Most useless weapon of the 20th Century

I would like to submit something that has come up on a different topic - the Japanese 'beehive' AA round for the 18.1 inch battleship gun.
Only fired once, and damaged the gun barrel!

 

This museum is one I believe.


http://www.lacoupole.com/

 

Actually, several were fired by YAMATO when she came under US Navy air attack during her suicide run to Okinawa. The rounds hit the Pacific Ocean, but nothing else. It's not known if they damaged the gun barrels, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did.

 

It's Heinkel He-177 and actually it wasn't so bad at all!
a $ engined bomber capable of dive bombing is quite a feat and the production models A-5 were pretty reliable and served with destinction on the eastern front!

 

Really a bad idea the Ohka 2 seat trainer!!!!



Piloted rockets are always a bad idea when you are the pilot....puting an instructor in it made it even worse! :kill:

 

Everything I've ever read, both German and American, flat states that the He 177 was a death trap, prone to catching fire even when no one was shooting at it. It was a four engined plane, but they were mounted in pairs with each pair turning a single propeller. The arrangement didn't work (and was the cause of the fires) and the Luftwaffe High Command refused to allow the engines to be separated, as this would have made the 177 a true four-engined bomber and thus incapable of dive bombing.

 

I agree, plus if you look at cutaway drawings or plans of the He177 it's practically impossible to hit it without putting a round through a fuel tank.

 

Well, you can miss the fuel tanks... but then you hit the engines or the pilot!

 

What about a British experimental weapon called the Great Pardulluem if I spelt it right. The is a antrical in the January World War 2 magazine :lol:

 

What is it?

 

Is that the giant catherine wheel type thing that was proposed for mine clearance on the Normandy beaches - very nearly wiped out those viewing the tests IIRC and featured in an episode of Dad's Army - plenty of opportunity for corporal Jones to shout 'Don't panic'.

If its not then I would suggest this as the most useless weapon of WW2.

 

The Great Panjandrum, IIRC - a nonsense word meaning an important personage or pretentious official.

TW

 

but as Profesor Ernst Heinkel said:
do not take our aircraft out of the context of the requirements that they were designed to fulfil. Do not confine yourself to those aircraft that were build in quantity an neglect those many others, good, bad and indifferent, that fell by the wayside, together with their creators' hopes and aspirations

 

"but as Profesor Ernst Heinkel said:
do not take our aircraft out of the context of the requirements that they were designed to fulfil. Do not confine yourself to those aircraft that were build in quantity an neglect those many others, good, bad and indifferent, that fell by the wayside, together with their creators' hopes and aspirations"

I'm not, but the fact that to me is inescapable is that the He177 was a complete and utter failure. Whether it or its specification or both were flawed doesn't change that fact.

I do not consider Heinkels as a whole to be poor aircraft, but the He177 in any of its guises was: it was unreliable, vulnerable to enemy fire, and one of those few aircraft that didn't even need enemy action to bring it down in quite significant numbers.

"Is that the giant catherine wheel type thing that was proposed for mine clearance on the Normandy beaches - very nearly wiped out those viewing the tests IIRC and featured in an episode of Dad's Army - plenty of opportunity for corporal Jones to shout 'Don't panic'.

If its not then I would suggest this as the most useless weapon of WW2."

Can something designed for mine clearance be considered a weapon? Isn't it more of a countermeasure?

(Pedantic man at his best! :lol: )

 

bat bombs , the americans would attach bombs to bats and let them fly into enemy territory.

 

What about that sharp pointy thing fixed to the end of gun barrel?

The Japaness still believed in the power of the bayonet even after it had long become obsolete, which probably explains why they insisted on maintaining a seriously flawed tactical doctrine when it came to infantry combat.

 

That sharp pointy thing fixed on the end of the rifle is still usefull today. Not as useful as digging ( entrenching) spade but still very much in use in close combat.

 

us military planers phased out the rifle bayonette and the guns on fighter planes in viet nam...yet both were brought back buy popular demand...go figure

 

As long as the bayonet is small enough not to seriously harm a gun's balance and aim, it is simply a useful attachment for close-combat, as well as a better way to use your standard-issue army knife than simply wielding it.

I agree, though, that since this weapon was originally invented to allow musketmen to fight cavalry charges, it is rather obsolete...

 

it's handy as a tool but as said many times a trench shuvel is much better as a melee (cant spell) weapon