Cap "we are going to do a simulation of the attack on pearl harbour but it isn't pearl harbour, we are not using the right planes or the correct number, we don't have the correct ships or period specific weapons either" Exactly why I love this channel 🤣
The USA's top-secret "variable timing" fuse for the 127mm dual-purpose guns was authorized to use by the Pacific Fleet, but use in the European theater was not allowed because they didn't want unexploded shells to be disassembled by Germany (or anyone else, for that matter) and reverse engineered.
By the Battle of the Bulge the VT fuses were released for use both by heavy AA and more importantly, artillery. It was felt that the Reich would not last long enough for them to analyze and copy the proximety fuse.
The first operational type built anywhere to provide ejection seats for the crew was the Heinkel He 219 Uhu night fighter in 1942. In Sweden, a version using compressed air was tested in 1941. A gunpowder ejection seat was developed by Bofors and tested in 1943 for the Saab 21.
My father flew the F-86 in Korea. Yes, they had ejection seats and no, you didn't want to use them unless you were really desperate. The canopy had to come off first and the damn thing slid BACKWARDS, almost taking your head off in the process. Also, if you were at or below 1000 feet, it was useless. Edit: In addition, after hearing Cap talking about opening a window at 150 knots? Try punching out at 600. I suffered catastrophic engine failure in a 15-C model at relatively low altitude (1875 feet according to the black box). It was eject immediately or burn. You pull the handles and that's all you remember until you're almost on the ground. That was the ONLY time I punched out, thank whomever. It broke my left arm, 6 ribs, and my left ankle. Three months until I was back in the saddle again.
Makes me think we need a sort of “G-out” effect in your vision in DCS upon ejection. It wouldn't be that hard to implement or take up many resources computationally so I don’t see why we couldn’t get that!
@@Mobius118 I don't play the game (yet), but I guess my question is, what would be the point? Once you eject, you're out of the fight anyway. I mean, drama? Realism? Although, if you were to make SAR a feature to return a pilot to the fight (as long as you didn't punch out at 600+...). On a completely different point, did you know that actual military simulators are capable of factoring in your individual physical factors? Example: I could always handle a little more +G's for a little longer without problem, but I'd succumb to red-out a bit quicker than normal. Now THAT would be a nice feature in the game if you asked my opinion, although I imagine it would add another strain on multiplayer servers. Plus, I'd love to see the results if players enter their real world physical data and try to fly high performance aircraft, lol! We aren't a bunch of squat, muscled up, little a-holes for no reason, after all! Heh, the game could even keep it's original name DCS, but the 'C' would stand for 'Cessna', not 'Combat'. Hope I'm not sounding too mean, lol! After all, should all fighters go the unmanned route, there wouldn't be a huge requirement for peak physical fitness.
Great vid, as always. My understanding is that for land heavy AA guns they would have been director controlled. One director controlling 4 to 6 guns. Each director would pick out a target and focus those guns under its control on that target. As for "not hitting the target directly" check out the AA engagement articles on NAVWEAPS where Iowa scored a direct hit with a 5"/38 on an inbound IJN airplane. The director operator reported that one moment he was looking at a plane, the next he was seeing nothing but an engine and propeller flying through the sky.
Have you tried one where it's just the actual defences there on the day, including the ships and land defences and the local air assets, except instead of being surprised they are ready and waiting? That would actually be interesting and useful....
HE-219 (sexy airplane) had ejection rails for the pilot in the early 1940's. Thanks for all the time and effort you put in to these scenarios, Cap. Greatly appreciated by us Viewingtons.
Love to see this again with distributed AA batteries half on the northern spit as well as the field (maybe some 57's on the middle island in the harbor). Bring the zeroes in groups of 4, 12 planes per spawn. Not sure how close in time you could get them, maybe 2-3 minutes per respawn.
Ejection seats were in ww2 do335 had one It had 4 buttons to activate it and you had to manually eject the canopy. Due to the speed of the 335 pilots kept ripping their arms of as the canopy would fly of faster than they could let go of the jettison handles.
"Why he didn't hit his target? No idea." Moments earlier: "These planes are pretty miserable to fly when they're damaged" "Wowee! It's like a 100mm gatling gun!"
Part of what made proximity fuses so useful was that aircraft flew in formations rather than being drip fed into a meat grinder. Is this worth simulating?
