The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare - We Are The Mighty
Articles

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Latente Flickr


In “The World’s Worst Weapons,” Martin Dougherty details the long history of over-ambitious, under-achieving weapons that failed to hit their mark.

From brass knuckle-knife-revolvers to rocket propelled ammunition, we’ve described the eight worst guns ever produced.

8. Sten gun MK II

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Half length portrait of a paratrooper carrying a Sten gun, having loaded it ready for immediate action. | Imperial War Museums via Wikimedia Commons

Unfortunately the Sten gun MK II tended to misfire frequently. Furthermore, there were reports of the gun’s bullets bouncing off of targets.

“At a time when Britain faced invasion and vast numbers of weapons were needed, the Sten was quick and easy to put together, and it was a lot better than nothing,” Dougherty wrote.

Country: United Kingdom

Entered service: 1940

Type: Submachine gun

Range: 230 feet

Capacity: 32 rounds

7. The Bazooka

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
US Army Signal Corps

One glaring problem with the bazooka was the massive flare it created when fired, which both exposed the shooters position and shot dust, debris, and flames back at the soldier firing the weapon. Later versions of the bazooka included a back blast shield.

“The best thing about the bazooka was that it formed the basis for better weapons that came along later,” Dougherty wrote.

Country: United States

Entered service: 1942

Type: Unguided antitank weapon

Range: Under 500 feet

Capacity: Single shot rocket launcher/ 3.5 pound explosive

6. LeMat grapeshot revolver

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
The LeMat grapeshot revolver. | Forgotten Weapons via YouTube

The LeMat grapeshot revolver is another great idea for the battlefield that suffered from poor execution. Designed as a cavalry weapon late in the US Civil War, the LeMat revolver stored 9 pistol rounds in a revolver set up, with an additional barrel and single shotgun shell in the middle.

The user would toggle the movable firing pin to select which round they wanted to fire. While it was a great idea in theory, in practice the guns proved to be poorly made.

Country: United States

Entered service: 1856

Type: Handgun

Range: 164 feet

Capacity:  9 rounds

5. Krummlauf

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
A soldier holds an extreme 90 degree version of the Krummlauf. | Public Domain

The Krummlauf looks like a good idea, if only the physics from Elmer Fudd cartoons held true in real life.

This gun was meant to shoot around corners with its curved barrel, between 30 and 45 degrees, and a mounted periscope sight on a fairly standard assault rifle.

After much time and money spent tinkering with the design, it was deemed too expensive and unsuccessful to produce on a larger scale.

Country: Nazi Germany

Entered service: 1945

Type: Longarm

Range: 6,561 feet

Capacity: 30 rounds

4. Chauchat

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Belgian machine gunner in 1918 guarding trench with the much-hated ChauChat. | Wikimedia Commons

In 1915 at the height of World War I, France’s Chauchat light machine gun exemplified everything a light machine gun should not be.

The weapon was both poorly manufactured to the point that it kicked like a mule. The firing mechanism frequently jammed, and even when it did work perfectly, the gun’s 20-round capacity was inadequate for combat.

Country: France

Entered service: 1915

Type: Support weapon

Range: 3,280 feet

Capacity: 20 rounds

3. Gyrojet

The Gyrojet pistol was one of the most creative ideas in modern history of firearms.

Gyrojet pistols used rocket propulsion to fire its ammunition. However, the guns were terribly inaccurate and were therefore discontinued.

Country: United States

Entered service: 1965

Type: Handgun

Range: 165 feet

Capacity: 6 rounds

2. Mars Pistol

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Two Mars pistols, which despite being manufactured within 13 serial numbers of each other have small but significant differences. | Forgotten Weapons via Youtube

Two Mars pistols, which despite being manufactured within 13 serial numbers of each other have small but significant differences.

At the beginning of the 20th century, inventors tried to create a self-loading pistol. Eventually, the Colt M1911 would become the standard, but before that, many mistakes, like the Mars pistol were made.

The Mars was very complicated to operate and ejected used cartridges directly into the shooters face.

“About 80 were made, after which the Mars quite rightly faded from the scene,” Dougherty wrote.

Country: United Kingdom

Entered service: 1900

Type: Handgun

Range: 131 feet

Capacity: 6 rounds

1. Apache pistol

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Apache revolver – Curtius Museum, Liège. | Latente Flickr

Perhaps no other gun on this list over promises and underperforms like the Apache pistol. This pistol appears to combine the effective ingredients of a knife, brass knuckles, and a small caliber revolver into a neat, fold-out package.

In practice none of the three components of the weapon deliver.

The brass knuckle component works well enough, but the knife is thin and flimsy on its hinge. The revolver, with virtually no barrel to speak of, is terribly under-powered and inaccurate.

Additionally, because of the unguarded trigger, the user is likely to accidentally fire the weapon often.

Country: United States

Entered service: 1880

Type: Personal defense

Range: Close combat

Articles

Former Delta Force officer says the elite military unit taught him you only have to be 70% certain before you act — here’s why

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare


Over more than 20 years in United States Army special operations, first as a Ranger and then a Delta Force operator, Dalton Fury learned that effective leaders never wait for perfect certainty to act.

Fury is the pseudonym he uses for both his nonfiction and fiction writing, since his time in the highly secretive Delta Force has required him to conceal his true identity.

In an emailed list of leadership lessons sent to Business Insider, Fury posited a hypothetical question before giving a surprising answer: “How much information or intelligence does a special operations unit need before they launch a high-risk kill or capture mission? I argue that very rarely will the intelligence picture be better than a 70% solution, and at that point action should be taken.”

Waiting for that extra 5-10% closer to 100% clarity only further closed the window of opportunity.

Fury argued that only after the American special forces and their elite allies adopted this 70% mentality were they able to finally take the steps that led to eliminating Al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

And though Fury operated in extreme situations on a battlefield, he said the “pull the trigger” mentality is as necessary in an office.

To Fury, leaders of special operators (spec ops troops) and corporate managers are placed in the same situation, where they need to make decisions with limited data, resources, and time.

