Jump to content

Talk:V-1 flying bomb: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
 
(254 intermediate revisions by 98 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject Germany|class=B}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|

{{WikiProject Germany|importance=high}}
{{WPAVIATION|class=B|Aircraft-project=yes}}
{{WikiProject Aviation|b1=n|b2=y|b3=y|b4=y|b5=y|Aircraft-project=yes}}
{{WPMILHIST
{{WikiProject Military history|class=start|B-Class-1=no|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|Aviation=yes|German=yes|Weaponry=yes|WWII=yes}}
|class=B
{{WikiProject Rocketry|importance=high}}
|Aviation-task-force= yes
|German-task-force= yes
|Weaponry-task-force= yes
|WWII-task-force= yes
}}
}}
=='Simple device': incl engine?==

"simple device" "constructed in around fifty man-hours of mainly sheet metal" -- does that include the engine?
: It was a very simple engine - so quite possibly, yes. Mind you' I'm only guessing that. [[User:Tannin|Tannin]]
::Can't say for sure, either, but the V-1 engine was little more than a stovepipe with a valve on the front, a fuel injector, & a sparkplug. [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 21:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, I added the shutters to the description. But I wondered about the rate of firing, said to be 100/sec. That certainly would produce a buzz - but despite its name, it actually uttered a sound much more like that of a fast two stroke engine, a puttering sound, and I wondered if /sec should have been /min? Help would be appreciated.

[[User:Fentonrobb|Fenton Robb]] 12:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

:I've heard recordings (though I can't remember where and I can't vouch for it being a real recording and not a simulation), and 100/sec sounds right. I would think that 100/min would be way too slow; the craft would have time to start falling between pulses. [[User:KarlBunker|KarlBunker]] 16:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

==Number of V-1's produced==

From the entry: ''Almost 30,000 V1s were manufactured. 9,521 were fired at England''. I have another figure: ''V1's launched against England, not including the V1's that landed short of their targets or fell into the sea'' = 10,753. It's doubtful that both are right. Can anyone provide a reasonably certain estimate?

==Engine sound recording==

The sounds stops, I suppose when the engine shuts off, but I do not hear the impact. This gives a feeling of the sample being a bit uncomplete. How long does that take? Perhaps too long for including that? - [[User:Patrick|Patrick]] 11:38 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

I don't have a more complete recording but. I think it takes a long time before the impact (several minutes). But size of the file would not be a problem Ogg/vorbis is very good in compressing silence :).
[[User:Ericd|Ericd]] 11:46 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

:So the good thing is that you have time to look for cover, the bad thing that you may not hear it coming at all if you are near the place of impact. - [[User:Patrick|Patrick]] 12:26 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

::The time delay wasn't that long, perhaps 10-15sec, from what I've read & heard. People uniformly heard it (I understand it was pretty loud, louder {or more piercing} than an aircraft engine); what was frightening was to hear it cut, since that meant it was about to hit. [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 07:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Typically, they flew at about 1500 feet, but their behaviour was pretty unpredictable after the engine cut out. Some seemed to dive or even drop ballistically for about 7 - 10 seconds, while others would continue on their way losing height while gliding down to earth. I saw one cut out and then circle round the R. N. Hospital at Chatham for many minutes (it seemed like hours!) as it spiralled down. Fortunately, it missed the Hospital. By the look of them, they should not have been able to glide without power at all, but glide they did. [[User:Fentonrobb|Fenton Robb]] 17:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

It's great to have the sound recording here, but it's in a format that (it seems reasonable to presume) few people will be able to play. My system (Windows 2000, Media Player 6.0 and RealPlayer both installed) doesn't know what to do with it, and despite a lifetime spent working with computers, Ive never heard of .ogg files. (I don't play with sound much these days, I grant you. Stll, it seems like a reasonable random sample system.) Now sure, I could spend a few minutes and track the format down via a search engine, or ask around at the office and get a pretty fast answer, but I shouldn't have to do that. Wikipedia should make itself as easy to use as possible. Anyone want to add something like this:

* Media Files : [[media:V1sound.ogg|V-1 engine sound]] ([[Wikipedia:Sound help]])

(Linking, of course, to an appropriate page, which would link to a suitable download.)

Yes - Just what you asked for is in The Lambeth Archives with a lot of detailed information about where the bombs fell. I have added a 'external link' at the bottom of the article.
[[User:Fentonrobb|Fenton Robb]] 17:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


Well Ogg file are a full free software alternative to MP3, they seems accepted as the standard for Wikipedia. I will start an help page and upload the codec.
[[User:Ericd|Ericd]] 15:09 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

::Hi Tannin is the sound OK now ?
::[[User:Ericd|Ericd]] 15:53 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

:[[Image:Ltspkr.png]] - hope that helps. [[User:Halibutt|[[User:Halibutt|Halibu]][[User Talk:Halibutt|tt]]]] 00:34, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

==Added to WP:Brilliant prose==

I added this page to [[Wikipedia:Brilliant prose]]

Waoooh my visage turns red !
[[User:Ericd|Ericd]] 15:51 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

: Having contributed a fair slab of it myself, I can only ''completely agree'' with you that it is indeed "brilliant prose". :) [[User:Tannin|Tannin]]

