There is something so uniquely British about some designs. Some admixture of odd proportions and "good enough" engineering. Stumpy pistol rounds, bolt handles that hit the stock, and now this.
It's an interesting period of British design that's for sure, necessity and threat of immediate invasion by a superior force making us ditch our usual nitpickiness and just bash things out. That mentality worked carrying over to our car industry post war which is cool, although today that's pretty much dead in the water. RIP
Actually, if I remember correctly, this design is based, at least in shape, off the German WW1 portable flamethrower unit. The designation escapes me. farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7267843958_4d0642412a_b.jpg
It is a shame that the British automotive tradition withered that way. I must be odd to watch ones former colonies take over domestic industries. Tata seems to be good at long term planning. Maybe it will work out well.
You get used to it. Land Rovers and most "British" brands are out of most people's price league anyway, most cars you see are from Skoda, Vauxhall and Peugeot. Small hatchbacks and the like. What is a shame is the lack of UK based industry, but that's a worldwide issue we face with globalisation. It all has its benefits and drawbacks however, and if we do get a raw deal with importing European cars with leaving the EU we'll have to start manufacturing something soon; so you may yet see more quirky British shit built from necessity! Hooray!
The WW2 flamethrowers(as opposed to incendiary bombs) generally used a blend of heavy oil and petrol, rather than a thickener. I’ll try and check the papers and confirm what was used in this model.
I used to have the manual for this.. It's proper name was the "Ack Pack" flamethrower. The pressure vessel was spherical and filled with nitrogen, and there was a charging manifold to fill them from bulk N2 cylinders. The fill was petrol with a thickening agent similar to napalm. I seem to remember something about different coloured filler caps, but I can't recall the details.. it may have been to indicate different fuel types or training mixtures. I do recall that you could just squirt fuel by pulling the firing lever part way back. The recommended procedure was to squirt fuel first to wet the target and then ignite it with lit fuel..
Are you sure you are thinking if the British design? I recall the papers describing hydrogen pressurisation, using a single tank to pressurise and drive a pilot light. I could be wrong, I’ll try and refind the file in question. If I’m right, it is also possible that I’m describing an early war design, with the use of hydrogen not present in later models. The state of the art In flamethrowers ignition advanced immensely in the course of the war.
Whenever I see this flamethrower I always remember the first place I'd ever seen one. The film A Bridge Too Far, when two British paratroopers are attempting to clear a German bunker on their end of the bridge at Arnhem. Great scene, fascinating flamethrower.
Just a note, but I don't think the shoulder straps are the originals. Those quick release clips look suspiciously like the same fitted to the SA80 rifle sling.
The hoses also look too modern to be WW 2 stock. Somebody probably restored this tank to "wearable" condition, using what was at hand and not retraced original material.
This was a great video. I remember seeing this kind of flamethrower in the movie ' A Bridge To Far'. It was funny in that scene of the movie mentioned because the guy missed the machine gun nest and instead hit an aummuntion shed instead. So yeah the outcome was 🔥🎆🎇
My Grandfather Ken Seal used one of these landing at sword beach on dday. He was the only one in no.6 commandos with a flame-thrower. There's some good pictures of him on the net just about to land. It looks different to the one here. Google no.6 commando sword beach dday to have a look. He's written of the flame-thrower about that day that "my primary target was a pill box...my secondary target was a flack-tower... it weighed about 35lbs and was very effective at about 20 yards...capable of sustaining a burst of flame for approx 20 seconds...discarded it after the pill box attack as it was of no further use...was quite a relief to get rid of it as it was very bulky and highly dangerous".
Really interesting shape to optimize a flat-ish pressure vessel. Any other shape (cylinder etc) will try to turn into a sphere when you inflate it, creating inherent weak points. You wouldn't want to run around with a big sphere on your back. A doughnut can contain pressure without changing shape.
Have to admit... if there were one class of weapons I would love to never have existed, it's these. As a former firefighter/EMT.... these things are beyond horrifying in what they do. They're fascinating and horrifying at the same time.
