Is this photo a fake?!

[ww2admin]

The first photo is real. However, the second photo I don't know. I have no evidence and the source of its origination was taken from a video game forum. Does anyone know more about this photo?

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15402-2/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg)
http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15405-2/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg)

[MayberrySaint]

Looks photoshopped to me. The focus is a bit too clear compared to the rest of the photo. Also, none of the people in the photo are looking at the MG...it seems that they would be if it was really there. I don't see any other damage indicating a kamikaze attack. So IMHO, I would say fake.

[pdf27]

Concur. That machine gun would have to be going at a hell of a speed to penetrate both sides of that flash hider, but at the same time because it's bent if it had been going at any speed then it would have twisted the flash hider and probably gun barrel mountings badly. Furthermore, there is no sign of any other damage to the ship so this kind of implies that the MG attacked the ship by itself.

It might also be worth checking what type of machine gun that is - I wouldn't be surprised to find it's actually something like a .30 Browning. If you identify it as something non-Japanese that's a smoking gun...

<apologies for the unintentional pun!>

[Man of Stoat]

It is indeed some flavour of Browning.

[ww2admin]

Alright, it's real: http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/Letters/Kamakazepilotwhocrashedin.html

[Chevan]

Not sure about second , but firs photo is real.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze#Background

[MayberrySaint]

Good find...it looks better in your link. There is a shadow on the ship that I didn't see the first time.

[pdf27]

I'm still not convinced - and that link you found certainly doesn't count as proof.
Couple of points:
1) Not all that many Japanese aircraft used machine guns derived from the Browning type - there was one (The H0-103/Type 1), but this was not used on the Zero, which was armed with a derivative of the Vickers instead - and that is a Zero attacking the Missouri in this photo.
2) Look at the position of the shadow of the machine gun relative to the shadow of the barrels on the turret. Then look at the position of the machine gun relative to the barrels in 3D space. The shadows overlap but as far as I can make out the parts don't in 3D. That suggests they couldn't quite get the raytracing right when photoshopping the machine gun in.
3) Just noticed this, and IMHO the clincher. Look at the shadow of the machine gun barrel - it isn't bent downwards. The barrel itself is. Hence this MUST be a fake.

[Rising Sun*]

2) Look at the position of the shadow of the machine gun relative to the shadow of the barrels on the turret. Then look at the position of the machine gun relative to the barrels in 3D space. The shadows overlap but as far as I can make out the parts don't in 3D. That suggests they couldn't quite get the raytracing right when photoshopping the machine gun in.
3) Just noticed this, and IMHO the clincher. Look at the shadow of the machine gun barrel - it isn't bent downwards. The barrel itself is. Hence this MUST be a fake.

Note also that the shadow of the breech looks more like the shape of a weapon with an open frame butt much smaller than the MG's breech.

EDIT: I'm so clever, I didn't notice the shadow to the left of the left gun port. Which appears to be the breech. DER!

[Gen. Sandworm]

Its is a rather puzzling photograph ........... however with out doing optical analysis......I would say its real. The shadows are odd but that is due to the position of the sun.

It is very possible ........... we dont know if the plane in the pic is the same that hit in this instance or do we........maybe I missed something.

The downward bend of the barrel makes sense if it became lodged under the cone of the second gun and bent at an angle. Also appears there is a slight lifting of the farthest barrel.

The only thing .......... and one would need to study the layout........is that the angle at which the picture is taken seems to be a bit far out. However if it is photoshoped im sure its based off a real pic. So the angle must be right.

We have all probably see alot of odd things happen but in this case it looks like the MG sliced more thru the end of the barrel then punctured it.

The detail is great.....almost to good ...... yet it is in the foreground.

Also for this to fly out of a plane...........the ass end (lack of a better word) looks really undamaged. Not sure how it was mounted but you would expect to see some stripping ........... maybe in the middle there is some damage.

I think its real ............ but if its photoshopped then someone put a great deal of time and effort into it.

JMO

[Chevan]

I just puzzled - what someone would want to false this photos for?
What could be the aim of falsification.
Is this the Moon landing?:):D

[KMDjr]

Hello,

This is a real photo, most ceetainly not faked--why would it be?--and widely reproduced in histories of the battleship in question. There are also photos in the same series of the young IJN pilot's body lying on the deck of the ship...

[ww2admin]

Hello,

This is a real photo, most ceetainly not faked--why would it be?--and widely reproduced in histories of the battleship in question. There are also photos in the same series of the young IJN pilot's body lying on the deck of the ship...

Where can we see these photos?

[KMDjr]

Hello,

I have it in at least one BB book--probably more than one--and the Malcolm Muir book on the IOWA-class BBs (IIRC) has the photo of the young pilot's remains. The MG was ejected when the ZEKE hit USS MISSOURI's side and embedded itself in the 40mm Bofors barrel as shown...The Japanese pilot's body was ejected too, but not in one piece. He was given an appropriate military burial at sea as I recall.

HTH

[Gutkowski]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/gutkowski/fake.jpg
The point of impact shows the cone of the barrel going out and not inward and there is no bending of the AA barrel due to impact .

[1000ydstare]

Weren't the guns removed from a lot of Kamikaze planes?

It was quite (I beleive) normal for the planes to be stripped of items not deemed needed, ie the undercarriage lowering switch :p.

Likewise the part of the bofors that the machine gun has penetrated is quite weak. It is not designed for the stresses of firing rounds, merely to hide the flash from the firer. I feel a bit more damage would have been caused (ie bending of barrel and flash eliminator) had a 15 Kg - 20 Kg javelin travelling at speed hit it.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

I agree; Japan was running out of stuff like MGs and it is obviously Photoshopped.

[KMDjr]

Hello,

Did photoshop exist in the 1940s/50s/60s/70s? The picture is an official one and a copy is undoubtedly available through NHC or NARA II. Take the time to examine Malcolm Muir's work on the IOWA-class BBs and see if it helps...It was published in 1988. Photoshopped then?

Many MGs were retained on these planes, and for obvious reasons. They did not want them destroyed before reaching their objective. Also a lot of Tokko missions were last-minute affairs, with little or no time for stripping the planes down that thoroughly.

A Bofors 40mm weapon weighted some 1200lbs; a quad mount weighed almost 11-12 tons. The 7.62 mg shown embedded in the barrel would have weighed something less than 90lbs.

Just some food for thought.

[Rising Sun*]

The 7.62 mg shown embedded in the barrel would have weighed something less than 90lbs.

Just some food for thought.

I don't know enough to dispute or confirm the authenticity of the picture, which I'm happy to accept is genuine, but I'm reasonably sure that Japan didn't use 7.62 mm as its aircraft armament in WWII. I thought their nearest calibres were 7.7mm upwards.

Having once briefly been an M60 7.62 mm machine gunner, I agree that a 7.62mm MMG would have weighed less than 90 lb. Under 20lb is my recollection. Much more and I couldn't have carried it. At 90lb, I couldn't have dragged it, unless it was on wheels and then not for long.

It couldn't have weighed much more than 20 lb in an aeroplane when it's shorn of mounts like the one stuck in the gun.

Not least because at around .30 for 7.62 / 7.7 the maximum weight for a Japanese aircraft gun was less than a third of 90 lb. http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-pe.html

I'll allow more weight for a 7.62mm for a heavier barrel for sustained fire in an aircraft, but I'm struggling to understand a gun which has a barrel about 8 to 10 times heavier than the breech.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

My bad. I thought you got it from a website.

[KMDjr]

Hello Rising Sun,

I'm trying to avoid ridiculous hair-splitting here, which this issue does not merit in any way; 7.62mm seems close enough to 7.7mm for someone to understand the fact that Japanese airplanes mounted this size--which we often called .30cal as well--and that this appears to be what has pierced the 40mm. The weight figure is deliberately approximate and based upon John Campbell, which is all I had at hand & cared to grab. For those whose minds require more minute details, I will leave that digging up to them, although in any case it has no bearing on the authenticity of this old image.

[savoy6]

yeah...the kamikaze aspect is BS, since i'm pretty certain Zeros and other japanese planes didn't come with Browning M2 .50 cal MGs as standard equipment...lol...given the placement of the charging handle cutout in the reciever...
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/M2/M2HB_0.jpg

now, this could have come from a US plane since it looks like the stripped down version used in fighter aircraft wing mount.

[KMDjr]

Hello,

Actually the 12.7mm Japanese aerial machineguns were Browning designs...
read about it here:
http://www.warbirdforum.com/jaafmgs.htm

And the pic is real, as there are different views of the same 40mm skewered by the Japanese MG.

Enjoy!

[savoy6]

http://www.warbirdforum.com/type01mg.jpg

standing corrected....lol...yeah, i can buy that..that would explain what looked like a M1919 barrel shroud on a .50 cal...

[Yurek]

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15402-2/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg)

The first picture the kamakaze plane hit the water before it hit the ship

[redcoat]

Why would anyone wish to fake this photo ????

While interesting, it makes no point of any importance.

It just shows a rifle caliber MG which has been thrown into the flash hider of a 40mm AA gun.

The flash hider is made of quite thin sheet metal, a metal object thrown from a crashing aircraft could quite easily jam in it.

[redcoat]

The first photo is real. However, the second photo I don't know. I have no evidence and the source of its origination was taken from a video game forum. Does anyone know more about this photo?


http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15405-2/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg)
I did some looking around and I found a photo of a Japanese Type 3 , 13.2mm HMG, as fitted to a Zero.
Its identical to the gun in the photo.
Its not a fake ;)

http://inlinethumb58.webshots.com/17913/2592602500103014230S500x500Q85.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2592602500103014230vxqfBe)

[WaffenSS]

1st is defenately real ive seen this footage on history books and on ww2 history shows

[tskross]

umm...has it occurred to anyone that it could both be real...and a fake?? I mean it doesn't look photoshopped IMO, but isn't it quite possible that some sailors looking for some amusement at the photogs expense (or just trying to make an exciting photo) stuck that gun in there?
I mean judging from the damage to the barrel of the bofors it sure doesn't look like that mg went through it, possibly a round from an mg, but from the other direction, notice the "tearing" at the end and how it splays outward, in the opposite direction of the mg, and assuming the tip of the mg is going out the other side it does seem reasonable to say that on the other side of the bofors barrel there is an entry point from a medium caliber round. To me it looks like the mg was just stuck into the exit point...
and also judging from the looks on the sailors faces, they don't seem too amazed by the whole thing, like the joke is over (although after suffering a kamikaze attack that could be understandable anyways)
just my humble opinion

[imi]

This Kamikaze photo is tough!

[imi]

http://www.nsm88.org/merchandise/cds/nosurrender-hail.jpg
Looks like its real but I'm not sure about that

[BearMgk]

hmm have you no bigger resolution? its kinda diff to say if its real and if its fake but seems fake to me

[RifleMan20]

http://www.nsm88.org/merchandise/cds/nosurrender-hail.jpg
Looks like its real but I'm not sure about that

Looks like a scene from the movie Sobibor, but am not surprise if it actually happens.

[BearMgk]

the first is real
the second is fake

[imi]

BearMgk:sorry I found in a site thats the max resolution.

[X3 R.A.P.T.O.R.]

Enlarging the low res photo destroys it but I can see a P series hardshell on the guy's belt but a revolver in his hand?????? It could be a captured piece but then I'd expect to see a different frame design. Lots of hollywood promo stills floating around out there being passed as "genuine". Saw the Nazi funeral scene from Where Eagles Dare listed on ebay just a week or so back and it was listed as a WWII Nazi photo.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

the guy with the gun has no shadow... there should be some.

[BearMgk]

BearMgk:sorry I found in a site thats the max resolution.

no problem mate

[BearMgk]

as far i know from movies when you hit with a bullet in the head the person should bleed right away and i dont see clearly that he is bleeding so its fake i think..

[Chevan]

http://www.nsm88.org/merchandise/cds/nosurrender-hail.jpg
Looks like its real but I'm not sure about that
As far as i know usially they shoted to the top of neck , not in head.
But somthing promts to me - this is yet scene from a movie.
The face of SS officer is too staged.
Besides inside the camps Nazis usially hanged the peoples, and stayed the bodied to hung for several days , in "educational" aims.
They executed the prisoners to the hear near the ravines or pits.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

His pistol looks more like a Lechtpistole (flare pistol) or a Kampfpistole (Heavy pistol that can even launch AT rounds) or a revolver. I think he should have a Luger or a Walther.
And his feet does not quite match with the ground... And why is a prisoner running in the background?:D

[flamethrowerguy]

As far as i know usially they shoted to the top of neck , not in head.
But somthing promts to me - this is yet scene from a movie.
The face of SS officer is too staged.
Besides inside the camps Nazis usially hanged the peoples, and stayed the bodied to hung for several days , in "educational" aims.
They executed the prisoners to the hear near the ravines or pits.

Isn't this a scene from "Schindlers List"?

[herman2]

I think the photo is real. Why would someone fake a photo like this. I looked at it only once for a second and I could tell it was real. If others think its not real then maybe they need glassess. I'm really surprised that this is even up for discussion. What ever that thing is hanging from the big gun, it looks very real.

[flamethrowerguy]

I just put in my Schindlers List-DVD in and checked it out. It's definitely from the movie. It's the scene where the camp commander Amon Göth wants to shoot an elderly jewish worker but his pistol won't work so the man is lucky and survives. Just the yellow star of David has been removed from the man's vest.

[Chevan]

Isn't this a scene from "Schindlers List"?

I have not seen this film yet. but probably you right.
I've heard it was black-white film . Some of historians worry that this movie can be mistakaly used in future as a "documentary evidence" of Terror.

[flamethrowerguy]

Well, it's a very disturbing movie. Any holocaust denier should watch the movie and if he still says "this did not happen" afterwards than he can't really behelped. Spielberg made the movie in B/w to create the authentic athmosphere of that time for we all know ww2 documentaries only in black/white. After all I firstly watched the movie in a cinema in my vacation in Poland back in 1993 when the movie was released there. I am german, but after the movie while leaving the cinema, belive me, I did not dare to speak a single word in german. I was a little bit afraid they would lynch me....

[namvet]

both photos are real. I found them here on nav source

photos (photos) more than likey the machine gun came from the crash in the first photo. their both dated the same day. today photo fakers want something more in the shock and awe department.
.
.
-- the guy being shot is from Schindlers List. the officers gun jammed he got pissed and walked away.

[Adrian Wainer]

Well, it's a very disturbing movie. Any holocaust denier should watch the movie and if he still says "this did not happen" afterwards than he can't really behelped. Spielberg made the movie in B/w to create the authentic athmosphere of that time for we all know ww2 documentaries only in black/white. After all I firstly watched the movie in a cinema in my vacation in Poland back in 1993 when the movie was released there. I am german, but after the movie while leaving the cinema, belive me, I did not dare to speak a single word in german. I was a little bit afraid they would lynch me....

That is a very interesting posting, like I could understand if the movie was about say the Russians murdering Polish soldiers at Katyn, that it might not be too good to be a Russian in Poland or if the movie had been about the Nazi destruction of Warsaw that it might not be too good to be a German in Poland but I am somewhat surprized that there would have been that much Polish solidarity with murdered Jews in that, Poland was and is a very catholic country and the Catholic Church was highly anti Jewish until relatively recently and since the State of Israel was allied to the United States and Russia supported the Arab cause, anti-semitism in the USSR and its satellites was defacto officially sanctioned.

As for the holocaust deniers, those people are hardly going to be persuaded by a film made in Hollywood using actors, when they can see and choose to ignore primary evidence from in the likes of actual photograph, etc, etc.

I know a lot of people saw that movie and were very moved by it, but I hated it in that in my opinion, it was Spielberg on a personal ego trip turning the Holocaust in to a soap opera and I regard it as posatively nasty in that I believe it is made with the intention of getting the Wartime American Jewish community and the Wartime wider American community free of any responsability as to what happened to Europe's Jews during World War 2, since whilst what Schindler did was a great and noble thing, most Jews in Europe ended up in the gas chambers not on Schindler's list.

I also saw War of the World's, if you see the scene where the crazy person invites Tom Cruise in to the basement look at the way he holds the gun, there is a poster for the film Exodus in which the gun is held in the same way, coincidence or what? Really I think War of the World was a leftist Hollywood attack on America's working class and anybody who might think that people crashing planes in to the World Trade center was a major attack, notice how the upper middle class wife and her new hubby stay nice and safe in their in-laws fancy town house in Boston, obviously the white upper middle class are too virtuous to be attacked by the Aliens and the only people who really suffer are the working class ie the Cruise charactor, the nutter in the basement and the military well for being military and having tanks and guns and stuff.

As for the machine gun lodged in the 40mm, I think on balance it is real. The flash hider would not be that strong, so the machine gun would not need much of a velocity to penetrate it and the damage done to the machine gun could have occured when it was ejected from the aircraft as e.g. when the plane might have exploded. Also that might have been the only thing which hit the ship in that area from an exploding aircraft, so there is no need for a damaged area to exist beside where the machine gun is. As for the photo of the man kneeling on the ground, I think it is a publicity still from a movie.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

[namvet]

Isn't this a scene from "Schindlers List"?

yes it is. the prisoner survied because the gun jammed.

[namvet]

wife and I were speechless after watching. I think the most powerful movie ever made about the holocaust. Won 7 Oscars. Another 63 wins & 21 nominations. its a true story. Oskar Schindler is buried in Israel. I now have the DVD. and on special features they interview survivors who confirm the event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad1x0b4GBmE

[pdf27]

For what it's worth, I preferred the book the film is based on (Schindler's Ark by Thomas Keneally). The film is just a little too glossy for my taste... It's an excellent film, but the book just somehow works better.

[Jazzman]

Well, I'm totally confused. The photo of the man kneeling is for sure from Schindler's List, I remember the scene well, the guy was demonstrating how to make door hinges and Goth got pissed off and took him out back to shoot him, but his gun jammed and the poor guy survived. The problem I'm having is that in the picture posted here the German officer is clearly holding a revolver and in the movie I seem to remember him using a Walther automatic. Also, while automatics can jam quite easily, revolvers do not. The gun jamming was the point of the whole scene, so what's with the revolver?? Maybe this scene was some sort of out-take or something?

[Cavalry Gunner]

see this link http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/Letters/Kamakazepilotwhocrashedin.html

Both Pictures are original Heres the story :

On April 11th 1945 A Japaneese pilot Named Setsuo Ishino Crashed his plane
into the USS Missouri. His body was recovered from the deck of the Missouri
and Capt William Callahan gave him funeral services with full honors aboard the USS Missouri. The Machine Gun From Ishino's Plane wedged itself between
two barrels of one of the USS Missouris 40mm machine gun turrets.

No Fakes

Cavalry Gunner ;)

[colonel hogan]

The first photo is real. However, the second photo I don't know. I have no evidence and the source of its origination was taken from a video game forum. Does anyone know more about this photo?

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15402-2/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-uss-missouri.jpg)
http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/15405-2/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg (http://www.ww2incolor.com/us-navy/kamikaze-gun-missouri.jpg)

it's real i've seen it in many books aboutww2.

[Terry_214]

Both pics are 100% right.