Is this mini cruise missile a good idea?

[Philip the Arab]

Okay you are right but V1 rockets still weight 2ton and have 10 meter lenght which would cause to be detected easily by any cheap air defence systems. Today instead of V1s we have GPS guided artillery rockets.

Regarding low cost autonomous attack system , I would refrain making any comments because I don't know how much cheap they are
Using drones with ATGMs and smart munitions sounds better to me.
These low-cost missiles could turn back safely if there weren't any targets?????

Apparently only 30000 us dollars for each one projected for 12000 units produced. As I said before its more of liking the propulsion system which is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsejet more than the V-1 itself but that's what I would use for its low cost the downside is its very loud but solutions have been proposed by various people. Overall its much cheaper than a turbojet or turbofan by a whole lot as back in ww2 it was produced for only a few hundred or few thousand in todays dollars. It could also be used as a target drone as the French did after WW2. Something like this would work

 

[UkroTurk]

Apparently only 30000 us dollars for each one projected for 12000 units produced. As I said before its more of liking the propulsion system which is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsejet more than the V-1 itself but that's what I would use for its low cost the downside is its very loud but solutions have been proposed by various people. Overall its much cheaper than a turbojet or turbofan by a whole lot as back in ww2 it was produced for only a few hundred or few thousand in todays dollars. It could also be used as a target drone as the French did after WW2. Something like this would work

Apparently only 30000 us dollars for each one projected for 12000 units produced. As I said before its more of liking the propulsion system which is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsejet more than the V-1 itself but that's what I would use for its low cost the downside is its very loud but solutions have been proposed by various people. Overall its much cheaper than a turbojet or turbofan by a whole lot as back in ww2 it was produced for only a few hundred or few thousand in todays dollars. It could also be used as a target drone as the French did after WW2. Something like this would work

Surprising information ,thanks, I haven't known 12000 units low-cost cruise missiles were produced.
30k price sounds convincing. I am puzzled.


İnstead of v-1 missiles , today GPS guided artillery rockets conduct great deal. GMLRS rockets cost also nearly 30k.

 

[Yaseen1]

In future countries may develop intense laser beams made walls at their borders which will destroy any missile passing through it israel is already working on it it will be effective for low moving objects

 

[Philip the Arab]

Surprising information ,thanks, I haven't known 12000 units low-cost cruise missiles were produced.
30k price sounds convincing. I am puzzled.


İnstead of v-1 missiles , today GPS guided artillery rockets conduct great deal. GMLRS rockets cost also nearly 30k.

They weren't produced they were supposed to be but it was eventually cancelled which sucks a whole lot. It was proposed it would cost 30k dollars for 1 each but it wasn't confirmed. Short range cruise missiles are still used artillery guided with gps only have 20-30 mile range compared to V-1 with 150 miles. Besides as I said before I just like the pulsejet inside of it.

 

[Darth Vader]

one issue is delivery system , you need to launch a big number ASAP so these babies can form a swarm
this can be used as offensive and defensive platform
If you can deploy 20 to 30 birds with one system in around 1 minute it will be a major system

Drones and Smart smaller amunication is the way for future as you need precision since most of warfare is going into urban areas

 

[Philip the Arab]

one issue is delivery system , you need to launch a big number ASAP so these babies can form a swarm
this can be used as offensive and defensive platform
If you can deploy 20 to 30 birds with one system in around 1 minute it will be a major system

Drones and Smart smaller amunication is the way for future as you need precision since most of warfare is going into urban areas

VLS maybe? Should work and can work with basically any size VLS because of size of the missile. Cruise missiles do work in urban environments as well as any other and can loiter.

 

[UkroTurk]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JB-4
http://www.usscusk.com/loon.htm

Your order already was done

İgnition and take off and reliability seem to be still crucial problems.

 

[Philip the Arab]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JB-4
http://www.usscusk.com/loon.htm

Your order already was done

İgnition and take off and reliability seem to be still crucial problems.

