Editing Surface-to-air missile (section)

===World War II===
During [[World War II]], efforts were started to develop surface-to-air missiles as it was generally considered that [[flak]] was of little use against [[bomber]]s of ever-increasing performance. The lethal radius of a flak shell is fairly small, and the chance of delivering a "hit" is essentially a fixed percentage per round. In order to attack a target, guns fire continually while the aircraft are in range in order to launch as many shells as possible, increasing the chance that one of these will end up within the lethal range. Against the [[Boeing B-17]], which operated just within the range of the numerous German [[8.8 cm Flak 18/36/37/41|eighty-eights]], an average of 2,805 rounds had to be fired per bomber destroyed.{{sfn|Westerman|2001|p=197}}

Bombers flying at higher altitudes require larger guns and shells to reach them. This greatly increases the cost of the system, and (generally) slows the rate of fire. Faster aircraft fly out of range more quickly, reducing the number of rounds fired against them. Against late-war designs like the [[Boeing B-29 Superfortress]] or jet-powered designs like the [[Arado Ar 234]], flak would be essentially useless.{{sfn|Westerman|2001|p=111}} This potential was already obvious by 1942, when [[Walther von Axthelm]] outlined the growing problems with flak defences that he predicted would soon be dealing with "aircraft speeds and flight altitudes [that] will gradually reach {{convert|1000|km/h|abbr=on}} and between {{convert|10000|-|15000|m|abbr=on}}."{{sfn|Westerman|2001|p=111}}<ref group=nb>This is a quote-of-a-quote and the original source is not available. Axthelm almost certainly stated these numbers in metric terms.</ref> This was seen generally; in November 1943 the Director of Gunnery Division of the [[Royal Navy]] concluded that guns would be useless against jets, stating "No projectile of which control is lost when it leaves the ship can be of any use to us in this matter."

====Axis efforts====
[[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 141-1898, Peenemünde, Start Fla-Rakete "Wasserfall".jpg|thumb|right|A ''Wasserfall'' missile lifts off during a test flight.]]

The first serious consideration of a SAM development project was a series of conversations that took place in Germany during 1941. In February, Friederich Halder proposed a "flak rocket" concept, which led [[Walter Dornberger]] to ask [[Wernher von Braun]] to prepare a study on a guided missile able to reach between {{convert|15000|and|18000|m|abbr=on}} altitude. Von Braun became convinced a better solution was a crewed rocket interceptor, and said as much to the director of the [[T-Amt]], [[Roluf Lucht]], in July. The directors of the ''Luftwaffe'' flak arm were not interested in crewed aircraft, and the resulting disagreements between the teams delayed serious consideration of a SAM for two years.{{sfn|Westerman|2001|p=78}}

Von Axthelm published his concerns in 1942, and the subject saw serious consideration for the first time; initial development programs for liquid- and [[solid-fuel rocket]]s became part of the Flak Development Program of 1942.{{sfn|Westerman|2001|p=112}} By this point serious studies by the [[Peenemünde]] team had been prepared, and several rocket designs had been proposed, including 1940's ''[[Feuerlilie]]'', and 1941's [[Wasserfall missile|''Wasserfall'']] and [[Henschel Hs 117]] ''Schmetterling''. None of these projects saw any real development until 1943, when the first large-scale raids by the Allied [[air force]]s started. As the urgency of the problem grew, new designs were added, including ''[[Enzian]]'' and ''[[Rheintochter]]'', as well as the unguided [[Taifun (rocket)|''Taifun'']] which was designed to be launched in waves.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/cosford/collections/missiles/missile_info.cfm?missile_id=33 |title=Scheufeln Taifun |access-date=2006-07-16 |url-status=bot: unknown |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040110140650/http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/cosford/collections/missiles/missile_info.cfm?missile_id=33 |archive-date=10 January 2004 |website=RAF Museum }}</ref>

