Comments on: How to Rate a (Possibly) Stupid Weapon Idea

By: ANUP R. MAHESHWARI

ANUP R. MAHESHWARI — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:43:37 +0000

DEAR SIR, I ANUP R. MAHESHWARI HAVE DONE B.E.MECHANICAL .I FILED PATENT ON ‘SEA WAVE POWER GENERATION’.I HAVE DESIGN OF NEW GUN.I WANT TO MAKE CAREER IN WEAPON DESIGN .I TRIED MANY TIME IN USMILLITARY BUT THEY DONT GIVE ANY RESPONSE .NOW WHAT SHOULD I DO .PLEASE GUIDE ME.
THANK YOU.

By: Leafy

Leafy — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:31:59 +0000

I have never read such a lot of mind dumbing articles from imbicles in my life. No wonder you all shoot eachother and have this fascination with comspiracy plots. I suppose you are what your President is and you get what you deserve, hey Yanks you are all on a slippery slope to hell!
Ask the rest of the world what they think and then you may wake up your ideas of invincibility.

By: Senor Freebie

Senor Freebie — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 03:47:12 +0000

Kaltes:
How much have you looked into Metal Storm?
Are you aware that there is a version in development, intended for delivery for the Australian army, which significantly can be loaded just like an M-203 grenade launcher?
The reason I bring this up is because you went on about the barrel loading aspect a fair bit. Let me put this to you as a concept. Imagine an M-203 attachment which weighed the same as an M-203. Then take 2 of the grenades in the soldiers pack and add that weight to the launcher, allowing the soldier to fire 3x40mm grenades on semi-automatic.
Is this not the concept the US was attempting to complete with the OICW? Is it not lighter? Does it not deliver more punch? In fact doesn’t it aleviate the EXACT short-comings of the OICW project which caused it to be canned?
Additionally, on the issue of paying foreign companies, have you checked out the components in your Abrams lately? Or how about those fancy new Strykers? What about the Harriers or for that matter pretty much every Jet Engine in the USAAF.

By: walter huffman

walter huffman — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:24:34 +0000

How does this one sound as A air born barrer that flotes like A balloon.Please consider A milar bag A large one with A smaller one inside elecrticaly insulated forming A capicitor filled with Helium gas with A capulary tube for longer deployement each with A coper wire conected they form A grid wall located several feet apart.as the wires cut the magnetic lines of force as the planet rotates A high voltage charge is built up and stored in each nodiul anything hitting this shield would discharge this charge doing damage to itself.A whole border could use this grid inexpensively what ya think???Like A tholian web on Star treck.

By: Phil Baker

Phil Baker — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 01:43:26 +0000

I finished a 25 year military career as a US Army Warrant Officer; a technical expert in my field, who served in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa, as a military advisor… I have a BS in computer science, and am now working on my MBA… my IQ is significantly higher than 90… and the vast majority of military personnel I served with during my career were capable of understanding, maintaining, and using all high-tech weapons systems in combat. Most had, or were getting, a college degree.
This included computer systems, radars, missiles, and higher classified weapons… Now; when we debate the value of the concept of a new weapon such as Metal Storm, please, please, sirs, do not stoop to idealogically motivated contempt for US Military personnel… we are not stupid for having volunteered to serve. We had to pass intensive IQ tests, and aptitude tests to qualify for careers on technically advanced equipment.
I was a subordinate of Gen Wm Goodpaster at Nato HQ (SHAPE) in Belgium; a more intelligent and superbly educated man does not exist anywhere in the world… and I am not stupid either, thank you. Oh, yes; one year after my retirement I rose to the level of General Manager of an American corporate division in North Africa.
By the way; Metal Storm seems to be an idea that is looking for a reason to exist… a niche solution, at best.

By: Punisher1

Punisher1 — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 01:23:35 +0000

I’ve looked into Metal Storm a couple of years back and they have come up with some interesting items. Some are good Ideas others are not.
First off there weapon systems are simple. Nothing too complicated. No bulky feed systems that get jammed, a simplified system that could work for a few applications but not all.
Mostly I could see them as a disposible weapon that coulbe be dropped off and used in various ways and or a qick change grenade launcher. Strapped to a combat drone is not a half bad idea eathier.
Beyond that I think it’s all Hype.

By: David hambling

David hambling — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 10:31:02 +0000

Seriously though, there are two problems with trying to spot the stupid weapon in advance:
1) Even after the event, it’s hard to get people to agree on what the stupid weapons are. 5.56mm assault rifles? B-2 bomber: black & white elephant or outstanding warplane? Depleted uranium penetrators…?
2) Everyone makes outrageous claims for products in order to sell them, whether it’s a five-bladed razor or a new missile. With any multi-billion projects there’s a usual curve of starting with sci-fi expectations which gradually get whittled down as it nears delivery.
And when I say outrageous claims, I mean outrageous: look at the people claiming that the B-2 really does incorporate antigravity drive (knocked of from Zeta Reticulan tecnhology)
In other words, you can’t judge a product by its marketing or it’s silliest supporters. Metalstorm, by using the ‘million rounds a minute’ slogan, have attracted plenty of publicity but danegrously over-inflated expectation.
The product itself looks decent enough for special-purpose applications — not a replacement for existing systems but good for certain niche requirements.

By: Kaltes

Kaltes — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 07:09:01 +0000

Metal Storm sucks.
Being forced to carry around whole barrels factory-loaded with ammunition if you want more ammunition, instead of simply carrying more ammo, is terrible and inefficient. Being forced to rely on reloading barrels in a factory is even worse.
The barrel(s) is/are the heaviest component of any given weapon, swapping magazines for additional barrels adds tremendous additional weight as the amount of ammo capacity needed increases. And for what? Being able to shoot off all your ammo at once? This is a GOOD thing? No… No it is not. Sure, blow all your ammo in less than a second so your weapons system is now useless until you send it back to a factory to get reloaded…
Metal Storm is CRAP. I can’t think of any situation where conventional weaponry would be able to do a better job much more cheaply and efficiently.
Also, it is Australian teachnology, so screw paying a foreign company license fees until the system fully proves its worth (which it never will).

By: Herschel Smith

Herschel Smith — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:39:58 +0000

Noah (the other one), I know exactly how my comments make me look. I meant what I said. The individual to whom I was talking discussed the alleged Bush administration's long admiration of Nazi Germany and facistism (sic). Not only is such a notion completely irrlevant to the post, but he doesn't know that. He just made that up. Such a comment also throws a highly charged political allegation into a technical discussion, blurring the lines in an educated (supposedly) discussion. He also alleges that no one in the military (or at least the ones operating weapons systems) has an IQ above 90. He doesn't know that. He just made that up. Further, he doesn't know what IQ it would take to operate the final system if it ever were to be deployed. He just made that up too. Even if there were a direct correlation between HS graduation and IQ (which is dubious at best), he doesn't even begin to demonstrate that the weapons systems operators would have a decreased IQ compared to any time in the past, nor does he demonstrate what the present IQ is or would be. Further, he casts doubt on the ability of U.S. troops to operate such a system when it hasn't been proven. He just made that up too. On the other hand, my post pointed in the direction of metal fatigue, stress corrossion cracking, parts and components reliability, etc., i.e., the system itself, not the people who operate it. The person making the post casts aspersions on individuals whom he does not know and whose capabilities he knows nothing about. Talking bad about people you don't know. That's not only easy and convenient, its irrational.

By: rabidfox

rabidfox — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:50:48 +0000

I have another one: Add 100 pts if a politician wants it but DOD doesn’t.