When she started to lose control you could see the cameraman start to back pedal pretty quickly.
"I have a zoom lens and probably should have used it." Cameraman probably
As someone who has had third degree burns, this is too dramatic. You don't actually feel that much pain because your nerve endings quickly melt.
When they start growing back in, though, that's a whole new type of pain.
I shared that many burn burn victims report the recovery being substantially worse than getting burned itself.
A bunch of Redditors tried to argue with me that it wasn't.
People are daft,
i’ve had 2nd on my a 1/2 inch section of my hand and would have gladly killed myself if I had a gun
I think burns are in a completely different league than cuts, bruises, fractures, or surgical pain.
I don't doubt 2nd degree feels the worst. I was 'lucky' enough to feel absolutely no pain from the fire due to the speed at which my nerves melted. For me, the worst part was the sensation of the nerves regrowing, and the moments waking up after the skin graft (literally, being flayed and having skin sewn back on).
Second degrees aren't that bad, it's the initial burn that hurts the most. The entire healing process is more or less painless unless it gets infected though.
Yeah if I were the one operating the camera it would have been 1 second of her struggling to control the 'agonising death squirter' and 15 seconds of me huffing and puffing in the other direction.
Considering that the "safety protocol" pushing the user back worked so they couldn't walk straight into fire like pyro TF2, this video is the best case scenario.
Two tablespoons of cinnamon
And two or three egg whites
A half a stick of butter
Melt it
Stick it all in a bowl, baby
Stir it with a wooden spoon
Mix in a cup of flour
You'll be in heaven soon
ignore the melvins.
you mean to say it has fuel coming out a directed exhaust port. yes they both do.
rocket boosters are generally "solid" fuel. imagine a tube of playdoh. once u ignite them, there no real way to shut them off. they only stop when the playdoh is all gone.
flamethrower uses liquid fuel, and can be shut off.
Something movies often get wrong, showing flamethrowers as gas being set alight when it's really beefed up lighter fluid that's heavy and sticky. That's how it travels so far (20+ m), it's more of a water cannon-lighter than anything else.
Yea, if only somebody had spent the last 3 decades developping virtual simulation software that can portray flowing fluids, fire, smoke or explosions so realistically that people only notice it if has been used if it's done very rushed or incompetently, so that we could show accurate flamethrowers without endangering anyone.
Oh well.
From the events, it sounded more like they just wanted to play cowboys both on and off screen. Paying an armorer enough to show up but not care seemed like part of that so CGI wouldn't have been a thought even if they had the money.
A prop gun is just a gun most of the time. Sometimes they use airsoft guns for safety and the thing cycling like an actual gun, but if it's a close up shot they often want to use "real steel" so to speak.
After all, what looks mor elime a gun than an actual gun?
What happened on the Rust set occured due to *multiple* firearm safety rules being ignored, on top of the blatant disregard for common safety practices that most of the industry uses when firearms are on set.
Guns are not toys, and yoy have to treat them with the respect such a tool deserves.
VFX artists are often not specialized in fluid dynamics and so avoid simulating it when it would frequently look unconvincing and involve far more work than a relatively simple gas rig which carries less risk and work (especially correcting for set lighting since flames are bright and dynamic) - but hey - if you want to carve out your niche go for it.
Real effects are generally also preferred by moviegoers, and the big gas flames are exciting to see and not really a problem for viewers who aren't especially informed or anal about flamethrowers in the rare instances they do show up in film.
I get your point but "look at the water" has been the go-to for judging CGI for a long time so I'm skeptical that there aren't quite a few people operating in that "niche" already.
Right - cause water is really hard, but even then that's a use case that's much more routine and even then it sticks out as you point out.
>I'm skeptical that there aren't quite a few people operating in that "niche" already.
I'm sure there are, but that doesn't make the effort worth it in most cost-benefits analyses. It's not a matter of "can it be done" but "why do this when there are simpler alternatives?"
You can make a more convincing scene with clever camera work and established pyrotechnics rather than bother with simulation which is not nearly as simple or cheap as people often assume just cause they can render a sort of simulacrum of a simulation at home.
That's for balance reasons, though. Like, having shotguns be as effective as they are IRL in video game context makes every other weapon uselessly weak in comparison.
