Dumbest military weapons

TarJak · 09-09-10, 06:54 AM

Somebody thought these were a good idea at the time. Good thing someone else didn't:
http://him.uk.msn.com/in-the-know/ar...ntid=154615827

TLAM Strike · 09-09-10, 09:34 AM

I would disagree with some of those...

The Fu-Go balloon was unsuccessful because the US didn't let anyone know that they were landing on US soil so the Japanese abandoned the idea. The balloons did succeed in providing a cheap method of delivering ordnance in to the continental US- I hate to think what could have happened if the Japanese decided to put some of the chemical or biological weapons they used in China on one.

M-388... this one always comes up doesn't it? Personally its one of my favorite weapons ever! They get it wrong when they say it would render vast areas uninhabitable, the yield of the bomb was quite small: .10-.20 kilotons. The weapon would only generate a fatal amount of radiation about a 1/4 mile from the blast. The warhead was latter used in the Ginnie Air to Air missile.

Chauchat Submachine Gun? Submachine Gun? I assume they meant the Chauchat Light Machine Gun. The Chauchat SMG was for tank crews to fire out of ports in their vehicles it was unsuccessful because of its overpowered cartridge. not exactly a huge failure.

Oberon · 09-09-10, 10:15 AM

Yeah, the Davy Crockett is a favourite isn't it...common misconception that. Still, by the time that the Crocketts were flying around most common sense would have gone out the window anyway and there would be mushrooms everywhere.
It's hard to think what is the dumbest military weapon...certainly the animal based ones qualify. They missed the Pigeon guided missile on that list too.
I think Torpedo Rams, despite being cool looking, were a rather dismal failure in terms of what the Admiralty thought they would be able to do...but I wouldn't call it dumb.
The Maus, well protected and armed, but as fast as a dying snail and forced to become a submarine whenever it found a river because it would destroy the bridge if it tried to use it. Dumb? Maybe, but through no real fault of German designers who were stuck with a backseat fuhrer. Thank god.
Kamikaze could be considered dumb, after all, it's a one use weapon and you deplete your reserves of pilots, but it was rather effective at first and used by a country on the back foot. I think when one gets to that stage in war, then even dumb ideas are used in the vague hope that they will have some use. After all, the submarine was considered a dumb idea by some at one point, as was the aeroplane.

Jimbuna · 09-09-10, 10:26 AM

My favourite was the Northover projector with No 76 SIP glass bottle 'sticky' grenade issued to the Home Guard.

There were two versions of this grenade, the first designed for hand-throwing and the second, which had a green cap and slightly thicker glass was designed for firing from the Northover Projector.

If not handled correctly, this was an extremely dangerous grenade. It was not unknown for the grenade to burst either in or as it left the Northover Projector barrel.

AVGWarhawk · 09-09-10, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

My favourite was the Northover projector with No 76 SIP glass bottle 'sticky' grenade issued to the Home Guard.

There were two versions of this grenade, the first designed for hand-throwing and the second, which had a green cap and slightly thicker glass was designed for firing from the Northover Projector.

If not handled correctly, this was an extremely dangerous grenade. It was not unknown for the grenade to burst either in or as it left the Northover Projector barrel.

What you are saying essencially is research and development was non-existent?

CCIP · 09-09-10, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

After all, the submarine was considered a dumb idea by some at one point, as was the aeroplane.

Well, I think initial efforts in the military employment of ANYTHING generally end in failure. That's just how technology tends to work. Geez, I'm thinking back to the Hunley - it sank three times by the time it finally sank another ship. If you only looked at its employment, submarines would definitely look like the worst weapon ever. But look where subs are today!

Bilge_Rat · 09-09-10, 12:47 PM

I like the Davey Crockett...

my vote for dumb weapon would be the Boulton Defiant fighter. Leave it to the Brits to design a fighter that has no weapons that can fire forward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

Oberon · 09-09-10, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

I like the Davey Crockett...

my vote for dumb weapon would be the Boulton Defiant fighter. Leave it to the Brits to design a fighter that has no weapons that can fire forward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

In the defence of the Defiant, that rear gun did manage to get a few Messerschmitts that mistook it for the Hurricane and tried to attack it from the rear...but yes, it wasn't the most successful fighter in the war...

nikimcbee · 09-09-10, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarJak

Somebody thought these were a good idea at the time. Good thing someone else didn't:
http://him.uk.msn.com/in-the-know/ar...ntid=154615827

This sounds like something off the history channel

.

I'll just add: Hitler's top 10 extreme dumb weapons that he never used.

Takeda Shingen · 09-09-10, 03:31 PM

Ah, the Davey Crockett. If Fallout 3 has taught me anything, it is that shoulder-launched nuclear weaopns are awesome.

Bilge_Rat · 09-09-10, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Ah, the Davey Crockett. If Fallout 3 has taught me anything, it is that shoulder-launched nuclear weaopns are awesome.

no self respecting home owner should be without one ...

Bilge_Rat · 09-09-10, 03:52 PM

another example of poor design was the F-4 Phantom, not the plane itself, which was used by USAF and USN and featured a great design, but the fact that it was designed with no internal gun since designers were convinced that air-to-air missiles had rendered guns obsolete.

That sounded great until Vietnam came along and it turned out the AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles the F-4 carried had been designed to track big, slow moving bombers and were almost useless against fast turning north vietnamese fighters..

needless to say, every US fighter since then carries an internal gun.

of course, it was'nt just the US, the Russians and the French made the same mistake. It was just the Israelis who insisted on having a gun and had the french instal a 30mm cannon in the Mirages they bought. They were put to good use in the six-day war...

