PDA

View Full Version : Bf109 ramming into US bombers



Uufflakke
06-01-2008, 05:42 AM
Today I saw an interesting documentary on YouTube about German Bf109's who were ordered to ram themselves into B-17's and B-24's to stop them from bombing the German homeland.

I never knew about this bizarre episode of WWII.

For those who are interested in seeing this 45 minutes documentary in 5 parts (including interviews with German and US pilots who survived these ramming attacks) here is the link to part 1:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8QyELSlHVAA&feature=related

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh195/Uufflakke/IMG_6679.jpg

Images are no stills from original footage but animated graphics of the documentary...

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh195/Uufflakke/IMG_6680.jpg

DKoor
06-01-2008, 05:44 AM
Teh link?

F19_Orheim
06-01-2008, 05:44 AM
link?

Uufflakke
06-01-2008, 05:53 AM
Sorry guys, something went wrong when attaching the link.
But below you will have all the links to this documentary:

Part 1:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8QyELSlHVAA&feature=related

Part 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aMyYJx7I4i4&feature=related

Part 3:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tK4y7M1EDYA&feature=related

Part 4:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=p6Vc3TJXASw&feature=related

Part 5:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=icHRPZn7u_g&feature=related

F19_Orheim
06-01-2008, 05:54 AM
thanx mate.. will have a look http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DKoor
06-01-2008, 06:16 AM
Check out the B-17 at time 7:00 in "Dogfights - Luftwaffe's Deadliest Mission (1 of 5)" (http://youtube.com/watch?v=8QyELSlHVAA&feature=related) ...

X32Wright
06-01-2008, 08:27 AM
why do you think they were called 'RAMMJAEGERS'??? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

jensenpark
06-01-2008, 09:06 AM
There's an interesting (but very, very dry) book on this - "last flight of the Luftwaffe"

From the book - few got through...most apparently did not attack (hid up in the clouds - justifiably) or were whacked by escorts. Hard to d/f with all that extra armour.

Thanks for posting the links - will watch now.

b2spirita
06-01-2008, 09:29 AM
what a stupid waste of perfectly usable aircraft, surely that must have been obvious to the luftwaffe

Luke5skywalker4
06-01-2008, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by b2spirita:
what a stupid waste of perfectly usable aircraft, surely that must have been obvious to the luftwaffe

Well, duh, it was obvious to the Luftwaffe. Top Luftwaffe pilots and squadron commanders were against such tactics. One German pilot, the name I don't remember, explained that it was waste considering that if a pilot could get that close to a bomber, they would have the chance to shoot it.

b2spirita
06-01-2008, 12:19 PM
it didnt need to be obvious to top pilots, its ovious to anyone even vaugely considering the idea

DKoor
06-01-2008, 12:20 PM
Arguably.

One engined, small (in comparison to other fighters of era, especially US ones), Bf-109 fighter takes a lot less resources to produce than a B-17 or B-24.

Not to mention loss of one man vs loss of 10 man.

A lot of countries in war would be willing to 'accept' such K/D ratio.

Now, what could be done with such actions on larger level, tactical level, is another question.

Mofast
06-01-2008, 12:35 PM
My grandpa was RCAF in WWII as a mechanic on Hurries and Mossies in Canada as part of the Commonwealth Air Training Plan. When he retired and was living on Vancouver Island BC he spoke with a German guy at the gym who told him that near the end of the war he was being taught simply how to take off in a 109 and simply ram a "terrorfleiger", but was spared that fate due to VE.

It can be surprising the stories one can encounter by talking to those folks from that generation, Ive had a few almost surreal conversations with some guys from that era.

Great post Uufflakke.

X32Wright
06-01-2008, 01:21 PM
Rammjaegers were FAR from being suicidal. These were not kamikaze type of attcks. They were rather just to stop the bomber onslaught by sacrificng their planes but not themselves. They mainly used the 109's and 190's wing to slice at the contrl surfaces of the bombers, ram the end of the bombers with their props or slice at the nose of bombers and then bail.

Ths is well documented that some squadrons were converted to be 'ramjaegers', I know that Adolf Galland was against this poor use of G-6's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderkommando_Elbe

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/neilpage/sturmjaegerthemen.html

Sillius_Sodus
06-01-2008, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by jensenpark:
There's an interesting (but very, very dry) book on this - "last flight of the Luftwaffe"

From the book - few got through...most apparently did not attack (hid up in the clouds - justifiably) or were whacked by escorts. Hard to d/f with all that extra armour.

