Fire and Zombies

[UNDEAD FRED]

Do you think that fire could be used as an effected weapon against zombies?

[IronJayBee]

I always thought if they dont burn fast enough you have to deal with flaming zombies, and no one wants to do that :)

[UNDEAD FRED]

Fire could be used as a more effective tool of escape, sort of what they did in NOTLD68. Beat them or burn them, they go up pretty easy.

[BenAli]

No .....................

[Slayer]

Provided your safehouse is not flammable, like made out of rock or stone, maybe cinderblocks, and provided your out of harms way like on the roof. Then yes, fire can be an effective weapon to kill zombies. And it's certainly the best way to dispose of them when killed.

[bandits1]

I think fire could be effective only if there's little chance of flaming zombies setting you or your belongings on fire. Brains do melt/burn/explode.

[Victor Clark]

Fire is not a good idea, and that is for several reasons.

1. Fire dosen't kill (at least not instantly): even if you set the head or any major organ on fire, it would just burn and settle, so either way it wouldn't kill them.
2. Zombies can't feel pain: so if you set a zombie on fire, all you'll have is a zombie coming after you on fire. And this is especially bad if the zombies are running (see Dawn of the Dead 04 and 28 Weeks Later).
3. Fire could spread the virus: this always puzzled me when I watched Night of the Living Dead. If you burn a zombie, wouldn't the smoke contain the virus as well? And if so, what do you think will happen when it turns to a form of acid rain? I certainly don't want to be in a storm like that any day!
4. Burning flesh could make you hungry: and this is especially bad if you're starving to death (see Andy's video in the Dawn of the Dead 04 special features).
5. Fire can destroy everything, except a zombie: so if you're running from a zombie that's on fire, hide in your safehouse, and the flaming zombie bangs on the door, guess what happens to the house? It burns down! This can take your shelter, your supplies, your weapons, and probably you.

And with those facts on the table, I can safely say that fire is bad for combat.

[bandits1]

Fire is not a good idea, and that is for several reasons.

1. Fire dosen't kill (at least not instantly): even if you set the head or any major organ on fire, it would just burn and settle, so either way it wouldn't kill them.
I figure if the head is on fire long enough and/or the fire is hot enough, the brain would burn or melt.
2. Zombies can't feel pain: so if you set a zombie on fire, all you'll have is a zombie coming after you on fire. And this is especially bad if the zombies are running (see Dawn of the Dead 04 and 28 Weeks Later).
They may not feel pain, but eventually the fire would render their bodies useless.
3. Fire could spread the virus: this always puzzled me when I watched Night of the Living Dead. If you burn a zombie, wouldn't the smoke contain the virus as well? And if so, what do you think will happen when it turns to a form of acid rain? I certainly don't want to be in a storm like that any day!
Wouldn't the heat of the fire kill any virus?
4. Burning flesh could make you hungry: and this is especially bad if you're starving to death (see Andy's video in the Dawn of the Dead 04 special features).
I don't think the smell of burning human would make me hungry enough to eat someone. Of course, this is assuming I'm not already infected.
5. Fire can destroy everything, except a zombie: so if you're running from a zombie that's on fire, hide in your safehouse, and the flaming zombie bangs on the door, guess what happens to the house? It burns down! This can take your shelter, your supplies, your weapons, and probably you.
Again, I wouldn't use fire anywhere near my safehouse...unless said safehouse was fire-proof.
And with those facts on the table, I can safely say that fire is bad for combat.
It's obviously not the best choice in most cases, but could be useful in certain scenarios.

[Dagnammit]

1. Fire dosen't kill (at least not instantly): even if you set the head or any major organ on fire, it would just burn and settle, so either way it wouldn't kill them.

Good point. It's not necessarily effective and quick in a close combat situation. However, if it's a matter of clearing up a crowd of zombies that are blocking your path or besieging your (non-flammable) fortress, the heat of a fire would, within a minute or two, cause the brain's water content to boil and thereby reduce a zombie's grey matter to boiled mush. Plus, as the Sheriff said - "They go up pretty easy" - possibly because of the build up of methane and other gases inside the digestive system that occurs after death.


2. Zombies can't feel pain: so if you set a zombie on fire, all you'll have is a zombie coming after you on fire. And this is especially bad if the zombies are running (see Dawn of the Dead 04 and 28 Weeks Later).

Another good point - if you're fighting in close quarters you're likely to end up on fire yourself. On the other hand, as we've seen in Night and Dawn, the zombies are scared of fire close-up, and will withdraw from it, and as we saw in Land, they are distracted by the sight of distant fire (or fireworks, at least). This could prove very useful.

3. Fire could spread the virus: this always puzzled me when I watched Night of the Living Dead. If you burn a zombie, wouldn't the smoke contain the virus as well? And if so, what do you think will happen when it turns to a form of acid rain? I certainly don't want to be in a storm like that any day

Nope, fire destroys infection. Historically and even in modern times, fire has successfully been used to dispose of bodies infected by the Black Death, Ebola and other nasties. It's even said that the Great Fire of London stopped the Plague in it's tracks in that city, sucking the virus out of the air like a sponge and incinerating the weak and diseased in it's path.

Plus, who ever said we're dealing with a virus? Nothing like that was even hinted at in Romero's films.

The outbreak in Return of the Living Dead was caused by an inorganic toxin that was not denatured by exposure to high temperature. This fell in the rain and infected the buried dead causing them to rise as fast, strong, (almost) invincible zombies. If this is the case, don't worry about fire, you're probably dead already. :lol:


4. Burning flesh could make you hungry: and this is especially bad if you're starving to death (see Andy's video in the Dawn of the Dead 04 special features).

Hehe! I can't argue with that! :lol:


5. Fire can destroy everything, except a zombie: so if you're running from a zombie that's on fire, hide in your safehouse, and the flaming zombie bangs on the door, guess what happens to the house? It burns down! This can take your shelter, your supplies, your weapons, and probably you.

I accept that this is a problem in areas where houses are mostly made of wood, but pretty much very single building in the city where I live is made of brick or stone, and even doors and window fittings are made from uPVC, so these houses are impossible to burn down from the outside. Like anything else, it depends on your situation.

I think fire has its place in the arsenal of zombie fighting tools - mainly as a last resort for repelling/destroying a small group but also as a tactical tool for executing well though out culls of larger hordes.

[blaje]

Well in the book eden they use flame throwers from ontop of the walls(where theres no real risk of getting hurt)

I think flame throwers are a good choice when you bunkered in, like in eden they have a small section of new york with big concrete walls-if your on the run, its probably the worst idea ever.

[DarthJoe8]

:think: Fire wouldn't be my first choice. Maybe a slash and burn retreat/escape use but not to openly attack them with it. I would think its to risky.

:drinking:

[Slash Maraud]

Fire could work if you were able to use it relatively safely. Saw a way to do it on late night TV, really bad 1950s horror flick, 'The Day of the Triffids' huge walking plants killing people. The plants or in this case, Zeds are pressed up against a solid fence, maybe electric, several deep. You spray them with a flammable substance, gas, diesel whatever, toss in a road flare or turn on the fence and have a undead cook off. Problems with that option are that there is no pain felt by a burning Zed as mentioned previously, the smell, the potential for a flaming zed to somehow get in, and the potential for all those zeds to set fire to something else like your safehouse, escape vehicle(s) or fuel and ammo storage making the option of a zed cook out one to be considered very carefully or used only as a total last resort.

