Talk:Churchill Crocodile

Danger money

Each tank crew were paid an extra six pence a day as danger money due to the fact the flame throwers broke the Geneva Convention and the Germans would shoot them out of hand. Both sides used flame throwers and both sides shot the crews concerned, I think it's worth a mention.Twobells (talk) 14:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Flamethrowers were not banned under the Geneva Convention, until the publication of Protocol 3 (Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons), Geneva 10 October 1980. So no excuse for the Germans! 78.105.252.123 (talk) 12:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The Germans shoot crews that used them against civilians. Ironically use of flamethrowers by Germans against military targets was considered a war crime. --41.150.54.156 (talk) 12:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

What rubbish! The Germans invented the modern flamethrower, and were the first to use in battle during World War One. THAT may have been called a war crime at the time, but they were so common by the Second World War I hardly think their military use would have been too contraversial. Also the main footage of German soldiers using flame throwers is destroying Russian villages (presumably as reprisals) and destroying Warsaw. Are these "military targets" or civilian ones? Also how would German soldiers be able to know if a flamethrower tank had been used against civilians unless they'd knocked it out immediately after such an attack? The reality is that all soldiers, not just Germans, hate and fear flamethrower attack, and hate the operators. It's a soldier thing, not about being German, British, American or Nazi, and this is touched on in the main article on flamethrowers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.126.255.228 (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Jellified fuel and 'wet shots'

Can anyone find a source for the fuel used - I think that flamethrowers actually used thickened petrol otherwise the range would be very poor. I also recall reading that Crocodiles would use unignited 'wet shots' to persuade strong points to surrender; some of the text here seems to suggest that this is the case but does anyone now of the sources? Sorry these are questions rather than answers. Mungo Shuntbox (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Churchill Crocodile. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070405053519/http://www.desertrat.brigades.btinternet.co.uk:80/equipment.htm to http://www.desertrat.brigades.btinternet.co.uk/equipment.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Croc?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_Crocodile#/media/File:ChurchillCrocodile.jpg is not a Churchill its a Sherman.Slatersteven (talk) 19:14, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

I think that photo was there to illustrate a Sherman Crocodile conversion. I would keep the photo but change the caption. Mark Taylor (talk) 21:08, 26 November 2019 (UTC)