Thanks for posting the links - will watch now.

jensenpark,

I have that book and yes, it's verrrryyyy dry. I'm still happy to have it my library though.

Uufflakke
06-01-2008, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by Mofast:
My grandpa was RCAF in WWII as a mechanic on Hurries and Mossies in Canada as part of the Commonwealth Air Training Plan. When he retired and was living on Vancouver Island BC he spoke with a German guy at the gym who told him that near the end of the war he was being taught simply how to take off in a 109 and simply ram a "terrorfleiger", but was spared that fate due to VE.

It can be surprising the stories one can encounter by talking to those folks from that generation, Ive had a few almost surreal conversations with some guys from that era.

Great post Uufflakke.

That's an interesting story Mofast. If your grandfather had been told that decades later he would have a conversation at the gym with a German pilot he would have sent that person to a mental hospital or at least call him insane.

Life is full of surprises isn't it.

Choctaw111
06-01-2008, 02:32 PM
I have known about this for a long time, and often wondered why.
Weren't the big cannon enough to down the bombers? The Germans figured ramming them was the best method?
I don't know how many of these pilots were killed that could not bail in time.

DKoor
06-01-2008, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
Weren't the big cannon enough to down the bombers? The Germans figured ramming them was the best method? +1

With some modifications, one really large cannon with one or two shells (PaK.7,5 ?) could maybe fitted on a fighter... and then if he could maneuver onto bomber 6 from point blank range he can't miss, and the chance of bomber survival after that are practically nil.
They could still be heavily armoured and capable to take soak some of defensive fire.

Capt.LoneRanger
06-01-2008, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
Weren't the big cannon enough to down the bombers? The Germans figured ramming them was the best method? +1

With some modifications, one really large cannon with one or two shells (PaK.7,5 ?) could maybe fitted on a fighter... and then if he could maneuver onto bomber 6 from point blank range he can't miss, and the chance of bomber survival after that are practically nil.
They could still be heavily armoured and capable to take soak some of defensive fire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is true, but as you can see from the short "report", the German Command was not aiming at the bombers, but at the crews morale. And showing desperation to fight the intruders by risking their own lives is a much better sign than just to continue against an ever growing superiority.

Pirschjaeger
06-01-2008, 03:19 PM
IIRC, this was towards the end of the war when supplies were running low and desperation was the decision maker.

Also, sure the planes could have been armed. But a pilot with an armed plane does not let himself get as close as a suicide pilot would. A suicide pilot has one simple mission.

IMHO, it wasn't a bad tactic. The damage a bomber can do compared to that of a fighter is much, much greater. When I flew coops, if I ran out of ammo and there were still bombers, I'd try to ram their wings. Other players didn't like this. Too bad. I like immersion.

Choctaw111
06-01-2008, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:


IMHO, it wasn't a bad tactic. The damage a bomber can do compared to that of a fighter is much, much greater. When I flew coops, if I ran out of ammo and there were still bombers, I'd try to ram their wings. Other players didn't like this. Too bad. I like immersion.

I hear ya. Immersion any day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Pirschjaeger
06-01-2008, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I hear ya. Immersion any day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I remember a few years ago a member, I think it was the clown dude(can't remember his ID), was chastised for having tapped into the enemy's coms in a coop server. By doing this he was able to collect vital info on the enemy's movement and strategy. Personally, I thought it was great and added a deeper level to immersion.

Thinking back, I still can't believe how many called him down for doing what they did in real.

Pilots in pampers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Like BC's sig says, or used to say, "Immersion baby!". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

jarink
06-01-2008, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by b2spirita:
what a stupid waste of perfectly usable aircraft, surely that must have been obvious to the luftwaffe

At the end of the war, the Luftwaffe actually had a surplus of aircraft. What they lacked was enough skilled, veteran aircrew to man them and fuel to fly them.


Originally posted by DKoor:
With some modifications, one really large cannon with one or two shells (PaK.7,5 ?) could maybe fitted on a fighter... and then if he could maneuver onto bomber 6 from point blank range he can't miss, and the chance of bomber survival after that are practically nil.
They could still be heavily armoured and capable to take soak some of defensive fire.

Again, pilot skill was an important factor. Sure, one or two shots would be enough if they were able to get close enough for a no-deflection shot from directly at the 6, but that would have been a different form of suicide. Putting enough armor (not to mention the weight of such a large gun) on a plane to allow such a tactic would have resulted in such poor performance, they would have been sitting ducks for escorts.