==V-1 firing video clip pointer==

[http://www.srl.org Survival Research Labs] is a performance art group in the San Francisco Bay area that uses a V1 in some of their shows. They have a [http://www.srl.org/machines/v1/ 24 MB mpg video accessible from their website] where you can see and hear the engine. The clip ends with an amusing visit from the fire department. Mark Pauline, the leader of SRL, explains in the video how they replaced some broken valves on the V1 by following the original German design, except using nickel valves instead of stainless valves. I was at a show in Berkeley tonight where they fired it. Email me if you want to see any of the video I shot with my little Canon S400 camera.
[[User:RobertStewart|RobertStewart]] 05:50 Nov 13, 2003 (UTC)

I posted edited versions of the videos I mentioned above [http://www.wombatnation.com/2004/01/video-from-srl-performance on my blog] quite a while ago, but forgot to update this page. Let me know if you want a copy of the original. My email address can be found on my website.
[[User:RobertStewart|RobertStewart]] 08:11 May 1, 2005 (UTC)

==[Ff]lying [Bb]omb capitals?==

Shouldn't "V1 flying bomb" be written as "V1 Flying Bomb", since it's used grammatically as a proper noun, like [[De Havilland Mosquito]]? Or not? I get confused about this (see my talk page) [[User:(|(]] 09:06, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In any case the article title is inconsistent with usage within the article [[User:(|(]] 09:06, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

:It's ambiguous, since "flying bomb" is a generic term that describes many similar weapons (see [[flying bomb]]), but the term was first used in English to describe this particular weapon. Most usually in English, the weapon is simply called the "V-1" (or V1 or V 1...), and in this sense, "flying bomb" is not a proper name. Since the original (German) term for the weapon doesn't even have a name, I think that "flying bomb" is more appropriate --[[User:Rlandmann|Rlandmann]] 09:20, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

==von Braun at Peenemünde==

Wasn't [[Wernher von Braun]] also involved in some way at [[Peenemunde]] ?
-- Kim Bruning

:Indeed, almost all the time, but not at all with the V-1. Rockets proper were von Braun's endeavour; see [[V-2 rocket]]. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 20:15, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

==Good wiki process example!==

This page is a really good example of the wiki process at its best. Lots of contributors, and over time it has turned into a really comprehensive article. It could perhaps use a very gentle copyedit to make it flow more smoothly (this is what always happens to multi-author documents - they get disjointed), but overall ... great work, team! [[User:Tannin|Tannin]] 14:16, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

=='V-2' hyphenated, 'V1' not?==

I just wonder about the title of this article vs the V-2 one. In the three books on the subject that I possess, the usage seems to be the hyphenated version for both 'Vergeltungs'-weapons. I actually think this is more typical of German language usage as well. Therefore, if no one objects carrying convincing arguments, I will rename this (the V-1) article (by moving it) to 'V-1 flying bomb'. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 22:37, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

:Well, as I've not got heaps of (negative) comments so far, I'll ask an admin to fix the move (renaming) to 'V-1 flying bomb' (couldn't myself due to a redirect already bearing that name). Now's your last chance to speak up... --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 23:31, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

::And now it's too late (this time around), i.e., the move is done. A new discussion will have to take place if someone thinks otherwise than keeping the current name. Also please see the thread on my [[User talk:Wernher|talk]] page concerning this issue. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 00:47, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

:::There doesn't seem to be consensus in the sources I've seen; hyphen or no seems to be based on the author's preference. Hyphenated seems to go to the convention used in aircraft, as in P-38 (pursuit 38). My own bias is for hyphenated. [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 07:36, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

==Is the description of the guidance system correct?==

My great-uncle gave me a set of books about WWII and (being a tech geek even when I was a kid) I was fascinated by the diagrams and description of how the V-1 knew when it was over its target. Here's the way the book explained it:

There was a small propeller on the nose, connected to a long screw thread going back inside the missile. On this thread was a washer, and at the back end of the thread were two electrical contacts.

As the missile flew the airflow turned the prop and hence the threaded shaft; the washer would be wound along the shaft as it turned. When it reached the electrical contacts it would make a circuit, which energized a solenoid attached to a small guillotine. This guillotine would cut through the fuel lines, stopping the engine, and the missile would then dive.

At the launch site the engineers would preset the starting position of the washer on the shaft according to the known distance to the target and an estimate of the headwind. It sounds very rough-and-ready but it was accurate enough.

:The description's pretty accurate - the only error is the often-quoted part about the guillotine cutting the engine's fuel lines to stop the engine. Actually the guillotine was used to cut the elevator control cable (there was only the one cable as the elevator was spring-loaded to the down position, i.e. to give 'up' elevator the cable pulled and to give 'down' the cable was slackened) and when the ''air-log'' propeller fired the guillotine it was this control cable that was cut - the sprung-elevator then went into the fully-down position which put the V-1 into a sudden dive. The abrupt negative-G then caused the fuel flow to cease which stopped the engine. [[User:Ian Dunster|Ian Dunster]] 11:53, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

*On reading this article, I found myself asking "but how did they control when the bomb should dive??". So I've created a section about the guidance system, based on what you've written above. Hope this is okay! [[User:Mikecron|Mikecron]] 00:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

== "although not always with the device buried deep enough to increase the effect of the blast." ==

Long ago, I read that the V1 was more effective than the V2 because the blast area was not reduced by its being buried. It did not usually hit hardened targets.

== Inconsistancy w.r.t. Barrage Balloons ==

There's a statement: "''half of those (3,876) landed in the Greater London area. An almost equal number were shot down or intercepted by barrage balloons''." ... implying 3000+ hit by destroyed. Yet, later we have, when talking baout barrage balloons ... "''and fewer than 300 V-1s are known to have been destroyed by hitting cable.''"

