Mr Bean wrote:If that Flame-Thrower was mounted on a Tank even Better
Hmm Prehaps Sheppered will run across this, What was the name of the Dededcated Flame Tank the Germans had during WWII?
The Germans had several different flame tanks, the only one that comes to mind was the Panzer IIF, but I think they also had a flamethrower conversion for the Panzer III. They also converted captured French tanks along with some half-tracks. I've near heard of any purpose build chassis for a flame tank though.
The Allies also had their fair share of conversions, with both M4 and Churchill conversions. There was one M4 design, which had four different flame ports, one in each corner. When activated they would totally surround the tank in fire, taking care of any pesky infantry in urban combat. Very useful in case the Rex gets close, though you could just blast it with the 75.
There were also T-34 and T-44 flame tanks along with some BT models. The T-54/55 and T-62 also have flame tank Variants, and there's the US Army's M48 flame tank. The US army also had a lot of monitor mounted long-range throwers in Vietnam. Such would be useful for controlling the rivers to limit the mobility of the Rex's for ease of hunting..
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Darth Wong wrote:Flamethrower. Fear of fire is instinctive and universal to virtually all animals.
Not a bad idea, but I'd personally rather not let the thing get close enough for me to use a thrower. Luckily the worlds Infantry weapons arsenals can do better then that in the form of the Russian RPO napalm rocket launcher.
Information on RPO & RPO-A Recoilless Flame-throwers
The RPO flame-thrower is a shoulder fired weapon. It fires a rocket-propelled napalm round. The RPO is reusable and can be fired at a rate of one shot per minute. It weighs 3.5 kilograms and is 1.44 meters long. The RPO-A is 0.92 meters long and contains only one half as much incendiary mixture as the RPO. This improved version is a disposable weapon. It can be fired by one operator at an estimated two shots per minute. The RPO is capable of firing 4 liters of incendiary mixture to a maximum effective range of 180 to 200 meters. The range and accuracy of the RPO-A are two to three times higher than that of the RPO. Both flame-throwers are effective as antitank weapons, "bunker-busters," and against troop formations. Both models may be present in some former Soviet airborne and first-line ground forces units.
That's great, if you're starting off with the thing loaded and you hit him with the first shot. Otherwise, the thing is 30 meters away and it's more than 10 meters long. At two rounds per minute, you don't get another shot (for the purposes of this scenario, I don't think it counts if the Rex, while eating you, bites into a napalm cansiter and dies).
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
Your not going to miss at that range. And I was thinking more on the lines of firing into the ground, then running. Flame throwers are very awkward and heavy, and have no stopping power. If the Rex is charging, it wont be able to stop in time, and will likely end up crushing you or setting you on fire as it dies.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Well, one thing, the Rex probally didnt run erect like us, due his massive size of his head, he would probally run with the tail up, like a pendullum to make up for the head for balance. Which make easier all tatics hitting his head instead of body.
And of course he can stop in time. Otherwise his running for hunting would be useless if he had not control over it.
The fire fear is a good idea, but Not all animals run from a source of fire instantaly, much more if the source is smaller than the animal. They may act with curiosity around it. But nothing that a taste of the heat couldnt make him get angry and go away (Big carnivores are very carefull to not get hurt hunting).
Muffin is food. Food is good. I am a Muffin. I am good.
Rathark wrote:I'll avoid obvious options such as rocket launchers, and focus on weapons that require a bit more effort (not to mention nerve).
A T-rex is charging at you at maximum possible speed (whatever that is), starting from 30 m away. If you were to use any of the following weapons to defend yourself, how would you do it? Would all require perfect timing and precision? Are some just plain unusable?
Elephant rifle (any)
M-16 (ordinary bullets)
2 Uzis with amour-piercing rounds
12-gauge shotgun
Traditional whale harpoon
Medieval broadsword
Samurai sword
Just for the record, I know nothing about hunting, and I have never handled a firearm in my life.
Hmmm, If I had to use a shotgun, or the Uzis, or the M-16, I'd take a page out of the book of our ice age ancestors. Using the weapons, I'd shoot at it, drive it mad and herd it toward a cliff. Then the T-Rex plummets to it's doom.
If I had the elephant gun . . . aim for the head folks! I don't know where a T-Rex's other vitals are or how well protected they are, but I do know where it's brain is.
Even with the flamethrower, you should bear in mind that the beast is charging at you at full speed. According to RedImperator, that would be 25 km/h, meaning that it can close the distance of 30 meters in a bit over 4 seconds. Personally, I would have said that it's top speed is twice that much, but my info may well be outdated.
In any case, you have only between 2 and four seconds to make your move, and even them the T-Rex might have too much momentum to stop even if it would like to.
lgot wrote:Well, one thing, the Rex probally didnt run erect like us, due his massive size of his head, he would probally run with the tail up, like a pendullum to make up for the head for balance. Which make easier all tatics hitting his head instead of body.
And of course he can stop in time. Otherwise his running for hunting would be useless if he had not control over it.
The fire fear is a good idea, but Not all animals run from a source of fire instantaly, much more if the source is smaller than the animal. They may act with curiosity around it. But nothing that a taste of the heat couldnt make him get angry and go away (Big carnivores are very carefull to not get hurt hunting).
If you shoot the rex with a flamethrower, it's going to be perhaps 10 meters away. Some how I doubt that while covered in fire it would be rational enough to stop quickly, more likely it will be enraged and driven mad. Thus I'd shoot the ground with an RPO, and use that as a distraction so I can get clear enough to safely set it on fire. If you simply set the ground on fire with the thrower, then you stuck since you cant move very fast in the first place, and have no range advantage.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
In my opinion, the best way is to let the T-rex xhase you, and then, using any form of trap known (a large bear trap might just work here), trip the bloody bugger. According to what I've heard, should the T-rex trip while running a certain distance, it has a high likelyhood of dying. Incredible how the mighty are fallen.