A far better weapon was a salvo of R4Ms.

The rockets were small and light enough to be fitted to nearly any fighter (and I'm surprised they weren't used more) with little performance loss. Individual rockets were very inaccurate, but the spread you got from a salvo of 2 dozen rocket gave a very good chance for a hit, especially in close-packed bomber formations.

As for the Rammjaegers, does anyone know if they used trailing wires to snag other airplanes? I remember reading that some aerial victories were scored in such a way very early on in WWI, before guns were common.

JG51_Rudel
06-01-2008, 09:41 PM
The name of the Squad in the show is the:

Sonderkommando Elbe

luftluuver
06-01-2008, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
With some modifications, one really large cannon with one or two shells (PaK.7,5 ?) could maybe fitted on a fighter... and then if he could maneuver onto bomber 6 from point blank range he can't miss, and the chance of bomber survival after that are practically nil.
They could still be heavily armoured and capable to take soak some of defensive fire.
Do you have any idea what a PaK 7,5 weighed? Never mind what the firing of the weapon would do to the fighter.

A 50mm was tried on a 262 and it was a dismal failure.

Capt.LoneRanger
06-02-2008, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I hear ya. Immersion any day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I remember a few years ago a member, I think it was the clown dude(can't remember his ID), was chastised for having tapped into the enemy's coms in a coop server. By doing this he was able to collect vital info on the enemy's movement and strategy. Personally, I thought it was great and added a deeper level to immersion.

Thinking back, I still can't believe how many called him down for doing what they did in real.

Pilots in pampers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Like BC's sig says, or used to say, "Immersion baby!". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You also get kicked and even banned for doing this on WC. Real pitty, IMHO, though I never did listen to enemy coms. But considering the lack of interactivity with operators, observation-points or even radar in the game, I really think this adds some immersion to the game.

And saying so, I want to point out, that I am often the guy on the bombrun, so this would hit me the hardest.

DKoor
06-02-2008, 03:50 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
With some modifications, one really large cannon with one or two shells (PaK.7,5 ?) could maybe fitted on a fighter... and then if he could maneuver onto bomber 6 from point blank range he can't miss, and the chance of bomber survival after that are practically nil.
They could still be heavily armoured and capable to take soak some of defensive fire.
Do you have any idea what a PaK 7,5 weighed? Never mind what the firing of the weapon would do to the fighter. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Two things.

1.Google is your friend. Such weapon should weight around 1000kg, so why should I have any ideas when I can have facts?
2.Firing would do to a fighter much better thing than ramming did.

tragentsmith
06-02-2008, 04:11 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I hear ya. Immersion any day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I remember a few years ago a member, I think it was the clown dude(can't remember his ID), was chastised for having tapped into the enemy's coms in a coop server. By doing this he was able to collect vital info on the enemy's movement and strategy. Personally, I thought it was great and added a deeper level to immersion.

Thinking back, I still can't believe how many called him down for doing what they did in real.

Pilots in pampers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Like BC's sig says, or used to say, "Immersion baby!". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You also get kicked and even banned for doing this on WC. Real pitty, IMHO, though I never did listen to enemy coms. But considering the lack of interactivity with operators, observation-points or even radar in the game, I really think this adds some immersion to the game.

And saying so, I want to point out, that I am often the guy on the bombrun, so this would hit me the hardest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I would mind if someone was listening to our comms. I mean, we have no cryption or decryption device, and comms were not so easilly intercepted IRL as switching channels on teamspeak. So that has nothing to do with "immersion". It's just a bad way to justify cheat.

Capt.LoneRanger
06-02-2008, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by tragentsmith:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Choctaw111:
I hear ya. Immersion any day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I remember a few years ago a member, I think it was the clown dude(can't remember his ID), was chastised for having tapped into the enemy's coms in a coop server. By doing this he was able to collect vital info on the enemy's movement and strategy. Personally, I thought it was great and added a deeper level to immersion.

Thinking back, I still can't believe how many called him down for doing what they did in real.

Pilots in pampers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Like BC's sig says, or used to say, "Immersion baby!". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You also get kicked and even banned for doing this on WC. Real pitty, IMHO, though I never did listen to enemy coms. But considering the lack of interactivity with operators, observation-points or even radar in the game, I really think this adds some immersion to the game.