Death by flamethrower would be fairly quick, they can never carry enough fuel. This wouldn't scare me as much as white phosphorus grenades which everyone can carry.
I read somewhere that the flamethrower operators (the ones lucky enough to survive) went home only to seek counseling over the horrors they witnessed and committed
Hi, you have picked the one weapon that every Para hated to jump with, hated to carry and hated to use. In 1960 I talked to one of the old sweats left over from Arnhem (the rumour in our battalion was that there were only 38 blokes that got away and the highest rank was a Corporal!) and he told me that no one would volunteer to carry a flamethrower, I used one once and once only.
“Similar to a pressure washer” Imagining Private Noodle Arms flailing this thing around while flames go in every direction and angle, similar to how I looked operating a pressure washer at 12 years old.
Things I don't wanna do, #58,581 in a series: walk around in a combat zone carrying a) a weapon that will make everyone who sees me instantly prioritize me as a target and b) a pressurized tank of explosively flammable stuff on my back.
One was seen used in the film A Bridge Too Far, the valve was used and the operator missed the bunker target and hit a ammo dump next to it with obvious results.
everyone knows Samurai Cop was a soft-sea-boot of Hollywood Cop and you absolutely have to carry over the more memorable lines for the audience to remember and clap at.
Don't know if it just where I'm from (Northern UK) but we pronounce buoy as "boy", sounds really weird to hear it as "boo-ey". Great vid though, wasn't complaining!
I'm surprised Charlie Hobson wasn't In this vid with you. Great job on the flamethrower I didn't even know the British even made a flamethrower. The tank looks just like the tank that the Germans used on the wex flammenwefer
I would not recommend firing this without any heat protective glove, especially for the off-hand, @6:02 try to fire it like that and you'll get flaming liquid on your hand.
Most man portable flame throwers were. The British didn't use man carried flame throwers much, they devoted their resources to vehicle mounted flame throwers. Churchill Crocodiles for heavy support, and from August 1944 onwards, several "Wasp" Universal Carriers in the heavy weapons companies of each battalion for more general duty. The British were probably the biggest user of flame throwing weapons in the latter half of WWII, and there are several Operational Research Reports issued on their use and effectiveness. Operation Astonia is a good example to look up for how the terror effect of the Churchill Crocodiles helped the British overcome a 12,000 man garrison for minor losses (~500 casualties).
Well, not the American M2. That is a very safely designed flame thrower that you did have to worry about getting shot at with (well worry anymore than normal about being shot at). This British thing is a very poorly designed death trap by comparison. I feel sorry for anyone who had to carry it into combat.
@@bayouboyy For how well the m2 is built, you are still carrying a tank of pressurized fuel or napalm or vodka... If the tank ruptures you're not gonna be happy...
@@1r0zz I can think of a lot worse things than being covered in fuel. There are a lot of mechanics out there that get covered in fuel pretty regularly. Point being, a person loaded with an M2 is at no additional risk while being shot at than any other of his fellow soldiers.
The last operational use of the Life Buoy was by the SADF during Operation Hooper in 1987-1988. One of its uses there - in addition to killing people an overly brutal and inhumane manner - was to burn the hulls of destroyed tanks. A tank that hasn't burned can be, with some difficulty, be repaired. A tank that has been on fire for a while has had its armour softened and is completely useless. The SADF were making deep strikes, and would not have been able to deny wrecks to the Angolans. Hence, the use of flamethrowers.
1:28 - Also, if hydrogen ignites when you _don't_ want it to, this is very hard to detect quickly, since a hydrogen-oxygen flame is essentially transparent.
I honestly never saw a flamethrower that looked even remotely save to operate... They all have that "eh, it'll work" look no matter the country and no matter the age.
To me the front hand grip, looks like it's a little too close to the nozzle. Do you know if that was a potential burn hazard for the user? Thanks & great content as always.
The 1944 changes is interesting, as 1944 UK intel documents on German models describe using a flare or firework at the front as the Japanese method, and don’t seem to record it being in UK use. I’m looking at the immediate postwar papers as soon as I finish lunch, I’ll try and update if I learn more.
