[sci.military] Flamethrowers- they're not for the squeamish.

drn@pinet.aip.org (donald_newcomb) (02/08/91)

From: drn@pinet.aip.org (donald_newcomb)

  I could find no direct reference to this rather grim subject in the 
newsgroup from mid December so, I will open it up. 
  With troops planing to assault fortified positions, would flame-
throwers be used by either side?  _Brassey's Infantry Weapons of the
World_  discusses the flamethrower from Richard Fiedler's 1901
<flammenwerfer> to the Mark VII Churchill (Crocodile) flame throwing
tank of WWII. The discussion concludes, "in urban areas, smaller
flamethrowers will be extremely valuable to attacker and defender
alike. They will remain useful weapons for some time to come and it
is a pity that development of them in the forces of the Western World
has been so reduced."
  The only flamethrowers listed as current issue are the Soviet
ROKS-2 & 3 and LPO-50. The US M-7 is pictured but the caption des-
cribes it as obsolete. No data is given for the M-7.
  Are flamethrowers in the arsenals of either the US or Iraq? If not,
why not? What use of flamethrowers can we expect to see?
  Please reply directly to this address. I will post a synopsis of
responses.

Reference:
_Brassey's Infantry Weapons of the World 1950-1975_; Owen, J.I.H., Maj.
Gen., Editor; 1975; Bonanza Books, NY (US Edition).

Donald Newcomb
drn@pinet.aip.org
(601) 688-5998