NAPALM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Canadian Army Infantry role "is to close with and destroy the enemy" [4][5]
The Australian Army defines the role of the infantry thus: "The role of the Infantry is to seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize or hold ground and repel attack, by day or night, regardless of season, weather or terrain."[6]
The United States Army describes the mission of infantry: "The Infantry closes with the enemy by means of fire and maneuver in order to destroy or capture him or to repel his assault by fire, close combat, and counterattack."{FM7-8, Infantry Rifle Platoon And Squad}
The infantry mission is "to close with and engage the enemy in all operational theatres and environments in order to bring about his defeat"[citation needed]
The US Marines role is to Locate, close with and destroy the enemy with fire and maneuver."
Use any legal method, of which Napalm is one.
Do those who are in the negative on here mean you would get choosy about what ordinance you choose to drop from your aircraft ?
Doesn't DU ordnance also leave a legacy on survivors ?
What about Fuel air bombs ? They are a fire ball like napalm ?
The Australian Army defines the role of the infantry thus: "The role of the Infantry is to seek out and close with the enemy, to kill or capture him, to seize or hold ground and repel attack, by day or night, regardless of season, weather or terrain."[6]
The United States Army describes the mission of infantry: "The Infantry closes with the enemy by means of fire and maneuver in order to destroy or capture him or to repel his assault by fire, close combat, and counterattack."{FM7-8, Infantry Rifle Platoon And Squad}
The infantry mission is "to close with and engage the enemy in all operational theatres and environments in order to bring about his defeat"[citation needed]
The US Marines role is to Locate, close with and destroy the enemy with fire and maneuver."
Use any legal method, of which Napalm is one.
Do those who are in the negative on here mean you would get choosy about what ordinance you choose to drop from your aircraft ?
Doesn't DU ordnance also leave a legacy on survivors ?
What about Fuel air bombs ? They are a fire ball like napalm ?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Found here
Net explosive wt is a factor...
Fuel Air Explosives will have a larger blast radius; The main destructive force of FAE is high overpressure, useful against soft targets such as minefields, armored vehicles, aircraft parked in the open, and bunkers.
The 550-pound CBU-72 cluster bomb contains three submunitions known as fuel/air explosive (FAE). The submunitions weigh approximately 100 pounds and contain 75 pounds of ethylene oxide with air-burst fuzing set for 30 feet. An aerosol cloud approximately 60 feet in diameter and 8 feet thick is created and ignited by an embedded piezoelectric crystal detonator to produce an explosion.
For those that espouse that Naplam is ILLEGAL, they just changed the Formula and its called INCENAGEL. Same Mk-77 Firebomb cheap aluminum containers.
MK 77 Mod 5 firebombs are incendiary devices with a function identical to earlier Mk 77 napalm weapons. Instead of the gasoline and benzene fuel, the Mk 77 Mod 5 firebomb uses kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.
A napalm bomb will cover a pear-shaped area 275 feet long and 80 feet wide. A solid sheet of 1500 degree fire envelops everything, killing personnel, exploding ammunition. It is not a flash fire like gasoline alone would be, but clings and burns and burns.
The real effectiveness of napalm lied in the ability of the bomb to skid along surfaces as it fell, exploding the bomb and spraying the jellied gasoline everywhere. In this manner, even the smallest drop of napalm could set any surface ablaze.
Mk 77 Bomb
.......Use of aerial incendiary bombs against civilian populations, including against military targets in civilian areas, was banned in the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Protocol III. However the United States reserved the right to use incendiary weapons against military objectives located in concentrations of civilians where it is judged that such use would cause fewer casualties and/or less collateral damage than alternative weapons........
Use in Iraq and Afghanistan
Net explosive wt is a factor...
Fuel Air Explosives will have a larger blast radius; The main destructive force of FAE is high overpressure, useful against soft targets such as minefields, armored vehicles, aircraft parked in the open, and bunkers.
The 550-pound CBU-72 cluster bomb contains three submunitions known as fuel/air explosive (FAE). The submunitions weigh approximately 100 pounds and contain 75 pounds of ethylene oxide with air-burst fuzing set for 30 feet. An aerosol cloud approximately 60 feet in diameter and 8 feet thick is created and ignited by an embedded piezoelectric crystal detonator to produce an explosion.
For those that espouse that Naplam is ILLEGAL, they just changed the Formula and its called INCENAGEL. Same Mk-77 Firebomb cheap aluminum containers.
