Richard Vogt (left of Udet) was probably the finest Turbo-Autist to have ever designed planes. You may know some of his designs like the massive Bv238 and the weird Bv141. Anyways, he was seemingly obsessed with wacky designs and his designs would never really take-off (figuratively, not literally;they flew pretty well) with the Luftwaffe.
He also worked in the US after the war, and worked on the Nuclear Powered Bomber project.
I'll bring up a few more things I've seen around.
Simply looking at this thing tells you everything you need to know.
An attempt to counter British air patrols over the Bay of Biscay, several Type-VII Uboats were modified by cramming as many AAA guns onto the deck as possible. Proved fairly useless and the modifications were either canceled or undone.
A naval round developed by the Japanese in WWII, these shells consisted of a mass of thermite-filled tubes (1,200 in the 16" version) in an attempt to combine a shotgun and a flamethrower into an anti-aircraft weapon. Generally considered ineffective.
A WW2-era radar guided 1000lb bomb. Combat service began in April 1945, sinking several Japanese ships, including damaging an escort destroyer at a range of 37km.
I have honestly read your post at least half a dozen times and I cannot for the life of me figure out what you hope to gain from this. Closest I can figure, you're trying to bring sponsons back? That's fine, but why the wheels? Who would control these? Are you putting one on every wheel? And what does spherical wheels have to do with anything?
You might just be a shitposting genius. Thanks for the inspiration.
Nah like saw blades
What was the problem with this one?
Canards made it too unstable for the era?
They should have just made bigger bombers.
Rohr 71X
Today it would cost as much as a ultralight due to cheapo steel construction, but be as tough as a CAS.
I mean put a ball & socket joint-style turrent on the wheel part of the treads, and remote control it from inside the tank. It doesn't even need a big barrel, just fill the ball with ammunition like a giant drum and pew pew at the infantry that approach/that you spot. Use a cable connection to prevent hax. What's the worse that could happen?
All of the barrels would get fucked by terrain features riding that low on the vehicle, there would be no way to aim them unless you think a camera mounted way down there would stay clean/functional, no one would be up to the task of actually operating them because they would be busy with servicing the non-retarded guns, a hollow drum would make for some really shit tier running gear and would dent/cave in easier than a solid wheel would crack also meaning that the ammo inside would undoubtedly get damaged and cause jams which cant be cleared because the guns are inaccessible, there's no way to stabilize something that is built to bounce up and down with the terrain so it could only be used while stationary but you cant use it while in a hull down position because the guns are on the bottom of the vehicle, there's no way to clear a stoppage or reload without having to pull out the tanker bars and lift the track off, loading new ammo would get a road march's worth of mud inside the drum, no way to change the barrels you fucked up by hitting on rocks and shit and also got obstructed by mud and burst when you tried to shoot without having to pull the entire assembly apart… Fuck this may be a worse idea than invading Russia in late summer with an army relying primarily on horse drawn transportation.
It was an odd, experimental, prop-driven aircraft that was pitched shortly after the RAF and Fleet Air Arm had been shown the proposals for 1st gen jet aircraft. The rear mounted wings & canards were intended to make it easier to land on aircraft carriers (by giving the pilot a better view of the deck) but some of the limited documentation suggests that the design added a few new problems with landing that at least cancelled that advantage out.
For use against amphibious tanks?