PDA

View Full Version : Finest WWII CG documentary (featuring the battle of Santa Cruz islands) I ever see



Wildnoob
06-14-2009, 08:21 AM
part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBD9EoBTahQ

parte II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...0u8s&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAXfj_U0u8s&feature=related)

part III: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...uZBU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQjxojAuZBU&feature=related)

I think that many things are unic, so critizen something is not very easy. but in comparison with THC dogfigths series, this "thing" is just FARRRRRR superior in my view. it shows losses from both sides, engine sounds and it's very didatic. if I was a history teacher would use this kind material for my classes in studying WWII without doubt. of course that is just CG animation and with sure have it's erros, but I just love it. even that the didatic content is in Japanese and I don't speak a single word from this langague and thefore don't manage to understand nothing, it's magnic for me. really, wouldn't say really the best but with totally sure one of the top documentarys I ever see. I'm being imparcial belive, it's not because the pacific theater of operations is my favorite one, but because it show many things from the battle. well but that's just MY view and I don't know anything and I are a idiot, but would like that you folks watch it and share your opinions about it.

Wildnoob
06-14-2009, 09:49 AM
I though that the torpedo bombers, especially early in the war when the Japanese type 91 torpedo was the best of it's class in world, that it was some sort of stand off weapon and more safety to bse used for attack ships, especially because the torpedo sigth wich would make the deflection calcule for launch the torpedo as far from AAA fire as possible and ensure a hit on the target. but looks that the realitty was really very different. at least on this CG reconstitution the B5N's get very close to their targets and many get shoot down by AAA and miss their torpedos. be a torpedo bomber pilot no way was a safe task, especially in the torpedo launch run, that I though it was more safety them dive bombing, altough seems that I was very wrong. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

jensenpark
06-14-2009, 10:11 AM
spectacular. Nice find.

Gives a great sense of the chaos of war.

Trefle
06-14-2009, 10:17 AM
Thanks for sharing the link Wildnoob , they did an impressive job with CG , was really nice to watch http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Wildnoob
06-14-2009, 10:25 AM
thank you very much folks, hope that you all enjoy it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'm just a sim pilot, never touch in a airplane, I'm not joking with real pilot's, but again at least by this CG, miss bombs in divebombing ships is a problem to me in IL2 also. logic, with sure is no way a easy task hit a moving vessel with heavy AAA fire from 3000 meters (10000 ft) or more in a dive, but IL2 seems to have simulate this at least well I would risk to say, because I think this CG is pretty accurate, and I always miss a lot of bombs while divebombing ships on the sim. but really, I never feel the chaos (even that is wat may I can a superficial feeling) of the aerial warfare since I have watch this CG reconstitution, in any movie that I have watched. can have it's erros, of course it must have, but is just amazing. awesome job in capture the intense and brutal aerial warfare from both sides early in the pacific war.

R_Target
06-14-2009, 10:44 AM
Can anyone confirm that this is Tochy's work? I remember seeing a DVD advertised somewhere but can't find the site now.

Uufflakke
06-14-2009, 12:12 PM
It's indeed made by Masaru Tochibayashi aka Tochy and here is the DVD:

http://www.pacificwrecks.com/reviews/3dcg.html

You can d/l the 29 minutes version here:

http://www.aeronautic.dk/Warships%20movies.htm

Wildnoob
06-14-2009, 12:34 PM
thank you very much for the links mister Uufflakke!

this one I need to buy and have in my colection http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (the animation itself already wroth everything but just hope that a english version is avaliable though).

Gammelpreusse
06-14-2009, 02:01 PM
Gotta say, if this video illustrates one thing, then it is the extreme effectiveness of american naval AAA. Got a bit sweaty by some of the scenes after IL2 pacific expiriences.

Thanks for posting, Wildnoob! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Wildnoob
06-14-2009, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
Gotta say, if this video illustrates one thing, then it is the extreme effectiveness of american naval AAA. Got a bit sweaty by some of the scenes after IL2 pacific expiriences.

Thanks for posting, Wildnoob! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

thank you very much if you like from it! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

and yes, totally agreed with you. late in the war the USN introduce radar guied guns. this turn the things even worse for Japanese flyiers, altough by this time the main treath for American vessel where suicide (kamikaze) fligths. but still prove to be very effective especially for this far more dangeours new treath. when I play a quick mission with a D3A "Val" Japanese dive bomber in the coral sea map, last time I try attack a British aircraft carrier and simple couldn't realise my bomb with precision, the AAA always caugth me before, because for do this I would need to launch it from lower altitude (don't account my experiences, I'm a totally n00b) and I was having the same fate as the D3A's in this animation. the AAA guns where not part of "decoration" like some idiot movies show. they can really bring you down, especially if you are flying early war Japanese planes that don't feature armor protection or self sealing fuel tanks. even for well armored planes is already a very great treath. it's just scare, most of those aviators probably don't imaginate the life risk they where taking by flying such kind of plane and have to face a so heavy AAA. they are really brave, all flyers from all sides are, but make such attacks is almost suicide in most cases, especially for the lead planes in the divebombing I would say. maybe I are being sensasionalist because the own D3A, early in the war, his bomb hit score was 80 %. altough when Japan loose most of his professional pilot's and by the introduction of new allied figther aicraft and the clear obsolece of the D3A, this rate drop to 20 % if I'm not wrong.

