YOU PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOUR TLAKING ABOUT. My grandpa was the head pilot of this plane. The B24 was HIS plane ok?? And people the plane was abotu to be attacked or something and they all head to jump out i think. I do know 4 people died 4 were injured and 2 were uninjured. My grandfather was injured he was found in th dessert or berserte alone by the British during world was too. Now people. Get your facts straight before you say anything.
Maybe this will put someting into perspective on the Schweinfurt Mission (black thursday), 300 plus B17s took off another 100 plus B24s were supposed to join, but got lost in the weather. Of the 360 planes, more than 60 were lost, another 60 were so shot up they never flew again. Each plane carred a crew of ten. The 8th Air Force flew those missions everyday weather would permit from 1943 until VE Day. God bless those men!!! The greatest generation. God bless them all..thanks Gianni
It's defiantly a bomb I saw the whole footage in school years ago there's another B24 flying just above her for some reason that looses it's first bomb that causes this
I think it's actually from the BBC world at war program
That wasn't hit by a bomb. Or flak! The B-24 has had some fuel tank issues and sometimes they randomly blew up. I watched a documentary on the B-24 and they showed this footage and said the fuel tanks were sort of weird.
If you look carefully, it is hit by a bomb, but that isnt an explosion! The "fire" is the fuel from the wing bursting out. The bomb didnt explode because it was too high up for the system to arm.
i have heard arguements for both sides of the arguement and i have to go with the flak hit theory because the metal skin folded up and back. that would say a hit from below. a bomb would have smashed everything down and through the wing. thats my decision and i am sticking with it.
It was FLAK you idiots! Open your fucking eyes! The bombs you see falling are clearly falling to the right and behind the plane, they are not hitting the plane, but rather falling behind the plane and you see them reappear under the plane as they fall.
@klote2314 It does appear that way, but I watched it over and over again multiple times and the only bombs I saw were clearly back and to the left of the plane. This link has info on the plane: pacificwrecks. com/aircraft/b-24/44-42058. html
interesting, you can see he's in the midst for dropping his payload. Also when a whole wing is removed, even if the plane never com-busts, there is still no chance for the crew to get out.
Similar thing happened to my father's plane, "Dumbo the Pistol Packin' Pachyderm" of the 453rd BG. They took two rounds simultaneously, one in the nose and one in the bomb bay; it collapsed the port wing root. Only survivors, the bombardier and the nose gunner...explain that! Thanks to the Greatest Generation...I'm not speaking German!
This happened to my great great uncles plane in WWII! But it was a B-17. His plane got knocked out of formation by flak. I have a video on my channel about him and his brother too!
Further to my earlier posts, the official explanation was flak fire from the ground, which is natural. However this was not always the truth in such cases, it is still very difficult to prove either way. An official explanation would never conclude that a bomb hit the wing, just as an official explanation would never conclude a soldier was killed by friendly fire unless the evidence for such a conclusion was undeniable. It is a question of propaganda.
Also, though I agree this was an AA hit, I don't know how anyone knows that this was B-24-M-CO as I could see no identifying marks at all. I do know that in virtually every film I've seen of the Ploesti raid, this particular piece of film was in them. Because of that I've always assumed this bomber was shot down on that raid. I stand to be corrected, though. BTW, the B-17 I mentioned getting it's horizontal stabilizer knocked off survived.
This plane was hit by flak. You can clearly see the explosion going upward from the top of the wing as it was hit from underneath by AA. Also, a bomb dropped another plane in the formation would not have been armed yet so would not have exploded but simply broken off the wing as can be seen in a real bomb strike on a B-17 which got it's left horizontal stabilizer knocked off which is also on U-Tube. Also, you would have seen the bomb as it hit. Nothing came from above.
Ok now to the second bit.When a bomber of any type does a bombing the bombs have to be armed.When the bomb is armed they have a timing fuse or a small prop on the front which charges them.If that was a bomb that went through the wing then it make sense because the bomb would not have been completely armed by the time it reached that plane.Or it could have suffered metal fatigue in the wing joint.But from where it breaks up it doesnt look like it.
Sry about that!! Ok if that was a flak hit in the wing ,you would see the wing explode upwards and you would have bits of wing flying upwards. And i dont think a wing tank would survive a flak hit as flak were explosive rounds there fore the plane would've caught fire.
@MrCriticOfAll I've seen this footage many times and if this nimrod uploader would have included more than 3 seconds you would have seen that this plane immediately catches on fire.
@floydfreak63 Think about what you stated you say "immediately catches fire".The engine with it's red to white exhaust and the engines magneto's would've sparked the fire.Where as if the plane was hit by flak it most certainly would've exploded.
@MrCriticOfAll Dude, all you got to do is google "B-24M-15-CO, Serial Number 44-42058" and look at the first hit , "PacificWrecks(dot)com". Also, the 6th site down has a PDF of the official War Department report including an eyewitness account of the incident. Pretty interesting reading.
That is not a flak.If you look real close first you can see they are on their bombing run and second if you watch real close you can see the puncture in the wing drops not rises.
Look closely at the film and the explosion comes from just in front and below the wing coming up and through the wing which is then trailing smoke, if a bomb had just fell through it then there would be no smoke, the wing folded due to the extreme weight of the ship and the structural damage plus the extreme forces put on the airframe when aloft. Those are my continue two cents.
Thats a flak hit from just underneath the wing not a bomb going through the wing. Just because there is video from above the plane dont assume that a bomb fell on it from above. The bombs you see in the video being dropped are being dropped from the plane that lost the wing and a plane just off the starboard side of it, I can understand where the confusion lies when viewing this video because the camera is zoomed in giving you no reference to anything around it.
Can't see what all the fuss is about You can see the bomb go straight through the wing.The world at war video clip of this incident showed a flak free sky.These poor boys suffered the fate of friendly fire.
When the incident is broken down to frame by frame an unarmed bomb enters the picture, then the wing.
It was safer to fly the bombers that were higher in the formations, that was until the fighters arrived.The lower you were in the formation the more chance of this kind of thing happening
This B-24M-15-CO, Serial Number 44-42058, was with the USAAF 7th AF, 494TH BG (H), 867th BS.
It was named 'THE BRIEF'.
It took off from the island of ANGAUR, (part of the PALAU group of islands), on May 14th, 1945, as part of a mission to attack Japanese Anti/Aircraft (A/A) positions located on the island of KOROR.
It was shot down by A/A, NOT A BOMB.
The wreckage lies just south of KOROR, at position 7', 20'N 134',29E.
@twinstu50 After what I've read on the Pacific Wrecks about this case it isn't yet to fully deny that B24 was hit by bomb. It looks pretty much like that and american military could possibly want to hide the truth.
@twinstu50 I have this footage on vhs video , and if you pause the film and view it frame by frame you can see the bomb coming from above and hitting the wing. no mistake at all....Jim
@twinstu50 just replayed your 2 second clip maybe 30 times .
Definitely a bomb hitting the wing from above , can see it after it bursts through the fuel tank and out the underside .
If this was a flak hit , where is the explosion beneath the wing and the wing and fuelage lifting at the breakage of the spar ? they dont lift , they are both knocked DOWN .
@machvelocy The bomb hasn't exploded because it hasn't fallen far enough for the little prop on the arming system to unwind and arm the fuse .
As the bomb rolls out of the plane a pin is pulled out allowing the little prop to start spinning , but it takes some seconds to spin free .
The bomb that hits is still horizontal so it is most likely from a squadronmate flying at a slightly higher level , like the plane the film is shot from .
You can see this footage on many games, movies and documentaries, and it's just a 88mm Flak Direct hit, and this B24D is DROPPING bombs, not being hit by bombs.....
Oh, and this was filmed in the Pacific theatre by the way. So I very much doubt that it was a German Flak round, particularly as such drops were typically made at over 20,000 feet which made hitting them with any kind of ground fire (especially the idiotic suggestion of "small arms fire") about as likely as the Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl this year.
This clip of film is featured on World at War. I can confirm that it was a bomb that hit the wing. The reason for the bomb not exploding is that there is a tiny propellor on every bomb that acts as a mechanical safety device. Once the bomb is dropped the propellor spins due to the ambient air flow as the bomb falls; once it rotates a set number of times it primes the bomb. They should have been flying in formation.
Go frame by frame. You'll see a blurry outline of at least one bomb. nolifemerc is right. It's a ripple of bombs. Note the quick downward push on the fuselage. You can see a bomb's shadow on the wing but no hole from a shot from below as well. I hope they got out.
listen up all with iq ower 65, what happens when a 250 kg bomb explodes on a b24 wing, image the whole plane will blow up dont u think, this is something else like small arms fire or a 40 mm
@nolifemerc Idiot. Learn how these bombs work and you get the right back not to be called that. It was a bomb. Actually it was a ripple of bombs. Look closely...
@nolifemerc noone is saying the bomb EXPLODED on the wing, it merely HIT the wing. The ignition that lit the feul tank came from friction between the bomb and the wing. The propeller fuse on the bombs ensures it dosnt explode if it hits a nearby plane on its way down. The bomb would have hit its intended target and exploded despite killing a freindly on its way down.
(Part 12 Final) Instead of letting the facts take them to a conclusion, the seek only the facts that support what they want to believe and discard the rest. So sad and so ignorant we are as a whole. Oh wait, some wont like that statement because its not what they want to hear.....
@Warbirdguy1 Tell your Dad I studied Aerospace Engineering at College and I wish there are the opportunities that there were in his day! I've got a longer version of this clip, one with the borders included so you can see the tailplane, and can slow it down to 1/7th of it's original speed. A stick of 10 bombs can be seen dropping diagonally closer to the bomber from beyond the starboard wing before the impact, if he is interested. I guessed he was by the full page of comments he left!
@wierdwesterner Will you upload to youtube, it still does not make any sense because of how aircraft bombs work. I must say this though, Aerospace Engineering has nothing to do with aircraft ordinance and because of the uneducated and arrogant comments I have been seeing we are trusting noone. Please provide proof. I am sure that you are not the only one who has seen it therefore it must be on the internet. I can't find it so you may be bluffing to make yourself look better.
@Warbirdguy1 Since I don't have any video recording or compression software and because you were rude, I won't upload it. If you want to see it for yourself you can buy the DVD of "World at War" on amazon and watch the "Pacific" episode. Such incidents were common during mass formation bombings during World War 2, especially in the RAF night bombing campaigns. FYI, Aerospace Engineering has everything to do with weapons ordinance, particularly since the propelled ordinance age, thanks.
@wierdwesterner Problem with this post is the the British didn't fly enmasse at night. They were required to fly solo strikes, they took off alone, no form up, just go and bomb.
@Toddinfantry It is true there was no form up, bombers made the journey alone however bomb runs were made by up to 50 aircraft who massed over the target via different routes. This was done due to the limited availability of pathfinder crews in Mosquitos or lighter bombers and the increased accuracy of group bombing. There is actual footage and photographs of a British incendiary raid over Germany where a lower flying bomber is silhouetted against the flames below, google it.
Todays night flying aids were barely embryonic back then.
Basically, the 'stream' , of outward bound bombers, followed a planned route, bombed, and returned by a route that would not conflict with any incoming stream yet to bomb.
Here's a teaser.
A Lancaster pilot was awarded the Victoria Cross, though badly wounded, he 'pressed on'.
His comment as to why he 'pressed' on says it all.
@twinstu50 Definite seperation of streams were impossible. Most crews were inexperienced young men flying at night without any navigational aid other than charting and identifying rivers and other landmarks in the darkness. Getting lost was the norm, as was missing the target entirely. Collisions happened regularly. There are regular accounts of bombers hit by bombs and MAKING IT BACK despite the damage, such as one Stirling bomber of 37 squadron.
Todays night flying aids were barely embryonic back then.
Basically, the 'stream' , of outward bound bombers, followed a planned route, bombed, and returned by a route that would not conflict with any incoming stream yet to bomb.
Here's a teaser.
A Lancaster pilot was awarded the Victoria Cross, though badly wounded, he 'pressed on'.
His comment as to why he 'pressed' on says it all.
(Part 11) I have 20 years experience teaching and maintaining aircraft weapons systems, have worked on many aicraft including B-24 armament. I have restored over 200 Norden bombsights and similar aircraft components and am very familiar with aircraft armament. I base what I have said here on that hands-on experience. One of the many things I have learned about humans, they believe what they want to believe.
(Part 10) So the only sure thing is.. Dont believe anyone here that says they know what happened and that someone else is wrong. Not the kind of people you want to take advice from, dont trust them. Remember, there is no shortage of opinions and so called experts, but there is a real shortage of good advice and real experts. You guess which this post is for yourself.
(Part 9) Sorry, I spent too much time in the military myself to believe what I hear. I know better,, I spent over 30 years dealing with the military. But I cant discount completely what the veterans say either. I also am really not sure they, in the heat of the event can say they know exactly what happened. It is near impossible to tell by looking at this video here and tell exacty what happened either.
(Part 8) There are so many instances of the military modifying the truth for their own purposes. Think about, Tillman being killed, The WW1 Thanksgiving truce, the badly damaged B-17 that was escorted back to the channel by a German fighter, the military, explosions at American industry during WW2, General Dynamics claiming there were no electrical chaffing problems with the F-16 and The football player, Tillman killed by friendly fire.
(Part 7) There are no more bombs dropping near or onto the wing after the initial damage. Now from another perspective as to what history tells us. History is written by the most part by those in power at the time.
(Part 6) Also note that bombs were not dropped individually, they were released sequentially, one after another, there are no bombs near that were dropped before the one that hit or any after. The only bombs you see dropping ar those dropped far behind this aircraft. remember if a plane was above this one, it was in formation and traveling at approx. the same speed, you would see more bombs in the length of time it took to show these events.
(Part 5) Remember, as far as vertical speed, the bomb was stationary until it was released. The forward speed of the bomb/aircraft would have negligible effect in this scenario. Upon numerous views of this video seen here, there appears to be a shadow of a bomb shape on the trailing edge of the wing. This could be the shadow of the bomb, of the shadow of the plume of fuel as it rises above the wing.
(Part 4) If a 500 lb bomb dropped on it from even only 200 feet, it would most likely cause catastrophic failure of the spar and the metal {(aluminum and steel components) would easily cause a spark and enough heat to ignite the fuel in the wing. If either a bomb or flack impacted the wing, the results would look very similar. I would have expected to be able to see a bomb at the low speed it would be traveling, but no way could flack be detected in the video.
(Part 3) As with modern fuses, such as the M904 or M905 fuses, vanes turn to align the arming mechanism, this requires the arming vane to rotate in the airstream a few hundred feet in most cases before it will arm. A bomb dropping from lets say 300 feet above would posses quite a bit of energy from falling 300 feet. With the load on the wing from flying with a heavy fuel load, ammo for the guns and bombs, the wing would be already under a lot of stress.
