Flamethrower?

[weapon2010]

Does the flamethrower have the chance of blowing up?never saw it as  my flamethrower experience in the game is non-exsistent.

[A Canadian Cat]

I have no idea. I have never seen it but I would not count that possibility out. I would not worry about it much and if it ever happens make sure you post about it

[Wicky]

A test scenario could use a 100 flame throwers units clustered around a TRP - drop some mortar HE on em and see if they go critical in a chain reaction...

 

[domfluff]

Given that intentional Flamethrower ignition is not a trivial engineering problem, unintentional ignition seems pretty unlikely.

[Frenchy56]

Yeah, I don't think it's a thing that really happens with flamethrowers, even if Saving Private Ryan tells the opposite.

[DerKommissar]

Hollywood loves their explosions. In reality, cars do not get blown sky high after being hit by small arms fire.

This being said, I suppose it is possible that a tracer round somehow gets stuck inside a fuel tank (most likely, it'd go straight through). It can set off the petrol -- but it'll burn rather than explode.

Most flamethrowers had separate pressure tanks, for propelling the petrol out of the fuel tank:

So, if the pressure tank is hit by a bullet -- it could burst. So you may get a small non-fiery explosion.

Assuming the operator is being shot from the back, the pressure tank bursting and a fuel leak igniting would be in the direction of the bullet's entry hole -- away from the operator.

So, you won't get a fireworks display from one of these -- and if you're being shot at by tracer ammunition, you got bigger problems.

[weapon2010]

i thought it was reality, that the flamethrower duty was extremeley dangerous

[umlaut]

6 minutes ago, weapon2010 said:

i thought it was reality, that the flamethrower duty was extremeley dangerous

I am pretty sure it was. Even if they didn´t explode, then because a flamethrower was a high priority target for the enemy - and you would be relatively slow and easy to spot.

[Falaise]

I spoke with a French soldier from "chasseur alpin" who used a flamethrower at the end of the war when fighting in the mountains in the Alps
he explained to me that he was only exposing himself at the end to finish the job in the blockaus
he mostly told me about his loneliness, the other soldiers avoided him and did not talk to him
they disgusted them and don't understant his job

[Bozowans]

Yeah they don't explode when hit in real life. It's like shooting a metal tank full of water. It just punches a hole in the tank and the fuel starts leaking out. They don't explode in the game either.

I saw a WW2 flamethrower demonstration in person once. They are also much more silent than you might think. There is no big WHOOOSH sound like you hear in movies. At least not with the small backpack flamethrowers.

Flamethrower duty would still be very dangerous though because you have to get very close to the enemy. It's very hard to use them in CM for that reason. My flamethrower guys either get killed before they get close enough, or the enemy gets killed by other means before they get close enough. So they're useless either way.

Even if they don't explode, it would still be really awful to have to carry one in a real war. You can run with them but they're very heavy and awkward to carry and you probably won't be able to react or take cover as quickly. If by some chance you manage to get close enough to use it, then your exact location is instantly broadcast to everyone around you for a mile in every direction, like a giant beacon that says SHOOT ME.

[Bulletpoint]

11 hours ago, Bozowans said:

I saw a WW2 flamethrower demonstration in person once. They are also much more silent than you might think. There is no big WHOOOSH sound like you hear in movies. At least not with the small backpack flamethrowers.

+1 Didn't know that.

11 hours ago, Bozowans said:

Flamethrower duty would still be very dangerous though because you have to get very close to the enemy. It's very hard to use them in CM for that reason.

I'm sure it was dangerous to use in the real war, but in the game, it's nearly impossible to use flamethrowers at all. I think it has more to do with the game mechanics than realism. This weapon could do with a re-think of how it's supposed to be useful in game terms.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Bulletpoint

[Glubokii Boy]

When placed in ambush possitions they can do a decent amount of damage to careless attacker though...they may only get one or two bursts of before taking heavy fire...but thoose bursts can render entire squads more or less useless...a decent trade of i think..

