What if: Nazi ufos

[Darkevilme]

Seeing a bunch of conspiracy videos about nazis with ufos and nazis on the moon the obvious question that occured to me is why wouldn't nazis with access to ufos use them to win the war. So I figured this would be a potentially interesting alternate history but so outlandish that it really deserves to be under sci fi.

So the scenario is thus. Nazis have ufos, nazis are actually going to use them for warfare.

Ufo capabilities:
Each ufo is some 25 meters across and can carry 20,000 kg. Ufos have no flight ceiling and enough operational range to circumnavigate the planet. Top speed is 400kph though unlike conventional aircraft they can achieve that speed straight up. Ufos are not armoured and as such are vulnerable to gunfire from hostile aircraft.

Ufo production:
From june 1940 onwards 4 ufos can be produced per month. From June 1942 that expands to 8 ufos per month and june 1944 that expands to 12.

So the question is, what could germany have done with these outlandish flying machines and would they have been able to win the war?

[Zor]

Go up into orbit with a hundred and fifty 100 kilogram steel cones, drop them on England/the states/the USSR.

Zor

[Simon_Jester]

Targeting is a problem.

The UFOs also make really interesting tools for moving commando units and precision bombing of specific targets, because they can fly straight up beyond the reach of any air defense, then straight back down to ground level in a couple of minutes (assuming they can decelerate at 2g or so at the bottom). This makes a force of several dozen of the things an interesting way to drop an airborne battalion somewhere nasty, wreak havoc, and get the hell out. Not having to fly transport planes directly through the air defense network at interceptable altitude will really help.

Also, make sure UFOs on a bombing mission have an armored, pressure-tight control room- if the hull gets perforated by AA fire or bullets, you can still dog the hatch and make it up to orbit. This is of course not survivable if you're transporting personnel... hm. You need emergency sealants. It's still doable.

Note that long UFO missions will take much longer than "orbital" operations if they really are limited to ~400 km/hour even in vacuum. No circling the globe in ninety minutes, obviously, and flying from Brest to Washington will take something like 18 hours each way.

[Thanas]

If they can carry 20 tons, armor them up and use them against the allied bomber formations. Use them to attack from above.

[Simon_Jester]

They're very large to armor effectively on a 20-ton payload. Could you get .50-caliber proofing?

[Purple]

Just how much of the production time/cost is the engine alone? What about downscaling it? Specifically I am implying a V3 rocket that would carry conventional weapons to places across the globe with extreme accuracy and speed whilst being uninterceptable. You don't need 20KT of cargo to drop a few bombs on the Kremlin if you catch my drift.

[MrDakka]

For the OP, in case you haven't heard of it: http://www.ironsky.net/

As Thanas stated, they would effective against the Allied bomber fleets. If used correctly (Hitler not making military decisions) they could potentially eliminate the bomber threat to the German economy.

[Thanas]

They're very large to armor effectively on a 20-ton payload. Could you get .50-caliber proofing?

14mm armor should be sufficient for that (if I am wrong, I am sure Sea Skimmer will correct me on that) - how high is the thing/how many m² need to be covered?

[Simon_Jester]

They're supposedly 25 meters wide; even at 14mm thickness that's a lot of armor plate. Real WWII aircraft are much smaller than that and were armored only in vital areas, to reduce weight.

[Darkevilme]

Each saucer is 10 meters tall, the top and bottom are 10 meters wide while the rim is 25 meters wide as stated.

The primary production bottleneck is yes the production of the anti gravity engines. And yes one could build a smaller engine. However the engine requires a ring of components to function and the diameter of this ring directly relates to the maximum speed. A half size saucer has half the top speed while a double diameter saucer would have twice the top speed. So a V3 would certainly be able to strike anywhere, just not at all quickly and all things considered I was under the impression that german ww2 automatic guidance was many things but precise was not one of them.

[Simon_Jester]

Bear in mind that a cargo of 20 tons is painfully small compared to the size of this craft.

[JointStrikeFighter]

It's a heavier payload than every other plane of ww2. Hell it's heavier than a C130 can carry, and that's twice as big.

[Thanas]

They're supposedly 25 meters wide; even at 14mm thickness that's a lot of armor plate. Real WWII aircraft are much smaller than that and were armored only in vital areas, to reduce weight.