In general, these designs could be split into two groups. One set of designs would be boosted to altitude in front of the bombers and then flown towards them on a head-on approach at low speeds comparable to crewed aircraft. These designs included the Feuerlilie, Schmetterling and Enzian. The second group were high-speed missiles, typically supersonic, that flew directly towards their targets from below. These included Wasserfall and Rheintochter. Both types used [[radio control]] for guidance, either by eye, or by comparing the returns of the missile and target on a single radar screen. Development of all these systems was carried out at the same time, and the war ended before any of them was ready for combat use. The infighting between various groups in the military also delayed development. Some extreme fighter designs, like the [[Me 163|''Komet'']] and [[Bachem Ba 349|''Natter'']], also overlapped with SAMs in their intended uses.

[[Albert Speer]] was especially supportive of missile development. In his opinion, had they been consistently developed from the start, the large scale [[Combined Bomber Offensive|bomber raids of 1944]] would have been impossible.<ref>Albert Speer, "Inside the Third Reich", Macmillan, p. 492.</ref>

====Allied efforts====
[[File:Fairey Stooge.png|thumb|right|Typical of the "boost-glide" type weapons, the Fairey Stooge was an armed drone aircraft flown to a collision with the target. ''Enzian'' and ''Schmetterling'' were similar in concept, design and performance.]]

The British developed unguided antiaircraft rockets (operated under the name [[Z Battery]]) close to the start of [[World War II]], but the [[air superiority]] usually held by the Allies meant that the demand for similar weapons was not as acute.

When several Allied ships were sunk in 1943 by [[Henschel Hs 293]] and [[Fritz X]] [[glide bomb]]s, Allied interest changed. These weapons were released from stand-off distances, with the bomber remaining outside the range of the ship's [[antiaircraft gun]]s, and the missiles themselves were too small and fast to be attacked effectively.<ref name="nmsu"/>

To combat this threat, the [[U.S. Navy]] launched [[Operation Bumblebee]] to develop a ramjet-powered missile to destroy the launching aircraft at long range.<ref name="nmsu">{{cite web|url=http://nmsua.edu/tiopete/files/2008/12/wspgcoldbook.pdf|title=A Brief History of White Sands Proving Ground 1941–1965|publisher=New Mexico State University|access-date=2010-08-19|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141028154222/http://nmsua.edu/tiopete/files/2008/12/wspgcoldbook.pdf|archive-date=2014-10-28}}</ref> The initial performance goal was to target an intercept at a horizontal range of {{convert|10|miles}} and {{convert|30,000|ft}} altitude, with a {{convert|300|to|600|lb|kg}} warhead for a 30 to 60 percent kill probability.<ref name="hays">{{cite web|url=http://www.okieboat.com/Talos%20history.html|title=Talos Missile History|publisher=Hays, Philip R.|access-date=2010-08-19|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622194123/http://www.okieboat.com/Talos%20history.html|archive-date=2013-06-22|url-status=live}}</ref> This weapon did not emerge for 16 years, when it entered operation as the [[RIM-8 Talos]].<ref>Phillip Hays, [http://www.okieboat.com/Talos%20history.html "History of the Talos Missile"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622194123/http://www.okieboat.com/Talos%20history.html |date=2013-06-22 }}</ref>

Heavy shipping losses to ''[[kamikaze]]'' attacks during the [[Philippines Campaign (1944-45)|Liberation of the Philippines]] and the [[Battle of Okinawa]] provided additional incentive for guided missile development.<ref name="nmsu"/><ref name="Taylor45"/> This led to the British ''[[Fairey Stooge]]'' and ''[[Brakemine]]'' efforts,<ref>''Flight'' 1947, p.345</ref> and the [[U.S. Navy]]'s [[SAM-N-2 Lark]].<ref name="PLark">Parsch 2003</ref> The ''Lark'' ran into considerable difficulty and it never entered operational use. The end of the war led to the British efforts being used strictly for research and development throughout their lifetime.<ref name="Taylor45">Taylor 1975, p.45</ref>