[Bulletpoint]

29 minutes ago, RepsolCBR said:

When placed in ambush possitions they can do a decent amount of damage to careless attacker though...they may only get one or two bursts of before taking heavy fire...but thoose bursts can render entire squads more or less useless...a decent trade of i think..

Sure but this is not their intended role. They're nearly useless for the things they are supposed to do: taking out bunkers, trenches, and fortified buildings. 

[slysniper]

When used correct, the results are fine. Nothing wrong with the flame thrower, its the person using it. 

Every time something does not work for you does not mean the game has a issue.

To use effectively on the offence, the method that must be used to likely get the results you need is likely one of these two things.

Don't try to take on the enemy in a fire fight, flame throwers must be moved into locations that they receive no returning fire.

Per most military doctrines that is done by smoking the target to allow the flame thrower to move into place. Use smoke correctly and you will get them where you need to get them to go.

Second, I find that I can fire them at area target locations one hex away from the target and get the needed results. So you don't need to expose yourself to the target, if cover is available and you can get target to the adjacent hex you are likely good to go. Also a bust or two on adjacent hex might not do the job, but move that one additional hex right after the bust to target directly on target also will likely work. Flame does a great job of putting the enemy troops into a state that they are not going to recover from quickly.

Try using these methods before saying flame throwers don't work correctly in game.

[domfluff]

Yeah, flamethrowers are both incredibly awkward and devastatingly powerful - if you manage to get close enough, you'll usually clear out the fortified target in a single burst.

Also, Crocodiles. As in reality, the Churchill Crocodile is by far the best use of a flamethrower, with ridiculous range, heavy armour and a 75mm gun to back it up.

Man-portable flamethrowers might be the most difficult unit to use effectively in Combat Mission, but that doesn't mean they're modelled incorrectly.

One thing that CM does extremely well is give you an appreciation of range and scale - the 30m range of a man-portable flamethrower is extremely close, and more than anything dictates how they can be used - an awful lot can go wrong over that kind of distance.

[A Canadian Cat]

2 hours ago, slysniper said:

Every time something does not work for you does not mean the game has a issue.

No truer words have been spoken - at least not in the last 24 hours on this forum

Everyone should take this to heart. Start by asking yourself if you can see a problem with what you are doing and if you can do some research to find out how things were done historically. Then by all means post here with a question such as "how were flame throwers used in WW2. I cannot seem to get them to do anything helpful and I am wondering what I could do differently". Rather than jumping to the conclusion that the game mechanics are not working or the game is broken.

[Thewood1]

Another thing to keep in mind is most use of man portable FTs is for cleaning out strong points.  Most of the immediate combat has passed by a strong point so the FT user doesn't have to worry about flanks.  The FT's job is to do a final clean out of a strong point.

Even if you look at the usage of FTs that people have burned into the memories from Saving Private Ryan, the main strong point had already been flanked.  That gave the FT the opportunity to get close and fire up. 

Movie depiction of combat and the game ASL are probably the two biggest reasons people declare realistically researched wargames to be  broken.

[Warts 'n' all]

I quite enjoyed enjoyed using them in the Aachen campaign. Even firing them out of windows at nearby buildings a few times. Pretty coloured flames and dead Jerries, what more could one want?

[MikeyD]

I recall Steve mentioning that he once got to operate a flamethrower at a demonstration. He said, I recall, that it was an unpleasant experience. Feeling the heat coming off an exploding ball of flame originating just inches away from you. The closest most people get to fire these days is your gas stove or the occasional vacation campfire. Well, unless you live in California... or Australia... or Greece... or Spain...

[Glubokii Boy]

1 hour ago, Warts 'n' all said:

I quite enjoyed enjoyed using them in the Aachen campaign. Even firing them out of windows at nearby buildings a few times. Pretty coloured flames and dead Jerries, what more could one want?

The flamthrowers can indeed be tricky to use but they are one of those units that can bring great satisfaction ones they do work...

"ooohh, YES !!!!"