Loved that. Just been reading Middlebrook's Schweinfurt book. The B-17s on that raid were carrying 4,500 .50cal machine guns between them. But this vid shows how difficult it was for air gunners. Unfortunately the fighters attacking the un-escorted Schweinfurt raid used head-on attacks. So the air gunners couldn't bring their guns to bear at all. They (and the crew) could only sit and wait and pray very hard indeed. 60 B-17s were lost in that disaster.
These training videos were excellent, especially given the age of most of the recruits. These were kids, fresh out if high school, they watched cartoons, read comic books, and played sports, so the various services learned quickly that if you prrsented to necessary information like it was advanced trigonometry, it wasnt going to stick. Hollywood could make these training films by the ton for any topic. And they worked. These young kids learned, and didnt just fall asleep in class. For all their other beurocratic faults, the services learned how to adapt as they fought for real and put that to work teaching each new group of recruits. Thanks for sharing these with us.
Or, like my Grandfather a waist gunner serving in the ETO, dyslexic. This matched his learning style. He was an intelligent man, though he had a hard time reading.
Ah...my uncle became a waist gunner on a B-17. He was about seventeen years old then. They were all so young. My dad, a USN Aviation Machinist's Mate, who had joined the USNR at fifteen, was nineteen when called to active duty early in 1941. Thinking about it, he must have been about eighteen when he served aboard a four-stacker Clemson-class destroyer "inviting" German ships to get away from the US Atlantic coast during the summer of 1940...a "reserves training cruise". So these gunners were not much older than the paper-boys that the film mentions.
I'm building a B17G model kit right now so have been soaking up any info I come across. This is a little out of the norm and not totally relevant but interesting none the less. Hats off to those men who maned those guns, I'm sure no amount of imagination can begin to fathom the true reality of those moments in the air.
Eeh, so-so. These aren't stationary weapons with recoilless mounts, so it was more a game of 'spray and pray'. Bombers rarely flew out of formation, and a formation of bombers would have several gunners all targeting the same plane. There's also less air resistance at high altitude, so you're looking at a 'flatter' trajectory all things considered.
Great video, but interesting that it doesn't include any compensation for gravity and the resultant bullet drop. What kind of ranges are we talking for the 0.50 cal to be effective? 300 yds or less?
Out of effective range 800 yds is 2,400 ft. Average bullet speed is _about_ 2,400 ft/sec so time of flight is _about_ 1 second at 800 yds, 1/2 sec at 400 yds, 1/4 sec at 200 yds. S = UT +- 1/2 A T squared. Initial falling speed U is zero so UT is zero. 1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared (4.9) by 1 squared seconds (1) is _about_ 5 metres, 16.5 feet for 800 yds. 1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared by 1/2 squared seconds (1/4) is about 1.25 metres, 4.1 feet for 400 yds. 1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared by 1/4 squared seconds (1/16) is about 0.63 metres, 2.1 feet for 200 yds. It will be a bit more because of the bullet slowing but that will be much less than at sea level, there is about a 300 knot true airspeed tail wind on the bullets and the air density at 30,000 feet would have fallen by about 70%.
The paperboy analogy is sobering. It wasn’t long ago in these brave young men’s lives that they were paperboys….
Loved that. Just been reading Middlebrook's Schweinfurt book. The B-17s on that raid were carrying 4,500 .50cal machine guns between them. But this vid shows how difficult it was for air gunners. Unfortunately the fighters attacking the un-escorted Schweinfurt raid used head-on attacks. So the air gunners couldn't bring their guns to bear at all. They (and the crew) could only sit and wait and pray very hard indeed. 60 B-17s were lost in that disaster.
These training videos were excellent, especially given the age of most of the recruits.
These were kids, fresh out if high school, they watched cartoons, read comic books, and played sports, so the various services learned quickly that if you prrsented to necessary information like it was advanced trigonometry, it wasnt going to stick. Hollywood could make these training films by the ton for any topic. And they worked. These young kids learned, and didnt just fall asleep in class.
For all their other beurocratic faults, the services learned how to adapt as they fought for real and put that to work teaching each new group of recruits.
Thanks for sharing these with us.
Or, like my Grandfather a waist gunner serving in the ETO, dyslexic. This matched his learning style. He was an intelligent man, though he had a hard time reading.
This is history these have to be preserved 😊
I knew they had to lead the target, but it didn't occur to me until now the right reason why. Interesting!
Ah...my uncle became a waist gunner on a B-17. He was about seventeen years old then. They were all so young. My dad, a USN Aviation Machinist's Mate, who had joined the USNR at fifteen, was nineteen when called to active duty early in 1941. Thinking about it, he must have been about eighteen when he served aboard a four-stacker Clemson-class destroyer "inviting" German ships to get away from the US Atlantic coast during the summer of 1940...a "reserves training cruise". So these gunners were not much older than the paper-boys that the film mentions.
I'm building a B17G model kit right now so have been soaking up any info I come across. This is a little out of the norm and not totally relevant but interesting none the less. Hats off to those men who maned those guns, I'm sure no amount of imagination can begin to fathom the true reality of those moments in the air.
Watching this cause it helps me win in war thunder.
The animation bears the distinct mark of Warner Bros. loony tunes style.
11:53 - 4) Suppressing Fire!
Absolutely terrifying!
When you say remastered what processing exactly do you do on them. Thanks.. AI restoration?
Yes, AI upscaling for modern tv’s and monitors, clip centering on the focus of the event, and audio cleanup. Still learning the ropes.
@@ArmouredCarriers Excellent what software are you using please?
@@ArmouredCarriers Stop cropping please, it destroys the original presentation.
No comment on the drop of the bullets during flight. Was that a factor at the usual ranges?
Eeh, so-so. These aren't stationary weapons with recoilless mounts, so it was more a game of 'spray and pray'. Bombers rarely flew out of formation, and a formation of bombers would have several gunners all targeting the same plane. There's also less air resistance at high altitude, so you're looking at a 'flatter' trajectory all things considered.
Great video, but interesting that it doesn't include any compensation for gravity and the resultant bullet drop. What kind of ranges are we talking for the 0.50 cal to be effective? 300 yds or less?
Out of effective range 800 yds is 2,400 ft. Average bullet speed is _about_ 2,400 ft/sec so time of flight is _about_ 1 second at 800 yds, 1/2 sec at 400 yds, 1/4 sec at 200 yds.
S = UT +- 1/2 A T squared. Initial falling speed U is zero so UT is zero.
1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared (4.9) by 1 squared seconds (1) is _about_ 5 metres, 16.5 feet for 800 yds.
1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared by 1/2 squared seconds (1/4) is about 1.25 metres, 4.1 feet for 400 yds.
1/2 times 9.8 M/sec squared by 1/4 squared seconds (1/16) is about 0.63 metres, 2.1 feet for 200 yds.
It will be a bit more because of the bullet slowing but that will be much less than at sea level, there is about a 300 knot true airspeed tail wind on the bullets and the air density at 30,000 feet would have fallen by about 70%.
I wonder how they don’t hit the other bombers in formation by mistake
exactly
They sometimes did……..
Waist gunner the best position if you wanted out of this world 🌍
Why'd you crop it to widescreen? There's another copy out there with full 1:33 aspect ratio.