Germany's big Mistake, no Proximity Fuse in WWII

Unlike the allies, Germany ended WWII without deployment of a proximity fuse. Operational data showed proximity fuses were 4.75 times more combat effective as standard timed fuses for ground artillery anti-aircraft FLAK projectiles. Had they been developed, bomber losses would have not likely been sustainable. The video will estimate the increase in bomber losses had FLAK projectile proximity fuses had be in operation in lieu of standard timed fuses. Correction: Note units of 88mm flak guns rate of fire is rounds per minute not rounds per second.

[WWIIUSBombers]

Correction: Rate of fire of the 88mm FLAK gun is 15 rounds per minute, not per second.

[randomnickify]

Best part of this channel: no fluffing about, just going directly to the data table, never change.

[irishtino]

How this man gets less than 40k subscribers is sad, it is one of the only data driven WWII channels on YT. I grew up in a neighborhood full of WWII veterans, one of my best friends dad flew with 8th AF, two or maybe three tours. When he passed 30 years ago turns out he had 96 missions, three distinguished flying crosses (US, UK, FR) and a bunch of other citations. He never talked about flying other than funny anecdotal stories. His wife and kids didn't even know.
Another outstanding video today - thank you.

[robertslugg]

VT fuses were not employed where the enemy could have recovered an unexploded shell (all fuzes do fail at times). In the Pacific they dropped into the ocean. Those who experienced a VT fuze up close were never in a position to report back.

[JohnRodriguesPhotographer]

When the US deployed the proximity fuse initially for security reasons they were not allowed to fire them over land. I think it was late 1944 the army started using them for normal bombardment. As the shell would approach the ground the radar would reflect off the ground and you would get an airburst which is horrific on infantry. The Navy started using them directing fire over land when the Kamikaze threat became real. My dad fought with the 6th Armored Division throughout their European campaign. He had a very healthy respect for that fuse.

[KenshiroPlayDotA]

6:40 : Actually, the number of German FlaK rounds needed to down a U.S. heavy bomber wouldn't necessarily be divided by a 4.75 factor had the Germans had access to proximity fuzes, because it relies on data of the U.S. Navy engaging Japanese suicide aircraft, which means :

a) It pertains to 5" = 127mm rounds. The AAVT Mark 31 used in 5" guns had a bursting charge of 3.3kg of explosive D or composition A, while the 3 HE rounds for the German 88mm guns (8.8 cm. Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (kz.) m. Zt. Z. S/30, 8.8 cm. Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (kz.) m. Zt. Z. S/30 Fg, 8.8 cm. Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (kz.) m. A.Z. 23/28), which were the same round except for the fuzes, contained a bursting charge of 1kg of TNT or 40/60 amatol. So unless I'm completely wrong, the AAVT Mark 31 should have a larger lethal radius against identical targets than the 88mm rounds. Hence the probability of getting close enough to the target and still have lethal effects should be higher with the AAVT Mark 31 than with the 88mm rounds, so the ratio of close-enough detonations to direct impacts, which should be close to the VT combat effectiveness ratio, should be higher with the AAVT Mark 31.

b) U.S. Navy data was against Japanese suicide aircraft, which should have required less damage than U.S. heavy bombers to be shot down. If VT 127mm rounds were used against U.S. heavy bombers, they'd probably need to detonate closer to them to be lethal. And the lethal radius would be further reduced with VT 88mm rounds, so the VT combat effectiveness would further drop.

While I have no doubt that proximity fuzes would have greatly increased the combat effectiveness of German FlaK, I doubt it would have increased by a 4.75 factor.

[marcelbork]

Tens of thousands of Flak rounds in fact HIT their targets BUT PIERCED IT and flew through WITHOUT IGNITION. And the bombers of that time were so constructed that they could survive mere HOLES in their hull structures.

[marchutchings]

Utterly amazing how small the proximity fuse is. The cross section drawing 10 seconds into this video is most important to understand how they worked. Brilliant miniturisation for so long ago. Genius. Thanks for this important information.

[rare_kumiko]

Realistically, even if Germany had managed to develop a VT fuse at the same pace as the Allies and have it ready by 1943, I can't see German industry managing to produce it in the required quantities.

[_AnanasIEgenJuice_]

Extremely high quality video. Someone that actually does the numbers instead of just tossing opinions up in the air

[Perfusionist]

Navy sources indicate that the VT (Variable Time) fuze multiplied the effectiveness of 5" AAA fire by a factor of 4 to 7. Keeping the Germans from reverse engineering the VT fuze was why the Allied ground forces in ETO were forbidden to use POZIT fuzes for land targets until the Ardennes offensive. Proximity fuzes work for AA fire and also for causing airburst shells to detonate over troops in the open. Question; given the state of German industry circa 1944 - could they have produced enough VT fuzes to make a significant difference?

[czwarty]

I just yesterday read about this topic, and now a video from you! Good christmas present:)

[philiphumphrey]

They might have used it in the V2 in the same way that the Little Boy A bomb had a ground proximity radar altimeter to detonate it at the right height. An explosive charge detonated 100 ft or more above a city devastates a much wider area than a burst at ground level. The V2 landed at such a speed that it partially buried itself before the contact fuse could detonate it, rendering the explosion even less effective.

[Chiller]

Interesting analysis. I suppose there is some weakness in converting data taken from single engine Japanese fighter losses and applying it directly to 4 engine B17’s and B24’s and there may be some differences in the efficacy of the US and the German flak projectiles but overall I think it’s a good estimation, frightening though.

[heyfitzpablum]

Excellent analysis and I say that as a retired electrical engineer with 47 years in industry. Subscribing.

[samray]

finally! I have been talking about this issue for years! Just imagine the devastating effect of 128 mm from flak 40 with proximity fuses. The B-17s are just too vulnerable for such weapons.

[Jonnosummit]

Excellent annalysis including variations due to changing tactics and a dynamic battlefield on both sides.

[paulbrogger]

Significant analysis -- or maybe presentation -- of a WWII "what if". WELL done, sir!

[puebespuebes]

The main reason flak was so ineffective during ww2 was that pilot where trained to change heading and altitude constently to avoid the flak barrage that could not be calculated fast enought to adjust meaning they alway exploded too high or too low.

You can watch an old training film on this on youtube.

[michaelbizon]

Thank you & merry Christmas! Wow 4.7 x ouch! The US might have had to deploy the B-29s & nukes to Europe with losses like those. Excellently easy to follow assessment, the way these vids are put together is both entertaining to watch & thoroughly documented. Must have one heck of a lot of good sources.