At over about 350 degrees F, Type l Portland Cement will begin to dehydrate and its various aggregates will begin to expand. This begins a process of disintegration of the concrete. At increasing temperatures well above 350 degrees F, this disintegration becomes more profound. This is why special “refractory cements” are used with crushed fire-brick aggregates for uses in and around kilns and such. In theory, cooking these fortifications (presumably made with Type I cement) at ~3,500 degrees F (burning gasoline) for long enough, could have weakened them to some extent that had they been subsequently pummeled with conventional bombs or naval artillery that now embrittled, they’d have been destroyed. Wishful thinking I’m sure but having worked in the concrete industry for a quarter century, I couldn’t help myself in thinking this through lol
1. It is not laser guided bombs but WW2 bombing => almost no direct hits. 2. Only a smal fraction of the energy would go into the structure when burning on-top or at any side. Only stuff going inside deposits its energy efficiently into the structure, and that does not happen except bunker busters (that well, to inside before they detonate).
I made a kiln of regular paving bricks and Portland cement mortar. I fired it so hot that the bricks closest to the fire melted dark and glassy- even losing a quarter of their thickness. But the Portland mortar held up okay.
Alexander the Great did something similar. He would put a city to siege and set fires at the base of the walls. He would then have barrels of vinegar thrown via catapult at the fires which destroyed the now brittle masonry walls.
thank you. wonderfully documented. a pleasure to watch and all photos are actually related to events described. you set the gold standard for historical videos. i am proud of your work.
It was instrumental in it's uses against the German population, namely, in large cities with little to no military presence, mostly against women and children
@@francisdotso8594 Yeah except the Germans were the ones that started the concept of "Total War" when they practiced bombed civilians during the Spanish civil war. These bombing were avowed as a "terror campaign". The Germans also killed civilians in occupied countries to keep them in line. It wasn't unusual for hundreds sometimes thousands of random civilians to be summarily executed for any resistant a population dared to put up. BTW, wholesale killing of civilians wasn't a war crime until AFTER WWII. During the war Aerial bombing was governed by the Hague convention of 1907. This only protected "undefended civilians" if your town had one old obsolete weapon and it was employed in defense your town was a valid target for total destruction. The same goes when a military unit took up positions in your town. Oh and then there is the whole "Final Solution" program the civilians did nothing to stop. You don't get to start a war with a side of genocide and then cry about getting your ass kicked.
@@francisdotso8594 Maybe Germany shouldn't have toyed with the concept of "Total War" during the civil war in Spain in 1936. If you don't like being fried then don't start wars you can't finish. Don't allow the genocide of an ethnicity in your backyard.
Great video. I always wondered why the Normandy fortifications weren't attacked with napalm and they were! And as you showed, to almost no effect. On a side note, I read a book published by the Smithsonian about the Norden bombsite and the USAAF strategic bombing campaign in Europe. The author claimed that B-17s destroyed more Tiger tanks than any other weapon because of raids on marshaling yards and factories. If this was true, it would be a fascinating detail to share.
Ron Klages in his book Trail of the Tigers tries to break down Tiger losses into categories. He suggests that the majority were genuine combat losses and air attacks / fuel shortages etc were relatively minor. I haven’t read the book but there is a summary on the Panzer World website. 👍
Orders were placed for 1,500 Tiger IIs-slightly more than the 1,347 Tiger I tanks produced-but production was severely disrupted by Allied bombing raids. Among others, five raids between 22 September and 7 October 1944 destroyed 95 percent of the floor area of the Henschel plant. It is estimated that this caused the loss in production of some 657 Tiger IIs.
The French Resistance took thousands of German armoured vehicles out of action just before D Day. They did it by changing the destination labels on the freight wagons they were being transported on from Caen and Calais to Lyon and Marseille and off they went in the wrong direction, simple!!
@@vernongoodey5096 They also drained the axle lubrication systems of rail stocks and sold the lubricant on the black market. After the lubricant was drained, an abrasive substance was pumped in. This is recorded in Max Hasting's Das Reich.
Excellent presentation. Too much content on UA-cam and other sites claims to be authoritive on a subject but simply depends on visuals to compensate for lack of detailed analysis. Very well done 👍
I read the title and though "Wouldn't that be totally ineffective? Well I guess they knew better." After watching the video. "Seems like they didn't know better!"
I'm impressed that they tried a new idea, saw that it didn't work, then moved on instead of trying to force it to work. What amazed me was the scale: 824 bombers just to test out an idea? I can't get my head around the scale of that war.
At 6:27 i almost blew coffee thru my nose. Dude has a pipe in his teeth. While strapping jellied gasoline, complete with fuse. Probably was not lit, right? Still funny as hell. Dude i love everything about your stuff. Excellence!!
The ground crew probably fixed any hardpoint mounting failures with a ball-peen hammer. And people today wonder why there are safety labels on everything.
@@cf3714 Some people might wonder, but not the young dude who I saw taking his smoke break at a gas bar last summer. He did not go near the gas pumps but instead went for the propane filling area. I could not back out of there fast enuf.
Napalm doesn't burst into flames from just a spark or an ember or even a match The gelling agent lowers the flammable vapor dispersion below easy ignition levels. In fact US flamethrowers and bombs require a thermite ignition source.
I sort of checked out at 825 bombers being thrown at the targets, imagine what that looked like flying over. The volume of fire applied by the allies is just mind boggling. And on top of it, they delivered thanksgiving dinner to field units in 1944. Take that Austrian Corporal.
My father flew B24's out of England. He only flew 11 bombing missions, but he told me that on one of those missions, as soon as his group formed up and headed over the English Channel they were met by returning bombers. From that point on, until they returned to England there was never a moment he couldn't see bombers going to that target or returning from hitting it. Over 1000 bombers aimed at one unlucky site. I don't know which mission or target that was, but it happened between 6 June 1944 and 10 September 1944 when his crew was reassigned.
LOL, an option. You make it sound like an auto feature. "And that isn't all friends, if you order RIGHT NOW, you get wind chimes and an Air Inlet Ductwork that is Napalm Proof!"
yeah, but it depended on the ''client requirement'' what threats they saw as likely . In the 80s a lot was done m much of it now unused and removed .@@dagsterblaster4973
So what we are saying... is that the first napalm attack had much the same results as the early-mid war conventional bombing. Badly aimed (from too high), with sub optimal bombs, and no good experience base, meant that there was little to no effective result. That being the case, it wouldn't matter what you dropped. However - late in the war, the US and UK bomber commands were getting their act (and tactics) together and could get impressive results with conventional bombs. likewise, I would suggest that proper experience and equipment with napalm bombs could also have been effective in the right context. (probably not during WW2) But larger cannisters that had a bursting charge/fuse that worked 5 feet above the ground, delivered fast, at low level, that actually hit the target - in sufficient quantity... would have had a significantly different effect. What I am talking about is basically what the US airforce got around to doing in Vietnam. The thing I took from the experience described here, was that this air attack couldn't hit the side of a barn , so it is hardly surprising it achieved little.
Of course 8th AF wasn’t trying to burn the concrete itself. It’s somewhat surprising the napalm didn’t have more of a splash effect, which theoretically could have gone into openings in the fortifications or snuffed out oxygen under perfect conditions. But, the difference between theory and the real world is that in theory there is none!
I have never heard of this attack. I too have wondered why we did not use napalm on the fortifications. Now I know. I wonder if it could have been more successful if dropped by fighter-bombers as successfully deployed against caves and bunkers in the Pacific?
From what I have seen, These paper drop tanks, designed by the British, were very effective. They were much lighter than the metal ones designed in the U.S., and were readily available. Greg's air planes and cars has in depth info on drop tanks.
It mostly shows that at that time they lacked the guidance systems needed to attack those kinds of targets in any effective manner. Just couldn't get anything into exposed openings to have the desired results. I'd take it the story has changed a lot in that regard. A modern thermobaric could probably go right in a portal and pop one of those placements open as if it were a zit.
It should be noted that these attacks have looked somewhat different from "normal napalm attcacks" ( - if you can say so - ). Nearly all footage you can find of napalm attacks show napalm bombs being droped from low alltitude from fighterbombers, so that they hit the ground at a flat angel and with a high speed, causing the napalm to spread over a large area. When droped from a high alltitude, and impacting almost verticaly, the napalm will not be spread over a large area. The effect will be a very concentrated fire that only will cover a small area. The igniters used in most napalm bombs do not have explosive force enough to scatter the napalm over a larger area.
The report is inaccurate on one point. Napalm de-oxygenates the immediate area around the detonation causing asphyxiation. This is more apparent on troops in confined spaces such as bunkers and caves. There are numerous examples of this in the Vietnam War. Following attacks, the dead bodies of enemy soldiers with no physical signs of injury would be found.
They should have used of the A36s they bought. If not give RAF Mosquitos a go at it. They had clearly demonstrated their ability with pin point low level attacks.
the 1945 report shown was an AFTER ACTION REPORT. This described in detail what led up to the 6 June 1944 invasion of Normandy. The war in Europe was going on in Berlin by APR 1945.
I really appreciate that you don't just assert things as fact, you prove the facts -- from multiple sources. One minor point, besides the waste of 375,000 gallons of napalm, what was the cost of delivering all of that ordinance? There was the obvious cost of aviation gas for the planes, wear-and-tear on equipment, and all the costs of sending the crews out. Plus, surely the Germans put up some flak, right? Again, this is minor because it is obvious, but it would be nice to have a number.
Interestingly this lines up with some Korean POW interviews where they rated the effectiveness of US air support and stated that napalm was the least feared weapon. Napalm might look very effective from the air but it definitely seems to have limited practical effects.
Heavy bombers in WW2 not hitting their targets isn't surprising. Allied strategic bombing was a bad investment of a whole lot of money. I couldn't tell from the video what altitude the bombs were released from. Since these are B-17 and B-24 my assumption is that they released at high altitudes which is yet another example of the 8th Air Force living in fantasy land. By this time in the war they had overwhelming proof that they couldn't hit targets smaller than entire cities from high altitude. If they dropped from lower altitudes, I guess that means they couldn't hit anything ever, except the ground. Except that since they had aerial detonations, apparently they sometimes couldn't even hit the ground. I'm always torn between whether the Strategic Bombing Command should have been prosecuted for war crimes, or court-martialed for incompetence. Instead, they were rewarded with their own independent branch of the Armed Forces. WW2 Strategic Bombing is my favorite example of the success of failure.
Love seeing the wartime documents! Everything now is MsWord Typeset in some elegant font, with perfect printing, devoid of any distinctive character... no circular coffee mug stains or cigaret burns. Well, maybe the occasional roach burn... The thing to remember about those paper canisters -- their surfaces were well sealed inside and out, and Paper is AFTER ALL, WOOD FIBERS --> Lignin; Tough, Sturdy, Flexible, Durable. Hey, there were cultures in ancient times that used Thick Paper ARMOR to protect their soldiers from Arrows and Spears!
Jimmy Doolittle had a PhD. (1) Am not surprised it was tried. (2) Am especially not surprised the lengths to which data were collected, analyzed and documented.
I really doubt the results reported. Low level napalming would wound /burn more soldiers and render strong holds temporarily undefended . Ask the Vietnamese how ineffective napalm was .
Very interesting discourse by all the commentators. This was an interesting analysis of the mission. My only question is why was this mission even contemplated. By April 15, 1945, the war was concluding and the Allies knew this. VE day was a month away, so I wonder if the point of this was somehow politically motivated involving French authorities. To risk the American B-24 and B-17 crews seems fruitless, as all the prior fire bombings I'm aware of were conducted by British heavies over Germany.
I wonder if the experience with napalm in Vietnam would have changed these results. It does still seem a sound idea, dropping a highly flammable liquid into the space, will find its way inside somehow.
Now I understand those film images of Vietnam War & American aircraft dropping cannisters of napalm. One could be the streaming incineadry visual effects of WP, yet clouds of igniting napalm. We were witnessing the phospurous igniter.
This heavy bomber napalm bombing occurred two weeks before the war ended. It must have been a test against heavily fortified emplacements. The napalm being dropped in bombs was the same stuff used in flamethrowers. The USAAF was dropping napalm bombs on German targets from 1943 to the end of the war. The heavy bomber formations had aircraft loaded with napalm in the back of the formation that dropped their fire bombs to ignite what the high explosive bombs had exposed. Those created fires that gutted aircraft factories and manufacturing plants. Those were also used when bombing railroad marshalling yards full of cars loaded with coal and electric generation plants to set fire to the coal and any other railcars since most were constructed of wood. USAAF fighter bombers also made low level attacks using napalm bombs against German truck convoys, tanks and artillery hidden in forests and troops concealed inside structures.
The 467BG out of Rackheath, England flew that mission. My father was a PoW in Stalag Luft 1 at the time, having been a "guest" of the Luftwaffe since 13 August, 1944.
@@KevinLee-hu1lj I did not, however, there were a few stories that my grandmother had written down. A couple of the stories were confirmed and/or corrected in the book about the 467th. I tried tracking his missions but it appears that their plane was a pathfinder so he was sometimes bumped to a different plane as some higher ups liked to take his seat. The pilots name was Littleford - 8th - 467th - 791st I believe - G.A. Bentley Co-Pilot
@@chip9177 I was the archivist of the 467th for quite some time, spending days at the National Archives in Maryland photocopying crew rosters for each mission. I created databases from those rosters and show Littleford was active from Mission 84 to mission 202. On mission 84 July26 1944, his co-pilot was Pedersen, the target was Montreuil, France.
@@KevinLee-hu1lj That would be fun pouring over some of that info. I have two crew pictures, one looks like an official shot as they are not in flight gear but next to a B-24. Kakis & leather jackets w/crew names on the back & littleford is listed. Another pic is the crew next to a B-24 with their flight gear on & looking a little more haggard., That picture is labeled GP-83 (or 93) -1-467 16/11/44 crew 79 - a third pic is my grandfather in a biplane trainer in Ocala, FL - It is fun trying to find & organize history, esp of relations. Is there a way I can view the crew rosters? I would love to figure out which planes & missions he flew & how much of the verbal history matches the actual records. I think if I dont do it it will never be done as new generators are so removed from the war & never met any of their great grandparents. All, except for great grandmother (ex-wife of this flyer) who live to 103.
G'day, Thanks for posting..., this is brilliantly illuminating...! I grew up watching Napalm in operation, on the black & white TV News, at least 5 nights per week, from 1967 - '72 ; It worked so very well against wood and bamboo Thatch-roofed Houses & Villages, and the WW-1 & WW-2 stock footage of Infantry Flamethrowers & flamethrowing Tanks..., too, together with various references encountered over the years as to how, "Napalm was briefly trialled in the EuroPeon Theatre of Operations..., very late in the War ; which then promptly ended for all sorts of other reasons..." Which sort of hinted that something had failed to gel with the Operational deployment... (pardon that pun) ; but this is the first time I've ever heard of the scale of the attempt to cook Guns and People..., by dropping Jellied Petroleum Firebombs onto their 6 ft-thick Reinforced Concrete Roofs. "To make the World a better place, by Jove !" 375,000 Gallons, y'say, eh ? Well then, they Will be the Undersized U.S. 3.85 litre "Gallons", will they not ? Assuming thus to be the case, then those 1,443,750 Litres, upon burning, duly became 3,609.375 TONS...., of Carbon Dioxide. Released in 1945... By 1970, that Fossil Carbon had completed 95% of the Atmospheric Heating which it WILL Achieve... Though, By now ; it probably only has a Half a percent yet to go...(?) ! What a remarkably Stupidly Viciously Pointlessly Nest-Fouling Thing..., for any Rational Human to ever Want to go and do...! It boggles the mind. Such is life. Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@indisputablefacts8507 G'day, Hmmmn, they could indeed be Remarkably Pig-headed and Stubborn as Donkeys or Mules... From here it appears that the USA Army Air Corps' General Staff was actively competing with the USA's Naval Admirals, for demonstrating the most baseless faith in the Equipment they had fought so many Paperwork Battles and kissed so many Politicians' Arseholes to get the funding for... So B-17s were sent out on unescorted Deep Penetration Raids, because Official Doctrinal Theory held that they would be able so to do... Whereas the Navy merely stockpiled Pre-War Torpedoes which had NEVER been tested, ordered off the Blueprints, but during the Depression..., Treasury refused Funding to conduct any Firing Trials...; so all through 1942 US Submariners & Aircrew All of them knew...; Their Torpedoes were Useless Ducking Fuds. Which ran too deep, Missed, And then Even when They hit - They refused to go "BANG !!!" At all. The salient point Best remembered, though, is that, What the Wannabe Warrior (worrier...) Calls "Military Intelligence", (Ie, Constantly preparing in the Real World, To defend against whatever Hypothetical "Threat Scenarios" which they May be paid, To imagine...; of which to become AFRAID...!) AND, The Psychiatric Textbooks Call, "Pathological Paranoid Psychosis..." So, to be brutally honest, all the evidence appears to indicate that the Universal Creator Godtheory is not "On the side of" ANY Quarreling Individual or group thereof, who Choose to live in fear, and then try to Calm all their own Fearfulness, or Anger, or Envy, As they try To "Justify" Their Decision to go about Constantly Practising to kill Strangers for a living, Or being paid to actually Kill Strangers as a Patriotic practice... Are, all of them, Squeaking From a Godtheory's Eye Perspective..., Equally Faithless, blasphemous, apostatic, hypocritical, childish, and worthy of being Abandoned to the very Laws of Ballistic Physics & Explosive Chemistry and mass mastery of various Murderously SELFISH Martial "Arts" & "Skills".... So, my guess is that the Godtheory Regards ALL such Warriors(worriers) As Compost-On-The-Hoof, Taking their DNA out of the Human Gene-Pool..., The better to ensure that The Meek SHALL Inherit The Earth... Hence, "Billy Don't be a Hero... Keep your pretty head down, Billy Don't be a Hero, Come home t' be Fcuked Regularly...!" Or, words to that effect (!). Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao ;
Wow, I didn't know that they used Napalm in WW2. From what I saw, this sort of bombing was not effective. Napalm was extremely effective in Veitnam because it was a rural setting with lots of vegetation and more effect that on fortified bunkers and buildings
I've had several european theater vets tell me (growing up in the 80's) that the germans were still dug in in places along the coastline when they got there well after D-Day. This makes sense, considering Antwerp fell pretty late in the war along with several other "pockets" that were bypassed in favor of going straight after the bulk of the western front.
Thank you for the informative video. Notwithstanding your focus on the use of napalm, I think that the motivation and execution of the multiple 1945 air attacks on Royan must be considered together. They represent a complex story. The citizens of the town were the principal recipients of the ordinance dropped in these raids and to this day, the town marks its destruction and the death of its civilians every January. Interestingly, on the coastal path some German bunkers remain undisturbed, silent reminders perhaps of this strange period in western France at the close of the second world war in Europe.
