On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 6:13:30 PM UTC-5, RichD wrote:> On January 24, bitrex wrote: > > In WW2 there were electromechanical gun laying computers, the analog > > computer could continually integrate the position from radar data to get > > a target's velocity vector, and along with the range compute an > > appropriate gun super elevation. > > Here's a video series that shows how they worked, the mechanical > > ball-integrator was an ingenious contraption: > > <https://youtu.be/lr1uK24SND8> > I recall reading about submarine warfare in the Pacific. The boat had > a gizmo, the "is was", which somehow computed the aim of the torpedo > barrel. "the triangle of sub tactics" > > The captain read the target's co-ordinates, through the periscope. > Presumably the speed was simply dx/dt, probably timed with a > wrist watch. Unclear how they estimated its range.Submarines could do that with a standard optical approach. -- Rick C. -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
First Computer
Started by ●January 24, 2023
Reply by ●January 24, 20232023-01-24
Reply by ●January 24, 20232023-01-24
Fred Bloggs wrote:> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:58:27 PM UTC-5, Phil Hobbs wrote: >> Fred Bloggs wrote: >>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 2:23:58 PM UTC-5, Ricky wrote: >>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 10:15:21 AM UTC-5, Jeff Layman >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 24/01/2023 15:08, Dean Hoffman wrote: >>>>>> I was watching the show Mail Call. It talks of anything >>>>>> military. Guns, artillery, ships, whatever. The narrator >>>>>> claimed the first computer might've been on the USS >>>>>> Missouri. It aimed the guns on the ship. Is there such a >>>>>> thing as the first computer? >>>>> It depends what you mean by "computer". Isn't an abacus a >>>>> type of computer?! >>>>> >>>>> It's pretty widely accepted that the first computer - as >>>>> perhaps most would use the term - was Colossus: >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer> >>>> As you say, you first have to define what you are talking >>>> about. >>>> >>>> "the world's first programmable, electronic, digital computer" >>>> is how Wikipedia talks about Colossus. It was not a stored >>>> program computer, being programmed by switches and plugs. >>>> >>>> Code breaking drove a branch of computing technology. Another >>>> branch that was also desperately needed in the war, was >>>> finding targeting solutions. I don't recall the name, but there >>>> was a computer designed to be airborne, that was pretty >>>> interesting. I can't seem to find it on the web. I thought it >>>> was WWII vintage and used rather archaic components like delay >>>> lines. Maybe not. >>> >>> The "targeting" solution was done by analog in a gyro stabilized >>> bombsight, which also took control of the aircraft to fly it >>> steady and constant speed. The primary sensor was an optical >>> sight, making the whole idea of it a total piece of crap. Who >>> would have thought anyone would encounter cloud cover in northern >>> Europe, or that there would be a requirement for nighttime >>> bombings, and high altitude drops? Can we say morons? And the >>> product was the culmination of at least 15 years of development. >>> You can give a moron all the time and money in the world, and in >>> the end you're still left with a moron. >> The pre-war doctrine was that B17s in combat box formation were >> self-defending, and so could be used for daylight precision >> bombing. >> >> 'T'weren't so, but it wasn't the Sperry or Norden folks' fault. >> The Sperry in particular was a beautiful piece of kit for its day. > > That has nothing to do with the horrendously poor accuracy of the > bombsight even under ideal conditions. They were lucky to get within > miles of the target.Yer cracked. But we knew that. ;)> They used the bombsight for the A-bomb drops, > and both were off target by 2-3 miles.Ya can't blame a bomb sight for somebody dropping when the target isn't even in the field of view. And the accuracy was much better than that, especially in Nagasaki. A 20-kT bomb isn't that dangerous if it's two or three miles away. Cheers Phil Hobbs (Who lives exactly the wrong distance from Manhattan if there's a real nuclear war.)
