Just like modern Japanese cars: lighter & more nimble might be an advantage on a race track but I'd rather have a heavier more durable car.
Sure your Honda / Toyota gets better fuel economy than my BMW or wife's Mercedes or the typical American car that otherwise fits the same size category, but you'll never be as safe in a Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus as you will in a more substantial American or German car.
@Ismalith lol have you even seen the crash test for the Smart? I have. The g-forces inside the car when it bounces off a larger car are extremely bad for the occupants. Its a fact the the larger Suvs and trucks are safer
@PSG1JOHN1 the zero in the video was fighting an gruman wildcat this was no match for an zero but the wildcat was replaced by the hellcat this plane outpreformed the zero in any spec hellcat rulez the sky
@nohairguysrevenge Zero plane was light and fast and can out turn any allies aircraft, but its wings were not made of metal, in a diving turn it would rip off at high speeds. All allies fighter use there weakness vs our strength. A zero on your tail dive away, he cant stay with you. Allies mostly did strafing runs, diving on the Zero
Wildcat being heavy and slower use the first tactic and the thach weave
All about the plot there tactics vs our, Japanese never found away to deal with our tactics
@PSG1JOHN1 im am talking about the F6F Hellcat the replacement for the f4 wildcat watch zero vs hellcat on wake island, the hellcat out clibed the zero and took it down the F6 Hellcat is faster
@PSG1JOHN1 What you say is true. I think one of the reasons that the Japanese never caught up to our tactics was that they lost such a large percentage of their best pilots when 3 of their carriers were sunk in the battle of Midway. Very few of the replacements seemed to live long enough to take tactics to the next level. A large part of that was due to the intrinsic weakness of the Zero to take hits and survive with light pilot protection and tanks that didn't have an internal bladder.
Shaking my head at the comments. The Zero was a good aircraft and better at acrobatics than the Wildcat but it was decidedly not the best aircraft in the world. Not in 1941, 42 or 43. Bf-109, Fw-190 were far superior aircrafts. Even Wildcat kill:loss ratio equated 1:1 and probably better. That is the state of modern research.
Shaking my head at the comments. The Zero was a good aircraft but it had no armor, had weak weapons, was sluggish at higher speeds and burned easily. They were better at acrobatics than the Wildcat but there were not not the finest fighter in the world until 1943. Bf-109 anyone?
turns fast at low speeds, cant turn at high speed. made of lightweight, brittle aluminum. no armour for the pilot or engine, no self-sealing fuel tanks. you know what the zero was? a bully plane. im sure it looked really good against weak or outnumbered aircraft, but against heavy opposition (AA fire!!) it literally fell to pieces. what exactly is the advantage of being agile at low speeds? seems fundamentally flawed. I think it was just another shortcut taken by 2nd rate Imperial Japan.
@crookedspokeadjacent everyone just likes talking about Japan vs USA because the Pacific is less depressing than Europe. more blue and green, less brown and grey.
@crookedspokeadjacent it was one of the most advanced fighter aircraft at the start of the war and pretty much pwned anything that it came up against, but Imperial Japan failed to up their game while their enemies moved on and came up with better tactics and airframes and it was pretty much outclassed towards the end.
The lack of experienced pilots after suffering unnecessary attrition (Imperial Japan didn't really bother much with rescuing downed pilots) didn't help things either.
@rexregum fighter aircraft have too many variables for any to be considerd advanced until it fufills all of them. i would have classified the zero as a LIGHT, long-range raiding aircraft, not a frontline fleet carrier fighter. most of it's victories were against poorly-organized colonial air forces sitting on the runways. incendiary rounds were being made in WW1 so id have to say the zero was always obsolete. can't out-turn bullets, especially at low speed... its not about fighter vs fighter
@crookedspokeadjacent basically restated my point. They didn't up their game when they needed to. The ability to produce technically advanced aircraft wasn't beyond them, they had a healthy dose of victory disease and bad management.
@rexregum well shit buddy if everyone just restates YOUR point why do you need to reply to anyone's comments? "basically restated?" its either I completely ripped you off, or i actually have something to say. i'm not saying they fell behind, im saying the zero was a flimsy piece of crap that didnt make any sense
@crookedspokeadjacent you could be all iffy about it or alternatively you could just think great minds think alike.