Some of the zeds might have a head pop due to internal heat build up inside when whats left of the brain boils, but that will be few as most, by the time they get to your fortified safehouse, will have had most of their internal fluids run out and be, hopefully, pretty dried out and light up easy. If they don't light up easy, their clothing should, especially the ones who have uprooted themselves from a cemetary.

[Shadowalker191]

Guess nobody has ever smelled what human flesh burning smells like. Its sick, and makes your stomic wrech. Its not like smelling chicken on the grill.

[bandits1]

Guess nobody has ever smelled what human flesh burning smells like. Its sick, and makes your stomic wrech. Its not like smelling chicken on the grill.
That's what I'm saying. How in the world could that smell make any non-infected/non-cannibalistic human hungry? :loon:

And after about a minute of being on fire, I don't think these zombies will able to walk around and cause mayhem any more. I'm thinking the muscles, tendons, and cartilage burn, shrivel, and become useless. Let's say you were somehow able to revive a person whose body had been burned beyond recongnition in a house fire -- do you think that person would be able to stand up and walk away?

[jim96sc2]

Could it, yes. But it wouldn't be feasable. You'd have to have a fire capable of destroying a whole body before exiting. Sorry, but thats a lot of fuel, wood, and space. Too much to be any sort of effecient. Better to use fire for destroying the bodies.

[Augustus Desius]

Do you think that fire could be used as an effected weapon against zombies?

Essentially, yes it could, but the situations where it would be the better course of action are likely to be uncommon. As mentioned earlier, entrenched and fireproof defense may make it an efficient solution to a zombie swarm.

[retro zombie killer]

I think Zombies would burn pretty easy but I'd be afraid of them walking around while their burning and catching something else on fire like a building.

[jim96sc2]

I think Zombies would burn pretty easy but I'd be afraid of them walking around while their burning and catching something else on fire like a building.

No, they wouldn't. Ever see a rotting corpse? Its still wet from decomp. Wet does not burn. Unless all the corses are fresh from 100+ years in the desert and are mummified and dry your SOL.

[retro zombie killer]

No, they wouldn't. Ever see a rotting corpse? Its still wet from decomp. Wet does not burn. Unless all the corses are fresh from 100+ years in the desert and are mummified and dry your SOL.

Actually I was thinking of the gasses inside of the zombies which corpses give off as they rot which would act as an accelerate. But the gases might not be present if their up and moving around. I know the corpses(Zeds) might be wet or damp. I need to reconsider this, I guess. I do want to state that is wouldn't be a good idea to set fire to a Zed in a area where they would catch something else on fire like a building or house. There might be people inside.

[Headless Lynx]

Fire is a difficult thing to tame though, some of you think it may be good in some scenarios and some of you think it's out of the question.

Now if I remember, fire would kill pretty much any cell (virus) but it would need to be at the right temperature. (So virus' might not survive and spread)
The skin, muscle, ligaments and organs will burn away and at the right temperature, the skeleton will turn to ash. (The zed would be rendered useless as they will not be able to move and then eventually die (again))

I reckon fire is a good element in which you can use but you need to be sure whether the fire won't ignite anything important and the fire won't be to big so you can't put it out. And people in nearby buildings? F**k 'em. :evil: LOL

[Cenobite]

Nah, fire is dangerous, didnt your mother tell you that when you were a kid?

Also it spreads, unless you want to set half a block on fire.

[jagus12]

Well, if your safe-house is fire-proof, and theres no chance of burning something important, BURN THE ****ERS!!!!:rock:
Also:
Wine/Beer bottle + piece of paper + lighter = MOLOTOV COCKTAIL...
MOLOTOV COCKTAIL + Zeds = Burning Zeds
Burning Zeds = Dead Zeds (after like... a few secs)
Dead Zeds = Happy survivors! :)

[mattifikation]

Try after like, several minutes.

Sure, if you rig up some kind of thermite launching fiery death machine, you can hit them with flames that will destroy their brains in a few seconds.

Molotov cocktails.. no.

[Umbrela]

Fire would only be useful in a situation in which there were a fairly large quantity of undead stuck inside of a flammable building.

[JakAttak]

Fire would only be useful in a situation in which there were a fairly large quantity of undead stuck inside of a flammable building.
I agree Z's stuck together will burn quicker perhaps if you trapped them in a field and set that on fire you would have good results

[zombie2x4]

As seen in the original dawn of the dead fire holds the zombies at bay but when fighting the undead is fire our friend or foe?

[Devon]

For Fighting, I would say FOE

[zombie2x4]

Id say foe to I mean specially if your in a house or something majorly bad idea.

[kOntr4baNd]

Well what if your trying to thin them out a bit in a place that cant catch fire I mean then id say Friend

[zombie2x4]

I guess you have a point there

[chud]

In order to use fire it must be in a controlled environment such as a long trench the zombies fall into. Fire like any other weapon or tool must be used properly. you wouldn't close your eyes and fire the gun right?

[zombie2x4]

Well yeah but some people just wouldn't think in that moment. They might just throw a molotav cocktail in a moment of panic.

[kOntr4baNd]

You have a point I'd be one of those idiots who throws a flaming stick at a zombie in my house XD.

[zombie2x4]

Nice job XD.

[dead and loving it]

Zombies+Fire= Flaming crispy zombies who will still chase you.:scare:

[MorganaLeFaye]

I think zeds should ignore fire. Can't remember what film it was, but the zomibe just walked thru the fire, caught on fire, and still kept coming until he got his arms on the victim, and started eating him, oblivious to the fact he (and now the screaming victim) were both a ball of flame. That makes them even scarier to me.

[zombie2x4]

Zombies+Fire= Flaming crispy zombies who will still chase you.:scare:Ha ha nice.

[zombie2x4]

I think zeds should ignore fire. Can't remember what film it was, but the zomibe just walked thru the fire, caught on fire, and still kept coming until he got his arms on the victim, and started eating him, oblivious to the fact he (and now the screaming victim) were both a ball of flame. That makes them even scarier to me.
You have a point there. I can't think of the film either but I know I saw that.

[TEBreck]

This is a far fetched idea but I think if the fire was intense enough, like a flame thrower to the face, you might be able the boil the brain tissue right inside the ol noggin. THen blam pop that zombie head like a tic. Or maybe ooze out the ears like an over filled crock pot.
cheers

[zombie2x4]

You know thats not such a bad idea only problem is youd have to get pretty close to the zombie to do that unless you can get them into an incinerator or under the flame of a space ship taking off you know something like that.

[Darkness]

"You should do a bit of searching before starting new threads. We have one on this topic already."

http://www.allthingszombie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16169

[zombie2x4]

"You should do a bit of searching before starting new threads. We have one on this topic already."

http://www.allthingszombie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16169Sorry ma'am so then uh how do i delete this? (if I can)

[Darkness]

Sorry ma'am so then uh how do i delete this? (if I can)

"Don't worry. I have asked the Administration to merge them."

[zombie2x4]

Oh okie doke thanks ma'am sorry for the inconvience I'll look next time.

[BarnabusBlackoak]

but you do realize, the search function works like crap.

[zombie2x4]

I didn't even know we had a search engine

[Darkness]

but you do realize, the search function works like crap.

"I know, that's why I'm doing my best to try and keep an updated Index going for US&D. With Linked Titles. It's to try and make it easier to browse the titles in there, and figure out what's being talked about." :)

"By the way, if you get confused, stuck, or just need to ask, we do have a 'How Do I Do This' Thread. Or you can PM a Mod or Administrator. We are here to help, all you have to do is ask." :)
http://www.allthingszombie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14775


"PS. Bad Zombie Night! At this point, just lock this one. OK?" :lol: :)

[zombie2x4]

Okie doke but I'm still a bit confused what happens to this thread and the posts?

[Darkness]

"If its locked, it will stay here, and be readable, we just won't be able to post in it. If it gets deleted, its gone, pfft, bye bye. If it gets merged, all the posts in this thread will be filtered into the other thread, by order of post date. Including all this random chatting we are doing now."

[zombie2x4]

Ah okie doke well thank you for informing me next I will look before I make anew thread sorry for the inconvience have a nice day :D

[JakAttak]

wait is this tread going to be locked, deleted, or merged?

[Darkness]

"Been merged. Already done." :)

"Now.......Back to Fire and Zombies." :)

[JakAttak]

cool; Now fire should only be used as an aggressive defense measure.

[zombie2x4]

Yeah in a controlled area. So Jak what fire based weapon do you think is best?

[JakAttak]

depends on locations, tactics, and mobility.

[stark55]

there are some pretty intense flames out there some could probably cook or melt a brain pretty fast i think the military could make a flame thrower with the right stuff. the problem though is some home made flame throwers have a bug or two. some people could make a good enough flame thrower but most will end up with a super soaker with some gass, paint thinner and bleach in it. that is a risky weapon but i can see some people making good use of it. best to get some thing with some range.

[stark55]

No, they wouldn't. Ever see a rotting corpse? Its still wet from decomp. Wet does not burn. Unless all the corses are fresh from 100+ years in the desert and are mummified and dry your SOL.

that sort of depends the climet dry clothes could go up fast along with hair (in my case that would catch my clothes.)
some zeds would burn pretty well with scratches all over it would be eazyer for the fat to bubble up and burn.

[Trumble0]

How about using White Phosphorus... it pretty much disintegrates flesh. "These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed..."

[JakAttak]

some molotovs would burn up anything.

[NickelobLight]

http://coonlakebeach.org/images/zombie-poster.jpg

Note the last tip.

[secretcog]

Good thread here!

Let's see...human bodies flash point is...what?

A decomposed humans flash point is...what?

How long will it take for a human body to be consumed and immobilized by fire?

How long will it take a decomposed body to be consumed and immobilized and/or destroyed by fire?

If I understand the physiology of the zombie correctly...their nerves are dead. They wont feel nor respond to fire. They'll just keep pursuing their prey until they die a second death. But...at what point will the fire consume the brain?

Lastly, is the virus or any and all of it's byproducts accelerants? I've read references referring to an ooze or a gel emitting from the reanimated corpses. What's the flash point on said material?

[GunSlingerInferno]

If using a military style flame thrower, one that projects liquid or jellied flammables, it will stick and burn to anything it touches. It may not completely destroy a body very quickly, it would disable something even if it cannot feel pain. Flames will blind, eyes can't take much direct heat, if it's a military style some styles of accelerants can reach heats a little under 1000 degrees F. There are some that can get hotter, depends on the additives to the gasoline. At these temperatures, fat will combust very quickly. Unless they are magic zombies that don't need to use their eyes for sight or nose for smell, they won't be able to sense much anything. So, if you have a large group somewhere and can quickly set them alight, you would be able to avoid them. The man portable WWII versions have a range of around 120 ft. In a few situations flame can be a viable weapon, but there is a reason why most armed forces no longer use flame throwers.

[Trumble0]

...but there is a reason why most armed forces no longer use flame throwers.

I think there's probably more than one reason, its probably more than just the mechanics of using fire as a weapon of why they stopped using them... one of my buddies uncles was a Flamethrower in 'Nam and it made him go nuts, think about it... youre burning people alive, the smell and sound has to get to you after awhile... Just a thought though, but Id say there was also a psychological factor, I'd be interested to see how many Flamethrowers went "Section 8" back when they had a "Section 8" Discharge. Plus IDK... has anyone read up on the Geneva convention rules regarding flamethrowers as of late? maybe they altered it... but Napalm-like substances are still used I believe, so maybe flamethrowers could still be used, and its just a choice not to deploy them.

[Trumble0]

In the movie Night of the Creeps, a flamethrower was used effectively to combat zombies... but it was more to kill the brain slug type things after a shotgun blast to the head, rather than to kill the zombies themselves. Although, there was a scene where the flamethrower was placed directly into the zombies mouth and the trigger was pulled and the head exploded anyway... But I bet a flamethrower could melt a human face enough for the brain to effectively boil.

[secretcog]

Do topics ever end? Not that I don't enjoy the runs, but I'm curious if there's a panel of overseers that cataloge the thread Intel and log it into a zombie data base.

Encyclopedia Britannica: Undead Edition.

This fire question shouldn't be taken lightly. A zed could be a shambling/sprinting torch!

I agree with a jelly/glue based excellent as the best means to insure the greatest amount of damage on a walking corpse. Napalm!

[JakAttak]

I'm sure the heat would kill any parasite, virus, or bacteria in the brain.

[mattifikation]

After a good ten minutes of stumbling after you, catching you on fire, and biting you... sure.

[Dagnammit]

If a corpse is at the right stage of decomposition, I think you'd all be surprised at how fast they'd disintegrate in flames. From the moment a person dies, digestive gases (i.e. fart gas) build up in the stomach and intestines, and within a few days these are joined by gases released by decomposition (i.e. the digestive waste products of bacteria) which accumulate in all body cavities and even inside cells. Under the right conditions bloated corpse is basically big bag of methane. With enough accelerant applied, they'd go up pretty easy.

Set up a few of these near to each other and take hundreds of them out from a distance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb7pUeFPFao&feature=related

Just don't do it near your house.

[Darkness]

"A fact to remember......heat raises. It's possible that the brain will be poached to death, long before the body is consumed by the fire. Just a thought." ;-)

[JakAttak]

That's what I was talking about.

[csmasterrave]

If a corpse is at the right stage of decomposition, I think you'd all be surprised at how fast they'd disintegrate in flames. From the moment a person dies, digestive gases (i.e. fart gas) build up in the stomach and intestines, and within a few days these are joined by gases released by decomposition (i.e. the digestive waste products of bacteria) which accumulate in all body cavities and even inside cells. Under the right conditions bloated corpse is basically big bag of methane. With enough accelerant applied, they'd go up pretty easy.

Set up a few of these near to each other and take hundreds of them out from a distance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb7pUeFPFao&feature=related

Just don't do it near your house.



So we would need to light a few of them, run away and they may go BOOM???

[retro zombie killer]

The thing you all need to remember is that no Zombie will burn the same way. Depends on the rate of decay and the location and how damp the zombie is.

[Tripoli]

Regardless of the type of burns, the factors that cause death of the living are fluid accumulation/shift, inflammation, and or infection in and around the wound. Seeing that the un-dead are not affected by fluid shifts, pain or infection 1st – 3rd degree burns will be worthless in stopping zombies. Even dousing them with napalm, grease, diesel, or gasoline won’t do the job.

Now that you know zombies are not bothered by common burns, that would kill the living, lets talk about cremation. A cremator is an industrial furnace capable of generating temperatures of 1600-2100 °F to ensure disintegration of the corpse. The entire process usually takes about two hours.

Short of packing grease inside a tire and placing those tires around a zombie from toes to head (or just the head), add some diesel, and a flame I don’t think you can burn these things to re-death. Even this, the cause of death is from damage to the lungs (breathing hot gasses) before the brain will reach a boiling point.


Speaking of “just around the head”, this is Also Known As “Necklacing” a rubber tire, filled with gasoline, placed around a zombie's chest and arms, then setting that saturated tire on fire. This would be they only way I could see destroying a zombie’s brain. The questions now are who will be the one that will capture the zombie, squeeze that tire around the ghouls head, and then add flame? How many people will be injured trying to perform such a feat?

All and All, BAD IDEA. All that wasted fuel can be used to heat food, power cars, M/Cs, ATVs, etc.


Seems to me a bullet is cheaper and easier.

[Darkness]

*Darkness ponders.......*

"........Crossbow + Hollow Point Bolts + Napalm + Eyeball Shot = Roasted Zombie Brains..........hmmmmmmm." :evil: :lol:

[VideoJunkie]

1 - Get a backhoe or bull dozer.

2 - Dig a trench

3 - Use some noisemaker to attract the zombies

4 - Zombies fall into trench

5 - Spray Zombies with Gasoline

6 - Toss in a flaming branch

7 - Place marshmallows on a wire coat hanger...


Seriously, I believe that if you have the time and equipment to dig a few trenches then fire can be an effective weapon. Otherwise, I think it would be a great way to clear the fenceline around your compound. Imagine a large warehouse with a chainlink fence around it. The noise of your party starts to attract zombies. So what? They can't get past the fence. More zombies show up. Still no problem. You've got a fence. Still more and more of the nasty pussbags show up. Suddenly the fence collapses from the weight of the thousand of bodies pressed against it. NOW you have a problem...but not for long. Just for the rest of your short-assed life! Seems to me that before the number of zombies gets high enough to threaten your fence, you could drive around the perimeter in a pickup truck using a simple pumping system to spray gasoline on your visitors. Then a flaming branch across the fence and you've got a giant zombie barbecue. How well they burn will depend on how recently it's rained. After several days out in the sun without any rain, and without any water consumed, they should be dry enough to burn quite nicely. Meanwhile, any that aren't consumed by the fire will still be pressing up against you fence. You can always try again the next day. Even if some are to moist to burn well the first day, the fire will do a nice job drying them out. Then on day 2 or 3...Zombie Flambé!! The whole idea is to keep them in a tight pack against your fenceline. Chainlink fence doesn't burn. Zombies do. I know that metal exposed to fire can melt, but I've seen gasoline used to burn some pretty substantial undergrowth off of a chainlink fence with no ill effects. :drinking:Well, they did burn down a grape arbor, but I think that was mostly 'cause they were a little drunk at the time. Any, IMHO, fire used with a little planning can save more than just your ammo. It could save your butt!!!

[BobZombie]

HUGE waste of gasoline! Why not just dig a deeper hole and back fill the mess?

[VideoJunkie]

My idea was to deal with mounting numbers of zombies in a crisis situation. I don't have a problem with wasting gasoline. I figure that with the zombies no longer driving, the available stores of gasoline should be more than we can use before it goes bad. I've seen reports that gas goes bad in 6 months. Others claim it's more like 2 years. Either way, right now we've got enough gas stored locally to supply a million or so people with all the gas they need for at least a week. Cut the number of users to 10,000 and that means we've got gas for 100 weeks, or about 2 years. If you assume that we'll be using less gas per person it streches even further. Just rough guestimates, obviously, but you see what I mean. If you still don't like using gasoline, we could build a simple still. To get decently flammable product we'd have to run the stills output back through the still. Probably a couple of times, until it had reached a level of proof high enough. Bottom line, it's feasible. Actually, the bottom line is that I don't just want to sort of plow 'em under. Not without burning them thoroughly, or putting a .22 into each brain. I just couldn't sleep while thinking of thousands of zacks out there trying to dig their way out and feast on my tasty, tasty brains!!!

Besides, once we got the still going we could use the resulting alcohol for trade with other survivors. We'll need clean carbon to filter the product, but raiding a few pet stores will provide us with plenty of fish tank filters. That's all we'll need!

Back on the subject of using fire on zombies, Molotov cocktails. Here's the question. Don't laugh...are you supposed to tie a rag around the bottle and light it, or are you supposed to stuff the rag part way into the bottle and use it as a sort of 'wick'? It always looks like the rag is in the bottle, but I just don't think I'd want to light the damn thing! Anyone know for sure?

[Darkness]

"It's used as a wick, and you only fill the bottle half full." :)

[Bob]

VJ
Don't forget the fuel depot at the primary location.
We might have to use diesel instead of gasoline but they have an enormous amount of fuel on hand. Also the heavy equipment place across the road is going to have both gas and diesel.

If all else fails there is the fuel depot with the giant tanks up by the river.
A couple of fuel tankers would provide enough gas to toast a lot of Zeds...

[mattifikation]

Waste gas? You might as well. The roads will be gridlocked with the abandoned vehicles of the once-living, and the gas will be bad in a couple years anyways.

[VideoJunkie]

How long would it take for a zombie to dry out enough to burn without a generous amount of some accelerant? Would it ever happen? If so, how much depends on the local climate?

[Bob]

Never having lived in the desert I can't speak for a fact but it seems to be that before they got dry enough to burn readily they would be stiffened to the point of immobility. (based on beef jerky and overcooked meat in the oven)

Around here with our heat, humidity, and bugs it would be a couple of weeks to about a month at most before the legs were incapable of supporting them. Assuming there is not a delayed decay from the the infection.

Here is a thought for ya, how will the gasoline be dispersed?
Ordinary garden sprayers are not going to be of much use.
VJ where you with me when we tried to chemically clean that condenser coil at the mfg plant with Virginia 10. I tried to tell them it was going to eat the pump but did they listen to me noooo they thought they knew everything...
We ruined several and wound up doing a crap lousy job of cleaning.

The point is gasoline will ruin the rubber seal in most garden variety pump up sprayers.

[VideoJunkie]

This one I've already worked out. Take a 55 gallon drum. You need two threaded holes, one in the top, and one on the side near the bottom. Use hose from a gas station pump to connect to the bottom hole. The nozzle on the other end will work, although we'd have to crimp it down to get a decent spray pattern. The gas never runs through a pump. We use an air compressor to pump air into the top hole. The air pressure increases in the drum, and forces the gas out the bottom. The bottom hole leads to our spray hose. Easy, Simple to make and effective, although I'd be careful with it. I'm thinking a stake body truck with the 55 gallon drum in the far back corner. We could weld up some shielding between the drum and the guy with the spray nozzle, just in case. Then just drive along the fenceline and spray the zeds down. I'm talking about a gas sprayer, not a flame thrower. I'm thinking we douse 'em, then light 'em. Although, since flame travels across gas at less than 6 mph, I wouldn't have much of a problem with trying to light the spray. Could be pretty cool! I'd want a reliable solonoid shut off first, and a manual backup. We could build a rig like this in a few hours! Damn, you think Rudy would mind if we tried one out at the shop?

