Author Topic: Weapons that suck  (Read 38593 times)

Offline Charon

  • Member
  • Salutes: 95
    • [RAFT]
    • 37 
    • 39
    • View Profile
Weapons that suck
« on: August 12, 2013, 08:03:08 am »
This is a thread for REAL LIFE WEAPONS that SUCK.

If you can think of a weapon that has an incredible flaw, post it here. If it's not a modern weapon, be sure to post the following design or enemy counterdesign that fixed those flaws.

Offline Moriarty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 18
    • [Duck]
    • 27 
    • 31
    • 12 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2013, 08:29:51 am »
Banshee rocke.... oh real weapons ... huh

Offline Swizy

  • Member
  • Salutes: 20
    • [T.Pr]
    • 32 
    • 45
    • 30 
    • View Profile
    • FacePunch
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2013, 09:30:50 am »


pls kill me

Offline Gryphos

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 57
    • 15 
    • 18
    • 26 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2013, 11:30:38 am »
Pigeon guided missile... I'm not even fucking joking.

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

Offline James T. Kirk

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 182
    • [Cake]
    • 19 
    • 25
    • 43 
    • View Profile
    • The Cake Official Website!
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2013, 01:26:47 pm »
Banshee rocke.... oh real weapons ... huh

:(

Offline Swizy

  • Member
  • Salutes: 20
    • [T.Pr]
    • 32 
    • 45
    • 30 
    • View Profile
    • FacePunch
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #5 on: August 12, 2013, 01:40:03 pm »


Guys let's put pricks on our gun, we rebuild houses with them after the war!

Offline HamsterIV

  • Member
  • Salutes: 328
    • 10 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Monkey Dev
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #6 on: August 12, 2013, 02:40:49 pm »
I give to you the Chauchat

WW 1 France's idea of what a light machine gun should be. It had a reputation of jamming if dirt got into the magazine or firing compartment. Just the sort of thing you want to give to troops in muddy trenches. Also the barrel could not be exchanged when it got overheated.

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #7 on: August 12, 2013, 09:17:58 pm »
The original Bazooka was quite a failure when it came to German tank destruction. While it allegedly fired over a 100 yards, it was really found to only really be about 30 as you had to hit the tread or the very rear of a tank. Patton described it not as a tank hunter but as a weapon of last resort for infantry as they are overran by tanks.

Offline Lord Dick Tim

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 119
    • 7
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2013, 01:28:16 am »
I would need to do some research, but weren't a lot of the first forced air capture designs for automatic weapons total failures?

Offline WhiteWeasel

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • 13 
    • 10
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #9 on: August 13, 2013, 02:31:15 am »
In WWII Russians used to strapped bombs to dogs, and trained them to run under tanks and when they got ran over the bomb would detonate. Moral problems aside, the dogs used were trained with russian tanks-which ran on diesel and the germans used petrol. Little did the russians know is that a lot of animals use scent over sight as their primary means of detection. See where this is going?

Offline Piemanlives

  • Member
  • Salutes: 155
    • [Cake]
    • 20
    • 16 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #10 on: August 13, 2013, 02:39:36 am »
In WWII Russians used to strapped bombs to dogs, and trained them to run under tanks and when they got ran over the bomb would detonate. Moral problems aside, the dogs used were trained with russian tanks-which ran on diesel and the germans used petrol. Little did the russians know is that a lot of animals use scent over sight as their primary means of detection. See where this is going?

I remember reading about that, moral problems aside, it was kind of hilarious.

Offline Squidslinger Gilder

  • Member
  • Salutes: 287
    • [TBB]
    • 31 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #11 on: August 13, 2013, 05:09:55 am »


I remember reading about this thing. Someone thought it was a great idea to mix airplane and tank. Yeah...it didn't work out. Least not until someone thought up the A-10 Warthog.

Offline Piemanlives

  • Member
  • Salutes: 155
    • [Cake]
    • 20
    • 16 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #12 on: August 13, 2013, 05:13:03 am »


The Tsar Tank, made to strike fear into the the hearts of the enemy, however it was under powered, vulnerable to artillery, and had a tendency of getting stuck.

Offline Sgt. Spoon

  • Member
  • Salutes: 112
    • [Keno]
    • 3
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #13 on: August 13, 2013, 07:47:03 am »


The Tsar Tank, made to strike fear into the the hearts of the enemy, however it was under powered, vulnerable to artillery, and had a tendency of getting stuck.
Thanks for linking that. I saw it in a game once I never found out what it was called, or if it ever had existed. Safe to say, it would have been damn cool had it worked.

Offline N-Sunderland

  • Member
  • Salutes: 281
    • [Duck]
    • 15 
    • 45
    • 23 
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons that suck
« Reply #14 on: August 13, 2013, 10:11:54 am »
Now, anybody who found any of those things on Cracked.com, raise your hand.

*raises hand*