Reply by ●January 25, 20232023-01-25
On 24/01/2023 9:04 pm, Fred Bloggs wrote:> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:58:27 PM UTC-5, Phil Hobbs wrote: >> Fred Bloggs wrote: >>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 2:23:58 PM UTC-5, Ricky wrote: >>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 10:15:21 AM UTC-5, Jeff Layman >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 24/01/2023 15:08, Dean Hoffman wrote: >>>>>> I was watching the show Mail Call. It talks of anything >>>>>> military. Guns, artillery, ships, whatever. The narrator >>>>>> claimed the first computer might've been on the USS Missouri. >>>>>> It aimed the guns on the ship. Is there such a thing as the >>>>>> first computer? >>>>> It depends what you mean by "computer". Isn't an abacus a type >>>>> of computer?! >>>>> >>>>> It's pretty widely accepted that the first computer - as perhaps >>>>> most would use the term - was Colossus: >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer> >>>> As you say, you first have to define what you are talking about. >>>> >>>> "the world's first programmable, electronic, digital computer" is >>>> how Wikipedia talks about Colossus. It was not a stored program >>>> computer, being programmed by switches and plugs. >>>> >>>> Code breaking drove a branch of computing technology. Another >>>> branch that was also desperately needed in the war, was finding >>>> targeting solutions. I don't recall the name, but there was a >>>> computer designed to be airborne, that was pretty interesting. I >>>> can't seem to find it on the web. I thought it was WWII vintage and >>>> used rather archaic components like delay lines. Maybe not. >>> >>> The "targeting" solution was done by analog in a gyro stabilized >>> bombsight, which also took control of the aircraft to fly it steady >>> and constant speed. The primary sensor was an optical sight, making >>> the whole idea of it a total piece of crap. Who would have thought >>> anyone would encounter cloud cover in northern Europe, or that there >>> would be a requirement for nighttime bombings, and high altitude >>> drops? Can we say morons? And the product was the culmination of at >>> least 15 years of development. You can give a moron all the time and >>> money in the world, and in the end you're still left with a moron. >> The pre-war doctrine was that B17s in combat box formation were >> self-defending, and so could be used for daylight precision bombing. >> >> 'T'weren't so, but it wasn't the Sperry or Norden folks' fault. The >> Sperry in particular was a beautiful piece of kit for its day. > > That has nothing to do with the horrendously poor accuracy of the bombsight even under ideal conditions. They were lucky to get within miles of the target. They used the bombsight for the A-bomb drops, and both were off target by 2-3 miles. The CEP for raids over Europe was something like 10 miles. > The AA guns shot down more bombers than fighters IIRC. > >> Cheers >> >> Phil Hobbs >> >> >> -- >> Dr Philip C D Hobbs >> Principal Consultant >> ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics >> Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics >> Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 >> >> http://electrooptical.net >> http://hobbs-eo.comSpeaking of horrendously poor accuracy the British Royal Air Force calculated that only 1% of their bombs landed within a mile of the intended target. I once met a RAF WW2 navigator/bomb aimer who said some nights their designated target was the letter "R" - meaning where R was within the word BERLIN on their charts. He later flew with Mosquito pathfinders using Gee/Oboe navaids and H2S RADAR so although his bomb placement improved he seriously doubted the accuracy of main force that followed. piglet
Reply by ●January 25, 20232023-01-25
On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 at 3:57:33 PM UTC-6, erichp...@hotmail.com wrote:> On 24/01/2023 9:04 pm, Fred Bloggs wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:58:27 PM UTC-5, Phil Hobbs wrote: > >> Fred Bloggs wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 2:23:58 PM UTC-5, Ricky wrote: > >>>> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 10:15:21 AM UTC-5, Jeff Layman > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> On 24/01/2023 15:08, Dean Hoffman wrote: > >>>>>> I was watching the show Mail Call. It talks of anything > >>>>>> military. Guns, artillery, ships, whatever. The narrator > >>>>>> claimed the first computer might've been on the USS Missouri. > >>>>>> It aimed the guns on the ship. Is there such a thing as the > >>>>>> first computer? > >>>>> It depends what you mean by "computer". Isn't an abacus a type > >>>>> of computer?! > >>>>> > >>>>> It's pretty widely accepted that the first computer - as perhaps > >>>>> most would use the term - was Colossus: > >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer> > >>>> As you say, you first have to define what you are talking about. > >>>> > >>>> "the world's first programmable, electronic, digital computer" is > >>>> how Wikipedia talks about Colossus. It was not a stored program > >>>> computer, being programmed by switches and plugs. > >>>> > >>>> Code breaking drove a branch of computing technology. Another > >>>> branch that was also desperately needed in the war, was finding > >>>> targeting solutions. I don't recall the name, but there was a > >>>> computer designed to be airborne, that was pretty interesting. I > >>>> can't seem to find it on the web. I thought it was WWII vintage and > >>>> used rather archaic components like delay lines. Maybe not. > >>> > >>> The "targeting" solution was done by analog in a gyro stabilized > >>> bombsight, which also took control of the aircraft to fly it steady > >>> and constant speed. The primary sensor was an optical sight, making > >>> the whole idea of it a total piece of crap. Who would have thought > >>> anyone would encounter cloud cover in northern Europe, or that there > >>> would be a requirement