Well if you get thrown over board with this at least you can protect yourself from carnivorous sea creatures while keeping your self afloat. Because water + flame thrower = maximum effectiveness SARCASM!!
Actually i think this one is different than the standard issue. See, the shoulder straps look nothing like the ones in the pictures. Those have padding (Which you'd expect with the potential weight this thing has) on the top, which is seemingly looped in the structure of the tank, and ring connections at the bottom of the strap, they are also Xed on the back, which these are not. IMO, there's two variants as you described, the clearly older metal one, with a pump that goes from the pressure tank to through the doughnut. It also features a device at the pick-up of the tube, and a different style of gun. And the later variant, this one, which has no pump passing through, no device, and a significantly different gun. BOTH, however, have the same style of harness. Pictures are quite clear on that. I also recall them being called the ack-pack, tho, it's been a while. Source, some old pictures i had in a folder for a diorama i did with a friend. :)
That VFG looks uncomfortably close to the the muzzle end like if it drips a bit a t the end 3rd degree burns close. Im guessing it actually isnt but that would be scary to use.
Look just like the "wex" flamethrowers that the germans used during ww1. This also makes one wonder what are the advantages/ disadvantages of having a round donut shape for the tank.
The British admired the Wex M1917 and developed their own version of it between the Wars. The main change was to replace the original long flame lance with a handier flame gun.
It's amazing how many people are commenting on the way he says "buoy". Most Americans don't pronounce it like the word "boy". We just don't. American and British English pronunciations can be quite different. I'm not sure why people are getting so het up over it.
Allegedly wasn't this concept or design for the buoy style of flamethrower from a German WWI design? Also what were the supposed benefits of the doughnut shape over others?
Would like to see you use the British flame thrower.... And are you going to release a blooper tape???? That should be interesting.. Keep up the good work IAN.... Did i spell that right???
There is something so uniquely British about some designs. Some admixture of odd proportions and "good enough" engineering. Stumpy pistol rounds, bolt handles that hit the stock, and now this.
It's an interesting period of British design that's for sure, necessity and threat of immediate invasion by a superior force making us ditch our usual nitpickiness and just bash things out.
That mentality worked carrying over to our car industry post war which is cool, although today that's pretty much dead in the water. RIP
Actually, if I remember correctly, this design is based, at least in shape, off the German WW1 portable flamethrower unit. The designation escapes me.
farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7267843958_4d0642412a_b.jpg
DaddyPims but oh man those new Aston Martins and Mclarens mmmm.
It is a shame that the British automotive tradition withered that way. I must be odd to watch ones former colonies take over domestic industries. Tata seems to be good at long term planning. Maybe it will work out well.
You get used to it. Land Rovers and most "British" brands are out of most people's price league anyway, most cars you see are from Skoda, Vauxhall and Peugeot. Small hatchbacks and the like.
What is a shame is the lack of UK based industry, but that's a worldwide issue we face with globalisation. It all has its benefits and drawbacks however, and if we do get a raw deal with importing European cars with leaving the EU we'll have to start manufacturing something soon; so you may yet see more quirky British shit built from necessity! Hooray!
When you tell people you have to stop at the gas station before going to the gun range then you pull this out.
Diabolical, you know you are free when they sell napalm in gas stations.
Actually you need to mix the gasoline with a ivory snow substance to get the true Napam effect
Michael Jackson styrofoam works as a substitute
The WW2 flamethrowers(as opposed to incendiary bombs) generally used a blend of heavy oil and petrol, rather than a thickener.
I’ll try and check the papers and confirm what was used in this model.
A military-grade donut. Homer Simpson would love it!
I would love to try a giant ass donut that smells like nitrogen and taste like gasoline 😋
I used to have the manual for this.. It's proper name was the "Ack Pack" flamethrower. The pressure vessel was spherical and filled with nitrogen, and there was a charging manifold to fill them from bulk N2 cylinders. The fill was petrol with a thickening agent similar to napalm. I seem to remember something about different coloured filler caps, but I can't recall the details.. it may have been to indicate different fuel types or training mixtures. I do recall that you could just squirt fuel by pulling the firing lever part way back. The recommended procedure was to squirt fuel first to wet the target and then ignite it with lit fuel..
South African Army still had those in 1979 - covered in Platoon Weapons section of Basic.
Richard, still there in ‘88 too.
Are you sure you are thinking if the British design? I recall the papers describing hydrogen pressurisation, using a single tank to pressurise and drive a pilot light.
I could be wrong, I’ll try and refind the file in question.
If I’m right, it is also possible that I’m describing an early war design, with the use of hydrogen not present in later models. The state of the art In flamethrowers ignition advanced immensely in the course of the war.
Come to think of it, these definitely had a single central gas tank.
That is the most adorable flamethrower I've ever seen
Just Another Fanboy baby’s first flamethrower
Not to the ones in the flame.
It looks rather like a power drill with an overly thick cable to me.
@Stop Banningme Maybe you'd stop getting banned if you stopped saying stuff like this.
@Stop Banningme did your dad say that to you alot?
Whenever I see this flamethrower I always remember the first place I'd ever seen one.
The film A Bridge Too Far, when two British paratroopers are attempting to clear a German bunker on their end of the bridge at Arnhem. Great scene, fascinating flamethrower.
Human History and they blow up the ammo dump
Do you have a light? Err, why are you holding the blow-dryer in my direction..?
ruclips.net/video/PHe4tMN6IeE/видео.html
You're a wizard, Ian.
I'd acccept Ian as a fire wizard,
*but there was no demonstration* ,
so I'll guess him to be an illusionist, instead.
@@PomiDarQu HES GUN AND WIZARD JESUS.
Just a note, but I don't think the shoulder straps are the originals. Those quick release clips look suspiciously like the same fitted to the SA80 rifle sling.
The hoses also look too modern to be WW 2 stock. Somebody probably restored this tank to "wearable" condition, using what was at hand and not retraced original material.
This was a great video. I remember seeing this kind of flamethrower in the movie ' A Bridge To Far'. It was funny in that scene of the movie mentioned because the guy missed the machine gun nest and instead hit an aummuntion shed instead. So yeah the outcome was 🔥🎆🎇
I was just wondering if anyone would remember this Great Movie with connection to this weapon! The answer is an obvious one. :)
This flamethrower is in battlefield 1
My Grandfather Ken Seal used one of these landing at sword beach on dday. He was the only one in no.6 commandos with a flame-thrower. There's some good pictures of him on the net just about to land. It looks different to the one here. Google no.6 commando sword beach dday to have a look.
He's written of the flame-thrower about that day that "my primary target was a pill box...my secondary target was a flack-tower... it weighed about 35lbs and was very effective at about 20 yards...capable of sustaining a burst of flame for approx 20 seconds...discarded it after the pill box attack as it was of no further use...was quite a relief to get rid of it as it was very bulky and highly dangerous".
Really interesting shape to optimize a flat-ish pressure vessel. Any other shape (cylinder etc) will try to turn into a sphere when you inflate it, creating inherent weak points. You wouldn't want to run around with a big sphere on your back. A doughnut can contain pressure without changing shape.
Have to admit... if there were one class of weapons I would love to never have existed, it's these. As a former firefighter/EMT.... these things are beyond horrifying in what they do. They're fascinating and horrifying at the same time.
killerpeaches7 I agree. Flamethrowers are right there with chemical weapons in the "nobody should die this way" catagory.
Fun fact. The m2 flamethrower which is considered the best designed flamethrower, was designed by a company that made fire extinguishers.
Death by flamethrower would be fairly quick, they can never carry enough fuel. This wouldn't scare me as much as white phosphorus grenades which everyone can carry.
I read somewhere that the flamethrower operators (the ones lucky enough to survive) went home only to seek counseling over the horrors they witnessed and committed
The deaths were mainly from carbon monoxide which is pretty quick you only need 1 breath of that and you die
I had a super soaker like this as a kid. It had the second strongest kick in my arsenal. Granted I was like eight years old.
Honestly, the biggest difference between a super soaker and flame thrower is the ignition system.