Well, you'd only really need underside armor in this scenario, considering they would drop down from above, then switch and accelerate back up.

[Simon_Jester]

Yes. You need a disc of armor 12.5 meters in radius, 14 millimeters thick, and having a density of ~7.8 tonnes per cubic meter (for mild steel).

Unless I am doing my calculations very wrong, it will weigh fifty-three tonnes.

[Thanas]

Yes. You need a disc of armor 12.5 meters in radius, 14 millimeters thick, and having a density of ~7.8 tonnes per cubic meter (for mild steel).

Unless I am doing my calculations very wrong, it will weigh fifty-three tonnes.

*checks*

Yeah, seems correct. In that case, just armor the engine and cockpit. The rest could be considered expendable.

[someone_else]

You are a bit too bloodthirsty to see how fucking awesome these things are. It would be a relatively good fighter or bomber due to its "go straight up/down" trick and its ludicrous payload, but its speed sucks balls (it's in the bomber range, fighters can fly circles around them) numbers are also too damn low to matter in this role until very late (although would make quite a bit of Allies shit themselves), and by that time any weak point will be already found and exploited.

Also remeber that flak cannons can fuck them sideways if they aren't fully armored, so unless they fly very very evasively all the time they get shredded.

But that's only the dumbest thing you could do with them.

That thing is the perfect platform to do stuff from.
Is the engine noisy? Is it able to hover (UFOs usually do)?

I'd keep them down until I'd have a decent amount (30 or so), install MASSIVE jammers on them (and possibly radars) and use them to piss on the UK's air defence radars and radios from well beyond aircraft ceiling. This way buttloads of crappier mass-produced bomber crafts (whatever nazi had at the times) can unload bombs wherever they like while the enemy's detection and communication capabilities drop dramatically.

Oh yes, and they will totally rock as 24/7 manned air-surveillance platforms (possibly with radars too), also able to pick up their radio transmissions and relay everything in real time to troops on the ground. ALLIES WILL HAVE NOWHERE TO HIDE.

Theoretically they can be a relay for german LOS transmissions (that will make interception of the message a bit harder), if they had them at the times (I don't really know, just brainstorming).

Also: FLYING ARTILLERY. Whenever you have obvious blatant air superiority, flying artillery is a must-have (also slightly easier to aim than bombs). Also variant: FLYING FLAK CANNON. You can load one with one cannon and a buttload of ammo and with a squad of 10 or so plus a few bringing more ammo you can start shelling wherever you want with total impunity. Or something slightly smaller if the recoil is too much. You don't need very long ranges, only a parabolic trajectory.

You can also just drop stuff from A LOT above, but to escape enemy fighters it may be too much above to aim anything decently. I remember that bombs in WW2 dropped in the conventional way were inaccurate as fuck.

And last, these things will be totally overpowered long-range VTOL cargo aircraft that can drop any thing anywhere (you can keep anyone resupplied from anywhere). If you make one big enough to carry a battle-ready tank (they need to carry a payload of 50 tons), hilarity ensues.

Also can make a Sky Cargo to carry useful stuff from all over the world (like say nitrates or copper or rubber) without having to worry about being sunk or shot down.

Yeah, pretty nasty shit these things will do even without having them directly in the harm's way (especially in FLYING ARTILLERY role). I believe that they could very well make a significant difference in the outcome of WW2 if used well.
Although I doubt nazi would have a so flexible mind to use them like I said.


Btw, the nazi were designing a ludicrously overpowered flying thing (albeit a slight bit more realistic than a full blown flying saucer) with theHo 229

[Darkevilme]

Yes the Ufo is able to hover. And no they're nowhere near as noisy as regular aircraft.

A tripe width saucer would be a monstrous aircraft but it is possible to build them. Producing them would basically replace a production increase for regular saucers. So june 1942 they start building 1 heavy saucer per month in addition to the 4 regular sized ones. On the plus side a 75 meter saucer would have enough cargo capacity to carry a tank and be able to achieve 1200km/h. The important question is whether such things are worth sacrificing the increase in production of regular saucers.

