Talk:V-1

Tea room discussion
I'm not sure the definition given, an early guided missile, is correct, even though it seems to agree with what is listed under guided missile. A V-1 had only the most basic guidance, and could not be controlled after launch. Secondly, is it a missile, or is flying bomb more correct.--Dmol 14:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, keeping itself on course by making corrections via its control surfaces didn't apply to the V-1 as far as I can remember. Perhaps it just needs a longer, more specific definition. SemperBlotto 15:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The WP article describes the control system. It is a stability control system, not a course-correction system, more analogous to the feathers on an arrow. DCDuring TALK 15:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Not so: it had a gyrocompass, and thus would correct course. Robert Ullmann 16:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Since it has a guidance system, however elementary, it is a guided missile (for which, I guess, flying bomb is a dated synonym). This doesn't necessarily mean remotely guided or controlled. —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 06:33 z 


 * It was a course-maintenance system. Most definitions of guided missile provided by other dictionaries refer to external control or a homing system. The WP article refers to "preset guidance" as a variety of guidance. That is very similar to calling an arrow a guided missile because the archer presets the path and the vanes minimize the departure from the path or calling a rifle bullet guided, because it uses a gyroscopic principle to maintain its course. The lack of external referents is key to the distinction. To call it guided makes our definition (and Wikipedia's) depart from prevailing definitions of "guided missile", whether or not it conforms to a more idiosyncratic definition of "guided missile". DCDuring TALK 10:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * See also Guidance system.


 * Of course contemporary guided missiles are more sophisticated—a typical dictionary definition wouldn't be intended to cover the entire history of guided missiles. Perhaps the V-1 needs a “historical” label.  But unlike an arrow, it armed itself, had several inputs (altimeter, pendulums, gyro), effected its own course, and tried to blow itself up on the target (conceptually identical to a Tomahawk cruise missile). —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 16:27 z 


 * Some of the same would be true of a fused, finned artillery shell, especially one gyroscopically stabilized by rifling, or a finned, fused artillery rocket. Fancy contemporary cruise missile carry sensors and compare what they sense with a stored map. I simply don't believe that our definition accurately defines V-1 using the ordinary meaning of the terms used in the definition. An encyclopedic article that can explain itself at length can stretch and redefine terms in ways that we should not. DCDuring TALK 17:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No, the V-1's guidance system uses feedback from sensors to alter its control surfaces. Arrows, spinning bullets and finned rockets don't respond to their own roll, pitch, yaw, tilt, or distance travelled (the V-1's cumulative airspeed counter is not just a timed fuse).  For decades, guided missiles had no stored maps or digital computers—these things don't define them. —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 18:35 z 

On a tangent, a guided missile isn't really a vehicle; it's a weapon, in the class of bullets, shells, and bombs. It can travel through air or space, and may guide itself by control surfaces or redirecting its jet or rocket exhaust. Needs work.

And missile (military) and rocket (military) define themselves by each other: the definition of the latter, simpler device needs some help. —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 16:56 z 


 * I agree: the ordinary meaning of "vehicle" is not really right for this, whether or not it is technically correct. DCDuring TALK 17:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it works, although it's not immediately clear, the missile itself is nothing without the warhead or equivalent element, hence it is the "carrier" of the warhead, AKA its vehicle (much like a substance can be a vehicle for a disease). Circeus 18:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a strong analogy, but this isn't a great definition.


 * “Unmanned vehicle” implies an airplane or rocket ship with the cockpit replaced by a guidance system, akin to a drone or remotely-piloted vehicle (RPV)—a guided missile is none of these. In theory, there are guided missiles without warheads (see Kinetic Energy Interceptor). —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 18:43 z 


 * Some definitions of "guided missile" from our competitors via OneLook:
 * MW: a missile whose course may be altered during flight
 * Encarta: a self-propelled missile that can be steered in flight by remote control or by an onboard homing device
 * AHD: A self-propelled missile that can be guided while it is in flight.
 * Dictionary.com (RH): an aerial missile, as a rocket, steered during its flight by radio signals, clockwork controls, etc.