The 50 Kilometers speed of Jurassic Park is not very well acepted because that would make the Rex get extremelly hurt everytime he , when running trip or hit something.
And Sea Skimmer:
The Rex used the hunt living animals, not things hold in one position. The prey would change direction, react against him, hide between smaller spaces. If the Rex wasnt able to control his feet to change direction, stop or anything like this we would have a very funny predator, tripping, falling, getting hurt with other herbivores horns, hiting the trees and all that. He would trip or had to change the direction but the idea of him losing the control at point of passing over his prey is a bit too much.
Muffin is food. Food is good. I am a Muffin. I am good.
But, of course, rather than running away, as any real Soviet Hero, I'll confont the beast with my AK-47. Of course, I'll outfit it with other weapons, including a grenade launcher and laser sights, just in case the creature tries anything stupid on me. Well, at least it wroked for my man, Boris (see Yuri's Revenge)
I just realized something: everyone seems to be coming up with grenades, napalm, rockets, etc. to kill Rex. But he's only 30 meters away to start. Doesn't that limit your firepower somewhat? If you die from a grenade fragment while taking Rex down, I think you still lose.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
Trying to hit a T-Rex in the eye, yeah, good luck even with full auto weapons. Machine guns such as the M16 and Uzi actually have less stopping power than any decent hunting rifle, the only advantage they have is a much higher rate of fire. The problem is the bullets from an M16 won't do much to big game such as cape buffalo or elephants, let alone a T-Rex. You'd have to empty the entire magazine to stop an elephant, and even then it's kinda iffy.
For a T-Rex you'd need at least a Barrett M82 firing .50cal Raufoss API (explosive tipped, tungsten carbide penetrator, and burning zirconium particles) rounds. From 30m you should be able to get off at least 3 shots or so since it's a semi-auto, then you can run and fire again. A flamethrower might work too if it's one that shoots a column of flame about 15m or so. The problem with a flamethrower is range, you can't the T-Rex until it's halfway to you.
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either.
The only think that I'd go up against one of them with would be a cruise missile or some type of nuclear weapon preferrably from a battleship several miles away.
If you shot flame at the T-Rex immediately, the T-Rex would instintively avoid it, giving you a lot more time than freaking 4 seconds to take it down. If you used something with an insane firing rate at its head, maybe you could hit its brain that's the size of a peanut or whatever it is. But it would have to be very accurate as well, unless you just aimed in one spot and let the bullets spread over its head from the recoil. But I'd probably use a flamethrower. And how could you run away from something going 25 kmph???
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? -Obi-Wan Kenobi
"In the unlikely event that someone comes here, hates everything we stand for, and then donates a big chunk of money anyway, I will thank him for his stupidity." -Darth Wong, Lord of the Sith
Agreed. I don't know why everyone thinks the T-Rex will just charge through the flame; I pointed out earlier that nearly all animals have an instinctive fear of flame, and I haven't seen anyone produce any evidence that the T-Rex would be an exception.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
I wonder if it would react to the muzzle flare of guns?
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? -Obi-Wan Kenobi
"In the unlikely event that someone comes here, hates everything we stand for, and then donates a big chunk of money anyway, I will thank him for his stupidity." -Darth Wong, Lord of the Sith
I doubt it. Real guns don't make the huge muzzle flare that movie guns do. Besides, even the huge movie gun muzzle flare is tiny compared to a dinosaur; not like a 60 foot jet of flame.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Actually, a better question would be how it would react rather than if it would react.
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? -Obi-Wan Kenobi
"In the unlikely event that someone comes here, hates everything we stand for, and then donates a big chunk of money anyway, I will thank him for his stupidity." -Darth Wong, Lord of the Sith
lgot wrote:The 50 Kilometers speed of Jurassic Park is not very well acepted because that would make the Rex get extremelly hurt everytime he , when running trip or hit something.
And Sea Skimmer:
The Rex used the hunt living animals, not things hold in one position. The prey would change direction, react against him, hide between smaller spaces. If the Rex wasnt able to control his feet to change direction, stop or anything like this we would have a very funny predator, tripping, falling, getting hurt with other herbivores horns, hiting the trees and all that. He would trip or had to change the direction but the idea of him losing the control at point of passing over his prey is a bit too much.
Normaly sure, but what about when its covered in fire and in massive amounts of pain? I dont think its going to have the same fine motor controls. Thats why I'd want a distraction to open the range if I was going to use a flame weapon.
Really, I'd rather just kill it instantly by mcausing massive amounts of damage with a Preadtor, which has a nifty follow up frag grenade behind the AT warhead, or the KPV quad mount.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Normaly sure, but what about when its covered in fire and in massive amounts of pain? I dont think its going to have the same fine motor controls. Thats why I'd want a distraction to open the range if I was going to use a flame weapon.
Really, I'd rather just kill it instantly by mcausing massive amounts of damage with a Preadtor, which has a nifty follow up frag grenade behind the AT warhead, or the KPV quad mount.
He will probally avoid the fire just with vision. not needing contact. But amount of pain ? Its not very sure what can be "amount" of pain to one such big thing, which may have the slow pain registration of the repitles or anything alike this. Things that are going to pain him, will make him stop not trample...
You want a distraction ? A cow tied in a hope. He will stop for it and you can just go home.
Muffin is food. Food is good. I am a Muffin. I am good.
I have vague memories of an old cartoon show called "Cadillacs and Dinosaurs." Does anyone here remember how they stopped large therapods in that show?
