Bernardz wrote in message news:MPG.1a593408a1392c869897ea@news...
In early December 1944, General Bissel produced a paper which argued
strongly in favour of the V1.

The following is a table he produced

Blitz (12 months) vs V1 flying bombs (2 3/4 months)
-----------------------------------------------------
1. Cost to Germany
...........................Blitz.................. ..V1
Sorties...................90,000.................8 025 (error: 8892)
Weight of bombs...........61,149 tons............14,600 tons
Fuel consumed.............71,700 tons.............4681 tons
Aircrafts lost............3075....................0 (error: 80, from air launches)
Men lost..................7690....................0

2 Results
Houses damaged/destroyed...1,150,000............1,127,000
Casualties.................92,566...............22 ,892 (error: figure is dead plus wounded, based on 6,184 dead/correction to 12,000 dead= close to 29,000 total)
Rate casualties/bombs tons...1.6...............4.2

3. Allied air effort
Sorties......................86,800............44, 770
Planes lost..................1260...............351
Men lost.....................805...............2233


Any comments!

34,000 V-1s were produced by Fiesler, Volkswagen, and the Mittelwerke.
Unit cost was RM 5000. Of all those produced only around 5000 found
their targets in the UK and Belgium. That makes it 20% effective of
those launched, the remaining number found stockpiled. It was a cost
effective weapon compared to a Mark IV tank (RM 100,000) but
militarily of little value. As a psychological/nuisance weapon it did
well but did not in any way deter the Allies from bombing Germany and
grabbing land. The Germans would have done better to replace the
amatol warhead with a radiological warhead. London and Antwerp would
have then been contaminated and abandoned.

Rob