They Called It "Suicide Point" — Until This Marine Shot Down 12 Japanese Bombers in One Day

Описание: Why a 22-year-old Marine gunner trusted experimental radar on a beach they called "Suicide Point" during WW2 — and changed antiaircraft warfare in the Pacific. This World War 2 story reveals how one gun crew proved radar-directed fire could work when everyone said it couldn't.

July 4, 1943. Private First Class Evan Evans, antiaircraft gunner, 9th Defense Battalion, stood behind a 90mm gun on Rendova Island. Two days earlier, Japanese bombers had killed 59 Americans on this same beach while the island's radar systems were offline. Sixteen more bombers were inbound. Every gunner knew radar-directed fire was theoretical at best — the SCR-268 radar wasn't designed to work with the Sperry M-4 gun director. Officers called it "inaccurate" and "unreliable."

They were all wrong.

What Evans discovered that morning wasn't about following the manual. It was about integrating radar data with mechanical computers in a way that contradicted everything instructors had taught. By the time the engagement ended, Japanese pilots were calling their approach to Rendova "the death run." Other Marine gun crews started requesting the same radar setup. And they survived.

This technique spread unofficially through Defense Battalions across the Solomon Islands, crew to crew, battery to battery, before appearing in any official training manual. The methods tested under fire at Rendova became standard antiaircraft procedure throughout the Pacific Theater.

🔔 Subscribe for more untold WW2 stories:    / @wwii-records  
👍 Like this video if you learned something new
💬 Comment below: What other WW2 tactics should we cover?

#worldwar2 #ww2history #ww2 #wwii #ww2records

⚠️ Disclaimer: This is entertainment storytelling based on WW2 events from internet sources. While we aim for engaging narratives, some details may be inaccurate. This is not an academic source. For verified history, consult professional historians and archives. Watch responsibly.