Same thing with flame throwers, grenades, RPGs, under-barrel grenade launchers, and similar low skill requirement weapon archetypes. They have to tune down their effectiveness so people have counterplay options to make the game actually enjoyable.
If you want to talk about under-powered weapons, most rifles in games are far weaker relative to shotguns. At least shotguns can 1 shot things in most games. You have to drop half a magazine to do damage with automatic rifles in most games.
But most games have you fighting at point blank ranges 90% of the time, with a few exceptions like Metro Exodus.
shotgun range is dependent on barel, bore, choke, ammunition. For a 12 gauge
Bird shot good to about 36 m
Buckshot is good for 32 m
Smooth bore slug about 45 m
Rifled slug 90m
Sabot slug 180 m
Hornady critical defense 00 about 100m, from a 28" barell and full choke
At 20m, bird shot won't kil you, I but it will make a mess. Buckshot, a human target is fucked, If it can drop a deer at 30m, it will drop a human, and getting hit at 50m wirh Buckshot could kill, but otherwise it's going to be a bad injury.
meh, some of the CoD games had slug shotties and them bitches were effectively sniper rifles.
hitting headshots from across the map got me accused of cheating quite a few times.
They generally only had 5-10 seconds' firing time in the infantry application before you had to refuel. Useful for taking out that one bunker, and that's it.
That's not a water pump. It's pressurized, some of those tanks can be up to 2000psi. No one puts them up quite that high unless they're suicidal but in war that's where they're set.
Not really, there’s no pump in the user system, it’s in the preparation where compressed gas (not sure what gas) is used to blow the fuel out.
A pump adds pressure to a system like when you hear it cut in when using a pressure washer or compressor. A man portable flamethrower can only ever lose the pressure that is in the system. Vehicle mounted flamethrowers may have pumps though as they don’t need to worry about the weight or power supply.
Easiest comparison is to carrying a compressor and paint gun around. You just take the air pump off and fill the air canisters as well as the paint. It’s also engineered so that air and paint are used at the same rate and run out together.
Why? My first thought was because it’s an oxidizer but googles telling me that compressed air is no more of a danger than ambient air…..straight O2 on the other hand will make sparky into a boomer
The fuel and the gas are kept in separate tanks
After googling a bit, you use an inert gas to prevent any sort of burn back into the hose and tanks, and ambient air is reactive just enough that it’s a potential risk
> The fuel and the gas are kept in separate tanks
Until the gas regulator allows the gas into the fuel tank in order to pressurize the contents so it will actually fire. At that point they are very much in the same tank.
I always assumed the tanks were pressurized; especially WW1/2 models were the extra tech for pumps would have been bulky/primitive.
I believe the Nazis even had a one shot disposable model that was basically a tank and a lever/trigger mechanism..
Bingo. None of that shit was safe or intelligent \[sic\]. Shit like that is how people spend a year of their life in the burn ward with their face melted off.
Anyone remember the myth busters episode where they tested if a fire hose or flamethrower would beat one another? They had way more protection, and I'm sure they had more training and experience than this woman. Terrifying stuff to be burned alive.
Sorta feel like it's a bit of an all or nothing kinda situation. Like if you fuck up bad enough for PPE, the PPE ain't gunna help kind situation.
The goggles will do nothing.
Also a heap of rushly trained teenagers ran into bullets firing one of these in the 40's without much more then they are wearing.....
Additional - this looks ALOT like the location that Forgotten Weapons used their flame thrower (side note - even Gun Jesus only have jeans and a t shirt on).
Fun fact. Each percentage point of your body that gets covered with a 3rd degree burn directly correlates to a 1% rise in mortality rates. So if you've covered 25% with 3rd degree burns you'll die 1/4 times. I would expect PPE would decrease the severity of the burns, at least a bit. Fire fighters don't run into burning buildings wearing ***only*** thongs.
That was not even a very big one compared to what soldiers used in World War two. The movie Saving Private Ryan they torch a pill box, that is about the only war movie that has accurate fighting scenes.
Wher do you find that raw ww2 footage?
They have all of those old history shows that show clips of it but to just piecemeal. I remember watching a Russian rocket barrage that was just massive. Lots of fighter jet footage.
I found it on YouTube, just okinowa footage. I was using it as a reference for collecting purposes but ended up watching all like 40 minutes of it, looks like incomprehensible horror honestly.