How did the Zero not make any sense? In the context of the time it was introduced (start of WW2) it was one of the finest fighters in the world. Not the perfect fighter but more then enough to raise seven kinds of hell with the Allies at the beginning of the Pacific campaign, poorly organized and complacent the allies may have been.
@crookedspokeadjacent its eventual obsolesce was not surprising given it achieved its initial superiority in the sky with several severe compromises that the Japanese didn't have the foresight to make up for even when they opponents figured out the game plan and changed the way the game was played. If that's not falling behind, the you have a strange idea of what that is.
@rexregum lmao wow ive never described myself as a great mind. you mean to say they think like you...
"severe compromises"
"one of the finest fighters"
i sense some discrepancy in what you're saying. if it has severe compromises, its not good... too many flight variables to make specialized planes and put them in the front lines. doesnt make sense because: long range, but no armour, just waiting to get itself into trouble, far away from any support. very stupid and overconfident from day 1
@crookedspokeadjacent besides failing in trying to hawk your subjective opinion of what is "good" and what is "bad", often in contrast to the added opinion of plenty of possibly more informed people on the matter, you can't seem to present your opinions in a convincing way.
Bottom line is, you started out with the conclusion "Zero=useless plane" and simply worked your way back ignoring most of the "fight variables" that contradicted with your thesis and kept harping on your cherry-picked ones.
@rexregum c-c-c-c-c-cant turn at high speed.....cc-c-c-c--c-c-ccant turn at high speed....what a stupid fuckin plane it c-c-c--c-c-cant turn at high speed. DJ check my microphone!
@crookedspokeadjacent lol maybe DJ Kitty here does not really trust his own test pilots as well:
Capt. Eric Brown, CBE, DSC, AFC, RN, Chief Naval Test Pilot and C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft Flight recalls how he was impressed when they tested the plane. "I don’t think I have ever flown a fighter that could match the rate of turn of the Zero. The Zero had ruled the roost totally and was the finest fighter in the world until mid-1943"
@crookedspokeadjacent end of the day, something's whacked with your thesis given that an apparently "obsolete", "worthless", and "stupid" aircraft gave allied aviators, military planners and aircraft engineers plenty of headaches for the first half of WW2 before 1943.
You could actually do your homework and weight all the facts properly, or you could keep on watching DJ Kitty clips.
LOL, come back when you've finally completed puberty, kid.
@rexregum OH DAYUM hes pullin wiki on me. as if i havent read that test pilots opinion yet. i doubt anyone was shooting at him during the test. and no man i didnt start with that theory. just look up the kill ratio of the f4 wildcat (american) for 1942. i used to think the zero was badass before i read some ww2 books. lmao the reason it gave them headaches is because everything gives military planners headaches. whos DJ Kitty?? that was just me. calling me a kid gives u nothing...
@rexregum it stikes me that we might have hit a small misunderstanding. idk u seem like a decent sort lol im sure if u werent ud be impolite about this, which honestly you havent been uve been a great debater. i wish you no ill will. but i dont mean to say it cant turn quickly, or it cant turn. as a direct result of the wing design (this crap is all on wiki) it can turn VERY quickly at low or medium speed, but as it approaches top speed the "roll rate" drops. u have to roll a bit to turn. cont-
@rexregum that formula works fine in 1v1 dogfights because the other planes have to slow down to get more than a few shots at you. in that respect the zero pwned im sure. but in a situation where it was outnumbered or up against stable antiaircraft platforms (like in a strike against a carrier group), it would have to move quickly to avoid the bullets and AA shells. and if it cant turn at top speed, its going to crash or end up in the wrong place
@rexregum ur not gonna agree with me. ill let you say something else if u want but i aint replyin. if u want you could even say "hahahha look he knows hes wrong cuz hes not replying"
These Wildcats never had the chance when the Zeros ambushed them. If I was in one of those Wildcats I would just dive and turn right which the Zero cannot do unless the Zero pilot want his wings to be torn off.
thats no F4F4 or A6M3, those are F4F3 and A6M2-21, the F4 had 6 50s while the F3 had only 4 50s, the only zeros without the curved wing tips are the M3s, this ones definetely not a M3
Yeah, I agree with you completely. The hellcat was superior in almost every way to the zero. There were reported cases where hellcats had been outnumbered, and they used the older thatche weave tactic to defend against multiple enemies. They showed an example on the history channel program "Dogfights."
