[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Home]
4chanarchives logo
What was the worst weapon ever made includig vehicles
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.

You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons

Thread replies: 18
Thread images: 4
File: giant pit.jpg (9 KB, 300x168) Image search: [Google]
giant pit.jpg
9 KB, 300x168
What was the worst weapon ever made includig vehicles
>>
Worst for who?
>>
>>30509319
Summer pls go
>>
>>30509319
ur mum
>>
phosgene
>>
File: A38.png (66 KB, 450x263) Image search: [Google]
A38.png
66 KB, 450x263
>>30509319
A38 became a symbol of how not to make a tank.
>>
File: image.jpg (668 KB, 1214x910) Image search: [Google]
image.jpg
668 KB, 1214x910
>>30509319
Is this even a question?
>>
>>30509332
durrrr summer durrrrr
Probably advanced bioweapons. No way to contain spread, no way to treat the infected.
>>
>>30509319
1911 in 45 ACP
>>
>>30509356
To be fair the INSAS is a good idea on paper it's just poos can't into standards.
>>
>>30509319
BIG BROWN DOG
>>
>>30509319
UCP

May not be a "weapon" but it's a piece of issued equipment so whatever.

It's seriously a colossal fucking failure, and a representation of the bloat of the modern pentagon

>Natick develops desert brush pattern
>works ridiculously well, performs near standards to multicam and marpat back in the early 2000's
>some fuckface general swoops in
>"we gotta go digital camo to impress the plebeians, so we can throw more of them at Iraqi's instead of getting actual useful camo which would be far more useful"
>while we're at it, let's take some random ass colors WHICH HAVE NEVER BEEN TESTED TOGETHER and ship it out
>the US Army sent out an untested camoflage pattern to combat troops without even checking to see if it worked

I know it's not correct but I blame UCP for the Middle East quagmire. It represents the disconnect between the pentagon and troops, the modern bloat syndrome we suffer from as a military, and worst of all, the sheer nepotism and incompetence of flag officers.
>>
>>30510648
>>works ridiculously well, performs near standards to multicam and marpat back in the early 2000's

It beat out Scorpion, or proto-Multicam
>>
File: Jenkem.jpg (136 KB, 720x931) Image search: [Google]
Jenkem.jpg
136 KB, 720x931
Chlorine trifluoride
Its the most hilariously dangerous shit, originally designed to melt the Maginot Line bunkers and fortresses. You just can't really do very much with it, because by the time you're running around with it somewhere, its probably eaten the container its in, caught on fire, burned everything around it extremely violently and then degraded into airborne bone melting fucking acidic gas.
>>
>>30509326
For U
>>
>>30510736
And yet now we have OCP.

why can't the army just uncuck us for once.
>>
>>30510648
>>30510736
Which pattern is this?
>>
>>30512653
Elaborate story:

So way back in the 2000's, we were pushing in everyone's shit in afghanistan with the shock and awe shit, and were actually trying in Iraq a few years later.

However, since the Marines' camo was doing a way better job (with recruiting as well) the army decided it was time to adopt a new camo.

At the Natick soldier center (where the army researches all the shit that eventually trickles down to the grunts, not where the cool devgru shit is done), they test out a bunch of camo, including the multicam precursor, desert camos, mossy oak (lmao) and a bunch of shit.

UCP (or the universal camo pattern), wasn't even a thing at the time. All the camo being tested were organic, non-digital patterns, such as brush. So when the winning pattern, or Desert-All over Brush was announced, the army decided no, we are going to take the color palette of a different failed prototype, slap it onto digital camo, and call it UNIVERSAL CAMOFLAGE PATTERN GREAT IDEA. Of course, when you sent this into the field without testing it, it sucks.

The army fucked up royally for whatever jackass reason, and suffered dearly. The urban color palette failed in afghanistan and Iraq, and there were attempts to rectify it. When they found it was shit, soldiers tried to dodge UCP, and special forces units quickly adopted Multicam as a superior alternative to UCP, if not other camo.

UCP subvariants, such as type-A UCP which was 'fine tooled' to afghanistan terrain, were issued to certain ranger groups and failed just as miserably. The Army eventually adopted what they called OEFPattern, or Multicam to do the job of camo in the middle east.

Now, OCP (Operational Camoflage Pattern) is being rolled out to the Army by 2018, which is a slightly modified version of multicam so that they can avoid paying fees. They also switched from Tan to Coyote as a main color for accessories, since it has tested better in various environments, such as rocky desert and foliage.
Thread replies: 18
Thread images: 4

banner
banner
[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at [email protected] with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.
DMCA Content Takedown via dmca.com
All images are hosted on imgur.com, send takedown notices to them.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.