[Simon_Jester]

I'd keep them down until I'd have a decent amount (30 or so), install MASSIVE jammers on them (and possibly radars) and use them to piss on the UK's air defence radars and radios from well beyond aircraft ceiling. This way buttloads of crappier mass-produced bomber crafts (whatever nazi had at the times) can unload bombs wherever they like while the enemy's detection and communication capabilities drop dramatically.

It is questionable whether a twenty ton payload allows sufficient jamming for a relatively limited number of craft.

Also: FLYING ARTILLERY. Whenever you have obvious blatant air superiority, flying artillery is a must-have (also slightly easier to aim than bombs). Also variant: FLYING FLAK CANNON. You can load one with one cannon and a buttload of ammo and with a squad of 10 or so plus a few bringing more ammo you can start shelling wherever you want with total impunity. Or something slightly smaller if the recoil is too much. You don't need very long ranges, only a parabolic trajectory.

Flying artillery platforms are at least credible; the problem is that the inherent limitations of aiming an artillery piece in three dimensions at ranges of several miles straight up plus several miles sideways is... impressive.

You can also just drop stuff from A LOT above, but to escape enemy fighters it may be too much above to aim anything decently. I remember that bombs in WW2 dropped in the conventional way were inaccurate as fuck.

Level bombing from aircraft is inaccurate partly because the plane is moving and has no time to correct its aim. Being able to hover directly over a target at fifty or sixty thousand feet considerably improves your accuracy. It is also a very large advantage when using ground-penetrating bombs ("bunker busters").

Extremely high altitude precision bombing is probably the best application for this thing. Or one of them, at any rate. I'd suggest guided bombs but there's nothing stopping the enemy from jamming your guidance system as in real life.

And last, these things will be totally overpowered long-range VTOL cargo aircraft that can drop any thing anywhere (you can keep anyone resupplied from anywhere). If you make one big enough to carry a battle-ready tank (they need to carry a payload of 50 tons), hilarity ensues.

They are much too expensive to be used efficiently for this role. You can only make a few a month that are capable of carrying a heavy tank (presumably, one about twice the size of a standard saucer). There are no places where you can decisively win a battle by being able to airlift in one tank per several hours with each of a handful of transport aircraft. Not without enough buildup time that you could literally just drive the tanks there on the ground.

Btw, the nazi were designing a ludicrously overpowered flying thing (albeit a slight bit more realistic than a full blown flying saucer) with theHo 229

It was "overpowered" on paper. While prototypes were tested, there is no satisfactory evidence that they would have performed as advertised, or been that much of an overmatch against contemporary jet fighters from other advanced powers. Superficially, it looks like a rough match for the P-80 Shooting Star (of the same design vintage), possibly with a significant advantage in ceiling and top speed if it performed as advertised while powered by the relatively anemic Jumo 004 engine. Against aircraft that reached series production only a few years later (like the F-86) it is drastically inferior.

Not a bad design if it really was all it was cracked up to be, but not "ludicrously overpowered" in my opinion, either.

[Beowulf]

You could do long range bombing of convoys with Fritz-Xs or Hs 293. If you can keep the Allies from supplying the invasion forces, then it's impossible for the Allies to win. Submarines proved relatively ineffective, because they were found and killed. Flying in UFOs from FL400 or higher, means there's relatively limited amounts the allies can do to counter, and the Germans could destroy convoys with impunity. Each saucer can carry 5 or more bombs, and wire-guidance can make them immune to jamming.

[Simon_Jester]

Actually, at sea you can fly considerably lower because there's no fighter threat. AA is an issue but not a totally critical one, especially since you can do things like jink and dodge, and the typical convoy won't have enough heavy AAA to put a really menacing barrage up- not the kind that means guaranteed kills, and sheer size means these things can absorb a certain amount of fire without being totally screwed.

Although I'm not sure it's at all practical to build a wire-guided bomb/missile with a range of several miles.

[madd0ct0r]

in terms of dropping bombs and guidance over the land- why couldn't you do a straight plummet in the saucer, releasing the bomb at the bottom - a lot more KE and and a lot less time for inaccuracy.

with a bit of practice you could be taking out railway tunnels, dams and other disruption moves.

[MrDakka]

in terms of dropping bombs and guidance over the land- why couldn't you do a straight plummet in the saucer, releasing the bomb at the bottom - a lot more KE and and a lot less time for inaccuracy.

