Prev: RE: UN Ship Nomenclature Next: RE: UN Ship Nomenclature

Re: Vehicular Flamethrowers for SG2

From: John Leary <realjtl@s...>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 21:10:18 -0700
Subject: Re: Vehicular Flamethrowers for SG2

Glover, Owen wrote:

...Snip... The following is slightly rearranged to facilitate comments.
JTL...
> >	In WWII the German 251-16 halftrack mounted 2 1.4cm
flamethrowers
> >with a range of 35 meters.

> Hmm, so are we saying that we have a stream of the incendiary liquid
> 120m long or ...
> If teh former, I would imagine it is a real waste of propellant/fuel
if
     Yes, the subject is being limited to the 'Flamethrower'.
As far as waste goes, that is what war is about. (People, material,
countries, planets, ect.)  The only time one worries about fuel
is when you don't have any.

a means of delivering an incendiary ordnance to a point
> 120m away?
>  then we are back to an incediary warhead that we can
> put out to 3000m+ let alone the 120m!
... The answer here is a little more difficult:   
     Terror, The fear of being burned alive is in all of us.

     If given the choice of someone 3000 meters away shooting an
incendiary projectile at you or somebody 30 meters away shooting
flaming substance at you....  which would you choose?

Bye for now,
John L. 
> Owen G


Prev: RE: UN Ship Nomenclature Next: RE: UN Ship Nomenclature