for nighttime bombings, and high altitude > >>> drops? Can we say morons? And the product was the culmination of at > >>> least 15 years of development. You can give a moron all the time and > >>> money in the world, and in the end you're still left with a moron. > >> The pre-war doctrine was that B17s in combat box formation were > >> self-defending, and so could be used for daylight precision bombing. > >> > >> 'T'weren't so, but it wasn't the Sperry or Norden folks' fault. The > >> Sperry in particular was a beautiful piece of kit for its day. > > > > That has nothing to do with the horrendously poor accuracy of the bombsight even under ideal conditions. They were lucky to get within miles of the target. They used the bombsight for the A-bomb drops, and both were off target by 2-3 miles. The CEP for raids over Europe was something like 10 miles. > > The AA guns shot down more bombers than fighters IIRC. > > > >> Cheers > >> > >> Phil Hobbs > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Dr Philip C D Hobbs > >> Principal Consultant > >> ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics > >> Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics > >> Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 > >> > >> http://electrooptical.net > >> http://hobbs-eo.com > Speaking of horrendously poor accuracy the British Royal Air Force > calculated that only 1% of their bombs landed within a mile of the > intended target. I once met a RAF WW2 navigator/bomb aimer who said some > nights their designated target was the letter "R" - meaning where R was > within the word BERLIN on their charts. He later flew with Mosquito > pathfinders using Gee/Oboe navaids and H2S RADAR so although his bomb > placement improved he seriously doubted the accuracy of main force that > followed. > > pigletThere's a little bit here about Operation Starfish. The British set big bonfires away from actual cities to confuse German night bombers. It did work. <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2286276/Extraordinary-story-WW2s-Starfish-Sites-designed-look-like-burning-cities-saved-2-500-lives.html>
Reply by ●January 25, 20232023-01-25
On January 25, erichp...@hotmail.com wrote:> Speaking of horrendously poor accuracy the British Royal Air Force > calculated that only 1% of their bombs landed within a mile of the > intended target.But on D Day and afterward, the Luftwaffe was invisible. The most reasonable explanation is that their industrial sector had been wrecked. The aerial bombing campaign was effective, evidently. -- Rich
Reply by ●January 25, 20232023-01-25
piglet <erichpwagner@hotmail.com> wrote:> Speaking of horrendously poor accuracy the British Royal Air Force > calculated that only 1% of their bombs landed within a mile of the > intended target. I once met a RAF WW2 navigator/bomb aimer who said some > nights their designated target was the letter "R" - meaning where R was > within the word BERLIN on their charts. He later flew with Mosquito > pathfinders using Gee/Oboe navaids and H2S RADAR so although his bomb > placement improved he seriously doubted the accuracy of main force that > followed. > > pigletThe RAF quickly shifted to area bombing by night. Quote: "In 1942 Bomber Command received a new aircraft � the Avro Lancaster � and a new leader � Air Chief Marshal Sir Arthur Harris. Accepting that precision bombing was proving impossible, the War Cabinet sanctioned 'area bombing' � the targeting of whole cities to destroy both factories and their workers. It was judged necessary to defeat an enemy that seemed on the brink of victory. Harris believed it could win the war and gained much public support when he sent 1,000 bombers against Cologne." https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/raf-bomber-command-during-the-second-world- war I forget who, but one Nazi said after such a raid words to the effect, "If we get another raid like this, we will collapse." They received many more. The bombings clearly did not weaken citizens morale. However, they did disrupt the food, ammunition, and fuel supply. Nazi logistics and planning were so poor that it didn't take much to make it worse. Germany responded by distributing aircraft production to small isolated shops. By the end of the war, Germany had many planes, but few pilots and no fuel to fly them. Germany had to pull back 88 mm anti-aircraft from the eastern front to combat the bombers. This severely affected the defense against the Russians. However, special tactics allowed the bombers to evade the AA fire by changing altitude and/or course randomly. The shells rose about 1,000 feet per second. The planes flew at 30,000 feet, so it took the shells 30 seconds to get to their altitude. By the time they arrived, the planes were not there. It must be remembered that Air Chief Marshal Hugh Dowding was responsible for the early warning system that saved England during the Battle of Britain. He should not be confused with Harris. Bombing accuracy improved during the war. RAF Mosquitoes were famous for low-level daylight raids where they would hit specific buildings. By the end of the war, B-29's could place their bombs within hundreds of feet of their target. The first A-Bomb was against Hiroshima and was dead on. The flash and heat from the bomb was seared into the structures. They could triangulate these effects and show the bomb exploded at the exact altitude and location they had planned. The gate posts of a clinic were directly under the explosion and were driven into the ground by the force of the explosion. A nearby concrete building had the roof tiles blown away, and the metal framework was bent in s way that showed the direction of the explosion. I visited Hiroshima years after the war. They had left some of the buildings in place as memorials. The grass of a nearby park had been removed for some reason. As you walked on the rubble, you could identify teeth and broken jawbones of the victims, and pieces of bones from the skeletons. There were a lot of them -- MRM