Hi, you have picked the one weapon that every Para hated to jump with, hated to carry and hated to use. In 1960 I talked to one of the old sweats left over from Arnhem (the rumour in our battalion was that there were only 38 blokes that got away and the highest rank was a Corporal!) and he told me that no one would volunteer to carry a flamethrower, I used one once and once only.
“Similar to a pressure washer”
Imagining Private Noodle Arms flailing this thing around while flames go in every direction and angle, similar to how I looked operating a pressure washer at 12 years old.
The front grip looks like it's uncomfortably close to the business end, especially since there's no shielding of any kind.
Ｉｔ＇ｓ ｙａ ｂｕｏｙ．
Ficus Tindley fat flame thrower
boo-ee
Things I don't wanna do, #58,581 in a series: walk around in a combat zone carrying a) a weapon that will make everyone who sees me instantly prioritize me as a target and b) a pressurized tank of explosively flammable stuff on my back.
One was seen used in the film A Bridge Too Far, the valve was used and the operator missed the bunker target and hit a ammo dump next to it with obvious results.
The video up next is of a cluster of daddy longlegs spiders.... hmmm
same, so proper.
Same over here.
Errrrrrrrrrr I saw it and the image gave me indigestion. It's a tums festival!
+Ralph Replete But he didn't say that, it was in Samurai Cop.
everyone knows Samurai Cop was a soft-sea-boot of Hollywood Cop and you absolutely have to carry over the more memorable lines for the audience to remember and clap at.
crack a cold one with the buoyyyyy
Don't know if it just where I'm from (Northern UK) but we pronounce buoy as "boy", sounds really weird to hear it as "boo-ey". Great vid though, wasn't complaining!
Everywhere in the Commonwealth as far as I know (Aussie here).
It is pronounced "boy" I wonder how he pronouces buoyancy
The most ironic life preserver ever.
True
Britain, Britain, Britain. They even make their terrifying weapons quirky, bless 'em.
That nozzle looks a little too close to your hand for my liking.
That thing is riddled with safety problems wow props for the people who had to use it
This was a post-war experimental lightweight version. The wartime one had a more compex connector with a pressure regulator and release.
Thanks for this Ian! Love seeing British stuff. Be well!
I'm surprised Charlie Hobson wasn't In this vid with you. Great job on the flamethrower I didn't even know the British even made a flamethrower. The tank looks just like the tank that the Germans used on the wex flammenwefer
The man walks on and my first thought, "Be vewwy vewwy quiet, I'm hunting Rabbits!"
At first I thought it was a low budget Ghostbuster remake
I was just wondering where the Commonwealth's flamethrower from Day of Infamy came from just the other day...
Same! I didn't even know the Brits had a flame thrower I thought it might have been invented for game balance reasons.
This can be seen in action in 'A Bridge too far'.
Olive flavor wasn't as popular as the cherry.
“A Flame-Trooper kit is available near your location”
So the main question is are you presenting an invitation for getting shot in the back by basically wearing a giant bullseye that can explode?
I would not recommend firing this without any heat protective glove, especially for the off-hand, @6:02 try to fire it like that and you'll get flaming liquid on your hand.
A rather good design. It is smaller and lighter then most flamethrowers. Reliable, and simple.
Okay so I have watched absolutely none of this yet but Christ alive that thing looks like a death trap
Most man portable flame throwers were. The British didn't use man carried flame throwers much, they devoted their resources to vehicle mounted flame throwers. Churchill Crocodiles for heavy support, and from August 1944 onwards, several "Wasp" Universal Carriers in the heavy weapons companies of each battalion for more general duty. The British were probably the biggest user of flame throwing weapons in the latter half of WWII, and there are several Operational Research Reports issued on their use and effectiveness.
Operation Astonia is a good example to look up for how the terror effect of the Churchill Crocodiles helped the British overcome a 12,000 man garrison for minor losses (~500 casualties).
Well, not the American M2. That is a very safely designed flame thrower that you did have to worry about getting shot at with (well worry anymore than normal about being shot at). This British thing is a very poorly designed death trap by comparison. I feel sorry for anyone who had to carry it into combat.
