>rocket launching a glide bomb when pulsejet existsWhat is wrong with american engineering?
>>62877251The US tested pulsejet cruise missiles but ended up rejecting them in favor of turbojet. Much more fuel efficient (and thus longer ranged for same weight) if you're not constrained by the manufacturing limitations WWII Germany was.
>>62877630Wait, pulsejet is less efficient again than turbojet?I'm not an aircraft guy, if it wasn't obvious.
>>62877669Yeah, pulsejets have the advantage of being lighter and much easier to manufacture, but are just about the least fuel efficient type of jet around.
>>62877669Between 2 and 3 times more fuel consumption.A V-1 with turbojet should have had +600 km of range but even worse accuracy...Its main problem was the how they're used and the lack of radioguidance to improve its CEP to sub-1km (that germans had).
>>62877251there really isn't a better way to throw away resources, waste them and deny them elsewhere where they're needed. Tells you a lot about the 1-digit iq of the kraut.
>>62877676Considerign the huge amount of boom you can pack into one, and how good modern GPS is. . .how soon will sombody make a GPS guided version and dive them into an oil refinery?
>>62877868https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trembita_(cruise_missile)
>>62877868>>62880304Are these being spammed to whack large soft targets like refineries or deplete SAM/MANPAD stocks? I haven't heard anything about them but would be even cheaper than a Shaheed
