PDA

View Full Version : What ever happened to the Flame Thrower???



Sayeret
05-19-2004, 08:46 PM
After the second world war I haven't heard about any being used. Is there a reason and if so why?

Ratamacue
05-19-2004, 08:49 PM
They're not exactly a very humane weapon even though they're extremely effective in jungle and tunnel environments. Any chance that they're banned by the Geneva Convention?

catdat
05-19-2004, 08:53 PM
No they are not banned. We used a flame throwing tank as late as Vietnam with a lot of success. Great weapon for Urban/Jungle combat.

hey
05-19-2004, 09:30 PM
maybe because its a dangerous weapon not only to the enemy but also to the man carry the flame thrower and the people around him.. just an idea ;)

Ratamacue
05-19-2004, 09:30 PM
maybe because its a dangerous weapon not only to the enemy but also to the man carry the flame thrower and the people around him.. just an idea ;)

Good point. A round strikes that fuel tank and unless you're lucky as hell, you're going to end up in a great world of hurt.

hist2004
05-19-2004, 09:36 PM
Thermobaric weapons have replaced flamethrowers. The weapons create a huge pressure wave which effectively sucks the air out of the lungs of anyone unfortunate enough to be within range. The Russians used them to
great effect in Chechnya.

Regards,
Hist2004

hey
05-19-2004, 09:41 PM
Ratamacue wrote:

Good point. A round strikes that fuel tank and unless you're lucky as hell, you're going to end up in a great world of hurt.

exacly. you and your teammates. :|


Hist2004, Do you have more info about this Thermobaric weapons?

DrunkenMaster
05-19-2004, 09:43 PM
Thermobaric weapons have replaced flamethrowers. The weapons create a huge pressure wave which effectively sucks the air out of the lungs of anyone unfortunate enough to be within range. The Russians used them to
great effect in Chechnya.

Regards,
Hist2004
whoa never knew that....thermobaric weapon...whats that look like?.....

hist2004
05-19-2004, 09:55 PM
Thermobaric Weapons in Development for U.S. Infantry Forces.
Date: Friday, March 28 @ 00:13:24 PST
Topic: Anti-tank weapons


Well, this is the second time I'm writing this story. As you know, DefRev just got hacked. We believe the hacker, or more accurately--the "cracker", somehow hacked/cracked my admin account. This time, I'm hoping the story sticks. Just in case it doesn't, and what happened last time happens again, I WILL contact both the FBI and the Secret Service, and whomever else I have to, in order to hunt down and prosecute the perpetrator--so help me GOD.
Now that that's out of the way, here ya' go:

The U.S. Army is developing new thermobaric munitions for their BDM(Bunker Defeat Munition) and M203 grenade launchers, and ultimately for the XM29/OICW(Objective Individual Combat Weapon) as well. This is a long time coming. The Russian army has been using thermobaric light support weapons since its Soviet/Iron Curtain days. The Russian RPO-A Shmel is a perfect example. The RPO-A is kind of like a rocket-propelled flame thrower, and was used to great effect against Afghani Mujahideen in their Afghan War in the late '70's and early '80's. Any group of Mujahideen that were unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of an RPO-A while holed up inside a bunker or cave had virtually no chance of survival, since the fireball goes everywhere, including around corners.

Basically a thermobaric weapon deflagrates, rather than exploding. In other words, it creates a huge expanding fireball that burns up everything in its coverage zone. A thermobaric munition kills via three methods. The first is...

de-oxegenation. When fired into an enclosed space, like a bunker or building, the munition sprays its fuel(either liquid or liquid gel) out in the form of a fine mist, and ignites it. The resulting expanding fireball uses up all the available oxygen. The second lethal aspect is the burning/heat aspect, assuming all the oxygen hasn't already been sucked out of one's lungs. Finally, there is something called over-pressure, which has a blunt trauma effect that can also be lethal.

What's interesting is that the U.S. military has had thermobaric technology for quite some time, but has been hesitant to employ it. One of the reasons for this is that they are skittish about thermobaric weapons that use liquid as the fuel. Talley Defense has had a thermobaric-type warhead for their M72 LAW (Light Anti-Tank Weapon) for quite some time, but the Army hasn't wanted to adopt it. I say thermobaric-type because, from what I understand, the munition employs a gel, rather than liquid, and is not a true or purely thermobaric weapon. I will research this further to make sure I'm correct in this last point. I'm not sure if the thermobaric BDM munition the Army is going to be testing is Talley Defense's SMAW-D or SMAW-D/CS or not, but I will research this as well.

