Battle of the Somme | The Great War | Instruments of Death (Part 1)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июн 2024
- For anyone travelling through these peaceful French towns and villages and looking out over these beautiful fields it’s almost impossible to imagine what happened here in 1916. The Somme, the very name epitomises the waste, futility, and the horror of The Great War. It was here on a battlefront stretching almost 16 miles that a floored battleplan of a great summer offensive, doomed a generation of young men. The figures beggar belief, 20,000 men killed on the first day alone. To make matters even worse, the same tactics that destroyed Kitchener’s Army were repeated time and again.
In this documentary we see and hear about the weapons that caused such carnage here on the Somme and throughout World War I. We’ll also hear about the grim realities of life and war in the trenches, and about the efforts of the medical core, who tried to deal with the awful wounds inflicted by the weapons of The Great War.
00:00 - Introduction
03:54 - Lee-Enfield - Bolt-Action Magazine-Fed Repeating Rifle
08:32 - The Western Front - Trench Warfare Conditions
14:37 - Trench Raids - Improvised Close Quarter Weaponry
17:45 - Testing the Bayonet, Club, and Knife
20:18 - Somme Valley - British and French Offensive
23:36 - Kitchener’s Army - Lions Led by Donkeys
25:03 - The Slow Advance to German Lines
27:20 - Lochnagar Crater - Scars of War
29:03 - No Mans Land - Allied Forces vs Maschinengewehr 08
31:11 - Vickers Heavy Machine Gun
35:39 - Royal Newfoundland Regiment Assault
37:11 - Medical Treatment of the Wounded
Watch part 2 of the documentary here - • Battle of the Somme | ...
Subscribe to Element 18 - bit.ly/337R2uO 
Наука
Watch part 2 of the documentary here - ruclips.net/video/j7AnhGRvV7U/видео.html
All Wars are Fake and you know it.
Does anyone else get the impression the man giving the demonstration on the bayonet is thinking of putting it through the interviewer?
Could I remind you of Captain Noel Chavasse VC and bar. He was not in your words "stupid enough" to venture into no mans land, but brave enough to rescue several wounded men.
There's often a very very fine line between stupidity and bravery.
Noel Chevasse was an accomplished surgeon, amongst other very commendable qualifications and qualities.
What is a man like that doing doing into no-man's land? That's what unqualified stretcher-bearers are for.
Training a surgeon and giving him experience takes many years. It takes mere days to train a stretcher bearer.
Chevasse's place was in a Regimental Aid Post or a Casualty Clearing Station where his skills could be put to best use. By so doing, he could have saved hundreds of more lives.
Undoubtedly a brave man but, not the best at seeing the bigger picture.
He is still remembered in Liverpool his native city , rest in peace captain Noel Chavasse
@@michaelohare2928 I agree wholehearedly.
@@michaelohare2928 I went to the same school as him, Magdalen College School Oxford. He was there a bit before me though!
An ancestor of mine, Ernest Luke Moss, 1st Batallion Somerset Light Infantry, was one of those killed on that first day of the Battle of the Somme. 28 years old, so might have been thought of as 'old' by many of his fellow soldiers. Still far too young to die. R.I.P.
No known grave, I believe he is commemorated on the Thiepval Memorial.
When they had the 100th anniversary remembrance in London, with the near 20,000 names listed and small figurines to represent the fallen, my mother made a trip to see it, tracked down his name and paid her respects.
Industrial slaughter rip all those brave men
@@joanofarc708War is the Physical End to Ideological differences, nothing more nothing less. Keep that in mind as you look around the rock floating in space. As an American I'm horrified at what we are doing in Ukraine because after 20 years and giving a certain group trillions in equipment the War Mongers got Biden elected because Trump made it clear he wasn't doing the war thing. Honestly every politician should be required to go to the front lines and see how quickly we learn to "talk things out".
Jesus , the hand to hand combat expert was like the grim reaper 😵
I love watching the documentary, Apocalypse, about WW1. I think it's the best WW1 documentary.
Excellent presentation!
😂
Kevin Hicks has a great channel - would recommend!
Hes a lot more lively & enjoyable to listen to in his own show now his older than he was back in early 2000s when this was filmed
I thought it was him, recognised the voice instantly! 😂
Yep, Kevin's channel is brilliant 👏
I enjoy watching documentries about Britain in WW1 and spotting the archive footage of the American soildiers. 24:41 - 24:43 for example
It's good to see these young men today learning. Maybe we can continue teaching children today. War is hell. 21st century and we still go to war. Ridiculous us stupid humans.
My grandfather was involved in this battle. He died of a heart attack shortly after he received a notice from the "old mans draft" during WW2.
'its taken a whole side of the chunk out of it" WoW I think we can see that for ourselves !! "The bullets gone in and it's just gone "Puuuuugh " The level of insight from the interviewer is amazing. What would we do without his insightful commentary? We wouldn't know what had happened to that watermelon after it was shot at with 303 Lee Enfield.
He isn't everybody's cup of tea, I guess. Also, not exactly the reluctant type. Bit of a poser. But the overall info was well presented.
You can continue to whine like a pansy little bch or just sht the fk up, I don't know. I'm not nearly as bitter and lonesome as you, so whatever floats your boat, or raft is more akin to you.
Yeah, he does that overhyping thing as if none of us have attention spans and need constant stimulation. Not really my cup a tea. Best WW1 docs in my opinion describe in general what's going on and then use narrated letters from the combatants. Nothing wrong with this doc it's just not very focused.
I just learned the Dr Chevassewas also an Olympic athlete and awarded the victoria cross twice!! An amazing man....im american so i had to look him up...i find him quite impressive and im glad this documentary brought me to him.
I've never seen a grown man so amazed that a military rifle caliber bullet could destroy a watermelon.
It's like he was a sissy and couldn't fathom what a firearm actually does. Playing with little sticks is different than being hit with a projectile going 2400 feet per second. It's not the entry would that's brutal. It's the exit wound and the vacuum from the speed that turns you inside out.
Sissy little British man would faint if he held a rifle.
What about a grown woman?
What about a grown Trans person ?
I have actually owned a couple of those .303 Enfield or in America it's called .303 "British" lol and it happens to be top top notch sporting rifle and will make a particularally ghastly wound when taking down large game animals
There was letter somewhat lost to time that was written by one of my family that was in France, it was mostly about how awful everything was but he did highly praise the Enfield Rifle
Nobody alive understands just how bad it was.
You said this Lee -Enfield was first available in 1895? Was it used in the ANGLO BOER WAR (1899-1902)?
There is some weird, uneasy tension between the bayonet guy and the host at 18:19.
Die Geschichte wird vom Sieger geschrieben! Warum hatten die britischen Truppen solch hohe Verluste. Die Verteidiger waren auch gute Soldaten . Insgesamt war es aber traurig wie sich die Soldaten gegenseitig abgeschlachtet haben!
Germany shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
The English should not have been there in the first place. What were they doing in France?
Defending France, of course, having been invited to do so.
@@AF-vm6xxFrankreich und England waren sich damals einig Deutschland das wirtschaftlich zu stark wurde zu vernichten. Dafür opferten sie ihre eigenen Männer. England und Frankreich wurden immer schwächer und hatten ihre Koloniale Macht verloren.
@@butidonthaveaname6543
Defending France? Since 1905 the English had a Secret Military treaty with France. In essence they wanted to destroy an oeconomic rival. The Resultat was, they created a New Super Power the USA.....
They have a museum outside Newtownards in CO Down it has lots of the trench weapons soldiers would use in the raids ,,my dad's both grandfathers we're in the 36th Ulster Division,God rest the souls of all who never got home ☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️
That is a beautiful enfield.
Meh...I'm not an expert on SMLE military scope mounts, but it appears to have had a nonmilitary scope mounted to it, likely for hunting post war. SMLE
Also, while it was originally made in 1913, the rifle is not in original condition. Its had the mag disconnect removed, has a post ww1 stock and has a type B cooking piece which weren't introduced until late 1916. British rifles were commonly "FTR'ed" or rearesenaled over their many years of service, but for a show like this they should have put the effort into demonstrating one that would be correct for the time period.
That bloke on the range didnt have the first clue what he was talking about, "mushrooming" isnt a thing its called a tumbling round, the presenter's rate of fire was actually quite good
I am back there again on my own in September. Will be my 4th time in a year (been more than that). I cannot afford a home there sadly (i tried to buy last year in Guillemont).
I’m not a gun person so I’m asking: what are the differences between the Enfield and a Springfield?
I absolutely luv the British Lee Enfield Mark III Bolt Action 10 Round Rifle, it is a truly magnificent work of military simplicity, precision, and reliability.
