gaijin pls

@god2k562

4 жыл бұрын

Lol

@theyukeaces1185

4 жыл бұрын

xD

@ROBBANKS666666

4 жыл бұрын

Wakari masen

@borgar4357

4 жыл бұрын

Soon ™

@rasdread0989

4 жыл бұрын

Nope they'd abuse it

Wow! Never heard about this weapon before. Very cool!

@jameswhite153

4 жыл бұрын

me neither, although many air forces experimented with anti aircraft bombs in the interwar period.

@goofballordh7395

3 жыл бұрын

I can say the same with all the video he makes never heard of them before but it’s always fun to listen to

@kachungchan4077

3 жыл бұрын

Know this thing in a psp air combat game. Just like this video said, it hard to use.

@Phoenix8492

3 жыл бұрын

You should look up the San Shiki shell. It’s essentially this but fired from the cannon of a battleship!

Even if it was unable to hit the bombers. Disrupting the formation was a great result breaking the bombing run and isolating bombers to attack without the cover of the other bombers.

@patliao556

4 жыл бұрын

I mean, is it really doing something a gun run can't though? Is it worth the range and maneuverability costs in carrying the bomb to maybe disrupt a bomber formation? Clearly not.

@jasskeeper8152

4 жыл бұрын

@@patliao556 not really effective if japan was poor and had very small well trained pilot.

@Robert53area

4 жыл бұрын

@@patliao556 no but the concept of this bomb design is still used today, we just stuck a rocket engine on the back of it and a computer in the nose

@timboffm595

4 жыл бұрын

@@jasskeeper8152 Why does it matter that the pilots were small?

@chrisdelzell8467

4 жыл бұрын

@@Robert53area air to air rockets and early guided missiles were already around by this time, actually. Also the trend is towards shrinking warheads and trying to score a direct hit.

Conceptually brilliant, practically impossible.

@samsonwu9378

4 жыл бұрын

Had the Japanese had VT Fuzes technology then those bombs would be a disaster to the USA bombers

@Nyx_2142

4 жыл бұрын

@@samsonwu9378 Bombing a plane already in the air was a futile effort, no matter how advanced the fuze or bomb itself is. A gun or missile run would've achieved the same, if not better results and been much less wasteful on resources and time. Both being something Japan was severely lacking.

@jebise1126

3 жыл бұрын

@GbbJunkie well... not directly that bomb but it would make a bomb practical. if it would explode next to a bomber. but german AA rockets with VT fuses... those would be really really bad

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

@@Nyx_2142 VT fuses would definitely make this a lot more capable but I agree that it's still not practical. The problem of getting in to a good bombing position still exist thus I don't think it would have made it particularly operationally useful. Also AA missiles didn't see service even though AA missiles were tested and explored in WW2, they never matured enough to be used. There were parachute "aerial mines", anti-bomber bombs, anti-bomber rockets, and so on. But ultimately guns were the mainstay of fighters and the war ended with everyone still using guns until the advent of air-to-air missiles.

@skjorta1984

3 жыл бұрын

where have I heard this before

Meanwhile in the Ace Combat community: "What do you mean I can't use a FAEB on an aerial target?! I do what I want!" (Proceeds to bomb Aerial Bird out of the sky)

@jtho8937

3 жыл бұрын

Found the Ace Combatant.

Just found your channel, it is easily the most concise, interesting and binge-able videos I've found. Each of your videos is very short, but every second of the video is well used, well structured, and to the point without any of the intro-outro fluff on most channels. This format is absolutely brilliant and I would love to see more of your videos in the future, as weapon concepts like these I never would have heard of. Keep up the amazing work, I'm glad a channel like yours exists.

@H1MIN

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you your support and comments are much appreciated. While the content is slow to come out (all research/production is one person) more content is coming. Thank you all!

@midas2092

4 жыл бұрын

@@H1MIN I say all of this because you deserve it. Do you also make all the animations? If so, it is fantastically made, riding the line between entertaining flashiness and clear visual communication of the operation of all the weapons. Do things at your pace, I appreciate your attention to detail and precision.

