The German railway guns Dora and Gustav had a little smaller caliber of 80cm - but they could fire a round of 7.100kg over 47km and the crater was 36m deep. Dora was used in the battle of Sewastopol in 1942.
I was stationed at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in 1988 - 1990. I saw a "Little David" on display at the Museum of Ordnance which was then located at that base. In display were the tube, support structure and of course a round. Truly impressive. The Russian used to have a 240mm mortar that was loaded in the same way as the Little David but the American mortar was 900mm in caliber.
According to the book "The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War 2" the Little David had it's origins in a device used to test aircraft bombs by firing them from converted large calibre howitzers at chosen targets. This took the form of the Bomb Testing Device T1. Somebody then had the notion that this would make the perfect device to reduce bunkers to rubble, which led to the Little David. The Little David had no recuperator mechanism and the barrel was simply pumped back into position after each firing. It also suffered from poor accuracy, this and the ruinous 12 hour emplacement time needed for digging space for its huge box mount killed the project.
Pretty cool guns. I don't believe I would consider a gun that took 2 semis , a dozer and a crane highly mobile. The government has different definitions than I.
well when you have an army and the equipment at your fingertips you think differently. people thought that President Kennedy was crazy when he said before the end of the 60s they will put a man on the Moon
If you can move all that 1.000 miles in 24 hours it would be pretty mobile. So I can see why they tought it was highly mobile. Maybe it was highly mobile in those days… but was it effective? That’s the question I think.
That and 12 hours to set up and probably almost as long to prepare for transport to the next position. I can see why brass said "Screw it, let's just nuke them."
I met a guy who was on a crew for one of these things in Europe during WWII. He said by the time the gun was operational, the Germans had retreated out of range so the struck and moved forward. By the time the gun was operational, the Germans had retreated out of range. By the end of the war, they had never fired a shot.
I believe one shot from that 'super gun' pierced 90foot of rock & destroyed an ammunition dump that was stored in a cave. (At the battle for Sebastopol) And that they were brought over during early spring 1942
To get through the Siegfried line, the U.S. troops devised a method using a 155mm self-propelled gun. The pillboxes constructed by the Germans were usually immune to anything but a direct hit from a large caliber shell such as this. As the 155 could lower its gun and fire (essentially) point blank into the opening of the emplacement, the impact and subsequent explosion of the shell was sufficient to destroy the entire emplacement, including killing all personnel inside, even if they were behind walls protected from the initial blast (the concussion alone killed them).
The 155mm howitzer used in WWII was the M12. I'd put in the link to the reference article, but YT has trouble with those. I will add it in another comment.
You come up with amazing stuff. I've been studying military history for many decades but you are able to surprise me on a regular basis. Many thanks. I'm subscribed.
Well in the late 80s Gerald Bull was developing the Babylon gun for Iraq. 1000mm bore. The 350mm Baby Babylon was the prototype. The 1000mm gun was originally pitched to the US in the 60s. Bull also worked with an experimental gun using two 16 inch/405mm naval rifles mounted inline to fire test projectiles to over 100 miles in altitude.
Gerald Bull was so enthused with the ballistics he could make that he didn’t care who worked for. The last being Saddam Hussein. He’d been warned not too. So the Mossad assassinated him
building and firing superguns like this should be an international Olympic sport. It would about be the only Olympic discipline id actually pay to watch. Goal, shoot the furthest with a non self propelled projectile, bonus points if it detonates on impact.
@Clint Cannon curling dose not involve the use of explosives and or other means of accelerating a heavy object to near supersonic or supersonic speeds to then hit a target is barely or not visible to the shooter. The only thing the two have in common is that a mass is moved to a target by human will. this however describes a great many sports, such as soccer.
The shell crater shown near the end of the video appears to be much deeper than 13 feet. The soldier climbing out is probably close to 6 feet tall himself. He clearly traverses a distance more than 3 times his own heigh to get outt. Powerful weapon.
I love this channel but it doesn't distinguish clearly between relevant footage and stock footage. This crater could be from an entirely different cause.
"36 inch caliber, that overshadowed all German cannons employed during the war." Okay, so the round is bigger but the Little David is a child's toy compared to the Schwerer Gustav.
Gustav blew a 30-50 foot crater and obliterated anything that was put against it. No gun ever has been more powerful with as much range as Schwerer Gustav
Part of the problem with pre-landing bombardments was that naval guns are flat shooting, and couldn't be elevated to the near vertical required to impact the roof of a bunker, usually the weakest point. It fact, at Tarawa, the naval gunfire was flying over the whole island, and hitting the lagoon on the far side.
Then you have the USS Texas flooding one of her torpedo blister rooms to acquire the elevation needed to target areas further inland than her guns could initially reach.
oh thank god. youve slowed down your vocal delivery thank you! gonna watch all your vids from this point forward. no sarcasm, literally the only thing holding me back from subscribing
Yes, and the Schwerer Gustav was actually fired in combat, and though of slightly smaller calibre, fired a heavier shell of 7.7 tons weight. Also, the Little David was actually first designed to breach the Siegfried Line (though ended up not being needed) and was only later considered for use against Japan..
Naval guns using 16 inch/50 Mark 7 had AP (armor piercing) and HC (high explosive) rounds. The AP weighed 2,700 lbs, while the HC weighed 1,900 lbs. The AP actually had smaller warhead. Most of weight was additional steel needed to pierce 24 inches of enemy naval armor. The AP had 41 pounds of explosive while the HC had 154 pounds.
the AP was mark 8. The 16 inch guns themselves were mark 1, 6, and 7. The HC round was a Mark5 IIRC Both were rated for concrete bunker penetration, the Mark 8 at 15-30feet of 5000psi concrete and the mark5 at about 8 feet. (Dependent on range and angle of impact.) Assuming the use of a slight delay fuse, as they had a selection of fuses too.
@@mytech6779 Thank you. What surprised me was how little actual HE is in the shells. You have a projectile weighing over a ton, it has less than 200 lbs of HE. I saw that about reinforced concrete. Talk about old school bunker busters. Also saw craters they left on beaches prior to landing craft. Very impressive. Even today it's better to give, than receive 16 inch rounds.
As I understand matters, the "Little David" was originally conceived as a device to launch & test 500 lb Bombs & fuses without requiring an aircraft to drop the bomb. The "bunker buster" requirement was not until later in the war when planners were looking for a solution to deal with heavy fortifications in Europe. The "Little David" was considered a much more mobile & economic solution to the "Siegfried Line" than Railway Artillery of the same or similar caliber (914 mm/91.4 cm). The only other artillery around to handle the problem were the "Gustav/Dora" (800 mm/80cm) railway guns used by Germany, or the Mallett Mortar (19th Century) in storage somewhere in England.
The largest gun i seen fired in vietnam was 8" but 105mm, 155mm, 175mm were close behind. Every fire base FB had a battery of 105mm. 4th inf. div. pleiku. 1969.
Although the little david had the largest caliber seen in ww2, i think to avoid misleading people to think it was the biggest gun we should mention the schwerer gustav
Exactly. But they are 2 total different types. A mortar and a somewhat kind of a railwaygun (even if its not). Second had a much much higher performance.
by "on display" did you mean "rusting to pieces in a field where it can be appreciated for all it's might for about a decade or two before it falls apart"
for the big guns, calibre can mean two different things... Because the diameter is bleedingly obvious, but poorly related to range, calibre for big guns is barrel length divided by diameter (when measured in same units.)... This calibre then better indicates range... Anyway ... he only uses calibre for diameter in this this video.
I don’t know how you do it but you seem to uncover so a many amazing things that I’ve never heard of, thank you for your efforts, I can’t imagine how hard you must work to accomplish such things, I am left in amazement. Once again thank you
Little David was a muzzle-loading mortar with a maximum range of around six miles, and took twelve hours to dig into its fixed firing position. Thus it would have made easy meat for counter-battery fire from any substantial mobile artillery force in the vicinity, which could operate from outside the effective range of the Allied weapon. It is therefore hardly surprising that Little David never saw combat. The generally accepted 'biggest' gun of the Second World War was the Schwerer Gustav, capable of firing seven-ton shells over 25 miles, and which actually engaged in the 1941-1942 operations known as the Battle of Sevastopol. The most effective 'bunker buster' weapon of the War was arguably the ten-ton supersonic gravity bomb known as the 'Grand Slam' and designed by Barnes Wallis, 42 of which were delivered by specially modified Avro Lancasters during March and April 1945.
So let me get this straight....They named this mortar “Little David” and the Germans named their tiny Robot bomb “Goliath”.....David vs Goliath story isnt as impressive now
You would definitely hear that big monster coming . If you could see 16” coming over as marine once told me when he was in Beruit this beast would be clear as day.
the paris gun was manned by fifty navy personel. the shells had to be pre heated snd each shell was numbered as the shells would expand the barrel and they were progressevly larger
I want to thank you for the amazing information you provide to your viewers. This is fascinating material. I appreciate all of your efforts. Many thanks!
One was used on Okinawa by the US Army. On a side note the Australian Army experimented Mounting a Hedgehog anti-submarine mortar into a Mathilda tank chassis. Also to destroy Japanese bunkers it was in it's final testing stage by the time the war ended. It proved to be very effective destroying Japanese bunkers
The military is 20 years ahead of what’s revealed. Regan started the Star Wars program so they’ve been playing with lasers and electromagnetic rail guns for a min.
@@reddfoxx897 No the tech is there but no use of it is funded as nukes are a good enough deterrent and any more would be a waste of money at this time.
The caliber is a bit larger but the weight is tiny compared to the Nazigermany 80cm railwaygun. Shell weight difference is HUGE, more then double for high explosive (10582.19) pounds and 4 times (15652.82) more heavy was the anti armor shell for the Nazi gun. 6miles is also cute compared to the 80cm gun lol, more then 29 miles for the Nazis.. Last thing is the depth of that crater , that is really nothing compared to the 80 cm gun, it could smack more then 104 feet deep.
You should do a video on the shore batteries of Point Loma, in San Diego, California. The underground complexes are still there...at least when I was stationed at the Fleet Combat Training Center, Pacific back in 1980-81. I used to have to check a remote radio site at the end of the point and would drive past the old bunkers and could see the RR-like tracks used for bringing the guns out and the blast doors. I'm pretty sure they were built prior to WW-II to protect San Diego Harbor in case it was ever attacked. I think the guns were 18".
Fort Rosecrans, San Diego. Largest were two 16" guns but only installed for ww2. 4 10" disappearing guns from 1898 until the end of WW2 , 8 12" mortars for WW1 and WW2. 50 of the Mk2/3 16" 50 calibre (ratio definition of calibre.) guns were made for navy use after WW1, , but all handed over to the army for WW2, as the Navy Didnt have any battleship for them. (They were kept to go on Iowa's but they didn't fit right ! ) There were 21 batteries using the Mk2 16" 50 calibre. Iowa's used the Mk7 which is also 16" 50 calibre,so pretty similar, its just factual that the army didnt have 16" batteries ready to go, but the navy did. To be fair, the Army did have the very similar M1919 designed, but only had 7 made, having been given those naval guns to work with.
@Dark Footage Just a heads up... The U.S. Army closed the Aberdeen Proving Ground Ordnance Museum and Little David is unfortunately no longer on display and was moved out, current location is unknown. The new GOM is now down in Virginia at Fort Lee and not available for public viewing.
And here we see.... size doesnt matter (at least the caliber size) The 800mm railway guns were "smaller" in caliber.. but 7km range vs nearly 50km range is a HUGE DIFFERENCE, let alone the shell weight of 5-7,2 tons ;)
Just an FYI: All the ordnance which was on display at Aberdeen Proving Grounds was move during the last BRAC several years ago to Virginia, unfortunately for those of us living here: had great times taking visitors out to the Ordnance Museum: had the rail mounted Atomic Canon there as well!! John in MD
Little David 36-inch/914 mm mortar was truly a beast lobbying 1,656 kg rounds to about 6 miles. Epic proportions was also it's weight: a two-piece mobile unit, consisting of the 80,000-pound (36,000 kg) barrel and the 93,000-pound (42,000 kg) base. Not bad Lol 🤣😅
Well to be fair, they thought they might need it in Japan. There were only 4 nukes available in 1946, one of which wouldn't be ready until late 46. And there was great effort to convince the Japanese that we could produce one per week (although we couldn't) to persuade Japan to surrender before having to commit to an amphibious assault on Japan. If after 3 nukes, Japan didn't yet surrender, it would have been down to an amphibious assault, and overland urban fighting across the whole of Japan. Whether the nukes would work or not was a 'nail biter', and at least a million US and Japanese lives (each) hung in the balance.