And saying so, I want to point out, that I am often the guy on the bombrun, so this would hit me the hardest. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I would mind if someone was listening to our comms. I mean, we have no cryption or decryption device, and comms were not so easilly intercepted IRL as switching channels on teamspeak. So that has nothing to do with "immersion". It's just a bad way to justify cheat. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cheat? All you do is listening to other coms and what advantage can you get other than enemy-locations and targets.

In RL that was done by various means:
1. Locating emissions (in game terms: If you don't state your location, you won't be located, just as keeping radio-silence in RL)
2. Radar (we don't have that in the game, though it was vital since the early war)
3. C3 (we have no spotters or ground guidance in the game, though this was the key for intercept-operations)
4. Espionage prior to attacks

Since we don't have any of these 4 things ingame, it IS immersive to make these means available. Surely not the optimal way, though, I agree with you on that part.

Just look at games like SilentHunter. You can even receive enemy locations when they chat!

WOLFMondo
06-02-2008, 06:10 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
When I flew coops, if I ran out of ammo and there were still bombers, I'd try to ram their wings. Other players didn't like this. Too bad. I like immersion.

+1

If I've run out of ammo and i'm over freindly territory and high enough to bail I'll always try to ram other planes with my wing, tail or prop. Real pilots did it so I'm gonna do it.

DKoor
06-02-2008, 07:02 AM
It is possible to deploy gears and ram someone with them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
However a great share of luck must be involved...
Second best part to ram someone with is tail...
...followed by prop (engine: inoperable) but who cares, as long as you can land on friendly territory road.

WOLFMondo
06-02-2008, 07:38 AM
I've seen someone try that in a Stuka, didn't work very well though! I wonder if you lost both legs on the ju87 it would perform better?!

Pirschjaeger
06-02-2008, 08:56 AM
I tried knocking the gear off a Stuka before thinking I could get a little more speed. Forget it. Somehow the lack of landing gear greated a lot of drag.

Oleg never claimed to be perfect. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Trangent,

the IL2 series is both a sim and a game. Oleg was smart enough to make it both to better exploit the market. I'm more into simming. This means the only way to cheat is to tinker with the program it self. Just like real war, everything else is fair.

Listening to enemy communication is part of real war.

Sturm_Williger
06-02-2008, 09:16 AM
IIRC, it wasn't against the server rules when (Hristo ?) did it, they brought in that rule when his tactic came to light.

Personally I can't see how it can help much, you still have to do the business when you arrive at the enemy's location ( and if you fly like me, you probably just add a stat to the enemy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ).

I think they were more concerned with the tracking of bombers who had taken the time to climb to 6k and were trying to sneak to the targets via a roundabout route. It can be time-consuming, so I can sympathise with their PoV, but on the other hand, the justification of radar also exists.

Darth_Reagan
06-02-2008, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:

That is true, but as you can see from the short "report", the German Command was not aiming at the bombers, but at the crews morale. And showing desperation to fight the intruders by risking their own lives is a much better sign than just to continue against an ever growing superiority.

I would have thought bomber crew's morale was low at the best of times anyway, but it didn't stop them. Unlike a fighter which might be 'scared off' in some way a poor old bomber crew has to trundle to the target holding formation no matter how unhappy they are. I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying by the way, just the tactic.

WOLFMondo
06-02-2008, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by Sturm_Williger:
IIRC, it wasn't against the server rules when (Hristo ?) did it, they brought in that rule when his tactic came to light.


I remember when he did it, it wasn't against server rules because it pretty much an unspoken rule of any TS server or community that you just don't do that!!

ViktorViktor
06-02-2008, 10:14 AM
Immersion Simmersion, the real reason ramming enemy aircraft became an alternative towards the end of the war was cuz pilot quality was probably so low that these fellas couldn't shoot worth a lick.

I'm sure you veteran simmers can shoot at the experten level by now, so why bother to ram ? Just land and re-arm like pilots did in real life. That's immersion too.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WOLFMondo
06-02-2008, 10:20 AM
Why bother to ram? How else are you to take out an enemy plane without any ammunition?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pilots were ramming planes at all points in the war, there was even a Hurricane pilot in 1940 that rammed a Dornier over London. His Hurri was burning too! I belive the official account was he started to bail out but got back in his burning plane just so he could ram it.

Uufflakke
06-02-2008, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Why bother to ram? How else are you to take out an enemy plane without any ammunition?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pilots were ramming planes at all points in the war, there was even a Hurricane pilot in 1940 that rammed a Dornier over London. His Hurri was burning too! I belive the official account was he started to bail out but got back in his burning plane just so he could ram it.