 * IMHO, only the last would be consistent with a V-1-style course-deviation/stability control system constituting guidance. The ordinary meaning of the word "guided" would seem to imply some external agency (remote control) or, at least, target seeking. DCDuring TALK 19:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Man, I interpret that rather differently (and add one more):
 * MW: When the V-1's incorrect roll, pitch, or yaw are moving it off of its intended course, it uses its control surfaces to alter its actual course.
 * Encarta: This one depends on the definition of homing device. The V-1 is steered in flight by a device which enables it to find its target (historically, only about 25% of the time).
 * AHD: Self-propelled, obviously. Guided by its guidance system.
 * Dictionary.com: Ditto.
 * CanOD: “a missile directed to its target by remote control or by internal equipment.”
 * I dispute your interpretation of the “ordinary” meaning of guided. A guided missile is one with a guidance system.  None of the definitions above requires external guidance or remote control. —Michael Z. 2008-08-25 21:52 z 


 * Going by the above definitions, I feel like a "guided missile" is one that, if you somehow teleported it twenty feet mid-flight, would theoretically still end up at the same place. By contrast, from its Wikipedia article, it sounds like the V-1 would end up twenty feet away. Am I right? —Ruakh TALK 23:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No. Any craft which uses inertial guidance would fail the test.  That would include airliners, Apollo moon rockets, and Minuteman ICBMs, although I would assume that more elaborate systems would eventually compensate for the error by incorporating external inputs.


 * I get the impression that everyone here assumes that after the V-1, say starting later in 1944 with the V-2, everything called a “guided missile” must have had GPS, Google Maps, and scanned the ground with giant laser eyeballs. Come on folks—there's no magic. A guided missile is any one with some system which pivots a rudder or gimbals a rocket motor in response to its own movements.  For the first thirty years of their existence, they would have used a lot of mechanical parts for this, and had very little reliance on any external input. —Michael Z. 2008-08-26 04:20 z 


 * Ah, O.K., that makes sense. Thanks for explaining. (And I am so glad to live in the era of GPS, Google Maps, and giant ground-scanning laser eyeballs. Progress is great. :-) —Ruakh TALK 12:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Giant. Laser.  Eyeballs.


 * I've tweaked the definitions for rocket and missile. Please have a look.




 * Re: giant laser eyeballs: Yeah, I heard you the first time. What, you're the only one allowed to have a sense of humor? :-)  —Ruakh TALK 15:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I would argue that most weaponry missiles are not guided missiles, but ballistic missiles. Nobody would claim that an airliner or a manned space vehicle was a guided missile.
 * OTOH, the use of the word "guidance" in "inertial guidance system" suggests that the idea of guidance has to do with the ability to adjust power and control surfaces as opposed to the nature of the information to which the control system responds. It still seems more encyclopedic than we can accommodate. A less problematic definition would say that the V-1 was a "cruise missile". DCDuring <i >TALK</i > 16:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ballistic missiles include some artillery rockets, and theatre and strategic missiles which are fired at an area on the ground (elaborate ones also have terminal guidance which helps them hit a target precisely). They do not include antiaircraft, antitank, antiship, or anti-missile  missiles which are fired at potentially moving targets, nor any kind of homing or smart missiles, nor terrain-following cruise missiles. I merely referred to planes and rocket ships to point out that not only the primitive V-1 would fail a purely theoretical teleportation test, and that many sophisticated systems relied on similar principals.


 * Yes, guidance means what you refer to, but inertial guidance only includes inputs from internal sensors (although practical systems would supplement that with additional types of guidance if possible, e.g. ground-based nav beacons for aircraft). I suppose in theory the V-1 might be called a primeval cruise missile, but as far as I know this category normally means missiles which follow terrain features to evade radar. —Michael Z. 2008-08-27 17:43 z 


 * What I liked about "cruise missile" (vs. "guided missile") was that it sidestepped the encyclopedic discussion of guidance to focus on more salient and much less debatable features of the V-1: 1., its use of jet propulsion and, 2., its operation under power for almost its entire run to the target. DCDuring <i >TALK</i > 18:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, jet propulsion and an airplane-like trajectory is common to both the V-1 and cruise missiles. Scanning through V-1 flying bomb and cruise missile, I see that the two are historically related.


 * But constant propulsion is a characteristic of all missiles except ballistic missiles. And the more I think about it, all modern missiles also seem to be guided missiles.  Perhaps guided is an optional qualifier or intensifier, distinguishing post-1943 reaction-propelled missiles from pre-modern missiles such as sling stones, javelins, arrows, crossbow bolts and catapult projectiles. —Michael Z. 2008-08-27 19:41 z 

Regarding rocket, rocket engine, rocket propulsion and jet, jet engine, jet propulsion: I'm thinking the fact that the latter breathes air and the former doesn't may be a defining characteristic. —Michael Z. 2008-08-26 15:25 z