Like a Stuka?

Also: FLYING ARTILLERY. Whenever you have obvious blatant air superiority, flying artillery is a must-have (also slightly easier to aim than bombs). Also variant: FLYING FLAK CANNON. You can load one with one cannon and a buttload of ammo and with a squad of 10 or so plus a few bringing more ammo you can start shelling wherever you want with total impunity. Or something slightly smaller if the recoil is too much. You don't need very long ranges, only a parabolic trajectory.

Then they can finally realize their dream of shelling England

[Sky Captain]

Although I'm not sure it's at all practical to build a wire-guided bomb/missile with a range of several miles.

IIRC there are man portable wire guided anti tank missiles with a range of a few km and wire guided torpedoes with something like 20 - 30 km range so a bulky wire guided bomb with 15 km range (to be truly immune against fighters and AA fire) should also be possible. If Germans can build something like that then those ufo bombers with global reach could really screw up allied war making plans. In real life most of allied military industry in Russia and all industry in US were out of reach of German air attack so it could be left relatively unprotected. However German industry were well within reach from bases in Britain.
Even just bombing shipyards in US would massively hurt allied shipbuilding capability making it next to impossible to supply Britain and assamle D day invasion forces. Then there is psyhological factor that no place is safe from bombing.

A tripe width saucer would be a monstrous aircraft but it is possible to build them. Producing them would basically replace a production increase for regular saucers. So june 1942 they start building 1 heavy saucer per month in addition to the 4 regular sized ones. On the plus side a 75 meter saucer would have enough cargo capacity to carry a tank and be able to achieve 1200km/h. The important question is whether such things are worth sacrificing the increase in production of regular saucers.

Then it makes sense to make them as large as possible even if it means reduced numbers. For example three 400 km/h saucers with 60 ton total payload would be less effective than one 1200 km/h saucer with same payload. It could fly more bombing raids in same time while also being so fast it could disengage at will if there are incoming fighters.

[madd0ct0r]

in terms of dropping bombs and guidance over the land- why couldn't you do a straight plummet in the saucer, releasing the bomb at the bottom - a lot more KE and and a lot less time for inaccuracy.

Like a Stuka?

yup - where do you think i gopt the idea from?

airhorns a propoganda extra, espcially if you get them to sound 'ooooooooolaaaaaaa'

[Simon_Jester]

The problem with taking a target this size (it's pretty big for an airplane) close to the ground in hostile airspace is that it is vulnerable to WWII-era AA guns, if it flies on a predictable trajectory. Especially the quick-firing 20mm and 40mm stuff often installed around point targets to deter... well, dive bombing.

in terms of dropping bombs and guidance over the land- why couldn't you do a straight plummet in the saucer, releasing the bomb at the bottom - a lot more KE and and a lot less time for inaccuracy.

Because the enemy will fire powerful cannons at you and blow you to bits?

with a bit of practice you could be taking out railway tunnels, dams and other disruption moves.

These targets get an extra side-order of cannons.

A tripe width saucer would be a monstrous aircraft but it is possible to build them. Producing them would basically replace a production increase for regular saucers. So june 1942 they start building 1 heavy saucer per month in addition to the 4 regular sized ones. On the plus side a 75 meter saucer would have enough cargo capacity to carry a tank and be able to achieve 1200km/h. The important question is whether such things are worth sacrificing the increase in production of regular saucers.

Then it makes sense to make them as large as possible even if it means reduced numbers. For example three 400 km/h saucers with 60 ton total payload would be less effective than one 1200 km/h saucer with same payload. It could fly more bombing raids in same time while also being so fast it could disengage at will if there are incoming fighters.

Um, the "bigger equals faster" rule seems really weird.

Also, why is payload increasing with the radius of the saucer, not the area or volume? If that were true- that implies that the lifting power of the UFO drive scales with its diameter. Which means we actually get less payload on a bigger UFO, because when we double the radius we increase the weight by at least a factor of four, which means less spare weight for payload. A 50 ton saucer 10 meters wide might well have more payload than an 200 ton saucer 20 meters wide.

It would be amusing if the proper way to turn these things into really deadly bombers was actually to make them smaller...