London Blitz vs V1

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
Weight of bombs...........61,149 tons............14,600 tons
Fuel consumed.............71,700 tons.............4681 tons
Aircrafts lost............3075....................0
Men lost..................7690....................0

2 Results
Houses damaged/destroyed...1,150,000............1,127,000
Casualties.................92,566...............22 ,892
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!

--
What our descendants think of us and our ancestors will depend on what
we do now!

23th saying of Bernard

...........................Blitz................. ...V1
Sorties...................90,000................. 8025
Weight of bombs...........61,149 tons............14,600 tons
Fuel consumed.............71,700 tons.............4681 tons
Aircrafts lost............3075....................0

Shouldn't that be 8025 aircraft lost?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote:

snip
Shouldn't that be 8025 aircraft lost?

Given the cost of the things probably not, IIRC UK manufacturing cost was
estimated at less than UKP 100 when a Spit was over 10K.

Also the germans did have some small losses due to air raids and more in
accidents with with the things


--
regards
jc

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 23:08:29 +1100, John Campbell
wrote:

Given the cost of the things probably not, IIRC UK manufacturing cost was
estimated at less than UKP 100 when a Spit was over 10K.

The V-1 cost a hundred quid? You could get five V-1s for the price of
a Piper Cub? That would be the all-time bargain in terror weapons.



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..

The V-1 cost a hundred quid? You could get five V-1s for the price of
a Piper Cub? That would be the all-time bargain in terror weapons.

A British commission (RAE) just after WW2 concluded that the cost of a
V1, fuelled and armed (including the 200 pounds of Hydrogen Peroxide
needed for the launch) came to about 115 pounds. But that figure also
included a percentage of R&D and the cost of building Peenemunde.
They concluded that the raw cost of materials and manufacture was
around 87 pounds sterling. The average price the German government was
billed by the Volkswagen Fallersleben plant came to around 125 quid.

In article , Eugene
Griessel writes
Cub Driver wrote in message news:4j8uuv4648rrmgp
...

The V-1 cost a hundred quid? You could get five V-1s for the price of
a Piper Cub? That would be the all-time bargain in terror weapons.

A British commission (RAE) just after WW2 concluded that the cost of a
V1, fuelled and armed (including the 200 pounds of Hydrogen Peroxide
needed for the launch) came to about 115 pounds. But that figure also
included a percentage of R&D and the cost of building Peenemunde.
They concluded that the raw cost of materials and manufacture was
around 87 pounds sterling. The average price the German government was
billed by the Volkswagen Fallersleben plant came to around 125 quid.

Astonishingly low materials cost - and I guess that the workers were not
paid union rates...

When the first couple of V1s fell on Britain on the 16th of July, the
immediate reaction of the authorities was:

1. These items must be costly to built - the Germans really have taken
a wrong turning here.

2. We don't know how they are guided - but in case they happen to home
in on radio signals, perhaps we'd better stop the BBC from transmitting
when we detect some incoming...

Cheers,

Dave

--
Dave Eadsforth

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
Weight of bombs...........61,149 tons............14,600 tons
Fuel consumed.............71,700 tons.............4681 tons
Aircrafts lost............3075....................0
Men lost..................7690....................0

2 Results
Houses damaged/destroyed...1,150,000............1,127,000
Casualties.................92,566...............22 ,892
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


For the cost of 1 uncrewed, unrefuelled and unbombladen Lancaster the
Germans were getting more than 300 V1s. Furthermore they made little
demand on skilled labour or strategic materials. On the negative side
they had all the inherent problems of a fairly slow unaimed weapon.
Of around 10000 launched at Britain only about 2400 reached the vague
proximity of their target area. And many fell fairly harmlessly -
aided by British manipulation of intelligence. But as an economic
weapon they made much sense and if they had arrived on the scene some
months earlier in far greater numbers, when proximity fuzed, radar
guided AA was not yet available they would undoubtedly have had a
proportionately much larger effect on the prosecution of the war.
Thanks to Hitler's intervention this did not happen.