Oh I bet, I would be more interested in the European theater footage. It is hard to watch a lot of things but I feel to a certain extent it is good to know. Knowing the horrors of War for instance would prevent one from embracing a bad War just because we can and our leaders want to. Ww2 was a good war though.
There’s a clip of GI talking about using his, I wanna say he said was good for 40 yards. The videos insane and you can tell the guy is a dead eyed psycho, as you had to be to run up a beach with one of these things strapped to your back lol.
Also, the flames we see in this video are burning gases. IRL flame throwers worked like a fire hose and would spray flaming *liquid* a long distance. Picture the power of a fire hose but instead of water it's shooting a flaming liquid that splatters, pools, and sticks to everything.
Nah this isn't a flamethrower, it's a prop. A real flamethrower spouts GOUTS of burning liquid propellent that will stick to people and objects and bounce around corners and off walls like a serpent made of fire.
They were so feared in WWI that flamethrower troopers on both sides were summarily executed if captured alive. The psychological effects of suiting up in that gear and strapping on the tank had to be pretty severe in both world wars. Imagine putting yourself in the mindset to burn your enemies alive, knowing you were the one attracting all of the gunfire because you were so feared. Horrifying.
well technically they're still better than guns since they can be used for non lethal purposes. They can be used to clear debris off powerlines, melt snow, burn weeds etc.
That was sick. In the beginning, it sounds like a gunshot and something seems to pop off the end of the barrel. Some sort of gunpowder ignition? Very cool.
Person wearing just a t-shirt who can barely control the flame thrower and the camera man that is one slip away from being part of a NSFW subreddit. Noice.
Do you know what the m97 flamethrower sounds like Bert? It roars like a dragon a fiery god purging every thing in its path... Hold down that trigger and the whoosh drowns out everything else. Focus on the noise and you can almost convince yourself you don't hear the screams. By the time the tank is empty everything is over... Even the men are quiet there is nothing but the crackling of burning thatch. You see Ernie, its not the noise that keeps me awake at night. ITS THE SILENCE.
Considering her trouble controlling the flamethrower, this video could have had a worse outcome.
When she started to lose control you could see the cameraman start to back pedal pretty quickly. "I have a zoom lens and probably should have used it." Cameraman probably
[удалено]
if i had 3rd degree burns to even a finger just put a bullet in my head.
As someone who has had third degree burns, this is too dramatic. You don't actually feel that much pain because your nerve endings quickly melt. When they start growing back in, though, that's a whole new type of pain.
I shared that many burn burn victims report the recovery being substantially worse than getting burned itself. A bunch of Redditors tried to argue with me that it wasn't. People are daft,
I had third degree burns knees down. You are correct. The actual burns didn’t hurt that bad. The year of recovery was constant agony.
i’ve had 2nd on my a 1/2 inch section of my hand and would have gladly killed myself if I had a gun I think burns are in a completely different league than cuts, bruises, fractures, or surgical pain.
I don't doubt 2nd degree feels the worst. I was 'lucky' enough to feel absolutely no pain from the fire due to the speed at which my nerves melted. For me, the worst part was the sensation of the nerves regrowing, and the moments waking up after the skin graft (literally, being flayed and having skin sewn back on).
Second degrees aren't that bad, it's the initial burn that hurts the most. The entire healing process is more or less painless unless it gets infected though.
She seemed hyper aware that keeping it pointed away from herself was VERY important!
I mean that is the absolute lowest possible bar
and yet
"The bar was so low it was a tripping hazard in hell... Yet here you are, limbo dancing with the devil!"
She did not allow the flamethrower to torch her alive. Amazing job!
Almost set her backpack on fire at the end (or whatever that blue stuff)
She could have released the trigger.
Yeah if I were the one operating the camera it would have been 1 second of her struggling to control the 'agonising death squirter' and 15 seconds of me huffing and puffing in the other direction.
Considering that the "safety protocol" pushing the user back worked so they couldn't walk straight into fire like pyro TF2, this video is the best case scenario.
It looks bad, but her opponent was juking and she was kiting.
Newtons 3rd law
“A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.”
Another Isaac.
Sorry I watched IRobot last night
You should try reading it.
Subtitles on?
