Stupid things your friends have said relating to military equipment.

[Zad Fnark]

My favorite is when my friends insist AK-47s are about the most accurate rifle in existence.

Someone I used to work with claimed to have owned a "national match" AK. Maybe there is such a thing, but it seems oxymoronic. My feeling is that it wouldn't be an AK anymore.

ZF-

[dundonrl]

Someone I used to work with claimed to have owned a "national match" AK. Maybe there is such a thing, but it seems oxymoronic. My feeling is that it wouldn't be an AK anymore.

ZF-

the AK-47, was designed (someone correct me if I'm wrong) with sloppy tolerances, so that it would operate under almost any condition?

[HoratioNelson]

I'm not actually in the Forces (not yet anyways), but I am something of an aficianado for gear and such.

Just last Sunday, on the bus to a Cadet biathlon practice, I overheard a few first years discussing what kind of rifle we'd be using. Now, for Air Cadet biathlon, we used a .22LR. Either an SMLE modified to fire a .22 cartridge, or a Fortner action rifle. I prefer the SMLE, but that's neither here nor there. Being a sergeant, I decided to inform them.

"Usually we fire .22s, either an Enfield or a Fortner action"

And the response

"Aww, but I thought biathlon was done with the Barrett .50 cal"

And my reaction

[RustyBattleship]

Oh dear. I have quite a few Myth Busters to tell also.

The absolute, worst and highly anti-American is one person's theory on the Port Chicago explosion. In WW II, Port Chicago was an ammunition depot just across the river at Benicia, California. Something went wrong and two ammunition ships exploded with a terrific force sending up a huge "igloo" of water spray with a mushroom cloud emerging from it.

Well, there was some terrible racist legal actions following that relating to the fact that most of the ammunition handlers were black and whities didn't care if they got blown up or not. But that's not the problem I want to discuss.

The problem is, during my research on Port Chicago I found a website by some scatter brain trying to demean the US Military by claiming the explosion was really a test of a Uranium Atomic Bomb.

He claimed that the military's position of the first detonation of the Uranium bomb was the one dropped on Hiroshima and was deployed without first being tested is untrue. His logic introduction was that no weapon would ever be used without testing it first such as the Los Alamos Plutonium bomb.

Therefore, according to his "reasoning" the Hirosima bomb was the second use of a Uranium bomb and Port Chicago was picked to be the test site of the first one.

I was very seriously considering writing a very strong rebuttal to his twist-minded story but decided he must be in some padded cell by now and would never see it.

[TopHatter]

the AK-47, was designed (someone correct me if I'm wrong) with sloppy tolerances, so that it would operate under almost any condition?

Yes, that's correct. I've seen a documentary where Mikhail Kalashnikov was describing his AK-47 design philosophy.

He emphatically narrated and mimed picking up a handful of sand, throwing it into the chamber, slamming the bolt closed and rifle still shooting.

His experiences during the Great Patriotic War probably taught him one or two things about dirt and mud.

[Masada]

I'm not actually in the Forces (not yet anyways), but I am something of an aficianado for gear and such.

Just last Sunday, on the bus to a Cadet biathlon practice, I overheard a few first years discussing what kind of rifle we'd be using. Now, for Air Cadet biathlon, we used a .22LR. Either an SMLE modified to fire a .22 cartridge, or a Fortner action rifle. I prefer the SMLE, but that's neither here nor there. Being a sergeant, I decided to inform them.

"Usually we fire .22s, either an Enfield or a Fortner action"

And the response

"Aww, but I thought biathlon was done with the Barrett .50 cal"

And my reaction

surely he was joking?

[Triple C]

Oh yeah, and there was this kid way back from high school who tried to argue that the Sherman tank was better than the M1 Abraham because it can overwhelm the latter "with superior numbers and mobility".

[HoratioNelson]

surely he was joking?

Well, from the tone of his voice, he was either dead serious, or one of those people who make jokes without sounding like they're making a joke at all.

[dundonrl]

Oh yeah, and there was this kid way back from high school who tried to argue that the Sherman tank was better than the M1 Abraham because it can overwhelm the latter "with superior numbers and mobility".

I wonder how many Sherman tanks it would take to destroy, (not just mission kill) an M1A2 SEP Abrams? a Dozen, two dozen? (yes the M1 gets to fight back..)

[tankie]

Oh yeah, and there was this kid way back from high school who tried to argue that the Sherman tank was better than the M1 Abraham because it can overwhelm the latter "with superior numbers and mobility".

take him outside and give him a slap , ask what about a sqd v a sqd ;)

[bolo121]

Not strictly speaking about military equipment but something even worse..
Pirating military terminology for use in Corporate doublespeak.
for example "Strategically leveraging our core competencies in order to achieve tactical success at the local market level" Bleh. :(

[TopHatter]

At the moment, I'm watching a Discovery Channel doc called Wings Over Afghanistan, mostly because I'll watch/listen to anything narrated by Will Lyman (he even responded to an email I sent him, too cool!)

It's a pretty run-of-the-mill doc until they show animation demonstrating how a laser-targeting system can transmit GPS coordinates for a JDAM strike.

First, they show a moving vehicle clattering along in the mountains and then very conveniently stop and park itself while a B-52 comes along and blows it away...but the (presumed) Taliban vehicle is a Jagdpanther!

Next, they start talking about the B-52 itself and poor Will has to read a script that claims "The B-52 first saw action in Korea"

Apparently B-52's are also time machines to be able to see action in a war that saw a ceasefire July 1953, but only became operational in squadron service 1955-1956!

I'm only 6 minutes into the doc and the constant facepalms are already starting to hurt. Dare I watch further?

[RustyBattleship]

At the moment, I'm watching a Discovery Channel doc called -------------------

I'm only 6 minutes into the doc and the constant facepalms are already starting to hurt. Dare I watch further?

Now you know what my feelings were when I wrote Chapter 13 (DSRV) debunking the supposedly "unbiased" informational programs and a certain book that not only was wrong but horribly misquoted on the incorrect TV shows.

For fantasy mystery I'll stick to NCIS and NCIS Los Angeles (love that Daniela Ruah in the L.A. spin-off).

[Blue]

Never figured this one out and literally just walked away from it, but i had a coworker (for a very short time) who claimed to be an American veteran. Served in the Army as a cannon-cocker but couldn't name a single arty piece and said he was issued an AK-47. And he managed to say this with a straight face. I thought the guy too stupid to even call him out on it, though I did start too, but just had to walk away. Its no fun beatin up retarded kids.

[Gus00]