Unfortunately the German Vickers machine gun could fire tens of thousands of rounds in a short period of time, which is why the British and Common Wealth Allied Soldiers on 1July 1916, first day of the battle of the Somme were totally decimated, as Gen Haig, who did not have accurate intelligence, if any at all, about the effects of his artillery bombardment that successfully destroyed the German barbed wire and the Germans themselves, hence his order to go over the top and walk to the German enemy trenches was so needlessly tragic.
If gatlings had seen use in any real numbers in the american civil war, the results would have been catastrophic. However, the leaders of the time were wary of even early lever action guns because they use too much ammo too quickly and they had supply issues as it was. Concepts like fire superiority and covering fire were not yet fully understood, there was more focus on marksmanship and volley fire. There was, however, great interest in breech loaded single shot rifles, and many early designs were produced saw use on the battlefield by both sides which helped push firearms technology forward, from powder and ball muzzleloaders to metallic case breech loaders in less than 5 years, setting the stage for the wild west era.
I have a problem with interviewer's glee using the Vickers....
Bit more attention to firearms safety. You appear to be handling a cocked 303 with a magazine of live ammo.
British are so bad with gun safety/gun handling. They seem to take it so seriously but don't have the expirence and exposure necessary to really master gun safety. Even their military is like this.
@@rickyspanish9002 They're bad with everything else, too. Like winning wars, holding onto territory, enforcing their own borders. You name it.
its not that bad.
Good vid - thanks for posting. Sorry for nitpicking, but the place that you call "New-FOUND-lund" does not exist and never has. "New-fund-LAND", however, does. Britain's oldest colony, the Dominion of Newfoundland raised a battalion on their own tab at the beginning of the war - said battalion was sent to Gallipoli where it became part of a regular British army division, the 29th (not all units involved on 1 July were Kitchener Army outfits).
The 'Newfies' were the battalion next in line to my great uncle on 1st. July. He managed to get forward about 100 yards beyond their jumping off point before falling. He hung on the German wire for three months before his body was recovered and buried.
We will remember them.
I had a cousin who was wounded at Beaumont-Hamel, luckily for him he survived the war and is buried here in Newfoundland, unfortunately my Great x2 Granduncle was killed at Bailleul in April on 1918 and his body was never found after the war.
19 mines were blown on July 1st and the barrage before July 1st was 7 days not 5
The Germans actually pulled back slightly to give themselves the high dry ground when the trenching extent became evident.
Immediately upon being thrust out from my mother’s womb, I was next thrust into the world of medieval jousting and historical weapon performances.
British rifle was undoubtibly the best weapon in it's class during WWI.
You should have mentioned the 'dum dums' they filed the point off the .303 rnd,it would absolutely destroy anything it hit,used on particularly nasty Huns,like 'Sturmtruppen'
18:06 I had a feeling thats exactly how that guy would handle a fire arm.. jesus
England clearly left the best of its manhood on the fields of WWI and WWII. I own an Enfield no 1 MkIII 2a3 made in Rifle Factory Ishapore in 1968. It's chambered in .308 and shoots like a dream. It's certainly nothing to be frightened of as long as you're on the operating end. Even at age 72, I can empty the magazine in less than 30 seconds.
Does the presenter have german ancestors? The name "Ude" rings a bell. Erich Ude, the fighter ace, from WW2. I wonder if they are related.
"you can see how really lethal this weapon was" No shit sherlock !! That's what I call very informative ....I looking at a watermelon that is in pieces. I think I can work this one out for myself.
I’d love to watch the East
The behavior of the generals was nothing short of criminal. They should have had to lead from the front.
Interestingly, a surprisingly large number of Generals did exactly that- hence why so many of them were killed, and why they had to be ordered not to expose themselves unnecessarily. It is obviously absurd to suggest that leaders should do frontline fighting, that would be wholly negligent and displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how armies work- and I am sure you are not suggesting that.
One would hardly expect the Chairman of Tesco to be serving at a checkout every day, or the Captain of the Titanic stoking coal in the engine room.
My great uncle and namesake was killed at the Somme. His name is forever memorialized on the Thiepville memorial.
Thiepval
Anybody else wince at the the guy demonstrating shooting the Smelly "squeezing" that trigger?
you don't anyway. messes with the aim.