“Special operators aren’t required for every problem set,” he wrote. “But, special operators are expected to manage risk, get on target, figure it out, and run it down even when the picture is sketchy.”

Articles

Patton’s famous speech was way more vulgar than the one in the movie

“I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” Well, that’s one way to make a speech.


 

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare

 

This was part of a famous speech General George S. Patton would deliver to troops before a battle, a screed historian Terry Brighton called “the greatest motivational speech of the war and perhaps of all time” in his book “Patton, Montgomery, Rommel: Masters of War.”

Patton would deliver the speech without notes, so it changed slightly each time. It was full of the “language of the barracks” and the men who listened to it loved every word of it.

Those are the men who attempted to write it down and put it in their memoirs. Those memoirs are the basis of the speech we are familiar with today.

Patton used the speech to try and motivate his men to fight like combat veterans. Brighton remarks that some officers thought the speech was too vulgar – and apparently Hollywood did too.

The film “Patton” does contain some of the language in Patton’s famous speech, but much of the original was changed or removed. When Patton’s nephew asked about the profanity, the military leader reportedly told him:

“When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember. You can’t run an army without profanity, and it has to be eloquent profanity. An army without profanity couldn’t fight its way out of a piss-soaked paper bag.”

While veterans and war movie buffs are probably very familiar with the opening of “Patton,” the real speech the general gave is worth a read of its own.

(Be advised: There is some epic profanity in the following text)

“Be seated.

Men, all this stuff you hear about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of bullshit. Americans love to fight. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big-league ball players and the toughest boxers. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. That’s why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Battle is the most significant competition in which a man can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base.

You are not all going to die. Only two percent of you right here today would be killed in a major battle. Every man is scared in his first action. If he says he’s not, he’s a goddamn liar. But the real hero is the man who fights even though he’s scared. Some men will get over their fright in a minute under fire, some take an hour, and for some it takes days. But the real man never lets his fear of death overpower his honor, his sense of duty to his country, and his innate manhood.

All through your army career you men have bitched about what you call ‘this chicken-shit drilling.’ That is all for a purpose — to ensure instant obedience to orders and to create constant alertness. This must be bred into every soldier. I don’t give a fuck for a man who is not always on his toes. But the drilling has made veterans of all you men. You are ready! A man has to be alert all the time if he expects to keep on breathing. If not, some German son-of-a-bitch will sneak up behind him and beat him to death with a sock full of shit. There are four hundred neatly marked graves in Sicily, all because one man went to sleep on the job — but they are German graves, because we caught the bastard asleep before his officer did.

An army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, and fights as a team. This individual hero stuff is bullshit. The bilious bastards who write that stuff for the Saturday Evening Post don’t know any more about real battle than they do about fucking. And we have the best team — we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit and the best men in the world. Why, by God, I actually pity these poor bastards we’re going up against.

All the real heroes are not storybook combat fighters. Every single man in the army plays a vital role. So don’t ever let up. Don’t ever think that your job is unimportant. What if every truck driver decided that he didn’t like the whine of the shells and turned yellow and jumped headlong into a ditch? That cowardly bastard could say to himself, ‘Hell, they won’t miss me, just one man in thousands.’ What if every man said that? Where in the hell would we be then? No, thank God, Americans don’t say that. Every man does his job. Every man is important. The ordnance men are needed to supply the guns, the quartermaster is needed to bring up the food and clothes for us because where we are going there isn’t a hell of a lot to steal. Every last damn man in the mess hall, even the one who boils the water to keep us from getting the GI shits, has a job to do.

Each man must think not only of himself, but think of his buddy fighting alongside him. We don’t want yellow cowards in the army. They should be killed off like flies. If not, they will go back home after the war, goddamn cowards, and breed more cowards. The brave men will breed more brave men. Kill off the goddamn cowards and we’ll have a nation of brave men.

One of the bravest men I saw in the African campaign was on a telegraph pole in the midst of furious fire while we were moving toward Tunis. I stopped and asked him what the hell he was doing up there. He answered, ‘Fixing the wire, sir.’ ‘Isn’t it a little unhealthy up there right now?’ I asked. ‘Yes sir, but this goddamn wire has got to be fixed.’ I asked, ‘Don’t those planes strafing the road bother you?’ And he answered, ‘No sir, but you sure as hell do.’ Now, there was a real soldier. A real man. A man who devoted all he had to his duty, no matter how great the odds, no matter how seemingly insignificant his duty appeared at the time.

And you should have seen the trucks on the road to Gabès. Those drivers were magnificent. All day and all night they crawled along those son-of-a-bitch roads, never stopping, never deviating from their course with shells bursting all around them. Many of the men drove over 40 consecutive hours. We got through on good old American guts. These were not combat men. But they were soldiers with a job to do. They were part of a team. Without them the fight would have been lost.

Sure, we all want to go home. We want to get this war over with. But you can’t win a war lying down. The quickest way to get it over with is to get the bastards who started it. We want to get the hell over there and clean the goddamn thing up, and then get at those purple-pissing Japs. The quicker they are whipped, the quicker we go home. The shortest way home is through Berlin and Tokyo. So keep moving. And when we get to Berlin, I am personally going to shoot that paper-hanging son-of-a-bitch Hitler.

When a man is lying in a shell hole, if he just stays there all day, a Boche will get him eventually. The hell with that. My men don’t dig foxholes. Foxholes only slow up an offensive. Keep moving. We’ll win this war, but we’ll win it only by fighting and showing the Germans that we’ve got more guts than they have or ever will have. We’re not just going to shoot the bastards, we’re going to rip out their living goddamned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We’re going to murder those lousy Hun cocksuckers by the bushel-fucking-basket.

Some of you men are wondering whether or not you’ll chicken out under fire. Don’t worry about it. I can assure you that you’ll all do your duty. War is a bloody business, a killing business. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them, spill their blood or they will spill yours. Shoot them in the guts. Rip open their belly. When shells are hitting all around you and you wipe the dirt from your face and you realize that it’s not dirt, it’s the blood and gut of what was once your best friend, you’ll know what to do.