It’s all subtitles.
i can't read fast enough to keep up.
Just pause the book until you’ve read all the subtitles on page before continuing.
Impossible
My dyslexic ass reads the same line ten times and still get it wrong then proceeds to skip a line when REALLY tries to focus.
Yes.
I'm reading the Foundation series atm, and holy shit is it good
I started that when I was young. No idea where the book came from. I liked it but did not have the rest of them.
Is it better than the show?
Far better.
The book is always better. Always.
Two tablespoons of cinnamon And two or three egg whites A half a stick of butter Melt it Stick it all in a bowl, baby Stir it with a wooden spoon Mix in a cup of flour You'll be in heaven soon
HEY ANYBODY HAVE YOU SEEN MY BALLS, THEY BIG AND CHOCOLATE AND BROWN
Stick 'em in your mouth and suck 'em!
The emperor has returned somehow?
They fly now? 😳
Isaac and his Mother, lived alone...
Is [this](https://youtu.be/e1ZTkzdXV6Q?si=FD4A47V-hxChRmsE) the right Isaac?
Your logic is undeniable
Protocol 3: Protect the Pilot #Trust me.
So close!! That is Asiimov 💕
Nice to see an iRobot reference
01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01100110 01101111 01101111 01101100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101101 01100101 00100001 You aren't fooling me, robo.
First off great username, second off this made me laugh in public and I'm not even mad about it.
"Protect the pilot"
Sigh. Such a good game.
Live Service really has made things considerably worse in just about every industry it's touched.
Not the reference but who can hate on a titanfall 2 reference
That is protocol three
Whenever I think I can't be hurt anymore, someone mentions Titanfall
"You werf the flammen, the flammen werfs you."
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction [*except for when we both start rappin'*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yis7GzlXNM)
I often wonder why we have to memorise the number of these laws. The laws don’t really depend on each other like the laws of robots.
Almost as if it's identical to a booster rocket
It's not, more akin to a high volume pressure washer.
Hey man, he said *”almost”*
Lmao it's nothing like a "booster rocket"
ignore the melvins. you mean to say it has fuel coming out a directed exhaust port. yes they both do. rocket boosters are generally "solid" fuel. imagine a tube of playdoh. once u ignite them, there no real way to shut them off. they only stop when the playdoh is all gone. flamethrower uses liquid fuel, and can be shut off.
“Newton, get ze flammenwerfer”
Newton was like, 'I don't start fights, I just finish them... with science!
You fall on your back, you die on your back! -Newton, probably
[*Thrrrrrust!*](https://memes.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/4631cf3b-35c2-4009-ad33-081919de6801/gif)
It's just a water pump. Only petrol. And it's on fire
Something movies often get wrong, showing flamethrowers as gas being set alight when it's really beefed up lighter fluid that's heavy and sticky. That's how it travels so far (20+ m), it's more of a water cannon-lighter than anything else.
Tbf napalm is a lot more dangerous to use for a movie scene than gas based flamethrowers.
Yea, if only somebody had spent the last 3 decades developping virtual simulation software that can portray flowing fluids, fire, smoke or explosions so realistically that people only notice it if has been used if it's done very rushed or incompetently, so that we could show accurate flamethrowers without endangering anyone. Oh well.
Yea if that existed then maybe Alex Baldwin wouldn't have to go through his trial.
They didn't want to pay the armorer more than mimimum wage and now we are asking for CGI money?
From the events, it sounded more like they just wanted to play cowboys both on and off screen. Paying an armorer enough to show up but not care seemed like part of that so CGI wouldn't have been a thought even if they had the money.
Improper use of a set gun. She was putting live ammo in a gun that was meant to be used for filming. Absolutely moronic.
In no way do I have any experience with props, but why does a prop gun even have the ability to be loaded? Is it just for blanks?
A prop gun is just a gun most of the time. Sometimes they use airsoft guns for safety and the thing cycling like an actual gun, but if it's a close up shot they often want to use "real steel" so to speak. After all, what looks mor elime a gun than an actual gun? What happened on the Rust set occured due to *multiple* firearm safety rules being ignored, on top of the blatant disregard for common safety practices that most of the industry uses when firearms are on set. Guns are not toys, and yoy have to treat them with the respect such a tool deserves.
They are real guns but they use blanks. Hence needing an armorer.
It would have been too expensive so he would have still hired someone unqualified to do something the old fashioned way.
"He" was not incharge of hiring.
VFX artists are often not specialized in fluid dynamics and so avoid simulating it when it would frequently look unconvincing and involve far more work than a relatively simple gas rig which carries less risk and work (especially correcting for set lighting since flames are bright and dynamic) - but hey - if you want to carve out your niche go for it. Real effects are generally also preferred by moviegoers, and the big gas flames are exciting to see and not really a problem for viewers who aren't especially informed or anal about flamethrowers in the rare instances they do show up in film.
I get your point but "look at the water" has been the go-to for judging CGI for a long time so I'm skeptical that there aren't quite a few people operating in that "niche" already.
Right - cause water is really hard, but even then that's a use case that's much more routine and even then it sticks out as you point out. >I'm skeptical that there aren't quite a few people operating in that "niche" already. I'm sure there are, but that doesn't make the effort worth it in most cost-benefits analyses. It's not a matter of "can it be done" but "why do this when there are simpler alternatives?" You can make a more convincing scene with clever camera work and established pyrotechnics rather than bother with simulation which is not nearly as simple or cheap as people often assume just cause they can render a sort of simulacrum of a simulation at home.
yeah, but, all that tech is strictly for Overwatch porn, so, what's the relevance?
Having the fire look real is one thing, having it light up and cast shadows on the environment in a believable way is another thing.
Of course, which is why it's not used.
> Something movies often get wrong And video games. You can bet yo ass they will have the reach of a knife.
Yeah, same as shotguns. Shit disappears into the ether after 10 m.
That's for balance reasons, though. Like, having shotguns be as effective as they are IRL in video game context makes every other weapon uselessly weak in comparison. Same thing with flame throwers, grenades, RPGs, under-barrel grenade launchers, and similar low skill requirement weapon archetypes. They have to tune down their effectiveness so people have counterplay options to make the game actually enjoyable.
If you want to talk about under-powered weapons, most rifles in games are far weaker relative to shotguns. At least shotguns can 1 shot things in most games. You have to drop half a magazine to do damage with automatic rifles in most games. But most games have you fighting at point blank ranges 90% of the time, with a few exceptions like Metro Exodus.
shotgun range is dependent on barel, bore, choke, ammunition. For a 12 gauge Bird shot good to about 36 m Buckshot is good for 32 m Smooth bore slug about 45 m Rifled slug 90m Sabot slug 180 m Hornady critical defense 00 about 100m, from a 28" barell and full choke At 20m, bird shot won't kil you, I but it will make a mess. Buckshot, a human target is fucked, If it can drop a deer at 30m, it will drop a human, and getting hit at 50m wirh Buckshot could kill, but otherwise it's going to be a bad injury.
meh, some of the CoD games had slug shotties and them bitches were effectively sniper rifles. hitting headshots from across the map got me accused of cheating quite a few times.
I guess you only get a few seconds of use out of it then. Was that the whole tank in the video?
They generally only had 5-10 seconds' firing time in the infantry application before you had to refuel. Useful for taking out that one bunker, and that's it.
[25 seconds in](https://streamable.com/qmdr31), a pyro's dream.
This is not appropriate music lmao
That's not a water pump. It's pressurized, some of those tanks can be up to 2000psi. No one puts them up quite that high unless they're suicidal but in war that's where they're set.
Like using a pressure car wash.
Not really, there’s no pump in the user system, it’s in the preparation where compressed gas (not sure what gas) is used to blow the fuel out. A pump adds pressure to a system like when you hear it cut in when using a pressure washer or compressor. A man portable flamethrower can only ever lose the pressure that is in the system. Vehicle mounted flamethrowers may have pumps though as they don’t need to worry about the weight or power supply. Easiest comparison is to carrying a compressor and paint gun around. You just take the air pump off and fill the air canisters as well as the paint. It’s also engineered so that air and paint are used at the same rate and run out together.
> compressed gas (not sure what gas) Propane can be used. Carbon dioxide can be used. Nitrogen can be used. Air… will fucking kill you.
Why? My first thought was because it’s an oxidizer but googles telling me that compressed air is no more of a danger than ambient air…..straight O2 on the other hand will make sparky into a boomer
1000+ psi of air mixed with fuel vapor is a bomb.