willyvic
06-14-2009, 02:54 PM
Nice find. Enjoyed it a bunch. Keeps ya on the edge of your seat don't it?

WV

Uufflakke
06-14-2009, 03:38 PM
Tochy got his own site, can't understand a single word of it but click on the images and you will see some of his other CGI.

http://www.k4.dion.ne.jp/~suppon/ (http://www.k4.dion.ne.jp/%7Esuppon/)

Enforcer572005
06-14-2009, 09:39 PM
this is pretty impressive. Just wish he'd do an english version, but.....

And re: USN AAA, by this time there were a tremendous number of 20mm, 40mm, and auto 5 in guns. I think the proximity fused 40s and 5inchers were in some use by now. By 44, the navy AA was even worse. The 40mm proximity rds were the most effective AA weapon from what I've seen.

zardozid
06-15-2009, 02:39 AM
Thanks for the download links...the guy is truly a master.

Ba5tard5word
06-15-2009, 02:54 AM
Damn, that was pretty intense. That guy should work for the History Channel or make video games or something if he doesn't already.

JtD
06-15-2009, 03:39 AM
Originally posted by Enforcer572005:

And re: USN AAA, by this time there were a tremendous number of 20mm, 40mm, and auto 5 in guns. I think the proximity fused 40s and 5inchers were in some use by now. By 44, the navy AA was even worse. The 40mm proximity rds were the most effective AA weapon from what I've seen.

The US AAA of that time consisted mainly of 5", 1.1" and 20mm guns. The 20mm just being fitted to the more modern warships. The 40mm was rare, present on only a few ships. The 20mm guns was the most successful AAA gun in that engagement, as the IJN dive bombers attacking the carriers pull out nicely above the other units, most notably the South Dakota BB and allowed the gunners easy shots.

The 40mm was never used with proximity fuses as standard, there wouldn't be much point to it since a 40mm shell is not big enough to do a decent amount of damage with a nearby explosion.

There is extensive original video material from this battle available on the internet, much more scary to watch than this CGI version.

Very nice videos though, love the IJN ships!

GH_Klingstroem
06-15-2009, 03:47 AM
I dont get it!!! where are the purple and pink and gay blue tracers... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Vigotsky
06-15-2009, 03:49 AM
Amazing!

M_Gunz
06-15-2009, 05:08 AM
Closest thing I've seen to it are shows like Battle 360 that by compare are far less artful and detailed.

ADD: Well, maybe -- They did a good job on Battle 360 bringing survivors and footage in. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyh0axY9qSo&NR=1)

FlatSpinMan
06-15-2009, 06:29 AM
Brilliant. Gonna watch this again!
Thanks a lot Wildnoob for pointing us to it.

Gammelpreusse
06-15-2009, 07:08 AM
"the japanese would love to get another shot at her!"

"USS enterprise! a fighting city of steel!"

"...right smack on top of that sucker"

Pity, phrases like these and the overal presentation devalue the show quite a bit. More propaganda then documentary. The japanese version also is far superiour to give a better picture of the whole operatiion, and they manage that without narration!

Really a good opportunity at a side by side comparison between two shows about the same topic.

Blutarski2004
06-15-2009, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Enforcer572005:

And re: USN AAA, by this time there were a tremendous number of 20mm, 40mm, and auto 5 in guns. I think the proximity fused 40s and 5inchers were in some use by now. By 44, the navy AA was even worse. The 40mm proximity rds were the most effective AA weapon from what I've seen.

The US AAA of that time consisted mainly of 5", 1.1" and 20mm guns. The 20mm just being fitted to the more modern warships. The 40mm was rare, present on only a few ships. The 20mm guns was the most successful AAA gun in that engagement, as the IJN dive bombers attacking the carriers pull out nicely above the other units, most notably the South Dakota BB and allowed the gunners easy shots.

The 40mm was never used with proximity fuses as standard, there wouldn't be much point to it since a 40mm shell is not big enough to do a decent amount of damage with a nearby explosion.

There is extensive original video material from this battle available on the internet, much more scary to watch than this CGI version.

Very nice videos though, love the IJN ships! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... Jtd, pretty much spot-on. The only comment I'd make is that, courtesy of a minor collision, SODAK had undergone a repair/refit at Pearl Harbor not long before Santa Cruz and at that time had her AAA suite upgraded with the addition of 20+ x 20mm [probably single mounts] and 16 x 40mm [probably 4 x quad mounts]. Two of the three original 1.1 quad mounts were at that time removed.

Another bit of SODAK trivia: she only carried 8 x 5/38 twin mounts, instead of 10 as fitted to her sister ships. The two deleted mounts provided space and tonnage for expanded command and control facilities to assist in her projected role as a flagship.

Over and above the widespread adoption of the VT fuse in early 1944, one of the often unmentioned factors which made USN AAA so deadly was the adaptation of the Mk14 gyro gunsight for control of 20mm and 40mm AAA fire.

joeap
06-15-2009, 11:14 AM
AWESOOOOOME Thanks friend. Tochy is one of my faves. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

M_Gunz
06-15-2009, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
"the japanese would love to get another shot at her!"

"USS enterprise! a fighting city of steel!"

"...right smack on top of that sucker"

Pity, phrases like these and the overal presentation devalue the show quite a bit. More propaganda then documentary. The japanese version also is far superiour to give a better picture of the whole operatiion, and they manage that without narration!

Really a good opportunity at a side by side comparison between two shows about the same topic.

What disinformation or misinformation is presented in the Battle 360 show? How badly is the information slanted?
Yes they show the rah-rah spirit but do they treat the opposition badly? I don't see badly but I do see less-represented.
Does that devalue what besides opinion they do show?

One bit of info I did get from the Battle 360 show was that the Enterprise had been repaired and refit from the last beating
it took in the Solomons. All but one quad 1.1" gunmount (of 5) was replaced with quad 40mm Bofors.

Enterprise went into that battle with Bofors 40mm AAA according to Battle 360.

Trefle
06-15-2009, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Closest thing I've seen to it are shows like Battle 360 that by compare are far less artful and detailed.

ADD: Well, maybe -- They did a good job on Battle 360 bringing survivors and footage in. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyh0axY9qSo&NR=1)

Thanks for this link M.Gunz , i watched it along "Enterprise vs Japan" , it was really good that they added Veterans interviews with it , the reconstitution is nicely done

M_Gunz
06-16-2009, 01:39 AM
They are good to sift things from but take care to check here and there or at least be ready to find mistakes and omissions.
I think this is true of all things shown if only because to show everything completely would take many hours or some days,
who will even find or compile so much information? So I mine for nuggets of information in different places.

Tochy may have gotten a more even view but I can't know it simply because I don't understand Japanese! His view looks very
good and maintains an even tenor of attitude, very artful and consistent but that's all I can say. Perhaps subtitles would
be useful but they would also pollute the art.

Example: both tell of much destruction of different planes but Tochy really brings it home. The Battle 360 is arcade by
comparison, ie less real and less feeling.

Gammelpreusse
06-16-2009, 02:23 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
"the japanese would love to get another shot at her!"

"USS enterprise! a fighting city of steel!"

"...right smack on top of that sucker"

Pity, phrases like these and the overal presentation devalue the show quite a bit. More propaganda then documentary. The japanese version also is far superiour to give a better picture of the whole operatiion, and they manage that without narration!

Really a good opportunity at a side by side comparison between two shows about the same topic.

What disinformation or misinformation is presented in the Battle 360 show? How badly is the information slanted?
Yes they show the rah-rah spirit but do they treat the opposition badly? I don't see badly but I do see less-represented.
Does that devalue what besides opinion they do show?

One bit of info I did get from the Battle 360 show was that the Enterprise had been repaired and refit from the last beating
it took in the Solomons. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, imagine you watch your typical newschannel, and the guy reading the news suddenly makes it clear by his comments and implications he or his channel is supporting one of two parties in upcoming elections.

result...unuseable newschannel. Not impartial anymore, thus becoming a propagandachannel. (this termm, btw, is not to be taken as an offense, but simply as description)

It's pretty much the same here. Good entertainment value, not absolutely false, but pretty much one sided and thus not very useful if you have any interest in grasping the whole picture. No hard feelings involved, it's just an observation.

Blutarski2004
06-16-2009, 03:21 AM
Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
Well, imagine you watch your typical newschannel, and the guy reading the news suddenly makes it clear by his comments and implications he or his channel is supporting one of two parties in upcoming elections.

result...unuseable newschannel. Not impartial anymore, thus becoming a propagandachannel. (this termm, btw, is not to be taken as an offense, but simply as description)


..... It actually proved unnecessary for us to exercise our imaginations in this respect during the most recent presidential election.

Gammelpreusse
06-16-2009, 05:11 AM
Originally posted by Blutarski2004:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
Well, imagine you watch your typical newschannel, and the guy reading the news suddenly makes it clear by his comments and implications he or his channel is supporting one of two parties in upcoming elections.

result...unuseable newschannel. Not impartial anymore, thus becoming a propagandachannel. (this termm, btw, is not to be taken as an offense, but simply as description)


..... It actually proved unnecessary for us to exercise our imaginations in this respect during the most recent presidential election. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how do you mean?

M_Gunz
06-16-2009, 05:23 AM
The news has been slanted since before the US gained independence though at times it's been more than others.
Really I would say go all the way back in history and find the same.
The last election was somehow more propagandized than the 20+ that came before? On *any* big issue in history
you back to the newspapers in every city with more than one source (all Hearst-Gannet = 1 source) and find
multiple different views often completely opposed. For a nice study, read about the Sacco and Vanzetti trial.

Blutarski2004
06-16-2009, 06:20 AM
Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blutarski2004:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
Well, imagine you watch your typical newschannel, and the guy reading the news suddenly makes it clear by his comments and implications he or his channel is supporting one of two parties in upcoming elections.

result...unuseable newschannel. Not impartial anymore, thus becoming a propagandachannel. (this termm, btw, is not to be taken as an offense, but simply as description)


..... It actually proved unnecessary for us to exercise our imaginations in this respect during the most recent presidential election. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how do you mean? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

..... Not to hijack the thread, but the US media IMO betrayed a rather less than impartial stance in the 2008 presidential election. PM me if you want to discuss further.

Gammelpreusse
06-16-2009, 06:38 AM
Originally posted by Blutarski2004:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blutarski2004:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gammelpreusse:
Well, imagine you watch your typical newschannel, and the guy reading the news suddenly makes it clear by his comments and implications he or his channel is supporting one of two parties in upcoming elections.

result...unuseable newschannel. Not impartial anymore, thus becoming a propagandachannel. (this termm, btw, is not to be taken as an offense, but simply as description)


..... It actually proved unnecessary for us to exercise our imaginations in this respect during the most recent presidential election. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how do you mean? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

..... Not to hijack the thread, but the US media IMO betrayed a rather less than impartial stance in the 2008 presidential election. PM me if you want to discuss further. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah kay, see what you and Gunz mean. Sorry, I was not thinking US here in particular, I just tried to explain why I think one sided history shows have flaws in regards to educational pretense.
But yeah, I heared about these news bias problems in recent elections, especially about fox news.

baronWastelan
06-16-2009, 09:32 PM
EXCELLENT. especially how they showed the ships maneuvering.

BillSwagger
06-16-2009, 11:06 PM
at first, i wasn't sure if i was watching some stock film of the ships on the water.

I live near the ocean, so the way he captures the elements of the water, and marine layer is also very lifelike, aside from the detail attributed to the aircraft.

Flight_boy1990
06-17-2009, 07:09 AM
When i watched Battle 360 i puked.And when i heard the Enterprise's veteran words about Shokaku i think:"Smack right on top of that su(ker"...Shows the modern US attitude... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Anyway,Tochy's work is way above the Dog Fight's and Battle 360's level.

joeap
06-17-2009, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
When i watched Battle 360 i puked.And when i heard the Enterprise's veteran words about Shokaku i think:"Smack right on top of that su(ker"...Shows the modern US attitude... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Anyway,Tochy's work is way above the Dog Fight's and Battle 360's level.

Err I haven't watched the Battle360 but how does a VETERAN's comments (who lived thorugh the war 60 years ago) reflect modern US attitudes? That sort of statement could be made by any solider by any side in the heat of combat.

Friendly_flyer
06-17-2009, 02:08 PM
That was amazing! It really drove home why I have always hated naval engagements: There's just this big, blue ocean, nowhere friendly to put down your wounded kite, no little hill to sneak down low behind, no ground to help you judge your altitude at a glance...

The CGI is great, and I can't wait to see how Olegs & Cos next creation will stack up against it. Perhaps SoW:BoB will enable copious clips of Hurries bumping across grass strips set to heroic music.

Oh, and one thing: Would you Gents for a moment forget internal US politics and keep on topic?

R_Target
06-17-2009, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Friendly_flyer:
The CGI is great, and I can't wait to see how Olegs & Cos next creation will stack up against it.

I'm sure OM will have some surprises for us, but I don't know if anyone makes a machine that can render to that high quality standard in real-time.



Perhaps SoW:BoB will enable copious clips of Hurries bumping across grass strips set to heroic music.

I'm sure there will be some great movies made. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Choctaw111
06-17-2009, 09:00 PM
Wow. That's incredible. Thank you very much for sharing.

NuMcA_of_CS
06-18-2009, 03:06 AM
Thank you for pointing it out!! It was amazing! We are waiting for more, keep us posted! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif