flamethrower tanks needs a buff to make them more useful rather than just being able to kill open top exposed crews, it would be nice if these could also burn the engine, set exposed ammo on fire after prolonged exposure (to deplete MG belts and 20mm mounted guns for example), overheating the cannons and burn optics, IRL coctel molotov was actually useful against armor if an infantryman managed to get a clean hit on the engine, this would make it better at farming assistances rather than getting a kill directly cuz against well armored tanks theres not even an assistance if im not mistaken sinc theres no damage
7 Likes
Yeah I agree it should destroy engines if you hit the vents / be able to destroy machine guns. I dont think it should destroy the barrel though would be too cancerous
13 Likes
not destroying the barrel but more like gradually increasing the overheating value of the enemy cannon until it procs the delay
1 Like
Yeah not sure about that one, might just be a bit to stickly for gaijin’s spaghetti code
2 Likes
You can also add that driving over fire with a wheeled vehicle damages the tires, not to the point of instantly popping but just “don’t brake on top of fire of please”
idk how realistics this is tho.
2 Likes
Pretty sure the mix they use in flamethrowers would stick to the tires and ignite them if you drove through it.
2 Likes
If it has rubber tyres it could melt them, but things like the EBR have metal tyres too
Molotovs (and flame in general) were only useful against open toped vehicles, and gainst slosesd top ones that had decks that were not designed to defeat them.
Early tanks were vulnerable - T-26’s and the BT series, and some later tanks with large fan holes or engine air intakes on the deck would also be vulnerable.
But if the decks are designed well then flame is totally ineffective - would blind the crew if on vission devices tho
If you burnt off the rubber tires on the EBR though it could only drive in a straight line, the metal wheels don’t have steering. That would be funny, flamethrower its tires off and watch it plough into a tree or wall because it can still drive but not steer.
3 Likes
IRL would the flamethrowers go though openings in tanks like vents/mg slots etc and kill crew members? If so that would be something cool to see in game
they wouldn’t because they’re tiny holes otherwise plugged by a solid of metal (gun and whatnot)
We have at least one known example of a Panther being completely destroyed by a Churchill Crocodile’s flamethrower in combat. I can guess at why Gaijin doesn’t want flamethrowers to be that powerful in the game. But buffing them at least a bit would be a decent compromise with reality.
Is there a source?
4 Likes
I will look for it in a few hours when I’m at my pc. It was shared in the Discord server for The Troop, a WW2 game. Flamethrower vehicles are very effective there and the realism of this was being questioned, and in that context a source was provided. I’ll share it here as soon as I have it.
apparently these could kill the crew by depleting oxygen if lets say a flammpanzer focus fired a tank from close enough for sustained amount of time but it was too dangerous getting that close as any weapon could outrange a flame tank so assaulting positions defended by static guns, infantry with AT weapons and tanks with these things was nothing short of suicidal without previous bombardment and mixed forces assault in which case they probably wanted the heaviest tank for 1st wave and then throw these flamethrowers for a second wave instead to destroy bunkers infantry is having trouble with or setting structures on fire to force the defenders to surrender rather than fighting tanks
i wonder if these were used at some point to defend against assaults cuz im sure if used that way for ambush it would be incredibly deadly against most stuff that was caught by suprise when turning through a corner in the city
wish these things could also set these ANNOYING trees on fire in war thunder but i guess big fires cause a lot of lag in games
biblical accurate spreading fire in games = huge lag
1 Like
Found it.
The event I had in mind happened on 14th June at La Senaudiere. 15 Troop, C Sqn, 141 RAC. It’s described in the Report on the use of flamethrowers in the opening stage of the Normandy Campaign (D-Day to D+55)” TNA Supp 15/37. Unfortunately the document is not digitised.