Hi di Hi, in "1945" there were at least 5 nukes if not more built. One was tested in Operation Trinty, 2 were dropped over Japan, one was a Uranium bomd, one was a plutonium bomd both fission Type, Fat man & little boy dropped on Nagasaki & Hiroshima. There was at least another 2 in reserve at least maybe 4. In plans for Operation Downfall (plan to invade the Japanese 4 main home islands) the USA has lined up sufficent resources to churn out at least 200 nuclear bomds by late 1946 early 1947 alone. By end 1946 the US has certainly at least 50 or more nuclear bomds available at hand. It takes 2 or 3 or 4 days to assembled each nuclear bomd for it to be airdropped by B29 or B50 or B36. That why the Russian Red Army did not steam roller Western Europe in 1946. 50 good reason why not. Note in 1945 there was 1 test Trinty, in 1946 there was the Crossroad series of test on Warships & Merchant ships on Bikini atoll runned by the USN. 2 nuclear plutonium bomds were used Test Able & Test Baker in July 1946 in Bikini Atoll. Note between 1945 & 1990 over 70,000 nuclear bomds, warheads, arty/naval shells, torpedo, mines etc were all built by the USA at either Lawrence Livermore nuclear national laboratory or the Los Almos nuclear national laboratory. Current US stockpiles is approx 3,700+ ready for use or nearly ready for use with another 1,720 retired & in reserve that can be made ready for use depending by between a couple of weeks to up to a few months or half a year. There also sufficent weapons grade Plutonium that can be quickly turn into nuclear weapons within a year or 18 mths or less, estimate unknown but at least more then 5 or 6 thousands potenial nuclear weapons.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 I typed 46, but meant 45 (twice). Never type uncaffeinated. The rest stands. There were 5 bombs made in 45, yes. 1 test bomb (trinity), and 4 operational bombs. At the time of nuking japan, only 3 of those 4 bombs were ready (or nearly ready). Beyond those 3 operational bombs, it would be about a year before mass production of nuclear arms would come online. During that time there would have been 1 more in later 45, and perhaps 2 more hand crafted bombs in Q1/Q2 of 46. But it would be nearly a year before mass production, perhaps 10 months with luck. And the amphibious invasion of Japan would have gotten really messy during that year. Waiting to drop them until there were at least 3 lined up was basically a psyop, to bring the war to an early close. Designed to give the impression we were making them far faster than we really were (or "could", for about a year yet). If Japan had realized there were only a few more nukes coming over the next 10-12 months, surrender may not have occurred, and a hell of a lot more people would have died. But in July it sure looked like we were making one per week. And that had the desired effect. The numbers which were built during the cold war is a whole different conversation. And it's probably not fair to regard hydrogen bombs and fission bombs in the same sentence. The yield difference is huge. The early bombs were far more potent than the US estimated they would be. Japanese urban centers at that time were considerably more flammable than european counterparts. The resulting firestorm at Hiroshima killed more people than the bomb itself. Basically Dresden all over again. Also, nobody really knew what the radioactive fallout would do in a populated area. They knew it wouldn't be good. But it was worse than expected. But yeah, by late 46, it definitely would have ended. We really would be making them every week, and faster than that even. But a few million Japanese and American lives (which certainly would have perished in an amphibious assault across Japan) hung in the balance of that psyop ploy to drop 3 in rapid succession. It was a hail mary to end the war early.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 There was 4 bombs in 45, 1 test, 2 used and one that wasn't up to scratch I forget what it had wrong with it but it wasn't going to be used enless the Japanese refused to surrender but would have taken 2 weeks to send after the last one, it had defects, work on a fifth was going on but they wouldn't have completed till the end of 1945 so basically 46 due to shortage and yes even the USA had them in ww2. The USA didn't stat to produce nukes in the hundred's till 1949 to 1951 the USSR who also had a similar production rates didn't till 1956, so about 5/6 for the USA and 8 for Russia. Production comparison and total stoke including tests. Usa USSR 45=4 46=9 47=13 48=50 49=170 =1 50=299 =5 51=438 =25 52=841 =50 53=1,169 =120 54=1,703 =150 55=2,422 =200 56=3,692 =426
@@brianlong2334 Thanks very much, I read in a book on operational Downfall that the plans for invasion in 1946 that at least 200 nukes would have been produced then or planned for, am relying on memories over 15 or more years ago. I also read that there would be on some of the landings on the main islands again relying on memory massive multiple use of half a dozen or more nukes in tatical battlefield support of a singular landing on one of those main island. I also know that the USA was using was using it mainy calthrons? less so chemical processing to separate out Pu to weapons grade quality & it was a massive electricity guzzler & relatively inefficent compared with centrifuges/later generations of hyper centrifuges & now laser enrichment on its 2nd generation. At that time centrifuge tech was not yet being used for separation of Pu, having just been aquired by the US from the 3rd Riech, like electron scanning microscopy. So the issue is that could the extant US Grid & electrical generators handle the electrical demands for the processing of of sufficent weapons grade Pu for 200 bomds in 1946. Historical interest, could the USA sustained the scale of war industrial output to 1946 or even mid 1947. Note not questioning that it will win against Imperial Japan, there was a lot of viable alternatives to nukes like mass use of lewsite (a form of Mustard gas easy to produce), anthrax, herbicides specially developed for directed use against millet/barley/rice, cutting of Sea lines of communication totally by mines, Subs, air & later probably near uncontested naval supremacy or just total destruction of all cornuburations of any meainful size from the operational commitment of scores if not hundreds of operation Meetinghouse equivalent on steroids alone in 1946. I know that in the case of available copper, certain hardwoods & softwoods production the limits were already reach in 1945. Would the Grid have held up then to output goals of 200 Pu bomds, could they have installed the generating capacity & feed it with coal to sustain sufficent weapons grade Pu output without centrifuges but only or primarily calthron use. Thanks again for the info. 1.6 billion kilowatt hours to produce 113 pounds of plutonium by july 1945. Fat man required approx 13 pounds 10 ounces of Pu. So the Pu available in July 1945 could have potenially yielded at least 8 nuclear bomds. So to produce 1 pound of weapon grade Pu using calthron tech it required 141.6 million kilowatt hour using calthrons. To produce 200 Pu bomds required 2,720 pounds of Pu assuming the same design was used, it would require just around 40 billion kilowatts hours of electricity in 1945 & 1946. So assuming my numbers are somewhat correct, the US projections that for operational Downfall it would churn out 200 nukes in 1946 assuming Centrifuge tech would not yet be significantly deployed. In 1944 the USA produced 228 billion kilowatt hours of electricity & in 1947 255 billion kilowatts of electricity. The greatly increase need for electricity could certainly be meet to some extent with a expansion of installed generation capacity but there would be certainly almost certainly have been brown outs or black outs in the Grid at times & a reduction of other armament/muntion output assuming priority to produce the 200 nukes. Methinks one of the reason why the USA did not go big on Pu production after WW2 to counter the Soviets was the constraint on electrical supply availability, the political decision was made not to upset the electorate after WW2 with brown outs & Black outs. It was thanks to the maturation & development of centrifuge tech that open the politically doable pathway to mass US production of nukes. The constraint then on US production of nukes in 1945 to 1947 would have been the Grid & available generation capacity & political cost or of political elite sensitivities to brown or black out imposed on electorate then. Thanks again for the correction of 50 nukes output or availability very much later.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 I believe some people made a mistake when reading, as the 200 from what I can find was an order by the USAA so Airforce in 1945, that they wanted that many by 1946 not that they could build that many, the leaders on the project told the government that only 7 would be available in 1946, and in reality they build 9. From memory there was also some sort of shortages of somthing or delays of vital materials getting it to the USA. There was also only like 2 teams of individuals who were trained to put the bombs together safely, with the 4th bomb having some kind of problem would indicate that you wouldn't want to start mass production just yet, as 1 in 4 would be dangerous.