The name of the pilot was Ray "Arty" Holmes
http://www.bbm.org.uk/as-holmes.htm

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh195/Uufflakke/RHolmes.jpg

And this is an image of the rammed Dornier bomber above the roofs of London

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh195/Uufflakke/Dornier.jpg

ViktorViktor
06-02-2008, 11:13 AM
Ramming is like a gunslinger in a gunfight who instead of reloading when he runs out of bullets, rushes his opponent and tries to beat him to death with the pistol butt.

It just don't seem right. Nuh-uh, that's not what the Colt-45 was designed for.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

Pirschjaeger
06-02-2008, 11:22 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif @ Viktor.

Today is the first time I've flown in years. That's right, I got ram, 1946, and a stick from a guardian angel. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I was up against bombers and being way out of practice, I wasted a lot of ammo. Instinctively, and not even thinking of this thread, in each mission, I ended by ramming a bomber.

It's what I would have done in real and in real I think you'd have a much higher chance of survival. Oleg's planes are a little sensitive. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FliegerAas
06-02-2008, 09:29 PM
Is the secret weapons episode available anywhere? The internet says it has already been aired, but I can't find it anywhere?

Capt.LoneRanger
06-03-2008, 12:12 AM
Originally posted by Darth_Reagan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:

That is true, but as you can see from the short "report", the German Command was not aiming at the bombers, but at the crews morale. And showing desperation to fight the intruders by risking their own lives is a much better sign than just to continue against an ever growing superiority.

I would have thought bomber crew's morale was low at the best of times anyway, but it didn't stop them. Unlike a fighter which might be 'scared off' in some way a poor old bomber crew has to trundle to the target holding formation no matter how unhappy they are. I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying by the way, just the tactic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, considering the US Command published these incidents as "single incidents with unexperienced or dead pilots" and denied these had anything to do with the at these days feared Kamikaze, I guess they knew it would have an impact on the crews.

Pirschjaeger
06-03-2008, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by FliegerAas:
Is the secret weapons episode available anywhere? The internet says it has already been aired, but I can't find it anywhere?

I downloaded it from Stage6 when it was still running.

I miss that site. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

cawimmer430
06-03-2008, 01:18 AM
I have a book on German air warfare technology and I believe these pilots were part of a small organization called Selbstopfer (self-sacrifice). The aim was to crash your plane into an enemy bomber and hopefully bail if possible. There were even plans to use a type of manned V1 (Fieseler) rocket with a cockpit and a large warhead which the pilot would guide into a bomber stream, home it in on a bomber and then bail.

Let me see if I can find it and scan it (in German though).

Capt.LoneRanger
06-03-2008, 03:48 AM
Originally posted by cawimmer430:
I have a book on German air warfare technology and I believe these pilots were part of a small organization called Selbstopfer (self-sacrifice). The aim was to crash your plane into an enemy bomber and hopefully bail if possible. There were even plans to use a type of manned V1 (Fieseler) rocket with a cockpit and a large warhead which the pilot would guide into a bomber stream, home it in on a bomber and then bail.

Let me see if I can find it and scan it (in German though).

Wasn't the manned V1 intended for "guided" attacks against London and specific top priority targets? I never heard it was to be aimed at bombers. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Kurfurst__
06-04-2008, 12:01 AM
Originally posted by cawimmer430:
I have a book on German air warfare technology and I believe these pilots were part of a small organization called Selbstopfer (self-sacrifice). The aim was to crash your plane into an enemy bomber and hopefully bail if possible.

The Soviets used this tactics quite often in the GPW, calling the process 'Taran'. Several Soviet pilots survived mulitple 'taran' victories, and there was 'taran' order issued even decades later in the jet age, in the cold war, over the USSR (IIRC the last one got a MiG pilot to taran some unmanned recon drone over the USSR - the pilot didn`t make it).


There were even plans to use a type of manned V1 (Fieseler) rocket with a cockpit and a large warhead which the pilot would guide into a bomber stream, home it in on a bomber and then bail.

Let me see if I can find it and scan it (in German though).

I think some examples of V-1s with cocpit exists, but I believe those were used early in the development to sort out aerodynamic problems with the V-1 with a test pilot... many failed, until the wonderful Hanna Reitch got her hands on the stick and received the Iron Cross for it.