Sinking of Battleship Yamato Part I Animated 1945 

It's a mistake, my apologies for this. I will try my best further.

Why can’t this channel use a real voice to narrate this? I found myself irritated on several pronunciation errors rather than content. Maybe he doesn’t speak English. I’ll narrate for you for free

It rates a 1 out of five.

Need part two! can't find it.

Could you cover Yamato's performance at the battle off Samar? It was Yamato's only time engaging enemy warships. It's believed that she sank the escort carrier Gambier Bay and the destroyer Johnston, helped to sink the destroyer Hoel, and damaged the escort carrier White Plains beyond repair.

right now can”t afford it. but i will back on this project.

more gptchat trash

And very poor quality radar, given the number of shells it had to fire to sink a WW1-era US DD in the early months of the war. At least the CVE's in Leyte were presumably slower and easier to hit.

This actually only applies at night or poor weather: during the day, optical systems could match FC radar in effective range, due to WWII-era FC radars having shorter effective ranges than commonly assumed (even American radar fire control was simply not capable of reliable gunnery at the very long ranges people assume would’ve allowed American battleships to effectively outrange Yamato, as a gunnery exercise in 1944 using Iowa bore out). Pretty much all WWII-era battleships had effective ranges of around 25,000 yards. The difference radar made is that those with fire control radar kept that 25,000 yard effective range regardless of how bad visibility got.

@@hoosieryank6731 Yamato never fired on any American ships in the early months of the war (though she was around); the only time she fired on enemy ships was during the Battle off Samar, where her gunnery was surprisingly good, getting in a number of very near misses on the CVEs (at a range that was actually beyond her effective engagement range) as well as direct hits on Johnston (though it’s worth noting that while she found accurate firing solutions quickly during the engagement, she also lost her targets once they moved into the cover of a rainstorm).

@@bkjeong4302 This itself is also just an assumption made by only some of the contemporary historians who debate the issue, almost none of it has been proven. It's sad that the only chance these two ships would've had to fight was barely missed in the Philippines.

They were obsolete before they touched water. All 3 sunk pretty quick.

"quickly" compared to what? Shinano is the only one that went down easily, 3 torp hits from Archerfish which was due to shoddy workmanship from the BB to CV conversion, they ran pipes thru bulkheads that were never resealed, water tight doors left open for easy passage for the trip... but the craziest part of the Shinano sinking was the fact they knew almost immediately they were being tracked by subs, they had the radar ping they could hear that cut out quickly which only meant one thing, an American sub within 10 miles.. and instead of turning around and parking back in the bay, they risked it anyway.. Yamato, 12 bombs, (1000 AP) 7 torp hits, Musashi 19 torpedo's and 17 bombs (1000 AP) that's hardly "quick" in terms of naval warfare... here's a GREAT video on the exact engagement that sunk, Shinano. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9Lgc_NtwApQ.html@@SeanRCope

@@phillipschaber7836 Bismarck laughs at Yamato and Mushashi, ' that is IT, boys "? 400 battleship caliber shells from 20,000 yards to point blank range, countless cruiser and destroyer shells PLUS a minimum of 8 torpedoes , both aerial and ship launched................ and the scuttling charges! Brother ship , yes Bismarck and Tirpitz, were referred in masculine NOT feminine terms, Tirpitz took not one, not two BUT three Tall Boy , multi-ton Bombs and still took 15 minutes to capsize and sink ! PS - Both Bismarck and Tirpitz, unlike Yamato or Musashi, NEVER EXPLODED while sinking, just look at Bismarck's photos as compared to either Yamato or Mushashi.

not his fault he can’t speak Japanese

​@@thenormaldino3404 ... Nor English either, it seems.

@@thenormaldino3404raymond sproo wonce, “late” instead of “lay tee” and that was the first minute and a half alone

Sounds normal for computer voices.

Using computer voices is his Operation Downfall.

Possibly the single biggest suicide act in which literally thousands participated and perished.

The Japanese already figured this was a one-way trip from the start, actually.

Now she is a reef.

Yes she makes a beautiful reef. Sleek lines and pretty doesn't get the job done.

Ran away from a single destroyer at Samar lmao

​@@mynamejef7963hindsight 101

The Allied WWII-era battleships were just as outdated upon launch; they (save PoW) simply didn’t get sunk, and much of that was because the Axis powers left them alone due to their lack of value.

Yeah, even attempting to compare Bismarck to Yamato is in itself sad. Nothing produced by the KMS or Royal Navy could stand a chance against it in old Battleship warfare. Bismarck was nothing but a huge amount of propaganda. Bismarck was more comparable to the British KGV class or the American South Dakota class with it's outdated armor and paltry 8 15" guns. Was a laughable wasted 50,000 tons of metal compared to the Iowa class or Yamato. But, like you said. BB battles were a thing of the past by the time it was launched.

Some information is wrong sorry honestly i wouldn't be the only one to notice

Agree anything the Living Embodiment of God Hirohito wanted was done. All depended on who had the Emperors ear.

@@stunick1573 done in his name, it's unclear how much he himself actually had a full say in strategy as he was kept in the dark about the state of the fleet and military situation until late in the war.

@@grandadmiralzaarin4962 I would think with the crushing defeat Japan was facing with it's fleet every time it went out he had a pretty good Idea what was awaiting him. He may not have known the numbers and types but he knew it would be bad.

@@stunick1573 surprisingly no. He was actually completely in the dark about the naval losses as the IJN lied to both the Emperor and IJA about how badly they'd been mauled at Midway, Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf. The army and Emperor were still thinking the IJN had a viable surface fleet until early 1945

If Kurita had attacked the landing ships after Samar, the Yamato could have done some damage. Instead the surviving ships were destroyed piecemeal, doing nothing.

thanks. how's it..

@@TheWarline it's fantastic mate

I have to focus more on Part-2. and, I will upload Full video.. Combining Part-1 & 2.

@@TheWarline can't wait for it!

thanks for pointing it out.

Or they would have just bombed the shit out of it with carrier and land based aircraft.

I'm not sure that's fair. Yamato was launched in August of 1940, it was a product of the mid 30s. The Battle of Taranto was in Nov of 1940, the first all aircraft ship to ship attack in history, which was an incredible success and is arguably the battle that made the allies realize the potential of air power at sea. Prior to this, aircraft carriers were largely seen as support ships, not something that could actually take out a fleet (albeit it these were in port). Bismarck was sunk in May 1941, famously crippled by carrier aircraft, allowing it to be easily hunted down, once again proving air power at sea was a valuable asset. Pearl Harbour was THE global defining moment for carrier based operations, and that wasn't until Dec 1941. Now while all the fleet carriers the IJN used in Pearl Harbour were actually launched BEFORE Yamato, what's important to remember is that they really had very little idea of how effective carriers were going to be at the time. The D3A Val dive bombers, and B5N Kates were only just making their first flights as prototypes as Yamato's keel was being laid. And the famous A6M Zero wasn't in service until a month before Yamato was launched. So if you consider what naval power looked like in the 1930s when Yamato's plans were being drawn up, battleships were still very much the dominant force in naval warfare. It's more accurate to say the Yamato and Iowa classes of battleships came in around very end of the battleship era. Some battleship had to be the last class to be built before they went obsolete. And while carriers had been around since the 20s, it was until the 40s that their dominance was achieved (or maybe, ABLE to be achieved)

@thundercactus by the time it was launched, it arguably already was obsolete.

​@@hmk5123 arguable only in retrospect. If you consider the information they had at the time, it made perfect sense. And you can see their thinking change as the carrier battles proved the carrier was the future, because the nations who could still build NEW battleships post 1942 cancelled the designs. For example, the Montana class was planned as early as 1939, and ordered, by chance the shipyards to build them were too busy with Iowa and Essex. The keels were to be laid down in mid 1942, but by June (Battle of Midway) it was clear that battleships were obsolete, and the class was cancelled entirely. The British King George V battleships were completed, as the last one had its keel laid in 1941 and was completed 1946. The succeeding Lion class had their keels laid and were in construction, but were scrapped in 1942. The IJN Yamato class had 2 ships completed by the end of 1940, and taking 3yrs to build, Shinano would have been only half complete by the time of the Pearl Harbour attack. Consequently, construction was then paused because only by then was it apparent that battleships were a questionable investment. And the conversion was only begun the following year in July of 1942, after the battle of Midway where they lost 4 carriers. Every nation basically just finished the battleships they had in construction from 1939-1941, but no new battleships were built AFTER it became apparent that naval air power was the future. Given the state of Naval warfare in 1935-1939 (when the last lines of battleships were being designed and approved by govts), a proposal to shift the navy to a carrier based fighting force with no battleships would have sounded absolutely insane. Japan was actually a rare exception to focus on carriers early on, but carriers made a lot of sense for what they were trying to accomplish in the pacific.

@@thundercactus I would add to your answer the following: Both Yamato and Musashi took incredible punishment to sink. It literally took hundreds of planes hours to do the job. In Yamato's case, the US sent over 400 planes to sink her...and it took hours. How many navies, at the time, could bring to bear that many resources. No battleships, in the entire war, were ever sunk by aircraft, if they had aircraft cover. The only battleships sunk by air power were resting in port (in America's case, the US wasn't even at war) or not utilizing combined arms tactics (looking at you PoW and Repulse).