I was stationed in APG MD for school when I was in the Marines 1988 never knew what the big box was next to the Mortar tube on display. Now I know it’s the base of the mortar. Thanks.
It maybe the biggest Caliber but not the biggest round. The German Gun "Schwerer Gustav" hat a 80cm caliber and it was 7100kg heavy. It could fly up to 47km far and could go up to 32m into the ground or through 10m of concrete. The whole gun had a weight of 1350 tons. In comparison is little David really just little David
That's the difference between a mortar and an actual artillery gun. The Gustav was a monster of a artillery piece, and required a tremendous amount of manpower to even get where it was going as well as even more to operate and secure. Granted it was pretty much second to none at doing what it was designed to do, problem was it only did it a handful of times throughout the war.
For information, the German "Paris Gun" was known for its extreme range not its size; it ranged about 70 miles and was used for the propaganda story of "Germans shelling Paris". Other unmentioned monsters were the German Schwerer Gustav 60 cm railway gun and the Karl-Gerät 60 cm siege mortar. Of course with all the current civilian gun control politics, one could ask why governments were allowed to own these "assault weapons" as they're weapons of war and nobody should be allowed to own one of those... just be extorted to pay for them.
Is this known as big Bertha? If so after firing the barrel expanded and the next round was a larger diameter to compensate after a certain number firing stopped till it cooled and the same original first round started again
I could imagine a few scenarios in places like Vietnam where this little beast could have been employed to devastating effect collapsing underground bunkers in soft jungle soil but by that time most military people probably had no idea such a weapon even existed. Thanks to this channel for bringing to light such "lost" technology.
Really? “Most military people probably had no idea such a weapon even existed”? It was developed by the military. I’m pretty sure they still knew it existed 😂😂😂😂. Y’all got your clock cleaned by little brown men in pyjamas in Vietnam,I don’t think a bigger gun would’ve helped much. Didn’t do so well in North Korea or Afghanistan come to think of it.🤷
@@seektruth3307 American involvement in Vietnam happened less than 20 years after World War Two. My memory can clearly recall things that happened 20 years ago so I’m pretty sure there were people in the US Army who remembered these guns. America lost the Vietnam war. Bigly……..If pointing that out makes me a “weirdo” then I suspect you belong to the flat Earth society.
@@davidcat1455 Nah, I am fairly sure you have the flat earth market cornered. Especially if you think the Army, as a whole, knew about that weapon. I bet you didn't until you saw this video like everyone else. The VERY FEW who participated and were still alive 20 years later might have remembered but it is ridiculous to assume those in the military, in general, knew of this weapon that was NEVER employed in battle.
@@seektruth3307 General Westmorland was a artillery officer in World War II. But you probably didn’t know that.🤷 if you think that a capable commander with a ton of experience in available artillery was unaware of this “little beast’s” existence you really have fallen over the edge of your flat Earth.
The 36" round seems ideal for home defense.
Just as the founding fathers intended
Well it’s not a 9mm that will just blow the lung right out of your back. So it must be ok to own for self defense!
Not so great for concealed carry.
Now if they could put that on the AR platform you would have a best seller🤣.
Found the american
The German railway guns Dora and Gustav had a little smaller caliber of 80cm - but they could fire a round of 7.100kg over 47km and the crater was 36m deep. Dora was used in the battle of Sewastopol in 1942.
Hope you ain't trying to take over the world again? Hehe I guess that's why we spend so much money for defense in the USA..
No offense but when you elected that woman to run your country you really screwed up..germatic tribes or the smartest in the world..
10 meter wide barrel caliber, ammonium nitrate and high explosive shell, filled to the max.
I was stationed at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in 1988 - 1990. I saw a "Little David" on display at the Museum of Ordnance which was then located at that base. In display were the tube, support structure and of course a round. Truly impressive. The Russian used to have a 240mm mortar that was loaded in the same way as the Little David but the American mortar was 900mm in caliber.
Soviets also had a 400mm howitzer that was propelled only by tracks. It was made to compete with the states atomic annie nuclear artillery gun.
Aberdeen, where Kurt Cobain was from?
Gustav morters
Every American should own one
Lol why even mention that little Rusky round.
According to the book "The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War 2" the Little David had it's origins in a device used to test aircraft bombs by firing them from converted large calibre howitzers at chosen targets. This took the form of the Bomb Testing Device T1. Somebody then had the notion that this would make the perfect device to reduce bunkers to rubble, which led to the Little David. The Little David had no recuperator mechanism and the barrel was simply pumped back into position after each firing. It also suffered from poor accuracy, this and the ruinous 12 hour emplacement time needed for digging space for its huge box mount killed the project.
I was wondering how they aimed it
@@charles1964 I'm guessing a map, compass, and whatever counts as iron sights.
@AubryH. Nice research!!! Great information!
12 hours really isn't bad when it comes to setting up a siege weapon.
Makes sense
Pretty cool guns. I don't believe I would consider a gun that took 2 semis , a dozer and a crane highly mobile. The government has different definitions than I.
well when you have an army and the equipment at your fingertips you think differently. people thought that President Kennedy was crazy when he said before the end of the 60s they will put a man on the Moon
If you can move all that 1.000 miles in 24 hours it would be pretty mobile. So I can see why they tought it was highly mobile. Maybe it was highly mobile in those days… but was it effective? That’s the question I think.
The German equivalent took two entire freight trains to move and required the laying of two parallel curved railway lines for firing…
That and 12 hours to set up and probably almost as long to prepare for transport to the next position. I can see why brass said "Screw it, let's just nuke them."
Aye that they do lad. That they do.
I met a guy who was on a crew for one of these things in Europe during WWII. He said by the time the gun was operational, the Germans had retreated out of range so the struck and moved forward. By the time the gun was operational, the Germans had retreated out of range. By the end of the war, they had never fired a shot.
But as long as the enemy is retreating, I'd call that a success.
I believe one shot from that 'super gun' pierced 90foot of rock & destroyed an ammunition dump that was stored in a cave. (At the battle for Sebastopol) And that they were brought over during early spring 1942
The Germans saw it coming and hauled ass out of there, they weren't stupid you know.
The Pill Box retreated?
To get through the Siegfried line, the U.S. troops devised a method using a 155mm self-propelled gun. The pillboxes constructed by the Germans were usually immune to anything but a direct hit from a large caliber shell such as this. As the 155 could lower its gun and fire (essentially) point blank into the opening of the emplacement, the impact and subsequent explosion of the shell was sufficient to destroy the entire emplacement, including killing all personnel inside, even if they were behind walls protected from the initial blast (the concussion alone killed them).
the T95? that thing had a 105
The T28 never went beyond prototype. Don't know where you get your information, but I can only advise to find an alternative source.
The og comment is correct, look at the book, citizen soldier
The 155mm howitzer used in WWII was the M12. I'd put in the link to the reference article, but YT has trouble with those. I will add it in another comment.
us army self-propelled 155mm howitzer wwii
You come up with amazing stuff. I've been studying military history for many decades but you are able to surprise me on a regular basis. Many thanks. I'm subscribed.
