Flame thrower tanks?
 

Watching "Halls of Montezuma" tonight, lots of Shermans in it.
But anyhow, in some of the scenes there were Shermans being used that had flame throwers on them. Some were "shooting" from the cannon barrel, and I saw one that had a tube mounted above the cannon that was doing the "shooting". Quick Google search popped up photos of the Shermans with cannon and hull mounted (in place of the machine gun) flame throwers. But I didn't find one with a tube mounted above the cannon. Did find the POA-CWS-H5, but that was a side mount, double barrel cannon arrangement.
Only a couple of seconds on the film, but what I saw looked more like a tube attached above the cannon barrel.

Was it an oops moment of Hollywood magic, or was there such a set up as that on the Sherman?

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

There were a few variants, the British made a M4 crocodile ( based on the Churchill Croc ). The M4 with the flamethrower in the turret did exist, it was no Hollywood error, here are pics of a real one:
http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_flamethrower.htm

Paul

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

Here is some historical info on the development and adoption:
http://olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_pho...amethrower.php

This would make a nice RC conversion but the temptation to have real flame would be too much ;)

Paul

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

If I'm reading & understanding GG's post correctly Paul, I think you might have missed the point in what GG was referring to with some of the tanks in the movie possibly just being Hollywood magic.

GG recognized the M4 with the double barrel with turret flamethrower setup as real (almost a side-by-side setup called the POA-CWS-H5), as well as noted other tanks which had flamethrowers mounted in the typical machine gun location in the hull & those that shoot the flames directly from the main barrel. However, I believe GG was probably alluding that there were tanks in the movie which I guess had tubes actually mounted on the top of & maybe even connected to the main barrel, which were shooting the flames.

What GG is looking for then would be some real pictures of a tank that has an over / under setup for the main barrel / flamethrower, with the flamethrower sitting on the top or over the main barrel.

I can't remember from when I had watched the movie long ago, & I couldn't find screen shots of the tanks in question in that movie for examples of the exact FT tanks GG might have been referring to, but I can say that the M4 with the dual setup can easily look like an over / under setup depending on what angle you see the tank, & if you don't get to examine it very closely or for very long, like in this image below ...

http://gallery.kitmaker.net/data/25050/snapshot_8.JPG



~ Craig ~

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

am bussy on a project i swapt from a guy here in belgium, he started it i'll go finishing it off

that guy told me those shermans were called Zippo as nickname

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

Karel, the one tank picture you posted (shown below) seems like it would have been an ideal example of a tank which could fit the over / under, main gun / flamethrower description, so I thought you found it ... but after seeing this same image on Flikr (here), there was an interesting post giving a feasible explanation of the actual use of that top barrel which looked like it could have been a flamethrower ...

http://images.rcuniverse.com/forum/u...99/Bv59046.jpg


<span class="comment-owner"><span class="comment-author-container"> </span> </span> <span class="comment-owner"><span class="comment-author-container"> </span> </span> <small class="comment-meta"> <span style="font-size: larger;">"</span><span style="font-size: larger;">Armchair Aviator:
You are partly correct, In this case the barrel on the top is a fake. It's used in place of the main gun for fake firing demo's. The real main gun has no firing mechanism. I spoke to the owner two months after my last post.
The version of the M4 you are referring to is the M4A3R3 Flame thrower - Also known as "Zippo tanks". The flame thrower was mounted next to the main gun on one version. On another variant of the A3R3 it was installed in place of the hull mounted 30cal.</span>"



<span style="font-size: larger;">~ Craig ~</span>
</small>

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

aha nice to know, that must be the reason that placed it on this one sideways

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

Not to be out done - here FlammpanzerIII in action

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.n...41873483_n.jpg


https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...04928194_n.jpg

:D

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

B.A.F. Yep, what I saw looked like an over under. Movie was on the Military channel last night. "Officer and a movie" series.

You're right I may have mistaken it due to the angle, but to my foggy mind it looked like a maybe 2"I.D. steel pipe with brackets holding it on top of the barrel.
The photo you posted from the movie may in fact have been part of the shot I saw, looking at it I may have just seen something that wasn't there. [&:]

Just caught me as off, like one of the pyro techs rigged up something to make the scene.



As for copying something like that in an r/c. Dangerous as all get out I would imagine, but could be done a couple of ways.
I have a Stuart I built for a client that uses an automotive windshield washer pump to "shoot" water out of the cannon. Water goes about 20-25 feet out of it.
I have enough problems worrying about water intrusion or leaks, don't even want to go anywhere near a tank setup full of napalm. No thank you.

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

Flame tanks came in many varieties with flame guns inside a mock gun tube replacing the 75mm guns on A1 and A3 Shermans. These had a 4 man crew without the loader. The pressure tank and flame fuel cell took up most of the turret interrior. Other mods included bow mounts replacing the cal 30 MG and had a fuel cell in the bow gunner's position and retained the main gun. Some were controlled thru linkage by the TC, others by the bow gunner with the fuel cells in the sponson ammo stowage area. The Marine POA-CS-H5 had the flame tube mounted in the gunner's secondary telescope mount with the 300 gal fuel cell in the bow gunners seat. This is what you saw in the movie and at an angle would appear as two gun tubes as they are only a foot apart with the flame gun being a bit shorter. A very few M-46s in Korea were fitted with an external pot shaped flame gun mounted on the front plate and connected to the bow gun barrel. Operated by the bow gunner by aiming with the cal 30 mg. These only had a range of 100-150 yards and were rarely if ever used. I had an M-67 for a while in 1958....M-48 flame tank which got out to 4-600 yards but as with all flame guns, range depended greatly on temperature and humidity. A full load would only give you about 90 seconds before reloading and this in itself was a very dangerous job. I got rid of it after one firing on the range.....[:@]. Two Pershings were fitted with bow flame guns with a 300 gal fuel cell in the ammo wells under the turret. None were ever issued and the T-35 Pershing flame design was discontinued.

Forgot to mention....the M-46 flame tanks had a huge armored trailer similar to the Crocodile....and hooked to the rear of the tank by a universal joint about 2 feet in diameter. The flame fuel ran along the right sponson boxes under a 1/2 inch thick armored shield. Only saw one and another with the flame "pot" and no trailer. at the time we weren't very interested in history...just keeping warm and alive.

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

Hi Pattoncommander
Thinking about it, the idea of putting the flame fuel inside the tank armour spells UXB.
The brit Crocodile solution with the fuel &amp; nitrogen in the separate trailer sounds a lot better solution?

Mal

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

I'm building the Zippo Sherman. The one of the ones the Seabees put together in Hawaii for Iwo Jima(then went in to production). They added the flame barrel out of the periscope hole in the mantlet. Mine will be non woking on my tank. I'll use it for the IR Emitter tube. I caught it in one of my Sherman modeling books and liked the difference.


Bill

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

And also a Churchill flame tank 1/16 rc..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QLanMeUMhs

RE: Flame thrower tanks?
 

The flame mix was always an X hazardous activity.....seperate cells is a good idea, but then a lot depends on proper mix and consistancy which combined with air temp and hiumidty can render the flame gun useless or very bad for the crew. Croc was a mean weapon.


Bill, think you refer to the gunner's telescope hole as with the POA...primary gunsight was the periscope on top, secondary was telescope in the mantlet.