Wrong. they were told not to get into a TURNING fight with the Zeros. Being involved in air to air combat is considered a dogfight, whatever tactic you may use.
Individually Japanese pilots at the start of the war were good, however by the end of it the general quality of Japanese aircrew was lacking.
You can try to redefine the concept of "dogfighting" all you want. But the rest of the world reconizes the engagements between Wildcats and Zeros as DOGFIGHTS.
The turning fight is just but one aspect of the dogfight. American pilots learned to stay out of the turning fight with a Zero which they would lose and use the Wildcat's ruggedness and armour in the THatch Weave.
Dogfigitng is ACM (Air Combat Manuvering), the Thatch Weave is an ACM.
@rexregum I don't know why you have to be a fucking douchebag about this. And no, I didn't defeat myself. I'd also like to know where you received your info...
This is A6M2.
BattleshipYAMASIRO 5 months ago
I fly like that with my rc airplane sometimes :P
TheChickeneer 5 months ago
Just like modern Japanese cars: lighter & more nimble might be an advantage on a race track but I'd rather have a heavier more durable car.
Sure your Honda / Toyota gets better fuel economy than my BMW or wife's Mercedes or the typical American car that otherwise fits the same size category, but you'll never be as safe in a Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus as you will in a more substantial American or German car.
sixty8panther 10 months ago
@sixty8panther Sounds like you are hell of a bad driver. Still, you aren't safer than Hummer, Subaru, Saab or city buses for sure.
cyphertek 9 months ago
@sixty8panther
WTF?
American Cars and the SUVs in the extreme, are unsafer than a Smart.
I don´t know where u read that big = save, but it is nonsense.
Ismalith 9 months ago
@Ismalith lol have you even seen the crash test for the Smart? I have. The g-forces inside the car when it bounces off a larger car are extremely bad for the occupants. Its a fact the the larger Suvs and trucks are safer
FutureMarine246 5 months ago
@FutureMarine246
Drive them against a tree or a wall and your changes to stay alive are better in a smart.
Ismalith 5 months ago
@Ismalith also not true again I ask have you actually seen the crash tests? I have
FutureMarine246 5 months ago
@FutureMarine246
Ok and what do you think is more dangerous?
A small crumble zone? or if the passenger cabin totaly colapses?
Ismalith 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FutureMarine246
Ok and what do you think is more dangerous?
A small crumble zone? or if the passenger cabin totaly colapses?
Ismalith 5 months ago
Zero was the best dog fighter in WW2, so the Allies never dog fight with it, just passing run, because the Zero would kick there ass good.
US used there strength of heavy guns, and dived on there targets and flying away.
Zero had no armor, and one tracer round hits it gas tank the zero blows up.
Only read Japaneses aircraft that can take on the US planes later in the war was the Ki84 it can take on a mustang.
Ki84 to late in the war to do anything
PSG1JOHN1 1 year ago
@PSG1JOHN1 the zero in the video was fighting an gruman wildcat this was no match for an zero but the wildcat was replaced by the hellcat this plane outpreformed the zero in any spec hellcat rulez the sky
nohairguysrevenge 1 year ago
@nohairguysrevenge Zero plane was light and fast and can out turn any allies aircraft, but its wings were not made of metal, in a diving turn it would rip off at high speeds. All allies fighter use there weakness vs our strength. A zero on your tail dive away, he cant stay with you. Allies mostly did strafing runs, diving on the Zero
Wildcat being heavy and slower use the first tactic and the thach weave
All about the plot there tactics vs our, Japanese never found away to deal with our tactics
PSG1JOHN1 1 year ago
@PSG1JOHN1 im am talking about the F6F Hellcat the replacement for the f4 wildcat watch zero vs hellcat on wake island, the hellcat out clibed the zero and took it down the F6 Hellcat is faster
nohairguysrevenge 1 year ago
@PSG1JOHN1 What you say is true. I think one of the reasons that the Japanese never caught up to our tactics was that they lost such a large percentage of their best pilots when 3 of their carriers were sunk in the battle of Midway. Very few of the replacements seemed to live long enough to take tactics to the next level. A large part of that was due to the intrinsic weakness of the Zero to take hits and survive with light pilot protection and tanks that didn't have an internal bladder.
JaleelJohanson62 1 year ago
the narrator is speaking english, but you'd never know
vk45de 1 year ago
Shaking my head at the comments. The Zero was a good aircraft and better at acrobatics than the Wildcat but it was decidedly not the best aircraft in the world. Not in 1941, 42 or 43. Bf-109, Fw-190 were far superior aircrafts. Even Wildcat kill:loss ratio equated 1:1 and probably better. That is the state of modern research.
DeathWishMonkey 1 year ago
Shaking my head at the comments. The Zero was a good aircraft but it had no armor, had weak weapons, was sluggish at higher speeds and burned easily. They were better at acrobatics than the Wildcat but there were not not the finest fighter in the world until 1943. Bf-109 anyone?
DeathWishMonkey 1 year ago
How can a Wildcat be that manuverable???
elithompandre8266 1 year ago
これで帰ってきてるのがアメリカの強いところだなあ。
LaYodo 1 year ago
Zero:
turns fast at low speeds, cant turn at high speed. made of lightweight, brittle aluminum. no armour for the pilot or engine, no self-sealing fuel tanks. you know what the zero was? a bully plane. im sure it looked really good against weak or outnumbered aircraft, but against heavy opposition (AA fire!!) it literally fell to pieces. what exactly is the advantage of being agile at low speeds? seems fundamentally flawed. I think it was just another shortcut taken by 2nd rate Imperial Japan.
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent everyone just likes talking about Japan vs USA because the Pacific is less depressing than Europe. more blue and green, less brown and grey.
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent it was one of the most advanced fighter aircraft at the start of the war and pretty much pwned anything that it came up against, but Imperial Japan failed to up their game while their enemies moved on and came up with better tactics and airframes and it was pretty much outclassed towards the end.
The lack of experienced pilots after suffering unnecessary attrition (Imperial Japan didn't really bother much with rescuing downed pilots) didn't help things either.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum fighter aircraft have too many variables for any to be considerd advanced until it fufills all of them. i would have classified the zero as a LIGHT, long-range raiding aircraft, not a frontline fleet carrier fighter. most of it's victories were against poorly-organized colonial air forces sitting on the runways. incendiary rounds were being made in WW1 so id have to say the zero was always obsolete. can't out-turn bullets, especially at low speed... its not about fighter vs fighter
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent and it had to go low speed to turn.....
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent basically restated my point. They didn't up their game when they needed to. The ability to produce technically advanced aircraft wasn't beyond them, they had a healthy dose of victory disease and bad management.
Fortunate for us I must say.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum well shit buddy if everyone just restates YOUR point why do you need to reply to anyone's comments? "basically restated?" its either I completely ripped you off, or i actually have something to say. i'm not saying they fell behind, im saying the zero was a flimsy piece of crap that didnt make any sense
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent you could be all iffy about it or alternatively you could just think great minds think alike.
How did the Zero not make any sense? In the context of the time it was introduced (start of WW2) it was one of the finest fighters in the world. Not the perfect fighter but more then enough to raise seven kinds of hell with the Allies at the beginning of the Pacific campaign, poorly organized and complacent the allies may have been.
rexregum 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent its eventual obsolesce was not surprising given it achieved its initial superiority in the sky with several severe compromises that the Japanese didn't have the foresight to make up for even when they opponents figured out the game plan and changed the way the game was played. If that's not falling behind, the you have a strange idea of what that is.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum lmao wow ive never described myself as a great mind. you mean to say they think like you...
"severe compromises"
"one of the finest fighters"
i sense some discrepancy in what you're saying. if it has severe compromises, its not good... too many flight variables to make specialized planes and put them in the front lines. doesnt make sense because: long range, but no armour, just waiting to get itself into trouble, far away from any support. very stupid and overconfident from day 1
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent besides failing in trying to hawk your subjective opinion of what is "good" and what is "bad", often in contrast to the added opinion of plenty of possibly more informed people on the matter, you can't seem to present your opinions in a convincing way.
