@@moosiemoose1337 Pretty sure vibrations on surfaces and pressure spike in air will bust your eardrums by sheer force. Not to mention how that still created nice amount of spalling inside of that steel coffin. Looks intact on outside but would be more that supriced if there is life signs when door is opened.
@@bullet_casing8482 I'm just curious, yaknow? Like are flashbang grenades effective against soldiers with ear protection? Genuine question because I have no idea.
turret jammed 100% but the way the 650mm plate flexed and resisted is amazing, this scenario is not possible irl tho because dora would have zero chance of hitting any moving thing at sea
dudes... dora/gustav were guns placed on rail...fucking rail. They could only shoot at fixed targets straight ahead, they can't turn their guns to lead their shots. It normally took ~ 1 month for the crews to get a gun into firing position, where the gun would face the direction of its fixed targets (fort, bunker...), even then those guns missed a lot since they only shoot one shell at a time.
@@shaddaboop7998 that would require a ship of tremendous size with beam exceeds 100 meters wide at the minimum. Germany ship building capability was never that good, they weren't at the level of uk japan and us, they would realistically struggle to build something of yamato size, H class is just wet dream and a 1 million tons ship is certainly out of reach
I stood right next to one of these 800mm shells and let me tell you, seeing that thing looking so tiny next to that turret really gives me an impression of how Gargantuan the proportions of BattleShips are.
Dude, its mind boggling. I have been to the USS North Carolina which is equipped with 9x 16 inch guns which is “small” by ww2 standards of a battleship and the rounds and turret are massive.
@@PracticalReformation16 Inch guns are considered considerably large for battleship standards, the Bismarck, often cited as one of the most powerful and effective battleships ever (although was stopped short when it had a bunch of the British navy after it once it sunk the hood) and it had 15 inch guns. The Yamato was just giant however, with 18 inch guns but ultimately by the end of the war was just a massive floating target.
Modern people will really have no idea what colossal powerhouses WW1 and 2 battleships were. Although obsolete their sheer scale makes them fearsome fighting machines beyond comprehension.
Hardly obsolete if given half the nudge the newest capital ships have gotten. Nothing short of a MOAB sized anti-ship is taking them out. They can easily mount more of the newest weapons systems than any other ship can and still maintain at least 1 turret with the big guns for sea borne targets.
@@WhenindoubtFox-3 these days No Armor = Best Armor at sea. Penetrating warheads of missiles could easily disable a armored vessel, and as a result defense against attack relies more on automated systems these days. CWIS and RAM are more than capable of making up for what armor cannot do nowadays and if we were to ever make a modern battleship for shore bombardment support the vessel would likely boast little to no armor, but pack a bunch of point defense systems capable of 360 Degree defense across the ship. It would also likely possess anywhere from 6-12 big guns (12 inch caliber and up), along with massive VLS pods. The big guns would be for the most part shore bombardment, while VLS could cover Anti Ship and inland duties. Why waste a very expensive Missile shelling coastal defenses when you can lob much cheaper GPS guided artillery shells instead?
@@richardbossman9875 err... General Belgrano was sunk by just one submarine. Or do you know what brings down yamato and bismark? So yeah, Battleship (or battlecruiser) is obsolete even by ww2 standard.
Really puts into perspective how insane WW2 battleships were considering that Dora and Gustav were the heaviest guns to be used. Well at least Gustav was, we don't know if Dora ever fired at a target.
@@BFVK I believe Gustav has fired at 7 separate targets sending total of 48 shells their way throughout the period of roughly two weeks. We know that Dora has been placed into firing position and rigourously prepared near Stalingrad, but I am uncertain whether it sent any shells towards the cities defenses as the gun had to be disassembled for retreat not long after.
@@megan00b8 Dora was used in the assault of Sevastopol (not Stalingrad). Forty-seven shots were fired toward the city at the arsenal, headquarters building, shore guns and ship's anchorage. Most of the shots were solid shells, 5 were experimental high explosive shells. The Dora was also planned to be used for shelling Leningrad, but the barrel had not yet been repaired, and after the city blockade was broken, the gun was hastily evacuated to Bavaria.
It'd be nice if you'd do some naval sims of realistic scenarios that either happened, or could have happened. You could read about certain impacts that happened irl, research the details like the angles involved and the range and see what you can reproduce. Or just explore the edge cases of exchanges that could very plausibly have happened. If you want ideas for scenarios, I could probably give some solid ideas.
"tiny" well, for naval standard yes, but we are talking about 127mm cannons, those are huge shells and Will cause a mess when they hit unarmored parts... Expecially because all the AA crew was exposed with Little pritection
It almost happened, Admiral Raymond Spruance commander of the US Fifth Fleet ordered Task Force 54 consisting of 10 battleships to engage Yamato's fleet but his subordinate Vice Admiral Mitscher, commander of Task Force 58 consisting mainly of carriers sent 280 aircraft to attack and only informed his superiors after they were launched. Mitscher had spent his entire career dealing with traditionally minded battleship admirals and correctly saw an opportunity to crush the notion of battleships once and for all by destroying the largest one in human history.
Point of interest: given how ballistics arc, it'd be interesting to see this same scenario just from a different angle. If the shell hit from above while descending that would reduce the effective thickness of the sloped armor. Would also be interesting to see the damage if the shell hit the top of the turret, too, and how the shell would perform from different distances (aka at different speeds).
To see the entire frontal plate of the Yamato turret begin to wobble inward is shows the incredible amount of energy Dora had (along with all big guns of that era).
yeah yeah because all 150 of them just cramped into that one spot right behind the armor plate and not spread out standing behind various components and deep under the barbette doing their jobs 🙄 delusional
@@Jouriza900 also don't forget the sound of such an explosion inside the turret. at the bare minimum all crew would be deaf permanently after that and likely out of action for some time
Yeah the crew is alive, but that's be a helluva concussive stun. The sound of the impact in such a well armoured enclosure, I'd imagine it'd pretty deafening
do a 3 part series where you test how pen, almost pen, and non pen does to the human body w/ and w/o a vest. would like to see how much spalling and how deadly it is from each of thise
@@thezig2078 kevlar-yes, but steel and ceramics based vests would spall. Actually, almost every steel and ceramics vest have at least kevlar lining, specially to prevent spall
should be noted, that the battleship's turret face is the strongest part of the armour, and Yamato's turret face was absurdly strong even by the already ludicrous standards of Capital ships. it was strong enough that when the US army ran tests on Shinano's unused turret face they did the math and found that even if USS Iowa was literally touching the Yamato's sides, her 16 inch shells would not penetrate the turret face.
@the man formerly known as commenting is what I do well seeing as the Dora's round is more than twice the size of an Iowa's 16 in round, I can understand that.
800mm Dora actually had a direct hit in Sevastopol at Russian Naval Gun, installed and fortified at top of the hill there over a huge concrete bunker base, after the hit the naval arty gun was permanently disabled, from what I heard the operating crew in the bunker did not survive as well.
The thing is though, that you've set the shell to come in perfectly horizontally. Whereas in real life, it'd be coming in from a great distance and therefor at an angle, reducing the armor slope effectiveness. Would love to see the shell come in at a more realistic 20-30 degree angle!
Did you notice the shock managing to transfer both through the barrel and turret ring? That thing isn't going to shoot right if if you get it unjammed.
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 Impact clearly shows deformation of the metal over a large area, it would be no surprise if the whole gun, turret and mount became warped and were a total loss (Just know that if a BB gun didn't have a recoil system, it's would slowly wreck the turret. and that's with shells 1/3rd of Dora's weight -if we are talking Yamato projectiles)
Impressive, despite non penetrating shot the turret would be out of action. A shell with such weight and at such speed would jam the turret ring while the crew inside would beg they weren't there
This well illustrated why battleship turrets often went out of action after even glancing hits. Everything more fragile than that armor plate is probably all over the turret in tiny pieces.
It's funny when you realize that Yamato was so freaking huge that even the 800mm shell is somewhat small compared to it. It's like 37mm shell vs Tiger I turret.
I'm here to remind that this canon could pierce over 20m of ground and 2m of Cement and destroy amunition magazine during siege of Sewastopol. It just show how armored turret of Yamato was
If this armor penetrating shell hits like this it penetrates 1 meter of steal armor or 7 meter reinforced concrete, thats the facts. I think it will pirce the frontarmor of the turret and would come out of the back of the turret.
