https://youtu.be/nqJiWbD08Yw
I'm a big fan of Tom Scott's YouTube stuff. He does multiple different threads of stuff. My personal favourite is "Citation Needed" (bit sweary); there is one of these about the invasion of Fishguard.
Thats a good un - ta la
Cooooooooooooooooooool 8)
I wasn't aware real explosions watched movies.
Can we put him through the kitty flap?
Thanks Last Hussar, well worth a re watch :)
I enjoy most of Tom's work
This is a fun game.
Not one I'd play with some people here...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FJSI7QTAt_o
That was really interesting, particularly seeing the dynamic change :-\
Good stuff. Back in the 80s in Film school we had a course "pyrotechnics 1" when we were told how to do this, but never got to practice. Some health and safety thing, we were only given squibs to play with to simulate bullet strikes.
Anyway, the guy who did the effects for 1989 version of "The Winter War" movie told that you get realistic artillery strikes when you dig a hole, put some explosives at the bottom and then half a bag of Thomas slag on top. Apparently it looks the part going up and floating down.
Cheers,
Aksu
Many games 'Explosion'/'Strike' markers are wrong. More 'Hollywood'!
Instead of 'Flame'... mainly upward... a 'star' shaped, dust or dark'ish smoke coloured, more horizontal... 'Blast' would be better for most lighter HE/Grenades.
Heavier Arty/bombs... penetrating ground... a more vertical component of dirt.
However, they are only 'representation', same as figs/models are. And they look 'pretty'! You don't see many table representations of 'Shell'/'Shrapnel' airbursts... probably the most common use of Arty, cannonballs apart.
Your average H&M film would look boring if cannonballs merely bounced their way through lines.
QuoteYour average H&M film would look boring if cannonballs merely bounced their way through lines.
..
merely? (thinking of maimed, disembowelled, splattered, exploding human flesh and bone). Perhaps too challenging for the CGI guys (or censors)?
Movies do blood and guts anyway. In long shot it wouldn't be the imagery of a bombardment.
There is a description from a British officer (I think at Waterloo) watching a cannonball get closer, and not ducking so he wouldn't give his men a bad example, and it completely decapitating the file next to him. Cannon balls moved slowly enough you could watch them approach with time to think and react!
QuoteCannon balls moved slowly enough you could watch them approach with time to think and react!
Depends on what point you see it in its flight path, I would imagine (obviously, because I've never been a target of such missiles!). For example, I've read of one instance when a soldier thought one was slow enough he could stop it with his foot but ended up losing a leg. But that makes me think that one was nearing the end of its trajectory. For others (at optimum velocity), I imagine there was time to think but not enough time to react in the way you might think ....
... although, watching this video (apparently shell and not solid shot), I'm even struggling to see the incoming projectile! :o
Nice find, Westmarcher. I could not see the projectiles at all! I suppose that if one was right on track at long range a cannonball might be visible.
As for 'reaction'... not much time there...maybe enough to drop. But 'time' can 'go funny' sometimes! I remember stupidly falling off a horse at canter...and everything seemed to be 'slo-mo' with plenty of time to think... until I hit the damp sand! LOL!
Some decent shooting there. Makes one wonder if rules may err towards 'randomness' sometimes. Certainly, counter battery fire would have a good chance of success... and against inf/cav...
Initially, was thinking that gun might have been rifled... but no, smoothbore. Scruffy blighters, though... not much polishing done there! lol.
A rolling cannonball might not be moving fast... but will still have a LOT of 'stored energy'... so, no, not a good idea to 'stop' it!
As for movies... 'Gettysburg' seemed pretty good until Pickett's Charge and the 'trampolining' Rebs!
Actually, having re-watched some clips from 'Gettysburg'... good stuff! Not as 'overdone' as I 'remembered' ;)
This is an interesting video which, I think, I've already seen, or one very much like it. The thing that impressed me was the accuracy of that smoothbore (12pdr?) and the thought of standing in a line under fire from a battery of them. It must have been horrific. Even if they missed, dropped short or over-shot, the effect on morale must have been significant the longer a unit had to endure it.
QuoteMovies do blood and guts anyway. In long shot it wouldn't be the imagery of a bombardment.
There is a description from a British officer (I think at Waterloo) watching a cannonball get closer, and not ducking so he wouldn't give his men a bad example, and it completely decapitating the file next to him. Cannon balls moved slowly enough you could watch them approach with time to think and react!
It all depends on crossing speed.
From the right position, and with smokeless propellant people have even been able to watch battleship shells.
(Outbound battleship shells).
Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 29 December 2021, 11:20:00 AMIt all depends on crossing speed.
From the right position, and with smokeless propellant people have even been able to watch battleship shells.
(Outbound battleship shells).
You can see a variety of projectiles in the right conditions. I have seen both Airgun pellets and .22 rimfire rounds after firing them
You can normally see a feild gun shell to the top of it's trajectory. From then on it disappears from sight. And know I don't know why.
It's because at the top of it's trajectory, it has no vertical velocity.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/7G0BYq1GmlZJgfqLnZ9yT5muQXoviono6FCH8wlxtQHt_5jI9HCRlfCGXAhfUYodD5T8YZuFo4CQ-cpo9nCX7V5H8uQg6WNtJUy070G4wQDt8Q)
While we are on the Venn diagram of "Tom Scott" and "things Pendrakeners have heard of", here is "citation needed" for Mad Jack Churchill.
Gary (in glasses) is normally a motor mouth; watch him at 3m35ish when his normal exaggeration can't match Mad Jack's actual actions.
Also Chris (beard) getting a point for the
incorrect answer to Churchill's escape, because by this point ANYTHING is possible!
.... meanwhile .... back to Horse & Musket era artillery. :P
Did anyone see the "follow-up" YouTube video entitled Artillery Games? I recommend it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPIMqvtocfU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPIMqvtocfU)
I have read accounts of WW1 pilots who could see heavy arty shells 'going past'and realising that 'there' was not the place to be! ;)
Quote from: Heedless Horseman on 29 December 2021, 02:29:51 PMI have read accounts of WW1 pilots who could see heavy arty shells 'going past'and realising that 'there' was not the place to be! ;)
Seem to remember that more aircraft were lost due to collisiion with heavy shells than in air to air combat.
Not sure about that.
But, most WW1 Memoirs were written by 'Scout/Fighter' pilots... who survived to write.
Just thinking about those who went up in BE2's! Slow, unreliable, no maneuverability, no gun... 'loitering' over very hostile environment...when 'spotting' was 'Their Job'. Daily. A silent Salute to them.
The recent Russian movie of the Decembrist revolution has IMHO fairly good movie representation of solid shot and canister against dense formations. The St Petersburg square shooting starts at 1h40mins https://youtu.be/uRMmG-0rMVE (https://youtu.be/uRMmG-0rMVE)
Cheers,
Aksu
QuoteYou can normally see a feild gun shell to the top of it's trajectory. From then on it disappears from sight. And know I don't know why.
Crossing speed again: On the way up, it is travelling almost directly away.
Past the top, it is tracking faster relative to the shooter's viewpoint.
The thing that strikes me about that ACW artillery video is the sound it makes, almost a whistling, vibrating sound. Having a whole battery of those aimed your way with that horrendous incoming noise, then seeing them impact around you, must have been terrifying.
True. And relatively low MV means time to hear incoming.
But ANY incoming Arty would be Most unpleasant. WW1 'Wizz Bangs', WW2 'Moaning Minies'...
HV AT rounds... 88 or 75... not much time to register before the Clang.
One can only imagine the fear among 'formed' troops having to advance across 'Real' battlefield distances.. not just a few table inches... when under fire.
Having no experience... and thinking 'Table' Distances... seeing Vid of actual battlefields... My God...How did They do it?
When I attended the Austerlitz bicentenary, one of the things that most struck me was the way the ground - frozen iron-hard - transmitted terrifying vibrations when the guns fired. Add to that the consciousness that they were trying to kill you, and you've got a good understanding of why units roll 1 on their reaction tests.
I was also struck by how good hot mead is in freezing weather, and how awkward it is to hang around with a trainee you fancy but whose exam you'll have to grade in a week!
Same with Cavalry.You can often FEEL the ground vibrate when several horses are on the move.. and If they were coming At You with Intent...
My police training did involve the mounted branch charging us, and yes it was terrifing
A few years ago. a very lovely Gel of my aquaintance, asked whether I would accompany her 'To the Races'. Full of expectation, my intent was to get 'trackside'... and experience the 'Thunder of Hooves' at close quarters!
Sadly. her 'garment'... it was 'Ladies Day'... meant that She was feeling a little bit cold and that drinkies were required. Being a Gentleman of sorts, I, of course, acceded... and did not get Anywhere close!
L.O.L ! :'(