😢
Presenter was enjoying that machine gun a bit too much. x
I wish I could be invincible and fight it every war in history
wao
Enjoyed most of this but not sure how much you engaged with the details here and rather went in for the more salacious aspects. You say Kitchener’s army “was destroyed” but it wasn’t anything of the kind. Casualties were heavy but 20,000 dead and 40,000 wounded out of about 160,000 men who took part on day one was hardly total destruction.
You also don’t mention the successes in the south, and the fact that the offensive played a major part in an attritional success that played a major part in wearing down the Germans. It also led to the development and progression of the British army to win the war within two years.
Tactically, you also don’t address the fact that different battalions attacked in different ways in different formations. The troops were not all ordered to advance slowly. See 4 Division for example who used skirmish formations and were in no man’s land before zero hour. Other examples too.
It’s “pick-er-Dee” by the way not “pic-ard-Dee”.
Thanks for the video.
Your twice as fast if you're a left handed shooter
SHORT bursts my friend. SHORT BURSTS! PLEASE! ITS AN ANTIQUE SIR!
The biggest cannon of the war, MLE 400mm, played a huge part on this battle ---> find the story here:ruclips.net/video/leqoJy5WujU/видео.html
Long on talk, short on facts.
Not much about the Somme more about the weapons of WW1..
So, the presenter did the equivalent of Cosplay, and due to his "Interest" he is a military arms expert. Right.
He's a retired RMP WO1 who spent years working in the Tower on public duties and managing the museum small arms.
You mean LARP:)
Jeepers Creepers that’s scary
I am at minute 8 of the video and not sure if I should continue. This giddy happiness while playing with the remains of what represented an human head for their shooting experiment is really off putting. Its really surprising for me, because I am used to more analytic and content british historians. Sorry, but that kind of behaviour is really sick. War is not fun, (thats the whole premise of the video I would hope), and it starts with little boys having fun about a gun that makes heads explode...
Shock value only seen better on netflix
There must be an easier way to slice up a melon than charging at it on a horse and hitting it with a sword. I haven't even got a horse so I have to buy melon pre-cut into cubes which is more expensive
Sod the pointy stick. Best close quarter weapon was the entrenching shovel.
OK Rambo
@@snowflakemelter1172seems your history is a little lacking buddy.... hes completely on point, the European style entrenching tool (the spade type like the Germans (and others) carried in both worlds wars) was probably the best CQB weapon, and one of the most favored. Its well documented how much hand to hand occurred (likely more than in any other modern war) and there is much written about weapons that were favored for it. Entrenching tools were at the top of the list, followed by various war clubs.
He isn't trying to be Rambo, merely demonstrating that he reads more than you do. Sorry to melt your snowflake bro.
@@rickyspanish9002 like either of you have ever done any CQB 🤣
@@snowflakemelter1172 lol as it so happens I have lol. Certainly not hand to hand, but room clearing and house to house, for sure.
@@rickyspanish9002 airsoft.
Human insanity!!!
15:37 you see that moose statue in the back? That for the b’ys ! “Better than the best”
That Polodude wouldnt have lasted one day out there. Sorry. Facts interesting though. The Vickers is just a thing of beauty, no matter what it does.
Terrible slaughter rip all those men
The Short Magazine Lee Enfield was not adopted by the british army until 1902.
You are wrong yourself Short magazine Lee-Enfield Mk I 1904-1926 In service A shorter and lighter version of the original MLE-the Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield or SMLE (sometimes spoken as "Smelly," rather than "S-M-L-E")-was introduced on 1 January 1904. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee-Enfield stop correcting others when you can't get it right yourself The video doesn't say SMLE in 1895 it just said "Lee-Enfield" which is correct Magazine Lee-Enfield 1895-1926
@@pvtjohntowle4081
Don't get your magazine in a twist fella.
Such rapid fire with the LE was achieved because the 2nd finger was used to pull the trigger, whilst the thumb & 1st finger manipulated the bolt action.
Very correct this is the technique to fire super rapidly, but the length of the bolt and the locking mechanism of it also significantly aide speed
No it was not achieved that way.
Yes, the Lee-Enfield CAN be fired like that and some modern RUclips shooters find it easier to do it that way, but for well-trained troops there was no need.
It is an anachronism and rarely, if ever, employed by British and Commonwealth troops during the First World War.
