Probably many people had seen one of these use as ornamental device but in the close combat arena it was a very usable edged weapon…or not?
The japanese army adopted it in 1937 and used until the end.
The katana used as propaganda weapon, a gigantic samurai sinking ships in this italian poster celebrating the attack on Pearl Harbour.
Japanes officers swords had also very infamous usage - beheading of allies POWs…
I will send some photos Monday - have them at work.
Swords become very much sought collectibles among allied troops.
Japanese flag - original one - was going for about $100 - quite considerable sum these days. Sword could fetch even $300.
Personally I don’t believe that samurai swords had an advantage when confronted with Tomphson SMG or Garand Rifle… 
Cheers,
Lancer44
I don’t really understand the point of those videos.
That tempered steel can sometimes deflect a soft copper envelope containing even softer lead ?
They remind me of the schoolboy discussions of which would win in a fight, a shark or a grizzly bear.
Not even a pretence of scientific analysis, the sword vibrates, the M2 was bedded by Action Man - and as for the 9 mm (?) “test” the less said the better.
Now all we need is a swordsman who is slimmer than his wpn and with reactions of a speeding bullet.
Can hardly wait for the test of sunglasses against a fission wpn…
:roll:
the purpose of the video ?..dont know but is however is fun
Personally I don’t believe that samurai swords had an advantage when confronted with Tomphson SMG or Garand Rifle…
I had no chance for sure, but probably it was more useful than a bayonet.
A interesting link dealing with the parts and elaborated construction and finishing of te katana sword.
http://www2.memenet.or.jp/kinugawa/english/sword/sword100.htm
It seems that main use of the Japanese sword was chopping the heads off of innocent civilians in the rape of Nanking.
I doubt it ever saw much use in combat.
Not only in Nanking but also in other places, yes it was the practice, I have some pictures but I wont post those for matters of good taste.
Probably the only combat it saw was in the last stand “Banzai” infantry attack.
Unless I am very much mistaken the Japanese officers always carried their swords exposed in attacks, as their soldiers nearly always fitted bayonets even their MGs (in particular the one that looked similar to the Bren) were fitted with bayonets. So I would surmise that the swords did see action. If only close in when the toms had opted for bayonet fighting.
Certainly the jungle warfare that the Japanese were often involved in would have lent itself to the use of a sword as a particularly effective close in weapon.
The purpose of the samurai sword is not so much functional. It is rather ceremonial in nature. It is a symbol of the Bushido spirit. A comparable symbolism in the western world is like how American cavalry officers during the American Civil War still wielded rapiers during battle even when muskets were the standard weapons. A more modern example is that when men of the USMC don their dress uniforms, they still carry their ceremonial swords. Swords are symbols of the proud history of a soldier’s profession, and to the Japanese the traditiona is not only military but also spiritual.
Sure the simbolism was important, even sometimes ackward check this japanese tankist with katana. ¡¡¡¡
Somewhat entertaining video but not very practical to decide whether the Katana was effective as a functioal weapon or not. After all the katana wasn’t intended to be used as armor of to deflect bullets. You could use similiar video to question the use of a trench knife or K-bar or bayonet. I’m guessing they wouldn’t fair much better if mounted in cement with an M-2 unleashed on them. If I was in a fixed bayonet charge I wouldn’t want to meet the guy skilled with a Katana. To me the video just proves that some people have no respect for a fine edged weapon. What a waste of Katana. To me a better demonstration would have been to pit a man with a Katana against a man with a rifle and bayonet (practice weapons of course).
Aitape, New Guinea, 24 October 1943: Sergeant L. G. Siffleet, M Special Unit, tied and blindfolded, about to be beheaded. Sergeant Siffleet, a radio operator, was part of a long-range reconnaissance unit led by Dutchman, Sergeant Staverman, operating behind Japanese lines in New Guinea. The party was betrayed and Staverman killed. Siffleet and two Ambonese companions – Reharin and Pate Wail – were taken to the Japanese base at Aitape where all three were executed by beheading on the order of Vice-Admiral KAMADA, commander of Japanese naval forces at Aitape. According to the original caption to this photograph the name of the Japanese executioner was YASUNO, who died before the end of the war. Siffleet was buried on the beach at Aitape below the tideline and his body was never recovered. The photograph of his execution was taken by a Japanese soldier and found by American forces when they invaded Hollandia in 1944. The photograph of Siffleet’s execution appeared shortly afterwards in American, and subsequently Australian, publications as an illustration of the brutality with which prisoners of the Japanese were treated. For many years in Australia the photo was captioned as if it depicted the execution of Flight Lieutenant Newton VC, Royal Australian Air Force, by the Japanese at Salamaua, New Guinea, on 29 March 1943.
Photograph and caption courtesy of AMW Canberra
Lancer44
Well, really sad and brutal situation, some of the Doolitle B-25s mission crews wich were unfortunate enough to land in japanese controlled territory , sufered the same treatment.
Being an AUstralian I do not particulary like looking at Aus. POW’s. Awful way to die, by the sword.
As did countless Chinese in Manchuria in actual, reported, beheading contests. I believe two Lieutenants competed for the “honor” and both got tennis elbow from the swiping motion. Sick stuff.
It’s only a “toy” if you have don’t have a rifle, I could imagine that a samurai sword would be intimidating in a serious hand-to-hand fight. But then, they often didn’t get that close.
Mostly, it’d be like this:
Nickdfresh, I believe you’re referring to second lieutenants Mukai Toshiaki and Noda Tsuyoshi, thought I didn’t know about the “tennis elbow” trivia. They were both tried and executed by the Chinese government in 1948 (I’m not sure by the Communists or Nationalists). I have some info here:
http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=38
As for your “toy” comment – I tend to somewhat disagree with that. I don’t think we can even compare swords and guns. Japanese officers don’t carry necessarily with intention to fight with them as their primary weapon, just as an American Marine don’t always attach their bayonet on their rifles and use it as a spear. For the western Marine, the bayonet is a tool/weapon when situation dictates it. Similarly, for the Japanese officer, the sword is a tool when appropriate. For one, leading your troops in battle with a traditionally honorable weapon can raise morale much more effectively than waving your sidearm in the air.
I think the video in the original post completely missed the point. It’s amusing, but it’s also rather useless. I can take a hammer and smash a rifle to bits. Does that mean modern soldiers should equip themselves with big hammers instead of their assault rifles?
This scene from 'Indiana Jones" is the best description of outcome of any competition between sword and gun.
There was an incident in Burma when a Japanese officer rode (on a horse no less) up to a Grant tank, mounted it and proceeded to kill the tank commander with his sword. He then climbed in, killed or wounded another couple of crew before the 75mm loader (I think) managed to knock him on the head with his pistol butt then put four rounds into him.