I had seen pictures of these taken from inside B29s, but had never had an explanation of what they were until now, thank you!

Never heard even a distant rumor about this! I wonder if the whole story of WWII will ever be told? I've been reading about it my whole life, there certainly are a lot of books about WWII aircraft and air combat!

Of the Japanese Navy's ace pilots who used Type3 bombs in air-to-air combat, the most famous is Iwamoto Tetzou. According to his autobiography, he dropped the bomb on the US bomber squadron those struck Rabaul. Then from the ground, it was informed by radio that they all had crashed, he wrote that. However, recently published books suggest that Type3 bombs were not very effective. Author Hiroshi Umemoto wrote his book, comparing each combat reports the Japanese Navy and the United States in Rabaul. The Japanese Navy reported they had shot down many aircrafts by using the Type3, but reportedly the US was surprised by the bomb, broke their formation and has returned to the base.

@czechchineseamerican

4 жыл бұрын

Great information, thanks for posting!

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

As mentioned thanks for the extra bit of information.

@michaelrenper796

3 жыл бұрын

So the bomb was disruptive in the beginning more than damaging. But the US air force adjusted tactics, making in in-effective. Sounds like an explanation to me.

@michaelrenper796

3 жыл бұрын

@@sushiromifune7096 I have no specific information on counter measures against this bomb. What is well documented though is that the US air force was very good at post engagement analysis, developing counter measures and training crew. I saw a training video for counter measure against German flak fire here on youtube recently. When an American formation turns back, aborting mission in face of a threat, as your sources report, you can be absolutely certain that huge effort will be invested into analysis and developing countermeasures. Will be hard to find what those were, but the Japanese sources say that the bomb became ineffective, which is highly suggestive of counter measures (e.g. having fighter intercepts flying at the attack altitude, or bombers breaking formation in a specific pattern when high altitude fighter approach).

@invadegreece9281

3 жыл бұрын

I feel those bombs could be used for anti ship because I assure you no ship would particularly like a swarm of burning pellets falling on its deck.

I've heard about Type 3 Shell that function similarly but used by ships, this is the first time I've heard the bomb type.

It's kind of the same idea has for the 460mm anti air shell fired from yamato and musashi guns, with same results.

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

Well it's a common misconception that the problem was with the Type 3 shell. The Japanese used the Type 3 shell for most of their naval guns of all caliber. That includes the 46cm guns on Yamato, but also on other calibers like those on the Kongos or even cruisers. The problem lied in not the shell itself but the fact large naval guns like those seen on Yamato just aren't effective AA weapons. When used on the 12.7cm guns on Japanese destroyers, the shell performed fine. Although once again the Japanese 12.7cm guns being one of the first dual-purpose naval guns, was rather inadequate in the AA role by the standards of WW2. The Type 3 was also used for shore bombardment as seen in Guadalcanal. The alternative was the Type 0 HE round which could be fused to explode in air for AA purposes, but otherwise served as the primary anti-ship munition for destroyers as AP was not produced for 12.7cm naval guns or below.

@invadegreece9281

3 жыл бұрын

@@neurofiedyamato8763 lol bc japan wants things to burn bc the destroyers apparently

@invadegreece9281

3 жыл бұрын

@@neurofiedyamato8763 also wouldn’t those bursting AA shells actually be good anti ship because most ships decks were wooden?

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

@@invadegreece9281 Many ships used wood on the surface but it's backed by metal even on very small warships. The deck isn't actually wood. The actual structure is steel. They just put wood on top of it primarily for insulation and grip. Even tread steel plates get slippery when wet, wood doesn't. If you ever left metal out in the cold or summer heat, you'll notice it gets very cold and hot respectively. Wood doesn't do that making it great for insulation and thus the ship comfortable to live and operate in. The burning of the surface isn't such a huge risk to a ship since the damage is superficial. But it is nonetheless a flaw with wooden decked ships. Cruisers and above would have a layered armor deck protection scheme further preventing such fires from doing anything serious. The fires wouldn't go through past the main steel structure beneath the wooden coverings. You want fires deeper in a ship or elsewhere. Armor piercing can do that by penetrating and then exploding which ignites flammable things inside in addition to the primary shock wave mangling everything. Pure high explosive can destroy soft unarmored components outside like fire control systems and AA guns. The incendiary round can't damage the fire control or AA guns. It might temporarily knock them out by forcing the crew to abandon their station, but the equipment won't get seriously damaged. The fires need to be very high temperature and last long enough to cause deformation in the mostly steel components. Incendiary aren't useless, they would still cause damage but AP and HE is just better at anti-shipping for vast majority of the time.

@invadegreece9281

3 жыл бұрын

@@neurofiedyamato8763 None the less there is a good chance that this could seriously hamper AA or open top gun turrets by either killing some crew or just torching em all together

After all of the work that was put in to developing, manufacturing, delivering, and training, I'd be surprised if this bomb scored a single confirmed aerial kill during the entire war.

Great videos. Keep them coming!

Love the NO SOUND ending on your videos!

Almost like the San-Sheki shell

@user-do5zk6jh1k

4 жыл бұрын

Shiki*

@Nyx_2142

4 жыл бұрын

And just as useless in the anti-air role.

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

Well it's a common misconception that the problem was with the Type 3 shell. The Japanese used the Type 3 shell for most of their naval guns of all caliber. That includes the 46cm guns on Yamato, but also on other calibers like those on the Kongos or even cruisers. The problem lied in not the shell itself but the fact large naval guns like those seen on Yamato just aren't effective AA weapons. When used on the 12.7cm guns on Japanese destroyers, the shell performed fine. Although once again the Japanese 12.7cm guns being one of the first dual-purpose naval guns, was rather inadequate in the AA role by the standards of WW2. The Type 3 was also used for shore bombardment as seen in Guadalcanal. The alternative was the Type 0 HE round which could be fused to explode in air for AA purposes, but otherwise served as the primary anti-ship munition for destroyers as AP was not produced for 12.7cm naval guns or below.

I saw a movie of a B-29 formation many years ago with this cloud exploding above them and I always wondered what it was. And now I know, thanks! Great video!

Those explosions with the pellets trails of smoke reminds me of when I burnt the insides of pens where the ink inside would pop sending burning plastic flying

I actually didn't know of this bomb, thanks for the short summary.

A hidden part of history. Thanks for posting!

I had never heard of these. Thanks!

The same story about Japanese incendiary fragmentation munitions, such as this or the famous Type 3 shell (sanshiki-dan): originally designed for AA, but eventually became known for attacks against land-based installations.

I feel like that with minimal changes and fragmentation bombs, this design would have been greatly improved... I don't know for sure, but I do know throwing burning things at moving targets ain't all that practical.

@kimjanek646

3 жыл бұрын

The issue is bringing such bombs to higher altitudes than the bombers. The phosphorus bomb only weighed 33kg while the smallest bomb dropped by German plane weighed 50kg. A fragmentation bomb would be several times heavier than an incendiary bomb which doesn’t require the use of heavy steel to achieve its effects.

Look no matter how ineffective a design it wasthe shear genius to come up with it in the first place must be applauded.

"No B-25s were harmed during the making of this video."

when you gotta fight fire with fire...

This might have been useful if they had used them against us aircraft carriers earlier in the war since early us carriers have wooden decks

Could you make an animation about the fragmentation rounds fired but the soviet spg 9

When I was a kid, back in the 60s, I remember dad telling me about a similiar concept by the Germans. White phosphorus shells in their 88s. Probably easier to deploy since you just shoot up and don't have to deploy a plane. If you ever watch 12 O'Clock High, tv or movie, you should see these being fired. Dad told me they even deploy color smoke rounds to rattle the crews nerves.