In fact, rapid fire wasn't designed to be all that rapid - faster than normal, but still utilising all the principles of marksmanship, as the soldier had to be accurate as well as reasonably fast. They would be expected to fire 15 rounds, at a Second Class Figure target at 300 yards within one minute, starting with one round in the chamber and 4 in the magazine. You have to get a move-on, sure, but it is quite achieveable using the standard shooting technique and employing all the marksmanship principles without daisying around with your middle finger. I have done it myself without too much difficulty.
The middle finger technique was first described in Weapons Training Memorandum no. 7 (published in 1944) as an alternative to standard hip firing for CQB situations. The description however contains an important caveat that states:
"It must be clearly understood that the methods are intended for use at very short ranges only. 40 yards can be taken as an absolute maximum. At ranges beyond this, to obtain reasonable accuracy, the normal method of of shooting must be employed."
@@robertstallard7836 LOL. I was actually told by someone who served in the trenches as a rifleman during WW1 that they did this. I suppose you are yet another American 'expert' in everything and yet know nothing?
@@lorenzbroll0101 No. Actually a British historian, battlefield guide and regular shooter of a range of firearms, including the SMLE, as well as a former soldier. I've also studied the sources pretty extensively.
As I said, it was a technique that was "rarely, if ever, used". That's not to say it WASN'T used! Name the most weird and wonderful way of doing anything, and someone, somewhere will probably have done it!
Indeed, in demonstration shoots for young soldiers in training, where instructors would shoot 30+ rounds just to show it could be done, they probably did so (and also polished the inside of the chargers!) but it was by no means common and certainly not taught.
There are no contemporary photographs nor accounts of it being used - if it was commonplace, then there probably would be.
To summarise - the rapid rate of fire was not achieved because they used that technique. It was achieved because they they were disciplined, highly practiced and skilled, and had a firearm designed to allow it to be done.
@@robertstallard7836 It might not have been 'taught' but it was frequently done when a heavy fusillade was required. Due to the design of the LE bolt action. It was something that the Germans could not do with their rifles by the way.
My great uncle was killed in this hell battle.his body not found.
My great uncle was gassed at the second battle of ypres. Luckily some of his effects, a medal and his boot with the I'd number stamped into it well part of the boot, was amazing to hold it knowing where it had been.....
the syrup is almost as shocking
A Lee Enfield rifle in a platoon defense is devastating fire onto German infantry attacking a British position. The German Mauser is just as effective in a defensive position like the Americans found out against the Spanish and the British in the Boer War. In the US Military we have a saying. The King of Battles is Artillery and the Queen of Battles is the Infantry. As in all wars the artillery produces the most casualties and infantry holds the ground that artillery has fired upon. The Queen tells where the King needs to put his balls on. Machineguns with the infantry is the equalizer to any infantry attacking but artillery in rapid fire with the same caliber or sightly bigger, it just delivers more bullets and death in an area target at rifle range in support of their infantry riflemen. Known as the Devil's Paint Brush by British soldiers or the Essence of Infantry as the Germans called it. All casualty producing weapons and very deadly. We can see it now in the fighting in Ukraine against the Russians with trench warfare and artillery duels but in modern times that WWI style trench systems but with more fluid combat action. We are seeing in Ukraine what WWI would be like with 21st century use of drones, satellite imagery, and GPS location systems. The basic infantryman has to fight with his rifle and equipment issued to him. Honestly wars are never going to end as long as other human beings are always going to disagree.
US wasn’t involved in the boer war
He stated against the Spanish
Interesting thensimilarities between WW1 and the Ukraine conflict.
Funny how the French Generals pledged to defend Verdun to the “last drop of blood”…just not their blood..
Look at the casualty list of the French. Now look at how stupid your comment is.
Putting a general in the front line would be stupid.
@@snowflakemelter1172 The politicians responsible for the wars should go into the trenches, that would be the right decision. And for the generals, too, the enlisted men were just numbers!
Sounds like zelensky
@@seitenwind7940 many generals started off as junior officers involved in previous wars, where they proved their courage.
Why didn’t they hang General Haig?
