Vehicle flamethrowers

[Dr Dave]

I was looking at the British North Africa list. Where are the range stats for the M3 Satan flamethrower, ie. big vehicle mounted flamethrowers like the Satan and the Crocodile?

[sediment]

No range stats for any flame weapon.  The flamethrower special ability only kicks in in close assault.  No stand off flame attacks as far as I can see.  Crocodiles range stats is for the gun in the turret, not the flame.

Wiki suggests M3 Satan was only issued to the USMC in 1943.

Cheers, Andy

[Dr Dave]

Most sources give the Crocodile a range of about 100m, some a little longer at up to 150m - it depended on the rate and timing after prep of the flame attack since pressurisation was lost if left for too long. I Think BKCII gave them 12 attacks at 10cm and they ignored cover, but I've not got my rules to hand.

As for the M3 Satan, according to the lists the British can have them as well as lend lease kit - they'd be useful for winkling the DAK out of any positions during the El Alamein battles.

[sediment]

From what I've read, Crocodiles used to increase their range by hosing bunkers and the like with unignited fuel, which significantly increased the range it could be projected.  If necessary, they would light it with another jet of ignited fuel.  Apparently, getting soaked in fuel was enough to make all but the most zealous hold outs surrender.  Doubt it matters in the rules, but Crocodiles should be allowed a flame attack at 5 or 10 cm range, but it's probably enough of an abstraction to allow them the stats in close assault, they are pretty much almost there at that range.  Interestingly, the British in NW Europe and British paras seem to again be denied man portable flame weapons, which is one of the things BKCII had omitted as well, although for some bizarre reason they are included in the Italian lists.  Even more bizarrely, in Italy they are given to a flamethrower platoon of infantry, not an engineer platoon.  Are these meant to be sappers, I wonder and why not NW Europe and to the paras?

Cheers, Andy

[Dr Dave]

Yes, no para flamethrowers. I met a chap - Spr Tom Carpenter RE - who told me about about watching the Arnhem road bridge on fire. Recently painted, so slightly flammable still.  So no flamethrowers for them. I guess the Author has never seen A Bridge Too Far?

British inf bttns could draw them for the engineer platoon, but rarely did.

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

One suspects the manpack ones were replaced by the Wasp carriers.

[Orcs]

British inf bttns could draw them for the engineer platoon, but rarely did.

Most unpopular weapon I would suspect, both for the poor sod carrying it and those anywhere near him.  Makes you an instant target with the added chance of the thing exploding and burning to death.

And why use it when you could get a nice armoured vehicle to carry it for you

[sediment]

I agree with the sentiments re flame weapons, but if you have a bunker to deal with, there's nothing quite like the toasty effect they produce.  There are always guys who will be prepared to carry and use flame weapons.  I suspect Wasps would have replaced man packs where available, but I don't recall Wasps being available in Normandy and most accounts of their use seem to have been in Germany.  On that basis, man pack flame throwers would have been a pretty essential ingredient in assault engineer platoons taking on bunkers and the like, assuming of course there isn't a friendly Crocodile anywhere around.

Cheers, Andy

[barbarian]

My grand dad served in an engineer unit for the French in Italy (Elba june 44) and Provence all the way trough Germany.

They used to deal with bunkers by sending a poor lad running with the help of covering fire on the "windows" to just drop explosives on the roof of the bunker. (1kg of C4 I believe)

The bunker was not destroyed (maybe some cracks at time) but the people inside all died from the blast.

I have the composition of an engineers unit somewhere (all US equipment of course) and there is no flamethrowers.

[sediment]

Wiki listing under flamethrowers, UK and Commonwealth

The British World War II army flamethrowers, "Ack Packs", had a doughnut-shaped fuel tank with a small spherical pressurizer gas tank in the middle. As a result, some troops nicknamed them "lifebuoys". It was officially known as Flamethrower, Portable, No 2.

The British hardly used their man-portable systems, relying on Churchill Crocodile tanks in the European theatre. These tanks proved very effective against German defensive positions, and caused official Axis protests against their use. This flamethrower could produce a jet of flame exceeding 140 metres (150 yd). There are documented instances of German units summarily executing any captured British flame-tank crews.[22] In the Pacific theatre, Australian forces used converted Matilda tanks, known as Matilda Frogs.

So they certainly had them, and they were used according to what I have read, and they are allowed in the British Italian list.  Plus, the paras also had them issued, as neither Wasps nor Crocodiles could be parachuted and I doubt even a Wasp was modified for glider landing.

Still think man pack flame weapons should be in the NW Europe and Paras army lists.

Cheers, Andy

[Mal Wright]

The main object of the Churchill Crocodile and the Wasp, was to avoid 'close assaults'. These should be given a ranged attack. If to be included in close assault perhaps flame thrower vehicles and man packs should fire first and the target only reply if it survives.