Ya the M2 was my comparison point I mean compared to that the life this thing looks like suicide in the form of a blow drier
@@bayouboyy
For how well the m2 is built, you are still carrying a tank of pressurized fuel or napalm or vodka...
If the tank ruptures you're not gonna be happy...
@@1r0zz I can think of a lot worse things than being covered in fuel. There are a lot of mechanics out there that get covered in fuel pretty regularly. Point being, a person loaded with an M2 is at no additional risk while being shot at than any other of his fellow soldiers.
The last operational use of the Life Buoy was by the SADF during Operation Hooper in 1987-1988. One of its uses there - in addition to killing people an overly brutal and inhumane manner - was to burn the hulls of destroyed tanks. A tank that hasn't burned can be, with some difficulty, be repaired. A tank that has been on fire for a while has had its armour softened and is completely useless. The SADF were making deep strikes, and would not have been able to deny wrecks to the Angolans. Hence, the use of flamethrowers.
1:28 - Also, if hydrogen ignites when you _don't_ want it to, this is very hard to detect quickly, since a hydrogen-oxygen flame is essentially transparent.
first time I've ever seen anything like that - fascinating
ooooh so THAT'S what they use in bf1
I always wondered why the flame troops where carying a tire on their back
NIGEL, GET THE LIFE BUOY
I GOT AN OLD INNER TUBE AND A BAD IDEA!!!
In Britain Bouy is pronuced just as Boy. To quote an old English song, appropriate to this 'Ave you got a light boy? 'Ave you got a light?
British don't say "booey" they say "boy".
Didn't even know that Americans said it like that until now
Organ Farm we know. We don’t care.
Wow good thing Ian is an American. Wow that sure was close.
I honestly never saw a flamethrower that looked even remotely save to operate... They all have that "eh, it'll work" look no matter the country and no matter the age.
1 in the morning about to go to sleep. Damn it Gun Jesus
Bonzi Buddy jeez it's 3:30 p.m. here
Bonzi Buddy Poor plebs, it's only 6am where I am, so I always get to wake up to a new Gun Jesus sermon
made by krispy kreme
L0L
ShinobuBlade probably better for your health than those sugar laden death cakes.
Krispy krout more like
Acually , those quick release buckles are a style introduced in the late 1960's early seventies. Though, may be protytype or trails pices.
To me the front hand grip, looks like it's a little too close to the nozzle. Do you know if that was a potential burn hazard for the user? Thanks & great content as always.
Looks like the Wechselapparat "Wex "
The 1944 changes is interesting, as 1944 UK intel documents on German models describe using a flare or firework at the front as the Japanese method, and don’t seem to record it being in UK use.
I’m looking at the immediate postwar papers as soon as I finish lunch, I’ll try and update if I learn more.
I don’t seem to have postwar papers on British design (as opposed to enemy types) ordered up, I’m afraid I can’t really say any more.
He looked badass when he walked out with it strapped to his back.
Well if you get thrown over board with this at least you can protect yourself from carnivorous sea creatures while keeping your self afloat. Because water + flame thrower = maximum effectiveness
SARCASM!!
Probably mentioned before BUT you can see one of these in action in the film ‘ a bridge too far’
I would be interested in seeing Ian shooting a (well made obviously) Luty homemade smg
So awesome. More flamethrowers please!
Actually i think this one is different than the standard issue. See, the shoulder straps look nothing like the ones in the pictures. Those have padding (Which you'd expect with the potential weight this thing has) on the top, which is seemingly looped in the structure of the tank, and ring connections at the bottom of the strap, they are also Xed on the back, which these are not.
IMO, there's two variants as you described, the clearly older metal one, with a pump that goes from the pressure tank to through the doughnut. It also features a device at the pick-up of the tube, and a different style of gun. And the later variant, this one, which has no pump passing through, no device, and a significantly different gun. BOTH, however, have the same style of harness. Pictures are quite clear on that. I also recall them being called the ack-pack, tho, it's been a while.
