The Best That Never Was 2 (Prototypes)

[The Dark]

Just about the only thing 1940s Germany was good for was coming up with wacky weapons. One I ran across today for the first time is the Fliegerfaust/Luftfaust, which was supposed to be a man-portable anti-aircraft rocket system. It didn't really work, but it's at least interesting in theory. The Fliegerfaust B was a 9-tube launcher that weighed 6.5 kilograms (loaded), firing spin-stabilized 20mm high-explosive rockets. The firing method, per Ian Hogg, was that five rockets would fire from non-adjacent barrels, followed a tenth of a second later by the other four rockets, giving a dispersal pattern intended to improve the odds of a strike against an enemy aircraft. The warhead was the standard 20mm AA shell. Reloads were carried in a canvas "bucket" carried on the right hip via shoulder strap, and looked a bit like a speedloader for a revolver. It was barely deployed before the end of the war (three were photographed in rubble in Berlin), and accuracy problems were never ironed out, which made it of dubious effectiveness as an AA weapon.

[Draq]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krummlauf

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Draq

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krummlauf

I have that. Look under the description for the Sturmgewehr 44 in German Assault Rifles.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Just about the only thing 1940s Germany was good for was coming up with wacky weapons. One I ran across today for the first time is the Fliegerfaust/Luftfaust, which was supposed to be a man-portable anti-aircraft rocket system. It didn't really work, but it's at least interesting in theory. The Fliegerfaust B was a 9-tube launcher that weighed 6.5 kilograms (loaded), firing spin-stabilized 20mm high-explosive rockets. The firing method, per Ian Hogg, was that five rockets would fire from non-adjacent barrels, followed a tenth of a second later by the other four rockets, giving a dispersal pattern intended to improve the odds of a strike against an enemy aircraft. The warhead was the standard 20mm AA shell. Reloads were carried in a canvas "bucket" carried on the right hip via shoulder strap, and looked a bit like a speedloader for a revolver. It was barely deployed before the end of the war (three were photographed in rubble in Berlin), and accuracy problems were never ironed out, which made it of dubious effectiveness as an AA weapon.

Running the rocket warhead through FF&S, it should be either damage -1 or 1, Burst 4, Pen Nil (it works out to Dam 0.40, Burst 4, Pen -4 for a TL 5, 2cm HE warhead).

[rcaf_777]

Not sure where this came from? not sure if it is movie prop or something the the US Army was testing.

Are those AGM-114 Hellfire or AGM-65 Maverick missiles?

[ArmySGT.]

Appears to be a mock up of a Hellfire II.

[rcaf_777]

Are you sure? the picture and truck are pre 2000 I think

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

Are you sure? the picture and truck are pre 2000 I think

The truck is a CUCV (a military version of a Chevy 2500) and the mount looks like tripod for a TOW in ground mount.

I think it is a clever photoshop. There has been on again off again prototypes for a ground launcher version of the hellfire.

The missile is a Hellfire and the mount looks like the hard point for a Apache.

I think it is a clever photoshop with elements taken from several sources.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

Not sure where this came from? not sure if it is movie prop or something the the US Army was testing.

Are those AGM-114 Hellfire or AGM-65 Maverick missiles?

ArmySGT's right. There is no CLU (command/launch guidance unit) in the system, and firing the missiles from that truck would blow ALL of the windows out. I'd say it's photoshopped too.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

Not sure where this came from? not sure if it is movie prop or something the the US Army was testing.

Are those AGM-114 Hellfire or AGM-65 Maverick missiles?

Hellfire: The Swedes use a ground mount version of it for various things.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Hellfire: The Swedes use a ground mount version of it for various things.

Primarily an anti-ship missile, as the RBS 17. It's a modified (by Bofors) AGM-114A. The intent was to use them against landing craft to allow longer-ranged weapons to focus on other ships. The warhead was modified for this role, detonating after penetration of the hull, so it wouldn't be as effective in an anti-vehicular role. Norway had some as well (I don't know if they still do).

[lordroel]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Hellfire: The Swedes use a ground mount version of it for various things.

How is it targeted.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by lordroel

How is it targeted.

Laser designation. Except for the Longbow variant (AGM-114L, which is radar-guided), all Hellfires are laser-guided. The designator does not have to be at the same location as the launcher; as long as the missile can see the dot, it'll go for it. This also gives it limited re-targeting capability, since if the dot is moved to a different target within the field of view, the missile will steer accordingly.

[Damocles]

My guess is that the pic is 9th ID HTLD. They were doing a lot of stuff with CUCVs in the mid-80s as they waited to receive HMMWVs. They had a ground launched hellfire unit. The unit expected to receive UAVs, so they used surrogate manned aircraft, which likely included laser designation capability. They also had forward lasing teams to designate targets.

The 22 meg file in the second link is worth a read. There's a terrible pic at the back that looks like a CUCV firing a Hellfire to me...

https://books.google.pl/books?id=zi3...vision&f=false

http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=get...fier=ADA370233

[lordroel]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Laser designation. Except for the Longbow variant (AGM-114L, which is radar-guided), all Hellfires are laser-guided. The designator does not have to be at the same location as the launcher; as long as the missile can see the dot, it'll go for it. This also gives it limited re-targeting capability, since if the dot is moved to a different target within the field of view, the missile will steer accordingly.

So could one designator be use to home in more than one missile into a target at once.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Laser designation. Except for the Longbow variant (AGM-114L, which is radar-guided), all Hellfires are laser-guided. The designator does not have to be at the same location as the launcher; as long as the missile can see the dot, it'll go for it. This also gives it limited re-targeting capability, since if the dot is moved to a different target within the field of view, the missile will steer accordingly.

They never thought of making a GPS-guided version?

EDIT: Just remembered that GPS guidance doesn't work well against moving targets.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

Not sure where this came from? not sure if it is movie prop or something the the US Army was testing.

Are those AGM-114 Hellfire or AGM-65 Maverick missiles?

I think I found this launcher's origin. It is a "real" launcher but NOT a complete one. The reason there's no CLU (the black box which energizes the missiles) or any cable running from one (like the cable running down the side of the second launcher shown in the field with the two soldiers) is because one is not normally attached to this launch rail. The rail shown made an appearance on the US Navy's Cyclone Class Patrol Ships and the rail launcher is a "plug and play" assembly that connects to the ship's command and control systems (and therefore needs no external power/launch system). I'm guessing the pickup is a delivery vehicle taking it to a ship or test site.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I think I found this launcher's origin. It is a "real" launcher but NOT a complete one. The reason there's no CLU (the black box which energizes the missiles) or any cable running from one (like the cable running down the side of the second launcher shown in the field with the two soldiers) is because one is not normally attached to this launch rail. The rail shown made an appearance on the US Navy's Cyclone Class Patrol Ships and the rail launcher is a "plug and play" assembly that connects to the ship's command and control systems (and therefore needs no external power/launch system). I'm guessing the pickup is a delivery vehicle taking it to a ship or test site.

The Swedes use a ground-mount Hellfire launcher as a shore defense weapon.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

The Swedes use a ground-mount Hellfire launcher as a shore defense weapon.

The Swedish launcher looks different. It has a tripod, a U-shaped swivel mount, and a crossbeam at the top that the Hellfire is suspended from. The launcher on the back of the truck doesn't have anything to the outside of the missile, where the Swedish launcher would.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by The Dark

The Swedish launcher looks different. It has a tripod, a U-shaped swivel mount, and a crossbeam at the top that the Hellfire is suspended from. The launcher on the back of the truck doesn't have anything to the outside of the missile, where the Swedish launcher would.

I question whether the rig I saw on the USS Firebolt(?) is anything more than a testing rig. While it is clearly shown mounted amidships with the missiles slung on it, I cannot imagine such a rig going to sea with the missiles hanging exposed to the weather. Even the Griffin Missile Launchers and Stinger Missiles USS Firebolt carries are mounted in enclosed boxes resembling the boxes that Penguin Missiles come it (but smaller, of course).