Flak/AA - Why do we not research it ?

[ArtieBob]

When one looks at the numbers, the failure to develop and put into service proximity fuzes seems a technological disaster for Germany. If the Flak kill rate could have been increased by a significant amount, then major changes to both the tactics and strategies of the allied air war probably would have resulted. It has been many years since my USNavy training in air defense gunnery, but IIRC, we were told the kill rate using proximity fuzing increased by a factor of more than two to one, under certain conditions, by an order of magnitude.

Best regards,

ArtieBob

[PeterVerney]

Regarding the proximity fuse. I well remember the flying bomb period when there was a battery of four 3.7? guns with proximity fuses, stationed near us. They were radar controlled and would fire a salvo of 20 rounds. We would stand counting the bursts and very often by about number 12 they would have hit the V1. But the rest of the salvo would still explode around it.
By contrast at Hythe was a massive concentration of Bofors which put up a wall of fire such that little blacks clouds would form from all the bursts. The V1 would scud merrily through it all and they would possibly hit 1 in 6 whereas the 3.7s got perhaps 2 in 5.
I suppose someone has real figures but that is how it seemed to us at the time.

[Martin Gleeson]

Thanks to all for the responses so far.

Mike. I have no intention of beginning major research into this subject ! I have far too many projects in progress as it is. I knew someone would suggest this !

Byron. Excellent information on the Rhodes Flak units. Thank you for that.

Max. That is interesting, that some people are doing work at a local level.

SES. Yes, I have been aware of Michael Holm's excellent website for some time. It is a great resource for those beginning research.

Denes. Thanks for the recommendation of Edward Westermann's book on German Flak. I had been meaning to ask for an opinion of it, having spotted it on Amazon some months ago.
The figures you quoted from it prove my point about the need to do research on this neglected field.
By the way may I single out for praise the two-volumes of FROM BARBAROSSA TO ODESSA by you, Dmitriy Karlenko and Jean-Louis Roba concerning AAA claims. Your team gave the claiming unit in many (most ?) instances, including some Soviet batteries.

ArtieBob. I am sure you are entirely correct. I believe the experience of the US Navy Pacific Fleet using proximity fuzes would support your comments.

Thanks to all. Hope we have more contributions.

Martin Gleeson.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Martin Gleeson

Thanks to all for the responses so far.

Denes. Thanks for the recommendation of Edward Westermann's book on German Flak. I had been meaning to ask for an opinion of it, having spotted it on Amazon some months ago.
Martin Gleeson.

Well, I bought it with high hopes (see the review at http://stonebooks.com/archives/011118.shtml) and was very disappointed. The author starts with the idea that the role and value of "the German ground-based air defences" (a phrase it feels like he uses about six times per page) have been denigrated or ignored. That's strange because just about every airman's memoir I've ever read suggests that Allied flyers were terrified of it and that it took down a lot of aircraft.

There is about one paragraph on the 1940 Blitzkrieg in the West and little or nothing on Army or Navy Flak. The book concentrates on home defence. From memory, the author didn't seem to have a good grounding in the history of the air war and that led him to write some very odd things at times. The writing style felt very cumbersome and I found the book a struggle to get through.