Eugene Griessel

In article ,
says...
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
Weight of bombs...........61,149 tons............14,600 tons
Fuel consumed.............71,700 tons.............4681 tons
Aircrafts lost............3075....................0
Men lost..................7690....................0

2 Results
Houses damaged/destroyed...1,150,000............1,127,000
Casualties.................92,566...............22 ,892
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


For the cost of 1 uncrewed, unrefuelled and unbombladen Lancaster the
Germans were getting more than 300 V1s. Furthermore they made little
demand on skilled labour or strategic materials. On the negative side
they had all the inherent problems of a fairly slow unaimed weapon.
Of around 10000 launched at Britain only about 2400 reached the vague
proximity of their target area. And many fell fairly harmlessly -
aided by British manipulation of intelligence. But as an economic
weapon they made much sense and if they had arrived on the scene some
months earlier in far greater numbers, when proximity fuzed, radar
guided AA was not yet available they would undoubtedly have had a
proportionately much larger effect on the prosecution of the war.

Agreed. By the way I am in the process of writing a fictional story
based on such a scenario

WWW.bernardz.20m.com



Thanks to Hitler's intervention this did not happen.

I am not so sure Hitler was wrong! The V1 could probably have come on-
line in 1943 only at a terrific price and a very limited target -
Britain. At that time Britain was a minor part of the war. The major war
was in the East and he needed resources against Russia. Before 1943,
when it looked like Hitler could win the war those resources required
could be far better spent on things that mattered like tanks and planes.

After 1943, he needed to gain time for a miracle. Maybe the Allies would
split. To do that he needed to give the German people hope and vengeance
that they could still fire back. That is what these weapons provided.


Eugene Griessel





--
A terrorist kills for publicity.

24th saying of Bernard

Bernardz wrote in message news:MPG.1a5aa8ed3b4d2ccc9897f3@news...

I am not so sure Hitler was wrong! The V1 could probably have come on-
line in 1943 only at a terrific price and a very limited target -
Britain. At that time Britain was a minor part of the war. The major war
was in the East and he needed resources against Russia. Before 1943,
when it looked like Hitler could win the war those resources required
could be far better spent on things that mattered like tanks and planes.

The flying bomb offensive, from 12th June 1944 to 1st September 1944
cost Britain almost 48 million pounds in lost production alone. In a
report by the Air Ministry dated 4th November 1944 it is stated: "The
main conclusion is that the results of the campaign were greatly in
the enemy's favour, the estimated ratio of our costs to his being
nearly four to one." Move this back 18 months when the Allies had no
fighters fast enough to shoot down these weapons and no effective
low-level AAA and a grim picture begins to emerge. I'm not saying
that the campaign would have brought the allies to their knees but
speculation is that D-Day would have been postponed for at least a
year and costs and casualties would have been high. If the A4 project
had been abandoned and the flying bomb project given top priority it
would have meant more than 30000 of these beasts arriving over Britain
a month - with Britain largely impotent to stop them. A fearful
thought.

In article ,
says...
Bernardz wrote in message news:MPG.1a5aa8ed3b4d2ccc9897f3@news...

I am not so sure Hitler was wrong! The V1 could probably have come on-
line in 1943 only at a terrific price and a very limited target -
Britain. At that time Britain was a minor part of the war. The major war
was in the East and he needed resources against Russia. Before 1943,
when it looked like Hitler could win the war those resources required
could be far better spent on things that mattered like tanks and planes.

The flying bomb offensive, from 12th June 1944 to 1st September 1944
cost Britain almost 48 million pounds in lost production alone. In a
report by the Air Ministry dated 4th November 1944 it is stated: "The
main conclusion is that the results of the campaign were greatly in
the enemy's favour, the estimated ratio of our costs to his being
nearly four to one." Move this back 18 months when the Allies had no
fighters fast enough to shoot down these weapons and no effective
low-level AAA and a grim picture begins to emerge. I'm not saying
that the campaign would have brought the allies to their knees but
speculation is that D-Day would have been postponed for at least a
year and costs and casualties would have been high. If the A4 project
had been abandoned and the flying bomb project given top priority it
would have meant more than 30000 of these beasts arriving over Britain
a month - with Britain largely impotent to stop them. A fearful
thought.



This is very similar to a fictional work that I am in process of
writing.

Draft version 1 is available at

www.BERNARDZ.20m.com

Note there are quite a few mistakes that I am currently fixing in
version 2.


--
A terrorist kills for publicity.

24th saying of Bernard