Shittiest weapon ever

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-08-16 09:47pm

What is the shittiest, most worthless or most useless modern day weapon used by the worlds militaries?

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-08-16 09:48pm

Humans. We were promised robots by the year 2000 damnit!

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2003-08-16 09:52pm

Gnomes are the most useless weapons ever!

Toss them and they just shatter. You can't even hurt a fly with one of those.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-08-16 09:54pm

Enigma wrote:Gnomes are the most useless weapons ever!

Toss them and they just shatter. You can't even hurt a fly with one of those.

Sure you can!

And give us our GridFire rifles and we'll see who's useless then...

But, this is "modern" weapons, and I don't think Gnomes qualify as modern military weapons.

As for the worst one...I'm sure Sea Skimmer will be here shortly, but from what I can think off the top of my head...a .38cal revolver. I think they're still used, somewhere.

justifier · Post by **justifier** » 2003-08-16 09:57pm

A canteen, for something used by the military its a really shitty weapon

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-08-16 09:58pm

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:Humans. We were promised robots by the year 2000 damnit!

*cough* We do have battle robots, it's just that they're disguised as...er....
coughwedonothaveanyrobotspleaseforgetwhateverisaidthisconversationnevertookplacecough*

I nominate the only weapon I have used and truly disliked, the M-79 grenade launcher. You load the grenades shot-gun style, so it's a bitch to reload while in battle.
There are tons of other problems with the damn thing, so it's basicallly worthless in my opinion.
Not something you'd want to have along in a firefight.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-08-16 10:03pm

RogueIce wrote:
Enigma wrote:Gnomes are the most useless weapons ever!

Toss them and they just shatter. You can't even hurt a fly with one of those.
Sure you can!

And give us our GridFire rifles and we'll see who's useless then...

But, this is "modern" weapons, and I don't think Gnomes qualify as modern military weapons.

What 'you talking about? Plop a stone knife in front of a Gnome and he'll devastate an entire army while drinking tea and listening to New Age music

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2003-08-16 10:16pm

Captain tycho wrote:<snip>
What 'you talking about? Plop a stone knife in front of a Gnome and he'll devastate an entire army while drinking tea and listening to New Age music

HAH! Puny gnomes. One step and you're powder.

As for the most useless modern weapon? Chicken Cannon.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-08-16 10:19pm

Enigma wrote:
Captain tycho wrote:<snip>
What 'you talking about? Plop a stone knife in front of a Gnome and he'll devastate an entire army while drinking tea and listening to New Age music
HAH! Puny gnomes. One step and you're powder.

As for the most useless modern weapon? Chicken Cannon.

You know the chicken canon is a weapon of mass humiliation.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2003-08-16 10:31pm

Stupid thread hijackers.
Let's get back to the topic please.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2003-08-16 10:34pm

Captain tycho wrote:
Darth Garden Gnome wrote:Humans. We were promised robots by the year 2000 damnit!
*cough* We do have battle robots, it's just that they're disguised as...er....
coughwedonothaveanyrobotspleaseforgetwhateverisaidthisconversationnevertookplacecough*

I nominate the only weapon I have used and truly disliked, the M-79 grenade launcher. You load the grenades shot-gun style, so it's a bitch to reload while in battle.
There are tons of other problems with the damn thing, so it's basicallly worthless in my opinion.
Not something you'd want to have along in a firefight.

A good soldier can reload an M-79 in about 3-4 seconds, so it's only really good in ranged combat. And believe it or not, that was it's purpose. Unlike in video games, you don't want to use grenade launchers at close range in real life.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2003-08-16 10:35pm

And anyway, the P-90 sucks ass. It jams so easily that if you drop it, you are fucked.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-08-16 10:39pm

YT300000 wrote:And anyway, the P-90 sucks ass. It jams so easily that if you drop it, you are fucked.

It might be good for American soldiers,sell these weapons to the enemy.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-08-16 10:45pm

YT300000 wrote:A good soldier can reload an M-79 in about 3-4 seconds, so it's only really good in ranged combat. And believe it or not, that was it's purpose. Unlike in video games, you don't want to use grenade launchers at close range in real life.

I'd say he probably knows the difference, being in the military.

Then again, it's the Air Force, so depending on what he does...maybe not.

Anyway, it is pretty useless. Sure, it's good for ranged combat, but what about when you get in close? Then it serves no useful purpose beyond as a blunt object. You'd have to carry another weapon with you, or sit out the fight and hope for the best.

Hence the M203. Much better, IMO. And since the thread's about the modern weapons, the M203 is available, so the M79 is now, essentially, worthless (and redundant), unless for whatever reason you don't have the M203.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-08-16 10:52pm

Captain tycho wrote:Stupid thread hijackers.
Let's get back to the topic please.

Thank you.

I heard some pretty shitty things about the SA-80/L85 Assault Rifle. I get the feeling the Enfield EM-2 was far superior, but that's the breaks when your weapon is designed by an inept bureaucracy...

EDIT: /me rails the Typodemon in the FUCKING FOOT!

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2003-08-16 10:59pm

For the average soldier (who doesn't have an M-203) the M-79 is the best GL I know of. Other contenders (such as the MM1 or the MGL-Mk1) require the user to be extremely strong with a huge amount of endurance if they want to carry it and another weapon. With the M-79 you can still carry a small firearm (an MP7 is perfect for this role).

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-08-17 04:00am

I would say the Vietnam era M16 with an ordinance CF. or that one WWII anti tank weapon...

any time the round can be larger then the barrel it's going down is a BAD THING.

Gunny Culver has a point about one of the battles where the M16s were issued rounds that were bigger then the barrel, but fit into the magazines.

needless to say rifle won't work.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-08-17 12:26pm

Montcalm wrote: It might be good for American soldiers,sell these weapons to the enemy.

Don't blame America for that piece of shit, FN is Belgian.

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2003-08-17 12:44pm

P90. Just can't compete.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-08-17 12:51pm

YT300000 wrote:And anyway, the P-90 sucks ass. It jams so easily that if you drop it, you are fucked.

The P90 has its problems but for the mission it was intended for it is a decent weapon. There are far worse weapons out there.

As to the M79 and M203 issue. Apples and oranges really. The M203 is nice because it allows the soldier to have both an assault rifle and relatively accurate grenade launcher. On the other hand the M79 is much more accurate at long ranges and is actualy quicker to reload. Both have their strong points, both have weaknesses. The US military will be solving this problem shortly. The XM8 will have M203 capability while the military also developes the XM25, a magazine fed 25mm grenade launcher with 6-10 grenades and all of the XM29s capabilities in a smaller more efficent package. This will truly render the M79 an obsolete (but well designed for its time) weapon.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-08-17 12:52pm

Enough with the spam people. Any more references to gnomes and I nuke the post.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-08-17 01:56pm

To throw something unusual out there I'm going to say the British Dido class cruisers were at least amoung the worst. They where near unarmored, top heavy and had awful armaments. Despite having a completely DP main battery of 5.25 inch guns there awful high angle control systems made them near useless against aircraft and they had almost no light AAA. The guns lacked the punch of 6-inch weapons aginst surface targets as well. Course all British cruisers sucked against planes.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-08-17 02:12pm

The SA-80 is a great weapon, provided you only use it for indoor target practice. It is, from what I can say, the single worst assault rifle ever made, why the army went from the SLR to this bag-o-shit can only be to show support for the British company that made it.

I'm sure I could think of some equally bad weaponry given time, but I just needed to get that out of my system.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2003-08-17 02:24pm

The Bayonet is pretty impractical, but AV's right, the Shitty-80 is pretty damm awful AFAIK.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-08-17 02:27pm

Captain tycho wrote:
Darth Garden Gnome wrote:Humans. We were promised robots by the year 2000 damnit!
*cough* We do have battle robots, it's just that they're disguised as...er....
coughwedonothaveanyrobotspleaseforgetwhateverisaidthisconversationnevertookplacecough*

I nominate the only weapon I have used and truly disliked, the M-79 grenade launcher. You load the grenades shot-gun style, so it's a bitch to reload while in battle.
There are tons of other problems with the damn thing, so it's basicallly worthless in my opinion.
Not something you'd want to have along in a firefight.

Argh, here we go with the ruthless propaganda against the venerable M-79 as opposed to the M-203. The 203 is a crap weapon, the only saving grace it has is the fact that it is strapped to the bottom of a M-16. The quardrant sights are almost impossible to get good stock weld with and sight alignment and sight picture suffer horribly because of that. The leaf sight is a leaf sight so it make the M203 very much an area weapon in such that at high ranges, good luck getting a good hit. Reload rates with the M-203 are comparable with a M-79 so thats not an issue.

People are skimming over the purpose of the gernadier too. The make up of a fire team is supposed to spread the weapons load out. Not every man in a team can have ubber weaponary. Not every one can have every capability there is. The gernidier is not supposed to have in close weapons systems, he has the area weapon at range. Thats what he does.

An 0351 in the Marine Corps goes into to battle with the SMAW and a 9mm. He has no assualt rifle, no MP 5 or any such thing. He relys on his team mates for the rifle fire and they reley on him for the anti armor capability that he provides. Same with the gernadier, he provides a capability that the others can't and he relys on them to protect his ass too.

If they go ahead with the XM-25(?), I believe that the gernadier position will be once again a billet in the squad. If so, I doubt that he will get a rifle along with the gernade launcher. He'll more than likely get a M9.