If the shell were to be fired at it , definitely be a plunging hit. I surely doubt that unless the ship was static and they had a lucky first hit , it would get really ugly really quick! I'm thinking the plunging fire if a hir anywhere inside the armored citadel would be devastating, to say the least if not for the ship definitely for the crew anywhere in the vicinity of the hit not to mention around the magazines
imagine being literally on the other side of the ship then suddenly you feel the craziest thump ever in your entire life and also never hearing anything again but a high pitched squeal for the rest of your life. as a welder being on the other side of a ship when someone has to use a sledge hammer is bad enough i cant phathom what this would sound like not even ear plugs could save you from partial hearing loss atleast
Very cool, but is this shot at close range or at distance, im thinking the angle of approach Of the 800mm at let say 15000m would be quite steep and most likely hit the turret directly, keep in mind the 16" shell from the iowa class penetrated the face armor at yamatos turret of a distance of roughly 10 000 yards in an after war penetration test
actually, they used reduced powder charges in that test, since what they wanted was to test if Iowa could penetrate at 40,000 yards, but insted of trying to shoot from that disctance they just reduced the powder charge and shot from 10,000 yards. So infact Iowa could in theory penetrate 26 inches Vickers hardened steel from 40,000 yards. They did 2 tests, one shot went right through and another was stoped but there was emmense spalling from the metal. In both cases the steel plate cracked.
Now we need an 800 mm tungsten armor piercing sabot shot at that thing. Oh, what about modern GBU-57A/B MOP bunker buster vs the Yamato? Their about 70% heavier and coincidentally, about the same diameter as the Dora shell. It may be quite a bit slower at impact, but the extra weight as well as the plunging affect would probably have it stand a much better chance of penetrating.
The US ran tests after the war on the turret face armor built for Shinano, the third Yamato-class that was converted into a carrier late in the war. They were able to penetrate it with the Mk8 "super-heavy" 16" AP shell from an Iowa-class gun. If the 32" Gustav shell couldn't pierce it, it would only be because the shell was to lightly-constructed to hold together on impact. There's a reason battleships had two types of shells, one for punching holes, and one for digging them.
i feel like anybody in between the two guns where it hit would be dead because even tho it didn't fully pierce the armour it definitely would have created some internal spalling not to mention every weld on that turret is completely destroyed and that being the case if the round has explosive filler it would create a lot of overpressure which could possibly kill people
Both Yamato and Musashi suffered from brittle armor plate as well as defective welding. During the war, prior to their demise, both ships were struck by attacks that should have done relatively minor damage, but instead did damage far out of proportion to what should have been inflicted. This was the result of plates that cracked and welds that split. I wonder if this simulation took such a possibility into account.
This feels like an significant under-penetration. One quick rule of thumb is that penetration depth - all other factors being equal - is more or less proportional to the square root of the density of the target plate. The concrete piercing shell for the Dora is typically quoted as penetrating around 7 meters of concrete. Concrete density is around 30% of steel's density, so the square root of that is about 0.55 - which would indicate an expected penetration of roughly 3 meters of steel. Even if it was proportional to straight density, that would still suggest a penetration of roughly 2 meters of steel. Separately, I also derived an estimate for armor penetration for WW2 AP / APC / APCBC rounds based on barrel length as roughly 0.03 * barrel length, which would suggest at least 1 meter of armor penetration for the Dora. All of these should suggest that the round would have punched through. Not to mention the 1945 test with a USN 16in gun that did punch through the spare armor plate for the Shinano's unfinished turrets - with a much smaller projectile than the Dora's.
is the caliber of the yamatos guns accurate? because those barrels dont look like 460mm to if the projectile is 800mm they look way bigger or the projectile is too small and compared to the armor thickness of the frontal turret (650mm) the projectile also seems a little too small (i measured the screen with a ruler and calculated the %, but i might be wrong
The barrels are just under half the size of the shell, and considering 460mm vs 800mm it seems accurate. I gotta agree on the armor's thickness, though, it seems a bit sus.
Yes they are. 460 mm guns refers to the size of the projectile fired, not the diameter of the gun barrel itself. So the 460mm would be the inside of the gun, not the outside. The 650 mm armor also refers to the armor at a 90 degree angle, the round strikes at a sloped angle so the armor appears thicker. as sloping is acting on it.
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 Honestly its just because its the most powerful shell ever fired out of a gun in history and thats what makes me not believe this is posible
"Sir, crewmen in gun turret 3 all became deaf." "Ensign, I thought it was turret 1 being hit with that humongous shell." "Yes sir. That is correct sir."