I have wondered why massive napalm attacks were not used prior to landings in the Pacific. The ineffectiveness reported here explains why we never tried it.
That's NOT the reason - napalm bombing didn't really start until 1944 by which time many of the landings had been done. In 1944 and 1945, napalm was used as a tactical weapon against Japanese bunkers, pillboxes, tunnels, and other fortifications, especially on Saipan, Iwo Jima, the Philippines, and Okinawa, where deeply dug-in Japanese troops refused to surrender. Also napalm bombs were dropped by aviators of the US Navy, the USAAF, the US Marine Corps, and the Royal Air Force in support of ground troops. Supporting landing operations requires very accurate artillery support which MUST finish just before the first Marine boot touches ground, this is easy to coordinate using naval guns & much harder using airplanes - where friendly troops are concerned you need markers & this is hard to do. The Allies managed to carpet bomb their own troops in Europe a few times due to the lack of sophistication of communications & the inexperience of aircrews. Generally it wasn't worth the risk of a cock up.
I am puzzled as to why there were still bombing missions in coastal France in April 1945, almost a year after D-day. Wasn't France liberated by then? How did the Germans even support those strongholds in 1945? A month after this Napalm attack the war in Europe was over. This is an interesting piece of history I had no Idea about. I did not know that there were still German strongholds on the coast of France in 1945. Surely this attack could have waited. In May, after surrender, they could have taken those strongholds without a shot. Was this an experiment?
I like all the details. I've learned, however, that my love of details is not common amongst other apes. For wider appeal, you might want to summarize some of the details. Very interesting results, though - and even more interesting considering that the US went on to continue widespread napalm attacks for decades after. It seems that they might have had better luck hitting the enemy with poison ivy - as far as mass demoralization was concerned.
Actually, I'd have thought this would have been an expected result. Fire is not likely to damage concrete 6 feet thick with an earthen cover. Maybe a massive concentration of heat over a period might compromise a small outer layer but nothing significant. This is a core reason fuel-air bombs are only effective on non-hardened targets like humans & trucks out in the open. Maybe if they could have atomised the fuel in thru the openings prior to igniting, it would've hurt the people on the inside. But they would be rapidly replaced & the guns left unaffected.
A pointless destruction of the town of Royan France. A town of no strategic importance. At the time of the raid, the town was hundreds of miles away from the front lines which at that time were well inside Germany. The German garrison and local citizens had a peaceful coexistence and were patiently awaiting the soon end of the war. The German garrison was largely unaffected by the raid and afterwards helped with rescue efforts of the town victims. The surviving townspeople were angry for many years at the Allies for the unnecessary death and destruction of their town.
635,000 tons of munitions, including napalm, dropped on N. Korea... not fortifications but innocent, non-political citizens. USA-DOD kept detailed lists of it all. Edited... many who commented may not have watched the vid, it explains that napalm was of little use against fortified positions. You would think it would be but it wasn't.
take a heavy duty 1qt Ball glass storage jar and loosely fill with Ivory soap shavings using a kitchen box grater, then cover with just enough fresh gasoline, seal and let sit for about a week at room temperature ~ open and stir contents using a pencil diameter long wooden dowel, making sure mixture is the consistency of runny yogurt = diy napalm, which will burn thru an asphalt road surface, among other things...
![B-17 FLYING FORTRESS BOMBERS RETURN WITH COMBAT DAMAGE AND WOUNDED HD COLOR [ WWII DOCUMENTARY ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vlx3z4htmDU/mqdefault.jpg)
![B-17 FLYING FORTRESS BOMBERS RETURN WITH COMBAT DAMAGE AND WOUNDED HD COLOR [ WWII DOCUMENTARY ]](/img/tr.png)
At over about 350 degrees F, Type l Portland Cement will begin to dehydrate and its various aggregates will begin to expand. This begins a process of disintegration of the concrete. At increasing temperatures well above 350 degrees F, this disintegration becomes more profound. This is why special “refractory cements” are used with crushed fire-brick aggregates for uses in and around kilns and such. In theory, cooking these fortifications (presumably made with Type I cement) at ~3,500 degrees F (burning gasoline) for long enough, could have weakened them to some extent that had they been subsequently pummeled with conventional bombs or naval artillery that now embrittled, they’d have been destroyed. Wishful thinking I’m sure but having worked in the concrete industry for a quarter century, I couldn’t help myself in thinking this through lol
But what percentage of the heat energy of burning gasoline poured on top of concrete is actually absorbed by the concrete?
1. It is not laser guided bombs but WW2 bombing => almost no direct hits.
2. Only a smal fraction of the energy would go into the structure when burning on-top or at any side. Only stuff going inside deposits its energy efficiently into the structure, and that does not happen except bunker busters (that well, to inside before they detonate).
There ain't nothing like an expert's opinion. I appreciate your valuable contribution.
I made a kiln of regular paving bricks and Portland cement mortar. I fired it so hot that the bricks closest to the fire melted dark and glassy- even losing a quarter of their thickness. But the Portland mortar held up okay.
Alexander the Great did something similar. He would put a city to siege and set fires at the base of the walls. He would then have barrels of vinegar thrown via catapult at the fires which destroyed the now brittle masonry walls.
Interesting idea and experiment. This channel is providing new, real information instead of just another rehashing/retelling of the same WWII stories.
Again, thanks for your efforts. Love your research and presentation.
thank you. wonderfully documented. a pleasure to watch and all photos are actually related to events described. you set the gold standard for historical videos. i am proud of your work.
Thanks for that!
This is a fantastic historical review. Well done and full of primary source documents.
This channel is so full of incredible information and so well presented there’s nothing else comes close 👍👍
Interesting. I never knew that napalm was used in WWII, and certainly wouldn't have guessed it was tried against concrete fortifications.
Napalm was pretty much developed for ww2 I think it had fertilizer added during Vietnam it was napalm b and burned hotter and longer.
Napalm was instrumental in the Pacific Island hopping campaign
It was instrumental in it's uses against the German population, namely, in large cities with little to no military presence, mostly against women and children
@@francisdotso8594 Yeah except the Germans were the ones that started the concept of "Total War" when they practiced bombed civilians during the Spanish civil war. These bombing were avowed as a "terror campaign".
The Germans also killed civilians in occupied countries to keep them in line. It wasn't unusual for hundreds sometimes thousands of random civilians to be summarily executed for any resistant a population dared to put up.
BTW, wholesale killing of civilians wasn't a war crime until AFTER WWII. During the war Aerial bombing was governed by the Hague convention of 1907. This only protected "undefended civilians" if your town had one old obsolete weapon and it was employed in defense your town was a valid target for total destruction. The same goes when a military unit took up positions in your town.
Oh and then there is the whole "Final Solution" program the civilians did nothing to stop. You don't get to start a war with a side of genocide and then cry about getting your ass kicked.
@@francisdotso8594 Maybe Germany shouldn't have toyed with the concept of "Total War" during the civil war in Spain in 1936.
If you don't like being fried then don't start wars you can't finish. Don't allow the genocide of an ethnicity in your backyard.
When the only thing the enemy has to say about your bombs is that they smell bad, you know they're exceptionally useless.
🤣
Great video. I always wondered why the Normandy fortifications weren't attacked with napalm and they were! And as you showed, to almost no effect. On a side note, I read a book published by the Smithsonian about the Norden bombsite and the USAAF strategic bombing campaign in Europe. The author claimed that B-17s destroyed more Tiger tanks than any other weapon because of raids on marshaling yards and factories. If this was true, it would be a fascinating detail to share.
Ron Klages in his book Trail of the Tigers tries to break down Tiger losses into categories. He suggests that the majority were genuine combat losses and air attacks / fuel shortages etc were relatively minor. I haven’t read the book but there is a summary on the Panzer World website. 👍
Orders were placed for 1,500 Tiger IIs-slightly more than the 1,347 Tiger I tanks produced-but production was severely disrupted by Allied bombing raids. Among others, five raids between 22 September and 7 October 1944 destroyed 95 percent of the floor area of the Henschel plant. It is estimated that this caused the loss in production of some 657 Tiger IIs.
The French Resistance took thousands of German armoured vehicles out of action just before D Day. They did it by changing the destination labels on the freight wagons they were being transported on from Caen and Calais to Lyon and Marseille and off they went in the wrong direction, simple!!
@@vernongoodey5096 They also drained the axle lubrication systems of rail stocks and sold the lubricant on the black market. After the lubricant was drained, an abrasive substance was pumped in. This is recorded in Max Hasting's Das Reich.
*bombsight, they were looking through a sight to release a bomb which landed on a site.
Excellent presentation. Too much content on UA-cam and other sites claims to be authoritive on a subject but simply depends on visuals to compensate for lack of detailed analysis. Very well done 👍
I read the title and though "Wouldn't that be totally ineffective? Well I guess they knew better." After watching the video. "Seems like they didn't know better!"
I'm impressed that they tried a new idea, saw that it didn't work, then moved on instead of trying to force it to work. What amazed me was the scale: 824 bombers just to test out an idea? I can't get my head around the scale of that war.
At 6:27 i almost blew coffee thru my nose. Dude has a pipe in his teeth. While strapping jellied gasoline, complete with fuse. Probably was not lit, right? Still funny as hell.
Dude i love everything about your stuff. Excellence!!
The ground crew probably fixed any hardpoint mounting failures with a ball-peen hammer. And people today wonder why there are safety labels on everything.
@@cf3714 Some people might wonder, but not the young dude who I saw taking his smoke break at a gas bar last summer. He did not go near the gas pumps but instead went for the propane filling area. I could not back out of there fast enuf.
Napalm doesn't burst into flames from just a spark or an ember or even a match The gelling agent lowers the flammable vapor dispersion below easy ignition levels. In fact US flamethrowers and bombs require a thermite ignition source.
I bet it still was a sight to see.
Thank you for helping me to learn something new about operations in the E.T.O.
"The intent of this video.." . You've got better intro than Mark Felton.
I sort of checked out at 825 bombers being thrown at the targets, imagine what that looked like flying over. The volume of fire applied by the allies is just mind boggling. And on top of it, they delivered thanksgiving dinner to field units in 1944.
Take that Austrian Corporal.
My father flew B24's out of England. He only flew 11 bombing missions, but he told me that on one of those missions, as soon as his group formed up and headed over the English Channel they were met by returning bombers. From that point on, until they returned to England there was never a moment he couldn't see bombers going to that target or returning from hitting it. Over 1000 bombers aimed at one unlucky site. I don't know which mission or target that was, but it happened between 6 June 1944 and 10 September 1944 when his crew was reassigned.
The formation would blacken the sky
Great video! There seems to be a thesis forming about the effectiveness and deployment of incendiary weapons.
I was involved with designing bunkers in the '80s. ''Napalm dampers' were an option in air-inlet ductwork .
LOL, an option. You make it sound like an auto feature. "And that isn't all friends, if you order RIGHT NOW, you get wind chimes and an Air Inlet Ductwork that is Napalm Proof!"
yeah, but it depended on the ''client requirement'' what threats they saw as likely . In the 80s a lot was done m much of it now unused and removed .@@dagsterblaster4973
So what we are saying... is that the first napalm attack had much the same results as the early-mid war conventional bombing.
Badly aimed (from too high), with sub optimal bombs, and no good experience base, meant that there was little to no effective result.
That being the case, it wouldn't matter what you dropped.
However - late in the war, the US and UK bomber commands were getting their act (and tactics) together and could get impressive results with conventional bombs.
likewise, I would suggest that proper experience and equipment with napalm bombs could also have been effective in the right context. (probably not during WW2)
But larger cannisters that had a bursting charge/fuse that worked 5 feet above the ground, delivered fast, at low level, that actually hit the target - in sufficient quantity... would have had a significantly different effect.
What I am talking about is basically what the US airforce got around to doing in Vietnam.
The thing I took from the experience described here, was that this air attack couldn't hit the side of a barn , so it is hardly surprising it achieved little.
How would WWII technology get the fuses to explode 5 feet above the ground?
@@paulbriggs3072
A stand off probe.
Like what the Mk 82 bomb does with a Fuze Extender.
@@paulbriggs3072 a proximity fuse or a timer might've worked. How well it worked or quickly they could have made enough might be another story.
Very VERY interesting analysis. Thanks for sharing your fascinating research.
It is incomprehensible to think of being a human being in an area targeted with napalm
Let's see what happens, and the old adage You don't know until you try.
Hitler did not identify the locations along the seawall in France, it was by the The Desert Fox, Erwin Rommel.
Right on. Thanks for sharing.
Of course 8th AF wasn’t trying to burn the concrete itself. It’s somewhat surprising the napalm didn’t have more of a splash effect, which theoretically could have gone into openings in the fortifications or snuffed out oxygen under perfect conditions. But, the difference between theory and the real world is that in theory there is none!
I have never heard of this attack. I too have wondered why we did not use napalm on the fortifications. Now I know. I wonder if it could have been more successful if dropped by fighter-bombers as successfully deployed against caves and bunkers in the Pacific?
Great research and presentation/ I'm surprised testing had not shown the effects of impacting on soft ground.
I'm surprised paper fuel tanks actually worked. Not surprising at all that napalm is ineffective against concrete.
From what I have seen, These paper drop tanks, designed by the British, were very effective. They were much lighter than the metal ones designed in the U.S., and were readily available. Greg's air planes and cars has in depth info on drop tanks.
Thanks, all your episodes are great
Thanks for the kind channel donation. It is much appreciated!
It mostly shows that at that time they lacked the guidance systems needed to attack those kinds of targets in any effective manner. Just couldn't get anything into exposed openings to have the desired results.
I'd take it the story has changed a lot in that regard. A modern thermobaric could probably go right in a portal and pop one of those placements open as if it were a zit.
It should be noted that these attacks have looked somewhat different from "normal napalm attcacks" ( - if you can say so - ). Nearly all footage you can find of napalm attacks show napalm bombs being droped from low alltitude from fighterbombers, so that they hit the ground at a flat angel and with a high speed, causing the napalm to spread over a large area. When droped from a high alltitude, and impacting almost verticaly, the napalm will not be spread over a large area. The effect will be a very concentrated fire that only will cover a small area. The igniters used in most napalm bombs do not have explosive force enough to scatter the napalm over a larger area.
The report is inaccurate on one point. Napalm de-oxygenates the immediate area around the detonation causing asphyxiation. This is more apparent on troops in confined spaces such as bunkers and caves. There are numerous examples of this in the Vietnam War. Following attacks, the dead bodies of enemy soldiers with no physical signs of injury would be found.
narrative backed by paper documents = new subscribe. continue on with the intel briefing. please keep this format
They should have used of the A36s they bought. If not give RAF Mosquitos a go at it. They had clearly demonstrated their ability with pin point low level attacks.
the 1945 report shown was an AFTER ACTION REPORT. This described in detail what led up to the 6 June 1944 invasion of Normandy. The war in Europe was going on in Berlin by APR 1945.
These videos are some terrific history!
I really appreciate that you don't just assert things as fact, you prove the facts -- from multiple sources. One minor point, besides the waste of 375,000 gallons of napalm, what was the cost of delivering all of that ordinance? There was the obvious cost of aviation gas for the planes, wear-and-tear on equipment, and all the costs of sending the crews out. Plus, surely the Germans put up some flak, right? Again, this is minor because it is obvious, but it would be nice to have a number.
Interestingly this lines up with some Korean POW interviews where they rated the effectiveness of US air support and stated that napalm was the least feared weapon. Napalm might look very effective from the air but it definitely seems to have limited practical effects.
Heavy bombers in WW2 not hitting their targets isn't surprising. Allied strategic bombing was a bad investment of a whole lot of money. I couldn't tell from the video what altitude the bombs were released from. Since these are B-17 and B-24 my assumption is that they released at high altitudes which is yet another example of the 8th Air Force living in fantasy land. By this time in the war they had overwhelming proof that they couldn't hit targets smaller than entire cities from high altitude. If they dropped from lower altitudes, I guess that means they couldn't hit anything ever, except the ground. Except that since they had aerial detonations, apparently they sometimes couldn't even hit the ground. I'm always torn between whether the Strategic Bombing Command should have been prosecuted for war crimes, or court-martialed for incompetence. Instead, they were rewarded with their own independent branch of the Armed Forces. WW2 Strategic Bombing is my favorite example of the success of failure.
6:25 A guy smoking a pipe while loading napalm? Genius.
Chewing on an unlit pipe - a common practise
Love seeing the wartime documents! Everything now is MsWord Typeset in some elegant font, with perfect printing, devoid of any distinctive character... no circular coffee mug stains or cigaret burns. Well, maybe the occasional roach burn...
The thing to remember about those paper canisters -- their surfaces were well sealed inside and out, and Paper is AFTER ALL, WOOD FIBERS --> Lignin; Tough, Sturdy, Flexible, Durable. Hey, there were cultures in ancient times that used Thick Paper ARMOR to protect their soldiers from Arrows and Spears!
Jimmy Doolittle had a PhD. (1) Am not surprised it was tried. (2) Am especially not surprised the lengths to which data were collected, analyzed and documented.
Excellent report
I really doubt the results reported. Low level napalming would wound /burn more soldiers and render strong holds temporarily undefended . Ask the Vietnamese how ineffective napalm was .
Good video. I learned a lot. Thanks for making.
Any figures on 8th Air Force losses in this attack?
I heard the historian and peace activist lecture Howard Zinn lecture once, and I believe he said he flew on one of these missions.
Depressingly fascinating.
Great video
Very interesting discourse by all the commentators. This was an interesting analysis of the mission. My only question is why was this mission even contemplated. By April 15, 1945, the war was concluding and the Allies knew this. VE day was a month away, so I wonder if the point of this was somehow politically motivated involving French authorities. To risk the American B-24 and B-17 crews seems fruitless, as all the prior fire bombings I'm aware of were conducted by British heavies over Germany.
You win some, you lose some.
I wonder if the experience with napalm in Vietnam would have changed these results. It does still seem a sound idea, dropping a highly flammable liquid into the space, will find its way inside somehow.
That was an expensive experiment...
Especially for those Allied troops who died due to fire from those fortifications.
Really enjoy your series but why so little about the B24?
Interesting. Would volume detonation cloud explosion work better against such target?
Not surprised by the results really.
Now I understand those film images of Vietnam War & American aircraft dropping cannisters of napalm. One could be the streaming incineadry visual effects of WP, yet clouds of igniting napalm. We were witnessing the phospurous igniter.
I fully expected the effects of napalm to be negligible, it's a no brainer really. Especially when dropped from high altitude.
This heavy bomber napalm bombing occurred two weeks before the war ended. It must have been a test against heavily fortified emplacements. The napalm being dropped in bombs was the same stuff used in flamethrowers. The USAAF was dropping napalm bombs on German targets from 1943 to the end of the war. The heavy bomber formations had aircraft loaded with napalm in the back of the formation that dropped their fire bombs to ignite what the high explosive bombs had exposed. Those created fires that gutted aircraft factories and manufacturing plants. Those were also used when bombing railroad marshalling yards full of cars loaded with coal and electric generation plants to set fire to the coal and any other railcars since most were constructed of wood. USAAF fighter bombers also made low level attacks using napalm bombs against German truck convoys, tanks and artillery hidden in forests and troops concealed inside structures.
The 467BG out of Rackheath, England flew that mission. My father was a PoW in Stalag Luft 1 at the time, having been a "guest" of the Luftwaffe since 13 August, 1944.
My grandfather was co-pilot out of Rackheath with the 467
@@chip9177 I hope you heard his stories about his experience
@@KevinLee-hu1lj I did not, however, there were a few stories that my grandmother had written down. A couple of the stories were confirmed and/or corrected in the book about the 467th. I tried tracking his missions but it appears that their plane was a pathfinder so he was sometimes bumped to a different plane as some higher ups liked to take his seat. The pilots name was Littleford - 8th - 467th - 791st I believe - G.A. Bentley Co-Pilot
@@chip9177 I was the archivist of the 467th for quite some time, spending days at the National Archives in Maryland photocopying crew rosters for each mission. I created databases from those rosters and show Littleford was active from Mission 84 to mission 202. On mission 84 July26 1944, his co-pilot was Pedersen, the target was Montreuil, France.
@@KevinLee-hu1lj That would be fun pouring over some of that info. I have two crew pictures, one looks like an official shot as they are not in flight gear but next to a B-24. Kakis & leather jackets w/crew names on the back & littleford is listed. Another pic is the crew next to a B-24 with their flight gear on & looking a little more haggard., That picture is labeled GP-83 (or 93) -1-467 16/11/44 crew 79 - a third pic is my grandfather in a biplane trainer in Ocala, FL - It is fun trying to find & organize history, esp of relations. Is there a way I can view the crew rosters? I would love to figure out which planes & missions he flew & how much of the verbal history matches the actual records. I think if I dont do it it will never be done as new generators are so removed from the war & never met any of their great grandparents. All, except for great grandmother (ex-wife of this flyer) who live to 103.
How/why would Eight AF be conducting such a mission 3 weeks before VE Day? That makes no sense.
Absolutely _terrifying_ weapons...on paper.
Thanks
G'day,
Thanks for posting..., this is brilliantly illuminating...!
I grew up watching Napalm in operation, on the black & white TV News, at least 5 nights per week, from 1967 - '72 ;
It worked so very well against wood and bamboo
Thatch-roofed Houses & Villages, and the WW-1 & WW-2 stock footage of Infantry Flamethrowers & flamethrowing Tanks..., too, together with various references encountered over the years as to how,
"Napalm was briefly trialled in the EuroPeon Theatre of Operations..., very late in the War ; which then promptly ended for all sorts of other reasons..."
Which sort of hinted that something had failed to gel with the Operational deployment... (pardon that pun) ; but this is the first time I've ever heard of the scale of the attempt to cook Guns and People..., by dropping Jellied Petroleum Firebombs onto their 6 ft-thick Reinforced Concrete Roofs.
"To make the World a better place, by Jove !"
375,000 Gallons, y'say, eh ?
Well then, they
Will be the
Undersized U.S. 3.85 litre
"Gallons", will they not ?
Assuming thus to be the case,
then those 1,443,750 Litres, upon burning, duly became
3,609.375
TONS...., of
Carbon Dioxide.
Released in 1945...
By 1970, that Fossil Carbon had completed 95% of the
Atmospheric Heating which it WILL Achieve...
Though,
By now ; it probably only has a
Half a percent yet to go...(?) !
What a remarkably
Stupidly
Viciously
Pointlessly
Nest-Fouling
Thing..., for any
Rational Human to ever
Want to go and do...!
It boggles the mind.
Such is life.
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
What REALLY boggles the mind is that the USAAF generals found that it was ineffective and didn't keep on doing it anyway.
@@indisputablefacts8507
G'day,
Hmmmn, they could indeed be
Remarkably
Pig-headed and
Stubborn as Donkeys or
Mules...
From here it appears that the USA Army Air Corps' General Staff was actively competing with the USA's Naval Admirals, for demonstrating the most baseless faith in the Equipment they had fought so many Paperwork Battles and kissed so many Politicians' Arseholes to get the funding for...
So B-17s were sent out on unescorted Deep Penetration Raids, because Official Doctrinal Theory held that they would be able so to do...
Whereas the Navy merely stockpiled Pre-War Torpedoes which had NEVER been tested, ordered off the Blueprints, but during the Depression..., Treasury refused Funding to conduct any Firing Trials...; so all through
1942
US Submariners & Aircrew
All of them knew...;
Their Torpedoes were
Useless
Ducking Fuds.
Which ran too deep,
Missed,
And then
Even when
They hit -
They refused to go
"BANG !!!"
At all.
The salient point
Best remembered, though, is that,
What the
Wannabe Warrior (worrier...)
Calls
"Military Intelligence",
(Ie,
Constantly preparing in the
Real World,
To defend against whatever
Hypothetical
"Threat Scenarios" which they
May be paid,
To imagine...; of which to become
AFRAID...!)
AND,
The Psychiatric Textbooks
Call,
"Pathological Paranoid Psychosis..."
So, to be brutally honest, all the evidence appears to indicate that the
Universal Creator Godtheory is not
"On the side of"
ANY
Quarreling Individual or group thereof, who
Choose to live in fear, and then try to
Calm all their own
Fearfulness, or Anger, or Envy,
As they try
To "Justify"
Their
Decision to go about
Constantly
Practising to kill Strangers for a living,
Or being paid to actually
Kill Strangers as a
Patriotic practice...
Are, all of them,
Squeaking
From a
Godtheory's Eye
Perspective...,
Equally
Faithless, blasphemous, apostatic, hypocritical, childish, and worthy of being
Abandoned to the very
Laws of
Ballistic Physics & Explosive Chemistry and mass mastery of various
Murderously
SELFISH
Martial
"Arts" & "Skills"....
So, my guess is that the
Godtheory
Regards
ALL such Warriors(worriers)
As
Compost-On-The-Hoof,
Taking their DNA out of the
Human
Gene-Pool...,
The better to ensure that
The Meek
SHALL
Inherit
The
Earth...
Hence,
"Billy
Don't be a
Hero...
Keep your pretty head down,
Billy
Don't be a Hero,
Come home t' be
Fcuked
Regularly...!"
Or, words to that effect (!).
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao ;
Hitler would NEVER surrender nor order retreat from such defenses
Dropping External Fuel Tanks from medium altitude and expecting any sort accuracy is lunacy
And shockingly concrete doesn't burn 🤷♂
Wow, I didn't know that they used Napalm in WW2. From what I saw, this sort of bombing was not effective. Napalm was extremely effective in Veitnam because it was a rural setting with lots of vegetation and more effect that on fortified bunkers and buildings
"If a burning glob of napalm got on them they just brushed it off" oh. I figured that would be much worse.
I've had several european theater vets tell me (growing up in the 80's) that the germans were still dug in in places along the coastline when they got there well after D-Day. This makes sense, considering Antwerp fell pretty late in the war along with several other "pockets" that were bypassed in favor of going straight after the bulk of the western front.
The US Army decided to isolate the Germans coastal submarine bases instead of attacking them since they had nowhere to go except out to sea.
More a case of Facepalm than napalm Saw the clip title and thought ' wow ' , saw the effect and thought ' oh ' .
Huh, you're right. I thought you were gonna say fire tornados or something extremely brutal.
Great info
@6:30 Best thing I've seen all year mate.
What if they had used artillery proximity nose fuses? Perhaps with a small charge inside the tank to spread the gel.
Thank you for the informative video.
Notwithstanding your focus on the use of napalm, I think that the motivation and execution of the multiple 1945 air attacks on Royan must be considered together. They represent a complex story. The citizens of the town were the principal recipients of the ordinance dropped in these raids and to this day, the town marks its destruction and the death of its civilians every January. Interestingly, on the coastal path some German bunkers remain undisturbed, silent reminders perhaps of this strange period in western France at the close of the second world war in Europe.
I have wondered why massive napalm attacks were not used prior to landings in the Pacific. The ineffectiveness reported here explains why we never tried it.
That's NOT the reason - napalm bombing didn't really start until 1944 by which time many of the landings had been done. In 1944 and 1945, napalm was used as a tactical weapon against Japanese bunkers, pillboxes, tunnels, and other fortifications, especially on Saipan, Iwo Jima, the Philippines, and Okinawa, where deeply dug-in Japanese troops refused to surrender. Also napalm bombs were dropped by aviators of the US Navy, the USAAF, the US Marine Corps, and the Royal Air Force in support of ground troops. Supporting landing operations requires very accurate artillery support which MUST finish just before the first Marine boot touches ground, this is easy to coordinate using naval guns & much harder using airplanes - where friendly troops are concerned you need markers & this is hard to do. The Allies managed to carpet bomb their own troops in Europe a few times due to the lack of sophistication of communications & the inexperience of aircrews. Generally it wasn't worth the risk of a cock up.
My god! Someone who knows how to present a map!!
Good Video/Info.
Is this the presage to the daisycutter and moab weapons?
Whose bright idea was it to try to burn concrete???
I am puzzled as to why there were still bombing missions in coastal France in April 1945, almost a year after D-day. Wasn't France liberated by then? How did the Germans even support those strongholds in 1945? A month after this Napalm attack the war in Europe was over. This is an interesting piece of history I had no Idea about. I did not know that there were still German strongholds on the coast of France in 1945. Surely this attack could have waited. In May, after surrender, they could have taken those strongholds without a shot. Was this an experiment?
How many aircraft were lost in this attack to the enemy or maintenance?
A beautiful yet flawed experiment... Only to be nearly obsolete by August that year.
I like all the details. I've learned, however, that my love of details is not common amongst other apes. For wider appeal, you might want to summarize some of the details. Very interesting results, though - and even more interesting considering that the US went on to continue widespread napalm attacks for decades after. It seems that they might have had better luck hitting the enemy with poison ivy - as far as mass demoralization was concerned.
Actually, I'd have thought this would have been an expected result. Fire is not likely to damage concrete 6 feet thick with an earthen cover. Maybe a massive concentration of heat over a period might compromise a small outer layer but nothing significant.
This is a core reason fuel-air bombs are only effective on non-hardened targets like humans & trucks out in the open. Maybe if they could have atomised the fuel in thru the openings prior to igniting, it would've hurt the people on the inside. But they would be rapidly replaced & the guns left unaffected.
A pointless destruction of the town of Royan France. A town of no strategic importance. At the time of the raid, the town was hundreds of miles away from the front lines which at that time were well inside Germany. The German garrison and local citizens had a peaceful coexistence and were patiently awaiting the soon end of the war. The German garrison was largely unaffected by the raid and afterwards helped with rescue efforts of the town victims. The surviving townspeople were angry for many years at the Allies for the unnecessary death and destruction of their town.
0:25 Beautiful scenery.
And no animals were harmed during the attack.
Proof of all Claims Required.
It seems the recipe delivery systems had been greatly improved by the time Viet Nam came along.
I thought France was liberated in August of 1944. Why are we dropping napalm in April of 1945??
8:35
You would think the Allies could have TESTED this idea before committing almost a 1,000 heavy bombers.
Good video
It seems like the ineffectiveness of this type of ordinance could have been easily assessed with just a little bit of pre-deployment testing.
True, but then again, what better way to test then on the real thing.
Fortifications? Was Dresden a fortification?
Probably more people died in the planes that were shot down. A rather "expensive" experiment in terms of cost, materials, & perhaps, lives
*@WWIIUSBombers >>> Great video...👍*
Imagine 375,000 gallons of napalm
635,000 tons of munitions, including napalm, dropped on N. Korea... not fortifications but innocent, non-political citizens. USA-DOD kept detailed lists of it all. Edited... many who commented may not have watched the vid, it explains that napalm was of little use against fortified positions. You would think it would be but it wasn't.
take a heavy duty 1qt Ball glass storage jar and loosely fill with Ivory soap shavings using a kitchen box grater, then cover with just enough fresh gasoline, seal and let sit for about a week at room temperature ~ open and stir contents using a pencil diameter long wooden dowel, making sure mixture is the consistency of runny yogurt = diy napalm, which will burn thru an asphalt road surface, among other things...
Leaded or unleaded gasoline?