Quote:
Originally posted by VityazKnight:
Supposedly these were the truly revolutinary german developments in WWII. Ta-183 being a precursor to Mig-15, and X4 missile being the first true air-to-air missile. They also had wire guided and infra-red[!!] missiles in development.
Also supposedly there was a forward swept wing version of the He-162 which was the first FSW aircract (NASA build a FSW X-29 in the 80's and the russians build the FSW S-37 fifth generation fighter in the 90's [!!!!]).
Ive done some searching but I just cant find any links on any of these remarkable technologies. It would be helpfull if anyone knew of any?
|
Try luft45.com. Other than that, most of these technologies actually left much to be desired. As "futuristic" as they seemed for the time most were developed hastily and had many problems that made them virtually worthless as weapons deployed in operational combat. As just one example, had the X-4 as designed reached operational use it would have quickly (and rightly) been rejected by service pilots as a worthless weapon that was a death trap for the launch platform. It also wasn't the only AAM in existance at the time although it was closer to being operational than its competition.
See the following I posted on another board about the worthlessness of the X-4 as an operational weapon:
Engagement sequence:
Assumptions: Launch aircraft Fw 190A-8. Initial speed 180 m/s (~400 mph). Max missile velocity 320 m/s (~715 mph). Target velocity 112 m/s (250 mph). Engagement is a stern chase (e.g., the fighter is closing from behind).
The minimum engagement range is roughly 2.2 km (7 sec flight time for the missile which represents its arming point. Engagement any closer and the missile has not armed itself due to fuzing arrangements). Firing aircraft and missile separation at arming ~ 1 km.
The firing aircraft has been flying straight and level for several seconds (let's say 5 at least) prior to launch to acquire the target and allow for a clean launch. From this point to missile impact or miss the launch aircraft must continue to fly straight and level at the target as radical maneuvers will prevent the pilot from guiding the missile and could result in fouling the guide wire or separating it. Capture distance (the point at which the pilot acquires the missile in sight and begins to control it) is irrelevant due to the large minimum range.
The target is assumed to be between 2.5 and 3.5 km. Total missile flight time will therefore be between 10 and 12 seconds roughly.
Discussion:
The pilot is required to fly the missile using a joystick mounted on the aircraft instrument panel. This makes operating the missile very similar to 1st generation ATGM's like SS 11, Sagger, Snapper, Kobra etc. From historical experience, a well trained operator of these missiles (hundreds of simulated and actual launches) can be expected to hit a moving target roughly 40 to 60% of the time (depending on direction of movement, etc.). An actively avoiding target reduces this to 20 to 40% of the time roughly. Distracting the operator can reduce this even further.
Now, with the X-4 we have a pilot flying a marginally stable Fw 190 (it does maneuver with small control changes and requires pilot attention to fly) also trying to track a small missile moving at high speed while controlling its movements with a joystick and, trying to track a target moving (and likely attempting to evade interception) all at the same time. unlike the ATGM operator who has telescopic sights to help him acquire the target and track his missile, the pilot has no such help while the X-4 is little larger than a large ATGM like Snapper.
Additionally, the pilot must remain in steady level flight for almost half a minute while acquiring, launching, controlling and, intercepting his target with a missile. This could prove very unhealthy in a situation where escort fighters are present.
Also, the carrying of a missile or missiles will reduce aircraft performance to some degree.
Conclusions:
The X-4 was a poorly conceived idea. No testing on live targets (drones for example) had been carried out in testing it. It did get tested in about a half dozen flight firings mostly from Ju-88 carriers where the operator was in the nose and not piloting the aircraft (using a Ju 88 as a carrier / launcher would have been suicide in 1945). The control system was inadequite for controlling the missile and renders its accuracy little, if any, better than random chance. All in all, the X-4 was another example of a clever idea poorly carried out in part due to the superiority of Allied electronic warfare systems that scared the Germans into trying to use wire control and no radar system.