Bottom line is, you started out with the conclusion "Zero=useless plane" and simply worked your way back ignoring most of the "fight variables" that contradicted with your thesis and kept harping on your cherry-picked ones.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum c-c-c-c-c-cant turn at high speed.....cc-c-c-c--c-c-ccant turn at high speed....what a stupid fuckin plane it c-c-c--c-c-cant turn at high speed. DJ check my microphone!
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent it's funny to watch you spazz out over things that happened 60 years ago... lol.
rexregum 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent lol maybe DJ Kitty here does not really trust his own test pilots as well:
Capt. Eric Brown, CBE, DSC, AFC, RN, Chief Naval Test Pilot and C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft Flight recalls how he was impressed when they tested the plane. "I don’t think I have ever flown a fighter that could match the rate of turn of the Zero. The Zero had ruled the roost totally and was the finest fighter in the world until mid-1943"
trolololol.
rexregum 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent end of the day, something's whacked with your thesis given that an apparently "obsolete", "worthless", and "stupid" aircraft gave allied aviators, military planners and aircraft engineers plenty of headaches for the first half of WW2 before 1943.
You could actually do your homework and weight all the facts properly, or you could keep on watching DJ Kitty clips.
LOL, come back when you've finally completed puberty, kid.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum OH DAYUM hes pullin wiki on me. as if i havent read that test pilots opinion yet. i doubt anyone was shooting at him during the test. and no man i didnt start with that theory. just look up the kill ratio of the f4 wildcat (american) for 1942. i used to think the zero was badass before i read some ww2 books. lmao the reason it gave them headaches is because everything gives military planners headaches. whos DJ Kitty?? that was just me. calling me a kid gives u nothing...
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@rexregum it stikes me that we might have hit a small misunderstanding. idk u seem like a decent sort lol im sure if u werent ud be impolite about this, which honestly you havent been uve been a great debater. i wish you no ill will. but i dont mean to say it cant turn quickly, or it cant turn. as a direct result of the wing design (this crap is all on wiki) it can turn VERY quickly at low or medium speed, but as it approaches top speed the "roll rate" drops. u have to roll a bit to turn. cont-
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@rexregum that formula works fine in 1v1 dogfights because the other planes have to slow down to get more than a few shots at you. in that respect the zero pwned im sure. but in a situation where it was outnumbered or up against stable antiaircraft platforms (like in a strike against a carrier group), it would have to move quickly to avoid the bullets and AA shells. and if it cant turn at top speed, its going to crash or end up in the wrong place
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@rexregum ur not gonna agree with me. ill let you say something else if u want but i aint replyin. if u want you could even say "hahahha look he knows hes wrong cuz hes not replying"
crookedspokeadjacent 1 year ago
@crookedspokeadjacent lol backtracking and trying to use the good ol' /ignore runaway isn't going to work or make you look any better.
You got yourself into that corner with your own reckless heckling and loose words, you only have yourself to blame for your
Does your argument not have the same flaws as the Zero? Zero armour and the inability to turn around once you got it going at speed?
LOL.
rexregum 1 year ago
These Wildcats never had the chance when the Zeros ambushed them. If I was in one of those Wildcats I would just dive and turn right which the Zero cannot do unless the Zero pilot want his wings to be torn off.
916ppl 1 year ago
thats no F4F4 or A6M3, those are F4F3 and A6M2-21, the F4 had 6 50s while the F3 had only 4 50s, the only zeros without the curved wing tips are the M3s, this ones definetely not a M3
nuk3m3vil 1 year ago
@nuk3m3vil A6M3-22 is using curved wing , A6M3-32 not
7511232 1 year ago
What a terrible inaccurate video. The Wildcat pilots still alive today would be laughing at this!
ironfalcon100 1 year ago
This is stupid. American pilots were specifically told NOT to dogfight Zeroes...
svolypet 2 years ago
@svolypet
Where is the source?
jinshiksung 2 years ago
Go look it up yourself. I don't remember where I saw it.
svolypet 2 years ago
@svolypet Yeah I know. Stupid Japanese filmakers. They should show how the Americans started dominating the zeroes with the thatch weave tactic.
lay3Rv2 2 years ago
The Thach Weave tactic was the only effective way for Wildcats to combat Zeroes. Any other way was suicide (this includes dogfighting).
svolypet 2 years ago
Hellcats and corsairs used the same tactic too. Especially if they were outnumbered.
lay3Rv2 2 years ago
The thing is...Hellcats could afford to dogfight the Zeroes. They outperformed the A6M3 in almost every way.
Wildcats did not. Thus, they used the Thach Weave, which is not portrayed in this video, like you said. That's why this video is stupid.
svolypet 2 years ago
Yeah, I agree with you completely. The hellcat was superior in almost every way to the zero. There were reported cases where hellcats had been outnumbered, and they used the older thatche weave tactic to defend against multiple enemies. They showed an example on the history channel program "Dogfights."
Anyways, that video is dumb. I'm glad we agree.
lay3Rv2 2 years ago
@svolypet But shoot them down in one pass?
ironfalcon100 1 year ago
Wrong. they were told not to get into a TURNING fight with the Zeros. Being involved in air to air combat is considered a dogfight, whatever tactic you may use.
Individually Japanese pilots at the start of the war were good, however by the end of it the general quality of Japanese aircrew was lacking.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum Wrong.
Webster Dictionary:
Main Entry: dog·fight
Pronunciation: \ˈdȯg-ˌfīt\
Function: noun
Date: 1656
1 : a fight between dogs; broadly : a fiercely disputed contest
2 : a fight between two or more fighter planes usually at close quarters
NOTICE: ==CLOSE QUARTERS==
svolypet 1 year ago
@svolypet you double wrong:
LOL you self-pwned
2 : a fight between two or more fighter planes usually at close quarters
NOTICE= USUALLY
You failed english? Usually does not mean ALL the time.
Besides in order to shoot down a Zero in those days you had to be within gun range, that's knife-fighting distance by any standards.
In any case, Wildcat-Zero air combat kill-loss ratio was 5.9-1.
Lol, you just defeated yourself with your own argument.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum Oh, btw...the ratio was 5.9-1 WITH the Thach Weave. Dumbass.
svolypet 1 year ago
@svolypet dude, you still fail history. Lol.
rexregum 1 year ago
You can try to redefine the concept of "dogfighting" all you want. But the rest of the world reconizes the engagements between Wildcats and Zeros as DOGFIGHTS.
The turning fight is just but one aspect of the dogfight. American pilots learned to stay out of the turning fight with a Zero which they would lose and use the Wildcat's ruggedness and armour in the THatch Weave.
Dogfigitng is ACM (Air Combat Manuvering), the Thatch Weave is an ACM.
rexregum 1 year ago
@rexregum I don't know why you have to be a fucking douchebag about this. And no, I didn't defeat myself. I'd also like to know where you received your info...
svolypet 1 year ago
@rexregum Just dive & turn right.
elithompandre8266 1 year ago
they are A6M2, the A6M3 had a rounder cowling covering and had wings that were flat ended
Akirameerkat 2 years ago
speak pitch is too low
aure232 2 years ago
A6M2だよ
dadaisonn 2 years ago
F4F-3 vs A6M2
7511232 2 years ago
thats an A6m3 the m3 had laminar flow wings. like the P-51
XenephusVC 2 years ago
Ye, it's an A6M3
Messer262 2 years ago
woops Im sorry I meant thats an A6m2
XenephusVC 2 years ago
@Messer262 Do you know this is Battle of Coral sea ? Was any A6M3 in Coral sea ?
7511232 1 year ago
@XenephusVC Look at the engine dude , A6M2 and A6M3 are not same engine
7511232 1 year ago
Hi guys
Excellent CGI I think this is the work of Masaru Tochibayashi, aka "Tochy Suppon", ?
Shame they got Dr Stephen Hawking to do Amerian pilot's voice. lol :p
BTW awesome movie,what is it called?
Respect
CM6 :-)
CheckMySix 2 years ago
A6M2
7511232 2 years ago