I remember from the manual of "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe" - and in part my maternal grandpa's tales - that during the Allied bombing of Schweinfurt in 1943 the Luftwaffe used a similar tactic to halt the bomber stream. Since it was a desperate measure, however, they used standard bombs with time fuses and the results left a lot to be desired since, like the Japanese Tako bombs, timing and aiming was difficult. In the cases where a hit was scored the explosion of 500 kg in the middle of a bombers' combat box was devastating.

@zerstorer335

3 жыл бұрын

SWOTL was where I first encountered the concept. I was confused by it, at first, because the game called them "aerial bombs" and I was thinking "aren't ALL bombs dropped from planes aerial bimbs?".

Just fouund this channel omg so good!

Finally i found how that bomb worked.

really nice edit tho....impressive

Can u make a video about how do battleship turret rotate?

Another great type-99

These videos are really cool! Reminds me of the animations that would play on some of the old history channels programs about WW2 aircraft and weapons, not like today with the history channel only playing crap like Yawn Stars...:( I've heard of the Type 3 bomb, but I've yet to find ANY evidence of a successful air to air shootdown caused directly by this weapon.

@H1MIN

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. Same here the only notes I found were warnings issued to pilots of these impressive aerial explosions and how to avoid them. There was mention of a bomblet getting stuck on an engine nacelle, but it burnt out with minimal damage. More of a impact psychologically than tactically, but trying to disrupt bombing runs seemed to be the intended effect.

Very informative

I understand that they were usually dropped from an altitude that caused the small pellets to burn up before they hit the bombers.

I acculy wish ur vids were longer lmao

omg so many tank shells and bombs on this channel

Interesting idea

The first Japanese Zero downed by a P-38 was by bombing. When the Lightning was first introduced in service in the Pacific, a promotion was promised to the first pilot to down a Zero. I forget the pilot's name, but he was on one of the first operational sorties of a P-38 and was buzzing around a Japanese island air base to taunt them to come up and fight. When a Zero took the bait and started its take off run, he dived on it to blast it with guns, then remembered he would be at a disadvantage since he was carrying a pair of 500 lb bombs. He ditched the bombs, then circled around to come in behind, but the bombs had fallen in the water just off the end of the runway and the Zero was knocked out of the air by the water spouts. He had the nerve to ask for a promotion. I remember reading about this in a book authored by a USAAF ace.

How often did they use it?

it will be hard for the positioning before attack is it efficient?

We need this in warthunder it can make playing as Japan fun and challenging

@flak8842

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly there is also the same idea invented by The Germans in WWII It is the same as the Japanese one but it's a cluster Bombs You can find it in Il-2 Sturmovik 1964 There is 2 variants of them AB 200 KG AND AB 500 KG

@flak8842

3 жыл бұрын

Also nazi Germany to be exact Did invent the X-2 Guided Rocket as it was the first rocket to be able to be guided manually by the pilot Which it was the first technology to Guided Air to Air missiles

fascinating!

They are spectacular and impressive to watch, but are absolutely ineffective. 🇯🇵 💥

Neat. Scary, but neat.

Do one on the San shiki shell pls

imagine they combined promixity fuzes with these

I read about these in a Hellcat pilot’s biography, I think it was Hamilton McWhorter, he said they never hit anything.

The people who are about to get hit by this: "WAIT! LET'S TAKO 'BOUT THIS!"

now i imagine air to air bomb as something like this like bomb with a lot of smaller rockets that can lock on target

I wonder if the U.S. military took this concept to produce the first cluster bomblets. I WAS testing armor out near Aberdeen Proving Grounds around 2005, and our task was to set explosives next armor panels my company developed, for early IED testing. We were told to watch our steps as old unexploded cluster bombs had been left around the test range. They basically became land mines so we became very conscious of where we stepped that day.

