@@naufaldaffa194 Yeah, but Soviets had costal defense turrets which were never penetrated by Gustav. Those turrets bought months of defence, and Hitler was pissed af
@@joeybacker8429 firing range , it is but germans did alot of attacks to britain with schwerer gustav cannon but it almost didnt do any destruction, neither did it destroy anything, not because british building are strong or something it was because the shells did only damage to small areas, unlike missiles And it was almost imposible to move schwerer gustav to position, you would have to build two train tracks everywhere and alot of strong bridges that can carry that beast Sooo, its bullshit , a waste of money, more of an propaganda machine then an actually effective war machine it did soo less damage that no one even talks about nazi germany bombing britain with schwerer gustav (im not from england, and im not patriotic about it, im just saying the truth)
Just imagine what makes more damage: a 7t 800mm shell or a 1.47t 914mm shell? I would put my money on the germans. Ranking by calibre size is ridiculous.
@@wrathxerath5274 don’t forget Mallet’s Mortar placing higher than Little David despite all statistics showing Little David being larger than the mortar
Well, if you really want to rank in the destructive power of the shells... During the cold war america made a cannon that shot small nuclear bombs, soooo.....
The Nazis had a thing going on with nordic mythologie The names of Karl Gerät stolen from wikipedia The first six had the nicknames "Adam" (later "Baldur"), "Eva" (later "Wotan"), "Thor", "Odin", "Loki", and "Ziu"
@@SuperEHEC Da du Deutsch bist schreib doch (Die Deutschen) ja das Hört sich immer so abwerten für Deutschland an... Auch wenn es nicht gut war was die gemacht haben..
@@ichbinincompetent4009 naja aber in diesem Fall war es ja eher die Führungsebene der Deutschen Also schon Nationalsozialisten Nicht das die keine Deutschen waren aber um die Befürworter des Regimes und den "Otto normal Deutschen" zu unterscheiden würde ich dann schon Nazis sagen Ja im Prinzip waren das alles Deutsche und alles Nationalsozialisten Ich mag das Wort nazi eigentlich nicht weil es einfach falsch ist und Naso heißen sollte Aber wenn es darum geht Militärische Ausrüstung zu benennen von irgendeinem Amt dann würde ich schon davon ausgehen, dass ein gewisses Maß an politischer idiologie da drin steckt Nicht das man die jetzt per se verteufeln muss was ich auch ablehne Aber kein Landser dachte sich "Dicke Kanone, die taufen wir jetzt Thor" Würde ich behaupten Weiß ich aber nicht
@@ichbinincompetent4009 was heißt hier abwertend? Es war die damals bestehende Regierungsform in Deutschland und deshalb ist es absolut legitim, sie als Nationalsozialisten "Nazis" zu bezeichnen. So wie man auch die damaligen Sowjets durchaus als Kommunisten bezeichnen sollte. Mich persönlich hat es sogar enorm gestört, das hier die aktuelle Fahne Deutschlands benutzt wurde und nicht die Reichsflagge mit Hakenkreuz. Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist genauso wenig verantwortlich für "Schwerer Gustav, Odin, Loki oder Thor", wie die russische Föderation für die "Zar Kanone!
Yeah exactly having a tsar cannon that shoot once not even during a conflict is nice but having Yamato's gun which shoot during war (once but at least they shoot) would be nice
They would take 7th place, and push everything else down. But the list doesn't seem to include any naval guns, as the British 18 inch naval gun is also absent.
@@Doman9191 The Little David was never mounted on a tracked chassis, although there might have been plans to do so. I believe it spent the entirety of its life mounted to a steel box filled with concrete that was placed in the ground for firing.
@@DeathHead1358 It was not planned to put a Little David on a tracked chassis. It was planned to carry it in two (barrel and base) towed by heavy tractors.
Top huge stone ball guns (XIV-XVII centuries): 1. 40-inch bombard in Vienna museum (lost after 1938 Anschluss - maybe, destroyed by nazis) (1015 mm) 2. 36-inch Turkish bombard (914 mm) 3. 33.5-inch Russian Tsar-cannon (33.5" - diameter of ball, caliber of barrel - to 35 inches) (850 mm) 4. 31.5-inch German Pumhart von Steyr (800 mm) 5. 29-inch German Faule mette (737 mm) 6. 27.5-inch Indian Malik-e-Maidan (700 mm) 7. 26-inch German Dulle Griet (660 mm) 8. and 9. 25-inch Turkish Dardanell gun and Indian Thanjavur gun (635 mm) 10. 21-inch Russian bombard, maked by Kashpir Ganusov (Distorted name of a German master) (533 mm) 11., etc. - 20-20.5 inch guns, maked by German, Russian or other masters Top iron ball guns (XVI-XVIII centuries): 1. 13.5-inch Russian "unicorn" (82-kg bomb or big iron ball more 100 kg) (343 mm) 2. and 3. 11.25-inch Indian Dal Madan Kaman and Jahan Koshna guns (286 mm) 4. and 5. 11-inch Indian Jaiwana and German kanone Greif guns (280 mm) 6. 10.75-inch German Asia gun (273 mm) 7. 10-inch Russian Eagle gun (254 mm) 8. 9.45-inch Indian Zamzama gun (240 mm) Plus three huge iron ball guns: 1. 24-inch Russian coastal Rodman gun (610 mm) 2. and 3. 20-inch American and Russian Rodman guns (508 mm) Top big guns in XX century: 1. Great Babilon (1000 mm) 2. Little David (914 mm) 3. Soviet S-76 airbomb gun (6-ton BRAB-6000 bomb and special 15-ton parachute test projectile) (820 mm) 4. Dora or Schwerer Gustav (807 mm) 5. Soviet S-76 airbomb gun (BRAB-3000) (650 mm) 6. and 7. Karl mortar (600 and 540 mm) 8. German WW2 experimental naval gun (530 mm) 9. French Obusier modele 1916 (520 mm) 10. Soviet TG-1 gun (500 mm) Plus huge mortars from XVIII-XIX century: 36-inch Mallett mortar 510 mm French Mortier monstre 635 mm Russian mortar from early XVIII century (maybe, error in data) Plus naval guns from 1870-1880s: Britain - builted 18-inch guns Italia - builted 18-inch guns Russia - builted one 16-inch gun, projected 20-inch gun WW1-WW2 small-known naval guns: Britain - builted 18-inch L/40 gun, projected 18-inch L/45 and 20-inch guns German Empire - builted 38cm guns, projected 42cm guns USA - builted 18-inch guns L/47 and L/48, projected 20- and 24-inch guns Russian Empire - ~50% finished 16-inch L/45 gun, and, according to some sources, finished 16-inch L/50 gun, planned 16-inch L/52 and L/54 guns, and 18-inch L/45 gun (40% more powerful than Japanese 460 mm guns from Yamato battleships) USSR - finished 16-inch L/50 gun, planned 18-inch L/55 gun, also, projected battleships with 20- and 21-inch guns In post-WW2 period Soviets projected 535-mm and 562-mm rocket guns Biggest tank guns in projects (biggest ever built - British 183 mm and 290 mm AVRE, Soviet 152 mm KV-2, American 155 mm T30): USSR - (early 1930s) 203 mm and 305 mm naval guns, (1940) 203 mm B-4, (1941-44) 500 mm, (1960s) 240 mm and 300 mm rocket guns, also, 406 mm B-37 self-propelled naval gun, and other SPGs with 203, 210, 250, 280, 305, 356, 400, 500 mm guns USA - 175 mm guns (1950-1980s) Germany - 170, 210, 305, 600 mm guns (WW2 period)
You missed the Dardanelles gun, the weapons used to demolish the walls of Constantinople in 1453. It still exists today. It fires a 24.8" shell. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardanelles_Gun
The main guns of the Yamato-Class had 46cm (18,11 inch). They were the biggest guns ever made for a ship and also the biggest breechloader ever made. Which raises the question: Why are they/it not encluded int this list?
@@justinflowers9380 I've "forced" vacation this week and germany is right now in a super lockdown, so nitpcking and booming are the only things I can do right now XD
@@Leatherface123. Maybe the Iowa's 16inch because they could also fire nuclear shells but at a further range. Well.. same warhead so the same damage but less risk.
@@matteusgreyling7074 Well, I don't think Gustav would even be on the top 5 if the firepower is calculated. After all in the cold war, Nuclear Artillery are made and tested by many countries.
@@pickle7428 Yep but there is a difference how the R is pronounced (the H is silent)... And of course "Metall" is more pronounced with the accent on the A, and the A is pronounced in way, which no English speaker would ever pronounce it... How I know? I am German myself ;-)
@@JumpOverYourShadow ooh I didn't hear her making these mistakes other than that ik bc I have studied it for an year in the past and I kinda learned only to read Have a great day and thanks for correcting me
Both the bl howitzer and the mallet morter are on show at fort nelson in portsmouth england among 100s of other historical guns and cannons. It's honestly a great afternoon trip and you can even walk through some of the underground tunnels used to store and transport munitions. honestly though the sheer size of the bl howitzer is pretty intimidating, i think people dont realise the shells are almost the size of a person.
I mean are inches and pounders somehow tied to military context? Example on naval stuff people talk about knots, instead of m/s in both Imperial and metric.
Karl Gerat range is NOT 47 km. This is just impossible with barrel that short. The actual range was 4.5 km for concrete piercing shell and 6.7 km for high exploisive.
The "real" top ten: 1. Mallet's Mortar (Great Britain, 914 mm) / Little David (USA, 914 mm) 2. Tsar Cannon (Russia, 890 mm) 3. Pumhart von Steyr (Austria, 820 mm) 4. Schwerer Gustav (Germany, 800 mm) 5. The Basilic or The Ottoman Cannon (Ottoman Empire, 745 mm) 6. Faule Mette ("Lazy Mette", Germany, 735 mm) 7. Malik-i-Maidan ("Master of the Battlefield" or "Ruler of the Plains", India, 700 mm) 8. Dulle Griet ("Mad Meg", Belgium, 660 mm) 9. The Dardanelles Gun or The Great Turkish Bombard (Ottoman Empire, 635 mm) / The Thanjavur Cannon (India, 635 mm) 10. Mortier Monstre ("Monster Mortar", Belgium, 610 mm) Honorable mention: Grose Bochse ("Big Gun", Germany, caliber unknown, may have been close to Pumhart von Steyr)
The Germans didn't actually 'go around the line' as the maginot line extended right to the channel coast. The Germans just attacked a very much lesser defended part called the Ardennes.
Strange to compare old stone balls guns with modern guns that used shells! And where are the French Obusier de 520 mm modèle 1916 or the Japanese 46 cm/45 Type 94 naval gun that equipped Yamato-class battleships?
1st on the list is outside fort Nelson in Portsmouth, great place to see a lot of big guns. They even have the project babylon supergun there. The gun behind the mortar is off a battleship and if it was fire for that position it could clear the isle of white and which is 20+ miles away
The announcer doesn't know what "caliber" is in relation to artillery. Caliber is has much longer the barrel is in relation to the diameter of the shell. The Iowa Class Battleships guns are 16"/50 Caliber which means the length is 16" X 50 = 800 inches.
Caliber is the diameter of the shells, Length in Calibers is the length of the barrel measured using the caliber So a 75/34 Mod. 1934 cannon for example is a 75mm in caliber and L34 in barrel length, which is 2550mm, 2.5 meters.
In Denmark the Germans build some hell big canons under 2 world war. 38 cm S.K.C/34 guns weighing 650 tons the guns could fire between 42 to 55 kilometres. If I remember right the barrel could be up to 18 meters long the shells weight up to 800 kg. The canons were placed along with the danish north coast and was the biggest coastal fortification, built by the Nazis in Scandinavia.
Yes, all these canons are very impressive and almost all have seen the battles but the top and biggest gun is Dardanelles Gun or Basillica made by ottomans and it seen its first battle when ottomans attack the Istanbul or Constantinople. Basillica was design by Munir Ali in 1464, weight 16 ton, length 5.18 m (17.0 ft) and diameter is 1054 mm (41.5 in).
yeah, those guns are impressive, but really heavy. since it's barrel was made with wrought iron (the chamber were bronze one) and fire a massive stone balls, it became dangerous after a couple of shots and i read that even one of them explode due to overheat. several centuries after the fall of constantinople, this gun saw another action against british ships off gibraltar IIRC, and put massive holes into the ship. nevertheless the ship survives and the gun was captured by the brits. Early guns were massive, but it could only fire stone balls or else it would turn into a massive bomb. that's why it's fellow bombard, mons meg in this video could only fire several hundreds kilos of stone ball
Invasion of Japan didn't happen because of Russian victories in Mainland China, where main Japanese forces where defeated. Only after that they surrendered. . Atomic bombings didn't do any effects on Japanese military or economical potential and damage wasn't that huge and didn't change any Japanese fighting spirit. Atomic barbaric bombing of civil cities is war crime for which USA is damned and doomed.
@@AlexanderTch That is - as far as I know - not completely true. Yes, the USSR won against the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria but that was mainly because of the Japanese nearly emmediatly surrendered. Furthermore was this not the main cause for the USA to not invade Japan's mainland. The main reason was that the US suffered great losses in the invasion of Okinawa and the atomic bomb was successfully tested in Nevada. They now had the choice of either invading the Japanese mainland and to probably suffer even greater losses or to use the newly invented atomic bomb which they chose to use to test the destructive power of the atomic bomb which had the positive side effect of maybe making the Japanese surrender which happened. But before the USA accepted they tested the second bomb made out of plutonium. The destructive power of the atomic bombs was indeed devastating as many people died and the Japanese wooden buildings were easily destroyed. Also Nagasaki, the target of the second bomb, was an important harbour (also militarily) and the destruction of which did have a military impact. But the intention of the US was mostly just to test the atomic bomb and is indeed in my opinion a severe war crime.
@@AlexanderTch Sorry if "Kwantung" isn't the right name but since I am German it says so in my book and upon longer thinking "Kwantung" doesn't sound Japanese. That is, because in Japanese there always has to be a vocal after every consonant (with one exception being "n").
@@niklaswein5055 I repeat, Atomic bomb didn't change anything. It was just 15-20 kilotons and it didn't do any damage to Japanese military or economic potential. Main Japanese forces were in China and most resources they got from China. USA knew that without USSR they would have lost half of their army. Japan didn't even think about surrendering until USSR broke their lines in China, came to Korea and capture main Chinese lands. Nagasaki was bombed on 9 of August ,and the same day Russian Army started war. And Japanese surrendered only in September, 3 weeks later after bombings. Bombs were to scare UsSR, not Japan. Bombs had very low power and USA had just few of them. Japan suffered heavy bombings before . So, bombings didn't affect on Japan leadership or military commandment either. Nobody knew exactly what's that weapon about. Japan was bombed more terribly by conventional bombs, like German cities were terribly burnt by western allies without any nuclear power.
@@AlexanderTch Why exactly Japan surrendered is not known. On the radio the Showa-Tenno just said the war has not necessarily evolved to Japan's advantage. Surely, the victory of the USSR in Manchuria was one of the causes. But Japan's main forces weren't in Manchuria where the USSR attacked, as Manchuria belonged to Japan since 1905 when they won against Russia in the Russo-Japanese-War (1904-1905). At the time the USSR broke their non-agression-pact with Japan and declared war, Japan's defeat was already clear. They lost their main naval forces in the battle of Midway as well as their only 4 aircraft carriers and couldn't compet with the US-Navy. Their land troops were poorly equipped and scattered around south east asia. They were pushed back in Burma by the British, in New Guinea by the Australians, the front in China came to stop due to lack of recourses and the merge of the Chinese nationalists and communists and the US took island after island from Japan in bloody beach landings. The Japanese air force couldn't keep up to the American as they could produce many planes due to lack of recourses. Manchuria, where the USSR attacked only was used by Japan to produce millet which was mainly used to feed other colonies like Korea which pruduced rice. The atomic bomb that was thrown over Nagasaki did indeed destroy the military harbour of Nagasaki although this wasn't the main objective of the US. As I said earlier, it isn't exactly known which event caused the surrender of the Japanese. Fact is, they offered to surrender after the first atomic bomb to which the USA didn't respond. They accepted after the second one. Both the USA and the USSR now had the chance of invading Japan. I think, that all those events led to the Japanese surrender and not only the actions of the Soviet Union. Also I quite enjoy this discussion. It is very interesting to discuss with someone who also knows quite a bit about the Pacific War. You have earned my respect.
How about Yamato's 460 mm ship artillery? She carried 9 of them and her sister Musashi also packed 9. It would have included another nation flag for a bit more diversity.
I saw you posted in the post 9 the 2B1 OKA ;P i remember that beast never was able to shoot due its extreme recoil after shoot nuclear rounds (yup the oka was thinked to be a nuclear cannon fast tank :3 i hope be useful information eheh
The Oka/Condensator was a counterpart to the US nuclear artillery experiments (like literally mini-nukes, not just the poisoning depleted uranium used today), exemplified by the nuclear shells developed for Iowa and the gun/mortar nicknamed Atomic Annie, which did actually see service in Korea (Yes, US technically nuked other countreis, not just Japan). And it could shoot more than once. However, shooting meant that you lose the capability of an SPG as the recoil from the gun would damage either the transmission or the suspension.
20-inch Dahlgren cannon: four were cast by the Fort Pitt Foundry between 1864 and 1867 as part of the original planned armament for USS Puritan (monitor). These 4 cannons were named 'Satan', 'Lucifer' 'Moloch' and 'Beelzebub'. The first 3 were accepted by the U.S. Navy, but saw no service. The fourth gun, was sold to Peru where it became part of the defenses of Callao.
Incorrect: Rank 7 should be Yamato Battleship main artillery 460 mm with 1.4 ton shells. Also it fired 3 of them from one turret almost simultaneously.
They could have mentioned the 1000mm supergun that Gerald Bull was making for Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War, even though it was never fully built.
Sahi Gun with 635mm should have been Nr 5 the Sahi guns were the guns the Ottomans used to breach the walls of Istanbul during the siege and conquest of the city in 1453.
Что? Мортира Карл стреляла на 42 км? И это при её длине ствола? Здесь похоже опечатка, и дальность стрельбы была от 4,5 до 6,5 км в зависимости от типа снаряда.
