Dumbest military weapons

[Bubblehead Nuke]

With this being a subsim board, I am suprised that nobody has made a comment of the effective range of a Subroc vs the Lethal radius of said weapon.

Nothing like a 2 for 1 weapon.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead Nuke

With this being a subsim board, I am suprised that nobody has made a comment of the effective range of a Subroc vs the Lethal radius of said weapon.

Nothing like a 2 for 1 weapon.

The SUBROC had a range of 30 miles, the effect of the 5 kt warhead would only be dangrous out to about a mile from ground zero. The 11 kt warhead of the ASTOR torpedo (8 mile range) would be dangerous about a mile and a half from the blast. The ASTOR would shake the launching sub up a bit but not sink her, plus she could clear datum and get away from the blast.

[Gerald]

JAS 39 Gripen aircraft (two seater) Length: 14.1 m (14.8 m) Height: 4.5 m Span: 8.4 m Wheelbase: 5.2 m (5.9 m) Track width: 2.4 m Empty weight : 6500 kg (7000 kg) Starting weight: ~ 8700 kg (8500 kg) Max takeoff weight: ~ 12 500 kg (12 800 kg) Engine: RM 12 Thrust: 54 kN thrust with EBK: 81 kN (equiv. ~ 40 000 hp) Engine: Volvo Aero RM 12 (a development of the F404-400 from General Electric) Max speed: Mach 2 (about 2 500km / h) Armament: Rb74, Rb99, Rb75, Rb15, Bomb Capsule 90 and 27 mm Akan (only Version A and C) Range:> 3 000 km off distance: 400 m Landing distance: 500 m Number of FM: 204st (of which 28 pc two seater) in service since: June 9, 1996 Acceleration: Mach 0.5 to 1.15 in 30's . Turn Force: Up to 9G Radar: Ericsson PS-05 / A. Detects fighter at 120 km distance.
Manufacturer: Industrial Group JAS

[CCIP]

What's so bad about the Gripen?


And on the topic of subs, I'm pretty sure the dumbest submarine designs yet were those which attempted to use the subs as a big gun platform, including the British M class and the French Surcouf. Had the Germans actually built the Type XI cruisers, I'm pretty sure they would've ended up in the same category. Not to be bloodthirsty, but I kind of wish one of those subs had actually participated in actual combat - it would've shown exactly what a terrible idea the whole concept was (by inevitably failing horribly and being sunk), and would end for good all the myths and misconceptions about surface-gunning supersubs.

[Gerald]

It is a good plan for sure

[CCIP]

Oh, and another batch of candidates for this would definitely have to be the three "battlecruisers" built for Jackie Fisher's Baltic project (Glorious, Furious, Corageous). Had they actually been used as intended, they would've not only failed spectacularly, but the plan involving them would probably be a massive fiasco as well. And not to mention they were structurally unfit to even use their main weapons without damaging themselves. Forget about being able to survive any sort of battle damage. Luckily they were quickly converted into carriers...

[Gerald]

during WWI, so the ships,carrier was clearly a lift

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

The SUBROC had a range of 30 miles, the effect of the 5 kt warhead would only be dangerous out to about a mile from ground zero. The 11 kt warhead of the ASTOR torpedo (8 mile range) would be dangerous about a mile and a half from the blast. The ASTOR would shake the launching sub up a bit but not sink her, plus she could clear datum and get away from the blast.

Thank you.. I forgot about the ASTOR. Yet ANOTHER great design in the use of atomic weapontry. You had to hold position, maintain positive control of the weapon, and had to signal detonate the warhead. Like the other guy was not going to shoot at you in the meantime. The only thing I liked about it was that it was electric so it was not quite as noisy.

About the lethal radius, in a typical air burst you are correct, however, in a subsurface burst, the shock wave would have resulted in an overpressure wave that would have crushed a submarine. That was one of the design criteria of the thing. You did not have to land on the bad guy, you only had to get close. You get it in the general area, detonate it deep, and let the water hammer do the rest for you.

I remember reading about the SUBROC on the boat. They said that a 688 MIGHT be able to survive a max range attack if they did a 180, STOOD on the power and had a minimal cross section while at the same time going shallow rapidly just prior to detonation. Going shallow was to minimize the effect of the shock wave by decreasing the intial pressure on the hull. The variables involved were many and they did not give more than a 50/50 chance.

The older sailors who served on the 594/637 class boats said that they knew it was a suicide shot. They KNEW they could not go fast enough to get out of the danger zone. But, they were willing to take it if it would prevent the other guy from launching his missles.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead Nuke

Thank you.. I forgot about the ASTOR. Yet ANOTHER great design in the use of atomic weapontry. You had to hold position, maintain positive control of the weapon, and had to signal detonate the warhead. Like the other guy was not going to shoot at you in the meantime. The only thing I liked about it was that it was electric so it was not quite as noisy.

About the lethal radius, in a typical air burst you are correct, however, in a subsurface burst, the shock wave would have resulted in an overpressure wave that would have crushed a submarine. That was one of the design criteria of the thing. You did not have to land on the bad guy, you only had to get close. You get it in the general area, detonate it deep, and let the water hammer do the rest for you.

I remember reading about the SUBROC on the boat. They said that a 688 MIGHT be able to survive a max range attack if they did a 180, STOOD on the power and had a minimal cross section while at the same time going shallow rapidly just prior to detonation. Going shallow was to minimize the effect of the shock wave by decreasing the intial pressure on the hull. The variables involved were many and they did not give more than a 50/50 chance.

The older sailors who served on the 594/637 class boats said that they knew it was a suicide shot. They KNEW they could not go fast enough to get out of the danger zone. But, they were willing to take it if it would prevent the other guy from launching his missles.

Interesting factoid:

The USS Dentuda SS-335 survived a ~20 kt subsurface nuclear blast while dived at a range of about 1250 yards. This is Test Baker during Operation Crossroads.

Following the test she was returned to service for a while before being scrapped.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

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

this should probably merit a new thread, but found this cool powerpoint on the new F-35. Canada is planning to buy 60 or so to replace our 30-35 years old CF-18s.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armamen...ougHayward.pdf

all variants of the F-35 will/can carry a 25 mm gatling gun. The conventional take off and landing AC has an internal one, while the carrier and the STOL versions can have one added as a pod as the mission requires.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

all variants of the F-35 will/can carry a 25 mm gatling gun. The conventional take off and landing AC has an internal one, while the carrier and the STOL versions can have one added as a pod as the mission requires.

Note I said internal gun. A gun pod is not internal.

A gun pod degrades stealth and performance.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Note I said internal gun. A gun pod is not internal.

A gun pod degrades stealth and performance.

So does that make it a dumb weapon?

[SteamWake]

Anyone mention the Petard yet??

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

[Task Force]

heh, got a laugh out of the AT dog idea... and the fact they used russian tanks as pratice targets. Guess they didnt think the russian dog could just use its sence of smell, and not see its a russian tank

[Spyguy101]

Nuclear depth charges
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_depth_charge