Before condemning Haig, you should really study more and take into account all the factors. Read proper history books, don’t just follow the uninformed headline grabbers.
ruclips.net/video/NJ5zaRQJj6s/видео.html&ab_channel=TheWesternFrontAssociation
@@jackthebassman1 But Haig had nothing but contempt for the enlisted solder. Coming from a Cavalry background he had no understanding on how modern infantry (for 1915) tactics had evolved. His failings that turned into offensives failing to meet objectives were put down to cowardice and a lack of backbone from the infantry on the ground. Take a look at his track record when it comes to in field and Courts Martial and summary executions. He also canvased the ANZAC high command on numerous occasions to bring in the death penalty for cowardice and desertion in the face of the enemy. In that respect the ANZACS cared more about their troops than Haig ever did.
@@anthonycollingridge970 - "But Haig had nothing but contempt for the enlisted solder." - Hogswallop. His staff had to dissuade him from visiting the wounded in hospital, because they saw how much it distressed him.
"...he had no understanding on how modern infantry (for 1915) tactics had evolved." - Neither did any of the other generals in 1915.
Regarding courts martial and the death penalty for cowardice: This was one of the means in every army at the time for maintaining discipline and good order, and every soldier knew it. Executions happened, but they were anything but summary (hence the bit about Courts Martial - every accused man was given full opportunity to mount a proper defence with a legal team whose job it was to do their best to get the man acquitted). I don't like it either, and full kudos to the ANZACs for refusing to do it, but that's how armies of the time functioned.
Because he played a huge part in winning the war and was well-liked by the troops. More people (most of them old soldiers) turned up for his funeral that did for Churchill's.
"Oh! What a Lovely War", Blackadder and the War poets aren't documentaries, you know!
You’re fascinated. But you never did it…
It is a cliche that first world war generals were stupid. That is not true but the glorious luminescence of hindsight.
The first months of the war and the last were characterised by manoeuvre, but once the trenches formed a continuous line from the North Sea to the Swiss border, there was no other way to attack the enemy except by frontal assault.
The entirely new character of war meant that like everyone else, the Generals had to go through a learning experience. The lessons of 1915 taught them the importance of a preliminary artillery bombardment and the Somme was characterised by a week long preparatory barrage. It was expected that there would be no Germans left. That turned out to be false.
More lessons were learned in 1917. New weapons like tanks developed and employed Messines and the opening phases of Third Ypres were successful. Then it started to rain. .Cambrai was initially a great success for the tanks. Church bells were rung in England, but there was a failure to consolodate and the ground was lost to German counter attacks.
By 1918, everything was in place for the Battle of Amiens, 'the black day of the German army'. Australian General Monash had tried out the combined arms tactics on a smaller scale a month before at Le Hamel. The Australian and Canadian Cops spearheaded the attack on August 8. The Hundred day advance of open warfare began and ended with the armistice.
It must also be recognised that while the bloody battles of 1916 and 1917 had not produced the hoped for breakthrough, and turned into battles of attrition, they had depleted the German army, which unlike the allies, could not replace the losses.
The "Lions led by donkeys" trope is starting to wear thin with me. It's worth considering that the British Army of 1916 was about 10X the size of what it had been in 1914. There was a desperate need of officers and NCO's to lead them, and many - including generals - found themselves in positions of authority far beyond what the Army could prepare them for in such a short time frame (and far beyond what more than a few of them were capable of). Many of them - including generals - were KIA; many were demoted or sent home; those that were left got on with their new jobs as best they could, and somehow managed to lead to victory the only army in the field that was capable of winning the war in 1918.
The Balfour-Declaration, which was signed in november 1917 between the british foreign minister Balfour and Lord Rothschild had the purpose to get the USA into the war. It was a very dirty deal.
dangerous to have that loaded rifle shame should know better.
The British troops that knew it was suicide to jump out of the trenches and run right into the same old crap, over and over again because of the generals, got shot and killed by the brass if they didn’t get out.
After the first few were shot and killed, then listed British troops knew they would be shot and killed in the trenches just being shot once or twice , 😊but it was better to be shot and killed by then they have their head the volume to smithereens like what they saw on the battlefield?.
Maxim was an American
I’ll take the M1903
please no dub steppy tunes
Ironically the current British machine gun we use today the GPMG has a range at indirect fire with a C2 sight of 2500 meters. The old Vickers had 3000. Really?
Indirect fire is a loose term, and while the 303 is slightly beefier than a 7.62, both weapons at both ranges are really only going to marginally effect area denial fire. I would gander Training and doctrine is where this range diffrence lies; the reduction in range is less due to the ability of the round to travel to that distance and more to do with that its not the best use of resources to engage targets at 2.5 or 3 km away, especially considering the modern british military's habit of carrying a very limited number of rounds into battle.
