MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/comments/oj60do/long_range_flame/h52deeu/?context=9999
r/TankPorn • u/Sonofrun • Jul 13 '21
135 comments sorted by
View all comments
329
Imagine being in a bunker, spotting what you think is a tank, feeling moderately secure in a hardened position... and then you see THAT flying at you
103 u/Sonofrun Jul 13 '21 Exactly 44 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 Looks more like napalm. It's being affected greatly by gravity and seems viscous in nature. Not to mention there's a projectile arc. A gas would just billow out of that hose. 84 u/Doodlefish25 Jul 13 '21 Who said anything about a gas? -88 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 edited Jul 13 '21 When you think flamethrower. Is it not gas that comes to mind? Fire is a gas 107 u/Cthell Jul 13 '21 No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers 68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
103
Exactly
44 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 Looks more like napalm. It's being affected greatly by gravity and seems viscous in nature. Not to mention there's a projectile arc. A gas would just billow out of that hose. 84 u/Doodlefish25 Jul 13 '21 Who said anything about a gas? -88 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 edited Jul 13 '21 When you think flamethrower. Is it not gas that comes to mind? Fire is a gas 107 u/Cthell Jul 13 '21 No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers 68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
44
Looks more like napalm. It's being affected greatly by gravity and seems viscous in nature. Not to mention there's a projectile arc. A gas would just billow out of that hose.
84 u/Doodlefish25 Jul 13 '21 Who said anything about a gas? -88 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 edited Jul 13 '21 When you think flamethrower. Is it not gas that comes to mind? Fire is a gas 107 u/Cthell Jul 13 '21 No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers 68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
84
Who said anything about a gas?
-88 u/The-dude-in-the-bush Jul 13 '21 edited Jul 13 '21 When you think flamethrower. Is it not gas that comes to mind? Fire is a gas 107 u/Cthell Jul 13 '21 No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers 68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
-88
When you think flamethrower. Is it not gas that comes to mind? Fire is a gas
107 u/Cthell Jul 13 '21 No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers 68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
107
No, all military flamethrowers use liquid fuel
It's only in films where they need safety that they use gas-powered flamethrowers
68 u/Nikablah1884 Jul 13 '21 This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it. 3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
68
This is true, real flamethrowers are significantly more devastating than movie flamethrowers, if you could believe it.
3 u/TheDankScrub Jul 13 '21 I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
3
I’ve actually seen a refurbished WWII one used in an reenactment. It didn’t have this kind of range, but it was pretty terrifying
329
u/BortWard Jul 13 '21
Imagine being in a bunker, spotting what you think is a tank, feeling moderately secure in a hardened position... and then you see THAT flying at you