They are problems but they are fixable for example wouldn't a pneumatic launch be a solution after all the reason it needs to be taken into the air is because air is needed to start the engine. This is how the Nazis started it.
Ignition of the Argus pulsejet was accomplished using an automotive type spark plug located about 76 cm (2.49 ft) behind the intake shutters, with air supplied from a portable starting unit. Three air nozzles in the front of the pulsejet were at the same time connected to an external high-pressure air source that was used to start the engine. Acetylene gas was typically used for starting the engine, and very often a panel of wood or similar material was held across the end of the tailpipe to prevent the fuel from diffusing and escaping before ignition. The V-1 was fuelled by 625 litres (165 US gallons) of 75 octane gasoline.

solutions for the problems as I stated before, a circular metal device that is sealed before the starting that automatically opens after the cruise missile is in the air to help the problem without this problem stated "very often a panel of wood or similar material was held across the end of the tailpipe to prevent the fuel from diffusing and escaping before ignition."

"air nozzles in the front of the pulsejet were at the same time connected to an external high-pressure air source that was used to start the engine."
An integrated device to give air to the system to start it could work as long as the technology was there as the Nazis used a portable one but its been 70 years and technology has changed a lot since then.

"Acetylene gas was typically used for starting the engine"
This can still be done today with an integrated and small amount of Acetylene Gas inside of the cruise missile itself with a small tube connected to the inside of the engine to get it to work without using external systems.

Sound is a problem but I do think noise reduction could be achieved but I don't know exactly how this could be achieved. Tell me if I covered the problems correctly please.

 

[UkroTurk]

According to Russian wiki
You can use Google translate.
К 29 марта 1945 года около 10 000 было запущено по Англии; 3200 упали на её территории, из них 2419 достигли Лондона, вызвав потери в 6184 человек убитыми и 17 981 ранеными[3]. Лондонцы называли Фау-1 «летающими бомбами» (flying bomb), а также «жужжащими бомбами» (buzz bomb), из-за характерного звука, издаваемого пульсирующим воздушно-реактивным двигателем.
Около 20 % ракет отказывали при запуске, 25 % уничтожались английской авиацией, 17 % сбивались зенитками, 7 % разрушались при столкновении с аэростатами заграждения. Двигатели часто отказывали до достижения цели и также вибрация двигателя часто выводила ракету из строя, так что около 20 % Фау-1 падали в море. Хотя конкретные цифры варьируются от источника к источнику, британский доклад, опубликованный после войны показал, что на Англию были запущены 7547 Фау-1. В докладе указывается, что из них 1847 были уничтожены истребителями, 1866 были уничтожены зенитной артиллерией, 232 были уничтожены аэростатами заграждения и 12 — артиллерией кораблей Королевского ВМФ.[4


Сравнение Blitz (12 месяцев) и летающих бомб V1 (2 ¾ месяца)
Blitz V1
1. Стоимость для Германии
Вылетов blitz: 90 000 -V1: 8025
Вес бомб, тонн 61 149 -14 600
Израсходовано топлива, тонн 71 700 - 4681
Потеряно самолетов 3075- 0
Потеряно экипажа 7690 -0
2. Результаты
Строений уничтожено/повреждено 1150 000 -1127 000
Потери населения 92 566- 22 892
Отношение потерь к расходу бомб 1,6 - 4,2
3. Стоимость для Англии
Усилия самолетов сопровождения
Вылетов 86800 -44 770
Потеряно самолетов 1260- 351
Потеряно человек 2233- 805



С одной катапульты по расчётам можно было запустить до 15 снарядов в день, хотя на практике это делалось далеко не всегда. Рекорд составлял 18 запусков в 1 день. Около 20 % всех пусков с катапульты были аварийными.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb_facilities

Having calculated the cost of launcher s, ground support, maintain and store , I would go for modern mini cruise missiles which don't need hefty amount of working power.
Hitler reduced the cost because he used convicteds as slaves. Moreover expansive bases are hurdle mobility. Mobility is more important than cost.
İf you add up all expenses V1 rocket program must cost much more than price of a rocket.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mini-cruise-missile-spear-3.482632/
http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...i-ship-capabilities-to-raf-and-faa-f-35s.html

I suppose 100km range is enough to craftly hit enemies vehicles. Also just weights 80kg.