TLAM Strike · 09-09-10, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

another example of poor design was the F-4 Phantom, not the plane itself, which was used by USAF and USN and featured a great design, but the fact that it was designed with no internal gun since designers were convinced that air-to-air missiles had rendered guns obsolete.

That sounded great until Vietnam came along and it turned out the AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles the F-4 carried had been designed to track big, slow moving bombers and were almost useless against fast turning north vietnamese fighters..

needless to say, every US fighter since then carries an internal gun.

of course, it was'nt just the US, the Russians and the French made the same mistake. It was just the Israelis who insisted on having a gun and had the french instal a 30mm cannon in the Mirages they bought. They were put to good use in the six-day war...

Interestingly the F-8 Crusader (AKA the "Last of the Gunfighters") only scored three kills (some say four) with cannons. The F-8 had the best kill ratio of the Vietnam war (19 to 3)

BTW the F-35B and F-35C will not have an internal gun.

Oberon · 09-09-10, 04:42 PM

The Erdnagel could possibly take its place up there...but it's hard to tell whether it was more the public perception over the aircraft as opposed to the actual design.

Bilge_Rat · 09-09-10, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

BTW the F-35B and F-35C will not have an internal gun.

that is surprising. One of the reasons pilots like guns on their planes, now that missiles are more reliable, is to be able to protect a downed pilot on the ground from enemy forces while waiting for rescue. Can't do that with AAM missiles.

09-09-10, 06:54 AM	#1
TarJak Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,052 Downloads: 150 Uploads: 8	Dumbest military weapons Somebody thought these were a good idea at the time. Good thing someone else didn't: http://him.uk.msn.com/in-the-know/ar...ntid=154615827

09-09-10, 09:34 AM	#2
TLAM Strike Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 8,633 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 6	I would disagree with some of those... The Fu-Go balloon was unsuccessful because the US didn't let anyone know that they were landing on US soil so the Japanese abandoned the idea. The balloons did succeed in providing a cheap method of delivering ordnance in to the continental US- I hate to think what could have happened if the Japanese decided to put some of the chemical or biological weapons they used in China on one. M-388... this one always comes up doesn't it? Personally its one of my favorite weapons ever! They get it wrong when they say it would render vast areas uninhabitable, the yield of the bomb was quite small: .10-.20 kilotons. The weapon would only generate a fatal amount of radiation about a 1/4 mile from the blast. The warhead was latter used in the Ginnie Air to Air missile. Chauchat Submachine Gun? Submachine Gun? I assume they meant the Chauchat Light Machine Gun. The Chauchat SMG was for tank crews to fire out of ports in their vehicles it was unsuccessful because of its overpowered cartridge. not exactly a huge failure. __________________

09-09-10, 10:26 AM	#4
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,461 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	My favourite was the Northover projector with No 76 SIP glass bottle 'sticky' grenade issued to the Home Guard. There were two versions of this grenade, the first designed for hand-throwing and the second, which had a green cap and slightly thicker glass was designed for firing from the Northover Projector. If not handled correctly, this was an extremely dangerous grenade. It was not unknown for the grenade to burst either in or as it left the Northover Projector barrel. __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

09-09-10, 12:47 PM	#7
Bilge_Rat Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: standing watch... Posts: 3,855 Downloads: 344 Uploads: 0	I like the Davey Crockett... my vote for dumb weapon would be the Boulton Defiant fighter. Leave it to the Brits to design a fighter that has no weapons that can fire forward. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant __________________

09-09-10, 03:52 PM	#12
Bilge_Rat Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: standing watch... Posts: 3,855 Downloads: 344 Uploads: 0	another example of poor design was the F-4 Phantom, not the plane itself, which was used by USAF and USN and featured a great design, but the fact that it was designed with no internal gun since designers were convinced that air-to-air missiles had rendered guns obsolete. That sounded great until Vietnam came along and it turned out the AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles the F-4 carried had been designed to track big, slow moving bombers and were almost useless against fast turning north vietnamese fighters.. needless to say, every US fighter since then carries an internal gun. of course, it was'nt just the US, the Russians and the French made the same mistake. It was just the Israelis who insisted on having a gun and had the french instal a 30mm cannon in the Mirages they bought. They were put to good use in the six-day war... __________________

09-09-10, 10:15 AM	#3
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Yeah, the Davy Crockett is a favourite isn't it...common misconception that. Still, by the time that the Crocketts were flying around most common sense would have gone out the window anyway and there would be mushrooms everywhere. It's hard to think what is the dumbest military weapon...certainly the animal based ones qualify. They missed the Pigeon guided missile on that list too. I think Torpedo Rams, despite being cool looking, were a rather dismal failure in terms of what the Admiralty thought they would be able to do...but I wouldn't call it dumb. The Maus, well protected and armed, but as fast as a dying snail and forced to become a submarine whenever it found a river because it would destroy the bridge if it tried to use it. Dumb? Maybe, but through no real fault of German designers who were stuck with a backseat fuhrer. Thank god. Kamikaze could be considered dumb, after all, it's a one use weapon and you deplete your reserves of pilots, but it was rather effective at first and used by a country on the back foot. I think when one gets to that stage in war, then even dumb ideas are used in the vague hope that they will have some use. After all, the submarine was considered a dumb idea by some at one point, as was the aeroplane.

09-09-10, 03:31 PM	#10
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	Ah, the Davey Crockett. If Fallout 3 has taught me anything, it is that shoulder-launched nuclear weaopns are awesome.

09-09-10, 04:42 PM	#14
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	The Erdnagel could possibly take its place up there...but it's hard to tell whether it was more the public perception over the aircraft as opposed to the actual design.