It's unfortunate that the U.S. Army and Marine Corps don't yet have these weapons available for our troops, because they would come in very handy right now, specifically for the purpose of burning out Iraqi army and Republican Guard strongholds, especially once we get to Baghdad. Once there, we will most likely experience some very heavy fighting from Iraqi forces that are dug in like Alabama ticks. The point is that nothing kills quite as effectively as a thermobaric weapon inside a confined space, which is most likely where these forces will be hiding or holed up in Baghdad.

http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,58094,00.html

http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/jidr/jidr010104_3_n.shtml

http://www.shipunov.com/eng/str/grenades/rpo.htm

Regards,
Hist2004

moughoun
05-20-2004, 02:04 AM
The Brazilian sf still use the Hydroar flamethrower

Abbyy
05-20-2004, 02:17 AM
Fire-throwing system TOS-1 caliber 220mm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Heavy flame-thrower system TOS-1 is intended for complex hitting the targets due to the impact of high temperatures and redunant pressure. TOS-1 can operate in different types of offensive and defensive battle for direct active support of motorized infantry and tanks, moving in their battle formation, defeat atack enemy" live forces from open and closed fire positions, and produce fireplaces on the area. TOS system consist of: fighting machine (FM), uncontrollable missiles (UM) and transport-charging machine (TCM).

The fighting machine is launcher, installed on chassis of the tank. It consists of chassis, rotary truck with rolling segment of launcher, power following drivers and the fire control system. Rolling segment of the launcher has 30 conductor pipes, for UM, which are set on the hull with gun-cradle. Through the axle цапф it is connected with turning truck lever. Pointing the launcher on the target in vertical and horizontal levels is made by force drivers.

Fire control system consists of sight, quantum range-finder, ballistic calculator, amd roll sensor. Uncontrolable missile consists of head segment with loading and fuse and missile segment, which operates on the solid fuel. Transport-loading machine is intended for transportation of UM, loading and unloading the launcher (LUM). LUM is set on the chassis of the truck with cross-country capacity and is equipped with handling device.



http://www.arsenal.odessa.ua/arms/technic/tos1/welcom38.jpg
http://www.arsenal.odessa.ua/arms/technic/tos1/welcom39.jpg
http://www.arsenal.odessa.ua/arms/technic/tos1/welcom40.jpg

Abbyy
05-20-2004, 02:20 AM
RPO-A, RPO-D and RPO-Z
Infantry rocket flamethrowers

RPO-A, RPO-D and RPO-Z flamethrowers are powerful assault weapon having three types of rounds:

the RPO-A (thermobaric) is intended to defeat covered fire weapons in urban areas, in the field and in mountains, as well as to demolish shelters, motor vehicles and lightly armored materiel;
the RPO-D (smoke) is intended to lay smoke screens blinding the crews of fire weapons and create intolerable conditions in various shelters;
the RPO-Z (incendiary) is intended to set up fires on terrain, in buildings, structures and fuel-oil depots.
These rounds can be fired from enclosures with a space of more than 60 m3, and in terms of the blast, blinding and incendiary effect they are equal to 105-mm artillery projectiles of similar assignment.

Up to now the RPO-type flamethrowers have no equivalents abroad.

The 9F700-2 computer-aided trainer is used to train the crews to operate RPO-A, RPO-D and RPO-Z flamethrowers.

http://www.shipunov.com/eng/str/grenades/images/shmel.jpg

stuntman
05-20-2004, 03:43 AM
What ever happened to the Flame Thrower???

Well to my understanding Hood and other moderator removes them.

Angelino
05-20-2004, 04:21 AM
IIRC the RPO-A differed for most western flamethrowers when it first came out. For one, it fires a capsule filled with incendiary materials, so it's more like a bazooka. The western flamethrowers that show up in all Hollywood movies are the Flow Stream type and have a continous stream of flame going from the nozzle to the target. However, these stream types use up quite a bit more fuel getting to the target.

Abbyy
05-20-2004, 04:42 AM
IIRC the RPO-A differed for most western flamethrowers when it first came out. For one, it fires a capsule filled with incendiary materials, so it's more like a bazooka. The western flamethrowers that show up in all Hollywood movies are the Flow Stream type and have a continous stream of flame going from the nozzle to the target. However, these stream types use up quite a bit more fuel getting to the target.

Western flamethrowers are pure incendary weapon while RPO have thermobaric warhead additionaly to incendary one. This cause much more destruction than stream flamethrower. Also RPO have much greater range comparing to stream types.

GazB
05-20-2004, 05:47 AM
Basically a thermobaric weapon deflagrates, rather than exploding. In other words, it creates a huge expanding fireball that burns up everything in its coverage zone.


Actually not accurate. You make it sound like Napalm... which it most defintitely isn't.

Napalm is similar in that it is all fuel and burns in the air, but the fuel in thermobaric rounds or FAE (fuel air EXPLOSIVES) actually explodes.

In normal explosives about 4/5ths of the explosive by weight is used to generate lots of free oxygen... the other 1/5th burns with that oxygen at supersonic speeds... RDX "burns"(ie detonates) at over 6km per second.
(because it has its own oxygen it will explode in space or underwater... unlike FAEs)
An FAE round also uses explosive but there is no oxygen generating material in the mixture... it is all fuel. This means before detonation the explosive mixture must be spread out in the air so that it has oxygen to burn... and it burns slower than normal explosive but still detonates and the explosion is much more powerful and over a longer period than with normal explosives.

Most early FAEs needed to be spread out fully and then detonated. If they weren't properly dispersed not all of the fuel burnt and the weapon power was less... this was a problem in enclosed places as when all the O2 was burnt up the rest of the fuel was wasted.