Source, some old pictures i had in a folder for a diorama i did with a friend. :)
we pronounce bouy the same as boy. I've wanted to see one of these since I was a lad!👍😁
That VFG looks uncomfortably close to the the muzzle end like if it drips a bit a t the end 3rd degree burns close. Im guessing it actually isnt but that would be scary to use.
My second favorite weapon from the Repairman Jack stories.
I saw something similar like this in A Bridge Too Far
Do you have a light? My cigar stopped burning.
Look just like the "wex" flamethrowers that the germans used during ww1. This also makes one wonder what are the advantages/ disadvantages of having a round donut shape for the tank.
The British admired the Wex M1917 and developed their own version of it between the Wars.
The main change was to replace the original long flame lance with a handier flame gun.
My eyes were glued to the m79 on the back wall
The way Americans say Buoy will never cease to bewilder me
Presumably if you turned the tank upside down and opened the valve that would vent the pressure gas while leaving the fuel inside.
Imagine using one without the front grip... That size and shape of tank is a bullet magnet too, surely!?!
Every flamethrower is a bullet magnet. And toroid is an efficient shape for a pressure vessel.
It's amazing how many people are commenting on the way he says "buoy". Most Americans don't pronounce it like the word "boy". We just don't. American and British English pronunciations can be quite different. I'm not sure why people are getting so het up over it.
I don't know why flamethrowers are ban.. or not used anymore.. those things are awesome.
With the burn time on these flamethrowers I would think it would be hard to run out of ignition cartridges.
I got sentenced to 30 years for owning and operating one of these contraptions . When I complained to the judge he said ' well , that's life boy ' .
Man, I hope they issued a good pair of gloves with that. Your forward hand is awfully close to the business end.
I wish you would’ve talked about why it’s in the shape of a doughnut. Did they just put a whole bunch of shapes in a box and pick up random?
you want a shape without any hard edges in order to have the internal pressure distributed as equally as possible on all sides.
@@alexm566 what do you mean by “hard edges”?
@@cartertrefz4585 lookup why the British comet plane was exploding mid air due to having square windows instead if rounded ones, same idea
Interesting unit
Of course you would fire a couple of igniters because you don't have enough fuel to ever need 10 and you want to be certain it ignites.
Lifebuoy flamethrower : kills 99 out of 100 in a bunker!
Take a look at the rhogun or Lacoste LDP above your right shoulder at 1:00 the next time you are in Leeds. Pls
Do you know IWS2000. It is truly be forgotten. Actually there is no video about it in YT
thats one DEADLY DONUT :p
Awesome video!
Those shoulder straps look uncomfortably thin for what I imagine would be a pretty heavy load when full.
Since the fuel ignites about four inches from the front grip, would they have been wearing a gauntlet of some sort?
What is the range and for about how long can you fire it before its empthy?
Allegedly wasn't this concept or design for the buoy style of flamethrower from a German WWI design? Also what were the supposed benefits of the doughnut shape over others?
Shit...I've been using it to water the garden...
any chance you have a German flamethrower
Now what i´m wondering is if this would actually work as a life buoy. Maybe if the fuel is empty and some pressure gas is still in there?
No need for gas in there as the fiberglass will retain the shape, and thus the volume (which creates the 'lift'), even without it.
+Laird Cummings just wear it backwards so you'll be facing up!! (Albeit, still under water....)
Man, your forward hand must have gotten real toasty firing that.
No way to depressurize, finite ignition cartridges, no shoulder stock.
Should probably just fill them with air and use them as actual life buoys.
wait, whats the E stand for in ARES?
rEsearch.
Ah I see, thanks
A.rmament RE. search S.ervices.
Deathbuoy flamethrower
If you turn the tank upside down, and pulled the trigger, ,, would that exhaust the tank without the liquid???
Thanks, and keep up the good work. ...
1:55 why hasn't this 'reverse double action' (don't have a better term lol) been implemented in revolvers???
Would like to see you use the British flame thrower....
And are you going to release a blooper tape????
That should be interesting..
Keep up the good work IAN....
Did i spell that right???
I love using this flamethrower in Day of Infamy
Was that a Swedish K pist M45 in the background?
You didn't mention anything about the sight picture, Ian.