Japanese combat images

[Jim D Burns]

Here’s a couple images I had never seen before, that I thought those here would be interested in seeing. It’s rare to see photo’s of Japanese troops in action.



Here are the two image captions:

Japanese soldiers looking at a Stuart tank destroyed by Major Mugita using molotov cocktails (1942)

Japanese soldiers assault an American Blockhouse on Corregidor Dec., 1941, with a Flamethrower

Jim

[Puhis]

Great photos, thanks! Do you have more of these? [;)]

[bklooste]

Are these for real ? IN both pictures they have a sword drawn ... makes me sceptical.
 
A major (Company CO ? ) throwing molotovs ...leading by example i see,  and if that doesnt work you can always slash the tanks.[:D][:D].

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: bklooste

Are these for real ? IN both pictures they have a sword drawn ... makes me sceptical.

A major (Company CO ? ) throwing molotovs ...leading by example i see,  and if that doesnt work you can always slash the tanks.[:D][:D].

I agree. The photos look to have been "re-staged" for the newsreel camera...

[Smeulders]

Both look staged, especially the bottom one, if there was any firing going on around, you'd expect that at least a couple of them would be smart enough to keep their heads down as long as the guy with the flamethrower wasn't finished. It's also strange how the bunch of them got to within metres of the blockhouse (and right in front of it as well) if it were still active.

[Shark7]

Well the top photo is a M3 Stuart light tank, so this is either a real picture, or one that is staged by using one of the M3s captured during the Philippines Campaign.

This one is definately battle damaged, you can note 2 things.

1. You can clearly see that the track on the left side is not going around the drive wheel.
2. The Transmission cover is clearly in the open position.

Now the fact that the infantry is rushing this tank would make one suspect that this is staged. But it is also possible that they are rushing it to finish off the crew.

But the one thing that does make it look staged more than not...where is the rest of the M3 platoon, and where are the supporting US troops...the troops in the picture don't necessarily look like they are under fire.

Second picture, no comment...others have already pointed out several things.

[Jim D Burns]

I can’t speak to their authenticity. I found them here:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/

I guess it is possible they were staged, but if so, then why aren’t they more commonly known photos from Japanese publications during the war? I’ve never seen a lot of the stuff posted at the site. Much of it is uploaded by individuals from their relative’s private collections.

There are some obvious fakes uploaded, but the community there is pretty good about debunking them when they’re posted.

I think the tank was in Burma by the way not the Philippines. At least I think the image title I clicked on said it was Burma, not sure anymore, it's buried in the site somewhere and I can't find it easily now.

Jim

[CarnageINC]

Maybe there some pictures from a training guide or manual? The Japs had to have captured enough Stuart tanks to maybe make simulated assaults on?

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC
Maybe there some pictures from a training guide or manual? The Japs had to have captured enough Stuart tanks to maybe make simulated assaults on?

Well Japan did have correspondents imbedded with their combat units, so it is possible these were taken during or very soon after combat occurred. This film covers most of the war in China, I just wish I understood Japanese:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvLWI0M0 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7iGHYUA ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESv7PYol ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_TDxmZu ... re=related

One thing of critical note, there are very few trucks seen throughout the film. In fact you probably see more trains than trucks, and all supply columns I saw were either man ported or horse drawn carts.

Overall you get the impression the Japanese military was far more primitive than the game portrays it as. Lots of foot slogging and most combat you see appear to be WW1 style rushes.

Jim

Edit: I watched it again, so ok I exaggerated the number of train’s lol, but there are very few trucks. Also officers are seen charging with their troops with their swords drawn. I think it was standard practice for officers to draw their swords when combat erupted, probably a machismo thing or something to do with Bushido or something.

[Jim D Burns]

double post

[Q-Ball]

Thank you for sharing, Jim. There are 100 US photos for every single Japanese photo, so all of them are valuable. I think this is a function of battle loss, rather than the amount of pictures taken. I bet there are thousands of good Japanese photos that were utlimately lost.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC
Maybe there some pictures from a training guide or manual? The Japs had to have captured enough Stuart tanks to maybe make simulated assaults on?

Well Japan did have correspondents imbedded with their combat units, so it is possible these were taken during or very soon after combat occurred. This film covers most of the war in China, I just wish I understood Japanese:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvLWI0M0 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7iGHYUA ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESv7PYol ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_TDxmZu ... re=related

One thing of critical note, there are very few trucks seen throughout the film. In fact you probably see more trains than trucks, and all supply columns I saw were either man ported or horse drawn carts.

Overall you get the impression the Japanese military was far more primitive than the game portrays it as. Lots of foot slogging and most combat you see appear to be WW1 style rushes.

Jim

Edit: I watched it again, so ok I exaggerated the number of train’s lol, but there are very few trucks. Also officers are seen charging with their troops with their swords drawn. I think it was standard practice for officers to draw their swords when combat erupted, probably a machismo thing or something to do with Bushido or something.

Well the German Infantry pretty much lugged it ffrom Warsaw to Moscow on foot and the artillary were horse drawn.. The germans did have a motorised AT company and used to pinch the 12 or 245 trucks and do shuttle runs . For germany most vehicles were used in supply collumns which is hardly news worthy so i dont think you will find many german vehicles in news reels either. I remember some IJA recon regiments had truck mounted troops later though again not many cameras will be in recon regiments. Better to stick teh TOE

[Shark7]

It was not uncommon for most armies to be more dependant on horses than trucks in the early stages of the war. Honestly, the Soviets might have had the most motorized divisions by 1941, as they had taken to providing trucks directly to the fighting units, after all, you don't have to feed a truck, and generally a truck can do the job of multiple horses.

[Cuttlefish]

Thanks for posting these, Jim. I think they may be authentic photos. It is very hard to be sure but most staged Japanese pictures have a certain theatricality about them that these lack. In the first picture especially there is some blurring, which I would not expect from a staged shot, and the Japanese soldiers seem completely intent on either the tank or on whatever fire might be coming from the tree line behind it. They do not seem to know or care that there is a camera behind them. And yes, Japanese officers led their troops with sword in hand.

It's hard to tell either way with the second picture but there is nothing about it that suggests it is obviously staged. The soldiers watching are not exposing any more of themselves than they have to and still see to cover the guy with the flamethrower. And all WWII flamethrowers were dangerous to use, Japanese models more so than most. They would not be anyone's first choice for a photo op.

[redcoat]

I've seen the second photo in books and magazines. Here is the same scene from another angle. [:)]

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Cuttlefish

Thanks for posting these, Jim. I think they may be authentic photos. It is very hard to be sure but most staged Japanese pictures have a certain theatricality about them that these lack.

You mean like holdign a sword in a striking position ? That has to be for the Cameras....

[Brady]

It's rare in the west to see pictures of Japanese troops in action. Thier are a lot of realy great Japanese pictures out their, their just hard to get at for most of us in the west, Japanese Magazines like KoKu fan are chock full of perioud pictures, I have several years worth of koKu fan's from the 60's, 70's and 80's, as but one example.
 
 The Flim linked above does have a lot of cool images in it, but one must view materail from the era of the Japanese empire in the same light as one would materal from any other nation of the time, it was a propaganda film, and neads to be looked at with a jaundced eye as a historical referance.
 
  

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: redcoat
I've seen the second photo in books and magazines. Here is the same scene from another angle. [:)]

Thanks, this image makes it much clearer. It now appears that they are burning a side entrance door, not the front where a MG would be. It appears the front is either off to the right (sheer face) or perhaps the left side (rounded face) of the image. Either way the men are well out of the view of any hostile fire from a potential portal in the blockhouse.

It still may be an after combat staged photo, but then there wouldn’t be a lot of foliage left to burn if they had burned it during the assault.

Jim

[Brady]

Maybe their a landscaping crew[:)]

[Kull]

The "flame thrower" is interesting - more of a "gasoline thrower" from the look of things. The liquid stream is definitely not on fire. One wonders how it was supposed to work - maybe in tandem with a guy shooting tracer rounds at the impact site to start the fire, after the the area was thoroughly drenched?