What are some of the most bizarre and never-used weapons in history?

  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
In summary: Dragonfly. In summary, the "Dragonfly" was a WW2 German experimental aircraft designed to fly fast and low, using its thrust-vectoring capabilities to dodge enemy fire. Despite being successful, the project was cancelled before it could be put into production.
  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,142
1,756
[Top ten] Best: Never-Used Weapon Systems, From the USSR's Ekranoplan to the Puckle Gun

...8. Bat Bomb
Aiming to end World War II, the Pentagon sponsored a project to release time-bomb-laden bats over Japan. The mammals would nestle in the nooks of buildings, where their incendiaries would eventually ignite. Little Boy and Fat Man beat them to the punch. [continued]
http://www.wired.com/culture/design/magazine/16-05/st_best

And one of my favorites: The Great Panjandrum
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=114542
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I like the "Puckle Gun" :biggrin:

I wonder what shape he'd have chosen for atheists? :rofl:
 
  • #3
How many pounds of explosives could bats possibly lift?
 
  • #4
waht said:
How many pounds of explosives could bats possibly lift?

lol About six billion in appropriations worth.
 
  • #5
I remember hearing about one during the Viet Nam era--late 60's or early 70's in the 'hippie era': It was a variation of a grenade, but they spend who knows how much trying to make the 'new' grenade with the design of a Frisbee. I can't remember if the war ended first, or projected time was extended so often for 'munchies' breaks that it got too expensive.
 
  • #6
It might have been George Carlin, but I can't remember for sure. Anyhow, it was a bit about the US Army developing a nuclear hand grenade that would devastate everything within 500 yards of it. Unfortunately, the average soldier could only throw it 20 feet.
 
  • #7
no--it was an actual 'project' by the defense dept.---again, if I remember right, the DOD spent about 1/4 million on the idea before it was 'scrapped'
 
  • #8
The best weapon is always a never used weapon :smile:

I did once hear about a nuclear land mine developed during the cold war to be deployed in the USSR's path in Europe 'just in case'. The second biggest problem (the first being the uninhabitable atomic scar to be left between E & W Europe) was parts would stop working in the prolonged cold it would have to endure. A proposed solution was to fill the casing with live chickens, food and water. They would be able to keep it warm 'til it was needed.

I told a vegetarian that once, and her first comment was "oh those poor chickens!"
Yeah, worry about the chickens 'cause everyone else within 10k will be just fine :rolleyes:
 
  • #9
Danger said:
...a nuclear hand grenade that would devastate everything within 500 yards of it. Unfortunately, the average soldier could only throw it 20 feet.

<insert icon for "laughing so much you can't breathe" here>

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
  • #10
waht said:
How many pounds of explosives could bats possibly lift?

The bats were to have carried small incendiary devices. The idea was to start fires in Japan's wooden structure cities.

One of the most cruel ideas was used in Cuba. CIA operatives would take cats out to the sugar cane fields. They would then soak a long piece of cloth in kerosene and tie it to the cats tail. When they lit the cloth the cats would run wildly through the fields starting fires in the sugar cane crop.

We haven't always been the good guys.
 
  • #11
Another animal related one- I heard Russia once trained dogs to associate the underside of tanks with food with the intent of strapping bombs to them. Unfortunately they only learned to associate the underside of Russian tanks with food.
 
  • #12
phyzmatix said:
I like the "Puckle Gun" :biggrin:

I wonder what shape he'd have chosen for atheists? :rofl:

Dodecahedron, of course. :biggrin:
 
  • #14
[QUOTEWe haven't always been the good guys. [/QUOTE]

Yeah, HUGE surprise there...
 
  • #15
edward said:
We haven't always been the good guys.

Wanna try, haven't ever been the good guys? Remember that you Yanks were selling arms to Hitler until he declared war on the US the day after the Pearl Harbour attack. Nothing like having a strong social conscience, unless it gets in the way of profit.
 
  • #16
And it was the Canadians that marched on Berlin?

Who was selling arms to Hitler?
 
  • #17
Danger said:
Wanna try, haven't ever been the good guys? Remember that you Yanks were selling arms to Hitler until he declared war on the US the day after the Pearl Harbour attack...

...got Saddam into power...trained Osama...voted Bush in a second time ( )...sold the Easter Bunny to Playboy...

*sigh*

(ok, maybe not the last one :biggrin: )
 
  • #18
Although not really comical, I've always been fascinated by the experimental aircraft designs that the Luftwaffe was coming up with during WW2. One of my favorites is the Triebflugeljager project, better known as the Dragonfly.

http://home.wanadoo.nl/r.j.o/skyraider/gallery/trieb_3.jpg
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/AC/aircraft/Focke-Wulf-Triebflugel/info/assy.gif
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/AC/aircraft/Focke-Wulf-Triebflugel/info/assy.jpg

Neat video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqqQ48KFXJE&feature=related
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Ivan Seeking said:
And it was the Canadians that marched on Berlin?

Quite a few, yes. Let's not forget Normandy, the Battle of Britain, and a few other minor conflicts that didn't interest the US.

Ivan Seeking said:
Who was selling arms to Hitler?
Lockheed, General Motors, General Electric... pretty much the entire US military-industrial complex.

Since the title of this thread reminds me of a quote from the trailers, I'll mention that I'm now heading off to watch Iron Man. Don't anybody bother me for a couple of hours.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
Danger said:
Quite a few, yes. Let's not forget Normandy, the Battle of Britain, and a few other minor conflicts that didn't interest the US.

My point was that we were there as well and probably in larger numbers by a couple of orders of magnitude or more. To say that we have always been the bad guys is ludicrous.

Lockheed, General Motors, General Electric... pretty much the entire US military-industrial complex.

Do you have references for this? Were they selling weapons or just doing business? This claim seems inflated given that before the war, we weren't at war. Large companies do business all over the world in times of peace.

Was Canada doing business in Germany before the war?
 
Last edited:
  • #21
These weapons all suck ass. I am reading "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich, I recommend that over these msn nonsense articles written by people who only know what they saw on tv and then made a list. Skunk works gives you the real deal no BS of what went on in SWs.
 
  • #22
Cyrus said:
These weapons all suck ass. I am reading "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich, I recommend that over these msn nonsense articles written by people who only know what they saw on tv and then made a list. Skunk works gives you the real deal no BS of what went on in SWs.

How old is the book? Does it mention anything about Lockheeds morphing UAV?
 
  • #23
Cyrus said:
These weapons all suck ass.

Yes, they do. :cry:

Im reading "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich,

Wow!

I recommend that over these msn nonsense articles written by people who only know what they saw on tv and then made a list. Skunk works gives you the real deal no BS of what went on in SWs.

Absolutely, please ignore the article linked.
 
  • #24
B. Elliott said:
How old is the book? Does it mention anything about Lockheeds morphing UAV?

Book is copy 1994. But its really really good if you want to learn about the aircraft of the cold war, and what we had, and what the russians had. As opposed to a quick top ten list that really says nothing.
 
  • #25
Ivan Seeking said:
Wow!

I don't know if that's sarcasm or if you've read the book?

Absolutely, please ignore the article linked.


The problem with this list is that it does not really tell you anything about these weapons, or any context. I've seen these on a program on the history channel, so I'd hope the author of this article had enough knowledge not to simply write up what he saw on tv.

I also don't understand the title. "Best: unused weapons?" How are they the best?
 
  • #26
Ivan Seeking said:
Yes, they do. :cry:


Wow!


Absolutely, please ignore the article linked.


I'm still trying to figure out if you're being sarcastic or not...
 
  • #27
Cyrus said:
The problem with this list is that it does not really tell you anything about these weapons, or any context. I've seen these on a program on the history channel, so I'd hope the author of this article had enough knowledge not to simply write up what he saw on tv.

I also don't understand the title. "Best: unused weapons?" How are they the best?

There is no need to trash something that is intended to be light entertainment. Frankly, I for one don't have the time to waste reading a book about old weapons. I do take the time to skim interesting news items when I need a break. Again, the point is that this is just light entertainment. It is supposed to be fun.
 
  • #28
Ivan Seeking said:
There is no need to trash something that is intended to be light entertainment. Frankly, I for one don't have the time to waste reading a book about old weapons. I do take the time to skim interesting news items when I need a break. Again, the point is that this is just light entertainment. It is supposed to be fun.

Sorry Ivan. I am not trying to trash your thread, but the article really ticked me off that the guy literally ripped off a show from the history channel and published it.

If you skim this kind of stuff and want to fly in a Russian MIG at the edge of the earth, you'll love this book. Its very very interesting and a fast read, and its full of actual facts behind what went on. There is actual meat to digest on.
 

1. What makes a weapon the "best" even if it has never been used?

The term "best" is subjective and can vary depending on the context. In the case of never-used weapons, the term could refer to their potential capabilities and effectiveness, as well as their design and technological advancements.

2. Are there any ethical concerns surrounding the development of never-used weapons?

Yes, there are ethical concerns surrounding the development of never-used weapons. Some argue that creating such weapons could lead to an arms race and increase the risk of them being used in the future, while others believe that investing in these weapons takes away resources from other important areas such as healthcare and education.

3. How do scientists determine which weapons are the "best"?

Scientists and engineers use a variety of methods to evaluate the effectiveness and capabilities of a weapon. This can include computer simulations, laboratory testing, and field trials. Factors such as accuracy, range, and impact are taken into consideration when determining the potential effectiveness of a weapon.

4. Can never-used weapons be considered for use in the future?

Yes, never-used weapons can be considered for use in the future. However, it is important to carefully evaluate the potential consequences and ethical implications before making any decisions about their use.

5. What are some examples of never-used weapons?

Some examples of never-used weapons include the Tsar Bomba, a Soviet hydrogen bomb with a yield of 50 megatons, the Railgun, a high-velocity projectile launcher, and the Active Denial System, a non-lethal directed-energy weapon. These weapons have been developed and tested but have never been used in combat.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top