"Fire support" is just the term for weapons that are used to support ground combat operations by tanks and infantry, and can include artillery, air strikes, surface to surface rockets, and other weapons. In the particular section they looked at fire support specifically, they were talking about heavy artillery, such as large howitzers and naval guns, which has been widely described by soldiers as sounding like a "freight train" ripping through the air.💯✌
Nice reaction. That said: 1) The tone of the original footage is MUCH too muted and quiet. One allmost can't hear anything of the WW2-footage-video even with my speakers turned up to full volume. 2) The V1 flying bomb wasn't a bomb that was thrown down from an aircraft. The V1 was basically the first real cruise missile. It was a rocket that was powered by a pulse jet engine. The first one of it's kind. That was (beside the V2) the first time of the use of such weapons and was the grandfather of a later, similar miltary rockets (during the V2 was the way into space and was in fact the first manmade object in space). 3) Because your only comment about the MG42 was only: "Why so much rage?" That wasn't what that clip about the sound of the MG42 was about. Explanation about the sound of that gun: The sound of the MG42 isn't just another simple run of the mill machinegun sound. The MG42 had an exceptional high rate of firing. It was different to ALL other guns and machine gun sounds in WW2 because of this insane high firing rate. It was called the "carpet ripper" by the Russians because it made a sound with each burst of fire, as if one would rip a large part of carpet out of a bigger carpet. That was different to all other machine guns, where the relative slow rate of firing made one still able to hear the single shots that came out of the barrels. The MG42 was called "the bone saw", too, because this gun made the impression, as if one could saw people apart with it. All other machineguns of that time had a much slower rate of fire. That is the reason, they had shown that gun in this video. 4) They used a very bad clip of the Junkers dive bomber in this video that didn't really brought across the main instrument of psychological warfare and terror of that famous aircraft. This aircraft had a little, propeller driven sirene attached to one of it's landing gears. The Jericho Siren. That siren made an unbelievable shrieking & howling noise that surpassed the regular noise of the aircraft engine in a dive by far. This is a very distinct noise and it was in later cinema movies (to this day) often falsely added to every scene of aircraft in movies where the aircraft are going into a dive or crashing to the ground. In reality that siren was much, much louder than any aircraft in regular dive situations. It was the "special sound" of that Junkers aircraft for all times. The so called Stuka. The Jericho Siren was an instrument of psychological warfare and caused the impression in people in large target areas of that bomber, that the Stuka bomber came down especially onto them personally. There are reports existing, that some people on the ground in the target areas were driven insane by that sound and the (often wrong) impression, that the bomber came down to them personally. 5) The last clip was showing B-17, B-24 and Lancaster bombers over Germany. Those were large four motored bombers in huge formations with large numbers of involved aircraft. Especially the Britons with their night raids with the Lancaster bomber created deliberately so called "fire storms" that sucked people and everything around them into the fires. The shown clips about the bombing of WW2-Germany were only a tiny, weak impression about the real scale and sound of such relentless bombings of towns over several years. Greetings
Wow! You really know your stuff man are you a history professor or something like that?? If so it's really a pleasure to meet you here you've really got me wanting to check out more🙌 thank you so much btw I appreciate the time you took to explain all what I missed 🙏👊have a good day:)
@@RishiTheLittleDragon Thank you for your nice feedback, but I'm just a regular guy who read some books and watched a lot of history videos. I'm simply interested in history and therefore I informed myself about history in general. It created the world we are living in now....and one has to know it to be able not to repeat its mistakes.
You talked about the beginning of WW1 and the Russian Revolution. I don't want to offend you and I don't want to sound like a smart ass, but in short: You mixed up totaly different events and causes for WW1 with totaly different events and causes for the Russian revolution. An Austrian Archduke, the ruling monarch of Austria, was the killed one and who caused WW1. The Russian revolution had it's origin in WW1, yes. But it was caused by completely other reasons and persons in a completely different way. I'm recommending you to react to "oversimplified WW1" from the "Oversimplified Channel". That is a very simple and easy to understand explanation for the reasons of WW1 and the war itself and it is made pretty entertaining. Many other reaction channels have already reacted to it and it educated the reactors at the same time about important events of history. Those are two relative short parts about WW1. The exact titles are "WW1-Oversimplified" (Part 1 and Part 2). But you have to change something about the volume of the audio of your reaction videos, first. The videos you are reacting to, are much too muted and relative silent and all of your reactions are nearly unwatchable therefore. That has definitely to change before you are doing any other reactions. Greetings
Thanks so much I'll have a look at that ww1 video pretty soon😄😁 also I've made my videos quieter for copyrights reasons that's all!! It is much better with headphones :)
@@RishiTheLittleDragon Other reactors are reacting in the regular volume to those videos. Maybe you should change that. The WW1-video with it's explanations will not work in this low volume.
The footage was filmed by especially trained military reporters in uniform who acted als a kind of reporter-soldiers under official military orders. This had the task on all sides of that war, to create propaganda for the masses. This wasn't filmed by private persons and not by private reporters. Private film cameras were very rare back then and the civillians were sitting in shelters and in cellars when tanks, aircraft or solders were showing up. Only in very rare cases on the American side of the war there were some few private reporters reporting sometimes from the front, when they were rarely allowed to do so. There were no private reporters on the German or Russian side of that conflict. The shown clips are relative poor in quality and sound, what isn't your fault. It's a relative half-hearted made original video, because it isn't showing the real baffling scenes and sounds of those weapons and vehicles. The original creator of the video obviously just added quickly some standard (and already very often shown) WW2 scenes from old propaganda footage and other documentaries about WW2. WW2 and it's sounds and the sounds of the shown weapons and vehicles were shown in in tons of other, better footage from that time and those other scenes are much more baffling, scarier and louder. This "sounds of war" video is only a video that is by coincidence the standard video of all other reaction channels, too. But I find that video very mediocre and misleading, despite the video is such a highly reacted-to video compilation of those sounds. That isn't a personal attack or critics for you. I only try to say with it: That original video isn't very good in the things it promises in it's headline.
@@RishiTheLittleDragon I know this footage from countless documentaries. But before I will recommend you to react to those documentaries, I would recommend you to watch the oversimplified explanation videos about WW1 and WW2. Otherwise you are only seeing "some stuff" without realizing the gigantic scale and the complicated context of both wars...wo were directly linked to each other. Therefore I would recommend to watch the two oversimplified video episodes about WW1 first. Because without knowing about WW1 you will have some difficulties to comprehend the reasons for WW2. But again, even if you think you have to mute the original videos for copyright reasons: You definitely have to turn up the volume, like countless other reaction channels have done it before you...or reacting to those episondes makes no sense.
@@RishiTheLittleDragon I read now your reply again and I misunderstood you the first time: I didn't realize, that you now are thinking, that all of the scenes are staged. No, that isn't the case. There were staged scenes sometimes back then, sure. But the re-enacted, staged scenes in old news footage and front-reporter footage from WW2 are the minority. The most of those scenes are real. But later on they were often edited and cut and put into the context of a kind of weekly "news-propaganda-show" for cinemas (because the most people had no TV back then). The footage is real. But it wasn't filmed by private reporters or private citizens. It was filmed by soldiers and soldier-reporters. They were like soldiers but instead of a gun they had a camera. Sometimes those photos and films were staged. There is a relative famous photo of some British soldiers taking a German tank crew prisoner in Africa in WW2, for example. The tank crew is holding their hands up in the air during climbing out of the hatches of the German tank and some British soldiers are pointing with guns at them. As far as I know that photo was staged and it was often shown in newspapers and documentaries and books about the desert warfare of WW2. But most of the WW1 film footage of trench warfare is staged. They had to do that in ww1, because the cameras were too big and too immobile to carry them around in a real attack. Most people don't know that, but I watched once a documentary about that subject and I was baffled by the fact, that nearly all ground warfare of WW1 of all sides of that war is faked and staged. There are only some seconds of film existing, where some soldiers are going over the top and running out of a trench to attack the enemy. And those few seconds of film are the only real footage of ground-battle footage of WW1. Everything else is staged when it comes to show direct battle in the trenches on the ground in WW1.
"Fire support" is just the term for weapons that are used to support ground combat operations by tanks and infantry, and can include artillery, air strikes, surface to surface rockets, and other weapons. In the particular section they looked at fire support specifically, they were talking about heavy artillery, such as large howitzers and naval guns, which has been widely described by soldiers as sounding like a "freight train" ripping through the air.💯✌
Oh jeeez 🤯🤯 that just blew my mind but thank you man👊✌
Nice reaction. That said:
1) The tone of the original footage is MUCH too muted and quiet. One allmost can't hear anything of the WW2-footage-video even with my speakers turned up to full volume.
2) The V1 flying bomb wasn't a bomb that was thrown down from an aircraft. The V1 was basically the first real cruise missile. It was a rocket that was powered by a pulse jet engine. The first one of it's kind.
That was (beside the V2) the first time of the use of such weapons and was the grandfather of a later, similar miltary rockets (during the V2 was the way into space and was in fact the first manmade object in space).
3) Because your only comment about the MG42 was only: "Why so much rage?"
That wasn't what that clip about the sound of the MG42 was about.
Explanation about the sound of that gun: The sound of the MG42 isn't just another simple run of the mill machinegun sound. The MG42 had an exceptional high rate of firing. It was different to ALL other guns and machine gun sounds in WW2 because of this insane high firing rate. It was called the "carpet ripper" by the Russians because it made a sound with each burst of fire, as if one would rip a large part of carpet out of a bigger carpet. That was different to all other machine guns, where the relative slow rate of firing made one still able to hear the single shots that came out of the barrels. The MG42 was called "the bone saw", too, because this gun made the impression, as if one could saw people apart with it. All other machineguns of that time had a much slower rate of fire.
That is the reason, they had shown that gun in this video.
4) They used a very bad clip of the Junkers dive bomber in this video that didn't really brought across the main instrument of psychological warfare and terror of that famous aircraft.
This aircraft had a little, propeller driven sirene attached to one of it's landing gears. The Jericho Siren. That siren made an unbelievable shrieking & howling noise that surpassed the regular noise of the aircraft engine in a dive by far. This is a very distinct noise and it was in later cinema movies (to this day) often falsely added to every scene of aircraft in movies where the aircraft are going into a dive or crashing to the ground. In reality that siren was much, much louder than any aircraft in regular dive situations. It was the "special sound" of that Junkers aircraft for all times. The so called Stuka. The Jericho Siren was an instrument of psychological warfare and caused the impression in people in large target areas of that bomber, that the Stuka bomber came down especially onto them personally. There are reports existing, that some people on the ground in the target areas were driven insane by that sound and the (often wrong) impression, that the bomber came down to them personally.
5) The last clip was showing B-17, B-24 and Lancaster bombers over Germany. Those were large four motored bombers in huge formations with large numbers of involved aircraft. Especially the Britons with their night raids with the Lancaster bomber created deliberately so called "fire storms" that sucked people and everything around them into the fires. The shown clips about the bombing of WW2-Germany were only a tiny, weak impression about the real scale and sound of such relentless bombings of towns over several years.
Greetings
Wow! You really know your stuff man are you a history professor or something like that?? If so it's really a pleasure to meet you here you've really got me wanting to check out more🙌 thank you so much btw I appreciate the time you took to explain all what I missed 🙏👊have a good day:)
@@RishiTheLittleDragon
Thank you for your nice feedback, but I'm just a regular guy who read some books and watched a lot of history videos. I'm simply interested in history and therefore I informed myself about history in general.
It created the world we are living in now....and one has to know it to be able not to repeat its mistakes.
You talked about the beginning of WW1 and the Russian Revolution. I don't want to offend you and I don't want to sound like a smart ass, but in short: You mixed up totaly different events and causes for WW1 with totaly different events and causes for the Russian revolution. An Austrian Archduke, the ruling monarch of Austria, was the killed one and who caused WW1. The Russian revolution had it's origin in WW1, yes. But it was caused by completely other reasons and persons in a completely different way.
I'm recommending you to react to "oversimplified WW1" from the "Oversimplified Channel". That is a very simple and easy to understand explanation for the reasons of WW1 and the war itself and it is made pretty entertaining.
Many other reaction channels have already reacted to it and it educated the reactors at the same time about important events of history.
Those are two relative short parts about WW1. The exact titles are "WW1-Oversimplified" (Part 1 and Part 2).
But you have to change something about the volume of the audio of your reaction videos, first. The videos you are reacting to, are much too muted and relative silent and all of your reactions are nearly unwatchable therefore. That has definitely to change before you are doing any other reactions.
Greetings
Thanks so much I'll have a look at that ww1 video pretty soon😄😁 also I've made my videos quieter for copyrights reasons that's all!! It is much better with headphones :)
@@RishiTheLittleDragon
Other reactors are reacting in the regular volume to those videos. Maybe you should change that. The WW1-video with it's explanations will not work in this low volume.
The footage was filmed by especially trained military reporters in uniform who acted als a kind of reporter-soldiers under official military orders. This had the task on all sides of that war, to create propaganda for the masses. This wasn't filmed by private persons and not by private reporters. Private film cameras were very rare back then and the civillians were sitting in shelters and in cellars when tanks, aircraft or solders were showing up.
Only in very rare cases on the American side of the war there were some few private reporters reporting sometimes from the front, when they were rarely allowed to do so. There were no private reporters on the German or Russian side of that conflict.
The shown clips are relative poor in quality and sound, what isn't your fault.
It's a relative half-hearted made original video, because it isn't showing the real baffling scenes and sounds of those weapons and vehicles. The original creator of the video obviously just added quickly some standard (and already very often shown) WW2 scenes from old propaganda footage and other documentaries about WW2.
WW2 and it's sounds and the sounds of the shown weapons and vehicles were shown in in tons of other, better footage from that time and those other scenes are much more baffling, scarier and louder.
This "sounds of war" video is only a video that is by coincidence the standard video of all other reaction channels, too. But I find that video very mediocre and misleading, despite the video is such a highly reacted-to video compilation of those sounds.
That isn't a personal attack or critics for you. I only try to say with it: That original video isn't very good in the things it promises in it's headline.
Oh my god!! I genuinely didn't think this was staged, do you have any links to any real ones; if you do I'll be very much delighted to check it out:)
@@RishiTheLittleDragon I know this footage from countless documentaries. But before I will recommend you to react to those documentaries, I would recommend you to watch the oversimplified explanation videos about WW1 and WW2. Otherwise you are only seeing "some stuff" without realizing the gigantic scale and the complicated context of both wars...wo were directly linked to each other.
Therefore I would recommend to watch the two oversimplified video episodes about WW1 first. Because without knowing about WW1 you will have some difficulties to comprehend the reasons for WW2.
But again, even if you think you have to mute the original videos for copyright reasons:
You definitely have to turn up the volume, like countless other reaction channels have done it before you...or reacting to those episondes makes no sense.
@@RishiTheLittleDragon
I read now your reply again and I misunderstood you the first time:
I didn't realize, that you now are thinking, that all of the scenes are staged. No, that isn't the case. There were staged scenes sometimes back then, sure. But the re-enacted, staged scenes in old news footage and front-reporter footage from WW2 are the minority. The most of those scenes are real.
But later on they were often edited and cut and put into the context of a kind of weekly "news-propaganda-show" for cinemas (because the most people had no TV back then).
The footage is real. But it wasn't filmed by private reporters or private citizens. It was filmed by soldiers and soldier-reporters.
They were like soldiers but instead of a gun they had a camera.
Sometimes those photos and films were staged. There is a relative famous photo of some British soldiers taking a German tank crew prisoner in Africa in WW2, for example. The tank crew is holding their hands up in the air during climbing out of the hatches of the German tank and some British soldiers are pointing with guns at them. As far as I know that photo was staged and it was often shown in newspapers and documentaries and books about the desert warfare of WW2.
But most of the WW1 film footage of trench warfare is staged. They had to do that in ww1, because the cameras were too big and too immobile to carry them around in a real attack.
Most people don't know that, but I watched once a documentary about that subject and I was baffled by the fact, that nearly all ground warfare of WW1 of all sides of that war is faked and staged. There are only some seconds of film existing, where some soldiers are going over the top and running out of a trench to attack the enemy. And those few seconds of film are the only real footage of ground-battle footage of WW1. Everything else is staged when it comes to show direct battle in the trenches on the ground in WW1.