Kamikaze Attacks and the Effect of Speed

Scott Sommers

Illuminator
Scott Sommers
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,866
I am not referring to meth or other forms of stimulants. Rather, I mean the magnitude of an objects's instantaneous velocity (here). The claim is repeatedly being made by our Truther friends that jet planes crashing into the WTC and Pentagon could not have caused the damage that was observed because they were not hard enough. I think that's their argument. I don't have the patience to wade through all their Truther crap to find out the exact nature of their claims. I just want to expand on some observations that I think are relevant and let the morons set me straight with their amazing logic.

Over on this post, we were talking about Japanese suicide attacks during the Second World War - the Kamikaze. Planes often not much larger than a car but with top speeds of as much as 600 mph were collided with steel ships over a thousand times heavy. At least 26 ships were sunk by Kamikaze. Check this video at 1:04 for an example of what speed can do.


But don't believe me. Let's hear what our Truther scientists have to say about this.
 
Last edited:
this is another good example:

The mechanical properties of a projectile depends on its speed. For example, if I take a soft lead bullet and press it slowly against a steel plate, say 0.5 cm thick, using a mechanical press, it would deform into a lead disc and the steel plate would be largely unaffected. However, if I take the same soft lead bullet and it's fired from a 0.357 Magnum, it would easily blow a large hole in the same steel plate.
Click to expand...
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00325.htm
 
I'm just shocked that this has to be even explained to some people
 
twinstead said:
I'm just shocked that this has to be even explained to some people
Click to expand...

No life skills. No interaction with the outside world. No relative employment skills. No relative employment qualifications. No real experiences.

Just gullible internet junkies with too much time on their hands..........and a chipped shoulder or two.
 
AJM8125 said:
Kamikazes?? Impossible! We had radar! We had interceptors!! Where were the interceptors?!?1. Nimitz ordered a stand down!
Click to expand...

:):):):)

It turns out that the Japanese discovered "stealth" first but they didn't know it. Some of the Kamikaze planes were fabric over steel tube frame and when they were used at night they didn't draw gunfire because our radar didn't see them.
 
But don't believe me. Let's hear what our Truther scientists have to say about this.
Click to expand...

The Kamikazis are not really good examples of this. They normally carried bombs or torpedos when carrying out the attacks (you can see what looks like a torpedo on the last plane shown.)

And US carriers did not have armoured decks unlike the British carriers of the same date. British carriers were hit but not seriously damaged by Kamikazis.

There are better examples to be found to illustrate the phenomenon of how a soft material will cut through a harder one due to its KE.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
There are better examples to be found to illustrate the phenomenon of how a soft material will cut through a harder one due to its KE.
Click to expand...

A modern and more effective way of highlighting this, to those who have difficulty in accepting or understanding it, is to point to the damage to your troops vehicles caused by small arms, RPG's and IED's. Only superman is immune.
 
BigAl said:
:):):):)

It turns out that the Japanese discovered "stealth" first but they didn't know it. Some of the Kamikaze planes were fabric over steel tube frame and when they were used at night they didn't draw gunfire because our radar didn't see them.
Click to expand...

From what I rember from a book I read last year, most of the planes hugged the coast and popped up over the hills at the last second and thus the shipps didn't have much time to react.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
The Kamikazis are not really good examples of this. They normally carried bombs or torpedos when carrying out the attacks (you can see what looks like a torpedo on the last plane shown.)

And US carriers did not have armoured decks unlike the British carriers of the same date. British carriers were hit but not seriously damaged by Kamikazis.

There are better examples to be found to illustrate the phenomenon of how a soft material will cut through a harder one due to its KE.
Click to expand...

But the Brits paid a price with having 1/3 fewer planes then the American Carriers because of the weight of the Armor. The Americans considered armoring the flight decks of carriers, but decided that having more fighters in the air was a better defense. Most naval historians consider them to be correct.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
From what I rember from a book I read last year, most of the planes hugged the coast and popped up over the hills at the last second and thus the shipps didn't have much time to react.
Click to expand...

The sailors also came to dread overcast days, which the kamikaze pilots would exploit to their advantage too. That is until radar directed AA became a reality, late 1944 or early 1945 IIRC.
 
Last edited:
my bold​

Grizzly Bear said:
Yeah, materiality isn't really important as when it concerns the force an object applies, you're considering it's velocity and mass first :\
None of those people ever seem to get that...
Click to expand...



Not necessarily Grizz​
.

Here's low velocity, low mass causing great damage.


Here's low velocity, high mass causing great damage.
​
 
Hardness is a function of whether one object can scratch another. A piece of talc cannot scratch a glass window and a piece of lead cannot scratch a stainless steel plate.

However, it's pretty easy to understand that a big talc rock thrown at a window will break the window. Why? The rock applies a force that exceeds that maximum bending or shear capacity of the window.

By the same token, a lead bullet fired from a gun can penetrate a small plate of steel. Why? It applies a force to the plate. It's not a question of scratching.

This is an incredibly easy concept to understand.
 
AJM8125 said:
The sailors also came to dread overcast days, which the kamikaze pilots would exploit to their advantage too. That is until radar directed AA became a reality, late 1944 or early 1945 IIRC.
Click to expand...

Proximity fuzes made the big difference. ISTR they came into general use in 1944 but were restricted to use over water so that there was no chance of one falling into enemy hands.
 
BasqueArch said:

Here's low velocity, low mass causing great damage.


Here's low velocity, high mass causing great damage.
​
Click to expand...


Dude those videos were disturbing XD

But force is determined by those two variables, and that's my point.​
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom