Ukrainian drones now spray 2,500° C thermite streams right into Russian trenches

Post content hidden for low score. Show…

Chuckstar

Ars Legatus Legionis
37,249
Subscriptor
The missile that fires thousands of tungsten ball bearings probably causes more suffering than this. The bearings can hurt you but not kill you. If you are under this, I have a hard time thinking that you are going to live for long.
I guarantee you wouldn't live long after being in the blast of that missile, unless you just happened to get really lucky about where you got hit. Meanwhile, that thermite isn't burning very long. It seems to burn just about long enough to light the undertgrowth on fire. Getting out of the way of the slow-moving drone would be entirely feasible. I wouldn't want to be the target of that thermite drone, but if I had to choose between that and the blast-fragmentation warhead... easy call.
 
Upvote
39 (39 / 0)

Wickwick

Ars Legatus Legionis
39,604
A minor style-guide note for the moonshark: There should not be a space between the degree symbol and the capital 'C' to denote degrees Celsius. The superscript circle and the letter 'C' together are the symbol for this unit (title and body of text).

Edit: I'm not sure how you managed to copy/paste the Wiki article quote with that space between. It's correct in the source article.
 
Last edited:
Upvote
9 (9 / 0)
Wowzers.

Re Geneva Convention — seems like something designed for colonial powers fighting wars of choice, like France fighting Britain over some territory in the Americas. Ukraine was invaded by an evil empire and is fighting for its existence. The only logical constraint for them to impose on themselves is their own enlightened self interest. They have to be in it to win it, not to conform to some imperialist honor code.

I know it’s unpopular, but I agree wholeheartedly. Any Russian not wanting to be subjected to a horrible death is free to leave or surrender, after which they should absolutely be treated humanely.
 
Upvote
45 (46 / -1)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

CannonFodder314159

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
145
Subscriptor++
You guys do understand, you are making publicity, to a Major war crime and crime against humanity don't you???
Do you really believe, burning people alive, even if they are evil, to be ok???
If you do, you are really no better than them, if not worse........
What is a "war crime against humanity"?

Using incendiaries against enemy positions in the absence of civilians with the purpose of killing enemy troops, destroying cover, destroying fortifications, destroying heavy weapons and destroying ammunition and stores are all perfectly legitimate.

To be clear I'm not cheering for people (even russian soldiers) dying, but pointing out that this isn't a war crime.
 
Upvote
59 (59 / 0)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

IncorrigibleTroll

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
9,228
I guarantee you wouldn't live long after being in the blast of that missile, unless you just happened to get really lucky about where you got hit. Meanwhile, that thermite isn't burning very long. It seems to burn just about long enough to light the undertgrowth on fire. Getting out of the way of the slow-moving drone would be entirely feasible. I wouldn't want to be the target of that thermite drone, but if I had to choose between that and the blast-fragmentation warhead... easy call.

Napalm and white phosphorous are probably both worse than thermite from a wounded and suffering point of view. White phosphorous only burns around 800c.
 
Upvote
21 (21 / 0)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

mhalpern

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
43,721
This sounds like the technology of war criminals. What insane individual thought this up and how can civilized 21st militaries be using it? I don't want my tax dollars paying for this.
burning enemy cover is not a war crime, never has been, intentionally burning the enemy is frowned upon, and illegal for some militaries (self enforced mostly) including the United States, however "accidentally" burning the enemy "its war they were too close to the cover we had to defoliate, their fault" notably this drone can't effectively be aimed at individuals
 
Upvote
49 (49 / 0)

Unclebugs

Ars Praefectus
3,037
Subscriptor++
WWI problems require WWI solutions.
Willie Peete is going to make a comeback. Putin has used it in several recent actions in Chechnia. Oh, and I don't think Putin will have any excuse not to use it on civilian populations. After all, this is a dictator that has no problem targeting schools full of children or kidnapping children to "re-educate" them.
 
Upvote
23 (24 / -1)

Barleyman

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,221
Subscriptor++
Upvote
17 (17 / 0)

mhalpern

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
43,721
Willie Peete is going to make a comeback. Putin has used it in several recent actions in Chechnia. Oh, and I don't think Putin will have any excuse not to use it on civilian populations. After all, this is a dictator that has no problem targeting schools full of children or kidnapping children to "re-educate" them.
WP never left, what do you think multispectral smoke is?
 
Upvote
16 (16 / 0)

xoe

Ars Scholae Palatinae
7,496
You guys do understand, you are making publicity, to a Major war crime and crime against humanity don't you???
Do you really believe, burning people alive, even if they are evil, to be ok???
If you do, you are really no better than them, if not worse........
I don't believe killing anyone by any mechanism is "ok", I do however believe that it is (far too) often necessary.
 