MK 77 Mod 5 firebombs are incendiary devices with a function identical to earlier Mk 77 napalm weapons. Instead of the gasoline and benzene fuel, the Mk 77 Mod 5 firebomb uses kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.
A napalm bomb will cover a pear-shaped area 275 feet long and 80 feet wide. A solid sheet of 1500 degree fire envelops everything, killing personnel, exploding ammunition. It is not a flash fire like gasoline alone would be, but clings and burns and burns.
The real effectiveness of napalm lied in the ability of the bomb to skid along surfaces as it fell, exploding the bomb and spraying the jellied gasoline everywhere. In this manner, even the smallest drop of napalm could set any surface ablaze.
Mk 77 Bomb
.......Use of aerial incendiary bombs against civilian populations, including against military targets in civilian areas, was banned in the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Protocol III. However the United States reserved the right to use incendiary weapons against military objectives located in concentrations of civilians where it is judged that such use would cause fewer casualties and/or less collateral damage than alternative weapons........
Use in Iraq and Afghanistan
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Napalm rockets??
I seriously doubt that such a store was developed, let alone used.
It may have gone one stage beyond concept to the point where a patent was applied for - but beyond that...
Is there any documentary evidence (aside from the late Wing Commander's recollection) to support that such a weapon was used operationally?
I'm always willing to be educated on such matters.
It's got me intrigued, that one.
I seriously doubt that such a store was developed, let alone used.
It may have gone one stage beyond concept to the point where a patent was applied for - but beyond that...
Is there any documentary evidence (aside from the late Wing Commander's recollection) to support that such a weapon was used operationally?
I'm always willing to be educated on such matters.
It's got me intrigued, that one.
The RAAF pilots found the accuracy of the conventional bombing in the mountainous Korean terrain left something to be desired and had a definite preference for the air-to-ground rocket. Late in 1951, the RAAF developed a new type of rocket containing napalm, known as the 'Flaming Onion', and after trials at Williamtown and preliminary testing in Korea, the first examples arrived at 77 Squadron early in February 1952.
The Americans showed considerable interest in the new weapon, and on 8 February 1952, when the napalm rocket was first used in combat, the USAF provided an RF-80 reconnaissance aircraft to record the results on film for later analysis. The Squadron's new CO, Wing Commander Ron Susans led four Meteors armed with the new rockets in an attack on several buildings with 75% of the rockets scoring hits on the targets, resulting in numerous fires. The new weapon was to prove extremely useful against the enemy vehicle convoys and troop concentrations and soon became the standard under wing weapon carried by RAAF Meteors, with each aircraft capable of carrying eight rockets under each wing.
The Americans showed considerable interest in the new weapon, and on 8 February 1952, when the napalm rocket was first used in combat, the USAF provided an RF-80 reconnaissance aircraft to record the results on film for later analysis. The Squadron's new CO, Wing Commander Ron Susans led four Meteors armed with the new rockets in an attack on several buildings with 75% of the rockets scoring hits on the targets, resulting in numerous fires. The new weapon was to prove extremely useful against the enemy vehicle convoys and troop concentrations and soon became the standard under wing weapon carried by RAAF Meteors, with each aircraft capable of carrying eight rockets under each wing.
Last edited by Hempy; 24th Aug 2014 at 23:13.
JP233?
This was banned by default of us entering the Land Mines Treaty but me thinks this would work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAGmDqH4c-8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAGmDqH4c-8
Did I miss something so cutting a hostages head of with a Bowie knife or more crucifixions since Caesar was in town suggest the level of reciprocity required. So the proportionality of napalm or the Beirut solution either seem quite apt in this circumstances
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
Instead of the gasoline and benzene fuel, the Mk 77 Mod 5 firebomb uses kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.
http://s05.static-shell.com/content/...-stil---en.pdf
Last edited by GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU; 24th Aug 2014 at 08:50. Reason: Crap typing
Unnecessary suffering? It does matter how one dies. I know it's from Wikipedia, but this is a useful quote...
"Napalm is the most terrible pain you can imagine," said Kim Phúc, a napalm bombing survivor known from a famous Vietnam War photograph. "Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius (212°F). Napalm generates temperatures of 800 to 1,200 degrees Celsius (1,500-2,200°F)."
I'd prefer something quicker.
As for its use in rockets, no, but newer, similar substances are...
