M6A - Japan's Submarine-borne Attack Aircraft

Рет қаралды 12,122

Жыл бұрын

The Aichi M6A "Seiran" was a Japanese purpose-made submarine-borne attack aircraft. Becoming ready in the closing stages of the Second World War, the M6A was the only one of its kind to be available during the conflict.
Game footage and aircraft models
War Thunder - / warthunder .
00:04 History
13:58 Opinion and Conclusion
Disclaimer - This channel is apolitical. We do not endorse any kind of political view.
Corrections
None
Music
by order of appearance
History:
- Beautiful Oblivion by Scott Buckley ssoundcloud.comscottbuckley
Music promoted by httpswww.free-stock-music.com
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
screativecommons.orglicensesby4.0
- William Tell Overture (by Rossini) | KZfaq Audio Library
Conclusion:
- Oh, crimson blood is burning "Aa Kurenai no Chi wa Moyuru" - Japanese 1944 song
Sources
- Operation Storm - Japan's Top Secret Submarines and Its Plan to Change the Course of World War II by John J. Geoghegan
- Monogram Close-Up 13 - Aichi M6A1 Seiran by Robert C. Mikesh
- Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War by R.J. Francillion
- I-400 Japan's Secret Aircraft-Carrying Strike Submarine - Objective Panama Canal by Henry Sakaida, Gary Nila and Koji Takaki
- Japanese Aircraft of World War II - 1937-1945 by Thomas Newdick
- Japanese Aero-Engines 1910-1945 by Mike Goodwin and Peter Starkings
- Several other sources like aircraft manuals and tests
I do not own any of the images used in this video. The owners of such images are identified in the video itself.

Пікірлер: 62

@Arthion Жыл бұрын

I reckon you should have emphasised how innovative the double fused pressure hull design was that allowed them to be so large in the first place, or how much trouble the Americans went through to keep the captured ones secret from the Soviets as they are sort of the grandfather of all modern large submarine designs thanks to that very design innovation.

@brendonbewersdorf986 Жыл бұрын

I was not expecting this at all but it's a welcome suprise haha thank you for covering this one. Here is hoping the D4Y also gets a video that one is unique to

@neilfoster814 Жыл бұрын

I have to say, the land based version (with retractable undercarriage) was a nice looking aircraft.

@KapiteinKrentebol Жыл бұрын

I think 1 is the picture that conveys best the M6A's purpose. 2 is a very nice picture too. I agree that the project was forward thinking but it was also a waste of resources (which was actually a good thing for the allies). If Japan had these in numbers right at the attack of Pearl Harbor they could have attacked the Panama Canal immediately. But then again they could have send a few carriers there as well which could have done more damage.

@accadacastkr4912 Жыл бұрын

Japan made some of the best looking and performing aircraft made many 1 /48 scale models of them, inc the sheridin, even the i-100

@ukulelemikeleii Жыл бұрын

I vote for picture number one; by the way, I had read somewhere that prior to surrender the Japanese had jettisoned all their aircraft because they felt that if they were found with the aircraft in u.s. markings, there would be dire consequences.

@jaex9617 Жыл бұрын

The big problem here is the cost of getting those bombs on target. Looking at the cost of the subs, the aircraft, and actually running the operation, it seems like an incredibly low bang-for-the-buck situation. In truth, it makes me wonder whether anyone in the Axis had ever studied logistics or operations research. These were relatively new disciplines at the time. Sounds like a joke, but I really wonder if no one in authority was familiar with basic cost-benefit / risk-return or SWOT analysis.

@allangibson8494 Жыл бұрын

The original design target was the Panama Canal lock gates. Rupturing the Gatun lake locks would take the canal out for six months minimum (because of the time the lake would need to refill).

@michaelpielorz9283 Жыл бұрын

speaking of bang per dollar.means the atomic bomb and the B29 would have never been build

@jaex9617 Жыл бұрын

@@allangibson8494Thanks for the info. Still a risky proposition but if it had succeeded it certainly would have been a problem for the Allies.

@jaex9617 Жыл бұрын

@@michaelpielorz9283How do you come to that conclusion? Thanks.

@theswampangel3635 Жыл бұрын

Very interesting and well-researched. Your conclusions are sound. I’ll vote for #1.

@Lord.Kiltridge Жыл бұрын

As for my opinion, I will let the experts speak for me. The Americans were so impressed with the three captured I-400 class subs, that they were classified and sunk at a secret location out of fear that the Soviets would copy the design. They were _that_ good.

@nikojnemavakvo Жыл бұрын

welcome to youtube :) its nice to see a new channel bringing new information, keep up the good work

@LastGoatKnight Жыл бұрын

Answer to the question: I like the concept and it worked, so I think that these things would've give nightmares to sailors. And picture 1 is better in my opinion

@eddies6977 6 ай бұрын

Well done. I too always thought of the M6A and its submarine platform as a novelty but you showed it a light that I too have given it more thought and appreciation for the engineering, from proof of concept to actual deployment back in 1943 was not a feat to trivialize.

@jb6027 Жыл бұрын

I saw this aircraft at Willow Grove Naval Air Station, outside of Philadelphia, in the 1960s. It and a number of other captured Japanese Aircraft were displayed together outside in the element for decades. I'm glad, given its historical value, that it is now properly restored and displayed.

@FireDragon16180 Жыл бұрын

Very good video, thank you. it was a powerful weapon system

@smigoltime Жыл бұрын

Finally somethingI never heard of, lovely one!

@RemusKingOfRome Жыл бұрын

Another Great video.

@mariodelgado9729 Жыл бұрын

So each sub carried 3 planes with a capacity of one 800 kilo pay load, so the maximum delivery would be a possible total of 2400 kilos per sortie IF the mission was a success!. Do the math, each B 29 was able to carry in an average range around 5500 kilos and there was hundreds of planes per mission, so yeah no dice on this three plane aircraft carrier being more than resource drain on the Japanese just like Yamato, Musashi or the German Koing Tigre, Maus tanks.

@jaex9617 Жыл бұрын

My reaction exactly. The direct and opportunity costs of getting that ordnance on target is ridiculous. For all their engineering fetishism, I really question whether anyone in the Axis knew anything about logistics and operations.

@RohanGillett Жыл бұрын

These planes were a novel and fun idea. But that's it. As you said, they only had an 800kg payload which was pretty minimal even if it hit the target. Of course, the submarines had to evade all the warships between Japan and the US. There were so many chance elements that the project had such a low chance of success. The whole idea was just a waste of resources, not efficient or useful at all. 2023 sees this logic repeat. Japan is rearming but doesn't have an economy to support it, but that won't deter them. They'll kill doing it and wasting their money.

@10OZDuster 4 ай бұрын

blocking/damaging the panama canal a high value target would be a big blow no one can pass through if block .....no ?......or the sub/aircraft dropping one load on the deck of carriers at night mission w/o being detected .........it just came too late thats why its a waste....if it came a year earlier could have serious consequence...but not saying japan will win because of it. Everything japan did at that late in time whatever it is totally useless if you think about it.

@ejt3708 22 күн бұрын

Just remember tho, the B29 costed more than the Manhattan Projecr. Difficult to attack anything without air superiority. Bio or chem weapons would have reduced the need for payload.

@fliegeroh Жыл бұрын

Great video

@McRocket 6 ай бұрын

I choose #1 (barely). #2 is more attractive for the plane. But #1 conveys more information. I really enjoyed this. And I agree completely with your conclusions. Thank you for this. ☮

@paulsnickles2420 Жыл бұрын

Very interesting video

@adamtruong1759 Жыл бұрын

The I-400 design is interesting, but I also kind of see as a bit of a "bully" so to say, they can be successful at attacking small targets that can't really defend themselves, but if they meet any kind of resistance (like a group of Hellcats, or even FM Wildcats) they fall apart.

@ajman66 8 ай бұрын

A pretty wild idea

@vespelian 9 ай бұрын

Brilliant technology but ultimately a bonsai project on their own. Artwork no. 1.

@dante001ish Жыл бұрын

There is something elegant about this design despite the purpose for which it was built for, sorry I know your preference for images but #2 is very striking.

@sinisterisrandom8537 11 ай бұрын

The I-400 still continues to be the forerunner that helped create modern-day Nuclear submarines. So perhaps a waste in the war, due to a limited amount but in reality a long historical life that still continues to live on thanks to the technical information still gathered from it.

@ejt3708 22 күн бұрын

I was hoping there would be a discussion of the potential use of these planes to attack a major West coast US city with biological or chemical weapons. Japan had a huge (and brutal) program based in China. Not a war winner, but it would have caused havoc nonetheless. Mark Felton (quasi believable?) has a vid on this. Any thoughts?

@CaptainVasiliArkhipov Жыл бұрын

Japan developed bubonic plague in Manchuria, 250,000 rats were used and fleas were infected, fleas deployed from submersible ultra long range aircraft carriers into every major US city might have had more effect than imaginable

@ejt3708 22 күн бұрын

I had heard there was a plan to attack the West coast with these planes. Fleas were difficult to keep alive on a sub tho? And contained?

@jarheads88 Жыл бұрын

# 1 great content super presentanion their is one off the coast of Hawaii USA

@carlnewman7096 Жыл бұрын

I think the concept of the submarine aircraft carrier was brilliant & to see that It was brought to fruition is such a practical was wS incredible, that the fleet been available earlier in the war & in large numbers it could have been a real headache for the allies & game changer in regards to naval airpower tactics. Image 1 is my favourite.

@TallDude73 Жыл бұрын

I would argue that German-planned attacks via V1 buzzbomb launches from U-boats against New York, countered by Operation Teardrop, would be a far better predecessor to ballistic missile submarines than the Japanese plan to start forest fires (doesn't lightning start most of them already?), but it's an interesting concept anyway. As with so many of these plans, the amount of effort and time spent never gets a return on investment.

@tyisen5125 Жыл бұрын

Testing a concept and actually implementing it were different. These were not the 'Fire starters', these were the result of ideas gained from them. Also, unlike the whole V1/U-Boat combo, the M6A/I-400 combo was proven to work.

@triceratops2929 Жыл бұрын

What are the seven military wonders of WW2?? 15:01

@Riccardo_Silva 10 ай бұрын

The second you said. Japan wasted a lot in WWII. After all, what could six Seirans have accomplished? They could just have risen up the tally of some Hellcat's pilot.

@donlawrence1428 Жыл бұрын

I think it is a good idea for high value targets, especially if they perfected the tactics. Imagine if they could patrol the entire pacific, using recoverable aircraft. They could harass shipping lanes, hit and run, 6000 miles away!.

@garyhooper1820 Жыл бұрын

These could add much to reconnaissance . The Pacific is ALOT of water , Not much punch tactically. Imo

@mikepette4422 Жыл бұрын

well this is rare an aircraft I've never heard of before but frankly this is a very specialized plane that had very very few planes built so i think i can be forgiven for my failure

@augustosolari7721 Жыл бұрын

Great weapon, had it attacked the Panamá Canal, it could have dealt a lot of damage.

@johnmorykwas2343 Жыл бұрын

In numbers the M6A and the subs, would have been very dangerous to the Allies. # 1.

@blairscartoonshistory7477 Жыл бұрын

I’ll say artwork 1

@williamroberts1819 Жыл бұрын

2 please

@stevenwilgus8982 Жыл бұрын

Brilliant design: but like jets in Europe, too little, too late. Had the navy and army worked even half way better together, enough of these could have blocked the Panama Canal and made raids in various areas. Maybe, might have, could have.... famous words for many ideas.

@PeteSampson-qu7qb Ай бұрын

The Japanese aircraft engineers were the match of anyone on earth but they were plagued by shortages and, in many cases, doctrine that was flawed. Japan was probably doomed when they invaded China and was definitely doomed when they attacked Pearl Harbor but they built some incredible aircraft. Cheers!

@lawerancedodd690 Жыл бұрын

Number 2

@magoid Жыл бұрын

I do think those had great potential for precise strikes and long ranges. If you think about it, this is the "Amerika Bomber" Germany never had. But thankfully, just like German wonder weapons, those were just too feel and too late to make a difference in the war.

@iDarkfigure Жыл бұрын

I've always believed that R&D was getting a little out of hand and a huge waste of dwindling resources late in the war for the axis forces during WWII. complicated concepts and ideas simply seemed be too little too late and on too small of a scale to realistically make a difference in the outcome... The Nazi Aircraft carrier is a classic example! Although interesting to hear all the details of these projects... it all boils down to they still would have lost the war anyway.

@gunshipgray4295 Жыл бұрын

@TheDkeeler Жыл бұрын

The whole concept was an extravagant failure especially when you consider the Japanese submarine campaign against America and Australia was a failure as well. They didn't sink many ships compared to many they lost to American subs. The resources to build these massive subs would of best been used to build basic attack subs. Thanks great topic !