[Necrowerx]

If a corpse is at the right stage of decomposition, I think you'd all be surprised at how fast they'd disintegrate in flames. From the moment a person dies, digestive gases (i.e. fart gas) build up in the stomach and intestines, and within a few days these are joined by gases released by decomposition (i.e. the digestive waste products of bacteria) which accumulate in all body cavities and even inside cells. Under the right conditions bloated corpse is basically big bag of methane. With enough accelerant applied, they'd go up pretty easy.


I think this is a very good point. However, we don't know if **walking** corpses might purge at least some of that gas out of their system by way of all that motion.
Great - now we have to worry about zombie farts, too! Disgusting! :lol:

However, their body fat and clothing could lend themselves to a "wick" effect, which as been used to explain some "Spontaneous Human Combustion" events. I also suspect a decent amount of that methane gas would remain in situ as well. People get gas all the time, going for a walk doesn't necessarily cure it, though it might work off some.

All in all, I've thought about both sides of the issue, and I think those of you who are anti-fire are selling it short. It has it's uses in certain circumstances. I wouldn't use it a primary mode of defense (i.e, in place of a carbine), but as a trap or planned offensive, it could be highly effective. You can make makeshift fuels from lots of substances too, not just gasoline, kerosene, etc. Even vaseline will burn. Mix with gas for cheap napalm! You'd have to raid a supermarket or drugstore to get mass quantities, but what the hey, that's expected anyway in a SHTF situation.


Regardless of the type of burns, the factors that cause death of the living are fluid accumulation/shift, inflammation, and or infection in and around the wound. Seeing that the un-dead are not affected by fluid shifts, pain or infection 1st – 3rd degree burns will be worthless in stopping zombies. Even dousing them with napalm, grease, diesel, or gasoline won’t do the job.
I think the point is being missed here. You can't compare what would kill a normal living human with what stops a zombie. A reasonably high temperature fire would melt eyeballs and sinus membranes, cutting off their senses, as well as sinew, ligaments, tendons, muscle tissue, and even the brain, all serving to at least incapacitate the zombie, greatly lowering it's threat (given that you're at a safe distance to avoid ignition yourself) if not destroying it.
You don't need total cremation. Bones can't attack you.

[VideoJunkie]

I think this is a very good point. However, we don't know if **walking** corpses might purge at least some of that gas out of their system by way of all that motion.
Great - now we have to worry about zombie farts, too! Disgusting! :lol:

However, their body fat and clothing could lend themselves to a "wick" effect, which as been used to explain some "Spontaneous Human Combustion" events. I also suspect a decent amount of that methane gas would remain in situ as well. People get gas all the time, going for a walk doesn't necessarily cure it, though it might work off some.

All in all, I've thought about both sides of the issue, and I think those of you who are anti-fire are selling it short. It has it's uses in certain circumstances. I wouldn't use it a primary mode of defense (i.e, in place of a carbine), but as a trap or planned offensive, it could be highly effective. You can make makeshift fuels from lots of substances too, not just gasoline, kerosene, etc. Even vaseline will burn. Mix with gas for cheap napalm! You'd have to raid a supermarket or drugstore to get mass quantities, but what the hey, that's expected anyway in a SHTF situation.


I think the point is being missed here. You can't compare what would kill a normal living human with what stops a zombie. A reasonably high temperature fire would melt eyeballs and sinus membranes, cutting off their senses, as well as sinew, ligaments, tendons, muscle tissue, and even the brain, all serving to at least incapacitate the zombie, greatly lowering it's threat (given that you're at a safe distance to avoid ignition yourself) if not destroying it.
You don't need total cremation. Bones can't attack you.


Good post! It's nice to see people thinking things through! (Especially when they seem to agree with me:evil:)

[Bob]

Ya know we could pressurize the tanks with Freon and perhaps generate phosgene gas to discourage the raiders. Also the main plant there runs on ammonia surely that could be useful.

[brainbuster]

Do you think that fire could be used as an effected weapon against zombies?
I think fire would be a terible idea. first of all fire would not kill the zombies. Fire can't penitrate a scull and besides if their brain rotting doent kill them i dont think over heating them will do the trick. also human flesh is not flamable so once their clothse burn off thats it unless you plan on dousing the Zed first. Secondly the fire could spread very quicly especily with a bunch of walking torches wandering around.So you would probubly burn the whole neiborhood down. Also you see movies where they burn the bodies in a big bonfire, well thats bullcrap you would need an creamatory oven to reduce them to anything resemeling ash. and why would you even need to destroy the bodies if you already destroyed the brains they are not getting up agian.
fire+Zed=very bad idea:

[VideoJunkie]

I think fire would be a terible idea. first of all fire would not kill the zombies. Fire can't penitrate a scull and besides if their brain rotting doent kill them i dont think over heating them will do the trick. also human flesh is not flamable so once their clothse burn off thats it unless you plan on dousing the Zed first. Secondly the fire could spread very quicly especily with a bunch of walking torches wandering around.So you would probubly burn the whole neiborhood down. Also you see movies where they burn the bodies in a big bonfire, well thats bullcrap you would need an creamatory oven to reduce them to anything resemeling ash. and why would you even need to destroy the bodies if you already destroyed the brains they are not getting up agian.
fire+Zed=very bad idea:

I get what you're saying, but I have to disagree, at least in part. Of course, you're right that fire would be a terrible offensive weapon. I wouldn't suggest running up to a zed and whacking it with a torch, then walking away as if the jobs all done!:lol: Ok, I MIGHT suggest that, but only 'cause I've got a warped sense of humor, and that sort of strikes me as funny!:loon:


Now as to burning bodies in a bonfire...VIKINGS...ring a bell? The vikings used to burn the bodies of their dead. Of course you won't get the same reduction as you would with a specially designed crematorium, but once you've burned away the flesh and fat, the bones and ashes aren't going to be a threat. As far as fire not penetrating the skull, heat WILL penetrate the skull, and will reduce the brain to steam and boiling fat. The steam leaves the skull, and the fat will burn.
I've gotta believe that the zed would be TOAST (:lol:get it?) by that point. Again, as a weapon against free moving zeds, fire is about useless. A flamethrower would be able to destroy a lot of zeds, but the potential for... a bunch of walking torches wandering around...burn(ing) the whole neiborhood down....is way to real to try it, if you have ANY other choice! You're absolutely right about that! BUT...

How about this? You dig a large trench with a backhoe or bulldozer, making sure that when you're done the sides are deep and steep enough to keep a zed from climbing out. Then you use loud noise or live bait to lure the zeds toward the trench. The zeds, being unable to think, fall into the trap. Once it starts to fill up, you spray 'em down with gasoline and torch 'em! Just let the zeds burn! You could repeat this often, until the trench began to fill up with bones and ash. Then just cover the trench and dig a new one elsewhere. If you didn't have access to the heavy equipment yet, you could build a trap out of chainlink fence.


First find a square area surrounded by a sturdy chainlink fence, preferably 6 feet or higher. Decide from which end you'll draw in the zeds. Remove the fence from that side. Cut a hole in the opposite side, about 6 feet across. Use the removed section to fashion a "tunnel" leading out of the 6 foot opening you just made. You'll have to fashion an easily operated gate at the end of the tunnel, and make damn sure it's as foolproof as possible! Now you have a volunteer act as bait to lure in the zeds. They are lead into the large open side, and are then funneled into the tunnel at the other side. Once your volunteer is safely out you lock down the gate and start spraying the zeds with gasoline. Then you light 'em up and let 'em burn! The zeds still trying to get into the tunnel will keep the burning zeds trapped, and will continue to push their way into the blaze as the first zombies are reduced to bone and ash. The person responsible for the fiery end of the trap would be close to his/her getaway vehicle, and would add more fuel to the blaze whenever it started to die out.

If gasoline ran low, you could distill a strong enough alcohol to take it's place. Hell, you could supplement the accelerant with the addition of wood as fuel! I'd stay the hell out of the smoke, but otherwise both of these traps seem to be effective and elegant solutions to the problem.

Oh, and as far as burning the zeds that have already been shot in the head....DISEASE!!! Gotta burn the corpses to reduce the risk of infectious disease. Before the advent of modern medical science, more people died of disease in wartime than were ever even wounded in battle. After a zed outbreak, we're going to be hard pressed to deal with medical emergencies. The last thing we need is an outbreak of some type of plague. So, burn the bodies and be careful to dispose of any other bio-waste with caution. (yes, I'm talking about :poo:)!

Anyway, thanks for the post, and welcome to ATZ!

[Necrowerx]

Gotta agree with VJ.
And Brainbuster, human flesh most certainly can burn.
One variant is called the wick effect, which is when clothing, saturated with human fat (which melts) acts just like a candle wick smothered in wax, and can burn the body to mere ashes in a few hours.
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=spontaneous_human_combustion.php

I suspect a good number of people have read Max Brooks' Zombie Survival Guide and are eschewing fire based on that reading (okay, not all of you, but I bet a lot!) I like the book a lot, but I don't think it should be taken as gospel.
Besides, he doesn't totally condemn fire. Even funnier, Max contradicts himself in the book - and I can prove it!

On page 9, he states that zombies do not feel pain nor physical sensation
On page 15, he states that zombies do not feel fear nor any emotion.
On page 51, he specifically states that zombies have no fear of fire, and won't even realize they're lit and burning. To wit:
FIRE
The living dead have no fear of fire. Waving an open flame in a ghoul's
face will do nothing to slow or impede its advance. Zombies who have
caught fne will neither notice nor react to the engulfing flames in any
way. Too many humans have met with tragedy forfailing to understand
thatfire is no deterrent to zombies!
Okay, so we've established this in his particular brand of zombie mythology. However, he then says, on page 144, the following:

10. THE FIRESTORM
Provided the blaze can be controlled, the area in question is suitably
flammable, and property protection is not an issue, nothing works better
than an artificial blaze. Zone boundaries must be clearly delineated.
Set a simultaneous fue to the entire perimeter so that the flames march
steadily inward. Do not allow for an escape route, no matter how narrow.
Keep watch for zombies that may have wandered through the
flames. In theory, the storm will herd the dead into a tight perimeter,
incinerating them in minutes. Mopping up will still be required, however,
especially in urban areas, where basements and other rooms may
have shielded zombies from the flames. As always, use caution, and be
ready to deal with fire as a secondary enemy.

"In theory, the (fire)storm will herd the dead into a tight perimeter" he says.
'Scuse me, Mr. Brooks, why exactly would it do that? You just stated that they have no fear nor feeling of fire - so why would a blaze tend to "herd them" into a "tight perimeter" - or anywhere for that matter? It makes no sense. They'd just walk right through it, unfazed, as stated on page 51, wouldn't they? So much for the infallible gospel. :)

Anyway, I think the best use of fire is as an offensive trap, and the use of trenches or fencing to contain them would be very effective.

There are only two zombie mythologies where burning is really bad and will only spread the condition further - the Return of the Living Dead series - because the zombie catalyst is Trioxin 245, a manmade military gas; and on the Fearwerx.com retail website, where all their zombie handling stuff says "Do not incinerate". (I guess they're RotLD fans)
In the case of a parasitic or viral catalyst however, fire would definitely be the answer to getting rid of it!

[VideoJunkie]

Great post! :doh:Damn, I've read that book a half dozen times and I never caught the contradiction!:doh: I can't believe I missed that! Just goes to show that anyone can miss things. Anyway, Great Catch! I guess I'm gonna have to break out the Survival Guide again.

[brainbuster]

I get what you're saying, but I have to disagree, at least in part. Of course, you're right that fire would be a terrible offensive weapon. I wouldn't suggest running up to a zed and whacking it with a torch, then walking away as if the jobs all done!:lol: Ok, I MIGHT suggest that, but only 'cause I've got a warped sense of humor, and that sort of strikes me as funny!:loon:


Now as to burning bodies in a bonfire...VIKINGS...ring a bell? The vikings used to burn the bodies of their dead. Of course you won't get the same reduction as you would with a specially designed crematorium, but once you've burned away the flesh and fat, the bones and ashes aren't going to be a threat. As far as fire not penetrating the skull, heat WILL penetrate the skull, and will reduce the brain to steam and boiling fat. The steam leaves the skull, and the fat will burn.
I've gotta believe that the zed would be TOAST (:lol:get it?) by that point. Again, as a weapon against free moving zeds, fire is about useless. A flamethrower would be able to destroy a lot of zeds, but the potential for... ...is way to real to try it, if you have ANY other choice! You're absolutely right about that! BUT...

How about this? You dig a large trench with a backhoe or bulldozer, making sure that when you're done the sides are deep and steep enough to keep a zed from climbing out. Then you use loud noise or live bait to lure the zeds toward the trench. The zeds, being unable to think, fall into the trap. Once it starts to fill up, you spray 'em down with gasoline and torch 'em! Just let the zeds burn! You could repeat this often, until the trench began to fill up with bones and ash. Then just cover the trench and dig a new one elsewhere. If you didn't have access to the heavy equipment yet, you could build a trap out of chainlink fence.


First find a square area surrounded by a sturdy chainlink fence, preferably 6 feet or higher. Decide from which end you'll draw in the zeds. Remove the fence from that side. Cut a hole in the opposite side, about 6 feet across. Use the removed section to fashion a "tunnel" leading out of the 6 foot opening you just made. You'll have to fashion an easily operated gate at the end of the tunnel, and make damn sure it's as foolproof as possible! Now you have a volunteer act as bait to lure in the zeds. They are lead into the large open side, and are then funneled into the tunnel at the other side. Once your volunteer is safely out you lock down the gate and start spraying the zeds with gasoline. Then you light 'em up and let 'em burn! The zeds still trying to get into the tunnel will keep the burning zeds trapped, and will continue to push their way into the blaze as the first zombies are reduced to bone and ash. The person responsible for the fiery end of the trap would be close to his/her getaway vehicle, and would add more fuel to the blaze whenever it started to die out.

If gasoline ran low, you could distill a strong enough alcohol to take it's place. Hell, you could supplement the accelerant with the addition of wood as fuel! I'd stay the hell out of the smoke, but otherwise both of these traps seem to be effective and elegant solutions to the problem.

Oh, and as far as burning the zeds that have already been shot in the head....DISEASE!!! Gotta burn the corpses to reduce the risk of infectious disease. Before the advent of modern medical science, more people died of disease in wartime than were ever even wounded in battle. After a zed outbreak, we're going to be hard pressed to deal with medical emergencies. The last thing we need is an outbreak of some type of plague. So, burn the bodies and be careful to dispose of any other bio-waste with caution. (yes, I'm talking about :poo:)!

Anyway, thanks for the post, and welcome to ATZ!
Hey thanks for the info and those are some goog ideas . I feel welcome allready, I wish i knew how to talk to people on this thing.

[DaXs]

While I agree that the useage of flamethrowers for protection of a home or property is a bad idea. I think many of you dont realise exactly how effective a Napalm hose is for Zombie elimination. If you sprayed even a Wet soaking zombie who just got out of a pond or swimming pool. Napalm would still burn and rapidly destroy the zombie (in seconds), Napalm burns much hotter than a gasoline fire. and is sticky like glue.

Think of a Hose slinging large profuse amounts of Burning, sticky super glue that burns UNDERWATER. The effects of such a weapon being used against a large group of zombies. Even a street sweeper shotgun, or a Belt fed 50. cal would pale in compairison of effectiveness to a napalm hose when dealing with large groups of undead.

Many of you think that the zombie would continue running and moving once coated in a fresh sticky layer of Napalm. You are very incorrect, Napalm would burn even soaking flesh in seconds, burning muscles and bone and converting the undead to ash in mere seconds.. not minutes.

The end result of any napalm attack against a group of zombies is obvious, the Napalm that does not make contact with the zombies remains burning on the ground and has a very similar effect to a pool of super glue. Zombies attempting to transverse the fire would end up stuck to the ground and burning.

A napalm hose would be a essential addition to any group of people attempting to retake ground from a large group of zombies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgYpRpiZmf0&feature=related
This is a video I posted in a different forum. somone redirected me here. I really want you to take notice of somthing when you watch this video.
The weapons that this group of people are using are not "Flamethrowers" These weapons are propelling napalm at high pressure. Notice the effect that the weapons are having on the target area. There is a pool of fire. Compair these weapons to other weapons of this type youtube also has available for your viewing pleasure. you will notice a major difference between this type of weapon and its counterparts.

These are Napalm hoses, Not flamethrowers. Flamethrowers only have a range of 30-50 feet and the fuel does not continue burning for more than a few seconds. Napalm contiues burning for minutes.

Please reconsider the viability of such weapons against any large group of the undead.

[Bob]

Napalm was developed at Harvard University in 1942-43 by a team of chemists led by chemistry professor Louis F. Fieser, who was best known for his research at Harvard University in organic chemistry which led to the synthesis of the hormone cortisone. Napalm was formulated for use in bombs and flame throwers by mixing a powdered aluminium soap of naphthalene with palmitate (a 16-carbon saturated fatty acid) -- also known as napthenic and palmitic acids -- hence napalm [another story suggests that the term napalm derives from a recipe of Naptha and palm oil]. Naphthenic acids are corrosives found in crude oil; palmitic acids are fatty acids that occur naturally in coconut oil. On their own, naphthalene and palmitate are relatively harmless substances.

The aluminum soap of naphtenic and palmitic acids turns gasoline into a sticky syrup that carries further from projectors and burns more slowly but at a higher temperature. Mixing the aluminum soap powder with gasoline produced a brownish sticky syrup that burned more slowly than raw gasoline, and hence was much more effective at igniting a target. Compared to previous incendiary weapons, napalm spread further, stuck to the target, burned longer, and was safer to its dispenser because it was dropped and detonated far below the airplane. It was also cheap to manufacture.

Modern day napalm uses no Napalm (naphthalene or palmitate) -- instead using a mixture of polystyrene, gasoline and benzene. After the Korean War a safer but equally effective napalm compound was developed. This new formulation is known as "napalm-B", super-napalm, or NP2, and it uses no napalm! Instead, polystyrene and benzene are used as a solvent to solidify the gasoline. This modern napalm is a mixture of benzene (21%), gasoline (33%), and polystyrene (46%). Benzene is a normal component of gasoline (about 2%), while the gasoline used in napalm is the same leaded or unleaded gas that is used in automobiles.

Napalm-B had one great advantage over the original napalm -- ignition can be readily controlled. Napalm is less flammable than gasoline and therefore less hazardous. The more polystyrene in the mixture, the harder it is to ignite. Napalm is actually harder to ignite than might be expected. A match or even a road flare will not ignite napalm. A reliable igniter is used to start napalm-B burning. Thermite is typically used to ignite napalm. Some forms of modern napalm cannot be ignited by a hand grenade.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/napalm.htm

[VideoJunkie]

Think of a Hose slinging large profuse amounts of Burning, sticky super glue that burns UNDERWATER. The effects of such a weapon being used against a large group of zombies. Even a street sweeper shotgun, or a Belt fed 50. cal would pale in compairison of effectiveness to a napalm hose when dealing with large groups of undead.

Many of you think that the zombie would continue running and moving once coated in a fresh sticky layer of Napalm. You are very incorrect, Napalm would burn even soaking flesh in seconds, burning muscles and bone and converting the undead to ash in mere seconds.. not minutes.

These are Napalm hoses, Not flamethrowers. Flamethrowers only have a range of 30-50 feet and the fuel does not continue burning for more than a few seconds. Napalm contiues burning for minutes.



Not trying to start an argument, but I'm confused. The term 'Napalm Hose' doesn't bring up any hits on Google, except references to a couple of computer games. Were you using the term to differentiate between the two common types of flamethrowers?

Type 1 - The flamethrowers found in some agricultural areas and in the movies. These use propane gas and have a limited range. They actually shoot a large flame over a short range. Useful and less dangerous than the other type.

Type 2 - Military flamethrowers which throw a stream of burning fuel for distances of almost 300 feet. These flamethrowers can also shoot out a stream of unlit fuel. This can be used to soak an area that can be ignited afterward.

The first type would be safer to operate, but be more limited in it's use. I'd say it's primary use would be to incapacitate zeds in groups. The flame would be insufficient to destroy the zeds outright, but WOULD be enough to quickly burn away the eyes, ears and airways. I know, zeds don't breathe! Well, let's just say that after they're sprayed with a propane jet about 20 to 30 feet long, they won't be able to smell anymore. Either they couldn't smell to begin with, 'cause they don't breathe (the 2 go together) or if they could before, and now they can't because of the fire damage. Either way works for me! They'd still be a threat, and need to be dealt with, but they'd be much less dangerous!

The second type is more of a danger to it's operator, and the people around him/her. The increased range (up to 10 times the distance) means the risk of hitting things you don't want to burn increases. Also, the liquid fuel is more of a danger to carry and operate. The upside is the ability to destroy zeds outright with a stream of burning fuel. Everything I've read indicates that your comment about burning zeds to ashes in seconds is simply an exaggeration. Don't sweat it, we all do it sometimes. The point is that a military flamethrower COULD destroy zeds.

Most of the people (including myself) who've posted here have been concerned about the danger of a fire getting out of control. The only safe way that I can see to use a military flamethrower would be as part of a trap. If you manage to round up large numbers of zeds in a large fireproof area...BBQ time! Say a large parking lot, or even better an airport! If you could lure the zeds to an airport that would be perfect! A couple of trucks with flamethrowers in the back could drive back and forth across the runways torching zeds at will! In that sort of environment the risk would be minimized and the potential return on your effort would be staggering.

In a more densely built up area, I'd be afraid of the fire getting out of control. But in the right location, and with the proper planning, either type of flamethrower could be a very useful addition to an anti-zed arsenal!:evil:

[KrimsonKing]

Here is a very simple and effective recipe for napalm.

Get a large metal bowl(plastic may corrode) and fill it about half way with gasoline and start mixing in crumbled Styrofoam until no more can be dissolved, now you got a bowl full of sticky napalm.


Have Fun!!!:evil:

[Bob]

Do you think premium gasoline would work better than regular?

[KrimsonKing]

I don’t know but what the hell give it a shot, its not like your paying for it in a situation such as this.

[Lurker13]

Is it useful for anything besides burning stuff? That sounds stupid but I meant other than killing things. Is it used for non fighting uses?

[EvilWeasel35]

I reckon fire could be used in some situations. For instance napalming an open area if there was a large hoard. However, I wouldn't advise the use of fire in close combat. It's one thing to have a crowd of zombies coming at you - something totally different if they are on fire and burning everything in their wake, including your shelter and you!

Edition - Oooo! I just made Sarg! :mrgreen:

[Bob]

So now you are Sgt Weasel35.

In most urban situations I think fire should be avoided when ever possible.

[KrimsonKing]

Sure, it can be used for clearing land; it’s quick and apparently good for the soil. Just be sure to dig a wide trench around the area first to prevent the fire from spreading.

You could wrap a rag around the end of a stick then dip it in the stuff to make a good torch. (No evilweasel I don’t mean flashlight)

You could cook with it but your food might have a slight plastic undertone.

That’s all I can think of right now:)

[Bob]

I would not recommend cooking on a fire of it due to toxic residue although C4 will heat coffee nicely.

[Darkness]

Here is a very simple and effective recipe for napalm.

Get a large metal bowl(plastic may corrode) and fill it about half way with gasoline and start mixing in crumbled Styrofoam until no more can be dissolved, now you got a bowl full of sticky napalm.


Have Fun!!!:evil:

"A Word To The Wise: Never use a formula posted on a random site, until you have fully researched it first. People can get badly hurt, even killed, messing with stuff they don't completely understand." :naughty:

[Bob]

Perhaps thats also why meth labs keep blowing up and catching on fire.

[EvilWeasel35]

You could wrap a rag around the end of a stick then dip it in the stuff to make a good torch. (No evilweasel I don’t mean flashlight)

Oh, ha ha. We use the same terminology. :roll::lol: And it's Sgt. Weasel now. :)

You could cook with it but your food might have a slight plastic undertone.

I read that as cooking with flaming zombies. :doh:
Yummy, would the slight plastic undertone be coming from all that plastic surgery, I wonder???
:think::evil:

[Bob]

Sgt Weasel
I think it would depend on what part of the anatomy was being burned :evil:

[Lurker13]

VideoJunkie mentioned this today and since hes gone :cry: for a while i'll post it.

1 - Zombies are attracted to noise and moving
2 - Big fires are noisey and fire looks like its moving.


See where wer'e going here?

Would a large fire in a hole or a swiming pool a cement one be enough to atract zombies? Would they just walk in to the fire and fall in and burn? Thats totaly cool!

[Bob]

Good idea but aren't most private swimming pools in fenced yards?
Public pools have fences also don't they?

[mattifikation]

The fire trap pool would make a better diversion than anything else. If you're in an area with enough zombies to bother with something like that, then your number one priority would be to get to a different area.

[Captain Necro]

I love the idea of fire on zombies, and I don't think you need any special environment of any kind, if your not near your safe house light them up.

Molotov cocktails are especially good for those of you out there with no firearm's and/or no firearm experience.

Just use your best judgment and do it, besides if zombies are on the loose are you really going to be worrying about setting something on fire?

[KrimsonKing]

The best liquid Molotov cocktail mixture is 3 parts kerosene 1 part motor oil.

The bottle should be sealed and wrapped in waste cotton which is then sprinkled with gasoline.
This will spread a large, slightly sticky flame.

[KrimsonKing]

Here is an easy way to make a Molotov launcher.

You take a short barreled 12 gauge shotgun and add a pair of legs in such a way that with a the butt of the gun they form a tripod, the weapon will thus be mounted at an angel of about 45 degrees; this can be varied by moving the legs back and forth.

It’s loaded with an open shell from which all the shot has been removed. A wooden dowel (a cylindrical stick) fitted to the barrel is pushed into the shell through the end of the barrel. A **** tail fixed to a padded rubber base is adhered to the opposite end of the dowel.

This weapon has an effective range of a hundred meters or more with fairly high accuracy. With practice it can be fired from the shoulder. This weapon can also launch pipe bombs and other things of that nature.
]
They could have used it in DOTD04 to launch Andy a sandwich or something.:lol:

[Bob]

They should have had the dogs pack arranged so Andy could have hooked it and lifted it up without having to open a door for the dog. I feel certain he could have fabricated something.

[joerrrrrr]

i personally think fire would be nice, spreads easily. it also kills the virus so you dont have to go through burning the bodies later. another thing is that if you set a zombie in a zombie filled area it could easily set others on fire

[mattifikation]

Other whats? Safehouses? Trees? Buildings? Survivors?

[Creeping Death]

The problem is:
When you set one on fire, they aren't gonna stop running immediately.
It'll take a little time to kill 'em. :scare:

[CAVU45]

Burning a zombie might make good cinema, but would it be practical? The problem as I see it is this; Fire spreads. It doesn't matter what device you use to start the fire, flamethrower, molotov...the fire will spread and could quickly get out of hand with no way of containing it. It is an area weapon, not a precision one.

Zombies that are set ablaze become walking (maybe running) candles that can set on fire everything they touch. See above why that's a bad idea.

I can see the scenario playing out something like this:
"Yea!! Look at that f****r burn! Burn baby burn!!!"
"Hey! Wait! Where's he going?"
"Oh s**t!! He just set that storefront on fire!! Now it's a car!!! This ain't good. Run guys!!!"

[Birdman44]

Fire would probably be a good thing while on the move to a destination. It will give the zombies something to watch and kill them eventually when they get too close. But i personally would never use it around an area im holding up in for fear of burning myself and group out:scare:

[the_velociraptor]

No .....................

Thank you. Extremely descriptive.

In any case, only if you have time to spare and no ammo to waste. Long as anything isn't flammable that could spread to your side, you can set zombies on one side of a wall on fire and wait until they're too charred to move.

[Ball Tripper]

I might consider using some moletov's on z-day. I don't have any guns though. So I'll be improvising a lot of stuff.

One thing about moletov's most people don't realize is that, glass bottles now a days are made to be pretty damn strong. I've thrown a snapple bottle straight up in the air as high as I could and it landed on concrete and bounced rather than broke. It's not like in the movies where a glass bottle will always shatter on the target and never in your pocket. Any glass that breaks easily enough to make a good moletov, would be a very serious hazard to carry around full of gasoline.

[Redfields]

IMO not wise to use fire

Reasons:
Flaming zombie chasing you is no fun
If you are holding a cade, chances are that the zed will light your cade on fire
May attract more zeds
Risk to set a fire trap
Not good for environment(pollution) *jks*

[JimiVengeance]

quick and simple answer...bad idea...

[Nameless1]

When ever someone mentions fire and zeds I think of that video diary on the Dawn of the Dead 2004. Where the gun store guy tries a Molotov and it doesn't really do anything. There's also the movie Mist where they try and use fire to keep off the monsters and it ends really badly...