Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Flamethrowers - Banned by some convention? Or just considered too damn dangerous for the operator?
ArtyEngineer    12/2/2008 10:48:25 PM
As an early Christmas present too myself I just picked up Call of Duty - World at War. It is absolutely awesome!!!! Dont have the word to describe the joy of working through jap infested bunkers and trenches with a flamethrower!!!!! But it made me wonder when they were officially withdrawn from service and what the actual reasoning at time of withdrawl was.
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
ArtyEngineer    Hope this works   12/2/2008 10:55:12 PM,0,0,0" height="392" width="480" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000">" / />" swliveconnect="true" name="gtembed" align="center" allowscriptaccess="sameDomain" allowfullscreen="true" quality="high" pluginspage="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="392">
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       12/5/2008 4:12:33 AM
Flamethrowers are probably one of the most terrifying weapons ever used on the battlefield, but the man portable versions have a lot of problems.
-  limited range, typically less than 50m for man portable weapons with jellied gasoline, but only 10-20m with straight gasoline (more typical in WWII).
-  limited ammunition, typically 10 seconds or less of fuel.
-  very heavy and bulky.  If you go prone the tanks stick up, and if penetrated dowse  the operator with fuel.
-  obvious and fragile.  A flamethrower was a prime target for snipers, and everyone else in general. 
A bullet in any of the tanks could put the flamethrower out of action, but an exploding fireball was unlikely unless the fuel tank was ruptured while the weapon was being fired.
Given the problems and limitations, man portable flamethrowers were probably used because there just no better alternatives available.  After the WWII longer range alternatives were developed, such as the American M202A1 and the German HAFLA, and flamethrowers were phased out as ineffective on the modern battlefield.  The latest generation of flame weapons are the ones that use thermobaric warheads.
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       12/5/2008 11:13:23 AM
The German Army used a device called  "Handflammpatrone" (translation impossible, something like "Hand-operated-flame-ammunition)  from 1965 - 2001.   Basically used in house to house combat and against entrenched enemies.   It would not use shrapnells like a normal Handgrenade but cause massive heat and fire / smoke after detonation with a range of 90 meters.   Used against vehicles it would blind the crew, and under perfect condition set the vehicle on fire." />
 DM 34 
It worked like this:  You pull the trigger and the flame-ammunition shoots out (like a small grenade) and after a minimal distance of 8 meters would explode on the impact and set free its burning substance.  The substance would than spread on a 15 meter long and 50 meters wide area, burning with 1300 °C.
Weight: 620g
 Fighting distance: 8 - 90 meters
 lengh: 406mm
 Ammunition: 240 g phosphor


Quote    Reply

LB    M202   12/6/2008 1:07:50 PM
It might still be in service but I doubt it's been used as it had reliability problems.  Not sure if ROK still uses it?
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       12/7/2008 9:01:39 AM" />" width="614" height="461" /> 
 I found this rare pic of one exploding" />

Quote    Reply