I don’t want any messages saying ‘I’m holding my position.’ We’re not holding a goddamned thing. We’re advancing constantly and we’re not interested in holding anything except the enemy’s balls. We’re going to hold him by his balls and we’re going to kick him in the ass; twist his balls and kick the living shit out of him all the time. Our plan of operation is to advance and keep on advancing. We’re going to go through the enemy like shit through a tinhorn.

There will be some complaints that we’re pushing our people too hard. I don’t give a damn about such complaints. I believe that an ounce of sweat will save a gallon of blood. The harder we push, the more Germans we kill. The more Germans we kill, the fewer of our men will be killed. Pushing harder means fewer casualties. I want you all to remember that. My men don’t surrender. I don’t want to hear of any soldier under my command being captured unless he is hit. Even if you are hit, you can still fight. That’s not just bullshit either. I want men like the lieutenant in Libya who, with a Luger against his chest, swept aside the gun with his hand, jerked his helmet off with the other and busted the hell out of the Boche with the helmet. Then he picked up the gun and he killed another German. All this time the man had a bullet through his lung. That’s a man for you!

Don’t forget, you don’t know I’m here at all. No word of that fact is to be mentioned in any letters. The world is not supposed to know what the hell they did with me. I’m not supposed to be commanding this army. I’m not even supposed to be in England. Let the first bastards to find out be the goddamned Germans. Some day, I want them to rise up on their piss-soaked hind legs and howl ‘Ach! It’s the goddamned Third Army and that son-of-a-bitch Patton again!’

Then there’s one thing you men will be able to say when this war is over and you get back home. Thirty years from now when you’re sitting by your fireside with your grandson on your knee and he asks, ‘What did you do in the great World War Two?’ You won’t have to cough and say, ‘Well, your granddaddy shoveled shit in Louisiana.’ No sir, you can look him straight in the eye and say ‘Son, your granddaddy rode with the great Third Army and a son-of-a-goddamned-bitch named George Patton!’

All right, you sons of bitches. You know how I feel. I’ll be proud to lead you wonderful guys in battle anytime, anywhere. That’s all.”

That’s one speech I wish I could have been there for.

Articles

The Navy wants you to stop bringing drones from home

The Navy has released a message to its entire force telling them to please get their unmanned aircraft systems, or drones, certified before taking them to the skies in any capacity.


The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Sorry, drone with its own GoPro. You’ll have to get certified before you can go on missions. (Photo: Don McCullough, CC BY 2.0)

The all Navy administrative message released by the SecNav Ray Mabus reminds all Navy commanders that any aircraft owned, leased, or procured in any way by the Department of the Navy must gain an “airworthiness approval” before it can be flown in any capacity.

So, leave your commercial, off-the-shelf drones at home until you get them certified sailor (or Marine)!

The Naval Air Systems Command told WATM, “The airworthiness assessments of small [commercial off-the-shelf] UAS  focus on the safety of flight, which assesses risks to personnel and property on the ground and in the air, and that the system can be operated safely and safety risks are understood and accepted by the appropriate authority.”

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
This is not a chief throwing an unauthorized drone into the sea. This is just a sailor launching a drone that does have an airworthiness approval. (Photo: U.S. Navy Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Bill Dodge)

For everyone hoping that this announcement came because Lance Cpl. Schmuckatelli flew his drone into a Harrier engine while the big bird was attempting a vertical landing, no dice.

In their message to WATM, NAVAIR said that the ALNAV was released to alert UAS operators to existing policies because cheap, commercial drones had allowed Navy organizations who wouldn’t typically buy aircraft to do so.

The Navy is trying to bring these non-traditional aviators up to speed, not responding to Seaman Skippy’s assertion that no one had specifically said he couldn’t fly a drone over the carrier during flight ops.

Commanders with a full inventory of drones without airworthiness approvals don’t have to panic, though. NAVAIR said that it has streamlined the approval process for small, commercial drones and it can take as little as a few days.

Some factors could cause it to take much longer, such as if the drone will be used for an especially challenging purpose or in a dangerous operating environment.

Those who are curious can read the full ALNAV here.

Articles

This is what each lifesaving item does in a Marine’s first aid kit

The purpose of combat is to deny the enemy control an area by inflicting the largest loss of life possible. When a friendly troop is wounded on the battlefield, the first step in first aid is to remove the enemy through violence or repel them long enough to retrieve the Marine and bring them to safety. This is the primary reason why Corpsmen have a rifle – to protect their patient during Tactical Field Care. The best thing a Marine can do to immediately help a casualty is kill the aggressor.

An Individual First Aid Kit (IFAK) is to be used on yourself, not for others. Therefore, every troop is issued an IFAK and must wear them consistent with their battalion’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). First Aid and Combat Life Saver drills are regularly trained in the infantry to the point where they can be done in the dark. Additional items can be added but these essentials cannot be taken out.

Marines across all ranks are trained in the use of these items, considerations and prevention of common mistakes when employing these medical devices. Certified training and practical application are supervised to prevent injury from improper use in training. So, if you are a civilian, do not just grab an IFAK and start practicing on your family.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
U.S. Marine Corps photo

Tourniquet

This typically applies to life threatening bleeding from an extremity. Amputations, severe lacerations, gunshot wounds can all be treated quickly and effectively using a tourniquet. This is the only medical treatment performed if there is still a threat present. If there is no threat present, junctional wounds can be packed with gauze or a hemostatic agent to control bleeding.

Craig Hall, Penn Tactical Solutions

According to the Combat Life Saving B151196 Student Handout at The Basic School, A tourniquet is applied two to four inches above the wound between the wound and the heart. When the constricting band applies pressure to the limb it will control the bleeding. Marines are trained to not tighten it to the point where it causes excessive damage to the limb. They will then mark the patient’s forehead with a “T,” time and date for each tourniquet applied.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Soldier applying a tourniquet in training (U.S. Army)

Gloves

To help keep the wound clean and minimize contamination, gloves are provided in all IFAKs to be used by the person treating the owner of the IFAK.

Alcohol Pads

For sterilization and cleaning of an area.

Band-Aids

To treat minor wounds.

Tape

Used to secure other items provided in an IFAK.

Combat Gauze

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
U.S. Marine Corps photo

When applied to a wound, causes the wound to develop a clot that will stop the flow of blood and will remain within the wound until removed by medical personnel…Combat Gauze is a 3×4 inch roll of sterile gauze that is impregnated with kaolin, which helps promote blood clotting…The combination of sterile gauze and proprietary inorganic material allows Combat Gauze to be non-allergenic.

Field Medical Training Battalion, Camp Pendleton, CA, Combat Lifesaver/Tactical Combat Casualty Care Student Handout

Back in 2009 when I first entered the fleet, IFAKs contained Quickclot, which was used to heat seal open wounds in conjunction with bandages. I remember my Corpsman saying that it caused additional problems during surgery for the casualty. The controversial use of Quickclot also brought up chemical concerns. By 2010, Quickclot was phased out and Combat Gauze was used to stop the bleeding by packing a wound with as many as needed to create a clot. Combat Gauze can also be used to make a pressure dressing.

Triangular Bandage

A Triangular Bandage can be used as a sling or improvised as a tourniquet. It can be adapted to be used as the Combat Life Saver Handout states “The only limitations are on the CLS’s (Combat Life Saver) imagination.”

Water ‘Jel’

Used to treat burn injuries

‘H’ Bandage

The H bandage is used to treat bleeding wounds and abdominal wounds. It has a bigger pad and a longer dressing to be able to wrap around the patient. It has a H shaped clasp to allow better cinching to provide pressure, thus the name.

Iodine

Used for cleaning and water purification.

Additional supplies not provided in an IFAK:

Tampons

You read that right. Corpsman are known to carry around tampons because they are really good at absorbing blood. The first time a Marine sees a Corpsman pull one out there is usually a giggle. That is, until the Corpsman tells said Marine it’s for bullet wounds. No more giggles.

Feature image: U.S. Marine Corps/ Sgt. Justin Huffy

Articles

How ‘Game of Thrones’-style family drama triggered a World War

Every high school student knows that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo helped spark World War I. But did you know that he wasn’t the only one killed that day? The other victim was his wife, Sophie, whom he married against everyone’s wishes. Their wedding pretty much cost Franzi everything – including his throne and his life.


The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Photo: Public Domain by Henry Guttman

What an Heir-Head

Franz Ferdinand was the greatest catch in Europe at the time of his coming of age, especially for the heir to Austria-Hungary (downgraded from the Holy Roman Empire in 1867). As nephew and heir to Emperor Franz Joseph I – husband of the tragically beautiful Empress Elisabeth, a.k.a. “Sisi” – Franzi could have his pick of any eligible woman in Europe. He couldn’t marry just any woman! According to aHabsburg family statute of 1839, archdukes and archduchess could only marry with the consent of the head of their house (i.e., the emperor). But the marriage market of late nineteenth century Europe was a small place. No matter which way he went, an archduke would end up wedding a relative; since she had to be Catholic, the bride-to-be would probably end up being a French, Bavarian, Portuguese, Italian, or Spanish princess, or even an Austrian archduchess cousin.

In 1915, Polish noblewoman, Princess Catherine Radziwill, wrote a fabulously gossipy memoir calledThe Royal Marriage Market of Europe, detailing the available royals of Europe and their family foibles. She snarked about Empress Sisi and her family, but actually had nice things to say about Franz Ferdinand and his marital choices – which went against the grain and wrought havoc in his family. Who was his choice? Not a royal princess, but a lady-in-waiting named Sophie Chotek.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Photo: Public Domain

By modern standards, no one would blink at a royal marrying a noblewoman – in fact, the bride would probably be of higher rank than many other princely wives-to-be. But for the tottering Habsburg-Lorraine family and its weakening empire, it was imperative to maintain a “pure” bloodline, one worthy of the perhaps oldest and most prestigious Catholic clan on the Continent. Only the bluest of blood would do for an empress consort! Which led to a hell of a family squabble…especially after Franz Joseph’s only son, Crown Prince Rudolf, committed suicide and didn’t leave behind a son.

I Keep on Fallin’…

Franz Ferdinand first met Sophie Chotek when she was a lady-in-waiting to the wife of his distant cousin, Archduke Friedrich of Teschen. The snobby, upwardly mobile wife of Friedrich – Isabella of Croÿ – was barely good enough to make it as an imperial wife. Gushed Princess Radziwill, “The young man — he was barely twenty-two at the time — fell in love with the Princess Isabella of Croÿ, whose father, the Duke of Croÿ, though belonging to the higher order of the German aristocracy, was still looked upon as a simple gentleman, in possession of large means and an old title.” Scandalous!

Isabella was “a clever, ambitious woman, who at once understood the immense advantages of such an un-hoped-for marriage,” and the imperial family tried to prove that her family wasn’t good enough, stating that Friedrich and Izzy’s wedding should be morganatic (a union between people of unequal rank, when any resulting kids usually can’t inherit any thrones involved). Isabella came up with enough evidence to prove her house was sufficiently ancient and high-ranking, so the Habsburgs begrudgingly allowed her into their family.

After Isabella got her long-awaited title of archduchess, she popped out eight daughters before giving birth to her golden ticket, a son. With so many marriageable girls, Isabella had a ton of matchmaking to do, and what better match could be made than with the heir of the empire? One of her daughters marrying the future emperor would also finally silence any detractors who complained about her own lineage. So ambitious Izzy, always playing up her family because of her own insecurities about it, set out to snag Franzi for one of her baby girls, bringing him over to her country house time and again. During this courting process – sometime in the 1890s, although the exact date is unknown – Franz Ferdinand met Sophie.

Sophie-Chotek-Franz-Ferdinand Photo: Unknown photographer

One Less Problem?

