We had proximity fuses for anti-aircraft artillery during WW2.

We had proximity fuses for anti-aircraft artillery during WW2. Why does it seem like it's a big deal to get them working again?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    a drone is a lot smaller than a giant bomber

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      then make smol fuze

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Drones are also not real, they are fantasy propaganda.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Its like if we tried to build a Sherman tank today, we just haven't maintained the infrastructure.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >We had proximity fuses for anti-aircraft artillery during WW2.
    and they still use them
    they have even improved on the design by making guided artillery shells

    the media just sees them using proximity fuzes for anti-drone weapons and assumes the rounds were invented wholecloth for the purpose instead of simply being a tool they already had and knew the capabilities of being pressed into a role its suited for

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this is why the mil blogs like 1945 and TheDrive are pretty fucking shit for understanding what's really going on in military procurement
      anyway, proxy rounds are just a backup for these.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        LASERS WILL KEEP IT CLEAN

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      While this is correct and the media is kind of wrong, at the same time you're skipping over the importance of supply chains and doing things with what we've got now. This reminds me of the common space internet question of "why don't we just restart Saturn V F1 engine production? We did it in the 60s so it should be easy now right?" Wrong. Tons of institutional expertise, specific materials, supply chains, manufacturing, skills and so on are all gone. Labor is all different. Even with crazy levels of detail in recording process it still wouldn't make sense. By the same token we wouldn't do WW2 style VT fuses for mass production at this point either. Yes the concept is straight forward but figuring out how to do it as cheaply as possible with current stuff with integration with current/future platforms, network standards etc and then mass produce is still a real endeavor that shouldn't be papered over. They'll get it done of course, but doing it right will take a lot of skilled people a fair amount of work.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        they dont use WW2-era VT fuzes because modern microchips are tons more resistant to shock than the vacuum tubes used in WW2
        and artillery pieces have been firing not just proximity rounds for decades, but they have been using way more advanced rounds
        and proximity shells never left service either, everything from ship 5in guns to 40mm bofors have gotten proximity and programmable rounds

        the machining, tooling, and labor are all present

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        they already have prox fuses for the guns they're issuing prox fuses for, they just weren't being issued to Strykers for drone defense

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Putting them on strykers is probably new.

    Modern fuses are also very different from ww2 fuses.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because by the late cold war anti-air artillery had become more niche in the face of missiles often being more efficient against high performance Jet aircraft. Big SAM's can hit aircraft at high altitudes, and a stinger missle is easier for infantry to haul around than an autocannon. Things like triple A still had a place against helicopters, but those would mostly be firing missles at standoff distances. Basically it was felt that since nobody was using bazillions of dive bombing propeller aircraft anymore, you didn't need bazillions of 40mm Bofors against them.

    But 2022 is not 1989, and cheap electronics and coding are about as dirt cheap as a pile of plastic and a 50 horse power engine or electric battery. Slap that shit together and you have a quadcopter bomber or a cheap suicide drone that broadly speaking, will attack you at similar altitudes WW1 or WW2 fighter bomber aircraft would, and suddenly it's VERY handy to have a lot of air bursting autocannons.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Lo' the pendulum swings.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    if they said they're fielding them then there's no issue getting them working again, they're in the field and they work

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >We had proximity fuses for anti-aircraft artillery during WW2.
    The Bofors fuze was also pretty expensive, it was just worth it based on what it saved.

    I assume the modern prox fuses are much smarter and could potentially be cheaper given consumerisation of electronics.
    Smaller means it can go on smaller rounds too and smarter means the rounds won't need as much explosive and frag, also making for smaller rounds so it could be a more portable weapon.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The USA never had Bofors fuzes especially not during world war II where the smallest we could get was 3inch gun rounds. I think the smallest we ever had in practice was 57mm or was it 56mm? I forgot.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >proximity fuses for anti-aircraft artillery

    How do they work? How do they detect that there's something nearby? Or they just blow up after a specific time?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      the original ones worked by sending out a radio wave to detect reflections.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Shortly after firing they put out a proximity sensor using radar waves, if something comes close the waves bounce back, the shell detects the reflected waves, and explodes

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the original ones worked by sending out a radio wave to detect reflections.

        That sounds pretty advanced for WW2 era tech.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          There was the US Navy Bat which was a passive radar guided glide bomb. And it was actually fielded. It got fooled easy but it was actually much more closer to today's guided missiles rather than the Fritz X.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it was considered amazingly advanced, and basically revolutionized artillery

          it was considered so valuable and ahead of its time, that they werent allowed to fire them at ground targets until mid-1944 for fear the germans might reverse-engineer them
          when they did roll them out, they were stupidly overpowered, there are accounts of every single tree in a forest being blown to the exact same height from the shells all detonating at the same height from the ground

          the secret was making a vacuum tube, basically a light bulb, that could survive the 15,000 Gs of accelerating from a gun tube
          this was done by basically making the smallest possible vacuum tube to reduce the force of acceleration on it and then wrapping the whole thing in wax to further deaden the shock

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >That sounds pretty advanced for WW2 era tech.
          That's because it was. The Americans and Brits basically considered it a super weapon technology at least somewhat comparable to the Atomic bomb.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I’m a retard, for a brief second i thought the picture was implying they tried to use VT fuse AA as anti artillery base defense type stuff. Cool video though, I’ve read up a lot on the VT fuses but haven’t seen this, thanks anon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >How do they work? How do they detect that there's something nearby?
      doppler radar

      as it approaches an object, the wavelength of the return signature increases in frequency
      and the round can be programmed to detonate at specific frequencies, ie. range

      imagine a train, as it gets closer it increases in pitch
      and then as it passes you by, it starts to trail off getting lower
      the fuze "hears" the radio wave getting higher and higher as it gets closer and closer

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, your image is from a porn. I thought I would just let you know in case you didn’t.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's not profitable for Raytheon or Lockheed to develop cheap munitions.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Are we mounting a 40mm gun on the stryker? Or have we decide a 30mm gun might actually be useable for proximity fuzes with current technology?

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Proximity fuzes were for large caliber AA Cannons. Post WWII, SAMS replaced those and rapid fire small caliber AA systems were used for low altitude SHORAD, which don't carry enough explosive payload or fragmentation potential to be effective with proximity bursts. In order to do enough damage to a large aircraft with a burst of proximity fuzed rounds, you would essentially have to have most of the burst actually be on a trajectory to hit it, so little effort was put into miniature VT Fuzes.
    Small caliber AA Cannons do carry a large enough charge for air burst to be effective against small drones, which are also slower moving, and therefore easier for a gun based system to get a shot on.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otomatic

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >discussing small caliber AA cannons
        >posts a modified 3" Naval Gun on a tank chassis
        The Otomatic is based, but you're illiterate.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    why do you believe the press has the foggiest idea what they're talking about?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *