Go to a Tech College (I don't know where you are so I can't suggest one), and take "Intro to Maya". It will help you with everything you just said you're at fault to.Knifewounds said:
Top ten greatest weapons in history
- Thread starter Knifewounds
- Start date
Aww, the M1911A1 only makes an appearance at #8?
If Tom Hanks can blow up a tank with one, I think it deserves a slightly higher spot.
I'm going to go with the liscenced Australian version of the fabrique national FAL. The self loading rifle.
It had as much hitting power as the AKM and was almost as easy to produce.
It was more accurate than the armalite series and was easier to maintain.
With a simple addition of a matchstick, it could be converted to fully automatic. This could be done in the field.
It's nickname was not 'the scorpian' or 'the peacemaker' by the diggers, it was called the *****. It didn't need to justify itself, because it was the *****.
And finally, behind it was an Australian digger, the only soldier more at home in the jungle than the Viet Cong. Which is strange, because our only Jungles are in Queensland and the first experiance most have of a rainforest is Canungra.
It had as much hitting power as the AKM and was almost as easy to produce.
It was more accurate than the armalite series and was easier to maintain.
With a simple addition of a matchstick, it could be converted to fully automatic. This could be done in the field.
It's nickname was not 'the scorpian' or 'the peacemaker' by the diggers, it was called the *****. It didn't need to justify itself, because it was the *****.
And finally, behind it was an Australian digger, the only soldier more at home in the jungle than the Viet Cong. Which is strange, because our only Jungles are in Queensland and the first experiance most have of a rainforest is Canungra.
uhh, no I didn't. Yes I do like anime, but I know whats real, and whats not. What I do know from my experiences with a katana is that it is far from being as weak as that. I took apart a rusty junkyard car with it before it started getting dull. Calling it useless in a battle outside of duels isn't true ether. After all Miyamoto Musashi took on a clan of samurai while using the kenjutsu technique that involves wielding two katana (all of which is documented history) Uhh, in hind sight most swords usually do get dull pretty fast so its hardly worth dwelling on.dathwampeer said:
How could you have ignored the Colt Paterson or Smith and Wesson model 1?
Being the first cartridge firing revolver, the Smith and Wesson model 1 pretty much nailed the last err nail in the coffin for steel weaponry.
It was the gun that changed warfare as we know it from slash slash to shoot shoot.
Being the first cartridge firing revolver, the Smith and Wesson model 1 pretty much nailed the last err nail in the coffin for steel weaponry.
It was the gun that changed warfare as we know it from slash slash to shoot shoot.
I will expand the ICBM to include all state-sponsored means of employing strategic or tactical nuclear weapons.Knifewounds said:
A perfectly valid argument exists that the ICBM and nuclear weapons (whether delivered by submarine, bomber, or missile) are being used all the time - by creating such fear of an attack that conventional warfare between nations which have such weapons has all but disappeared. Ideally, no weapon should be used.
The ability to deliver a nuclear counterattack renders warfare between two states virtually impossible. If the weapon is judged on the merits of "can this weapon fulfill its role?" and the role is, "scare anyone with sense into refraining from conventional warfare," then the answer is yes. These weapons have caused the biggest changes in strategic thinking in history. Nothing, nothing, ever, has changed how strategists have thought of war as dramatically as nuclear arms.
I guess I'm the only fan of things like napalm and high explosives?
Not saying a man walking up to me in a fight with a katana isn't respectable, but just if I'm going to pick anything I want the most damage in the smallest amount of time, and it doesn't take long to split a atom!
Not saying a man walking up to me in a fight with a katana isn't respectable, but just if I'm going to pick anything I want the most damage in the smallest amount of time, and it doesn't take long to split a atom!
The Fedorov Avtomat is the precursor to the modern assault rifle.Starke said:
I'm really tempted to go on a tyrannical rant about all the bullshit people are spewing in this thread and all the armchair soldier garbage being thrown around, but I really don't want to give myself an aneurysm so instead I'll just say this:
Just because you saw a Discovery Channel special about a weapon once doesn't make you an expert. Just because you own a weapon does not mean you know anything about that weapon. Just because you saw it on TV does not mean it's correct. Most of you probably don't even know how to swing a sword correctly nor spend enough time at the range to really have a firm grasp of firearms. It's safe to say most of you really shouldn't even be posting in this thread.
It wasn't directed at you, it was a rant directed to everyone else. Sorry if you got that impression.Starke said:So long as that rant wasn't directed at me.TOGSolid said:The StG44 thing was more because I wasn't willing to burn the time to verify, hence the probably. Though, now that I think about it BAR is another possible contender.