Each time he was invited to court his cousins, the more he fell for the one woman he wanted – and the one he couldn’t have. To be fair, Sophie’s background wasn’t exactly dirt-poor; it was just not up to imperial standards. Her grandfather was an Austrian count, while her diplomat dad worked all over Eastern Europe. Her clan wasn’t rich, but it was often in the wings of major imperial events, so Sophie would’ve known Franzi by sight. She was young, pretty, and refreshingly un-stuffy, compared to the rest of his family. In other words, perfect for the archduke. Princess Radziwill had fairly nice things to say about her, but admitted, “Her sway over the mind of her husband was unlimited, and, perhaps, even in excess of the love which he undoubtedly bore her.”

When Isabella found out by discovering a lost locket with Sophie’s picture in it, she was irate.According to Austrian noblewoman Marie Louise von Wallersee-Larisch‘s memoirs, “the archduchess immediately dismissed” Sophie and threw her out of her home. Emperor Franz Josef was opposed to their union, too, but Franz Ferdinand dug in his heels – it was Sophie or no wife at all. In a time of empires toppling left and right, the heir had to have a bride! Eventually, the emperor acquiesced, but added a harsh proviso.

FF and Sophie could get married – and they were, wed by a mere deacon – but she could never have imperial rank and their kids couldn’t inherit. As von Wallersee-Larisch noted, “the Emperor soon realized the marriage was a complete success,” so he bumped up Sophie’s rank to countess, then duchess. She still trailed behind every royal woman of the court and was probably shunned by all the archduchess. A shame no one realized that Sophie and FF made a popular couple that might have improved the imperial public image…especially with their three kids – Little Sophie, Maximilian, and Ernst.

In June 1914, Sophie and Ferdinand went on a diplomatic trip to an already uneasy area: Sarajevo. Only here, when  Franzi was on military duty, could the two unequally married lovebirds ride together in a car, so she accompanied him on the journey. The portents weren’t good – when the car overheated,Franzi quipped, “Our journey starts with an extremely promising omen. Here our car burns, and down there they will throw bombs at us.” While out and about in an open motorcade on June 28, Franz Ferdinand and Sophie were both shot by Gavrilo Princip, a nationalist terrorist. This was after a failed bombing attempt occurred that same day, and FF decided to keep on trekking.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Photo: Public Domain by Henry Guttman

Sadly, these later shots were fatal. When Sophie slumped over her husband in the car, an already mortally wounded Franz Ferdinand shouted, “Sophie, Sophie, don’t die, stay alive for our children!” Both were later declared dead at the Konak palace. And, of course, Vienna took a hard line at the assassination of its heir and his wife. They declared war, and the rest of Europe chose sides…starting World War I.

Also at HistoryBuff.com:

WWII and the Total Misrepresentation of Japan’s Surrender

How did the Puny Romans Deal with Massive Enemy War Elephants?

These Snake Oil Scammers Treated Addiction by Encouraging Patients to Drink Gold

The Bloodiest Thanksgiving Ever

Articles

These 12 awesome photos were ruined by blank firing adapters

Military folks get some of the best chances at awesome profile pics. They wear camouflage without looking ridiculous, spend a lot of time with firearms, and are generally physically fit.


Unfortunately, these awesome photos are often ruined by one little detail: blank firing adapters that turn weapons into big noise-makers. Sure, they make training much safer and cheaper, but is that really worth it when BFAs ruined these 12 photos?

1. A Marine pulls guard with his super-scary, blank-firing weapon as two Georgian soldiers giggle at him.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Spc. Nathaniel Nichols)

2. A U.S. Army Ranger student, assigned to the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade, realizes that his weapon couldn’t even kill a squirrel with this stupid BFA on it, July 8, 2016

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Austin Berner)

3. “Do I look like Rambo?” “No.”

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Spc. Garrett Johnson)

4. A soldier provides no security while on patrol because his weapon has been neutered with a BFA at Exercise Saber Guardian 16.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Anita VanderMolen)

5. Paratroopers blow open a door with real explosives and then attack their enemy with loud noises at the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, California.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(GIF: Fort Irwin Public Affairs Jason Miller)

6. Spc. Timothy Squires, an infantryman, scans his sector of fire and prepares to make “Pew, pew!” noises during a squad-level situational training exercise held in Kosovo, July 25, 2016. “Pew, pew!” noises are exactly as lethal as weapons with BFAs.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Thomas Duval)

7. Marine Corps infantry squad leaders try to look cool while rocking BFAs. They come close but just can’t get past the stigma of the unusable weapon.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Marine Corps Cpl. Aaron S. Patterson)

8. A U.S. Army Ranger student searches a simulated enemy prisoner of war. If the POW learns that the Ranger student’s weapon can only fire sound waves, he’ll likely resist and escape.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Sgt. Austin Berner)

9. An Army squad leader shows his men how to get a decent Facebook profile photo with a BFA. The BFA turns an otherwise lethal weapon into a prop.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Thomas Duval)

10. A cadet lays down imaginary cover fire for his teammate during a grenade course. The teammate’s grenades could actually kill someone but this simulated cover fire is useless.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Brian Hamilton)

11. A U.S. airman, right, actually manages to look cooler than a soldier simply by having a functioning weapon. The airman also has a pretty sweet helmet.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: Fort Bliss Ismael Ortega)

12. A U.S. Army soldier rocks sunglasses, a machine gun, and a belt of ammo but still looks funny thanks to mismatched camo, laser tag gear, and a blank firing adapter.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: U.S. Army Reserve Sgt. Quentin Johnson)

Articles

An open letter to Colin Kaepernick from a military veteran

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: Billy Hurst, AP)


EDITOR’S NOTE: The opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of We Are The Mighty.

So here we go again. Another professional athlete has decided to protest about the evils of the country that has given him more than any other country would. San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand during the National Anthem of two NFL pre-season football games and has said that he intends to continue to refuse in the future.

Related: Another open letter to Colin Kaepernick from a (more understanding) military veteran

Kaepernick made a blanket statement about his actions: “I am not going to stand up and show pride for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

Let’s dissect this a little.

“I am not going to stand up and show pride for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.”

This statement implies the government takes an active role in keeping minorities subjugated, like making laws that say “everyone but black people can do X.” That argument has been debunked so many times that you’re clearly uneducated on the issue and makes it hard to even take you seriously (forget the fact that our President is black, we have a Black Congressional Caucus and a long list of extremely successful black entrepreneurs). Truly active government oppression is a thousand times more brutal than what we have here. If you want to see what it really looks like, I invite you to Google El Salvador, Venezuela, Stalinism, North Korea, Somalia, or Saudi Arabia. Or let the USO set you up with a trip to Afghanistan. While there, ask about women’s rights and then tell us all how oppressive America is when you get back.

“It would be selfish on my part to look the other way.”

So how is sitting down selfless and not looking the other way? If you really want to make a difference, get off the bench and actually do something. You signed a $114 million dollar contract with the 49ers and have an average salary of $19 million. How much of that did you donate to black causes or use to help the suffering that has suddenly offended you? I made 1 percent of what you did last year and I’d bet all of it that I donated more of my time to help others than you did.

“There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

Embellish much? Sounds like we’re living in South Africa under Apartheid. The high-profile events you’ve launched off of are real problems, no doubt, but the actual law enforcement data suggests your statement is hyperbolic. Rule of law exists in America. Wrong-doers don’t get away with murder. (Well, OJ did, maybe, but that’s another story, isn’t it?)

When you decided to “sit in,” did you think you were the champion of a cause and every African American would agree with you? I’m willing to bet there are plenty who are rolling their eyes right now because they feel you’re doing more harm than good and wish you would just keep your thoughts to yourself. You’re not Che Guevara and this is not Bautista’s Cuba. You’re not a freedom fighter leading your people out of bondage. You’re an ill-informed athlete who’s only fanning the fires of racism by sitting on the sidelines for a principle that you only understand through a simplistic pop narrative that’s little more than a hashtag campaign.

Look, Colin, I get it. You want to show your anger and dissatisfaction about an issue that means something to you. The problem is you’re going about it all wrong. Instead of inspiring others or sparking change, you’re angering your fellow citizens (especially veterans) and losing respect instead of gaining it. You are an American citizen and this is your country. You have the right to say and do what you like, a right forged by the efforts of millions who actually put their lives on the line, the real freedom fighters.

If you’re pissed, fine. And if you’re pissed enough to take action, even better. Just do it in the right way. Write an insightful article about what ails you. Hire someone to write your memoir that outlines a proposed solution. Go on a speaking tour to raise awareness and inspire others. Use some of those NFL millions to fund a study that helps define the problem and the solution. Fund a scholarship or two for black kids who have the grades to get into college but not the money. Find an inner city high school and donate football equipment or (even better) spend some time on the field mentoring them.

You’re probably wondering why so many people disagree with you, even to the point of burning your jersey in the streets. Simply put, this country isn’t perfect, but even a passing knowledge of history (the kind usually possessed by a guy with a bachelor’s degree) should make you proud to be an American. We liberated Europe from genocidal Naziism, won the Cold War, landed on the moon, made more breakthroughs in technology and medicines that save lives every day than any other country, and given athletes the opportunity to make a ton of money to play a game. The list could go on and on, but it all points to one undeniable fact – the world would be a much worse place than it is without America.

Despite all that, you’ve decided America sucks and chosen to express your dissatisfaction by offending 99 percent of the 324 million Americans who have nothing to do with the issue you’re protesting. That’s your right and you certainly don’t have to respect the flag or the anthem.

But, in return, I don’t have to respect you. Now, instead of seeing a skilled athlete tearing up opposing defenses, millions of people are going to see a misguided man who chose to help break our country instead of help fix it. Sitting on the sidelines during the anthem only makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Need a role model, Colin? Look to U.S. Army Lieutenant Sam Kendricks, who stopped his Olympic pole vault to stand and show respect when he heard the anthem. That guy gets it, but, of course, he’s actually serving something bigger than himself.

Kelly Crigger is a retired lieutenant colonel and the author of “Curmudgeonism; A Surly Man’s Guide to Midlife.”

Articles

Another open letter to Colin Kaepernick from a (more understanding) military veteran

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
(Photo: thesource.com)


EDITOR’S NOTE: The opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of We Are The Mighty.

Thank you for using your platform to highlight a societal ill that needs our national attention and action to address and improve matters pertaining to equal justice under the law. Many will take issue with the manner of your “protest” and may never entertain the issue at the heart of your statement. These fellow Americans may have a concern about the nature of your protest rather than the substance of your protest.

Related: An open letter to Colin Kaepernick from a military veteran

I applaud you for risking the sure backlash and knee-jerk disdain sure to come for any American who dares to highlight an issue during the National Anthem. Because you are not a professional protestor, your methods may be crude and course. Because you are a professional athlete, your words may not convey the precise intent of your protest. But because you are an American, you have the right to express your thought or voice in a manner available to you. Some will offer advice on how to protest in a manner that is less upsetting to them and their sensibilities.

This misses the point of social protest. It is to awaken those very sensibilities and highlight the moral deficit in our social fabric. There are not many avenues or ways for a social minority to highlight an issue to the majority. Our shared history, our American history is replete with examples worthy of outrage and protest that caused no action or discussion by the majority.

A notable example is the story of Emmet Till. Many are not aware that the injustice endured by the murder, disfigurement, mutilation and hatred visited on a 14-year-old boy and his family, were the chief impetus to the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. In short, this 14-year-old boy was kidnapped from his home and killed. The assailants were known and a mock trial held. No convictions were given.

Your protest method is not innovative but has been shown to be effective in generating discussion. A similar example is Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968 Olympic Games.

Many will accuse you of nefarious motives and unpatriotic underpinnings. Many will look to dissect your background for failings to lessen your protest moment. Many will discount your intended message because of your delivery (manner and voice). And many will never look to address the intent of the protest because that is hard and dismissing is easy.