Anyone have a definitive answer? I suspect the latter is, but don't know. --Anonymous

:The prose might be somewhat unclear. According to [http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj89/hillson.html this report], "although guns and fighters destroyed most of the V-1 bombs (1,878 and 1,846, respectively), balloons were credited with 231 'kills'." Thus the first of the statements you're referring to should be more like "''An almost equal number were downed by the combination of fighters and barrage balloons''." --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 13:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

::Thanks! I added your link as an official reference in two articles. -- [[User:Ken g6|Ken g6]] 04:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

==Diversion & casualties==
It's widely believed XX Committee's efforts led to fewer casualties (I even believed it), but I read recently (I wish I could recall where...) diversion moved avg p.o.i. from rich parts of Lon to poor ones, & losses didn't change. (Given greater pop density in poor ones, it might even be they went up; the source didn't suggest it.) It's N a settled ish... [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 07:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

See [[Reginald Victor Jones|R.V. Jones]] in Most Secret War page 422; they decided to ignore Herbert Morrison’s instruction, while he was chairing cabinet, that the deception/diversion would be an interference with Providence (his constituency was Lambeth, and Morrison thought it was an attempt to keep the V-1s away from the rich civil servants in Mayfair etc). But Jones worked out it would save lives, even though it was moving the mean point to South London esp. Dulwich where his parents and old school were. He later calculated that the deception saved 2750 more killed & up to 8000 seriously injured. Will add this to the section soon. [[User:Hugo999|Hugo999]] 07:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

==Credits==
The article puts Berry's score at 59; I've seen 60 (somewhere...). Also, who were the others, & what squadrons were they? [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 07:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

==Spotting==
The article claims the pulsejet was audible @16km; @night, I'd say the visibility of the exhaust plume was more important, N? How far was it visible from? [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 07:52, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

==Development==
Not sure if it belongs here, but... Loon inspired trials of [[Regulus]] I (aboard ''[[Tunny]]'' & ''[[Barbero]]'') & Regulus II (''[[Grayback]]'' & ''[[Growler]]'', making ''Grayback'' first purpose-built [[SSG]]). ''[[Halibut]]'' would have been first SSGN, but Regulus II was cancelled, first. [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 08:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

==Casualties due to V1==
According to the Polish Wiki, the V1 was responsible for 5500 deaths and 16,000 wounded in London. I don't know what the source for these stats is, but thought it might be good to include'em.[[User:Radeksz|radek]] 08:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

: An article on the BBC website fits with those rough figures, but a source should be found.[[User:GraemeLeggett|GraemeLeggett]] 10:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[[Reginald Victor Jones|R.V. Jones]] in Most Secret War page 423 quotes the Official History “The Defence of the United Kingdom” as 8617 bombs launched, 2340 reached London Civil Defence Region causing casualties of approx. 5,500 killed & 16,000 seriously injured. He says the deception saved up to 50% say 2,750 more killed & up to 8,000 seriously injured, by estimating that while on the first 24 hours of the main campaign (June 1944; 2200 hours 15th to 2200 hours 16th) about 30 of the 90 plotted fell inside built-up areas, if the pattern was shifted NW by about 4 miles then about 45 or +50% would have fallen in built-up areas. [[User:Hugo999|Hugo999]] 08:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

==List of V1 falls==
Is there a definitive list of all the sites where V1s (and V2s for that matter) fell anywhere ?

== rv: vandalism ==

Apparently some anonymous bright-butt decided to edit the page as follows:

"The codename Flak ''penis'' Gerät 76 was somewhat successful in disguising the nature of this device and it was some time before references to ''p3n15'' were tied to the V83 pilotless aircraft (an experimental V-1)".

The vandalism occured at 12:30, July 6, 2006 by 82.110.219.14 .

Page reverted to previous state, since no changes happened inbetweeen vandalism and the current state. --[[User:Stealth HR|Stealth]] 18:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


== Detonation Mechanism ==
==Harmonised 20mm cannons==
Under specifications, it says "Detonation Mechanism: 100". What does that mean? 100 what?[[User:Tsuka|Tsuka]] ([[User talk:Tsuka|talk]]) 07:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I was reading this, and I was wondering, what does it mean to harmonise cannons to 300 yards?
The aircraft left wing cannons and the right wing cannons arc of fire crosses 300 yards in front of the plane --[[User:Denniss|Denniss]] 17:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
: No idea. Also the use of Amatol is unsourced - I think this ought to be [[Trialen]]. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
::{{Reply to|Andy Dingley}}: I've added an article on [[Trialen]]. [[User:Prioryman|Prioryman]] ([[User talk:Prioryman|talk]]) 22:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
::: Thanks. I've an article on [[aluminised explosive]]s in general I ought to upload. There was a stupid argument here (naval mines?) a while back on how they didn't exist. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:21, 6 October 2019 (UTC)


== The number destroyed by interceptors ==
It would be helpful if that explanation was in the article itself.


According to the Operation and effectiveness section, it was “about 1000”. But totting up the number as detailed by plane type later on in the article (Interceptors subsection) the number is far higher. Excluding Tempests, we have about 1300. The number destroyed by Tempests is hard to ascertain from the article (is the *total* 638?). So clearly “about 1000” is very wrong, even though it is referenced.
==Cruising Height?==
Need to specify consistent Cruising height - The V-1 has several heights given, Under:
*Description - 100 to 1000 m (300 to 3000 ft) – it would not cruise at 100m???
*Countermeasures - 600 to 900 m (2000 to 3000 ft)
*Specifications - 3050 m (10,000 ft) Is this a max not cruising height? As 10,000 ft is a rounded figure it should be converted to 3000 m. [[User:Hugo999|Hugo999]] 23:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


Also, it would be great to have a summary like this: xxxx were launched at English targets, of which xxxx were destroyed by interceptors and xxxx believed destroyed by anti-aircraft guns. [[User:Boscaswell|<span style="color: green">Boscaswell</span>]] [[User talk:Boscaswell|<span style="color: maroon">talk</span>]] 09:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
==Spies==
I remember hearing that German spies controlled by the British sent misleading reports which put the V-1's aiming off. This should be included in the countermeasures if anyone knows enough about it. See [[Double_Cross_System]]. [[User:Man with two legs|Man with two legs]] 11:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


Just under 2,000 V-1s (1,954 by the article's figures) were shot down by fighters, a startling 638 by the Tempest Vs of Nos.3, 56 and 486 (New Zealand) Squadrons alone. And 56 Squadron didn't even re-equip from Spitfires to Tempests until 6 July. (Though Mosquitos, with their long patrol endurance, night capability and very high speed in a shallow dive, did rather better than is commonly realised.) About 2,500 were shot down by the guns. In total about half of all the V-1s fired at London were destroyed by the Allied defences.[[User:Khamba Tendal|Khamba Tendal]] ([[User talk:Khamba Tendal|talk]]) 19:49, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
== V1 mole ==


== Why did attacks on England stop in October 1944? ==
CNN web is saying construction workers just found an unexploded V1 in London while digging foundations for a new office building, many blocks are cordoned off due to hazard. Wonder if it will be exploded in situ to get rid of it or defused and put on museum display?
The introduction mentions: "At peak, more than one hundred V-1s a day were fired at south-east England, 9,521 in total, decreasing in number as sites were overrun until October 1944, when the last V-1 site in range of Britain was overrun by Allied forces." This is dubious. The launch sites at the Dutch coast (e.g. The Hague) were not liberated before 5 May 1945, so there must have been an additional reason for the V1 attacks on England to stop in October 1944. [[User:Gollem|Gollem]] ([[User talk:Gollem|talk]]) 13:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
==Doodlebug==
: Because the launch sites at the Dutch coast weren't in easy range of London - they could only be used to attack London when extended range V-1s became available in February 1945.[[User:Nigel Ish|Nigel Ish]] ([[User talk:Nigel Ish|talk]]) 14:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm an Australian and I'm doubtful that the Doodlebug was named after an Australian insect. It seems more likley it was named after [[antlion]], which is of worldwide distribution.--[[User:Grahamec|Grahamec]] 11:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


In that case there is something else wrong with the introduction, as it mentions: "... thousands of V-1 missiles launched into England were fired from launch facilities along the French (Pas-de-Calais) and Dutch coasts."
==Assessment section==
By the way, the extended range V-1s were never used against England? As these came available 4 months after the last V-1 mentioned attack on England. [[User:Gollem|Gollem]] ([[User talk:Gollem|talk]]) 18:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
:The extended range V-1s were launched against England from three sites in western Holland on 3 March 1945 - three more sites were aimed at Antwerp. Attacks continued until 28 March - 275 bombs were launched at England, of which 125 got as far as the British defences, which destroyed 94 bombs - only 13 reached London. (Basil Collier, ''The Defence of the United Kingdom'' pp. 394–395.[[User:Nigel Ish|Nigel Ish]] ([[User talk:Nigel Ish|talk]]) 18:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


In that case the part that mentions "... October 1944, when the last V-1 site in range of Britain was overrun by Allied forces" is wrong/misleading? Since with the extended-range V-1s new sites in Holland became in range of Britain and these were never overrun by Allied forces, but surrendered only when the war was over. [[User:Gollem|Gollem]] ([[User talk:Gollem|talk]]) 20:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
The source used for this section seems of questionable value - a report which was written by an Allied officer in December 1944 clearly couldn't have had access to German records and probably wasn't based on the final assessment of the damage done to Britain. Is a post-war assessment available? --[[User:Nick Dowling|Nick Dowling]] 12:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
:It could be written clearer, but there were three phases of V-1 attacks against Britain - the first was the attacks from France against London, which stopped when the advancing Allied forces overran the launch sites, the air-launched attacks, which ended in January, and the very small scale attacks by long range weapons in March 1945 - the October statement in the lede refers to the large scale attacks from France (and technically it is correct - they bases in France were the only land bases in range of England AT THE TIME - it took several more months for the long range V-1s to be developed and new launch sites aimed at Britain set up.[[User:Nigel Ish|Nigel Ish]] ([[User talk:Nigel Ish|talk]]) 21:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


== Please, translate feet into metric ==


''The shorter range improved the accuracy of the V-1 which was six miles deviation per hundred miles of flight, the flight level was also reduced to around 3,000 ft.''--[[User:Adûnâi|Adûnâi]] ([[User talk:Adûnâi|talk]]) 14:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
== Ferry range of a V1 compared with conventional aircraft ==
:Done. This article has some problems, as a German subject the primary units should be metric, it needs a review. [[User:Nimbus227|Nimbus]] [[User talk:Nimbus227|<span style="color:#2F4F4F;">(Cumulus</span> <span style="color:#708090;">nimbus</span> <span style="color:#D3D3D3;">floats by)</span>]] 18:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


== Deaths in London ==
Pulsejets are inefficient. I have estimated the fuel consumed as pounds per 100 miles, expressed as a fraction of the gross weight of the aircraft. This method standardizes the figures, allowing the comparison of fuel consumed by aircraft of different weights.


If my understanding of the numbers is correct, a bit fewer than 10,000 V-1s caused about 25,000 deaths, meaning that an average of 2.5 deaths per bomb. That would seem to make the efficacy of the bomb fairly poor, at least in terms of people killed. (Damage to property being another matter.) Could someone source this information and add it to the article with the proper numbers? If it's there already, it's very well hidden, although I did find the figure of 9,521 total bobms in the lede. Shouldn't the death toll in London be in the lede as well? [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 07:40, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
The edit page of Wikipedia does not like tables, so I will present the figure differently.
:I don't claim a complete understanding of the subject, but it is immediately apparent to me that of the (approx) 10,000 v1s launched at London, a good proportion were shot down before reaching their target. What you need is the number that actually exploded in the target area. Do the bomb maps cover this? I have only used them for bombs, etc. early in the war. And that would be WP:OR.
:Where does the figure of 25,000 deaths come from? If you do a search on the Commonwealth War Graves site for civilian casualties from June 1944 through October 1944, you get 6,560 deaths - and just scanning a sample, they are in London and in the same format as civilians killed in their own home as you saw in the Blitz casualties. I make no claim that this piece of WP:OR is correct, but I think it raises a valid question. Remember that V2 casualties need to be accounted for. Also '''total''' V1 casualties would include significant numbers in Belgium, etc.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 23:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
::The 25,000 figure came from a TV documentary, so, of course, I did not accept it as fact, which is why I came to this article, where I was surprised not to find anything about deaths caused by V-1s -- hence my request. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 23:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
:::I note that the article tabulates 22,892 "casualties" - but that word is highly ambiguous, as for some it means killed, for others killed or wounded. I strongly suspect the latter. The article is extremely light on the results of the V1 - it does not even mention the worst result, the Guards Chapel, where 58 civilians and 63 military personnel were killed by a V1, with 20 seriously wounded civilians and 48 military. Other sources give a higher number of seriously wounded for the Guards Chapel- but it is very easy for a careless editor to stick in the word "{{strikethrough|wounded}}seriously". My source is Hitler's V-Weapons: An Official History of the Battle Against the V-1 and V-2 in WWII Frontline Books. I don't yet have a handle on how accurate this is, or have even worked out when exactly it was written (clearly some time shortly after the events), but I think casualty figures would be pretty good. This source says 2420 V1s landed in London - but there is no record of ones that exploded in rural areas. Clearly a bit more digging to do on sources, and the article is in need of some attention.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 07:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
::::Looking further in the same source, I see: <br/>During the whole period 9,251 Flying Bombs were in operation, 5,890 crossed the coast, 2,563 reached the London area and 4,262 were destroyed. There were 2,420 incidents reported in the London Region and 3,403 incidents on land elsewhere. Casualties (Operational Figures): Killed: London – 5,375 Elsewhere – 462 Seriously injured and detained in hospital: London – 15,258 Elsewhere – 1,504 In addition to these figures, Service casualties reported were: Killed: London – 207 Elsewhere – 95 Seriously injured and detained in hospital: London – 280 Elsewhere – 197
::::I might get to look further at this source later today.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 07:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::I have inserted some sourced figures on just London casualties within a new "Effect" section. I note that they do not match [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]]'s. Whichever figures we go with, the overall casualties could do with adding. I have not changed the lead - it probably needs an effect paragraph where the current one on V-1s in Finland is. Which needs moving into the main article or deleting IMO. My thought was to get consensus on what we put in the article and ''then'' summarise it into the lead. [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]] ([[User talk:Gog the Mild|talk]]) 14:05, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
::::::Collier (Appendix L) states total civilian casualties in the UK from V-1s of 6184 killed and 17981 seriously wounded - this does not include service casualties. He states that "about nine-tenth" were in the London Civil Defence Region.[[User:Nigel Ish|Nigel Ish]] ([[User talk:Nigel Ish|talk]]) 14:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::::{{u|Nigel Ish}}, checking, Atkinson cites Collier for his figures. [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]] ([[User talk:Gog the Mild|talk]]) 15:07, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
{{od}}I think the deaths and serious injuries figures now in the article (and discussed above) are closely related to the ones I have given above. What we do not know is the extent of rounding applied or any updating due to later research by other sources. I total my figures as 5,739 deaths (London and outside) and 17,239 seriously injured.<br/>The article may benefit from details of the worst incident, the [[Guards Chapel, Wellington Barracks]] (18 Jun 1944) (which was hit during a service). The casualty figures for this are in the post above, but I note that the article on the chapel gives a different number of injured- but the figure I found was "seriously injured". I recollect hearing that it took 48 hours to dig the last of the survivors out of the rubble - may be worth searching for a good source if that is true.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 15:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
:The second volume of Ullrich's new biography of Hitler -- while obviously not the best source for this kind of information -- gives (p.435) 5,842 killed and 15,900 injured. The source cited is Overy, ''The Bombing War'' pp.192f. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 20:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
::So, going to the original source, it says "During June, July and August 5,482 were killed and 15,900 injured, the highest figures since May 1941." Overy, Richard. The Bombing War (p. 193). Penguin Books Ltd. (Note the transposition of digits at some point - I have taken a cut and paste from an electronic book.) It is important that this is just 3 selected months. V1s continued to land at a lower rate after this. Looking back at the other source I have available, Hitler's V-Weapons An Official History. Frontline Books, the list of "serious flying bomb incidents" gives 2 in Sept 44, with deaths of 13 and 10; 4 in October, deaths 17, 12, 17, 10; 3 in November, deaths 18, 11, 12; 2 in December, deaths 13 and 26; 3 in January 1945, deaths 11, 14, 10 and one in March 1945 with 12 deaths. I have no idea what constitutes a "serious" incident. The point is that these numbers, whilst all within reach of each other, are not the same. Note that adding these "per incident" deaths to the 5,482 for the 3 busy months, gives a total 61 less than the overall total of 5,739 in Hitler's V Weapons. However, they are believably the same numbers with some corrections added at some point. Perhaps there were 30 or so incidents where only 2 people died, which didn't qualify as "serious". (All presuming my arithmetic is correct!!) I hope this is progress of some sort.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 22:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
:::Just to note, the transposition was Ullrich's error (or the typesetter's), not mine. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 22:50, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
::::It was always my suspicion that the error did not lie with a Wikipedia editor - interestingly you sometimes also find weird things with electronic books - though I have no idea how they muddle things up.[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] ([[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|talk]]) 23:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)