Upvote
29 (29 / 0)

Wallachia

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,187
This sounds like the technology of war criminals. What insane individual thought this up and how can civilized 21st militaries be using it? I don't want my tax dollars paying for this.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but your tax dollars have paid for way, way worse -- used by your own country -- repeatedly over the last 100 years or so
 
Upvote
48 (49 / -1)
The primary danger to enemy troops on the ground is grass fires and brush/forest fires and ammunition detonated by those fires. The quantity of burning thermite that makes it to the ground does not completely cover the ground. A soldier might be under the middle of it and only be hit by a few sparks that would cause burns. They would not be engulfed by flames as with a flamer thrower using napalm.
 
Upvote
24 (24 / 0)

mhalpern

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
43,721
I guarantee you wouldn't live long after being in the blast of that missile, unless you just happened to get really lucky about where you got hit. Meanwhile, that thermite isn't burning very long. It seems to burn just about long enough to light the undertgrowth on fire. Getting out of the way of the slow-moving drone would be entirely feasible. I wouldn't want to be the target of that thermite drone, but if I had to choose between that and the blast-fragmentation warhead... easy call.
especially as, as i mentioned earlier, thermite isn't (usually) sticky like napalm, stop, drop and roll should work if you aren't directly hit, if you are, strip first, and get out of the way
 
Upvote
18 (18 / 0)

IncorrigibleTroll

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
9,228
Willie Peete is going to make a comeback. Putin has used it in several recent actions in Chechnia. Oh, and I don't think Putin will have any excuse not to use it on civilian populations. After all, this is a dictator that has no problem targeting schools full of children or kidnapping children to "re-educate" them.

Is that white phosphorous (searches just return guys named Willie Peete)? Because if so, how can it have a comeback when it never went anywhere to begin with? Israel loves using the stuff.
 
Upvote
23 (25 / -2)

numerobis

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
50,232
Subscriptor
You guys do understand, you are making publicity, to a Major war crime and crime against humanity don't you???
Do you really believe, burning people alive, even if they are evil, to be ok???
If you do, you are really no better than them, if not worse........
Publicizing war crimes is a pretty important thing, actually.

But it should please you that story isn’t particularly about that, it’s about the tech. Granted, tech that the victims are inventing to defend themselves against an illegal war conducted under the reign of a criminal indicted for crimes against humanity. But there’s little in the story that discusses war crimes.
 
Upvote
27 (28 / -1)

Gibborim

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,829
Only if used to deliberately target infantry. The videoed operations so far seem to have been intended to burn away protective cover (trees/brush), which is a permitted use even if there's a risk of inflicting casualties as a side effect of the application of incendiaries.
That tracks for me. At reasonable weights, it would be far more effective at setting brush around a position on fire than immolating people. Thermite is a wonderfully effective/powerful incendiary, but it is not great for incinerating a large area.
 
Upvote
17 (17 / 0)

xoe

Ars Scholae Palatinae
7,496
This sounds like the technology of war criminals. What insane individual thought this up and how can civilized 21st militaries be using it? I don't want my tax dollars paying for this.
You're right, instead your tax dollars should be used to quickly and efficiently end the war by directly engaging Russian troops in Ukraine.
 
Upvote
41 (43 / -2)

mhalpern

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
43,721
Is that white phosphorous (searches just return guys named Willie Peete)? Because if so, how can it have a comeback when it never went anywhere to begin with? Israel loves using the stuff.
yes its a phonetic for white phosphorus, I think the proper phonetic is whiskey Pluto.
 
Upvote
6 (9 / -3)

Gibborim

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,829
One of those things spraying about in a refinery is going to burn for a long time.
A standard high explosive would probably be better. If you had a specific spot on a structure you wanted to burn through and could land the drone on it, that might be functional, but spraying a little incendiary around probably won't do much.
 
Upvote
8 (8 / 0)

ColdWetDog

Ars Legatus Legionis
14,402
what's unacceptable here?
I'm thinking the point @Air_Cooled_Driver is making is that Ukraine could have won this war, handily and completely, if we had actually supported them like a real ally. With appropriate weapons both quality and quantity and freedom to act in accordance with their tactical and strategic goals.

It is a bit of a quandary - Israel is the current poster child for peril of supplying a country enough stuff to engage in unrestricted warfare, but we could have done a whole lot better being less cowards ourselves.
 
Upvote
37 (39 / -2)

IncorrigibleTroll

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
9,228
That tracks for me. At reasonable weights, it would be far more effective at setting brush around a position on fire than immolating people. Thermite is a wonderfully effective/powerful incendiary, but it is not great for incinerating a large area.

The resulting munitions cookoffs are presumably where most of the casualties come from.

Anybody have specific knowledge of what thermite does to the barrel of a 2A65?
 
Upvote
11 (11 / 0)

bjn

Ars Praefectus
5,067
Subscriptor++
I know it’s unpopular, but I agree wholeheartedly. Any Russian not wanting to be subjected to a horrible death is free to leave or surrender, after which they should absolutely be treated humanely.
Sadly not. Blocking brigades shoot anyone trying to leave, and surrendering Russians have been deliberately shelled by their own side
 
Upvote
22 (24 / -2)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…
Post content hidden for low score. Show…