Most people haven't even heard of the Fedorov Avtomat. Hell, for a while I thought the StG44 was the first until I did some reading about assault rifles. The Avtomat was a select fire, shoulder fired weapon with a detachable, 25 round box magazine that fired the 6.5x50 Arisaka round. The Avtomat launched in 1915 making it the earliest weapon of this sort ever made.
You're trying to sound impressive. It's not working. Musashi founded the two sword technique known as Niten Ichi-ryū. Kenjutsu is a general term that means the Art of the Sword and encompasses various traditional Samurai sword arts.Knifewounds said:
Musashi won his fights because the way he fought was his own. The people he fought could not think outside the box due to the rigidity of their traditional training which allowed them to be easily picked apart.
Okay, I'll post.
#10 Stone Spear Point - Look at the Clovis people.
#9 Long bow - oh yeah.
#8 percussion cap rifles - revolutionized warfare.
#7 Center fire cartridges - yep, hello bolt action rifles and all modern long arms.
#6 Maxim machine gun - yep, changed warfare yet again
#5 Tanks - the advent of Armour has had enormous repercussions across all military's today.
#4 Airplanes - Yeah, completely changed warfare forever
#3 Aircraft Carrier - projection of power much?
#2 Cruise missiles - so you can reach out and tough somebody.
#1 Nuclear Weapons - Cold war anyone? Largest impact on modern history.
#10 Stone Spear Point - Look at the Clovis people.
#9 Long bow - oh yeah.
#8 percussion cap rifles - revolutionized warfare.
#7 Center fire cartridges - yep, hello bolt action rifles and all modern long arms.
#6 Maxim machine gun - yep, changed warfare yet again
#5 Tanks - the advent of Armour has had enormous repercussions across all military's today.
#4 Airplanes - Yeah, completely changed warfare forever
#3 Aircraft Carrier - projection of power much?
#2 Cruise missiles - so you can reach out and tough somebody.
#1 Nuclear Weapons - Cold war anyone? Largest impact on modern history.
The "greatest" weapons in history were often not the best of their kind (assuming we can even settle on what "best" means, and whether or not we want to discuss specific makes and models or broad weapon-types). The greatest weapons were those that changed warfare the most. The AK-47, while a fine weapon in the right hands, is not the greatest--I'm sure others have been more reliable, or more accurate, or more powerful, or some combination of these. Neither was the AK-47 the first of its kind. But it was a revolutionary weapon in a lot of ways--partly because it was one of the most powerful firearms a revolutionary could reliably get their hands on. Cheap to manufacture, durable and long-lasting, any tiny insurrectionist could suddenly have an amount firepower in his hands that, only fifty years earlier, was almost always restricted to a small gun carriage and water-cooling. That was the powerful lesson of the AK-47, and what makes it important.
In the Middle Ages the crossbow, although outperformed by the English longbow in rate-of-fire, and often range and accuracy, was closer to the AK-47 of its time. Pikes (which had been around for a long damn time, I might add) and other long pole-arms, though too clumsy to be used as an individual weapon, allowed Flemish peasants defeat heavily-armed, armored, and better-trained French men-at-arms.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's actually more rare that the weapon itself is what really matters, it's the world it's born into--for every weapon that's changed the face of warfare, there's an arguably 'better' weapon that has ultimately done nothing (see: the Brown Bess musket versus the Ferguson Rifle in the American War of Independence). That's stating the obvious, but I think it's important to note in this sort of thread, which tends to devolve into weird apples-to-oranges comparison and mildly disturbing weapon-fanboyism.
"The katana is the best sword ebber, it's all about honor and being able to cut Korean children in half it's so sharp!"
"Nonsense, the katana is ineffective against mail, one of the earliest and least-developed of Medieval armors, clearly it is a sissy weapon for girly girls!"
NOTE: The above examples are caricatures made for humor, not meant as an attack on anyone.
In the Middle Ages the crossbow, although outperformed by the English longbow in rate-of-fire, and often range and accuracy, was closer to the AK-47 of its time. Pikes (which had been around for a long damn time, I might add) and other long pole-arms, though too clumsy to be used as an individual weapon, allowed Flemish peasants defeat heavily-armed, armored, and better-trained French men-at-arms.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's actually more rare that the weapon itself is what really matters, it's the world it's born into--for every weapon that's changed the face of warfare, there's an arguably 'better' weapon that has ultimately done nothing (see: the Brown Bess musket versus the Ferguson Rifle in the American War of Independence). That's stating the obvious, but I think it's important to note in this sort of thread, which tends to devolve into weird apples-to-oranges comparison and mildly disturbing weapon-fanboyism.
"The katana is the best sword ebber, it's all about honor and being able to cut Korean children in half it's so sharp!"
"Nonsense, the katana is ineffective against mail, one of the earliest and least-developed of Medieval armors, clearly it is a sissy weapon for girly girls!"
NOTE: The above examples are caricatures made for humor, not meant as an attack on anyone.