Triethylaluminium thickened with polyisobutylene is used as an incendiary weapon, as a pyrophoric alternative to napalm, e.g. in the M74 rockets for the M202A1 launchers. In this application it is known as TPA, for thickened pyrotechnic agent or thickened pyrophoric agent.
By the way, can you resize the photo there, Hempy, so we can all still read the page?
"Napalm is the most terrible pain you can imagine," said Kim Phúc, a napalm bombing survivor known from a famous Vietnam War photograph. "Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius (212°F). Napalm generates temperatures of 800 to 1,200 degrees Celsius (1,500-2,200°F)."
I'd prefer something quicker.
As for its use in rockets, no, but newer, similar substances are...
Triethylaluminium thickened with polyisobutylene is used as an incendiary weapon, as a pyrophoric alternative to napalm, e.g. in the M74 rockets for the M202A1 launchers. In this application it is known as TPA, for thickened pyrotechnic agent or thickened pyrophoric agent.
By the way, can you resize the photo there, Hempy, so we can all still read the page?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Marc,
No, Born and bred in the UK.
The point was, you used the words "unnecessary suffering", how many civilian men, women, children, priests, nuns disappeared,
put in concentration camps or were tortured unnecessarily during the dirty war by fellow Argentinians ?
No, Born and bred in the UK.
The point was, you used the words "unnecessary suffering", how many civilian men, women, children, priests, nuns disappeared,
put in concentration camps or were tortured unnecessarily during the dirty war by fellow Argentinians ?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Green Knight
well said
BTW it was worked out that FranTan/napalm was the cheapest thing to use from a/c in terms of $ per kill.
I believe that we should limit the use of certain weapon types (for example, both sides refrained from chemical weapons in WW2, didn't they?). A sergeant major in 10Para once said these words of wisdom (can't remember exactly, but something like): "If you wouldn't be prepared to fight with clubs, then why do you want this fight?" - meaning commitment and reason for a fight should need to be that strong.
well said
BTW it was worked out that FranTan/napalm was the cheapest thing to use from a/c in terms of $ per kill.
I believe that we should limit the use of certain weapon types (for example, both sides refrained from chemical weapons in WW2, didn't they?). A sergeant major in 10Para once said these words of wisdom (can't remember exactly, but something like): "If you wouldn't be prepared to fight with clubs, then why do you want this fight?" - meaning commitment and reason for a fight should need to be that strong.
500N,
I was eight years old when the dictatorship ended in 1983. Besides that, most of the people involved in the regime ended in jail or are in trial.
I donīt know why I could not argue about unnecessary suffering. Itīs like banning from this topic an American because fellow Americans dropped the bomb, a Japanese because fellow Japaneses commited attrocities on Nanking, Germans because fellow Germans killed Gipsys, Jews (and so on), Britons because fellow Britons exterminated cities on the Crusades. And a very long list of etceteras.
I was eight years old when the dictatorship ended in 1983. Besides that, most of the people involved in the regime ended in jail or are in trial.
I donīt know why I could not argue about unnecessary suffering. Itīs like banning from this topic an American because fellow Americans dropped the bomb, a Japanese because fellow Japaneses commited attrocities on Nanking, Germans because fellow Germans killed Gipsys, Jews (and so on), Britons because fellow Britons exterminated cities on the Crusades. And a very long list of etceteras.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Dark Side of West Wales
Age: 85
Posts: 161
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys for responding to my original question. My follow up is to ask how you would feel about being tasked to use Napalm or a later version thereof on IS forces in the Middle East right now?
The reason I ask this question is to see if attitudes have changed in the last 40 years or so towards the use of such weapons. I count among my friends a couple of guys who were involved in Vietnam in the 1970's. One was an FAC who felt that napalm was the most effective weapon he could use against his enemy in open country or forest. He said that all that he had to do was call in a strike and as soon as the aircraft made a dummy run the Vietcong would often brake off the engagement. The psychological effect on his enemy was he felt was immeasurable.
The other guy was a pilot who had often been tasked with dropping Napalm as well as lots of other ordinance. He did not like Napalm as he felt it was a whole lot more dangerous to use. Although he had no qualms about using it.
IS are currently using many bestial techniques against civilians in Iraq with the intention of creating terror in these communities. Is it not time that we responded with a little terror of out own, perhaps?
The reason I ask this question is to see if attitudes have changed in the last 40 years or so towards the use of such weapons. I count among my friends a couple of guys who were involved in Vietnam in the 1970's. One was an FAC who felt that napalm was the most effective weapon he could use against his enemy in open country or forest. He said that all that he had to do was call in a strike and as soon as the aircraft made a dummy run the Vietcong would often brake off the engagement. The psychological effect on his enemy was he felt was immeasurable.