@@rickyspanish9002 A British soldier in Afghanistan carried 1000 rounds of Ammunition. Plus the lads in that section carried some belts on them. That whays a ton.
@@aaronwilkinson8963 Each soldier carried 1000 rounds? No Way. Most US rifleman carried 10-14 mags maybe a few more, so that's 300-420 rounds. Our 249 guys (FN minimi, 5.56) typically carried 6-800 rounds. Our 240s (MAG58) stayed mounted in Iraq, but i know in Afghanistan each member of a 240 crew carried 300-400 rounds and dispersed more amongst the platoon. Im having trouble believing anyone is humping 1000 rounds of 7.62x51. That's just shy of 70lbs. Plus the 25 lbs of a 240 with accessories. Plus water, med supplies, grenades, nods, body armour, helmet and sustainment gear? Must be one hell of a gym rat. Maybe 1000 rounds split between the gun crew, but each gunner humping that much? Idk man.
I'm not trying to bust stones, I do seruously love the british military, but you guys did develop a reputation for going on patrol light on ammo. Maybe your platoon was the exception, but your government is definitely stingy when it comes to rounds.
@@aaronwilkinson8963.....1000 rounds????....someone's been spinning you a tall tale buddy
@rickyspanish9002 sounds about right...I remember at the height of warfighting in Iraq in 2004 we carried 4-6 magazines 5.56...a bandolier a couple of grenades and at times a box of rounds for the minimi.
In a rifle section(squad) you may have a manoeuvre support group consisting of a GPMG(M240) 7.62 and that section will help carry its ammo too( usually 200 rds per man broken into 100rd belts.
The buzzword is 'manoeuvre' the need to move fast to get into a position to give cover fire for suppression for an assault,extraction so carrying 1000 rds?....i don't think so.
unfortunately, the guy in the videos showing the weapons seems too juvenile to present a subject of this seriousness.
He seems to go pale faced when that other guy starts to demonstrate the weapons on a lump of pork, though?
I’d have found it worse if he pretended to know anything about it. I think it is better that he is naive to these things just as the majority of the audience are. Just my tuppence worth.
Own a Enfield and will drop an Texas Hog and white tail deer. The rilfe is over hundred years old.
So can a black powder rifle circa 300+ years old.
What's your point?
👨🏫👩🏫"Those *(0.01%'ers)* who *_instigate, promote & prolong_* the endless amount of *Wars & Conflicts,* contemporarily & throughout History..... _Never _*_FlGHT_* in them."
(that job is left to the ordinary. hard-working everyday middle/lower-class *_Citizen;_* 👷♂👨🚀👨🍳💂♀👮♂ who, until very recently, didn't or couldn't *_know any better_* ... But never-the-less, they end up doing *_ALL_*_ of the _*_FlGHTlNG_* ... & indeed; *_DYlNG_* (* on our "Leaders" behalf) 🪖💀⛑💀🎖
††††† 🥀Lest We Forget Their Brave & Nobel *_SACRlFlCE._* 🥀†††††
"There's little _REAL _*_Justice_* to be found today, unless you Stand Up & Demand it."
19,240 British dead not 20,000, why round it up? Sloppy research ? Fyi 57470 British casualties suffered on the first day of the battle is often rounded up to 60,000 for no good reason other than exaggeration for effect. Accurate figures exist use them.
WHEN WAS THE WAR AGAINST WATER MELONS🍉🍉😢😢😢
30,000 + men died on the first of July 1916, Many from Canada, many from Newfoundland.
20,000 - about 300 or so dead from Newfoundland, yes - but none from Canada. The Canadians didn't get involved on the Somme until much later in the battle.
Good God why does this man look absolutely dumb workng that brit bolt gun.
The soldier loved the Lee Enfield? I don’t suppose the soldier being hit from a round from it would have loved it so much. What crass statements people make.
If you were carrying it, not facing it.
@@thomasbrennan6303 You understand that the people they were shooting at were soldiers as well, yes?
@@marishiten5944 No that's news to me.
Rock music combined over such a somber videonis bad editing imo
Poor sods knew. If the didn't walk into the German machine gun fire.
They would definitely be shot.
The only chance they had. Was to walk forward and hope the Germans missed.
As their own firing squad would not!
Bravery? Really? Poor sods.
