German flame thrower

[bnz. 42]

I am wondering if any one of you, guys, has (or has ever seen) an original Flammenwerfer 41, German flame thrower.
Do you have a picture of it?
Was there any special uniform to carry this scary weapon?

[P08]

Interesting question. I'd love to learn about this too

For some purposes it must have been an extremely effective weapon But it had potential for disaster if the carrier got shot.

[P08]

Found some info here: http://www.waffenhq.de/infanterie/flammenwerfer41.html

[Langemark]

Could this be of any help ?

Mark

[bnz. 42]

Could this be of any help ?
Mark

Mark, is this one from your collection? An awesome example!

If I had it, I would put it on SS-mannequin, and it would be "a bomb".

What is the value of it on today's market?

[Langemark]

- This FW 41 is from my collection. Although I am essentially an 'uniform collector' I have some (deactivated) weapons also.<O</O

- A special protective uniform was designed to be worn by FW-personnel. However those uniforms were rarely worn in combat.<O</O

- The last FW 41 I saw for sale last year was 2.000 Euros.
Best,
Mark<O</O

[djpool]

Heres a picture from the Regimentals Catalogue from about 5-6 years ago. Actually there were 2 that I saw in the shop.They were awesome.But at $2500 too pricey for me. About 4 years ago when we were in Germany I was offered one that was found in an old East German Army Barracks in Berlin. It was fairly priced at $1500 and still had fuel oil in the tanks! I passed on it because I wasn't sure I could legally ship it back to the states. I haven't seen any for sale over here yet. Jim

[bnz. 42]

It was fairly priced at $1500 and still had fuel oil in the tanks!

Actually, only one tank (the lower, bigger one) contained the flamable liquid.
The upper tank (the smaller one) was filled with Nitrogen and the pressure guided through the connected pipe into the lower tank.
The flamable liquid (in the lower tank) was droven out by the presure and ignited.

[Bergflak]

Flammenwerfer 41

The Fl.W. 41 pictured from the catalog is very interesting. It is wrongly mounted back to front on what is left of the carrying frame and has the first model of the flame tube. This model used a pilot-flame created from the gas tube on top. Didn't prove very successful in colder and damper climates. The second model, as pictured further up this string, used "strahlpatronen". The actual flame tube was made at Mauser werke, and carries a 10 round magazine going parallell with the tube. (Can be viewed dismantled in the earlier link). The rounds looks like 9mm pistol ammo, but has no projectile. When the "gunner" (or maybe more accurate; "Flamer") pulls on the handle a cartridge is pushed forward and arrested in the muzzle. The gas will open and the last pull of the handle will ignite the cartridge. Things "happen". When the gunner let go of the handle, the return spring will pull it forward cutting off the fuel supply, and at the same time eject the spent cartridge forward. Flamethrower is ready for the next "spurt".
The first models of flamethrowers were considered "dangerous" and gunners had leather protective clothing, including face-masks (I think). All pictures of the Fl.W. 41 shows the gunners in normal uniforms.
Not really sure what would happen if the flamethrower got hit. The Nitrogen is not flamable in itself, and the fuel wasn't really explosive (listed as "handelsübliche öl" or "Normal oil for general sale" in the original manuals). Could anyone tell me what type of fuel would work in this thing? I saw flamethrowers being used at the video from Knob Creek.

[Bob Lembke]

Flammenwerfer

My father fought with the Flammenwerfer for 2 1/2 years in WW I, and then in the fighting in Berlin in 1919, with the Freikorps Potsdam. I and a friend are writing a book under contract about WW I German flame-throwers and their employment. (Should be published by Schiffer in 2005.)

Very little is generally known about this, especially in the English-speaking world, and 90% of what is is dead wrong. We are working from documents, primary source accounts, patent applications, and my father's oral history.

The German troops in WW I never used protective clothing, as far as we can tell, although some other countries did, the Austro-Hungarians, I believe.

Re: your question: "Not really sure what would happen if the flamethrower got hit. The Nitrogen is not flamable in itself, and the fuel wasn't really explosive (listed as "handelsübliche öl" or "Normal oil for general sale" in the original manuals). Could anyone tell me what type of fuel would work in this thing?"

This getting hit and exploding thing, promoted all over the place, is appealing but largely a myth. (Brit FWs, often using compressed air and even oxygen, even exploded spontaneously on the proving ground. Stupid.) In reading 150 books in English, German, French, Italian and Slovene, only found one possibly true account of it supposedly happening once, but we know from better sources that no Flamm=Pioniere were killed on that day. The nitrogen was not only inert, it would be extinguishing. Units could "explode" as in rupturing, but not as in a flame explosion, and the working pressure was not that high, so the operator would be more likely to be hurt, not killed.

In WW I they used about five kinds of oil, for different purposes, such as (cheap) training oil, smoky combat oil (to cover the advance), and special low-smoke oil to attract minimal attention and artillery fire.

In the 26 attacks that we have solid data on the success, the German flame troops captured about 46,000 POWs, including a Brit and a French Brigadier; in 8 of these 360 MGs, and in 7 of those 280 cannon. (The most spectacular hauls were on the East Front, admittedly, but in an attack at Verdun a French brigade of the 29th ID was inhaled, almost 3000 POWs, 58 officers including the brigade and both regimental commanders. Losses? Four flame-pioneers.) Total number of flame troops lost in those 26 attacks? 69. Most of these attacks were on especially strong points, bridge-heads, etc.

One attack utilized 24 heavy and 130 light Flammenwerfer, directed tactically from the air by two-way radio and air-dropped orders.

The last model of light FW in WW I, the Wex, is, in my opinion (I am a mechanical engineer) overall a more sophisticated design than the FW 41, which resembles the earlier "Klief" (KLIEnen Flammenwerfer) more. Loaded, it weighed 50 lbs., less than the standard field pack, and sometimes men carried two of them.

Bob Lembke (visiting from Imperial Militaria)

[Blitz]

Could this be of any help ?

Mark

Mark, just out of curiosity. Is that Flammenwerfer operational? And if it's not, how has it been de-activated? I'm not so well educated in these as in regular firearms.

[Langemark]

Bob, Bergflak, bnz 42 and Jim, thank you for the interesting information.

Mark, just out of curiosity. Is that Flammenwerfer operational? And if it's not, how has it been de-activated?

Blitz, my Flammenwerfer isn’t operational anymore : several small holes were drilled in the flexible tube and most of the connection pipes are obstructed.

Best,
Mark

[Theodor]

Great information! Do the flame throwers really have to be deactivated? Can't they go under the title "heating equipment" or as a kind of working/manufacturing tool? In fact, some car workshops have not less dangerous torches

[Blitz]

Great information! Do the flame throwers really have to be deactivated? Can't they go under the title "heating equipment" or as a kind of working/manufacturing tool? In fact, some car workshops have not less dangerous torches

Theodor, a russian friend of mine told me that you can own a flamethrower-tank in Russia. That is, if it's named as a "Distant welding device"

[Greg Hamilton]

great pictures, thanks!


would any of the onwners of these post even more detialed shot or email them to me? I would love to build a repro for reenacting.

Also if anyone ever runs across one for sale please, please pass my info on. I'd love to put it right next to my panzerschreck!

Greg Hamilton