Weapons
MBDA offers surface-launched Brimstone to Poland

https://www.janes.com/article/83012/mbda-offers-surface-launched-brimstone-to-poland

 

[Philip the Arab]

According to Russian wiki
You can use Google translate.
К 29 марта 1945 года около 10 000 было запущено по Англии; 3200 упали на её территории, из них 2419 достигли Лондона, вызвав потери в 6184 человек убитыми и 17 981 ранеными[3]. Лондонцы называли Фау-1 «летающими бомбами» (flying bomb), а также «жужжащими бомбами» (buzz bomb), из-за характерного звука, издаваемого пульсирующим воздушно-реактивным двигателем.
Около 20 % ракет отказывали при запуске, 25 % уничтожались английской авиацией, 17 % сбивались зенитками, 7 % разрушались при столкновении с аэростатами заграждения. Двигатели часто отказывали до достижения цели и также вибрация двигателя часто выводила ракету из строя, так что около 20 % Фау-1 падали в море. Хотя конкретные цифры варьируются от источника к источнику, британский доклад, опубликованный после войны показал, что на Англию были запущены 7547 Фау-1. В докладе указывается, что из них 1847 были уничтожены истребителями, 1866 были уничтожены зенитной артиллерией, 232 были уничтожены аэростатами заграждения и 12 — артиллерией кораблей Королевского ВМФ.[4


Сравнение Blitz (12 месяцев) и летающих бомб V1 (2 ¾ месяца)
Blitz V1
1. Стоимость для Германии
Вылетов blitz: 90 000 -V1: 8025
Вес бомб, тонн 61 149 -14 600
Израсходовано топлива, тонн 71 700 - 4681
Потеряно самолетов 3075- 0
Потеряно экипажа 7690 -0
2. Результаты
Строений уничтожено/повреждено 1150 000 -1127 000
Потери населения 92 566- 22 892
Отношение потерь к расходу бомб 1,6 - 4,2
3. Стоимость для Англии
Усилия самолетов сопровождения
Вылетов 86800 -44 770
Потеряно самолетов 1260- 351
Потеряно человек 2233- 805



С одной катапульты по расчётам можно было запустить до 15 снарядов в день, хотя на практике это делалось далеко не всегда. Рекорд составлял 18 запусков в 1 день. Около 20 % всех пусков с катапульты были аварийными.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb_facilities

Having calculated the cost of launcher s, ground support, maintain and store , I would go for modern mini cruise missiles which don't need hefty amount of working power.
Hitler reduced the cost because he used convicteds as slaves. Moreover expansive bases are hurdle mobility. Mobility is more important than cost.
İf you add up all expenses V1 rocket program must cost much more than price of a rocket.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mini-cruise-missile-spear-3.482632/
http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...i-ship-capabilities-to-raf-and-faa-f-35s.html

I suppose 100km range is enough to craftly hit enemies vehicles. Also just weights 80kg.

View attachment 531117

Weapons
MBDA offers surface-launched Brimstone to Poland

https://www.janes.com/article/83012/mbda-offers-surface-launched-brimstone-to-poland

You don't need all these intricate launching systems that the Nazis used 70 years ago today you can simply make the missile mobile like this which can launch cruise missiles while being mobile and with the solutions above I do think it could be made by using a solid rocket booster at the back that ignites before flight and falls off as other missiles like the Tomahawk.

Make the missile compact like this with maybe the engine on top and it should work

Read this answer to a question in quora by a Turkish guy and I agreed with him a lot.
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-pulse..._filter__=all&__nsrc__=1&__snid3__=3724781294