The other guy was a pilot who had often been tasked with dropping Napalm as well as lots of other ordinance. He did not like Napalm as he felt it was a whole lot more dangerous to use. Although he had no qualms about using it.
IS are currently using many bestial techniques against civilians in Iraq with the intention of creating terror in these communities. Is it not time that we responded with a little terror of out own, perhaps?
Napalm is far too indiscriminate a weapon for today's 24 hour news, collateral damage averse society. You just need to look at the effect of one picture from Vietnam. Imagine news stories of children burning. Look at the reaction from the media when napalm was found in the Falklands after the war (even although it was played down by the BBC)
IS are currently using many bestial techniques against civilians in Iraq with the intention of creating terror in these communities. Is it not time that we responded with a little terror of out own, perhaps?
But while we have politicians who are probably trying to keep the moral high ground, when I don't think they need to, we will never defeat these sort of people, but just wait when they get back here and start back at home again and watch the 'turn the other cheek, living in a peaceful diverse population crowd' start bleating for the governments to do something, but it is too late now and these politicians will play at being 'big on the world stage' while more of our troops will be ham strung yet again and get nowhere other than more unnecessary loss of lives for no gain.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am inclined to agree as well.
Although the hawk in me has been somewhat subdued due to military experiences in my earlier years,
I've found that when dealing with a 'foreign' culture, one must first learn to speak their language....
This is what our elected representatives must realise.
See what I'm getting at?
.
Although the hawk in me has been somewhat subdued due to military experiences in my earlier years,
I've found that when dealing with a 'foreign' culture, one must first learn to speak their language....
This is what our elected representatives must realise.
See what I'm getting at?
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 25th Aug 2014 at 18:37.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExRigger
Re "
But while we have politicians who are probably trying to keep the moral high ground, when I don't think they need to, we will never defeat these sort of people, but just wait when they get back here and start back at home again and watch the 'turn the other cheek, living in a peaceful diverse population crowd' start bleating for the governments to do something, but it is too late now "
Have a read of the last few pages of the Heinous beheading crowd
and how Lebs and other Muslims who haven't assimilated (into what is a very multi cultural society) have caused no end of grief here in Aus,
http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/5459...ml#post8624017
Re "
But while we have politicians who are probably trying to keep the moral high ground, when I don't think they need to, we will never defeat these sort of people, but just wait when they get back here and start back at home again and watch the 'turn the other cheek, living in a peaceful diverse population crowd' start bleating for the governments to do something, but it is too late now "
Have a read of the last few pages of the Heinous beheading crowd
and how Lebs and other Muslims who haven't assimilated (into what is a very multi cultural society) have caused no end of grief here in Aus,
http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/5459...ml#post8624017
If I had a choice of munitions in the weapons magazine when directing a load for a strike aircraft, I'd pick FAE over napalm each and every time.
Napalm IMO was the forefather of the FAE, which gets a bit more use out of the fuel as a munition than the napalm does.
It provides both concussive force and flame/fire/incendiary effect to the target.
My two cents.
Napalm IMO was the forefather of the FAE, which gets a bit more use out of the fuel as a munition than the napalm does.
It provides both concussive force and flame/fire/incendiary effect to the target.
My two cents.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 25th Aug 2014 at 18:22.
Firstly I think I started an off topic launch with my response, however, thanks 500N, your link made interesting reading.
Problem being I believe UK has let it go to far, for too long and there is no will to do anything by the politicians and the police are hamstrung by them as well, if the law abiding indigenous population of all backgrounds stood up and said enough and tried to rebel they would be jailed.
I heard on the news that there is consideration of possible asbos being given out for those returning from fighting with the IS crowd, what message is that sending out, back on topic maybe they should be taken out by the latest version of napalm before they get a chance to get back, save the expense and hassle.
Problem being I believe UK has let it go to far, for too long and there is no will to do anything by the politicians and the police are hamstrung by them as well, if the law abiding indigenous population of all backgrounds stood up and said enough and tried to rebel they would be jailed.
I heard on the news that there is consideration of possible asbos being given out for those returning from fighting with the IS crowd, what message is that sending out, back on topic maybe they should be taken out by the latest version of napalm before they get a chance to get back, save the expense and hassle.