I love how the giant fearsome Gustav is fourth and everything onwards looks so tiny
Just imagine if u were in Sevastopol when Gustav hit the armory under the water that explosion can sunk ships near Sevastopol
Has to do with the caliber not the actual size of the whole gun
@@gentlebabarian I know
@@naufaldaffa194 Yeah, but Soviets had costal defense turrets which were never penetrated by Gustav. Those turrets bought months of defence, and Hitler was pissed af
@@drteska97 that's why u need to destroy the armory so the gun can't load their shells again
Tsar cannon: I'm number 3, I'm huge, I'm good, I'm strong
Schwerer Gustav: you sure about that?
Schwerer gustav was never effective and was sluggish on combat, sooo, pretty sure tsar cannon would be stronger if in war
@@alikorkmazgencoglu6721 depends on the war and the target! When it comes to firing range, "Schwerer Gustav" is number one.
@@joeybacker8429 firing range , it is but germans did alot of attacks to britain with schwerer gustav cannon but it almost didnt do any destruction, neither did it destroy anything, not because british building are strong or something
it was because the shells did only damage to small areas, unlike missiles
And it was almost imposible to move schwerer gustav to position, you would have to build two train tracks everywhere and alot of strong bridges that can carry that beast
Sooo, its bullshit , a waste of money, more of an propaganda machine then an actually effective war machine
it did soo less damage that no one even talks about nazi germany bombing britain with schwerer gustav
(im not from england, and im not patriotic about it, im just saying the truth)
@@alikorkmazgencoglu6721 the Schwerer Gustav were used in the Battle of Sewastopol on the Eastern Front.
There the Gustav did a lot of Damage.
@@_captainhero_ Hiting a reinforced concrete magazine 35m below ground....
Just imagine what makes more damage: a 7t 800mm shell or a 1.47t 914mm shell?
I would put my money on the germans. Ranking by calibre size is ridiculous.
@Martin Sonnleitner
your damn right! 7 tons against 1.47 tons, the ranking is really stupid, add the range of max of 47km who the hell made this?
@@wrathxerath5274 don’t forget Mallet’s Mortar placing higher than Little David despite all statistics showing Little David being larger than the mortar
Your generic Watch mojo ripoff
no research,no effort,no dignity
Sturmtiger: allow me to introduce myself..
Well, if you really want to rank in the destructive power of the shells... During the cold war america made a cannon that shot small nuclear bombs, soooo.....
Karl Gerat? That one hurt my German ears
Aber "Morser" nicht?
ÜÄÖ
Umlaute sind was tolles
ßßß
ẞẞẞ
Es ist the Buzz, Hälfte müll und die andere Wikipedia
das English von der hoert sich auch nicht wirklich besser an
It hurt my swedish ears also. Why the hell cannot they do some research how to pronunce things.
I'm not sure where the commentator is from but that wasn't easy on my British ears and she was supposedly speaking in English.
4:19 "(...) and was also called Thor." Shows pic on which the name "Loki" is written on the side.
The Nazis had a thing going on with nordic mythologie
The names of Karl Gerät stolen from wikipedia
The first six had the nicknames "Adam" (later "Baldur"), "Eva" (later "Wotan"), "Thor", "Odin", "Loki", and "Ziu"
@@SuperEHEC Da du Deutsch bist schreib doch (Die Deutschen) ja das Hört sich immer so abwerten für Deutschland an... Auch wenn es nicht gut war was die gemacht haben..
@@ichbinincompetent4009 naja aber in diesem Fall war es ja eher die Führungsebene der Deutschen
Also schon Nationalsozialisten
Nicht das die keine Deutschen waren aber um die Befürworter des Regimes und den "Otto normal Deutschen" zu unterscheiden würde ich dann schon Nazis sagen
Ja im Prinzip waren das alles Deutsche und alles Nationalsozialisten
Ich mag das Wort nazi eigentlich nicht weil es einfach falsch ist und Naso heißen sollte
Aber wenn es darum geht Militärische Ausrüstung zu benennen von irgendeinem Amt dann würde ich schon davon ausgehen, dass ein gewisses Maß an politischer idiologie da drin steckt
Nicht das man die jetzt per se verteufeln muss was ich auch ablehne
Aber kein Landser dachte sich
"Dicke Kanone, die taufen wir jetzt Thor"
Würde ich behaupten
Weiß ich aber nicht
@@ichbinincompetent4009 was heißt hier abwertend? Es war die damals bestehende Regierungsform in Deutschland und deshalb ist es absolut legitim, sie als Nationalsozialisten "Nazis" zu bezeichnen. So wie man auch die damaligen Sowjets durchaus als Kommunisten bezeichnen sollte.
Mich persönlich hat es sogar enorm gestört, das hier die aktuelle Fahne Deutschlands benutzt wurde und nicht die Reichsflagge mit Hakenkreuz.
Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist genauso wenig verantwortlich für "Schwerer Gustav, Odin, Loki oder Thor", wie die russische Föderation für die "Zar Kanone!
btw. i had a cat named Loki!
He was completely black and a little demon 😍
Yamato’s guns: Are we a Joke to you?
Yeah exactly having a tsar cannon that shoot once not even during a conflict is nice but having Yamato's gun which shoot during war (once but at least they shoot) would be nice
The Yamato's guns where only 460mm, so it would still rank low on the list
@@andrewluster6142 So what's your point? Nobody said they would be on the top. Just that they should be on the list..
They would take 7th place, and push everything else down. But the list doesn't seem to include any naval guns, as the British 18 inch naval gun is also absent.
@@Horseshoecrabwarrior Exactly, the list would seem to be of land based arty, so any naval gun doesn't really make sense
Something is wrong here ,,02. Little David '' looks like a self-propelled mortar and year of manufacture 1857 ;)
Maybe Area 51 existed then and the little david was built there at 1857 but it was kept a secret.
Maybe it was put on tracked chassis during ww2.
@@Doman9191 The Little David was never mounted on a tracked chassis, although there might have been plans to do so. I believe it spent the entirety of its life mounted to a steel box filled with concrete that was placed in the ground for firing.
It's also odd that the little david in the supposed footage is surrounded by either British or Canadian soldiers...
@@DeathHead1358 It was not planned to put a Little David on a tracked chassis. It was planned to carry it in two (barrel and base) towed by heavy tractors.
Top huge stone ball guns (XIV-XVII centuries):
1. 40-inch bombard in Vienna museum (lost after 1938 Anschluss - maybe, destroyed by nazis) (1015 mm)
2. 36-inch Turkish bombard (914 mm)
3. 33.5-inch Russian Tsar-cannon (33.5" - diameter of ball, caliber of barrel - to 35 inches) (850 mm)
4. 31.5-inch German Pumhart von Steyr (800 mm)
5. 29-inch German Faule mette (737 mm)
6. 27.5-inch Indian Malik-e-Maidan (700 mm)
7. 26-inch German Dulle Griet (660 mm)
8. and 9. 25-inch Turkish Dardanell gun and Indian Thanjavur gun (635 mm)
10. 21-inch Russian bombard, maked by Kashpir Ganusov (Distorted name of a German master) (533 mm)
11., etc. - 20-20.5 inch guns, maked by German, Russian or other masters
Top iron ball guns (XVI-XVIII centuries):
1. 13.5-inch Russian "unicorn" (82-kg bomb or big iron ball more 100 kg) (343 mm)
2. and 3. 11.25-inch Indian Dal Madan Kaman and Jahan Koshna guns (286 mm)
4. and 5. 11-inch Indian Jaiwana and German kanone Greif guns (280 mm)
6. 10.75-inch German Asia gun (273 mm)
7. 10-inch Russian Eagle gun (254 mm)
8. 9.45-inch Indian Zamzama gun (240 mm)
Plus three huge iron ball guns:
1. 24-inch Russian coastal Rodman gun (610 mm)
2. and 3. 20-inch American and Russian Rodman guns (508 mm)
Top big guns in XX century:
1. Great Babilon (1000 mm)
2. Little David (914 mm)
3. Soviet S-76 airbomb gun (6-ton BRAB-6000 bomb and special 15-ton parachute test projectile) (820 mm)
4. Dora or Schwerer Gustav (807 mm)
5. Soviet S-76 airbomb gun (BRAB-3000) (650 mm)
6. and 7. Karl mortar (600 and 540 mm)
8. German WW2 experimental naval gun (530 mm)
9. French Obusier modele 1916 (520 mm)
10. Soviet TG-1 gun (500 mm)
Plus huge mortars from XVIII-XIX century:
36-inch Mallett mortar
510 mm French Mortier monstre
635 mm Russian mortar from early XVIII century (maybe, error in data)
Plus naval guns from 1870-1880s:
Britain - builted 18-inch guns
Italia - builted 18-inch guns
Russia - builted one 16-inch gun, projected 20-inch gun
WW1-WW2 small-known naval guns:
Britain - builted 18-inch L/40 gun, projected 18-inch L/45 and 20-inch guns
German Empire - builted 38cm guns, projected 42cm guns
USA - builted 18-inch guns L/47 and L/48, projected 20- and 24-inch guns
Russian Empire - ~50% finished 16-inch L/45 gun, and, according to some sources, finished 16-inch L/50 gun, planned 16-inch L/52 and L/54 guns, and 18-inch L/45 gun (40% more powerful than Japanese 460 mm guns from Yamato battleships)
USSR - finished 16-inch L/50 gun, planned 18-inch L/55 gun, also, projected battleships with 20- and 21-inch guns
In post-WW2 period Soviets projected 535-mm and 562-mm rocket guns
Biggest tank guns in projects (biggest ever built - British 183 mm and 290 mm AVRE, Soviet 152 mm KV-2, American 155 mm T30):
USSR - (early 1930s) 203 mm and 305 mm naval guns, (1940) 203 mm B-4, (1941-44) 500 mm, (1960s) 240 mm and 300 mm rocket guns, also, 406 mm B-37 self-propelled naval gun, and other SPGs with 203, 210, 250, 280, 305, 356, 400, 500 mm guns
USA - 175 mm guns (1950-1980s)
Germany - 170, 210, 305, 600 mm guns (WW2 period)
1:28 when i wake up in the morning
Lol
Karl Geraet had a range of 4km or 10km depending on the ammo type. Chassis travel was 42 or 60km. On the picture is the Loki not the Thor.
Some like Thor could change between 2 calibres 540 mm and 600 mm.
Little David: designed in WW2
Video: 1857
*1857*
Me: triggered
Little David: designed in WW2
Video: 1857
1857
Me: triggered...
Not only that but its using the Russian 420mm chassis as a picture XDD
@@Juhnaaa didnt see that
*Even more triggered
What's about the Ottoman gun from 1453 with a caliber of 915 mm
18 inch guns on the Yamato class battleships?
18.1 inch
Its the Buzz, so its 50% bullshit and 50% just reading Wiki
Yes was there not a British monitor from WW1 that had an 18 inch Gun.
I was gonna say too.
@@greamespens1460 There was, but by comparison Yamato still had bigger guns by a few millimeters, thus the 18.1" designation Yamatos guns had
IT WASNT KNOWN AS THOR. THOR WAS ONE OF KARLS NAME. THERE WERE OTHER LIKE ADAM,EVA, ODIN...
And Loki, like the one they literally showed a picture of
emergency earth lodge
You missed the Dardanelles gun, the weapons used to demolish the walls of Constantinople in 1453. It still exists today. It fires a 24.8" shell. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardanelles_Gun
First thing I was gonna comment, you beat me to it by two years. There's also the Yamato & Musashi 46 cm guns.
The main guns of the Yamato-Class had 46cm (18,11 inch). They were the biggest guns ever made for a ship and also the biggest breechloader ever made.
Which raises the question: Why are they/it not encluded int this list?
To you my fair lad I also raise a question, does the exclusion of such a cannon matter so much?
Edit: This is a joke, don't take it seriously.
@@justinflowers9380 I've "forced" vacation this week and germany is right now in a super lockdown, so nitpcking and booming are the only things I can do right now XD
there are also quite a lot of bombards missing
Didn't the British also make an 18 inch naval gun
@@tarbogamer5867 they might have designed one but I don't remember on ever being used. I know they used 16inch guns on ships such as Nelson and Rodney
Buzz
Super cool look at some big guns. Thank you for the info and fantastic narration.
I miss those 460mm guns (18.1 inch) of the Yamato class battleships.
The narrator hurts my ears.
What accent is that? Lol
@@shaunw9092 an annoying one
I'd rather see guns ranked by kinetic energy.
That would be accurate in measuring the destruction that the guns can make.
@@Long_Live_Asir that would go to the M65 Howitzer
Capable of firing a nuclear shell
@@Leatherface123. Maybe the Iowa's 16inch because they could also fire nuclear shells but at a further range.
Well.. same warhead so the same damage but less risk.
@@tobichallanger9626 not effective when your 30
Miles from the sea
@@Leatherface123. But 40% of the World Population is living within 30 miles from the ocean.
Turkish "Dardanelles Gun" must be the 4th biggest ever made because it has 635 mm calibre and used in Fall of Constantinople.
I know and the Gustav Railway cannon shoukd be first
@@matteusgreyling7074 But they made the caliber-order not lookout.
@@deradler798 hmm your right, but i think they should've made the video in accordance to the firepower of the gun
@@matteusgreyling7074 Well, I don't think Gustav would even be on the top 5 if the firepower is calculated.
After all in the cold war, Nuclear Artillery are made and tested by many countries.
Soo this is a vehicle pp size competition?
caliber size
Basicly
pp competition but its the hole we're talking
Not pp, but nose
alternative title: the weapon engineers with the smallest PPs
Why would you put the russian flag on a sovietunion weapon.
....
you could say the same thing for using the German flag instead of the Nazi German flag
@@blitzer3973 oh you're an intellectual I see
@@DerMarschliedKamerad just use the battle flag then
@@DerMarschliedKamerad then ist's not nazi flag, bruh
What she expects: 1:28
What she actually gets: 0:53
One of your fan from India, love from India
Mai bhi indian hu
Wo bhi Indian hi hai😑
Me to i am from india state manipur
@@mmgaming6739 hi from Andhra Pradesh
@@mmgaming6739 I love North East
Good video, i like the graphics and the way of displaying each gun, and describing them.
Pronouncing "Rhein-Metall" like "Rhine-Metal" makes them sound like a band :-P
Pretty sure ei is pronounced like i
@@pickle7428
Yep but there is a difference how the R is pronounced (the H is silent)...
And of course "Metall" is more pronounced with the accent on the A, and the A is pronounced in way, which no English speaker would ever pronounce it...
How I know? I am German myself ;-)
@@JumpOverYourShadow ooh I didn't hear her making these mistakes other than that ik bc I have studied it for an year in the past and I kinda learned only to read
Have a great day and thanks for correcting me
@@pickle7428
Aw that's some nice words for once to read
Have a nice day too!
I thought it was *Reich-Metal*
Both the bl howitzer and the mallet morter are on show at fort nelson in portsmouth england among 100s of other historical guns and cannons. It's honestly a great afternoon trip and you can even walk through some of the underground tunnels used to store and transport munitions.
honestly though the sheer size of the bl howitzer is pretty intimidating, i think people dont realise the shells are almost the size of a person.
Best wishes from Russia 💞💞💞🙂🙂stay safe and happy healthy
1:25 wtf guys thats a long gun, most russian thing i've seen.
and same wishes, from u.s.
Russland Russland
Wodka trinkt man pur und kalt
Das macht hundert jahre alt
Ho ho ho ho ho ho, HEY
Best wishes from Poland, vodka kurwa brothers :)))
@@Harikuu uraaaaaa
I just love how the oka manages to *stay stable with that extremely long and heavy* barrel.
Very informative 👏 👌 👍 😀 🙌 😊
The mix of metric and imperial units are so hard to follow
Agreed why its soo hard say:400mm instead of 20 Inches/pounders..geez:):)
imerperial is just so outdated. I wonder if there are any third world countrys that still uses that crap.
@@Terminaor12386 usa
I mean are inches and pounders somehow tied to military context?
Example on naval stuff people talk about knots, instead of m/s in both Imperial and metric.
@@rn-zu5ld And UK.
You missed out the Japanese 18.1" naval gun as fitted to the Yamato & Musashi battleships.
Царь пушка: меня создали для понтов, я даже ни раз не стрелял
Автор канала: держи бронзу
Say hello to my Little David
if you put as much effort into the video as you do the intro your channel would be #1
And where is classified the supergun, "Big Babylon" of Saddam?
"Big Babylon" was never build.. (and it was more a satellite launcher..)
Big Babylon is only a smaller copy of the German supergun V3 (130m long).
@@0815firstuser0815 The V3 had a comparatively tiny calibre of 15 cm.
@@tz8785 Yes but a calibre isnt a gun and big can be wide or long or both.
@AlexGunzz ICBMs aren't guns, they're missiles
Little David was never mounted on a tracked chassis as such a huge and heavy artillery piece would absolutely destroy the chassis when fired.
Karl Gerat range is NOT 47 km. This is just impossible with barrel that short. The actual range was 4.5 km for concrete piercing shell and 6.7 km for high exploisive.
Yes it is!
Stalin said : yo can i have some 'eorup'
And Hitler replied : only a spoon full
Then Stalin pulled a comicaly large tank barrel
When Stalin said that? And why?
Ammunition storage for the mallets mortar: explodes
*skibidi bop m dada*
you forgot the cannon used in the siege of constaninople 1453
You should add to description that its ground moved guns, as ship guns would fit in this chart also (like 460's from Yamato ect ect).
It looks like we germans love big guns xD
Idk but i think that the schwerer would cause a bit more damage than the other guns
*Combined*
It's not the size that matters, It's how you use it.
The "real" top ten:
1. Mallet's Mortar (Great Britain, 914 mm) / Little David (USA, 914 mm)
2. Tsar Cannon (Russia, 890 mm)
3. Pumhart von Steyr (Austria, 820 mm)
4. Schwerer Gustav (Germany, 800 mm)
5. The Basilic or The Ottoman Cannon (Ottoman Empire, 745 mm)
6. Faule Mette ("Lazy Mette", Germany, 735 mm)
7. Malik-i-Maidan ("Master of the Battlefield" or "Ruler of the Plains", India, 700 mm)
8. Dulle Griet ("Mad Meg", Belgium, 660 mm)
9. The Dardanelles Gun or The Great Turkish Bombard (Ottoman Empire, 635 mm) / The Thanjavur Cannon (India, 635 mm)
10. Mortier Monstre ("Monster Mortar", Belgium, 610 mm)
Honorable mention: Grose Bochse ("Big Gun", Germany, caliber unknown, may have been close to Pumhart von Steyr)
👏👏👏❤️
#9 looks like something i would shit myself if i saw on the enemy team in WOT
Arti is already powerful, now imagine that and the number 5 mortar
@@nitroxdriverfrance7598 it was once, in an event.
That mallet's mortar thing looking like the mortars from the game Redcon
Little David is making impossible expectations to all the David's Little Davids out there :(
The Germans didn't actually 'go around the line' as the maginot line extended right to the channel coast. The Germans just attacked a very much lesser defended part called the Ardennes.
Strange to compare old stone balls guns with modern guns that used shells! And where are the French Obusier de 520 mm modèle 1916 or the Japanese 46 cm/45 Type 94 naval gun that equipped Yamato-class battleships?
I cant wait to see the 2B1 Oka be introduced in War Thunder
1st on the list is outside fort Nelson in Portsmouth, great place to see a lot of big guns. They even have the project babylon supergun there. The gun behind the mortar is off a battleship and if it was fire for that position it could clear the isle of white and which is 20+ miles away
Love from Mumbai Nepal
Mumbai is in India and you write Mumbai Nepal.
@@harshsaxena9207 Remember the meme of kp Sharma oli, relatable ?
@@viksingh3875 ok
The announcer doesn't know what "caliber" is in relation to artillery. Caliber is has much longer the barrel is in relation to the diameter of the shell. The Iowa Class Battleships guns are 16"/50 Caliber which means the length is 16" X 50 = 800 inches.
That is not quite correct - the caliber is the bore size of the gun and 16"/50 caliber mean that the barrel length is 50 times the caliber.
@@CharlesStearman no it's not. The caliber is the ratio times the size of the shell.
Caliber is the diameter of the shells, Length in Calibers is the length of the barrel measured using the caliber
So a 75/34 Mod. 1934 cannon for example is a 75mm in caliber and L34 in barrel length, which is 2550mm, 2.5 meters.
Specific to Naval Gunnery though. And all the guns in her list, I believe were land weapons.
@@keithw4920 the term's commonly used for all types of artillery, I believe, including tank guns
What about the ottoman super bombard used against Constantinople?
Gustav looks dope
Where is the Yamato class battleship's 460mm gun?
I was just thinking that, incomplete list.
Lol its ship gun..dumb.
@@joe125ful this video is not about the biggest land based guns. Read the title
@@falloszaurus695 So why you want add ship guns?:):)
They are too small to compare.
@@joe125ful because ship guns are guns. And if the yamato's guns could be in the list why are they too small to compare
6:43 yeah the Invasion never happend because the US nuked them
proud of using the atomic bomb?
@@csntb6822 Yep.
In Denmark the Germans build some hell big canons under 2 world war.
38 cm S.K.C/34 guns weighing 650 tons the guns could fire between 42 to 55 kilometres. If I remember right the barrel could be up to 18 meters long the shells weight up to 800 kg.
The canons were placed along with the danish north coast and was the biggest coastal fortification, built by the Nazis in Scandinavia.
If this was ranked in size, we all know who would be in first.
Most beautiful voice on utube.....
Mispronouncing Behemoths
(Bee-He-mUths)
and mispronouncing, Accuracy and Diameter, both of which made me cringe each time
They fucked up all german words pretty badly too.
@@Brodrick32 Yeah, what's a "die-a-metre"? LOL
Also, the 2B1 Oka/Kondensator was designed around a nuclear artillery shell.
Ока это 420 мм миномет, а Конденсатор 406 мм пушка.
Schwerer Gustav literally yeet's the Projectile away
Yes, all these canons are very impressive and almost all have seen the battles but the top and biggest gun is Dardanelles Gun or Basillica made by ottomans and it seen its first battle when ottomans attack the Istanbul or Constantinople. Basillica was design by Munir Ali in 1464, weight 16 ton, length 5.18 m (17.0 ft) and diameter is 1054 mm (41.5 in).
yeah, those guns are impressive, but really heavy. since it's barrel was made with wrought iron (the chamber were bronze one) and fire a massive stone balls, it became dangerous after a couple of shots and i read that even one of them explode due to overheat. several centuries after the fall of constantinople, this gun saw another action against british ships off gibraltar IIRC, and put massive holes into the ship. nevertheless the ship survives and the gun was captured by the brits. Early guns were massive, but it could only fire stone balls or else it would turn into a massive bomb. that's why it's fellow bombard, mons meg in this video could only fire several hundreds kilos of stone ball
6:42 "... thankfully the invasion never happened ...".
The invasion of Japan didn't happen because of the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Invasion of Japan didn't happen because of Russian victories in Mainland China, where main Japanese forces where defeated. Only after that they surrendered. . Atomic bombings didn't do any effects on Japanese military or economical potential and damage wasn't that huge and didn't change any Japanese fighting spirit. Atomic barbaric bombing of civil cities is war crime for which USA is damned and doomed.
@@AlexanderTch That is - as far as I know - not completely true. Yes, the USSR won against the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria but that was mainly because of the Japanese nearly emmediatly surrendered. Furthermore was this not the main cause for the USA to not invade Japan's mainland. The main reason was that the US suffered great losses in the invasion of Okinawa and the atomic bomb was successfully tested in Nevada. They now had the choice of either invading the Japanese mainland and to probably suffer even greater losses or to use the newly invented atomic bomb which they chose to use to test the destructive power of the atomic bomb which had the positive side effect of maybe making the Japanese surrender which happened. But before the USA accepted they tested the second bomb made out of plutonium. The destructive power of the atomic bombs was indeed devastating as many people died and the Japanese wooden buildings were easily destroyed. Also Nagasaki, the target of the second bomb, was an important harbour (also militarily) and the destruction of which did have a military impact. But the intention of the US was mostly just to test the atomic bomb and is indeed in my opinion a severe war crime.
@@AlexanderTch Sorry if "Kwantung" isn't the right name but since I am German it says so in my book and upon longer thinking "Kwantung" doesn't sound Japanese. That is, because in Japanese there always has to be a vocal after every consonant (with one exception being "n").
@@niklaswein5055 I repeat, Atomic bomb didn't change anything. It was just 15-20 kilotons and it didn't do any damage to Japanese military or economic potential. Main Japanese forces were in China and most resources they got from China. USA knew that without USSR they would have lost half of their army. Japan didn't even think about surrendering until USSR broke their lines in China, came to Korea and capture main Chinese lands. Nagasaki was bombed on 9 of August ,and the same day Russian Army started war. And Japanese surrendered only in September, 3 weeks later after bombings. Bombs were to scare UsSR, not Japan. Bombs had very low power and USA had just few of them. Japan suffered heavy bombings before . So, bombings didn't affect on Japan leadership or military commandment either. Nobody knew exactly what's that weapon about. Japan was bombed more terribly by conventional bombs, like German cities were terribly burnt by western allies without any nuclear power.
@@AlexanderTch Why exactly Japan surrendered is not known. On the radio the Showa-Tenno just said the war has not necessarily evolved to Japan's advantage. Surely, the victory of the USSR in Manchuria was one of the causes. But Japan's main forces weren't in Manchuria where the USSR attacked, as Manchuria belonged to Japan since 1905 when they won against Russia in the Russo-Japanese-War (1904-1905). At the time the USSR broke their non-agression-pact with Japan and declared war, Japan's defeat was already clear. They lost their main naval forces in the battle of Midway as well as their only 4 aircraft carriers and couldn't compet with the US-Navy. Their land troops were poorly equipped and scattered around south east asia. They were pushed back in Burma by the British, in New Guinea by the Australians, the front in China came to stop due to lack of recourses and the merge of the Chinese nationalists and communists and the US took island after island from Japan in bloody beach landings. The Japanese air force couldn't keep up to the American as they could produce many planes due to lack of recourses. Manchuria, where the USSR attacked only was used by Japan to produce millet which was mainly used to feed other colonies like Korea which pruduced rice.
The atomic bomb that was thrown over Nagasaki did indeed destroy the military harbour of Nagasaki although this wasn't the main objective of the US. As I said earlier, it isn't exactly known which event caused the surrender of the Japanese. Fact is, they offered to surrender after the first atomic bomb to which the USA didn't respond. They accepted after the second one. Both the USA and the USSR now had the chance of invading Japan. I think, that all those events led to the Japanese surrender and not only the actions of the Soviet Union.
Also I quite enjoy this discussion. It is very interesting to discuss with someone who also knows quite a bit about the Pacific War. You have earned my respect.
The Yamato had 18 inch guns. That should have tied for the #7 spot.
How about Yamato's 460 mm ship artillery? She carried 9 of them and her sister Musashi also packed 9. It would have included another nation flag for a bit more diversity.
From Delhi, China 🇨🇳🇨🇳
Ek khench ke lafa dunga.
Me from Islamabad, India🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
I'm from washington,india🤣
I'm from Delhi village
From Beijing, India😂😂😂
2ND
Gerald Bull: Hold my beer.
The mons Meg isn’t only the 6th, it’s tied for the place with the French obusier de 520 cannon.
1ST
the bigest canon in this video is nothing next to the Gustav
"karl Gerät also known as Thor" shows picture of Gun Loki
How about the Dardanelles gun? I believe that was a 3 and a half foot shell, if I'm not mistaken.
I saw you posted in the post 9 the 2B1 OKA ;P i remember that beast never was able to shoot due its extreme recoil after shoot nuclear rounds (yup the oka was thinked to be a nuclear cannon fast tank :3 i hope be useful information eheh
The Oka/Condensator was a counterpart to the US nuclear artillery experiments (like literally mini-nukes, not just the poisoning depleted uranium used today), exemplified by the nuclear shells developed for Iowa and the gun/mortar nicknamed Atomic Annie, which did actually see service in Korea (Yes, US technically nuked other countreis, not just Japan). And it could shoot more than once. However, shooting meant that you lose the capability of an SPG as the recoil from the gun would damage either the transmission or the suspension.
Forgot the Yamato and Musashi’s guns. 18.1 inches
The caliber is 460mm or 46.cm
The little david wasn't supposed to be used in combat at all. It was designed to test aerial bombs.
baguette: are you changing me?
There is a 640mm bombarde made in 1431 on the ”great canon square” in Ghent, Belgium
Karl gerat range was 10km. No way a barrel that short could get to 42 km
Is not about the length but about the Power.
Can you do comparison between t-x program contenders ...
Joseph stalin: a tank with a artillery gun is perfecty fine
they didnt mention the dardenelles gun made in the 15th century, it fired stone balls that had a diameter of 24.8 inches.
20-inch Dahlgren cannon: four were cast by the Fort Pitt Foundry between 1864 and 1867 as part of the original planned armament for USS Puritan (monitor). These 4 cannons were named 'Satan', 'Lucifer' 'Moloch' and 'Beelzebub'. The first 3 were accepted by the U.S. Navy, but saw no service. The fourth gun, was sold to Peru where it became part of the defenses of Callao.
Incorrect: Rank 7 should be Yamato Battleship main artillery 460 mm with 1.4 ton shells. Also it fired 3 of them from one turret almost simultaneously.
They could have mentioned the 1000mm supergun that Gerald Bull was making for Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War, even though it was never fully built.
Sahi Gun with 635mm should have been Nr 5 the Sahi guns were the guns the Ottomans used to breach the walls of Istanbul during the siege and conquest of the city in 1453.
they shouldve sorted them by size of the whole weapon.
>Yamato's guns aren't on the list of biggest guns by calibre.
>18.1-inch guns
Pumhart von Steyr: effective calibre approx. 800 mm (stone ball diameter)
If I remember well, the French had a rail mounted artillery system with a 520 mm caliber in 1918 : 265 tons, 1.4 t shells.
name?
Что? Мортира Карл стреляла на 42 км? И это при её длине ствола? Здесь похоже опечатка, и дальность стрельбы была от 4,5 до 6,5 км в зависимости от типа снаряда.
Shahi connon should be in this list too.It was the biggest hand made cannon ever build.
Tsar crusher looks great !