Germany's use of flamethrowers.

as I said, flamethrowers are primerily an assault weapon. the germans were on the defensive from june 44 onwards

also they were short of fuel, so why use flamethrowers when your tigers are stranded running on air.

these are the more likely reasons why germany kept the use of flamethrowers to a minimum on the western front

they certainly had both man portable and tank based throwers already in the line and had used both in africa and the eastern and early western campains. The allies also opperated flame throwers.

I see no reason why a threat of chemical warfare would prevent german reuseing the weapons especially when they are being used by the other side.

FNG

 

Or could it have been not an official threat but a kind of unspoken decleration?

What the hell?

Anyways, countering flamethrowers with gas would be illogical.

First, it would undoubtably provoke a counter-strike by the Axis forces (who would have had a ready supply of toxic gases)
Second it's like countering a swinging baseball bat with a Desert eagle. Overkill, especially when the gunman is using their free hand to swing another bat.

I'm not trying to make anyone mad, just looking at what's been given and developing my own conclusions.

 

Apologies if I seem to ignore your email, but little in it seems to have much (if any) relevance to the core of the matter and little would be achieved by opening up yet another dubious area of speculation such as those you pose. Not being one to ignore a challenge, I have made enquiries elsewhere re this subject and have been reminded that the British government did threaten to employ weapons of the type mentioned if the Germans continued with their use of their V weapons.
Interestingly, this threat seemed to have achieved little, since it failed to prevent V weapons being used. Anyway, that notwithstanding, I must state now that, irrespective of whatever demands this may prompt for me to prove this latter point, it is not my intention to respond, since it is my first Thread that I presently feel requires justifying. In closing, though, it strikes me as both interesting and intriguing that the contributors to this seemingly erudite Forum, failed to raise the matter of the British counter to the V weapon threat ( i.e. that they would use "dubious" weaponry should the V weapon campaign continue ) and yet virtually to a man they chose to rubbish an important part of my first query..............and merely because they "don't believe it" !.

 

There is no evidence that the British ever threatened the German's with the use of gas for any reason in WW2.

Churchill did suggest using gas to counter the German invasion of Britain if it happened in 1940, and some preparations for its use were made, though his General staff were totally opposed to the idea.

He also asked his military to look into the practicality of using either gas or biological weapons against Germany in late 44 when the German V-1 and V-2 bombing campaign started. However his advisers threw the idea out, and nothing came of it.

So, in a nutshell. While the British did consider using gas against Germany a couple of times in WW2, at no point did they either threaten or use these weapons against Germany in WW2

 

This reply is the most logical and relevent response I have yet received and goes a very long way towards accounting for the seeming lack of use by the Germans of flamethrowers in the theatre we are discussing. It is only a pity that it wasn't made any earlier, since had it had been so it would have removed the need for me to make any further points on the matter, at least those of the content that I still feel duty bound to make, but nevertheless now see as being superfluous. Having said that, others are quite right to insist upon independent verification (if obtainable)when contentious statements have been made, and I am still attempting to secure this. However, accepting as I do that the British threat may well have more likely (or as equally ) applied to the German's continued use of their V weapons, I do not plan to devote a great deal of time to this matter, other than, if unsuccessful, put forward a retraction.
BG

 

They used the Abwehrflammenwerfer 42 in italy, which fuel tank was buried in the ground so the allied soldiers could only see the nozzle. When they get triggered they projected a jet of flame for some 50 meteres.




The Abwehrflammenwerfer 42 was a German static defensive flamethrower or flame mine used during the Second World War. The were usually buried at intervals of 12 to 30 yards / 10 to 27 meters covering road blocks, landing beaches, harbor walls and other obstacles. They were normally mixed in with other mines or emplaced behind barbed wire and could be command detonated or triggered by tripwires or other devices.

The mine consisted of a large fuel cylinder 53 cm / 21 inches high and 30 cm / 11¾ inches with a capacity of 29.5 liter / 7.7 gallons containing a black viscid liquid, a mix of light, medium, and heavy oils. A second smaller cylinder 67 mm / 2-5/8 inches in diameter and 25 cm / 10 inches high is mounted on top of the fuel cylinder; it contains the propellent powder, which was normally either black powder or a mixture of nitrocellulose and diethylene glycol dinitrate. A flame tube is fixed centrally on top of the fuel cylinder, it is a 50 mm / 2 inch diameter pipe that rises from the center of the tank and curves to extend horizontally approximately 50 cm / 20 inches. When the mine is buried, normally only the flame tube extends from the ground.

When the mine is triggered, a squib charge detonates the propellent, which forces the fuel from the main cylinder and out of the flame tube. A second squib ignites the fuel as it passes out of the end of the flame tube. The flame projected is 4.5 m / 5 yards wide and 2.7 m / 3 yards high with a range of about 27 m / 30 yards, and lasts about 1.5 seconds.

Regards,
Che.

 

Thanks for your interesting message, Che, but I am really more interested in any use the Germans may have made of flamethrowers in France/Belgium/Holland and Germany AFTER D-Day. Given the intense and often very fierce nature of much of the fighting in this area at that time, I am astonished that neither I, nor anyone else it would see, have ever heard of any German use of this weapon in those circumstances.
Cheers,BG