914mm mortar. Just reading that is mindboggling.
Well in the late 80s Gerald Bull was developing the Babylon gun for Iraq. 1000mm bore. The 350mm Baby Babylon was the prototype. The 1000mm gun was originally pitched to the US in the 60s. Bull also worked with an experimental gun using two 16 inch/405mm naval rifles mounted inline to fire test projectiles to over 100 miles in altitude.
As soon as I started watching this video, I thought of that Gun.
Yea well, the Mossad put an end to that…
@@jamessimms415
5 shots from a 7.65, the biggest gun in the world stopped by one of the smallest.
Gerald Bull was so enthused with the ballistics he could make that he didn’t care who worked for. The last being Saddam Hussein. He’d been warned not too. So the Mossad assassinated him
@@Idahoguy10157
Bull was fascinated with the prospect of being able to use a gun to l as unch payloads into orbit.
building and firing superguns like this should be an international Olympic sport. It would about be the only Olympic discipline id actually pay to watch.
Goal, shoot the furthest with a non self propelled projectile, bonus points if it detonates on impact.
And Canada would neither fund the athletes, nor televise the event.
@@iamcondescending leadfobic gits
😂😂😂
@Clint Cannon curling dose not involve the use of explosives and or other means of accelerating a heavy object to near supersonic or supersonic speeds to then hit a target is barely or not visible to the shooter.
The only thing the two have in common is that a mass is moved to a target by human will. this however describes a great many sports, such as soccer.
What would the Paralympics version be? 🤔
The shell crater shown near the end of the video appears to be much deeper than 13 feet. The soldier climbing out is probably close to 6 feet tall himself. He clearly traverses a distance more than 3 times his own heigh to get outt.
Powerful weapon.
@@flightforensics4523 quiet, adults are talking.
A delayed charge , would dive deep in a half second...making a bunker buster varient..also good for air strips
It's probably marked 13 feet deep from the original ground level, there would be a ring of ejecta around the crater that adds to the height.
I love this channel but it doesn't distinguish clearly between relevant footage and stock footage. This crater could be from an entirely different cause.
"36 inch caliber, that overshadowed all German cannons employed during the war." Okay, so the round is bigger but the Little David is a child's toy compared to the Schwerer Gustav.
Gustav blew a 30-50 foot crater and obliterated anything that was put against it.
No gun ever has been more powerful with as much range as Schwerer Gustav
Part of the problem with pre-landing bombardments was that naval guns are flat shooting, and couldn't be elevated to the near vertical required to impact the roof of a bunker, usually the weakest point.
It fact, at Tarawa, the naval gunfire was flying over the whole island, and hitting the lagoon on the far side.
Then you have the USS Texas flooding one of her torpedo blister rooms to acquire the elevation needed to target areas further inland than her guns could initially reach.
“Look what this needs to mimic a fraction of my power.” - Oppenheimer
"Three thousand six hundred pound shell at a velocity of one thousand six hundred pounds a second." Who writes the script for these videos?
i used to live in Aberdeen and got to see this in person, it was very cool
Wow, 1600 pounds a second! That’s pretty fast!
The German schwerer Gustaf is like.... cute does it bite?
oh thank god.
youve slowed down your vocal delivery thank you! gonna watch all your vids from this point forward. no sarcasm, literally the only thing holding me back from subscribing
@0:50 "...by firing a shell of 3600 pounds at a velocity of 600 pounds per second..."
"pounds per second" isn't a velocity of a projectile.
My wife’s grandfather was in a crew for the Germans Big Bertha in WW1. He was nearly completely deaf from the sound. He was from E. Prussia.
It's a muzzle loaded mortar not a gun! No mention of the 80cm Dora. Largest calibre breech loaded railway gun built and fired!
Yes, and the Schwerer Gustav was actually fired in combat, and though of slightly smaller calibre, fired a heavier shell of 7.7 tons weight. Also, the Little David was actually first designed to breach the Siegfried Line (though ended up not being needed) and was only later considered for use against Japan..
My father said you could see them flying through the air. There was no hope for anyone in their path.
I love these informational videos. I’m sorry that they only get to the subject 3/4 of the way through the presentation. This trend…… IDK
Feels like calling a weapon like this "Little David" is like calling the 6'6" 350lb guard on the football team "Tiny."
It was just the War Department at the time. It didn't become the Department of Defense until 1949
The HE shell of mark 7 16"/50 naval gun can create a bigger crater (50ft in diameter and 20ft deep).
0:48 At a velocity of One thousand, six hundred pounds second. Fark that IS fast. I can't even fathom that kind of velocity.
Never even heard of this 36 inch WW2 mortar. Surprised it was never more widely used, at least the concept of larger caliber mortars.
because it cant survive on the battlefield (at least like how the 36" mortar was built)
Then we discovered that firebombing and the atomic bomb was much more effective at cracking Japan.
Naval guns using 16 inch/50 Mark 7 had AP (armor piercing) and HC (high explosive) rounds. The AP weighed 2,700 lbs, while the HC weighed 1,900 lbs. The AP actually had smaller warhead. Most of weight was additional steel needed to pierce 24 inches of enemy naval armor. The AP had 41 pounds of explosive while the HC had 154 pounds.
the AP was mark 8. The 16 inch guns themselves were mark 1, 6, and 7.
The HC round was a Mark5 IIRC
Both were rated for concrete bunker penetration, the Mark 8 at 15-30feet of 5000psi concrete and the mark5 at about 8 feet. (Dependent on range and angle of impact.) Assuming the use of a slight delay fuse, as they had a selection of fuses too.
@@mytech6779 Thank you. What surprised me was how little actual HE is in the shells. You have a projectile weighing over a ton, it has less than 200 lbs of HE. I saw that about reinforced concrete. Talk about old school bunker busters. Also saw craters they left on beaches prior to landing craft. Very impressive. Even today it's better to give, than receive 16 inch rounds.
ANY time the military would be making me drive around something called "the dragon wagon" I am ALL in for that.
As I understand matters, the "Little David" was originally conceived as a device to launch & test 500 lb Bombs & fuses without requiring an aircraft to drop the bomb. The "bunker buster" requirement was not until later in the war when planners were looking for a solution to deal with heavy fortifications in Europe. The "Little David" was considered a much more mobile & economic solution to the "Siegfried Line" than Railway Artillery of the same or similar caliber (914 mm/91.4 cm). The only other artillery around to handle the problem were the "Gustav/Dora" (800 mm/80cm) railway guns used by Germany, or the Mallett Mortar (19th Century) in storage somewhere in England.
The largest gun i seen fired in vietnam was 8" but 105mm, 155mm, 175mm were close behind. Every fire base FB had a battery of 105mm. 4th inf. div. pleiku. 1969.
