there. The key in
-intercepting the Japanese formations seemed to be speed on the part of
-the fighters, and formations of fighters or medium bombers could be
-harder to target with such a weapon than a packed formation of heavy
-bombers.
The Germans were forced to use standoff weapons on masses of heavy enemy
bombers because their fighters couldn't survive within gun range long
enough, even the Me-163 according to Ziegler. We had no such problem and
didn't need their desperate attempted solutions. If we had, similar guidance
servo mechanisms had been developed and tested in our antisub homing
torpedos.
Our late-war problem was knocking down Kamikazes with stiff controls that
kept them flying straight after the pilot had been killed. (from Sakai or
Hirokoshi??). For that we had the proximity fuze in a 5" shell.
jsw