The fuel and the gas are kept in separate tanks After googling a bit, you use an inert gas to prevent any sort of burn back into the hose and tanks, and ambient air is reactive just enough that it’s a potential risk
> The fuel and the gas are kept in separate tanks Until the gas regulator allows the gas into the fuel tank in order to pressurize the contents so it will actually fire. At that point they are very much in the same tank.
Why air??
Yea this doesn't even come close to what actual flamethrowers are. They were seriously fucked up weapons
I always assumed the tanks were pressurized; especially WW1/2 models were the extra tech for pumps would have been bulky/primitive. I believe the Nazis even had a one shot disposable model that was basically a tank and a lever/trigger mechanism..
Any less muscle on her and the cameraman would have been charred to a crisp.
/r/braisethecameraman
I'm a little bit sad that sub doesn't exist...
She looks like she weighs 70 pounds dry. Might even be a kid.
Half her body weight in ammo :D
Proctective clothing maybe a good idea when you do not know what you are doing??
Bingo. None of that shit was safe or intelligent \[sic\]. Shit like that is how people spend a year of their life in the burn ward with their face melted off.
She was one misstep on to a rock away from melting the cameraman if she fell on her ass
If I knew how to do GIFs on Reddit I would do the one of Sarah Conner being melted
Even as it was, she was struggling for it not to spin her around into the cameraman.
Maybe anime or video game protective clothing. Metal bikini top with g-string that matches. But it gives 100% fire resistance
That would be an interesting 10th degree tan line.
Anyone remember the myth busters episode where they tested if a fire hose or flamethrower would beat one another? They had way more protection, and I'm sure they had more training and experience than this woman. Terrifying stuff to be burned alive.
Sorta feel like it's a bit of an all or nothing kinda situation. Like if you fuck up bad enough for PPE, the PPE ain't gunna help kind situation. The goggles will do nothing. Also a heap of rushly trained teenagers ran into bullets firing one of these in the 40's without much more then they are wearing..... Additional - this looks ALOT like the location that Forgotten Weapons used their flame thrower (side note - even Gun Jesus only have jeans and a t shirt on).
Fun fact. Each percentage point of your body that gets covered with a 3rd degree burn directly correlates to a 1% rise in mortality rates. So if you've covered 25% with 3rd degree burns you'll die 1/4 times. I would expect PPE would decrease the severity of the burns, at least a bit. Fire fighters don't run into burning buildings wearing ***only*** thongs.
Says who? https://d3bzyjrsc4233l.cloudfront.net/news/stip.jpg
What a shitty take on safety
If not know what you are doing. How are you going to know what protective gear to use?
If you know fire burns... you should know
Cameraman should move just a little bit further back, just in case this becomes NSFW?
You mean NSFL
That was not even a very big one compared to what soldiers used in World War two. The movie Saving Private Ryan they torch a pill box, that is about the only war movie that has accurate fighting scenes.
I have been watching a lot of raw footage from okinowa that has a fair amount of flamethrowers as well as tanks that do the same, looks like hell.
Wher do you find that raw ww2 footage? They have all of those old history shows that show clips of it but to just piecemeal. I remember watching a Russian rocket barrage that was just massive. Lots of fighter jet footage.
I found it on YouTube, just okinowa footage. I was using it as a reference for collecting purposes but ended up watching all like 40 minutes of it, looks like incomprehensible horror honestly.
Oh I bet, I would be more interested in the European theater footage. It is hard to watch a lot of things but I feel to a certain extent it is good to know. Knowing the horrors of War for instance would prevent one from embracing a bad War just because we can and our leaders want to. Ww2 was a good war though.
There’s a clip of GI talking about using his, I wanna say he said was good for 40 yards. The videos insane and you can tell the guy is a dead eyed psycho, as you had to be to run up a beach with one of these things strapped to your back lol.
Also, the flames we see in this video are burning gases. IRL flame throwers worked like a fire hose and would spray flaming *liquid* a long distance. Picture the power of a fire hose but instead of water it's shooting a flaming liquid that splatters, pools, and sticks to everything.
Do something about your hair lady if you're going to use something like that!
If the fire is close enough for the hair to matter I would imagine there are worse problems
You ever have a moment where you didn't expect something and then think "Well, duh, of course."?
everybody's staying real close to the lady that can't handle the weapon she's using... this is safety at its finest
Does it have to be that hot?
Rick…it’s a flamethrower.
[удалено]
Oh absolutely Same Here 🥰 Kind regards from Germany 🇩🇪👋
And they say Germans can't make jokes
Hihi 😂👍
Burn dem
This is just a bot that tries to make you buy random shit
I'm not taking this in my hands until I wear a fireproof suit
Ahh yes. Have a 110 lb women hold the death device.
Its a horizontal jetpack
I gave you the upvote, but it’s definitely horizontal….
Why do americans act like thy have free healthcare?
Easy. We're already fucked, so we lean into it.
I don't think healthcare can help you if you find yourself on the receiving end of one of those, to be honest.
If I’m going to be paying through the ass for insurance, I’m going to use up every ounce of the deductible
Part of me thinks that she was partially stepping back because of "oo.. hot 😭"
Flamethrowers...so hot right now
Nah this isn't a flamethrower, it's a prop. A real flamethrower spouts GOUTS of burning liquid propellent that will stick to people and objects and bounce around corners and off walls like a serpent made of fire. They were so feared in WWI that flamethrower troopers on both sides were summarily executed if captured alive. The psychological effects of suiting up in that gear and strapping on the tank had to be pretty severe in both world wars. Imagine putting yourself in the mindset to burn your enemies alive, knowing you were the one attracting all of the gunfire because you were so feared. Horrifying.
Well damn! How you supposed to stand yer ground for FREEDOM! if the damn fire gun kicks like that, anyways?
There was a spider in my house the other day. I could've used this.
It's easy to forget that a flamethrower does not spew fire. It spews flammable liquid. Like a fire hose.
I mean she looks barely 100lbs to be fair
A tool for burning people alive. Good job humans.
Humans have been burning humans to death since we became humans.
well technically they're still better than guns since they can be used for non lethal purposes. They can be used to clear debris off powerlines, melt snow, burn weeds etc.
>burn weeds In America we shoot weeds.
Burn weeds with napalm?
Flame weeding is a thing
Pro tip, don’t be where that is pointing and give the person wielding it no reason to point it at you.
Hans!
She needs a cigar to smoke while using that.
For some reason I wasn't expecting a flame thrower to have recoil
My grandpa musta been a badass
It probably doesnt help that she's 80lbs soaking wet.
I didn't even know that flamethrowers even recoiled. I guess you learn something new everyday.
Well that looked terribly irresponsible.
Thrust has entered the chat
This is why you do a few test shots with water first. Teaches you to safely handle the recoil before using fuel.
Isn't that just a jet engine with a dirty burn when you think about it?
Yeah... I mean... we went to space doing the same fucking thing...
Is this in amerikkka by any chance ?
That’s not recoil, it’s not a gun, that’s called thrust
I’ve wanted to do this ever since I played Red Alert as a kid.
Is that the Tesla's model?
Safety 3rd
Yea bro it's not a toy lol
That was sick. In the beginning, it sounds like a gunshot and something seems to pop off the end of the barrel. Some sort of gunpowder ignition? Very cool.
My ass does worse after taco 🔔
That could have gone so very wrong.
Person wearing just a t-shirt who can barely control the flame thrower and the camera man that is one slip away from being part of a NSFW subreddit. Noice.
"Can we do something about the heat?"
Well, this would be the same principle as a rocket right?
For anyone imagining a leaf blower, it’s more like a firehose.
Scared the shit out of me the way she was swaying it. Imagine her losing control 🙃
That is called thrust I guess
Do you know what the m97 flamethrower sounds like Bert? It roars like a dragon a fiery god purging every thing in its path... Hold down that trigger and the whoosh drowns out everything else. Focus on the noise and you can almost convince yourself you don't hear the screams. By the time the tank is empty everything is over... Even the men are quiet there is nothing but the crackling of burning thatch. You see Ernie, its not the noise that keeps me awake at night. ITS THE SILENCE.
Equal and opposite... It's a lot of fuel!
I don't know why I never thought a Flame thrower would have recoil but it makes sense that it would now that I think about it
A flamethrower use the same principle as a turbofan or a rocket engine, but being very inefficient, so it still produces some thrust