USER PANEL



Login:
Password:

SEARCH 

ARCHIVE

«    Feb 2018    »
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728 

February 2018 (563)
January 2018 (681)
December 2017 (706)
November 2017 (727)
October 2017 (728)
September 2017 (696)

Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)

  • Category: Pics  |
  • 13 Oct, 2014  |
  • Views: 7457  |
  • Like
  • +22
  • Dislike  |
  •  
  •   

The Nazis may have been insane but if they had managed to get any of these weapons into action they probably would have taken over the world.

1 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


2 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


3 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


4 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


5 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)



6 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


7 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


8 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


9 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)


10 Insane Ideas For Nazi Weapons Of Destruction (10 pics)

Source


Do you like it?




№1 Author: Nick1090 (13 Oct 2014 09:40) Total user comments: 1257


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +3
  • Like
Doctor Evil was here.
  Reply       
№2 Author: taromaro (13 Oct 2014 12:16) Total user comments: 168


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +2
  • Like
Right, this ideas were so "insane", that most of them were developed by the US and USSR after the end of the war using the research material and German researchers.
  Reply       
№3 Author: Magicnet (13 Oct 2014 12:50) Total user comments: 189


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • -6
  • Like
taromaro,
taromaro,
Yes, they were insane. And no, none of these concepts was developed at all anywhere.

1)Have you seen a gun with a curved barrel? No, because if they were developing and testing them, they blew up and most likely killed the shooter. A curved barrel cannot work.

2)Ramming plane? Yeah, it would fall right from the sky after the first ram. Reinforced wings are heavy, thus slow, thus hard maneuverable, thus useless.

3)Kamikaze already existed in japan and way more effective than this shit.

4) An extremely heavy tank that bridges would collapse under? Wow, now that's useful technology. Except you'll have to leave it behind for enemies to find at every bridge.

5)Unguided missiles, wow now that's a novel concept. Except that such missiles were widely used in WW2 already by allied forces too...

6)Rocket U-boat - a concept that existed on all fronts.

7)A wooden cargo plane. Huge, extremely slow, extremely badly maneuverable and unable to carry cargo, because of it's weak material. Wow, much genious, so useful...

8)a rocket gattling gun with extremely low range. Wow, very useful to shoot at planes flying hundreds of meters up in the sky

9)A rocket plane that sets it's wings on fire. Wow ... God I can't even find new ways how to make fun of these things. That's the level of stupidity of these designs. Allied forces had as many active jet planes during the WW2 as the germans did. Germany: Arado Ar 234, Heinkel He 162, Messerschmitt Me 262. Allied: Gloster Meteor F.1 & F.3 (UK), Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star (US), Ryan FR Fireball (US).

9) and the mirror thing? Not possible today either. We still don't have the technology to anchor it aomewhere and keep it there to be effectively used.

Sio please tell me again, how these BRILLIANT ideas were supposed to tip the ballance of the war???
  Reply       
№4 Author: Charlie (13 Oct 2014 14:39) Total user comments: 0


  • Status:
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Magicnet,

1-This type of gun works not with a curved barrel but with the trigger system in 90 from the iron sight. Used mostly in pistols, and machine guns for CQB.

2,3-Ramming planes are desperation calls. Cheap planes, easy to pilot and safe for the pilots are the actual drones.

4-A problem over natural frontiers but undisputed champion at urban warfare.

5,6,9-Are u arguing that it was or wasnt developed somewhere else too?!?

7-Wow, there's must be a reason why it was delevoped and not used. Genius.

8-Very useful if you aim at the tanks lighter than 8Maus.

9-Yet.
  Reply       
№5 Author: styopa (13 Oct 2014 15:21) Total user comments: 1188


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
I don't disagree with your points, generally but 9 isn't really true.

Gloster Meteor was deployed in combat Jan 45, but only a squadron of 4 and they were forbidden to fly over Germany (which was pretty much most of the combat at that time).
Because of delays in delivery of production aircraft, the Shooting Star saw no actual combat during WW2.
FR-1 Fireball equipped a single squadron before the end of the war, but did not see combat.

OTOH, of the Me262 alone, nearly 300 saw combat and the aircraft claimed something around 500-600 kills, depending on who you believe.
  Reply       
№6 Author: Phynix4 (13 Oct 2014 15:59) Total user comments: 5461


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +1
  • Like
ideas, just ideas. all part of R&D that makes break-throughs in technology and materials. gotta start somewhere.-
  Reply       
№7 Author: LewisJones (13 Oct 2014 20:59) Total user comments: 2181


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
the curved barrel gun does exist, the bullet fragments and the effective range is short (and its useless with any shot not around corners) but they were made and used....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K
rummlauf
  Reply       
№8 Author: Brak61 (13 Oct 2014 21:04) Total user comments: 680


  • Status: User offline
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • +2
  • Like
So Hitler, like Wile E. Coyote, was a big fan of ACME Corporation. :10:
  Reply       
№9 Author: Grommo (15 Oct 2014 12:36) Total user comments: 0


  • Status:
  • Activity rewards:
  • Dislike
  • 0
  • Like
Number 1 and number 9 are the exact same plane, the fieseler reichenberg. Both entries are factually incorrect. In all tests of the Reichenberg it was dropped from a mothership bomber in the same manner as Chuck Yeagher's Bell X1. The Reichenberg was pulsejet rather than rocket propelled and had no ejector seat. It was to be just loaded up with explosives and flown to target with the pilot having the option of bailing out at the unlikely last seconds. The motivation was that the automated V1 buzzbomb cruise missiles were quite easy to observe and their flight paths possible to anticipate long before hand and intercept despite their very high speed . A manned flying bomb could change direction.
The test problems were in fact related to trying to land it for pilots in training, and the problem was its very high stall speed requiring a landing at over 200km/hr. This was analysed and solved by female test pilot Hanna Reitsch who reproduced landing procedures at high altitude and had sufficient altitude to recover from a stall.
  Reply       

Add comment

Name:

E-Mail:


bold italic underlined strike Ensert smilies
Type the two words shown in the image: