this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
565 points (99.3% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6660 readers
548 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
baseball.
The average American could be expected to already know how to throw a baseball, so it was easier to change the equipment to fit the user than to train every fucking soldier how to throw a lopsided stick.
That and all the other reasons. The only stick grenades still around in appreciable numbers are anti-armor grenades where the handle has a parachute inside. For normal fragmentation grenades, essentially everyone has moved to non-stick grenades (except the USMC who want to make stick grenades).
Even in WW2, the Germans produced more of the boring looking Model 39 grenades than they did of the iconic and eye catching stick grenades. People notice what they want to notice.
Hungary made stick grenades until relatively recently, but even there stick part is much shorter (M42)
Why I hedge with "essentially everyone" because I know some obscure Literally Who is always going to be an exception.
Rules are defined by their exceptions, so I tend to welcome the obscure wildcards for a frame of reference.
That's a reason for then not now.
Better question is then why didn't Germany stick with the old design instead of switching to more "modern" looking grenades?
And the answer is NOT "baseball". The answer is that they're too heavy and cumbersome. And the cons outweighs the pros.
The answer is it simplified NATO logistics
Pray we don't simplify it further
It's actually that they're more expensive when you add the frag jacket to them. There cheaper to produce but logistically more expensive being larger and multi part.
Is this why soldiers in the rest of the world kick their grenades like a soccer ball?
Knife juggler here, so I have a lot of experience throwing off-CG objects...
It's not really that different from throwing a baseball. It's a little more difficult to catch, but with very little practice ( like 5 or 10 minutes) you'll be able to do it. That being said, I think the "baseball" style grenades where adopted because they can fit through smaller openings, you can roll or tumble them towards your target, they're harder to see, and harder to scoop up and throw back.
And that was when the SAS started recruiting 'grenade returner' jugglers.
Uhh, what do you think Wimbledon is?
we are so lucky that basketball wasn't as popular back then
Balloons full of explosive gas.
I thought it was American football as the design is more shaped to be more closely resembling a hand held size 🏈
American football was simply more popular back then too, but a little less now in terms of ratio, but the crowd has still grown instead of shrinking/stagnantion
Because sometimes you need to take out a tank.
A football is WAY bigger than a grenade, and football was way less popular in the 40s because 1. Baseball came first and 2. Baseball is better in person and TVs sucked. Even if more people play football now, it's still better to design grenades around baseballs because you spend more time practicing with a ball in baseball, and only one person per team knows how to throw a football.
Oh, they made a football grenade don't you worry.
Next generation grenades would be kicked ⚽️💥
As someone who played football (american), that is incorrect. Most people on the team learn how to throw it properly, with the spiral. You like the game, so you toss around the ol' pigskin.
The quarterback is chosen for a variety of reasons.
In my opinion I think it's more likely for someone to have played baseball then football
Cause football needs alot more prep when baseball can be just a random school activity
Note: I'm not athletic at all and this is just based on my personal experiences
Why aren't grenades shaped like hacky sacks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gammon_bomb ?
The weapon of choice of long haired peaceniks.