The invasion of the Japanese home land would have been a too high a cost in American lives.
Just in case anyone was wondering what 2a was all about, yes, you are allowed to carry that.
Although the little david had the largest caliber seen in ww2, i think to avoid misleading people to think it was the biggest gun we should mention the schwerer gustav
Exactly. But they are 2 total different types. A mortar and a somewhat kind of a railwaygun (even if its not). Second had a much much higher performance.
by "on display" did you mean "rusting to pieces in a field where it can be appreciated for all it's might for about a decade or two before it falls apart"
We should still be using a lot of this equipment,just cus it’s an old technology doesn’t mean it doesn’t work.
for the big guns, calibre can mean two different things... Because the diameter is bleedingly obvious, but poorly related to range, calibre for big guns is barrel length divided by diameter (when measured in same units.)... This calibre then better indicates range... Anyway ... he only uses calibre for diameter in this this video.
Check with the Dragon Man, he probably has one in his museum. For a small fee, he would probably let you fire it on his range.
I don’t know how you do it but you seem to uncover so a many amazing things that I’ve never heard of, thank you for your efforts, I can’t imagine how hard you must work to accomplish such things, I am left in amazement. Once again thank you
Little David was a muzzle-loading mortar with a maximum range of around six miles, and took twelve hours to dig into its fixed firing position. Thus it would have made easy meat for counter-battery fire from any substantial mobile artillery force in the vicinity, which could operate from outside the effective range of the Allied weapon. It is therefore hardly surprising that Little David never saw combat. The generally accepted 'biggest' gun of the Second World War was the Schwerer Gustav, capable of firing seven-ton shells over 25 miles, and which actually engaged in the 1941-1942 operations known as the Battle of Sevastopol. The most effective 'bunker buster' weapon of the War was arguably the ten-ton supersonic gravity bomb known as the 'Grand Slam' and designed by Barnes Wallis, 42 of which were delivered by specially modified Avro Lancasters during March and April 1945.
shhhh
Pretty sure that was all considered for in the mission operational reqs.
So let me get this straight....They named this mortar “Little David” and the Germans named their tiny Robot bomb “Goliath”.....David vs Goliath story isnt as impressive now
You would definitely hear that big monster coming . If you could see 16” coming over as marine once told me when he was in Beruit this beast would be clear as day.
I’m so happy he slowed down his narration. This is perfect
I was questioned about my .50 AE. My response was to protect my next door neighbor from the cover of my house.
"The dragon wagon". Is there really any question that this was the greatest generation?
Wow that was a crater!!
Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
Thanks
the paris gun was manned by fifty navy personel. the shells had to be pre heated snd each shell was numbered as the shells would expand the barrel and they were progressevly larger
I want to thank you for the amazing information you provide to your viewers. This is fascinating material. I appreciate all of your efforts. Many thanks!
Wow !!! Gr8 documentary. Loved this one. I've never heard of Little David. 👍👍👍👍
Wow! Thanks for the interesting video! What an impressive Motor!
Never heard of this! At least as much as my memory remains. Great story. 🇨🇦 Veteran(pst 1990)
If aliens ever do try to conquer us, the resistance fighters will have a nice selection of heavy antique weapons to play with :P
The gun on display looks to be the same one in the part where they are testing it. It has the same mismatched tire
Growing up in the area, I saw “Little David” at Aberdeen. Immense!!!
You put out some quality videos and i'm really impressed and I thoroughly enjoy them, thank you
Thank you for vid's. I really enjoy your various channels & information you put out. 👍
One was used on Okinawa by the US Army. On a side note the Australian Army experimented Mounting a Hedgehog anti-submarine mortar into a Mathilda tank chassis. Also to destroy Japanese bunkers it was in it's final testing stage by the time the war ended. It proved to be very effective destroying Japanese bunkers
So we have the fictional "Planet Crackers" right? So here we have their far more smaller cousin "Continent Cracker" (or smth like that).
6:24 Yeah I'm pretty sure his brain was a little messed up off those pharmaceuticals and he really meant “highly experimental, mobile weapon”
I highly appreciate your work in unearthing amazing photos and footage most have never seen before.
Absolutely 💯 amazing !
This is savage! I wish they’d experiment this mass with Electromagnetic guns!
The military is 20 years ahead of what’s revealed. Regan started the Star Wars program so they’ve been playing with lasers and electromagnetic rail guns for a min.
@@reddfoxx897 No the tech is there but no use of it is funded as nukes are a good enough deterrent and any more would be a waste of money at this time.
I never comment but your docs are REALLY GOOD thank you
Man has always engaged in that competative way, 'Mine's Bigger than your's'.
Definitely a siege weapon.
The caliber is a bit larger but the weight is tiny compared to the Nazigermany 80cm railwaygun. Shell weight difference is HUGE, more then double for high explosive (10582.19) pounds and 4 times (15652.82) more heavy was the anti armor shell for the Nazi gun. 6miles is also cute compared to the 80cm gun lol, more then 29 miles for the Nazis..
Last thing is the depth of that crater , that is really nothing compared to the 80 cm gun, it could smack more then 104 feet deep.
Exactly that's what I thought little David might be a massive mortar but is nothing compared to the gustave
but he said the projectile weighed 36000 tons lol
@@datadavis 3600 pounds are not even 2 metric tons
@@Vanadium yea i heard wrong, im basically deaf😄
That's roughly like my CRV flying through the air. If my CRV was packed with high explosives of course...and it's not.
Here I was thinking the schwerer Gustav was the biggest
This video was wonderful, thank you.
You should do a video on the shore batteries of Point Loma, in San Diego, California. The underground complexes are still there...at least when I was stationed at the Fleet Combat Training Center, Pacific back in 1980-81. I used to have to check a remote radio site at the end of the point and would drive past the old bunkers and could see the RR-like tracks used for bringing the guns out and the blast doors. I'm pretty sure they were built prior to WW-II to protect San Diego Harbor in case it was ever attacked. I think the guns were 18".
Fort Rosecrans, San Diego. Largest were two 16" guns but only installed for ww2. 4 10" disappearing guns from 1898 until the end of WW2 , 8 12" mortars for WW1 and WW2. 50 of the Mk2/3 16" 50 calibre (ratio definition of calibre.) guns were made for navy use after WW1, , but all handed over to the army for WW2, as the Navy Didnt have any battleship for them. (They were kept to go on Iowa's but they didn't fit right ! ) There were 21 batteries using the Mk2 16" 50 calibre. Iowa's used the Mk7 which is also 16" 50 calibre,so pretty similar, its just factual that the army didnt have 16" batteries ready to go, but the navy did. To be fair, the Army did have the very similar M1919 designed, but only had 7 made, having been given those naval guns to work with.
How effective was a 16’’armor piercing shell using plunging fire against fortifications?
@Dark Footage Just a heads up... The U.S. Army closed the Aberdeen Proving Ground Ordnance Museum and Little David is unfortunately no longer on display and was moved out, current location is unknown. The new GOM is now down in Virginia at Fort Lee and not available for public viewing.
