The World's Worst Weapons - book I got for Christmas

[Raellus]

Despite the Stuka's already-mentioned shortcomings, it did continue to serve ably in the CAS and tank-busting roles on the Eastern Front until the Soviets gained air superiority in '44. In some ways, the JU-87 is a spiritual ancestor to today's A-10 Warthog and SU-25.

The AK-47 is widely considered to be the most influential weapon system of the entire 20th century and it will continue to serve well into the 21st. There are no less than three books (not technical manuals, mind you) entirely devoted to the historical significance of the the AK series currently on the shelf at B&N, including the bestselling The Gun, which I just recently finished (it was quite good). Claiming that the AK is one of the world's worst weapons is like claiming that cigarettes are good for your health. That's the kind of senstationalist revisionism that bad historians use to get published. I think that this is an author that I will stay well away from.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The AK-47 is widely considered to be the most influential weapon system of the entire 20th century and it will continue to serve well into the 21st. There are no less than three books (not technical manuals, mind you) entirely devoted to the historical significance of the the AK series currently on the shelf at B&N, including the bestselling The Gun, which I just recently finished (it was quite good). Claiming that the AK is one of the world's worst weapons is like claiming that cigarettes are good for your health. That's the kind of senstationalist revisionism that bad historians use to get published. I think that this is an author that I will stay well away from.

The text for the AK47, in case anyone cares:

Firing a short 7.62x39mm cartridge on semi- or full-automatic modes, the AK47 was one of the first assault rifles in the world, and in many ways it is not a good weapon. Its recoil is unpleasant; it is awkward to use with the cocking handle on the wrong side and a counterintuitive fire selector switch. It is also not very accurate.

And yet due to the incredibly robust and almost totally idiotproof design, the 'AK' has gone on to be a world-beater. It is particularly popular with conscript armies and militia.

Then why is it in a book titled "World's worst weapons"?

[copeab]

The Panzer I was designed as a training tank for the Wehrmacht; it was really not intended to be used in combat. However, September 1939 caught the Germans short of real tanks like the Panzer III and Panzer IV (the Panzer II was really too light, but a skilled commander could disable other tanks with it's 20mm gun).

(I do like to have some Panzer I's if I play the Germans in Steel Panthers, viewing them as armored MG nests on defense and expendable 'the enemy is here!' flags on offense).

I would consider the Tiger II a worse tank than the Tiger I. Every bad thing about the original was magnified in the sequel.

Worst airplane? Well, the Me 163 Komet killed more of it's pilots than Allied fighters did. The Ba 249 Natter was an even worse idea. However, this title possible goes to the Breda Ba.88 Lince (lynx), a twin engine fighter bomber. Several hundred were built based on prototype performance. However, once military equipment was added in the production models, performance dropped off to deathrap levels. In the end, those that survived the first few attempts to use them in combat were stripped of useful gear and left around airfields, to confuse photo-reconnaisance and serve as targets for the British to waste bombs on.

As for the counterintuitive selector on the AK-47, I've heard that explained that the gun was primarily intended as an automatic rifle, so auto on the first setting off safe was a logical extension of this (OTOH, the M16 was meant to primarily fire single, aimed shots, so it's selector settings were single before auto). No idea if this is true.

[mikeo80]

I am curious.

Did the book discuss the Douglas TBD Devistator?

Outdated in 1941, destroyed in droves during Midway, but the death of the Devistators is credited with opening the window in the Zero CAP that allowed the Dauntless dive bombers to sink thee Japanese carriers in five-ten minutes.

Granted there were MANY tactical errors made by Nagumo during Midway.

My $0.02

Mike

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by mikeo80

I am curious.

Did the book discuss the Douglas TBD Devistator?

Outdated in 1941, destroyed in droves during Midway, but the death of the Devistators is credited with opening the window in the Zero CAP that allowed the Dauntless dive bombers to sink thee Japanese carriers in five-ten minutes.

Granted there were MANY tactical errors made by Nagumo during Midway.

My $0.02

Mike

It did not. it did list the brewster buffalo, though.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

It did not. it did list the brewster buffalo, though.

OTOH, the Finns had a lot of success with their version of the Buffalo (denavilized) against the Soviets.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by mikeo80

I am curious.

Did the book discuss the Douglas TBD Devistator?

Outdated in 1941, destroyed in droves during Midway, but the death of the Devistators is credited with opening the window in the Zero CAP that allowed the Dauntless dive bombers to sink thee Japanese carriers in five-ten minutes.

Granted there were MANY tactical errors made by Nagumo during Midway.

Admittedly, though, torpedo bombers had to fly low and slow for th emost part, and couldn't take defensive maneuvers until after they finished their (long( attack run -- everyone's torpedoes bombers were vulnerable to enemy fighters.

(IIRC, either all or all but one of the TBF Avengers used at Midway were also lost; a lot of this could be traced to the poor performance of the American air-dropped torpedo)

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by copeab

As for the counterintuitive selector on the AK-47, I've heard that explained that the gun was primarily intended as an automatic rifle, so auto on the first setting off safe was a logical extension of this (OTOH, the M16 was meant to primarily fire single, aimed shots, so it's selector settings were single before auto). No idea if this is true.

Poorly-trained and adrenalized troops don’t always have a delicate touch. The selector lever on the AK-47 is designed such that a startled, excited infantryman will tend to slam the lever all the way to the bottom of its range of movement when taking the weapon off SAFE. Combine this with the tendency of the same kind of soldier to depress the trigger and hold it back until the magazine is empty, and the best-case scenario is a waste of ammunition. The Soviets concluded that it was better for their infantry to fire a single shot if they were reacting strongly to stimuli on the battlefield.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Poorly-trained and adrenalized troops don’t always have a delicate touch. The selector lever on the AK-47 is designed such that a startled, excited infantryman will tend to slam the lever all the way to the bottom of its range of movement when taking the weapon off SAFE. Combine this with the tendency of the same kind of soldier to depress the trigger and hold it back until the magazine is empty, and the best-case scenario is a waste of ammunition. The Soviets concluded that it was better for their infantry to fire a single shot if they were reacting strongly to stimuli on the battlefield.

Ah, okay, I thought the AK positions were: safe, auto, single while the M16 were safe-single-auto

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by copeab

Ah, okay, I thought the AK positions were: safe, auto, single while the M16 were safe-single-auto

Exactly.

As far as the recoil goes on full auto I've used a Valmet converted into a 7.62X39mm Galil SAR clone and I found it to be minute of car door at 100m.