In addition, not having a difficult discussion is easier than acknowledging a perspective not shared. Said another way is that the experiences that are not shared by the majority are often deemed non-existent. My nation, our nation, needs to continue the work to improve our social fabric and the actions of its institutions and agents to better provide equal justice. America, in its history, has made great strides in integrating many cultures, religions, and traditions.

America has led the world in demonstrating democracy in action. America has often led the world in being a champion for human rights and dignity. America is the greatest nation in this world and remains a beacon of hope for many people enduring deep levels of oppression.

While your manner of protest is not what I or many others would choose, I support you in this effort to highlight the need for a national engagement on the issue of equal justice. To those reading this letter, this is a call for us work together to discuss the issue, understand the perspectives/history and bring ideas and solutions to improve our America. I love my country and stand ready to serve again. This is the work needed to push us forward in making our nation a “more perfect union.”

Arthur Billingsley is a retired Navy commander, graduate of the Naval Postgraduate School with a Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering and Auburn University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Engineering. He’s currently working as an IT professional in northern Florida.

Articles

Here’s how to beat fatigue in your next PT test

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Private First Class Shawndel Hunter, Delta Company, 1st Recruit Training Battalion, does a pushup at Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego. | US Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Tyler Viglione


When taking a physical fitness test (PFT), you may recall giving all you have to max out the pushups, only to stop half-way up, shaking violently. No matter how hard you try in the next few seconds of the test, you are not going to get another pushup. That is muscle fatigue.

Also read: A retired Navy SEAL commander breaks down his morning fitness routine that starts at 4:30

Here is a question about how to avoid muscle fatigue during fitness tests.

Stew – it does not matter on what exercise I am on, I can never keep going until the entire two minutes of the PFT is complete. On a good day, I might manage 1:30 of pushups or situps. I usually just shake and drop to my knees uncontrollably. Don’t even ask how my bad days look. I would really like to score better on the PT test. I am a runner so the 1.5 mile run in 7 min mile pace is no problem. Jake

Jake – There are a few things that could be contributing to your fatigue or lack of muscle endurance (aka stamina) during the pushups and sit-up test.

1. Lack of Training

You need to up your training volume. I highly recommend doing pushups, sit-ups, pullups, and other core exercise (planks, etc.) three days a week. For example, if you have never done 100 pushups or sit-ups in an entire workout, you will never get 100 reps in two minutes. Try to build up over time to 2-3 times your goal maximum score during a workout. For instance, if your goal pushups max is 50 in 2 minutes, shoot for 100-150 during a normal workout. (See workout ideas for every OTHER day: PT Pyramid, PT SuperSet, Max Rep Sets). Also, stretch out your sets to 1-2 minutes in length on Max Rep Set Days.

2. Pace Yourself

Too many times people start out way too fast on these exercises only to burn out in the first minute. Pacing your running makes sense to you, right? You do not start the run in a sprint of your first lap (1/4 mile) — you have a set pace. The same holds true for exercises like sit-ups. Too many people start off in the first 30 seconds getting 30-35 sit-ups and fail to match that in the next 1:30. If you are stuck at 60 due to this, you can increase your score near overnight by dropping your pace to 20 reps in the first 30 seconds and push closer to 80 reps in 2 minutes. For pushups — that is a different animal, as you have gravity slowly eating away at your reps the slower you go. I recommend you let gravity take you down and exert fast on the up movement. Don’t waste energy going down when gravity will do that for free. Keep working your pace in the workouts and you will find that you have the stamina to go the full 2 minutes after a few weeks.

3. Fuel and Fatigue

Half of fatigue is in your mind, as your brain will tell you that you are finished before you really are. The other half of fatigue is in your fuel. Did you eat well the day before or the morning of the fitness test? Are you hydrated? Having your body well fueled will help you with PT tests — that means nutritious foods. However, when you start to shake at the end of your pushup timed set, you are going to waste a lot of energy fast, as that is a central nervous system breakdown (or the beginning of it). It is actually best to call it quits and not try to get that last pushup in, versus staying there and shaking for 10-15 seconds. You have to remember that you still have to do the 1.5 mile run next, and you will need that energy your body just dumped failing at pushups.

Practice taking the fitness test once every week or two just so you can also mentally say to yourself, “this is just another workout.” Getting rid of some of the PFT Anxiety might help you perform a little better as well. Eat well and workout regularly, so that 1-2 minute sets become easy instead of an impossibility. Check out the PFT Bible if you are interested in a program that is specifically designed for the most common PFT in the world.

Stew Smith works as a presenter and editorial board member with the Tactical Strength and Conditioning program of the National Strength and Conditioning Association and is a Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist (CSCS). He has also written hundreds of articles onMilitary.com’s Fitness Center that focus on a variety of fitness, nutritional, and tactical issues military members face throughout their career.

Articles

The Air Force scored the world’s only supersonic air-to-air gun kill in Vietnam

The air-to-air missiles of the F-4 Phantom II were notoriously unreliable in the skies over Vietnam. If the Phantom a pilot was flying was an early model and those missiles failed them in a dogfight, it was time to hightail it out of the sky. 

Luckily for Col. Phil “Hands” Handley, he was flying a U.S. Air Force F-4E on June 2, 1972, when he and his wingman were surprised by two enemy MiG-19 fighters. That day, Handley would score the highest-speed air-to-air gun kill ever, breaking the speed of sound to do it. 

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare

Handley and three other F-4E Phantoms were flying out of Ubon Air Base in Thailand in support of a search and rescue mission near Hanoi. The Americans were looking for a pilot who was shot down 23 days prior. 

Low on fuel, two of the F-4Es departed to rendezvous with an aerial tanker. Handley and his wingman kept flying the mission. The two were taken by surprise when two North Vietnamese MiG-19s appeared out of nowhere.  

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Booooooooo (screen capture from YouTube)

Neither pilot wanted to leave the other, but Handley’s wingman immediately went high. Turning hard into the pursuing enemy fighter planes, Handley turned on his afterburners and turned again, this time to the rear of the enemies. He made ready to fire his missiles. 

Handley’s F-4E Phantom was carrying a total of four missiles. Two of them were AIM-4 heat-seeking missiles and two were AIM-7 Sparrow missiles. This didn’t bode well for the pilot or his wingman, because the AIM-7 Sparrow had a 10% probability of killing the target. The AIM-4 was much worse, with only a 5% probability of killing the target. 

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare

That huge gap between killing and failure was on full display when Handley fired his missiles. All either flew wide, flew up, dropped to the ground or didn’t leave the rail at all. Undoubtedly, there was no one more disappointed by this than Handley, except for maybe his wingman, who had two MiG-19s bearing down on him. 

With his wingman critically low on fuel over “Thud Ridge” and unable to engage the enemy, his only chance was Handley’s 20mm cannon. It was a shot that had never been done before.

Closing in rapidly, which is an understatement considering Handley was flying at Mach 1.2, he fired a high deflection shot, a three-second burst from the plane’s M-61 Gatling gun into a MiG’s flight path. 

300 rounds from the Phantom lit up the MiG-19, which exploded into a flying ball of fire. Handley’s own speed and flight path put a lot of distance from the remaining enemy fighter, which broke off its attack. His wingman met his date with the tanker and they all returned to Ubon Air Base. 

It was the first time a pilot used his cannon at supersonic speed to down an enemy fighter. As if breaking a combat record wasn’t great enough, when the F-4E pilots returned to base, they learned the pilot they were searching for had been found and rescued. 

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
Handley, 2016 (U.S. Air Force)

“Hands” Handley would be in the United States Air Force for 26 years, retiring in 1984, still holding the record for the highest-speed guns kill in aviation combat history and the only supersonic guns kill ever made. To this day, he still holds that record.


Feature image: U.S. Air Force

Articles

An elite French flying team will hit the skies over the Air Force Academy

A French air force flying team will roar over the Air Force Academy on April 19 to celebrate the nations’ bonds built in the sky during World War I.


Patrouille de France, that nation’s equivalent of the Air Force Thunderbirds, will arrive over the academy about 11:30 a.m. Wednesday, April 19, for a brief air show. It’s a big flying team with eight Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jets, a twin-engined light attack fighter that’s known for its nimbleness.

“I think folks in Colorado Springs will get a great miniature airshow,” said Lt. Col. Allen Herritage, an Air Force Academy spokesman.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
The Patrouille de France flying over Paris during Bastille Day 2015. (Photo by wiki user XtoF)

This year marks the centennial of formal U.S. involvement in World War I, with America declaring war on the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the German monarchy on April 6, 1917.

The first Americans to reach the aerial battlefields of France, though, were American airmen of the French air force’s Lafayette Escadrille, a fighter unit with American pilots that was established a year before the United States entered the war.

America’s first flying aces came from the small French unit, including Maj. Gervais Lufberry, who was credited with downing 16 planes before he was killed over Francein 1918.

The relationship built over the trenches between French and American pilots is still celebrated at the Air Force Academy today.

Herritage said the school has a French officer on the faculty and French exchange cadets on the campus. One of the pilots on the French flying team, Maj. Nicolas Lieumont, was an exchange student at the Colorado Springs school.

“We feel lucky to have them stop in Colorado Springs,” Herritage said. “It marks our nation’s longstanding relationship with France.”

The academy is inviting locals to get a better view of the French team. Visitors are welcome at the academy on April 19 and can watch the show from a viewing area near the Cadet chapel.

Articles

The future of warfare is coming, and it’s bringing lasers

This week, both the British Ministry of Defense and the US Navy have made strides towards directed energy weapons that could change the face of warfare as we know it.


The British, for their part, are eyeing a laser system that could compliment the Phalanx close-in anti-missile system, which detects, tracks, and can destroy approaching threats at closer ranges than other missile defense platforms.

Currently, the Phalanx is a computer-guided system that relies on a 20 mm Gatling gun. The British are looking to do away with the gun and substitute a laser.

“It’s better to spend money on the laser than on the mount,” Andy Rhodes, a business development executive at Raytheon UK told Defensenews.com.

Lasers offer a number of advantages over traditional guns. As they rely only on electricity, lasers can be fired for less than $1 a shot. Also, no round will ever travel anywhere near as fast as a laser, which obviously travels at the speed of light.

As military powers around the world race to create hypersonic weapons that can foil missile defenses through speed alone, the need for laser-aided missile defense becomes clear.

“The potential of laser-based weapons systems has been identified as an opportunity and offers significant advantages in terms of running costs as well as providing a more appropriate response to the threats currently faced by UK armed forces,” the British MoD stated.

Additionally, lasers on lower power settings can be used to overwhelm enemy sensors and instruments.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
The Phalanx Close-In Weapons system.

The US Navy for their part has also taken a step towards directed energy weapons. On Monday, Raytheon delivered pulse power containers for the Navy to test out on a new railgun design.

Unlike lasers, railguns fire actual projectiles, however, they use directed energy to do it.

Raytheon says the pulse power containers, when incorporated into a completed railgun design, will be able to launch projectiles at speeds in excess of Mach 6, or about 4,600 mph. At those speeds, there is little need for an explosive round with a chemical charge.

“Directed energy has the potential to redefine military technology beyond missiles and our pulse power modules and containers will provide the tremendous amount of energy required to power applications like the Navy Railgun,” said Colin Whelan, vice president of Advanced Technology for Raytheon’s Integrated Defense Systems business.

The 8 worst guns in the history of warfare
The USS Zumwalt. | Raytheon

The Navy’s railgun could find itself aboard the Futuristic USS Zumwalt as soon as 2018,Reuters reports.

“The Navy is determined to increase the offensive punch of the surface warships,” said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute. “To do that with a limited budget, it needs to look at everything from smart munitions to railguns to lasers.”

Do Not Sell My Personal Information