Most Stupid Weapon of WWII

The concept was not so much one of a tank with a removable turret, more one of field guns that can be given added mobility with a removable self-propelled mounting.

The gun/turret would have wheels attached when dismounted and to all intents be a conventional trailed infantry gun, and each chassis would draw two; one on top and one towed behind. They looked like tanks, but in a way that masks what they actually were supposed to be. The 'Tankish' aspect was being assessed as a potential bonus, rather than the primary idea behind them.

~A

 

I was reading an article somewhere recently about the use of horses in the history of warfare and getting horses to settle or be comfortable around gunfire etc .

Further into the article it was mentioned as an aside that camels are not the least bit perturbed by the sound of firearms in battle and an attempt was even made to mount a cannon of some sort onto a camel ....I can imagine that you could mount it to shoot through the hollow part between the humps on a two hump camel ! I'd like to see that . Camel might have some bad feelings about the idea though .

Gotta be in the stupid category .

 

Not sure if its been posted yet, but i would put in Bat incendiries, and the Mistel contraption...Did it ever hit anything?

 

Camel gun? aaahh good ole kiwi military that!

 

Im very interested in Italian WW2 stuff, but I must say that - Breda 37 was stupid (ironically one of best Italian MG's), who saw other WW2 heavy machine gun with only 20 rounds in magazine (strip) ?! ​

Bren? - Was that a HMG?

 

If you are asking if anybody else had "strips" for a feed system, it seems to me that the Japanese had at least one model that used a Hotchkiss style feed system. The Breda 1937 was after all a modified Hotchkiss feed as well, I think the Japanese model was made by Nambu, and was designated the 03. But don't hold me to that model #, I could well be wrong. The Japanese had some odd feeds, one was a hopper as I recall, and they also used cloth belts in others.

 

Project Habakkuk was pretty ridiculous. An aircraft carrier made of ice? no thank you

Project Habbakuk | Strange Weapon of the Week

 

At the time it was proposed yes, but had England possessed one at the beginning of the war, deployed in the north-central Atlantic, it could have closed the mid-ocean air gap sooner and ended the U-boat menace ahead of schedule. Sometimes crazy idea's in the right moment in time can do wonders.

 

Well, that weapon couldn't be fired from friendly lines, as the radiation radius would affect them. So men firing these weapons would be actually suicide bombers! Pretty much the equivalent of a men with a nuke on his backpack, to detonate when near enemy troops. :lol:

 

I have to vote for the balloon bomb because of how high the hopes were for it and how really little it did in actually defeating us. No doubt it was innovative but if they had put the same effort into conventional weapons it would have been worse for our troops.

 

WHAT THE HECK IS THAT!!! Lol wow i agree that is pretty stupid

 

Both the Davy Crockett and the balloon bomb were weapons of desparation. The balloon bomb had little chance to do much damage but did not use much stategic materials that were in short supply. Any damage done was a benifit to Japan at little cost. The Davy Crockett would have very deadly to invading russian troops had it been used, but would have hard on the troops launching them as well as other nearby defending units. It was thought that NATO troops might be overwhealmed by large soviet tank forces and that tactical nuclear weapons would be needed to tip the balance. Fortunately we never had to test the theory.

 

I have a picture of the Davey Crockett mounted on a jeep. Please don't ask for it. I'd have to learn more. Stupid learning.

 

A little suffering is good for the soul I hear.

 

Schadenfreude me thinks.
Schadenfreude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

If you can't insult me in english, why bother

 

My turn to apologize. Just joshin' around. ..If the world were as polite as WW2f, there'd be no war. It all comes down to manners doesn't it? Consideration of others...Except if they're driving really slow. I hate that.

 

I know you were joking, hence mr. smiley! No worries! there a double one!

 

It is only worse if they are driving a bit slow, in the right hand lane of a two lane road with the left blinker on. About the time ya figure they have just forgot to turn that stinking thing off, and start to pass 'em, they hang a left right in front of ya.