(Part 2) Aviation fuel is approx 100 octane, extremely flammable. A flack detonation in the wing in my opinion would have caused immediate ignition of the fuel in this portion of the wing. A bomb dropped from above would not have traveled more than a few hundred feet at most. It would not have time to arm the nose fuse.
(Part 1) There are many here to say they know exactly what happened. I think the person you should believe is not the one that says they know for sure, or says someone else is wrong. I will give my observations of this video based on the video and my experience with military aircraft and armament. First, a flack projectile travels much faster than a bomb dropped from a couple hundred feet above and most flak explode on contact, but mainly using a proximity fuse.
It only looks like something has hit it from above because when the aircraft disintegrated at the port (left) wing root, the starboard (right) wing will continue to provide lift causing the plane to rotate over on its back and spin. An almost impossible situation to get out of alive.
LOL anyone who thought that was a bomb is a complete fool. If a bomb had exploded that plane would have been blown into a trillion pieces and the film we are watching wouldnt exist because the plane it was taken from would also be destroyed. They were not dropping firecrackers people. Those things had major explosive yield.
@Nonsensei436 Correct...except that bombs need to be armed to explode. Note the small propeller on the nose of a bomb, that needs to rotate hundreds of times to arm the bomb, so the bomb would not be "live" until much farther in the fall. The are many reports of bombs being dropped on lower aircraft with no explosion.
that B-24 was brought down by flak, not a bomb hitting the wing, if you happen to catch it on the History channel it shows the full footage on the plane getting hit and falling out of formation and the none of the crew made it out :(
Wow someone in there attempt to act like they know everything pretty much claims they where flying the damn plane Rofl. Watch in slow mo you can clearly see the wing open up in the shape of a bomb being drooped on top of it. That shape is telling.
@ww2footage lol they are , the bombs are on the rigth side behind the plane, what do u think happens if a 500lb bomb explode on the wing of a b24, you think there is any thing left?
I have seen this film MANY times, always thought it was flak. So did my dad who was a B-17 pilot (35 missions) with the 385th BG & witnessed many Forts + a few Liberators become victims of flak, fighters, mid air collisions, etc.
He also said accidents such has higher elements releasing their bombs on lower elements was usually due to the releasing aircraft being out of position, whether from dodging fighters, flak or just human error.
A just released bomb traveling too fast to see? Negative.
Shot down over Koror in the Palau Islands by Jap flak I believe. The tail gunner got out OK only to be murdered by the Japs on the ground. Bent prop .com has found and researched the wreck in detail. Correct me if I am wrong, thanks.
There is film footage of B-17s in formation where one above drops it's bombs and one bomb takes out part of the tail of one below. This picture is of a B-24 taking a direct hit by flak. One of the interesting pictures is of two B-17s that mated while forming up for a mission.
YES FOR THE 500 TIME, THIS IS NOT A BOMB HIT FROM ABOWE, IF IT WAS A BOMB 250-500KG DO YOU DUDES REALLY THINK IT ONLY MAKE A HOLE IN THE WING, THE WHOLE F PLANE WOULD BE GONE. ITS A FLAK HIT OK?
I can see how people would assume that was from a bomb-hit. It looks like there's pieces falling away underneath, but I think that's just the bombs falling. But whether that's what this video shows or not, it did happen, quite often actually. I've seen some pretty impressive photos of planes holed by "friendly" bombs...that's one reason the fuses don't arm right away. I think it was more common with the British, as they bombed at night...they depended on keeping formation to prevent such things.
Poor guys. Ever thought about how hard it must have been to escape from a bomber spinning down missing a wing and on fire? In a fighter, you just pop the canopy and jump, but most crew-positions in a bomber required going to an exit and jumping. Not easy if the plane is upside down, spinning and tumbling, and you're pressed against the wall by the G's. If you're lucky, it'll break up around you without exploding. Otherwise, how does a tail gunner get to the door?
Doesn't look at all like a bomb hit the plane. I looks more like a flak shell. Even if it was a bomb, do you know how many times pilots in the Royal Air Force and the Luftwaffe have made air collisions? Airplanes are far easier to control than free-fall bombs.
And my Dad was in the plane behind your Dad's plane and saw everything too.
He told me the yanks were not servicing their planes properly because they hadn't been able to have a shower every 5 minutes or their ration of 17 flavours of ice cream and hadn't been able to bomb Brit POW camps for the last day or 2 !
@yiblon Who was it that held up the fuckin D-Day beach break-out 'cause they had to stop and brew up a cuppa-fuckin-TEA every 5-6 hours?
And with military geniuses like Montgomery AIR-DROPPING Brit POWs to the Germans on a regular schedule, those camps were probably hard for the US to AVOID.
Just read another reference to the Army Air Corps CT-70 16mm as the source ?? Ive never been to DC so I cant say personally. I wish I knew what portions of the film they are referring to...........
@Wailwulf aaaaaaah B & H, I remember my Mom had one of those my Brother and our friends and I used to make a home-movie with in school way back in the day. we had colour film but no sound. LoL.
I have read several articles that include stock credited from an "Auricon" CT-70 that some of the Army flyers were using, dont know much about the CT-70 but I do remember the B & H, thx Wulf.
Rafl231D: if your serious, most of these programs are on DVD one aired in 1986, another in 1992. you ( or your association) could contact the producers but I wouldnt expect much. in fact there may already be a disclaimer in the credits I havent spotted. misleading as it may be to myself & others to include this plane in a program about other losses to flak over Germany, it does not HAVE to be historically accurate to be put in a copyrighted broadcast for entertainment purposes. Good Luck.
@1MtnBoy Thank you for your comment. I'm gathering the pertinent info, including frame by frame pix of the orig 35mm film & the stills made by others. I plan to publish the info on the 494th BG(H) website - provided my cohorts have no objections & we have the disk space. I'm not sure how to contact "all" the TV networks to correct them. I have knowledge of only 1video & it has it correct. If you can provide me other info on the other videos I will attempt to correct them as well.
@raf1231D you can view this footage on DHC "Wings" 2002 episode 4 and the " memphis-belle" documentary shown last year on "Discovery Channnel". and the last 2004 episode of "Wings of the lufftwaffe on "Military-channel" episode #12 the controversial raids on Dresden and Nurburg.
referenced to the 33 aircraft lost to AAA over Germany.
you can also contact the smithsonian natl archive in Wash DC., I understand this clip was copied from original footage for the DOD in 1958. it is 102 minutes long.
@1MtnBoy Thanks for the more detailed info - really appreciate it. This is a rather low priority project for me at the moment. On this particular incident, my Dad was piloting another B-24. I've got a ton of documentation on it & over the last 9 years, I've talked to probably 30% of the men who flew this mission. But the info is scattered all over my research stuff. It takes time to get organized. Again, thanks.
With all this speculation and chatter, for some real detail please read the MACR (Missing Air Crew Rpt). Since YouTube makes it difficult to post a url I've had to replace the "foward-slashes" with "spaces": ( raysestak-dot-com 494bga reference macrs 14351.pdf ) -- & checkout the rest of the website: ( raysestak-dot-com 494bga ). Also look at ( pacificwrecks-dot-com aircraft b-24 44-42058.html ).
You can understand why crews in the planes above this one would want it to be recorded as a flak strike!.....but bombs from above were a danger and did at times cause damage and death to those flying below.
@efc23 I'm sorry, I'm a bit irritated with the know-it-alls on this WWII Pacific B-24 incident. Read my posts for the REAL story. I've seen the 35 mm film & pix at the Nat. Archives & have copies plus the mission rpt, the MACR & personal stories of men who witnessed it. My Dad co-piloted the plane following it. His bombardier had a clear view & told me about it as did the bombardier of the plane in front of it who took still pixs w/post-bomb camera as it fell. IT WAS FLAK - NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
@raf1231D Now that is funny, your on here blowing your horn about all the details and you are calling others "know-it-alls"??? LOL!! Go back into your mom's basement and make some more model airplanes. And stop sniffing the cement.
@efc23 Please, please check out the following URLs -- YouTube prevents directly listing the url, so copy, paste then edit the following broken up addresses: raysestak. com /494bga /reference /macrs /14351.pdf Also look at: pacificwrecks. com /aircraft /b-24 /44-42058.html.
@raf1231D So, do you have any idea whether any of the crew escaped the plane before it crashed? And if they did, did they survive the war, or did they die in prison camps? God, WWII was such a terrible cataclysm. That's the best word I can think of to describe it as a whole. So, so many people dying. Such massive movements of people and equipment, social upheaval, everything! RIP to them all.
@raf1231D ok, i'm looking for footage of a WW2 bober getting hit by a friendly dropped bomb from above. if this nisn't it, it looks similar. the clip exists because I've seen it in the past and there are no doubts about it, u see the huge bomb falling on the wing and the bomber going down,
Do you happen to know which clip I'm talking about? thanks
@britoca Sometime or the other I've seen the clip you're talking about. My recollection is it was a B-17 over Germany. I have other notes here regarding this incident because it occurred on a mission my father flew & I've researched it. Friendly bombs dropped thru wings rarely if ever happened in the Pacific simply because there were fewer planes on a mission. One of the biggest mission flown over Japan involved around 150 B-24 from 3 BS, 50 B-25s and 150 P-51s bombing a fairly widespread area.
I love watching all the retards argue....
iphone3gs2208 2 weeks ago
ha ha
HybodusStudios 1 month ago
It was not a bomb. Static electricity ignited fuel fumes inside the wing.
nightwriterou812 2 months ago
YOU PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOUR TLAKING ABOUT. My grandpa was the head pilot of this plane. The B24 was HIS plane ok?? And people the plane was abotu to be attacked or something and they all head to jump out i think. I do know 4 people died 4 were injured and 2 were uninjured. My grandfather was injured he was found in th dessert or berserte alone by the British during world was too. Now people. Get your facts straight before you say anything.
Callio126 2 months ago
@Callio126 and who are you?
Tombolippe 2 months ago
@Callio126 and you get your english straight before typing something
djaihunter 2 months ago
fail
towelie86 2 months ago
Maybe this will put someting into perspective on the Schweinfurt Mission (black thursday), 300 plus B17s took off another 100 plus B24s were supposed to join, but got lost in the weather. Of the 360 planes, more than 60 were lost, another 60 were so shot up they never flew again. Each plane carred a crew of ten. The 8th Air Force flew those missions everyday weather would permit from 1943 until VE Day. God bless those men!!! The greatest generation. God bless them all..thanks Gianni
giannivee1 3 months ago
It's defiantly a bomb I saw the whole footage in school years ago there's another B24 flying just above her for some reason that looses it's first bomb that causes this
I think it's actually from the BBC world at war program
MrMoss2001 4 months ago
It's a bomb that passes straight through. Watch this footage in slow motion and the bomb can be seen descending towards the wing.
SidorovikPetrov 4 months ago
no, i think it was a flak hit, by the way the explosion happens. If it was a fuel proplem, it would propaply have caught fire first.
F4Ucorsairguy1 5 months ago
That wasn't hit by a bomb. Or flak! The B-24 has had some fuel tank issues and sometimes they randomly blew up. I watched a documentary on the B-24 and they showed this footage and said the fuel tanks were sort of weird.
LibertyBelle7 5 months ago
If you look carefully, it is hit by a bomb, but that isnt an explosion! The "fire" is the fuel from the wing bursting out. The bomb didnt explode because it was too high up for the system to arm.
Digger1902189 5 months ago
@okaaaiiiden hahahah who has the AIDS??
22hellman22 5 months ago
@okaaaiiiden Mate did u you hear me, your a DUMB FUCK!
22hellman22 5 months ago
@okaaaiiiden bomb does not arm till a certain height and would not go off dumb fuck
22hellman22 5 months ago
i have heard arguements for both sides of the arguement and i have to go with the flak hit theory because the metal skin folded up and back. that would say a hit from below. a bomb would have smashed everything down and through the wing. thats my decision and i am sticking with it.
woofdogmeow 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It was FLAK you idiots! Open your fucking eyes! The bombs you see falling are clearly falling to the right and behind the plane, they are not hitting the plane, but rather falling behind the plane and you see them reappear under the plane as they fall.
rodmunch1973 5 months ago
looks like a bomb to me... i can se that thing falling down on the plane
klote2314 6 months ago
@klote2314 It does appear that way, but I watched it over and over again multiple times and the only bombs I saw were clearly back and to the left of the plane. This link has info on the plane: pacificwrecks. com/aircraft/b-24/44-42058. html
ExploitedYouth87 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
for the idiots who thinks it was flak, pay attention to near the top right corner. you'll see a few bombs slamming into the wing.
Londonman21 6 months ago
for the idiots who thinks it was flak, pay attention to near the tope right corner. you'll see a few bombs slamming into the wing.
Londonman21 6 months ago
es el mejor ejemplo de la inteligencia yankee !!! ja ja putos de mierda !!
gustav1933 6 months ago
You can see the bomb strike the upper surface of the wing. It is not clear but it is there if you pause it in the right place.
imissbritishleyland 6 months ago
lol pwnd while dropping its payload
HotttyXx 6 months ago
this is just the video "Direct shot by antiaircraft gun - B-24 down " renamed
alieniemisteri 7 months ago
@alieniemisteri this vid have way more view o.O
qc1st 6 months ago
fake
alieniemisteri 7 months ago
> you brits bombed at night. americans bombed by day.<
----
Yes, and I think we shook hands every sun-down and sun-up as we swopped shifts
RonSkem 7 months ago
Comment removed
RonSkem 7 months ago
Comment removed
RonSkem 7 months ago
They might have made it home. Those planes could take quite a pounding and still survive
;)
RonSkem 7 months ago
@RonSkem
For christ's sake, start thinking, do your bloody homework!.
This aeroplane, 'The Brief', is well documented.
Of the two crew members who parachuted, one was captured by the Japs, and very soon after, murdered,- beheaded.
To the Jap,s Allied Aircrew, were a 'high value asset.
To stop their contribution, they were killed, murdered.
The REAL point is, militarily speaking, airborne assetts are, arguably, the most 'cost' effective assetts. Except for the Kamikaze.
twinstu50 6 months ago
interesting, you can see he's in the midst for dropping his payload. Also when a whole wing is removed, even if the plane never com-busts, there is still no chance for the crew to get out.
OneEyeWonderWeasil 7 months ago
Similar thing happened to my father's plane, "Dumbo the Pistol Packin' Pachyderm" of the 453rd BG. They took two rounds simultaneously, one in the nose and one in the bomb bay; it collapsed the port wing root. Only survivors, the bombardier and the nose gunner...explain that! Thanks to the Greatest Generation...I'm not speaking German!
bulklover 7 months ago
This happened to my great great uncles plane in WWII! But it was a B-17. His plane got knocked out of formation by flak. I have a video on my channel about him and his brother too!
LibertyBelle7 7 months ago
Further to my earlier posts, the official explanation was flak fire from the ground, which is natural. However this was not always the truth in such cases, it is still very difficult to prove either way. An official explanation would never conclude that a bomb hit the wing, just as an official explanation would never conclude a soldier was killed by friendly fire unless the evidence for such a conclusion was undeniable. It is a question of propaganda.
wierdwesterner 7 months ago 2
Catastrofic failure of the wing.