The RPO-A and most other newer Russian FAEs use a better method and detonate as they expand. This is called deflagrating. In fact the RPO-A has a small precursor charge that blows holes in things like walls or APCs. This means that instead of having to fly a rocket through a window to take out a room wiht a sniper or MG in it you can hit any part of the wall or the side of an APC and it will blow the FAE material into the room or APC and detonate it.

There were many problems with flamethrowers... one was short range, the second was the vulnerability mentioned to enemy fire. There was also the fact that most enemies loathed flamethowers and any operator captured was usually tortured and executed on the spot... which made them rather unpopular in close combat where capture was fairly common. It was effective in urban combat due to the closeness, but this increased the risk to the operators.



Finally, there is something called over-pressure, which has a blunt trauma effect that can also be lethal.


Overpressure is the blast wave... as I mentioned it is less powerful than for plastic explosives but of longer duration.


I say thermobaric-type because, from what I understand, the munition employs a gel, rather than liquid, and is not a true or purely thermobaric weapon.

If it is just fuel and uses O2 around the target and detonates then it is an FAE. FAEs can be Gel, liquid, gas, and even powder. Get a handful of flour and throw it at a candle... don't throw too much and don't do it near curtains or anything flamable... and protect your face... in fact just take my word for it.

Even the juice in an orange peel burns... take an orange peel, bend and squeese it into a naked flame and see the sparks fly.


The western flamethrowers that show up in all Hollywood movies are the Flow Stream type and have a continous stream of flame going from the nozzle to the target.

The flamethrowers you see in movies are crap. They use unthickened fuel and are more like very big blow torches than flamethrowers. Real flamethrowers use thickened fuel that continues to burn after it has hit the target. It can also hit surfaces and bounce around corners and into bunkers and things. Its main problem is lots of fuel is wasted burnt on the way to the target and the other is obvously a lack of range. Using rocket fired capsules solves both of these problems.

DrunkenMaster
05-20-2004, 11:12 AM
thanks gazb now I just burt down my house.....no but seriously you guys are informative and I do thank you for that

snake
05-20-2004, 01:43 PM
I think the thing you got to remember about flame throwers is that you have the fuel on your back and the Japs (No Offense intended) would shoot the guy with the flame thrower blowing him and all his buddies up in the process.


My 2 cents
Be Safe
Snake

Alex_All_Alone
05-20-2004, 07:41 PM
dont forget fun toys like the M202 'flash'

GazB
05-21-2004, 03:44 AM
I think the thing you got to remember about flame throwers is that you have the fuel on your back and the Japs (No Offense intended) would shoot the guy with the flame thrower blowing him and all his buddies up in the process.

I would imagine that the sight of the remains of troops killed by flamethrowers would be enough for most troops to decide that is not a good way to go and do everything in their power to avoid being on the receiving end of one... and that includes targetting flame thrower operators.

It wasn't just the Japanese... everyone did it.

16 OBr SpN
05-21-2004, 05:14 AM
The good old RPO! p-)

God knows how many lives of our soldiers it had saved.

During fights for Grozny in 1995 it was the "cure" against Chechen entrenchments inside the buildings and sheds. You fire one of those and the fire position becomes silent, along with the allied rooms located near it.
You go in, and the area of impact consisted mostly of body parts, the bodies in other rooms were more or less intact, except some occasions of popped out eyes, and blood from ears and noses.

One of the most deadly weapons out there.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

Abbyy
05-21-2004, 06:26 AM
The good old RPO! p-)
One of the most deadly weapons out there.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

what will happen if bullet (incendary) hit warhead?

2RHPZ
07-01-2004, 06:20 PM
Some information about the ROKS-2s or ROKS-3 flamthrowers - www.himvoiska.narod.ru

ROKS-3 http://himvoiska.narod.ru/ogn11.jpg
http://himvoiska.narod.ru/ognemet41-45.html

haze99
07-01-2004, 10:48 PM
The US Army, used the M-9A1-7 flame thrower in the Vietnam War. That is the last model used by US forces. They have been removed from service, I believe these are currently stored in arsenals or deports.

Yes, the M-202 (Flash) was a 4-tube, 66mm, incendiary rocket launcher. I think this was fielded in the early 1970's? (if you have seen the movie "Commando", Arnold fires a M-202.) I am not sure when these removed or why? Since there has been no replacement.

khukuri
07-02-2004, 04:11 PM
Lanca-Chamas
brazil
Still used today
I think its the only country that still uses ordinary flame throwers. But then you dont know, China still uses alot of old gear.

http://www.tropaselite.hpg.ig.com.br/27pic18.jpg

khukuri
07-02-2004, 04:17 PM
Okay this is ofcourse not a flame thrower, but a good thing to use when if you want to set things on fire.
A normal fosfate smoke grenade. If you throw it in an house the furniture and stuff around will set fire.
I dont know but i guess there should be fosfate smoke grenades for 40 mm launchers, we dont have them but they should exist.

Anyone else tried?

Combat Wombat
07-02-2004, 06:33 PM
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?s=12e7c93452499c74528b8b39e1b1210d&threadid=1107178

A home made flame thrower made out of pvc pipes.