Something I would love to see you guys test is an anti-air rocket against bomber formations or fighter swarms. These would be rockets that could reach a high enough altitude, with enough accuracy, with 100 kg to 300 kg warheads that would either explode at a predetermined altitude like anti-aircraft artillery or even better with a proximity sensor. The warheads would be large enough that they would not need to be incredibly accurate, especially if you could fire them in large salvos. This is WW2 (or slightly after) level technology but it was only discussed and never fully developed or fielded. It would be great to a simulation of how that would have gone if (probably the Germans) had gotten something like that together.
Just a mention about ejection seats & WW2 aircraft... most of them did not have such systems due to the fact that an ejection seat requires the overhead canopy to be completely removed from the aircraft before firing off so as not to hang-up on use and possibly critically injure the pilot on ejection. Most planes of the time did not have the provision to "blow-off" the canopy for proper deployment of an ejection system. If such had been available, a lot more pilots might have survived and safety systems on aircraft might have developed faster as a result...
I wonder if the 40 torpedo planes that were part of the attack and came in at a much lower altitude simultaneous to the high altitude bombers would change the outcome of this simulation since the AA battery would have to change altitude firings all the time.
Only apparent problem with the damage model is that graphically you see cockpit damage but the model cannot accommodate the fact that a dead pilot cannot fly
The "battleships" that were damaged were in fact cruisers. The easiest way to tell is that battleships were named after states, cruisers after cities, destroyers after people.
I wonder, could the Hochseeflotte defeat the Pearl Harbor attack fleet? They wouldn't be able to do much against the planes of course, but could they take out the Japanese ships and then survive until the airborne planes run out of fuel? If they can't: how about the Grand Fleet? If even they can't: how about every single ship that was at Jutland? (the Danish trawler isn't needed)
All those old AA guns just put up a metal wall of shrapnel that the warbirds just couldn’t cope with. I know some got through, but those wouldn’t have been acceptable losses for the attackers. I imagine that is exactly what the skies over Germany looked like in 1944-45. I don’t think a freaking bird could fly through all that flak!!
Next up, the radar-controlled gun aimers from around the tail end of 1944. These devices shot down more V-1s than the fighters or human-operated flak batteries.
Hi Cap. I really appreciate your videos. I don’t have the patience to learn to fly all the different aircraft, so I enjoy it third hand by watching you. Do you mind me asking, how many hours per week do you put into the channel? I’m guessing it’s a lot.. 🤔 Many thanks for keeping me entertained.. 🙂👍
@grimreapers absolutely no idea how you do that. As a father of five, who are all thankfully grown up and out of the house now, I couldn't imagine. But then again I guess I could because I used to work 60 hours a week and this is your full-time job too so carry on.😂 Oh and by the way you do a fantastic job
If i remember my aviation history correctly the first ejection seat was on the Heinkel He 219 Uhu night fighter. Believe bofors developed a gunpowder ejection seat for the Saab 21 around 42 or 43.
I reached my therapeudic dose at about 12 minutes in. Began to eel a little toxic (repetitious, dizzy, lost count) at about 22 minutes. Never did reach LD50
Ok, so I'm kind of addicted to your channel... but I want to see what might have happened if the US Navy had learned of the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 1st. Perhaps have all the battleships sitting close enough to head for the IJN fleet once they dispatched their planes. Bring the carriers back to lurk near enough to intercept the aircraft... There's something satisfying about watching them get smashed before they sneak in...
I would like to request a redo with all the aircraft arriving at the same time or near enough. I'd also have guns either side of the anchorage. Perhaps also have some of the aircraft coming in at low level too. This is assuming the pc can handle it?
Enjoyed the video, however I would like it to be ran back, with a few changes. A time on target attack by the Japanese in waves... I get you probably want to be accurate, but it is more accurate to try and guess it, rather than have the planes come in single file. Secondly, the guns need to be distrubuted more around the habour, a large battery is fine, however I think a few small batteries would be more efficient. Lastly, and I by no means know this myself, other than knowing it is a factor, how many shots can each gun shoot before it wears the barrel out? It could, and probably is in the 1000's, which I doubt each battery did shoot, but I think it would be better if that was modelled, by limiting the ammo of each gun to that number at least as it wouldn't matter if they had the ammo then, the gun is toast till a barrel change.