TigerMeadows 7 months ago
@TigerMeadows
Correct.
The fuel tank was exploded by an A.A. hit, the mainspar was destroyed by it, the wing folded, end of story.
Not really.
Two crew members parachuted, one was murdered by the Japs.
twinstu50 7 months ago
Completely correct!.
The question is, what caused the' catastrophic' failure of the wing?.
It was an Anti-Aircraft hit from the JAPANESE positions on Angaur (look it up), island, that this aeroplane's squadron, were tasked to bomb.
This 'case', is not difficult.
Very simple, basic, cross-reference 'homework',does suffice.
Why this vision is still a cause of ill-informed, innacurate, ill-educated comment, defies me.
Still, I am not surprised
twinstu50 7 months ago
Also, though I agree this was an AA hit, I don't know how anyone knows that this was B-24-M-CO as I could see no identifying marks at all. I do know that in virtually every film I've seen of the Ploesti raid, this particular piece of film was in them. Because of that I've always assumed this bomber was shot down on that raid. I stand to be corrected, though. BTW, the B-17 I mentioned getting it's horizontal stabilizer knocked off survived.
Rikki0 7 months ago
This plane was hit by flak. You can clearly see the explosion going upward from the top of the wing as it was hit from underneath by AA. Also, a bomb dropped another plane in the formation would not have been armed yet so would not have exploded but simply broken off the wing as can be seen in a real bomb strike on a B-17 which got it's left horizontal stabilizer knocked off which is also on U-Tube. Also, you would have seen the bomb as it hit. Nothing came from above.
Rikki0 7 months ago
Looks like FLAK damage, but I need to slow it down
fiverats1 7 months ago
Ok now to the second bit.When a bomber of any type does a bombing the bombs have to be armed.When the bomb is armed they have a timing fuse or a small prop on the front which charges them.If that was a bomb that went through the wing then it make sense because the bomb would not have been completely armed by the time it reached that plane.Or it could have suffered metal fatigue in the wing joint.But from where it breaks up it doesnt look like it.
MrCriticOfAll 8 months ago
Sry about that!! Ok if that was a flak hit in the wing ,you would see the wing explode upwards and you would have bits of wing flying upwards. And i dont think a wing tank would survive a flak hit as flak were explosive rounds there fore the plane would've caught fire.
MrCriticOfAll 8 months ago
@MrCriticOfAll I've seen this footage many times and if this nimrod uploader would have included more than 3 seconds you would have seen that this plane immediately catches on fire.
floydfreak63 7 months ago
@floydfreak63 Think about what you stated you say "immediately catches fire".The engine with it's red to white exhaust and the engines magneto's would've sparked the fire.Where as if the plane was hit by flak it most certainly would've exploded.
MrCriticOfAll 7 months ago
@MrCriticOfAll Dude, all you got to do is google "B-24M-15-CO, Serial Number 44-42058" and look at the first hit , "PacificWrecks(dot)com". Also, the 6th site down has a PDF of the official War Department report including an eyewitness account of the incident. Pretty interesting reading.
floydfreak63 7 months ago
@floydfreak63I shall and thanx.
MrCriticOfAll 7 months ago
That is not a flak.If you look real close first you can see they are on their bombing run and second if you watch real close you can see the puncture in the wing drops not rises.
MrCriticOfAll 8 months ago
i'd also like to point out, you cannot "shoot" bombs. you shoot warheads. and fleighing or whatever is not a word. it's flying.
machinegunboy98 8 months ago
@machinegunboy98 I shot a bomb once and it didnt go off.
MrCriticOfAll 8 months ago
@MrCriticOfAll be a little more descriptive, otherwise you are bullshitting everyone.
machinegunboy98 8 months ago
that's just flak. big difference between a flak hit, and a 500lb bomb
machinegunboy98 8 months ago
@machinegunboy98 Im in agreement with that.
uh1cobra 8 months ago
Look closely at the film and the explosion comes from just in front and below the wing coming up and through the wing which is then trailing smoke, if a bomb had just fell through it then there would be no smoke, the wing folded due to the extreme weight of the ship and the structural damage plus the extreme forces put on the airframe when aloft. Those are my continue two cents.
uh1cobra 8 months ago
Thats a flak hit from just underneath the wing not a bomb going through the wing. Just because there is video from above the plane dont assume that a bomb fell on it from above. The bombs you see in the video being dropped are being dropped from the plane that lost the wing and a plane just off the starboard side of it, I can understand where the confusion lies when viewing this video because the camera is zoomed in giving you no reference to anything around it.
uh1cobra 8 months ago
FAIL
HektorPedo 8 months ago
Can't see what all the fuss is about You can see the bomb go straight through the wing.The world at war video clip of this incident showed a flak free sky.These poor boys suffered the fate of friendly fire.
When the incident is broken down to frame by frame an unarmed bomb enters the picture, then the wing.
It was safer to fly the bombers that were higher in the formations, that was until the fighters arrived.The lower you were in the formation the more chance of this kind of thing happening
efc23 9 months ago
Thumbs up if u abuse that play button...
bmwagain 9 months ago 2
Way to go dumbass -
TheBeechingAxe 10 months ago
This B-24M-15-CO, Serial Number 44-42058, was with the USAAF 7th AF, 494TH BG (H), 867th BS.
It was named 'THE BRIEF'.
It took off from the island of ANGAUR, (part of the PALAU group of islands), on May 14th, 1945, as part of a mission to attack Japanese Anti/Aircraft (A/A) positions located on the island of KOROR.
It was shot down by A/A, NOT A BOMB.
The wreckage lies just south of KOROR, at position 7', 20'N 134',29E.
Use the above info to find out the full story.
twinstu50 10 months ago 33
@twinstu50 After what I've read on the Pacific Wrecks about this case it isn't yet to fully deny that B24 was hit by bomb. It looks pretty much like that and american military could possibly want to hide the truth.
YevgeniyO 7 months ago
@YevgeniyO
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink".
twinstu50 7 months ago
@YevgeniyO
Why?.
twinstu50 7 months ago
@twinstu50 how do you even know that its that plane from a 3 sec video O.o???
Nikola24able 6 months ago
@Nikola24able
Look up the 867th Bomb Squadron records, as I did.
It's not hard.
twinstu50 6 months ago
@twinstu50 ok I was just wondering how did you figure it out :)
Nikola24able 6 months ago
@twinstu50 I have this footage on vhs video , and if you pause the film and view it frame by frame you can see the bomb coming from above and hitting the wing. no mistake at all....Jim
jimbothegarbo 6 months ago
@twinstu50 just replayed your 2 second clip maybe 30 times .
Definitely a bomb hitting the wing from above , can see it after it bursts through the fuel tank and out the underside .
If this was a flak hit , where is the explosion beneath the wing and the wing and fuelage lifting at the breakage of the spar ? they dont lift , they are both knocked DOWN .
zarquon53 6 months ago
thats a flak hit.... if its a bomb that plane will be totaled.. not just a broken wing
machvelocy 10 months ago 15
@machvelocy nar the bombs don't arm them selves till a certain altitude.
22hellman22 9 months ago
@machvelocy The bomb hasn't exploded because it hasn't fallen far enough for the little prop on the arming system to unwind and arm the fuse .
As the bomb rolls out of the plane a pin is pulled out allowing the little prop to start spinning , but it takes some seconds to spin free .