The event is also described in the war diary for 141 RAC: “15 Tp attacked. LA SENAUDIERE782689 alone. KO’d one MK III and one Panther, Casualties - one Crocodile, one killed, two wounded, two missing. Remaining 2 tks returned to SOMMERVIEU.(3) Main Lessons (a) MK VII Crocodiles must be used primarily as flame NOT as A tk gun. In the early days of the invasion however, general principles had to go by the board in emergencies. (b) The few shots of flame actually fired did prove success.”
We also have photographic evidence of the Panther knocked out by the Crocodile.
It’s from I./6 Panzer Lehr.
1 Like
Allright but unless im missing something, this proves crocodile knocked out Panther but it doesnt say it was exclusively with flamethrower.
What was the mechanism by which the flame destroyed the panther?
This isnt conclusive evidence.
The original report does attribute the kill to the flamethrower. What the report says is that the Panther in question fired two rounds into the flamethrower trailer of one Crocodile, which failed to ignite. Two more Crocodiles engaged the Panther. One fired and the round bounced on the UFP. The other used the flamethrower on the Panther at short range and destroyed it.
If by this you mean, “how is it physically possible”, I don’t know for sure. If I had to guess, I would say that the heat may have ignited the Panther’s ammunition. After all, much more modest sources of heat resulted in fires of German ammo in other documented cases. For example, this is how one of the two Dicker Max ever built was lost. From Tank Encyclopaedia:
During the advance on Slutsk on June 26th, 1941, an unfortunate incident occurred which resulted in the destruction of one of the self-propelled guns. Although the exact cause was not definitively determined, it is believed that the intense heat generated from the engine, combined with the exceptionally high temperatures outside on that day, led to a buildup of heat. Within the area, a small quantity of high-explosive (HE) grenades was stored, which likely ignited as a result.
Fortunately, the crew members were quick to react when they noticed a small burst of flame, allowing them to promptly evacuate the vehicle. All five crew members observed the SPG continuing to move for a short distance before coming to a halt. However, shortly thereafter, the flames spread and reached the main ammunition storage, causing a catastrophic fire. As a result, the vehicle was completely destroyed and had to be abandoned at the roadside. Remarkably, despite the loss of the vehicle, it was reported that the gun of the SPG remained intact and was still usable.
Here is a photo:
If an overheating engine can ignite HE ammo, I suspect a flamethrower could do the same. The state of the Panther in the photo is also at least consistent with that interpretation.
2 Likes
I highly doubt the flame phased through the steel armor, or that it heated the interior fast enough to cook off the ammo.
The steel would be good conductor for heat but unless the ammo was touching outer armor directly, heat would need to pass through whatever was between the ammo and the outer armor. There isnt direct route to transfer heat.
The heat from armor would first need to heat up the material between, and that would need to heat up the ammo to the point of cook off. Even if it was just only air, it would take ages for heat to build up like that.
This is physics.
What most likely happened was that the crew panicked and probably opened hatch or something, trying to evacuate the vehicle.
Again, that likely didnt happen within minutes.
Likely the wasnt just engine heat either, but sunlight as well, and heat accumulated over several hours.
Well, we have a report that attributes the kill to the flamethrower, and two photos showing a Panther that suffered detonation, though the detonation might have happened after the tank was disabled by the flamethrower. What is certain is that as far as the unit in question is aware, no one other than the three Crocodiles engaged this particular Panther, and no 75mm hit penetrated or disabled it.
We have additional variables that are unknown to us. You brought up the crew panicking and opening a hatch, but it’s also possible that for example the commander was unbuttoned when the engagement began. Unlikely, but not impossible, especially because the Panther opened fire first and the two Crocodiles that were not being targeted surprised it by emerging from a smoke screen that had been covering the advance.
I think it is certainly possible that the flamethrower started a fire somewhere inside the fighting compartment that led to the crew bailing out and ignited an ammo cookoff only after the tank had already been abandoned.
Regardless of the specific mechanism or sequence of events though, this would still translate into a “target destroyed” in WT. I’m not saying flamethrowers need to be made that powerful in the game from a balance perspective but it’s enough plausibility grounds to buff them, especially because now they are basically useless other than as lag-generation engines.
2 Likes