Not reading through all the comments to see if this was addressed; USA invented the proximity fuze and fielded it in 1944. Initially it was only used by the Navy in the Pacific; 5 inch naval guns with proximity fuze's we're the only thing that could consistently stop Kamikazes. Eventually they were used on the 90 mm AA gun in England to shoot down V 1s. The US kept the fuze a secret from the British. They told the Brits that those gunners had exceptional eyesight from eating carrots.
When you send in a hundred plus planes in single file at a predictable altitude, it damn well better be 100% casualties. Why didn't you use Ju-88's with torpedoes to attack BB Row? (1 @Ju = 2 Kate's). This just a shooting gallery.
Zero's, Kate's and Vals wouldn't have survived the amount of hits the FW-190s absorbed. I'd say it would have defended better than shown even with 25 planes grouped. No expert though.
Hey Cap, how about a reimagining of the USS Laffy, the destroyer that survived something like 17 kamikaze attacks including bombs? But in this case, an Arleigh Burke destroyer guns only? Obviously, if it uses missiles they'd wipe the 50 Japanese aircraft out very quickly. But what if you had the 17 planes come in as 1s and 2s, reenacting the real Laffy attack, but allowing the radar controlled guns of an Arleigh Burke destroyer to show the difference between lots of human controlled guns and radar controlled guns.
A bungee-assisted escape from an aircraft took place in 1910. In 1916, Everard Calthrop, an early inventor of parachutes, patented an ejector seat using compressed air... The modern layout for an ejection seat was first introduced by Romanian inventor Anastase Dragomir in the late 1920s. It was successfully tested on 25 August 1929 at the Paris-Orly Airport near Paris and in October 1929 at Băneasa, near Bucharest. The design was perfected during World War II. The first ejection seats were developed independently during World War II by Heinkel and SAAB. Early models were powered by compressed air and the first aircraft to be fitted with such a system was the Heinkel He 280 prototype jet-engined fighter in 1940. One of the He 280 test pilots, Helmut Schenk, became the first person to escape from a stricken aircraft with an ejection seat on 13 January 1942 after his control surfaces iced up and became inoperative. The fighter was being used in tests of the Argus As 014 impulse jets for Fieseler Fi 103 missile development. It had its usual Heinkel HeS 8A turbojets removed, and was towed aloft from the Erprobungsstelle Rechlin central test facility of the Luftwaffe in Germany by a pair of Messerschmitt Bf 110C tugs in a heavy snow-shower. At 7,875 ft (2,400 m), Schenk found he had no control, jettisoned his towline, and ejected.[2] The He 280 was never put into production status. The first operational type built anywhere to provide ejection seats for the crew was the Heinkel He 219 Uhu night fighter in 1942. In Sweden, a version using compressed air was tested in 1941. A gunpowder ejection seat was developed by Bofors and tested in 1943 for the Saab 21. The first test in the air was on a Saab 17 on 27 February 1944,[3] and the first real use occurred by Lt. Bengt Johansson[note 2] on 29 July 1946 after a mid-air collision between a J 21 and a J 22. As the first operational military jet in late 1944 to ever feature one, the winner of the German Volksjäger "people's fighter" home defense jet fighter design competition; the lightweight Heinkel He 162A Spatz
@@grimreapers sir, yes, sir. because the world wouldn't be that funny without you saying things like "ich bin das sonderkommando!" or "lass mich allein!" 😁
I dont think i saw a single aircraft explode in this game unless i missed it. Why is that? I seen a ton of aircraft explode in the air watching ww2 footage, but not here.
Rumors were that the US was gonna attack Japan ,,,,im guessing Tokyo would have been the main target .. Obviously The Doolittle Raid was succesful but what would the success rate of The full US Pacific Fleet as well as US aircraft from the Phillipines and China have faired ?
Can you use the German 88mm DP guns for something like this?? They were known to be very dangerous, and if the game models them properly, it would be a period accurate weapon.
Dear GR ... as this was a lot of fun to watch .... i wonder .... could you do another ... destressing video . where it is ... the United "Freedom" Force of ... overlapping modern AA systems . land based Cwis with tracer at the front ... with maybe something like avengers just behind that and so on up to maybe the Patriot or more modern system... so that the avengers rockets show their freedom , i mean engage the enemy at the same time that cwis engages , as well as the larger systems also after flight time are engaging the same wave of enemy? with ever harder waves of enemy . For Therapy reasons . Because i found this vid sooooo therapeutic :D U know infinite ammo and all that ;) . Please and thank you . o7 from New Zealand