When the company digging your backyard for a swimming pool and they want longitude and latitude coordinates.
And here we see.... size doesnt matter (at least the caliber size)
The 800mm railway guns were "smaller" in caliber.. but 7km range vs nearly 50km range is a HUGE DIFFERENCE, let alone the shell weight of 5-7,2 tons ;)
Just an FYI: All the ordnance which was on display at Aberdeen Proving Grounds was move during the last BRAC several years ago to Virginia, unfortunately for those of us living here: had great times taking visitors out to the Ordnance Museum: had the rail mounted Atomic Canon there as well!!
John in MD
Little David 36-inch/914 mm mortar was truly a beast lobbying 1,656 kg rounds to about 6 miles. Epic proportions was also it's weight: a two-piece mobile unit, consisting of the 80,000-pound (36,000 kg) barrel and the 93,000-pound (42,000 kg) base. Not bad Lol 🤣😅
That was very interesting. What a weapon! Thank you for sharing this with us all.
The ideal gun for small to medium sized game at reasonable range.
This gun: (Exists)
The Ranger: (Heavy breathing)
Well to be fair, they thought they might need it in Japan. There were only 4 nukes available in 1946, one of which wouldn't be ready until late 46. And there was great effort to convince the Japanese that we could produce one per week (although we couldn't) to persuade Japan to surrender before having to commit to an amphibious assault on Japan. If after 3 nukes, Japan didn't yet surrender, it would have been down to an amphibious assault, and overland urban fighting across the whole of Japan. Whether the nukes would work or not was a 'nail biter', and at least a million US and Japanese lives (each) hung in the balance.
Hi di Hi, in "1945" there were at least 5 nukes if not more built. One was tested in Operation Trinty, 2 were dropped over Japan, one was a Uranium bomd, one was a plutonium bomd both fission Type, Fat man & little boy dropped on Nagasaki & Hiroshima. There was at least another 2 in reserve at least maybe 4. In plans for Operation Downfall (plan to invade the Japanese 4 main home islands) the USA has lined up sufficent resources to churn out at least 200 nuclear bomds by late 1946 early 1947 alone. By end 1946 the US has certainly at least 50 or more nuclear bomds available at hand. It takes 2 or 3 or 4 days to assembled each nuclear bomd for it to be airdropped by B29 or B50 or B36. That why the Russian Red Army did not steam roller Western Europe in 1946. 50 good reason why not. Note in 1945 there was 1 test Trinty, in 1946 there was the Crossroad series of test on Warships & Merchant ships on Bikini atoll runned by the USN. 2 nuclear plutonium bomds were used Test Able & Test Baker in July 1946 in Bikini Atoll. Note between 1945 & 1990 over 70,000 nuclear bomds, warheads, arty/naval shells, torpedo, mines etc were all built by the USA at either Lawrence Livermore nuclear national laboratory or the Los Almos nuclear national laboratory. Current US stockpiles is approx 3,700+ ready for use or nearly ready for use with another 1,720 retired & in reserve that can be made ready for use depending by between a couple of weeks to up to a few months or half a year. There also sufficent weapons grade Plutonium that can be quickly turn into nuclear weapons within a year or 18 mths or less, estimate unknown but at least more then 5 or 6 thousands potenial nuclear weapons.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 I typed 46, but meant 45 (twice). Never type uncaffeinated. The rest stands.
There were 5 bombs made in 45, yes. 1 test bomb (trinity), and 4 operational bombs. At the time of nuking japan, only 3 of those 4 bombs were ready (or nearly ready).
Beyond those 3 operational bombs, it would be about a year before mass production of nuclear arms would come online. During that time there would have been 1 more in later 45, and perhaps 2 more hand crafted bombs in Q1/Q2 of 46. But it would be nearly a year before mass production, perhaps 10 months with luck. And the amphibious invasion of Japan would have gotten really messy during that year.
Waiting to drop them until there were at least 3 lined up was basically a psyop, to bring the war to an early close. Designed to give the impression we were making them far faster than we really were (or "could", for about a year yet). If Japan had realized there were only a few more nukes coming over the next 10-12 months, surrender may not have occurred, and a hell of a lot more people would have died. But in July it sure looked like we were making one per week. And that had the desired effect.
The numbers which were built during the cold war is a whole different conversation. And it's probably not fair to regard hydrogen bombs and fission bombs in the same sentence. The yield difference is huge.
The early bombs were far more potent than the US estimated they would be. Japanese urban centers at that time were considerably more flammable than european counterparts. The resulting firestorm at Hiroshima killed more people than the bomb itself. Basically Dresden all over again. Also, nobody really knew what the radioactive fallout would do in a populated area. They knew it wouldn't be good. But it was worse than expected.
But yeah, by late 46, it definitely would have ended. We really would be making them every week, and faster than that even. But a few million Japanese and American lives (which certainly would have perished in an amphibious assault across Japan) hung in the balance of that psyop ploy to drop 3 in rapid succession. It was a hail mary to end the war early.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 There was 4 bombs in 45, 1 test, 2 used and one that wasn't up to scratch I forget what it had wrong with it but it wasn't going to be used enless the Japanese refused to surrender but would have taken 2 weeks to send after the last one, it had defects, work on a fifth was going on but they wouldn't have completed till the end of 1945 so basically 46 due to shortage and yes even the USA had them in ww2.
The USA didn't stat to produce nukes in the hundred's till 1949 to 1951 the USSR who also had a similar production rates didn't till 1956, so about 5/6 for the USA and 8 for Russia.
Production comparison and total stoke including tests.
Usa USSR
45=4
46=9
47=13
48=50
49=170 =1
50=299 =5
51=438 =25
52=841 =50
53=1,169 =120
54=1,703 =150
55=2,422 =200
56=3,692 =426
@@brianlong2334 Thanks very much, I read in a book on operational Downfall that the plans for invasion in 1946 that at least 200 nukes would have been produced then or planned for, am relying on memories over 15 or more years ago. I also read that there would be on some of the landings on the main islands again relying on memory massive multiple use of half a dozen or more nukes in tatical battlefield support of a singular landing on one of those main island.
I also know that the USA was using was using it mainy calthrons? less so chemical processing to separate out Pu to weapons grade quality & it was a massive electricity guzzler & relatively inefficent compared with centrifuges/later generations of hyper centrifuges & now laser enrichment on its 2nd generation. At that time centrifuge tech was not yet being used for separation of Pu, having just been aquired by the US from the 3rd Riech, like electron scanning microscopy. So the issue is that could the extant US Grid & electrical generators handle the electrical demands for the processing of of sufficent weapons grade Pu for 200 bomds in 1946. Historical interest, could the USA sustained the scale of war industrial output to 1946 or even mid 1947. Note not questioning that it will win against Imperial Japan, there was a lot of viable alternatives to nukes like mass use of lewsite (a form of Mustard gas easy to produce), anthrax, herbicides specially developed for directed use against millet/barley/rice, cutting of Sea lines of communication totally by mines, Subs, air & later probably near uncontested naval supremacy or just total destruction of all cornuburations of any meainful size from the operational commitment of scores if not hundreds of operation Meetinghouse equivalent on steroids alone in 1946. I know that in the case of available copper, certain hardwoods & softwoods production the limits were already reach in 1945. Would the Grid have held up then to output goals of 200 Pu bomds, could they have installed the generating capacity & feed it with coal to sustain sufficent weapons grade Pu output without centrifuges but only or primarily calthron use. Thanks again for the info.