== Arado image incorrect ==
Range, miles:
V1 160; Spitfire 1140; Hellcat 1530; Thunderbolt 1800


The arado carrying a V1 model is incorrect. It is stated to be the C version, and the wings and motors are correct, but the fuselage and cockpit is a clearly a 2 engined B version. If someone has a correct image could they change it please? Even if it's a drawing would be better than giving incorrect images
Fuel, pounds:
V1 1110; Spitfire 1260; Hellcat 3110; Thunderbolt 7250


: The image is correct, it is of a model in the Speyer museum. The caption makes no mention of which variant is modelled. If the model is incorrect then you will have to take that up with the curator of the museum. [[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]] ([[User talk:Murgatroyd49|talk]]) 16:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Fuel consumed, lbs/mile:
V1 6.9; Spitfire 1.1; Hellcat 2.0; Thunderbolt 4.0


:Well then i will have to. Unless the model in the image is a special version with a b2 cockpit and c cuadruple engines made specifically to carry V-1's, the model is not correct. I will take it to the museum. Regards [[User:Juanal expert|Juanal expert]] ([[User talk:Juanal expert|talk]]) 10:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Gross weight, pounds (GW):
::I did find that every source agrees it was a c variant what would do the launch, and i have found a technical drawings that include the launching system. Anyways, no C versions were ever completed, even less a prototype for the air launch arado, so sources widely disagree on wich versioj was it, because it simply didn't exist. It was only a project. [[User:Juanal expert|Juanal expert]] ([[User talk:Juanal expert|talk]]) 10:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
V1 4750; Spitfire 6600; Hellcat 12600; Thunderbolt 17500
::I was going to remove the original image, but because the special nature of this version, i will aimply add my image next to it. [[User:Juanal expert|Juanal expert]] ([[User talk:Juanal expert|talk]]) 10:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


==Disposal==
Fuel per 100 miles, as a % of GW:
V1 14.6; Spitfire 1.7; Hellcat 1.6; Thunderbolt 2.3


It would help perspective as to progress in dealing with the V-1 attacks on London if the date the first person who successfully defused a V-1, John Pilkington Hudson, were given. The date is not given in the wikipedia biography of JPH.[[User:Cloptonson|Cloptonson]] ([[User talk:Cloptonson|talk]]) 12:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


== volkswagen built this missile ==
On the last measure, a Spitfire is 8.7 times as good as a V1, a Hellcat is 9.1 times, and a Thunderbolt 6.3.


on the wikipedia site abount "companies involved in the holocaust" stays
It was difficult to find reliable figures for fuel capacity for the conventional aircraft, because some of these aircraft could use drop tanks. I took the figures for ferry range, a one-way trip, carrying nothing except pilot and fuel. I then estimated fuel carried as gross weight less empty weight, which I realise might not be an accurate estimate of fuel actually carried. I allowed 250 pounds for the weight of the pilot, his clothes, boots and parachute. Figures from Wikipedia.


"volkswagen built it"
I found figures for the V1 from zenza.se and fighterfactory. Fuel capacity 150 gallons, presumably Imperial, or 1110 pounds, and a range, one-way of course, of 160 miles. The gross weight of the V1 was 4750 pounds, warhead 1870 pounds, and fuel 1110 pounds, leaving an empty weight of 1770 pounds. The available load is 2980 pounds, and the mix of bomb load and fuel will vary with the desired range.


is that true?
A manned version of a V1 would have an available load of 2730 pounds after allowing 250 pounds for the pilot. At 6.9 pounds of fuel per mile, the ferry range would be 394 miles.


David Erskine [[Special:Contributions/58.168.27.1|58.168.27.1]] ([[User talk:58.168.27.1|talk]]) 00:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
volkswagen is a nazi-corporation. eine firma, ein konzern, ein unternehmen. [[Special:Contributions/2001:9E8:D2EC:9400:6208:7A64:817E:B8CF|2001:9E8:D2EC:9400:6208:7A64:817E:B8CF]] ([[User talk:2001:9E8:D2EC:9400:6208:7A64:817E:B8CF|talk]]) 07:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 07:55, 24 May 2024

Detonation Mechanism

[edit]

Under specifications, it says "Detonation Mechanism: 100". What does that mean? 100 what?Tsuka (talk) 07:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. Also the use of Amatol is unsourced - I think this ought to be Trialen. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley:: I've added an article on Trialen. Prioryman (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've an article on aluminised explosives in general I ought to upload. There was a stupid argument here (naval mines?) a while back on how they didn't exist. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:21, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The number destroyed by interceptors

[edit]

According to the Operation and effectiveness section, it was “about 1000”. But totting up the number as detailed by plane type later on in the article (Interceptors subsection) the number is far higher. Excluding Tempests, we have about 1300. The number destroyed by Tempests is hard to ascertain from the article (is the *total* 638?). So clearly “about 1000” is very wrong, even though it is referenced.

