Using a needle of all things as a detonator is a lousy idea. For one thing you're going to, as I've said, have all sort of problems getting it to reliably detonate the retro-rocket you plan building into them.
You might stop thinking about it as a retro rocket. All I need is something to create a braking force in the opposite direction the bullet starts with one velocity and ends with another. I don't need high precision, I fully intend to have craptacular reliability and make up the difference in rate of fire. You seem to think that every weapon has to be better than today's military to be effective against sword weilding foes. It doesn't. All I need is something that can mow down idiots with swords.
Only if the Fremen are kind enough to play right into your hands.
The only way Fremen are superior to flame throwing tanks is if we give the freemen obscene advantages. For instance the Freemen can use lasguns, guns or some other technology to take out the tank, but the tank can't use the same technology back.
Yes there are some things where flamethrowers don't work. But let's try a few basic scenarios:
Fort defense. You are charged with attacking my compound. I have dug flamenests into the perimetre, topped them off with concrete and insulated them so that I have small firing slits. Access is from the rear and a second row covers the access points. Each nest has overlapping fields of fire with adjacent nests. Your Freemen are charged with assualting my position however they damn well please. I have velocity discriminating sheilds and my support troops have all the stock issue in universe weapons (lasguns, etc.). How do you sword wielding freemen make it past the ring of flamenests?
And the fact that you now have a dozens of guys trying to shoot enemies (who use effective guerilla tactics of ambush) with 50ft jets of flame makes fratricidal kills a virtual certainty.
Guerilla troops are useful for the bleeding the enemy, and doing precious little of that. If you are forced to take guerilla action you are already screwed six ways to sunday because you cannot hold ground.
And the fact that you now have a dozens of guys trying to shoot enemies (who use effective guerilla tactics of ambush) with 50ft jets of flame makes fratricidal kills a virtual certainty.
BS. Just like a LMG you
don't point it at friendlies, you space your troops so that you have room to use 50ft jets of flame.
Frankly, the fact that you can't distinguish between a special purpose weapon that was relatively scarce in numbers (and virtually eliminated now) and a standard weapon is pathetic.
It is a special use weapon because
something else is superior. We are talking about a universe where that something else no longer is. We are not talking about an army equipped with viable machine guns, assualt rifles, artillery and fragmentation grenades ... in a nutshell modern armies have no use for flamethrowers outside of special purposes because they have
effective ranged weaponry; Dune does not (or if they do why are they too damn stupid to use it?).
Yes, and you'll note the difference between using them as support weapons to take out fixed fortifications like pillboxes and bunkers and what you propose doing in making them the standard weapon of soldier for ordinary battlefeild use.
When in hell did I say that? I said they be effective weapons, tanks are not standard weapons, but they are damn effective. A handful of flamethrowing tanks will utterly decimate sword weilding Freemen.
It is like the old British maxi gun, you might only have a couple but they can literally take out hundreds and thousands of the enemy (when the enemy happens to be charging with edged weapons).
Yes, and you do realize that burning sheilded troops ain't quite the same thing as burning a little bit of greenery right? Especially since by your own admission you're hoping more for the secondary transfer than a direct hit.
Yes it takes more flame to burn out the brush than it does to kill the humans. Humans die when exposed to very small amounts of burning napalm, it takes far more to defoliate.
And your realize that infantry are used to take and hold objectives right? If their ownly uses are destroy, you've seriously reduced their effectiveness.
Unless I dunno, gee use a mixed force. Say a few flame throwing tanks for open battle and something else (idiot freemen if nothing else) for objectives they can't handle. Having weapons which can kill your enemies wholesale is normally considered a good thing.
Yes, I do realize that. However equipping your entire force with specialized weapons cripples the utility of the basic infantryman.
And who in hell said you would? Dune doesn't even use such weapons when they'd be immenently sensible. Like using flame throwers to defend fixed points. You have a small number of flame throwers to be utilized as force multipliers. Only idiots don't utilize combined arms and heterogenous forces.
Of course that presumes that your the other guys is going to be so obliging as to charge your wide open flame tank rather than simply destroying it from a distance.
With what? Everything they have, I have. They have velocity discriminating shields ... so do I. They have lasguns, so do I. Anything they can use against a tank I can use against them. Given that their preferred method of fighting is with edged weapons they either:
a. Have nothing which can stop a tech (using in universe technology to the fullest)
b. Are too stupid to use instead of edged weapons (which goes back to the initial point).
Actually, I was referring to their lack of anything resembling a decent, miniaturized computer. That lack (and all that goes with it) makes it difficult to feild much in the way of sophisticated weaponary.
