Pete Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 Hi, does anyone know the required spec's for deactivating a flamethrower? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian L Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 Hi, does anyone know the required spec's for deactivating a flamethrower? And Mortars ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 Dear All, I doubt that a flamethrower is a firearm but I think that it would be a good idea to have some vital component missing or completely and obviously inoperative. A motor is clearly a firearm although easy to deactivate (and make a brand new one which I could do this afternoon in my workshop). John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packhow75 Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 Check with the Proof house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/5 See sectiopn 1 B, burning fuel definitley noxious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 I stand corrected! John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 24, 2015 Share Posted December 24, 2015 Some of the vets I work with use either a gas rifle or a blowgun to dart large animals. These are considered Class 5 as they discharge a dart , often loaded with a stuff called Immobilon. Get it on your skin you might have time for 'Oh Sh..':-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferretfixer Posted December 25, 2015 Share Posted December 25, 2015 (edited) 'Any Item which discharges a Noxious Substance'...................Section 5 Weapon. This was MEANT to cover Flamethrowers, but..................... When I was in the Police, if a perp was arrested for attempted/actual robbery. We used to charge them for being in possession of a Prohibited weapon. If they has an old Squeegy Bottle of Amonia. Because the sentence was greater upon conviction, than for an attempted Robbery! IE: An 'Item which discharged a Noxious Substance'!......... As Mortars have not been included in the unworkable new legislation. I wouldn't shout too loudly about them! The specs are sufficient & perfectly fit for purpose as they are!.....You DONT ant attention drawn to that category as well. We are Potentially going to suffer enough! There is MUCH to be legally challenged over these stupid, Ill thought out. & Unworkable, Discriiminatory Regulations....... As there are VAST sums of money involved in Deactivation, to name but one section of this nonsense. I feel it will be enevitable that a 'Major Player/Stakeholder' with the funds to do so. WILL Challenge this by taking the EU Government to the Euro Court of human Rights. Billions are Potentially involved here!.................... Deacts when Certed, are NO LONGER CLASSFIED AS FIREARMS!!! They are HARMLESS Lumps of Metal then! They actually have MORE value when destroyed as a Firearm & are from then on, HARMLESS! (Brit Spec, & done CORRECTLY to GOVERNMENT APPROVED ORIGINAL SPECS!) if the EU feel 'Threatened' by Harmless lumps of metal. There is no hope for the Human race, is there?.... If enacted, all this Nonsense Legislation, will do absolutely NOTHING, to protect us from Criminal's & Terrorists!!!!! I feel more threatened by The EU & our OWN Government to be perfectly Honest!.............................. Edited December 25, 2015 by ferretfixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 25, 2015 Share Posted December 25, 2015 Your right mate, the legislation exists, and is very workable. Says him after recent experience! BUT it was not the Boys and Girls on the ground, it is the morons in the offices who stop Policing by Consent , and look to 'How to can I enforce my prejudice'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REME 245 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 I would be very surprised if they would not want a visible aperture cut out of the pressure vessel on the Tank. Makes you wonder what happened to the war-time Lifebuoy ones they refurbished for the 1st Gulf War and then decided it was not very PC if indeed legal to use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower,_Portable,_No_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Not to mention %^*** dangerous for the operator! :wow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferretfixer Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 I would be very surprised if they would not want a visible aperture cut out of the pressure vessel on the Tank. Makes you wonder what happened to the war-time Lifebuoy ones they refurbished for the 1st Gulf War and then decided it was not very PC if indeed legal to use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower,_Portable,_No_2 We have always had them in War reserve stocks. They are not 'Generally' Talked about, instructed on. Or discussed in 'Normal' Warfare Training in the UK Forces. A Flamethrower is a Horiffic Weapon in use. We considered them Barbaric & Too Viscious for 'General' use on the Battlefield after the last World War. Russia & other countries of course. Continue to have them in the Armouries as the 'Norm'!........:embarrassed: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REME 245 Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 Are you saying from personal experience that you definitely know they are still in the system? The story I was told from an official source was that when they decided to field them in the First Gulf War they found the rubber parts had deteriorated in storage past a point where they were safe to use and a lot of money was spent having fittings and hoses made up at short notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferretfixer Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 Are you saying from personal experience that you definitely know they are still in the system? The story I was told from an official source was that when they decided to field them in the First Gulf War they found the rubber parts had deteriorated in storage past a point where they were safe to use and a lot of money was spent having fittings and hoses made up at short notice. Yes, When I was serving myself as an Armourer. :angel: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatchFuzee Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 For anyone interested in flamethrowers and not seen this already, I'm sure that you will enjoy watching:- http://www.questtv.co.uk/video/the-weapon-hunter-flamethrowers/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 The little carrier borne throwers were called WASPS. Imagine the Cromwell Crocodile! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degsy Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Yes , I think you would have to imagine it,:n00b: the Crocodile was based on a Churchill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 If I remember correctly, the Churchill Crocodile could fling flame 3-4 times the distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Yes , I think you would have to imagine it,:n00b: the Crocodile was based on a Churchill. :red: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferretfixer Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 If I remember correctly, the Churchill Crocodile could fling flame 3-4 times the distance. Very Good for doing toast then?............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lauren Child Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) Very Good for doing toast then?............... Very. Although you actually have to wonder how many people survived the war because of it. Many people surrendered when it lumbered into view against them, or later when they were covered in flammable liquid and facing a nasty end. The ignition trigger was separate for a very good reason, fed from a separate fuel source. A horrific weapon when used to its conclusion, but combined with the AVRE it was a much safer way of taking out bunkers and fortified positions than an infantry assault alone. The AVRE would blow a hole in the fortification, then the Crocodile would squirt the jelly through the hole and wait. Net result a lot of people alive on both sides who wouldn't otherwise be. Coming back to the thread topic, it would actually be interesting to see where that put the Crocodile in the eyes of the law. The main Crocodile equipment is only used to squirt jelly over large distance. The part that shoots flame is a separate tank next to the driver. Edited January 16, 2016 by Lauren Child Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Would you fancy being covered in an inflamnable liquid? Therefore a 'Noxious Substance' See Section 5. Don't go planning a stink bomb thrower either! :nut: Be werrrry carful with your muck spreader as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kestrelhunter Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 I like the M132 Mech Flame Thrower. I have located most of the parts and pieces, now just need to find a good M113 to put it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryL Posted July 27, 2018 Share Posted July 27, 2018 On 12/24/2015 at 11:18 AM, Pete said: Hi, does anyone know the required spec's for deactivating a flamethrower? Hi Pete, Did you ever get a satisfactory answer to this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 27, 2018 Author Share Posted July 27, 2018 Hi. No I didn't. But there must be a spec': https://www.dandbmilitaria.com/deactivated-eu-uk-spec-lpo-50-flame-thrower-sn-slpo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.