"Completely Mullered It" please speak in normal English, not slang English we are not all from pommy land.
Normal English wouldn't even exist, as language is a continuum not a ladder and dialects exist, furthermore English comes from England VIA their Germanic Anglo Saxon ancestors, who them came from North Germany and Denmark. Now, shush it. You're ignorant and probably obese.
Mr Jon Baker is no expert on the vickers and clearly isnt the brightest bulb..
One million rounds through a single vickers in one day??? Not even remotely possible. Not even close. The vickers, if properly set, fires 500 rounds a minute. Do a little math and you realize if you had an unlimited belt and fired at full capacity for every single second of a 24 hour period, you would only manage 720,000 rounds. Of course this wouldn't be possible as not only do you have to stop to reload and refill water, but a vickers barrel life is only 10k rounds under normal use, and will be drastically shortened by sustained fire. While the barrel can be changed (its not a modern quick change barrel, it requires a full disassembly) running an MG sustained like that, even a watercooled one, generates an intense amount of heat that makes disassembly and reassembly extremely difficult. This heat also rapidly wears down smaller parts of the MG like springs, extractors, ejectors, sears, pawls, etc., that are likewise next to impossible to repair/replace when the weapon is hit enough to light cigarettes off of. This isnt to mention the amount of fouling that would occur from running that many rounds. A further complication of the heat is once the gun is hot enough, rounds start to cook off and the gun "runs away" firing on its own. Id be surprised if many MGs ever fired more than 25000 rounds in one day..
Just for fun refrence, 1 million rounds of vickers ammo in crates would weigh 48.5 tons, and you would need over 3000 pints of water. Just imagine the pile of spent brass!!!
Additionally he seems very concerned with our presenter shooting short bursts, which further demonstrates his ignorance on how to correctly operate a belt fed machine gun. They are not designed to fired in short bursts as doing so wears down the firing mechanism, specifically the sear, and once that becomes worn down the gun "runs away" continuing to fire after the funner has leg go of the trigger mechanism. The vickers manual specifically states that the gun is to always be fired in bursts of 25 rounds for this very reason.
This Jon guy is a bit of a clown and shoukd really learn what hes talking about before he tries to present himself as an authority on a subject.
Perhaps the presenter would be better off traveling to America where he can find people better qualified in the subject of firearms handling
Crying about a TV show. 😂
Get of the internet and go for a walk..
@@snowflakemelter1172 Watching how horrible british people are with firearms does make me want to cry.
@@13infbatt interestingly I wrote this pn a walk.. with your wife... she likes to go on a stroll after we're finished in the bedroom
@@rickyspanish9002 pegging.
Sad, all this mutilation just because grown men can't sit around a table and sort something out. Moreover, all this carnage for the honour and prestige of Keiser Wilhelm and other "leaders".
Try negotiating with Hitler and Tojo…😏
@@francopasta3704 That was exactly my point.
Sadly that’s just too simple an argument for an extremely complex situation, try reading up proper history books, not just headline grabbers.
@@jackthebassman1 I have read plenty of history books and will continue to do so in future. However, nothing changes the basic premise that man is inherently selfish and lives by the ethos “I want more”. Man will never be satisfied with what he has and will therefore e.g. mobilize 3 million German men in 1941 to invade the Soviet Union because he wants “Lebensraum”. The same can be said of the Greeks, Romans etc. Why can’t people be satisfied with what they have and just live in peace? It really is that simple.
Well the thing is they didn’t want to sit around and talk it out! They all wanted a war… to be a leader of a Great War, to be remembered in history as victors of a war… like napoleon etc… the problem was the weapons had not been used before….. and the cost was so high… they really probably just went to hell…. Nothing honourable or victorious or great about this war. 😢
Die Französischen Generäle waren besonders Skrupellos
Mushroom? Expanding musicians will not used during World War I having been outlawed. (Yes the were exceptions) I'm not quite sure how they managed to pull together quite such a number of ill-informed misguided presenters but there you are.
I understand that the intention is to convey the gravitas of such weapons on people unfamiliar with them and on the battle itself that's no excuse poor content and inaccurate information.
That weapons except looks like a proper psychopath! He probably dreams of being on the Somme every night 🤦🏻♂️and loving it !
Thats a fairly rude thing to say. Dude struck me more as someone who spent too much time in the military and guess what a quick check of his LinkedIn showed??