The bomb that hits is still horizontal so it is most likely from a squadronmate flying at a slightly higher level , like the plane the film is shot from .
zarquon53 6 months ago
@machvelocy ...no it was hit by a bomb from an aircraft above. The fuzing pistol wouldn't have wound out yet, so the bomb wouldn't have gone off.
MrMoorkey 2 months ago
You can see this footage on many games, movies and documentaries, and it's just a 88mm Flak Direct hit, and this B24D is DROPPING bombs, not being hit by bombs.....
Decafeiner21 10 months ago
IMHO It looks like a flak hit because the bombs are far from the aircraft.
We can see footage from Europe repeated on Pacific's documentaries and vice versa. ;)
santobr 11 months ago
Oh, and this was filmed in the Pacific theatre by the way. So I very much doubt that it was a German Flak round, particularly as such drops were typically made at over 20,000 feet which made hitting them with any kind of ground fire (especially the idiotic suggestion of "small arms fire") about as likely as the Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl this year.
wierdwesterner 11 months ago
This clip of film is featured on World at War. I can confirm that it was a bomb that hit the wing. The reason for the bomb not exploding is that there is a tiny propellor on every bomb that acts as a mechanical safety device. Once the bomb is dropped the propellor spins due to the ambient air flow as the bomb falls; once it rotates a set number of times it primes the bomb. They should have been flying in formation.
wierdwesterner 11 months ago
Go frame by frame. You'll see a blurry outline of at least one bomb. nolifemerc is right. It's a ripple of bombs. Note the quick downward push on the fuselage. You can see a bomb's shadow on the wing but no hole from a shot from below as well. I hope they got out.
ironpirites 11 months ago
German anti-aircraft flak fire from the ground.
AESOPPOSEA1 11 months ago
got photo of that in a book
gundam116 11 months ago
alot of sadness in such a short video...
when you think about it
cs512tr 11 months ago
listen up all with iq ower 65, what happens when a 250 kg bomb explodes on a b24 wing, image the whole plane will blow up dont u think, this is something else like small arms fire or a 40 mm
nolifemerc 11 months ago
@nolifemerc Idiot. Learn how these bombs work and you get the right back not to be called that. It was a bomb. Actually it was a ripple of bombs. Look closely...
Zachey2001 11 months ago
@nolifemerc noone is saying the bomb EXPLODED on the wing, it merely HIT the wing. The ignition that lit the feul tank came from friction between the bomb and the wing. The propeller fuse on the bombs ensures it dosnt explode if it hits a nearby plane on its way down. The bomb would have hit its intended target and exploded despite killing a freindly on its way down.
Debbiebabe69 7 months ago
Yeah I'm thinkin flak also....
hobbeekid 1 year ago
Flak not bomb
Disgorge2b 1 year ago
now that sucks
southsidedude101 1 year ago
@southsidedude101 Haha did you see my dads comments that took up 2 pages. Oh I am not suprised to see you on the video lol.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
@Warbirdguy1 wow great to see you hear lol i did see the comments your dad put
southsidedude101 1 year ago
(Part 12 Final) Instead of letting the facts take them to a conclusion, the seek only the facts that support what they want to believe and discard the rest. So sad and so ignorant we are as a whole. Oh wait, some wont like that statement because its not what they want to hear.....
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
@Warbirdguy1 Tell your Dad I studied Aerospace Engineering at College and I wish there are the opportunities that there were in his day! I've got a longer version of this clip, one with the borders included so you can see the tailplane, and can slow it down to 1/7th of it's original speed. A stick of 10 bombs can be seen dropping diagonally closer to the bomber from beyond the starboard wing before the impact, if he is interested. I guessed he was by the full page of comments he left!
wierdwesterner 11 months ago
@wierdwesterner Ciould you upload the video to youtube? We would love to see it!
Warbirdguy1 11 months ago
@wierdwesterner Will you upload to youtube, it still does not make any sense because of how aircraft bombs work. I must say this though, Aerospace Engineering has nothing to do with aircraft ordinance and because of the uneducated and arrogant comments I have been seeing we are trusting noone. Please provide proof. I am sure that you are not the only one who has seen it therefore it must be on the internet. I can't find it so you may be bluffing to make yourself look better.
Warbirdguy1 11 months ago
@Warbirdguy1 Since I don't have any video recording or compression software and because you were rude, I won't upload it. If you want to see it for yourself you can buy the DVD of "World at War" on amazon and watch the "Pacific" episode. Such incidents were common during mass formation bombings during World War 2, especially in the RAF night bombing campaigns. FYI, Aerospace Engineering has everything to do with weapons ordinance, particularly since the propelled ordinance age, thanks.
wierdwesterner 11 months ago 2
@wierdwesterner Alright, cool. I will look into that, I appriciate you input and being honest!
Warbirdguy1 11 months ago
@wierdwesterner Problem with this post is the the British didn't fly enmasse at night. They were required to fly solo strikes, they took off alone, no form up, just go and bomb.
Toddinfantry 7 months ago
@Toddinfantry It is true there was no form up, bombers made the journey alone however bomb runs were made by up to 50 aircraft who massed over the target via different routes. This was done due to the limited availability of pathfinder crews in Mosquitos or lighter bombers and the increased accuracy of group bombing. There is actual footage and photographs of a British incendiary raid over Germany where a lower flying bomber is silhouetted against the flames below, google it.
wierdwesterner 7 months ago
@wierdwesterner
The night bomber 'streams' were well separated.
Todays night flying aids were barely embryonic back then.
Basically, the 'stream' , of outward bound bombers, followed a planned route, bombed, and returned by a route that would not conflict with any incoming stream yet to bomb.
Here's a teaser.
A Lancaster pilot was awarded the Victoria Cross, though badly wounded, he 'pressed on'.
His comment as to why he 'pressed' on says it all.
A VERY brave man!.
twinstu50 7 months ago
@twinstu50 Definite seperation of streams were impossible. Most crews were inexperienced young men flying at night without any navigational aid other than charting and identifying rivers and other landmarks in the darkness. Getting lost was the norm, as was missing the target entirely. Collisions happened regularly. There are regular accounts of bombers hit by bombs and MAKING IT BACK despite the damage, such as one Stirling bomber of 37 squadron.
Teaser = Bill Reid?
wierdwesterner 7 months ago
@wierdwesterner you brits bombed at night. americans bombed by day.
jros83 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wierdwesterner
The night bomber 'streams' were well separated.
Todays night flying aids were barely embryonic back then.
Basically, the 'stream' , of outward bound bombers, followed a planned route, bombed, and returned by a route that would not conflict with any incoming stream yet to bomb.
Here's a teaser.
A Lancaster pilot was awarded the Victoria Cross, though badly wounded, he 'pressed on'.
His comment as to why he 'pressed' on says it all.