Also, it would be great to have a summary like this: xxxx were launched at English targets, of which xxxx were destroyed by interceptors and xxxx believed destroyed by anti-aircraft guns. Boscaswell talk 09:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just under 2,000 V-1s (1,954 by the article's figures) were shot down by fighters, a startling 638 by the Tempest Vs of Nos.3, 56 and 486 (New Zealand) Squadrons alone. And 56 Squadron didn't even re-equip from Spitfires to Tempests until 6 July. (Though Mosquitos, with their long patrol endurance, night capability and very high speed in a shallow dive, did rather better than is commonly realised.) About 2,500 were shot down by the guns. In total about half of all the V-1s fired at London were destroyed by the Allied defences.Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:49, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why did attacks on England stop in October 1944?

[edit]

The introduction mentions: "At peak, more than one hundred V-1s a day were fired at south-east England, 9,521 in total, decreasing in number as sites were overrun until October 1944, when the last V-1 site in range of Britain was overrun by Allied forces." This is dubious. The launch sites at the Dutch coast (e.g. The Hague) were not liberated before 5 May 1945, so there must have been an additional reason for the V1 attacks on England to stop in October 1944. Gollem (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because the launch sites at the Dutch coast weren't in easy range of London - they could only be used to attack London when extended range V-1s became available in February 1945.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In that case there is something else wrong with the introduction, as it mentions: "... thousands of V-1 missiles launched into England were fired from launch facilities along the French (Pas-de-Calais) and Dutch coasts." By the way, the extended range V-1s were never used against England? As these came available 4 months after the last V-1 mentioned attack on England. Gollem (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The extended range V-1s were launched against England from three sites in western Holland on 3 March 1945 - three more sites were aimed at Antwerp. Attacks continued until 28 March - 275 bombs were launched at England, of which 125 got as far as the British defences, which destroyed 94 bombs - only 13 reached London. (Basil Collier, The Defence of the United Kingdom pp. 394–395.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In that case the part that mentions "... October 1944, when the last V-1 site in range of Britain was overrun by Allied forces" is wrong/misleading? Since with the extended-range V-1s new sites in Holland became in range of Britain and these were never overrun by Allied forces, but surrendered only when the war was over. Gollem (talk) 20:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It could be written clearer, but there were three phases of V-1 attacks against Britain - the first was the attacks from France against London, which stopped when the advancing Allied forces overran the launch sites, the air-launched attacks, which ended in January, and the very small scale attacks by long range weapons in March 1945 - the October statement in the lede refers to the large scale attacks from France (and technically it is correct - they bases in France were the only land bases in range of England AT THE TIME - it took several more months for the long range V-1s to be developed and new launch sites aimed at Britain set up.Nigel Ish (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please, translate feet into metric

[edit]

The shorter range improved the accuracy of the V-1 which was six miles deviation per hundred miles of flight, the flight level was also reduced to around 3,000 ft.--Adûnâi (talk) 14:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. This article has some problems, as a German subject the primary units should be metric, it needs a review. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths in London

[edit]

