Fire anyone?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Fire anyone?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Fire anyone?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Fire anyone? - 1/29/2007 2:22:59 PM

Kuokkanen

Posts: 3545
Joined: 4/2/2004
Status: offline

Glass bottle filled with pitch and gasoline was the most or the second most antitank weapon used by Finnish Defense Force in Second World War. Today are more efficient ways to burn tanks, but are they used and what's their effectiveness compared to modern AT weapons? Would missile loaded with (for example) napalm be more effective way to put tank out of commission than ... I really don't know modern AT missiles here other than already outdated TOW

< Message edited by Matti Kuokkanen -- 1/29/2007 2:35:39 PM >

_____________________________

You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

MekWars

Post #: 1

RE: Fire anyone? - 1/29/2007 2:27:49 PM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

Except "civilized" countries have banned such weaponry. We all know how good "laws" are concerning warfare. Well on second thought I guess we DONT.

The old adage " all's fair in Love and War" is only 1/4 correct now adays. As a man I wouldnt suggest you test the "love" part in any western nation.

(in reply to Kuokkanen)

Post #: 2

RE: Fire anyone? - 1/29/2007 11:24:23 PM

Smead

Posts: 107
Joined: 1/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

Glass bottle filled with pitch and gasoline was the most or the second most antitank weapon used by Finnish Defense Force in Second World War. Today are more efficient ways to burn tanks, but are they used and what's their effectiveness compared to modern AT weapons? Would missile loaded with (for example) napalm be more effective way to put tank out of commission than ... I really don't know modern AT missiles here other than already outdated TOW

WW2 AT weapons, bazooka, PF and similiar, and modern weapons from RPG to AT-4's to guided missiles like TOW and the misc Russian weapons use shaped charges to penetrate armor.

Against a tank, even in WW2, molotov cocktails were an annoyance weapon. I'm sure that they could be effective against the open topped half-tracks of that era though.

< Message edited by Smead -- 1/29/2007 11:36:03 PM >

(in reply to Kuokkanen)

Post #: 3

RE: Fire anyone? - 1/30/2007 11:15:33 AM

BailChannis

Posts: 9
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

Do modern tanks carry any oxygen internally, or could the crew theoretically be suffocated by a fire on the exterior which was intense enough to draw the oxygen out of the interior? Could a small thermobaric weapon be used as an antitank weapon?

quote:

Except "civilized" countries have banned such weaponry. We all know how good "laws" are concerning warfare. Well on second thought I guess we DONT.

They have?? There are a whole range of thermobaric weapons out there, which, while technically different than simple napalm or Molotovs, are essentially the same thing: fire bombs.

quote:

Against a tank, even in WW2, molotov cocktails were an annoyance weapon.

Unless buttoned down, tanks were extremely vulnerable to Molotovs. Also many tanks of the period were gas-powered rather than diesel, so the fuel tanks could be set off as gas has a fairly low flashpoint relative to diesel. Early Soviet tanks, I believe, were particularly susceptible.

< Message edited by BailChannis -- 1/30/2007 2:41:06 PM >

(in reply to Smead)

Post #: 4