Still, A VERY brave man!.
twinstu50 7 months ago
(Part 11) I have 20 years experience teaching and maintaining aircraft weapons systems, have worked on many aicraft including B-24 armament. I have restored over 200 Norden bombsights and similar aircraft components and am very familiar with aircraft armament. I base what I have said here on that hands-on experience. One of the many things I have learned about humans, they believe what they want to believe.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 10) So the only sure thing is.. Dont believe anyone here that says they know what happened and that someone else is wrong. Not the kind of people you want to take advice from, dont trust them. Remember, there is no shortage of opinions and so called experts, but there is a real shortage of good advice and real experts. You guess which this post is for yourself.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 9) Sorry, I spent too much time in the military myself to believe what I hear. I know better,, I spent over 30 years dealing with the military. But I cant discount completely what the veterans say either. I also am really not sure they, in the heat of the event can say they know exactly what happened. It is near impossible to tell by looking at this video here and tell exacty what happened either.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 8) There are so many instances of the military modifying the truth for their own purposes. Think about, Tillman being killed, The WW1 Thanksgiving truce, the badly damaged B-17 that was escorted back to the channel by a German fighter, the military, explosions at American industry during WW2, General Dynamics claiming there were no electrical chaffing problems with the F-16 and The football player, Tillman killed by friendly fire.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 7) There are no more bombs dropping near or onto the wing after the initial damage. Now from another perspective as to what history tells us. History is written by the most part by those in power at the time.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 6) Also note that bombs were not dropped individually, they were released sequentially, one after another, there are no bombs near that were dropped before the one that hit or any after. The only bombs you see dropping ar those dropped far behind this aircraft. remember if a plane was above this one, it was in formation and traveling at approx. the same speed, you would see more bombs in the length of time it took to show these events.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 5) Remember, as far as vertical speed, the bomb was stationary until it was released. The forward speed of the bomb/aircraft would have negligible effect in this scenario. Upon numerous views of this video seen here, there appears to be a shadow of a bomb shape on the trailing edge of the wing. This could be the shadow of the bomb, of the shadow of the plume of fuel as it rises above the wing.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 4) If a 500 lb bomb dropped on it from even only 200 feet, it would most likely cause catastrophic failure of the spar and the metal {(aluminum and steel components) would easily cause a spark and enough heat to ignite the fuel in the wing. If either a bomb or flack impacted the wing, the results would look very similar. I would have expected to be able to see a bomb at the low speed it would be traveling, but no way could flack be detected in the video.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 3) As with modern fuses, such as the M904 or M905 fuses, vanes turn to align the arming mechanism, this requires the arming vane to rotate in the airstream a few hundred feet in most cases before it will arm. A bomb dropping from lets say 300 feet above would posses quite a bit of energy from falling 300 feet. With the load on the wing from flying with a heavy fuel load, ammo for the guns and bombs, the wing would be already under a lot of stress.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 2) Aviation fuel is approx 100 octane, extremely flammable. A flack detonation in the wing in my opinion would have caused immediate ignition of the fuel in this portion of the wing. A bomb dropped from above would not have traveled more than a few hundred feet at most. It would not have time to arm the nose fuse.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
(Part 1) There are many here to say they know exactly what happened. I think the person you should believe is not the one that says they know for sure, or says someone else is wrong. I will give my observations of this video based on the video and my experience with military aircraft and armament. First, a flack projectile travels much faster than a bomb dropped from a couple hundred feet above and most flak explode on contact, but mainly using a proximity fuse.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
Comment removed
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
@Warbirdguy1 why is this comment removoed
southsidedude101 1 year ago
@southsidedude101 Becuase it was too short and dad wanted to elaborate more. So he deleted the original.
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
serious question-did this happen in the pacific or over ploesti?unfortunate either way, thanks for posting
RonyMexico 1 year ago
nice shot
drglibrl 1 year ago
It only looks like something has hit it from above because when the aircraft disintegrated at the port (left) wing root, the starboard (right) wing will continue to provide lift causing the plane to rotate over on its back and spin. An almost impossible situation to get out of alive.
moogug 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you watch very close over a few times you can see the flack hit the wing from underneath.
tomasbobby 1 year ago
If you watch very close over a few times you can see the flack hit the wing from underneath.
tomasbobby 1 year ago
that was no flak burst on the wing. flak tended to burst upwards. look very carefully. its definately a falling object going down through the wing.
tubbymarshall 1 year ago
LOL anyone who thought that was a bomb is a complete fool. If a bomb had exploded that plane would have been blown into a trillion pieces and the film we are watching wouldnt exist because the plane it was taken from would also be destroyed. They were not dropping firecrackers people. Those things had major explosive yield.
Nonsensei436 1 year ago 2
@Nonsensei436 Correct...except that bombs need to be armed to explode. Note the small propeller on the nose of a bomb, that needs to rotate hundreds of times to arm the bomb, so the bomb would not be "live" until much farther in the fall. The are many reports of bombs being dropped on lower aircraft with no explosion.
Toddinfantry 1 year ago
@Toddinfantry absolutely correct sir.
tubbymarshall 1 year ago
@Nonsensei436 YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT ! BOMBS HAVE TIMERS ON THEM YOU GOON !IVE SEEN THE SAME WITH B17. DONT REACT WIYHOUT KNOWLEGE.
rsm93 1 year ago
@rsm93 YOU ARE YELLING AT ME IN ALL CAPS LIKE A FUCKING MORON WHILE AGREEING WITH ME GOOD MOVE.
Nonsensei436 1 year ago
@rsm93 Hey buddy, aircraft GPBs do not have timers. They have fuses... So don't react without knowledge...
Warbirdguy1 1 year ago
That plane which lost a wing was dropping its bomb.If you watch closely those bombs are under that plane.That plane were probably hit by flak
ctforce0076 1 year ago
that B-24 was brought down by flak, not a bomb hitting the wing, if you happen to catch it on the History channel it shows the full footage on the plane getting hit and falling out of formation and the none of the crew made it out :(
1966omc 1 year ago
Its sad to think those people through that window died a few seconds later in that B-24.
jimmyxx3 1 year ago
Wow someone in there attempt to act like they know everything pretty much claims they where flying the damn plane Rofl. Watch in slow mo you can clearly see the wing open up in the shape of a bomb being drooped on top of it. That shape is telling.
oldnaziwino 1 year ago
there are bombs falling on the wing clearly seen
ww2footage 1 year ago
@ww2footage lol they are , the bombs are on the rigth side behind the plane, what do u think happens if a 500lb bomb explode on the wing of a b24, you think there is any thing left?
nolifemerc 1 year ago
I have seen this film MANY times, always thought it was flak. So did my dad who was a B-17 pilot (35 missions) with the 385th BG & witnessed many Forts + a few Liberators become victims of flak, fighters, mid air collisions, etc.
He also said accidents such has higher elements releasing their bombs on lower elements was usually due to the releasing aircraft being out of position, whether from dodging fighters, flak or just human error.
A just released bomb traveling too fast to see? Negative.
GeddyBre 1 year ago
False. My dad was with the 458th and says that this was a direct flak hit. I agree with raf1231D.
verobeachbob1 1 year ago
Shot down over Koror in the Palau Islands by Jap flak I believe. The tail gunner got out OK only to be murdered by the Japs on the ground. Bent prop .com has found and researched the wreck in detail. Correct me if I am wrong, thanks.
leesherman100 1 year ago
There is film footage of B-17s in formation where one above drops it's bombs and one bomb takes out part of the tail of one below. This picture is of a B-24 taking a direct hit by flak. One of the interesting pictures is of two B-17s that mated while forming up for a mission.
49bobbyk 1 year ago
YES FOR THE 500 TIME, THIS IS NOT A BOMB HIT FROM ABOWE, IF IT WAS A BOMB 250-500KG DO YOU DUDES REALLY THINK IT ONLY MAKE A HOLE IN THE WING, THE WHOLE F PLANE WOULD BE GONE. ITS A FLAK HIT OK?
nolifemerc 1 year ago
This is sort of optical illusion-y.
CaptainWatson234 1 year ago
suppose nobody survived..
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
That was a direct hit by flak.