1.6 billion kilowatt hours to produce 113 pounds of plutonium by july 1945. Fat man required approx 13 pounds 10 ounces of Pu. So the Pu available in July 1945 could have potenially yielded at least 8 nuclear bomds. So to produce 1 pound of weapon grade Pu using calthron tech it required 141.6 million kilowatt hour using calthrons. To produce 200 Pu bomds required 2,720 pounds of Pu assuming the same design was used, it would require just around 40 billion kilowatts hours of electricity in 1945 & 1946. So assuming my numbers are somewhat correct, the US projections that for operational Downfall it would churn out 200 nukes in 1946 assuming Centrifuge tech would not yet be significantly deployed. In 1944 the USA produced 228 billion kilowatt hours of electricity & in 1947 255 billion kilowatts of electricity. The greatly increase need for electricity could certainly be meet to some extent with a expansion of installed generation capacity but there would be certainly almost certainly have been brown outs or black outs in the Grid at times & a reduction of other armament/muntion output assuming priority to produce the 200 nukes. Methinks one of the reason why the USA did not go big on Pu production after WW2 to counter the Soviets was the constraint on electrical supply availability, the political decision was made not to upset the electorate after WW2 with brown outs & Black outs. It was thanks to the maturation & development of centrifuge tech that open the politically doable pathway to mass US production of nukes. The constraint then on US production of nukes in 1945 to 1947 would have been the Grid & available generation capacity & political cost or of political elite sensitivities to brown or black out imposed on electorate then. Thanks again for the correction of 50 nukes output or availability very much later.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 I believe some people made a mistake when reading, as the 200 from what I can find was an order by the USAA so Airforce in 1945, that they wanted that many by 1946 not that they could build that many, the leaders on the project told the government that only 7 would be available in 1946, and in reality they build 9.
From memory there was also some sort of shortages of somthing or delays of vital materials getting it to the USA.
There was also only like 2 teams of individuals who were trained to put the bombs together safely, with the 4th bomb having some kind of problem would indicate that you wouldn't want to start mass production just yet, as 1 in 4 would be dangerous.
Little David is no longer on display at APG. It's currently in storage with plans for future restoration. Meaning it's just going to get painted.
I was stationed in APG MD for school when I was in the Marines 1988 never knew what the big box was next to the Mortar tube on display.
Now I know it’s the base of the mortar.
Thanks.
It would cut down on accidental discharges, ...I mean it would be bloody difficult to accidentally shoot oneself while cleaning it. 😀
Impressive but no better than Atomic Annie in mobility
I wonder if it was scrapped or is it in a warehouse somewhere collecting dust
I believe it’s in a army museum
36000 pound mortars, fires at 6000 fps; makes craters Like On The Moon !!
knock knock ...it's dave man ...daves not home ...no man it's dave ...daves not home man
Everyone's tripping but damn we just drop them out the sky nowadays lol ☺
The term " Barking mad "....comes to mind...
It maybe the biggest Caliber but not the biggest round. The German Gun "Schwerer Gustav" hat a 80cm caliber and it was 7100kg heavy. It could fly up to 47km far and could go up to 32m into the ground or through 10m of concrete. The whole gun had a weight of 1350 tons. In comparison is little David really just little David
That's the difference between a mortar and an actual artillery gun. The Gustav was a monster of a artillery piece, and required a tremendous amount of manpower to even get where it was going as well as even more to operate and secure. Granted it was pretty much second to none at doing what it was designed to do, problem was it only did it a handful of times throughout the war.
For information, the German "Paris Gun" was known for its extreme range not its size; it ranged about 70 miles and was used for the propaganda story of "Germans shelling Paris". Other unmentioned monsters were the German Schwerer Gustav 60 cm railway gun and the Karl-Gerät 60 cm siege mortar. Of course with all the current civilian gun control politics, one could ask why governments were allowed to own these "assault weapons" as they're weapons of war and nobody should be allowed to own one of those... just be extorted to pay for them.
I believe the Schwerer Gustav gun was 80 cm (800 mm).
@@shadovanish7435 You're right - my mistake.
Is this known as big Bertha? If so after firing the barrel expanded and the next round was a larger diameter to compensate after a certain number firing stopped till it cooled and the same original first round started again
@@timlatte8302 Big Bertha was a German 420mm howitzer from World War I. The German people's tax-dollar at work.
@@timlatte8302 as far as i know they changed barrels after 6 or 8 shots i believe.
I could imagine a few scenarios in places like Vietnam where this little beast could have been employed to devastating effect collapsing underground bunkers in soft jungle soil but by that time most military people probably had no idea such a weapon even existed. Thanks to this channel for bringing to light such "lost" technology.
Really? “Most military people probably had no idea such a weapon even existed”? It was developed by the military. I’m pretty sure they still knew it existed 😂😂😂😂. Y’all got your clock cleaned by little brown men in pyjamas in Vietnam,I don’t think a bigger gun would’ve helped much. Didn’t do so well in North Korea or Afghanistan come to think of it.🤷
@@davidcat1455 Are you some kind of weirdo? Must be.
@@seektruth3307
American involvement in Vietnam happened less than 20 years after World War Two. My memory can clearly recall things that happened 20 years ago so I’m pretty sure there were people in the US Army who remembered these guns. America lost the Vietnam war. Bigly……..If pointing that out makes me a “weirdo” then I suspect you belong to the flat Earth society.
@@davidcat1455 Nah, I am fairly sure you have the flat earth market cornered. Especially if you think the Army, as a whole, knew about that weapon. I bet you didn't until you saw this video like everyone else. The VERY FEW who participated and were still alive 20 years later might have remembered but it is ridiculous to assume those in the military, in general, knew of this weapon that was NEVER employed in battle.
@@seektruth3307
General Westmorland was a artillery officer in World War II. But you probably didn’t know that.🤷 if you think that a capable commander with a ton of experience in available artillery was unaware of this “little beast’s” existence you really have fallen over the edge of your flat Earth.
I was stationed at APG from 92-95 it was there at that time on display along with the rail gun. They both were still there when I retired.
At a velocity of 1,600 pounds. The US literally will use anything except the metric system.
There's a practical use for this thing in making swimming pools.
holy crap that barrel seems THIN for that massive of a shell...