Indian Army wants combat flame-throwers

[Capt.Popeye]

Yes

Its not for terrorists alone.

It has application at other locations too.

Yeah. Hot Cooked meals too..... a change from packaged Combat rations.

 

[forcetrip]

A perfectly fine weapon against the type of targets mentioned in post No 1

Not that a comparison is needed, the Chinese use it too.

My comment was more of a light hearted joke about the more than necessary delays in foreign weapon inductions. About your other thing for it being a fine weapon I will have to whole heartedly disagree. All that ignite on someones back does seem a bit old fashioned. How about we google incendiary rockets or if I remember correctly the M202.

 

[kinsr]

i believe a flamethrower has uses other than to just burn terrorists. It can also be used to light up the foliage in a dense jungle that too from a distance of over 100 meters. Once the foliage cover is gone there are few places to hide for a terrorist. Also, the terrorists can infiltrate through fences but how can they cross a wall of fire. I think it is very much required by IA. Nothing else can light up a forest like a flame thrower other than perhaps a napalm bomb.

 

[ExtraOdinary]

They were used in WW 2, I wonder if armies use flamethrowers in this day and age.

i believe a flamethrower has uses other than to just burn terrorists. It can also be used to light up the foliage in a dense jungle that too from a distance of over 100 meters. Once the foliage cover is gone there are few places to hide for a terrorist. Also, the terrorists can infiltrate through fences but how can they cross a wall of fire. I think it is very much required by IA. Nothing else can light up a forest like a flame thrower other than perhaps a napalm bomb.

Another use is that they can also be used to cook food and light bonfires on lohri. I think instead of flamethrowers Indian army should induct some dragons.

 

[forcetrip]

i believe a flamethrower has uses other than to just burn terrorists. It can also be used to light up the foliage in a dense jungle that too from a distance of over 100 meters. Once the foliage cover is gone there are few places to hide for a terrorist. Also, the terrorists can infiltrate through fences but how can they cross a wall of fire. I think it is very much required by IA. Nothing else can light up a forest like a flame thrower other than perhaps a napalm bomb.

You never do that. Fire is an uncontrollable element. You can not plan a course of action thinking to burn things down. The only useful purpose is in close quarter reinforced positions with some sort of opening. Grenades and tear gas are used for that job today. Flame throwers were last successfully used in the vietnam and Korean war when engagement range was less than 50 meters. US stopped using them in 1978.

 

[kbd-raaf]

You never do that. Fire is an uncontrollable element. You can not plan a course of action thinking to burn things down. The only useful purpose is in close quarter reinforced positions with some sort of opening. Grenades and tear gas are used for that job today. Flame throwers were last successfully used in the vietnam and Korean war when engagement range was less than 50 meters. US stopped using them in 1978.

Controlled burn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[third eye]

My comment was more of a light hearted joke about the more than necessary delays in foreign weapon inductions. About your other thing for it being a fine weapon I will have to whole heartedly disagree. All that ignite on someones back does seem a bit old fashioned. How about we google incendiary rockets or if I remember correctly the M202.

Your point taken.

However, a flame thrower has tactical use in the battle field too. It is an old fashioned concept of WW 2 vintage but then other than mobile warfare in battles fought against fixed defenses it has relevance and shall help reduce losses for assaulting troops.

Rockets are not pin point weapons , for area targets napalm is better.

 

[sree45]

The one positive about using a flame thrower is no matter how brainwashed a terrorist is, fire will scare the shit out of him.

 

[forcetrip]

Controlled burn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Military personnel are not trained in fire fighter tactics. The reply was for the notion that an advancing unit sets fire to shrubs and vegetation to advance. Controlled burns are done for a wall of fire approaching rapidly towards a target. Access to more fuel for that fire is burned ahead of time and extinguished before it gets there. Or something similar. Let me know if I am missing something?

Your point taken.

However, a flame thrower has tactical use in the battle field too. It is an old fashioned concept of WW 2 vintage but then other than mobile warfare in battles fought against fixed defenses it has relevance and shall help reduce losses for assaulting troops.

Rockets are not pin point weapons , for area targets napalm is better.

There are thermite grenades among an arsenal of other more practical weapons.

 

[kbd-raaf]

Military personnel are not trained in fire fighter tactics. The reply was for the notion that an advancing unit sets fire to shrubs and vegetation to advance. Controlled burns are done for a wall of fire approaching rapidly towards a target. Access to more fuel for that fire is burned ahead of time and extinguished before it gets there. Or something similar. Let me know if I am missing something?



There are thermite grenades among an arsenal of other more practical weapons.

I was just being pedantic. It's my most annoying trait.

 

[GR!FF!N]

just another ploy of RSS..they want cremation now..not tomb.

topic...

its kind of interesting to see IA is inducting Flame Throwers.yes,it is quite a shock for any person for getting burned to death.I remember,Japanese Soldiers feared this weapon in WW II.it creates kind of fear of getting burned.but this type of weapons are better against foxhole or bunker.

 

[airuah]

Probably when terrorists are holed up in a house say in kasmir...you just use these. Would be good in flushing them out or burn the whole house down with them inside

 

[forcetrip]

But thermite grenade would kill fast, and would not have desired psychological effect on terrorists.

Terrorists should be burned alive.

I did state it as "practical". Did not touch the issues of "entertainment" or "Head on spikes effect".

 

[Hiptullha]

When the US used flamethrowers in Vietnam, most were abandoned due to them being heavy and un-practical. Has there been any improvement in flamethrowers? I do not see them as viable in taking down a terrorist threat.

 

[axisofevil]

Retarded move. Flame throwers are a serious weakness that any enemey can and will exploit. Sniping the gas cylinder can lead to explosions. Have planes drop bombs rather than this BS