49bobbyk 1 year ago
fail
davidcool140 1 year ago
I bet the crew was like ''WTF''
Latvietis96 1 year ago
Man that was some bomb
tryithere 1 year ago
I can see how people would assume that was from a bomb-hit. It looks like there's pieces falling away underneath, but I think that's just the bombs falling. But whether that's what this video shows or not, it did happen, quite often actually. I've seen some pretty impressive photos of planes holed by "friendly" bombs...that's one reason the fuses don't arm right away. I think it was more common with the British, as they bombed at night...they depended on keeping formation to prevent such things.
justforever96 1 year ago
Poor guys. Ever thought about how hard it must have been to escape from a bomber spinning down missing a wing and on fire? In a fighter, you just pop the canopy and jump, but most crew-positions in a bomber required going to an exit and jumping. Not easy if the plane is upside down, spinning and tumbling, and you're pressed against the wall by the G's. If you're lucky, it'll break up around you without exploding. Otherwise, how does a tail gunner get to the door?
justforever96 1 year ago
It was flak but do you really think the poor fuckers inside it cared?
chavmong 1 year ago
Doesn't look at all like a bomb hit the plane. I looks more like a flak shell. Even if it was a bomb, do you know how many times pilots in the Royal Air Force and the Luftwaffe have made air collisions? Airplanes are far easier to control than free-fall bombs.
Planbskate230 1 year ago
And my Dad was in the plane behind your Dad's plane and saw everything too.
He told me the yanks were not servicing their planes properly because they hadn't been able to have a shower every 5 minutes or their ration of 17 flavours of ice cream and hadn't been able to bomb Brit POW camps for the last day or 2 !
yiblon 1 year ago
@yiblon Be fair--your Dad's plane missed this mission because it was grounded with electrical problems (it was British after all).
airben3 1 year ago
@yiblon Who was it that held up the fuckin D-Day beach break-out 'cause they had to stop and brew up a cuppa-fuckin-TEA every 5-6 hours?
And with military geniuses like Montgomery AIR-DROPPING Brit POWs to the Germans on a regular schedule, those camps were probably hard for the US to AVOID.
ironhorzmn 1 year ago
Stupid Americans.
ttdantt10384 1 year ago
Just read another reference to the Army Air Corps CT-70 16mm as the source ?? Ive never been to DC so I cant say personally. I wish I knew what portions of the film they are referring to...........
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
Rafle231D: I thought the original footage shot while airborne was taken from a handheld 8mm camera ?
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
@1MtnBoy
Cameras used were most likely 16mm Bell & Howell Filmo. No sound, could be hand or motor cranked, or use of an internal spring mechanism.
Wailwulf 1 year ago
@Wailwulf aaaaaaah B & H, I remember my Mom had one of those my Brother and our friends and I used to make a home-movie with in school way back in the day. we had colour film but no sound. LoL.
I have read several articles that include stock credited from an "Auricon" CT-70 that some of the Army flyers were using, dont know much about the CT-70 but I do remember the B & H, thx Wulf.
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
Rafl231D: if your serious, most of these programs are on DVD one aired in 1986, another in 1992. you ( or your association) could contact the producers but I wouldnt expect much. in fact there may already be a disclaimer in the credits I havent spotted. misleading as it may be to myself & others to include this plane in a program about other losses to flak over Germany, it does not HAVE to be historically accurate to be put in a copyrighted broadcast for entertainment purposes. Good Luck.
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
unlikely a bomb, ya!
Nogger86Germany 1 year ago
Comment removed
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
@1MtnBoy Thank you for your comment. I'm gathering the pertinent info, including frame by frame pix of the orig 35mm film & the stills made by others. I plan to publish the info on the 494th BG(H) website - provided my cohorts have no objections & we have the disk space. I'm not sure how to contact "all" the TV networks to correct them. I have knowledge of only 1video & it has it correct. If you can provide me other info on the other videos I will attempt to correct them as well.
raf1231D 1 year ago
@raf1231D you can view this footage on DHC "Wings" 2002 episode 4 and the " memphis-belle" documentary shown last year on "Discovery Channnel". and the last 2004 episode of "Wings of the lufftwaffe on "Military-channel" episode #12 the controversial raids on Dresden and Nurburg.
referenced to the 33 aircraft lost to AAA over Germany.
you can also contact the smithsonian natl archive in Wash DC., I understand this clip was copied from original footage for the DOD in 1958. it is 102 minutes long.
1MtnBoy 1 year ago
@1MtnBoy Thanks for the more detailed info - really appreciate it. This is a rather low priority project for me at the moment. On this particular incident, my Dad was piloting another B-24. I've got a ton of documentation on it & over the last 9 years, I've talked to probably 30% of the men who flew this mission. But the info is scattered all over my research stuff. It takes time to get organized. Again, thanks.
raf1231D 1 year ago
With all this speculation and chatter, for some real detail please read the MACR (Missing Air Crew Rpt). Since YouTube makes it difficult to post a url I've had to replace the "foward-slashes" with "spaces": ( raysestak-dot-com 494bga reference macrs 14351.pdf ) -- & checkout the rest of the website: ( raysestak-dot-com 494bga ). Also look at ( pacificwrecks-dot-com aircraft b-24 44-42058.html ).
raf1231D 1 year ago 3
You can understand why crews in the planes above this one would want it to be recorded as a flak strike!.....but bombs from above were a danger and did at times cause damage and death to those flying below.
efc23 1 year ago
@efc23 I'm sorry, I'm a bit irritated with the know-it-alls on this WWII Pacific B-24 incident. Read my posts for the REAL story. I've seen the 35 mm film & pix at the Nat. Archives & have copies plus the mission rpt, the MACR & personal stories of men who witnessed it. My Dad co-piloted the plane following it. His bombardier had a clear view & told me about it as did the bombardier of the plane in front of it who took still pixs w/post-bomb camera as it fell. IT WAS FLAK - NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
raf1231D 1 year ago 20
@raf1231D Now that is funny, your on here blowing your horn about all the details and you are calling others "know-it-alls"??? LOL!! Go back into your mom's basement and make some more model airplanes. And stop sniffing the cement.
laughingboy0068 1 year ago
@raf1231D The men who witnessed the incident....are saying they didn't drop a bomb through their mates wing....killing them!
Well they would wouldn't they.......if I could blame it on flak I would too.
The world at war video shows a longer version of the incident, it shows a bomb passing through the wing......SORRY!
Flak or Bomb......it's the same out come for the poor lads in the B-24.
efc23 1 year ago
raf1231D 1 year ago 3
@raf1231D So, do you have any idea whether any of the crew escaped the plane before it crashed? And if they did, did they survive the war, or did they die in prison camps? God, WWII was such a terrible cataclysm. That's the best word I can think of to describe it as a whole. So, so many people dying. Such massive movements of people and equipment, social upheaval, everything! RIP to them all.
justforever96 1 year ago
@justforever96
A quick Google shows that all the crew were killed except the navigator who was captured and executed :(
JimThBrit 1 year ago
@JimThBrit
what the fuck were they over japan?
Frenchy849 1 year ago
@raf1231D ok, i'm looking for footage of a WW2 bober getting hit by a friendly dropped bomb from above. if this nisn't it, it looks similar. the clip exists because I've seen it in the past and there are no doubts about it, u see the huge bomb falling on the wing and the bomber going down,
Do you happen to know which clip I'm talking about? thanks
britoca 1 year ago
@britoca Sometime or the other I've seen the clip you're talking about. My recollection is it was a B-17 over Germany. I have other notes here regarding this incident because it occurred on a mission my father flew & I've researched it. Friendly bombs dropped thru wings rarely if ever happened in the Pacific simply because there were fewer planes on a mission. One of the biggest mission flown over Japan involved around 150 B-24 from 3 BS, 50 B-25s and 150 P-51s bombing a fairly widespread area.
raf1231D 1 year ago