@@ajalvarez3111 Couldn't agree more with this, if battleships were all ready obsolete why did it take 400 plus attack aircraft several hours to push this brute into the sea floor. She was an immense threat and to pawn her off as obsolete is lazy Monday morning quarter backing. Imagine if this was any other Navy going up against this monster Battlewagon or the American Navy During Coral Sea actions with only the Big E, Saratoga and or Wasp or Hornet as at Midway. People forget that American and British forces had between them 40 aircraft carriers of assorted size and function. Yamato was swimming up stream into the hornets nest without any of her own hornets. Conversely America was fielding the latest Hellcats and Corsairs with the improved dive bombers and torpedo planes with better torpedo's and all the lessons learned and put into action from the three and a half long years of fighting in open Pacific waters. Ito knew it was fruitless, but due to the the "living embodiment of God" Emperor wanting it done, he relented. Imagine if he had timed it better and came on the downward leg at night, steaming at 22 kts or 27 which she was capable of. Reaching Okinawa at morning. That all ready Obsolete battlewagon would have pounded the snot out of the American ground forces. Pretty much the same mission as the earlier one to the beach heads in the Philippines but with way less ships.

Yeah good catch, but no, only to the Shadowing float planes. There were so many Hellcats flying and buzzing Yamato diving in to strafe that 6 zeros would have lasted 30 seconds.

Yamato had 18-inch guns.

@@MiniMC546 you think I don’t know that?

In any event, anything above 16 miles was not meaningful in ship-to-ship combat. No one ever scored a hit beyond that range.

@@MiniMC546 And manual/visual fire-control. The American ships had FC radar and computers, so they could actually hit targets at those ranges.

If USS Montana was built, he could reach that target on Yamato with 27 miles

Cry more nerd neck

It’s an AI voice, not much you can really do to fix it. It also pronounced Yah-Ma-tow or Yah-Muh-tow depending on accents

Well it's a reef now,but I can say Battle Ship Texas and I can also go visit her. It's a shame they wasted this beautiful Ship. I would definitely love to see Yamoto as a museum Ship somewhere in Japan.

@@zeroelevens4957 Yes there is something that can be done to fix it, use a real HUMAN voice.

Yeah a lot of important names were pronounced wrong... Leyte and Spruance were butchered in the first 90 seconds

Don't forget Historigraph too!

were not available then.

I was suprise that most of japan ship at the time didnt even have a radar☠

Going to have to some what disagree here, Japanese gunnery was above average and if they could see it they hit it as all prior hostile contact with Nippon's forces prove that out. The battle in the Philippine Sea was proof albeit the Japanese were firing at smallish warships with massive armor piercing shells which blew holes threw the ships but didn't disintegrate them had they used contact fuses. Go back and check only one Japanese Captain realized the mistake being made.

I think it is

I am currently working on it.

@@TheWarline Great, we need more content like this. Visual Learners(psychology term) benefits drastically from this kind of videos on epic histories.

Will be released in the middle of next month.

Yes, and the armor piercing ammo it fired was of similar quality. The Iowa-class guns supposedly had better penetration, but less explosives than the Yamato cannons. But the Yamato-class were built mainly to be floating artillery anyway.

Technically no. The Yamato was built to withstand shells from other battleships, not bombs and torpedoes from aircraft. It was built too late.

The japanese navy built this massive Ship to counter US battleship etc. Not torpedo and Bombs

the armor quality was around the same quality as British WW1 era armor (being based on it), so yes it was low quality for the time it was build. HOWEVER, the difference was rather small. The British Royal Navy estimated that their WW2 era armor steel was around 15-20% stronger than their WW1 era armor steel. Historians all agree that British and German (pre war) armor steel was the best worldwide. So Yamatos armor quality might be lacking 15-20% behind other nations, but does that matter when you have a 25% thicker belt and a 33-45% thicker deck?

@@LILKRANKIN The Iowas guns had around the same penetration as Yamatos guns against vertical armor (so side armor belts), however Yamatos guns had a little bit better penetration against horizontal armor (armor decks). The reason for that is simple: 45cal length vs 50 cal length. Iowas shells have a flatter angle at impact, making them worse at deck penetration, but better at side penetration. However, they also have a lower mass, which negatively impacts penetration. In the end it doesnt really matter, both gun types are among the guns with the highest armor penetration of the war.

Not directly though. Only about 1/3 targeted Yamato, while the rest attacked the escorts. About half of the total aircraft were also only fighters.

Will be released in the middle of next month.