If my understanding of the numbers is correct, a bit fewer than 10,000 V-1s caused about 25,000 deaths, meaning that an average of 2.5 deaths per bomb. That would seem to make the efficacy of the bomb fairly poor, at least in terms of people killed. (Damage to property being another matter.) Could someone source this information and add it to the article with the proper numbers? If it's there already, it's very well hidden, although I did find the figure of 9,521 total bobms in the lede. Shouldn't the death toll in London be in the lede as well? Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:40, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't claim a complete understanding of the subject, but it is immediately apparent to me that of the (approx) 10,000 v1s launched at London, a good proportion were shot down before reaching their target. What you need is the number that actually exploded in the target area. Do the bomb maps cover this? I have only used them for bombs, etc. early in the war. And that would be WP:OR.
Where does the figure of 25,000 deaths come from? If you do a search on the Commonwealth War Graves site for civilian casualties from June 1944 through October 1944, you get 6,560 deaths - and just scanning a sample, they are in London and in the same format as civilians killed in their own home as you saw in the Blitz casualties. I make no claim that this piece of WP:OR is correct, but I think it raises a valid question. Remember that V2 casualties need to be accounted for. Also total V1 casualties would include significant numbers in Belgium, etc.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The 25,000 figure came from a TV documentary, so, of course, I did not accept it as fact, which is why I came to this article, where I was surprised not to find anything about deaths caused by V-1s -- hence my request. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I note that the article tabulates 22,892 "casualties" - but that word is highly ambiguous, as for some it means killed, for others killed or wounded. I strongly suspect the latter. The article is extremely light on the results of the V1 - it does not even mention the worst result, the Guards Chapel, where 58 civilians and 63 military personnel were killed by a V1, with 20 seriously wounded civilians and 48 military. Other sources give a higher number of seriously wounded for the Guards Chapel- but it is very easy for a careless editor to stick in the word "woundedseriously". My source is Hitler's V-Weapons: An Official History of the Battle Against the V-1 and V-2 in WWII Frontline Books. I don't yet have a handle on how accurate this is, or have even worked out when exactly it was written (clearly some time shortly after the events), but I think casualty figures would be pretty good. This source says 2420 V1s landed in London - but there is no record of ones that exploded in rural areas. Clearly a bit more digging to do on sources, and the article is in need of some attention.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looking further in the same source, I see:
During the whole period 9,251 Flying Bombs were in operation, 5,890 crossed the coast, 2,563 reached the London area and 4,262 were destroyed. There were 2,420 incidents reported in the London Region and 3,403 incidents on land elsewhere. Casualties (Operational Figures): Killed: London – 5,375 Elsewhere – 462 Seriously injured and detained in hospital: London – 15,258 Elsewhere – 1,504 In addition to these figures, Service casualties reported were: Killed: London – 207 Elsewhere – 95 Seriously injured and detained in hospital: London – 280 Elsewhere – 197
I might get to look further at this source later today.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have inserted some sourced figures on just London casualties within a new "Effect" section. I note that they do not match ThoughtIdRetired's. Whichever figures we go with, the overall casualties could do with adding. I have not changed the lead - it probably needs an effect paragraph where the current one on V-1s in Finland is. Which needs moving into the main article or deleting IMO. My thought was to get consensus on what we put in the article and then summarise it into the lead. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Collier (Appendix L) states total civilian casualties in the UK from V-1s of 6184 killed and 17981 seriously wounded - this does not include service casualties. He states that "about nine-tenth" were in the London Civil Defence Region.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nigel Ish, checking, Atkinson cites Collier for his figures. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the deaths and serious injuries figures now in the article (and discussed above) are closely related to the ones I have given above. What we do not know is the extent of rounding applied or any updating due to later research by other sources. I total my figures as 5,739 deaths (London and outside) and 17,239 seriously injured.
The article may benefit from details of the worst incident, the Guards Chapel, Wellington Barracks (18 Jun 1944) (which was hit during a service). The casualty figures for this are in the post above, but I note that the article on the chapel gives a different number of injured- but the figure I found was "seriously injured". I recollect hearing that it took 48 hours to dig the last of the survivors out of the rubble - may be worth searching for a good source if that is true.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 15:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second volume of Ullrich's new biography of Hitler -- while obviously not the best source for this kind of information -- gives (p.435) 5,842 killed and 15,900 injured. The source cited is Overy, The Bombing War pp.192f. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, going to the original source, it says "During June, July and August 5,482 were killed and 15,900 injured, the highest figures since May 1941." Overy, Richard. The Bombing War (p. 193). Penguin Books Ltd. (Note the transposition of digits at some point - I have taken a cut and paste from an electronic book.) It is important that this is just 3 selected months. V1s continued to land at a lower rate after this. Looking back at the other source I have available, Hitler's V-Weapons An Official History. Frontline Books, the list of "serious flying bomb incidents" gives 2 in Sept 44, with deaths of 13 and 10; 4 in October, deaths 17, 12, 17, 10; 3 in November, deaths 18, 11, 12; 2 in December, deaths 13 and 26; 3 in January 1945, deaths 11, 14, 10 and one in March 1945 with 12 deaths. I have no idea what constitutes a "serious" incident. The point is that these numbers, whilst all within reach of each other, are not the same. Note that adding these "per incident" deaths to the 5,482 for the 3 busy months, gives a total 61 less than the overall total of 5,739 in Hitler's V Weapons. However, they are believably the same numbers with some corrections added at some point. Perhaps there were 30 or so incidents where only 2 people died, which didn't qualify as "serious". (All presuming my arithmetic is correct!!) I hope this is progress of some sort.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note, the transposition was Ullrich's error (or the typesetter's), not mine. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:50, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was always my suspicion that the error did not lie with a Wikipedia editor - interestingly you sometimes also find weird things with electronic books - though I have no idea how they muddle things up.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arado image incorrect

[edit]

The arado carrying a V1 model is incorrect. It is stated to be the C version, and the wings and motors are correct, but the fuselage and cockpit is a clearly a 2 engined B version. If someone has a correct image could they change it please? Even if it's a drawing would be better than giving incorrect images

The image is correct, it is of a model in the Speyer museum. The caption makes no mention of which variant is modelled. If the model is incorrect then you will have to take that up with the curator of the museum. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well then i will have to. Unless the model in the image is a special version with a b2 cockpit and c cuadruple engines made specifically to carry V-1's, the model is not correct. I will take it to the museum. Regards Juanal expert (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did find that every source agrees it was a c variant what would do the launch, and i have found a technical drawings that include the launching system. Anyways, no C versions were ever completed, even less a prototype for the air launch arado, so sources widely disagree on wich versioj was it, because it simply didn't exist. It was only a project. Juanal expert (talk) 10:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to remove the original image, but because the special nature of this version, i will aimply add my image next to it. Juanal expert (talk) 10:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disposal

[edit]

It would help perspective as to progress in dealing with the V-1 attacks on London if the date the first person who successfully defused a V-1, John Pilkington Hudson, were given. The date is not given in the wikipedia biography of JPH.Cloptonson (talk) 12:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

volkswagen built this missile

[edit]

on the wikipedia site abount "companies involved in the holocaust" stays

"volkswagen built it"

is that true?

volkswagen is a nazi-corporation. eine firma, ein konzern, ein unternehmen. 2001:9E8:D2EC:9400:6208:7A64:817E:B8CF (talk) 07:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]