@drunkmexicanhusky8926

3 жыл бұрын

Cluster bombs existed before these came into use. The US and many nations used cluster bombs since the start of WW2. Cluster bombs in fact were used heavily by the US against Japan during air raids of cities since their houses were built mostly of wood, so the US used incendiary cluster bombs to start large fires.

well depends on the formation that thing is thrown. in a 1000 bomber attack formation bombing a big city you dont simply alter course. and breaking formation makes you easy prey for fighters

why doesnt war thunder have this historically acurate bomb

@ivanhazim2633

3 жыл бұрын

In Next New year i hope :(

@flak8842

3 жыл бұрын

The German X-2 Guided Bomb was also historically accurate and it was mounted on the Fw-190 as I remember I think it's the Antons or the Dora's or might be on the Ta-152 C3

@jeegunugger1871

3 жыл бұрын

Is that your mother in your pfp 😍

This is the first time I’m hearing of this. And yes no doubt it was ineffective, given that the Japanese lacked a viable proximity fuse. With a carefully calibrated proximity fuse though I think this could have been a very different story.

この3号爆弾の子弾は金属と化学反応する特殊な物で、エンジンが吸い込むとすぐガソリンが爆発するらしい。また当たらなくても編隊を崩せたりできたんだとか。

Humans are very inventive when comes to destruction

ロケットの様に作成したら、攻撃と爆撃機がどう成りますかっね？

Good

i learn something today

essentiaIIy an incendiary shrapneI sheII

Ifthey were used on infantry?

To think that the only reason that I was aware of this thing at all was because of Kantai Collection....

If I haven't seen it it's new to me.

They must have looked really cool when they went off.

Basically shotgun napalm bombs

The Germans dabbled with this concept(air to air bombing), as well.

@flak8842

3 жыл бұрын

It's true along with X-2 Guided rocket which it's an impressive invention to shoot down allied bombers The Idea of the X-2 is that it will have to be guided manually by the pilot himself to get an accurate shot

Bombing an aerial target is not a sound strategy. *laughs in Ace Combat*

It's like a Sanshiki - but air-to-air!

Tako time!

pretty similar idea to the 460mm type3 shell

I never would've thought of that. Hmmm.

Ace combat players: *Interesting*

Phosperous really ,Is that like phosperous ?

Alright we need the 460mm yamato shell with this one.

You mean Bombs with fuses like an AAA?

@jeffbenton6183

3 жыл бұрын

No. This is a cluster bomb, not a fragmentation bomb.

Pain tako

Ahead of it’s time

Playing AC:0 using FAEB to destroy XB-0 : Oh, well, I guess this is how game works. After watching this vid : HOLY SHIT!

Not bad, needs refinement but keep up the good work.

タコ弾か

Bombing the ground: No Bombing the sky: Bruh

So basically, you're dive/normal bombing a formation of bombers? We have gone from making planes that bomb ground targets to making bombs that planes can drop to bomb air targets

White phosphorus cluster bomb, where do I get some!

I remember burning myself with a sparkler as a child. I often think about that night. Such a small event, but ultimately the moment that would lead me to becoming Oyabun, highest leader of the Yakuza.

So it's a cluster bomb but for aerial targets

Little did they know that the plane itself is the multipurpose bomb

Interesting bit of history. I was unaware of this design. BRW, fuselage is pronounced: few●seh●lazh It rhymes with camouflage, or the Indian male name Roj

I hear that there was a Japanese Ace name Tetsuzō Iwamoto he shot down 202 enemy planes doing ww2 and i also hear that he use these air to air bomb and shot down B 25 but not sure.

Cluster anti air napalm go brrrrrr

Is cool

Could be useful in Air superiority mode

Knowing the mindset of the Imperial Japanese of the era I'm surprised it wasn't first tried on troops.

I have read of the Germans dropping bombs on USAAF formations during WW2 some varying success. I cannot remember why they stopped using it but I think trying to dealing with P-51 Mustangs while carrying a large bomb was not a good idea.

But if you have a formation of bombers dropping this, wouldn't it be devastating for a few of the bombers? I can imagine dodging 1 but 10 of these spread out idk

"How would YOU liked it if someone bombed you?!"

Think of it as air to artillery

So basically a flak shell launched from an aircraft instead of being hurled by ground artillery.

why is this recommended