There are any number of fieldable weapons that do not require miniaturized computers. Just using flamethrowers for fixed defense is lightyears ahead of dune.
FM:
In specific close order work, not mass open battles. Trench warfare and clearing island fortess are alot different than what you suggest. The flamethrower is not a weapon to use if your going to have a free flowing battle, which is what you're saying to use it in.
No I'm suggesting roasting what amounts to ancient sword infantry. I don't have to fight a pitched battle with legions of flame thrower troops. I can use a handful of flame throwing tanks and kill any loonies with edged weapons who mass in the open.
BH:
You forgot the six or so guys with rifles protecting them from getting picked off before they can get in range to use their flamethrower, or from being jumped by irate survivors of their attack when their tanks run dry. Since the rifles aren't an option, I guess you'd need some loonies with knives or something. "Until the ammo runs dry" is ~10 seconds for the M2-2, at which point some very angry guys with knives will be wanting a word with your flamethrower operators. I'd also point out to you that slavery exists in Dune: somehow I see a man like Baron Harkonnen having few qualms about simply rushing slaves at your flamethrowers until the tanks are dry.
You forget that we have those velocity discriminating shields which are the whole point they use swords in the first place.
Even with 10 seconds of flame you still have a ludicrious kill ratio before the sword bearing men get into range to stab. When one sides suffers 20:1 casualty rates it becomes damn hard to win on fair terms. Of course the amount of fuel a tank can carry means I can roast for a damn long time.
I'd also point out to you that slavery exists in Dune: somehow I see a man like Baron Harkonnen having few qualms about simply rushing slaves at your flamethrowers until the tanks are dry.
Slaves aren't free (indeed in most societies slaves to be an expensive investment) If his the money to
afford hordes of slaves we can afford hordes of flame throwers. Besides which how are you going to get them to charge? Threaten to kill them? Even slaves are going to resist being burned to death, even up to risking being stabbed by your men.
Horrible visual conditions like blowing sand, dense jungle or forest, thick fog, heavy snowfall, driving rain, dense urban areas, or the billowing black smoke your own weapons will produce? I'm not sure on the IR, but I don't recall it being used in Dune. Once you start setting fires all over the place, that'll be chancy too. "Clear the area before moving into it" might not be such a good idea in a city or in dry brush.
In other words the enemy can only attack you in thick fog, heavy snowfall, driving rain, or dense urban areas. The dense billowing smoke only occurs after the enemy is dead. I suppose you could launch in waves, still accept horrible casualties, and maybe cut the loss rate down towards 5 or 10 to 1.
If I had a weapon that limited the enemies freedom of action that severly, I call that a damn effective weapon. Not only can you NOT attack outside of ambush you can only ineffectively do that when the weather is adverse or you are in a city I can't afford to burn. What next are you going to ask that my men be asleep too?
Using flame throwers is chancy, well gee this is WAR. Chance is part of the game. If you can't accept any risks then stay home and play checkers. Reducing the enemies freedom of action is well worth the price.
Dealt with already in the thread. The "sword wielding loonies" will pull out the lasguns you forgot about, and turn your flame tank into a nice, bright napalm-fueled fireball.
And once the lasgun strikes the shield we get a minor nuclear explosion, in which case I fully intend to reply in kind.
So when troops armed with shields and knives manage a surprise landing on one of your worlds and take a major city, are your flamethrower units going to burn the city down to dig them out?
No I'd establish a militia in the major cities, have my own troops stationed there so when that any suprise attack either requires a crapload of resources to pull off or are repulsed.
A better question is what will
you do when my troops (armed with shields and knives in nothing else) manage a surprise landing on one of your worlds and take a major city and then deploy flamenests around?
I at least have the choice to burn the city down. At worst I can only deny you my own city, you on the othet hand can do jack didly squat.
If you "solve" that problem by staying turtled up in your defensive positions, you've just yielded the initiative to the enemy.
No the enemy has yielded to us. They can only fight where we can't bring flames and flame tanks to bear. Wahoo. Even then it is only when we can't accept the losses. Given that trained blade fighters are expensive and just about anyone with muscle can use a flame thrower and NOTHING you have put forth gives you a better than 5:1 loss ratio ... YOU LOSE.
We can always resort to using shields and knives and be little worse for having the OPTION of using flames.
Seriously can you guys moint a critique that doesn't amount to: "Well it ain't perfect so it must not be any good". Or "If you only use flamethrowers bad things happen"?[/i]
Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes.
Thank god for holzmann shield and stupid sword using looines.
