Fire (the flames kind): what's it good for?

[BLSTK]

It took a while but I knew Arthur would would get the Hot Shot Spot

Then again, Artie always was a bit of a flamer.

[Rocky Balboa]

Rocky, I have a favour to ask you.

Send me a PM Ill help if I can

[John Kettler]

Vark,

Are you talking about Wilson? The Crocodile and similar could squirt out a stream of fuel alone, which hit with enough force to smash through light metal structures, after which the occupants got to think about the implications of what might happen were said fuel to be ignited!

Regards,

John Kettler

[BLSTK]

Thank you, Rocky. Or should I say Herr General Balboa?

[MikeyD]

I believe flamethrowers and napalm were internationally banned as military weapons in the 1970s, the same time they banned flechette rifle rounds. I recall they had tried to ban military shotguns but the US fought that tooth-and-nail.

[Buzz]

Not much; they've mostly been replaced by thermobaric warheads and white phosphorus.

Thanks YankeeDog. I guess flamethrowers are like a .22 if you got thermobaric warheads and white phosphorus.

Mikey D"...tried to ban military shotguns..." Say what? Being familiar with a military shotgun I find that incredible. Destructive weapons in the right situation for sure but I not go down the ban weapons road.

Never used flamethrowers too much in CMx1 but they were unique. I imagine CMx2 flamethrowers would be "hot"... to watch and use in the game. Save the thermobaric warheads and white phosphorus for Black Sea.

[Dadekster]

I'll never get the logic. Ban flamethrowers but white phosphorus is good to go...wtf?! How does that make any sense

[LukeFF]

...but private citizens in the U.S. can still own flamethrowers.

[Lt Belenko]

In CM1 you could deny the enemy passage of a highly flammable area - like a wheat field in the summer - by setting it ablaze. Luckily, it wasn´t a very effective tool as the flames spread rather slowly - and not in a totally predictable manner.

That is my recollection of it - and because of that I´m looking forward to having fire in CM2 and not too nervous about the gamey aspects. But apparently other people have other experiences.

I once made a CMBB scenario with mass quantities of FTs and solid wheat fields. It wasn't that fun but watching the flames spread was cool.

[Dadekster]

...but private citizens in the U.S. can still own flamethrowers.

True but they can also own white phosphorus as well.

[Fenris]

I'm more interested in stuff burning and the smoke it produces and how those things affect the battlefield than flame throwing weapons TBH.

-F

[A Canadian Cat]

I'll never get the logic. Ban flamethrowers but white phosphorus is good to go...wtf?! How does that make any sense

Yeah there is debate about that. The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons bans all incendiary devices. However it has a limitation on the ban that allows the use of devices that might have secondary incendiary effects for illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems. So, white phosphorus is used in smoke munitions and can therefore be considered to be part of the exception.

Many feel that the fact that it sometimes gets used to intentionally set fire to things is not covered by the convention.

Mind you there is debate and many disagree with the literal interpretation and think that the purpose of the specific use of the weapon should be taken into account. In other words using white phosphorous for the purpose of creating a smoke screen is OK but using it to burn down a building or burn out the enemy from a forest is not.

[sburke]

Many feel that the fact that it sometimes gets used to intentionally set fire to things is not covered by the convention.

Speaking of which, there is a meeting of the committee to ban the use of lighters and matches in war. This is to be followed by a meeting to ban the use of flint and tinder.

[Buzz]

Did an casual search for "thermobaric warhead".

1st page included SMAW-NE that "...proved highly effective in the battle for Fallujah... SMAW gunners became expert at determining which wall to shoot to cause the roof to collapse and crush the insurgents fortified inside interior rooms..... The NE round is supposed to be capable of going through a brick wall, but in practice gunners had to fire through a window or make a hole with an anti-tank rocket....."

"The rational for this approach was straightforward: “Marines could employ blast weapons prior to entering houses that had become pillboxes, not homes. The economic cost of house replacement is not comparable to American lives…all battalions adopted blast techniques appropriate to entering a bunker, assuming you did not know if the bunker was manned.”

in 2005.." proposals on the table that thousands of obsolete M-72 LAWs could be retrofitted with thermobaric warheads, making then into effective urban combat tools."

Also... how Chinese, Russians — even "guerrilla groups" aka terrorists now have thermobarics’ shockingly destructive power in their grasps.

I suspect thermobaric warheads and white phosphorus are included in CMSF-2 & Black Sea .

[Lethaface]

While I think it's unrealistic to imagine it's possible to ban effective weapons (cluster munitions, incendiary devices), I understand the motives behind those efforts. It is easy to make fun about matches and lighters, but there is no fun in firebombing (WP) densely populated area's, or littering those area's with AP mines (cluster munitions). The hypocrisy certain nations/groups seem to adhere to regarding this subject is.... deplorable.

Firebombing a forest that holds 3 divisions worth of enemy troops or cluster bombing an enemy military installation is very different from using those weapons in densely populated area's in asymmetrical warfare. Ban or no ban, it shows the real morals and ethics of those that wage war; whether they claim to be in line with Geneve conventions or not.

[Buzz]

Agreed Lethaface. Banning WMDs, mini WMDs, "terror weapons" that disperses excessive destruction among a population should be attempted in my opinion. A limited but effective STRIKE on a lethal threat limits the avoidable annihilation of non combatants.

Been involved in immediate post burn / trauma care for many humans. This is a horrendous and painful way to die or "survive" only to die months later. Knowing the suffering involved in incendiary weapons if it was me and my guys "entering houses that had become pillboxes" or cause the roof to collapse and crush the insurgents fortified inside interior rooms .... I light up the other guys so me and my guys survive.

[Lethaface]

By the way, CMSF already includes thermobaric munitions. To be specific the RPG-29 and SMAW have those rounds, IIRC.

[Buzz]

By the way, CMSF already includes thermobaric munitions. To be specific the RPG-29 and SMAW have those rounds, IIRC.

You are correct Sir. Thank you for pointing this out.

CMSF Game Manual v1.20 page 200 re: RPG-29

".... It can also penetrate over 1.5m of reinforced concrete and still have enough power remaining to cause casualties beyond. The anti-personnel round is the controversial thermobaric type which kills by using over pressure instead of fragmentation or ex- plosive effect. The RPG-29 may not be as sophisticated and powerful as the US Javelin, yet it is extremely lethal to even the heaviest armored vehicles."

CMSF Game Manual v1.10 page 19 re: SMAW

"The SMAW is a reloadable crew served rocket launcher, similar in concept to the WW2 Bazooka or modern day RPG-7V. It is a light weight launch system which can fire three different types of 83mm rockets: Mk3 High Explosive Dual Purpose (HEDP), Mk6 High Explosive Anti-Armor (HEAA), and Mk80 Novel Explosive (NE). The latter rocket type is a new thermobaric round which increases lethality within confined spaces. The SMAW is capable of defeating most hardened targets, be it a concrete bunker or an armored vehicle. It has a maximum effective range of about 500m, but is most effective in the 150-250m range."

Defeating "hardened targets" should be much more effective that the historical "flamethrower" and my improve with CMSF-2 & Black Sea.

[Lethaface]

Hoping to see some Black Sea footage/screens soon! I'm curious with regard to how the Russian's will compare to US/Nato troops. Syrian special forces with their RPG-29's with t92 (export model) tanks and or the Syrian airborne troops with their BMP-3 could be quite deadly when properly used (ambushes and hit and run tactics). Not to mention the AT-14! Hiding on rooftops or balconies and then letting the enemy pass by and opening up from the side or rear. Goodbye to the imagined invincible tanks!

I miss those asymmetric tactics.

[Lethaface]

By the way if CMSF2 comes I'm hoping CMSF content will be compatible. Would be a shame to see all that content 'lost', I for one would gladly pay full game price for a CMSF update to the 3.0 engine.

[MikeyD]

Interestingly, I read the US had recently pulled the last of its entire tank fleet out of Western Europe after a 70 year stay. So US armor would be entering the Black Sea battles more as a long range 'expeditionary force' than as an army simply rolling out of laager and driving down the highway. That may have gameplay implications if that's incorporated into the backstory.

[AttorneyAtWar]

Interestingly, I read the US had recently pulled the last of its entire tank fleet out of Western Europe after a 70 year stay. So US armor would be entering the Black Sea battles more as a long range 'expeditionary force' than as an army simply rolling out of laager and driving down the highway. That may have gameplay implications if that's incorporated into the backstory.

Thats a good point. A great scenario would be when the Russians begin there invasion of (Ukraine?) the US Campaign can begin with the 82nd Airborne being rapidly deployed as a stalling force before we bring in the big guns! Those guys can be deployed in force within 24 hours anywhere in the world!

[Lethaface]

Interestingly, I read the US had recently pulled the last of its entire tank fleet out of Western Europe after a 70 year stay. So US armor would be entering the Black Sea battles more as a long range 'expeditionary force' than as an army simply rolling out of laager and driving down the highway. That may have gameplay implications if that's incorporated into the backstory.

Well I'm quite sure that the US will have a sizeable tank fleet (among things) around eastern europe before a Black Sea type of conflict starts. They wouldn't just send in the 82nd and wait for shipped in reinforcements if Russia mounted a proper full scale invasion into Ukraine.

[Erwin]

I would predict that there is no way the US (or NATO) would enter into a land war a huge distance away from logistical support and on another superpower's doorstep with essentially the same ultra lethal weapons that we field. Anyone who thinks that probably believes that the US would invade China.

[Buzz]

Hoping to see some Black Sea footage/screens soon! I'm curious with regard to how the Russian's will compare to US/Nato troops. Syrian special forces with their RPG-29's with t92 (export model) tanks and or the Syrian airborne troops with their BMP-3 could be quite deadly when properly used (ambushes and hit and run tactics). Not to mention the AT-14! Hiding on rooftops or balconies and then letting the enemy pass by and opening up from the side or rear. Goodbye to the imagined invincible tanks!

I miss those asymmetric tactics.

Lethaface, "By the way if CMSF2 comes I'm hoping CMSF content will be compatible. Would be a shame to see all that content 'lost', I for one would gladly pay full game price for a CMSF update to the 3.0 engine."

Could not agree more re: CMSF update to the 3.0 engine and would be a shame to see all that content 'lost'.

I set up some Syrian special forces with their RPG-29's and ran some of the NATO imagined invincible tanks past. Many of the uber tanks were... destroyed, some immobilized and a few were still in the fight. Of course I played with the RPG-29 before I just never noted what made them so potent.

As for "...Black Sea battles more as a long range 'expeditionary force' ...." it could still be a bouquet of modern game time fun with the NATO 'expeditionary force' taking on the Russian invasion into Ukraine with modules developing the NATO calvary on the way

Modern is good but we are about to get some RED THUNDER! to entertain us while new modern gets developed.