M4 Flame Tanks

[Terminus]

How were they organised? Attached to tank bn HQ's, separate platoons or something else entirely...

Army and/or USMC data both needed; any help appreciated...

[Onime No Kyo]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

How were they organised? Attached to tank bn HQ's, seperate platoons or something else entirely...

They were held exclusively in Corps reserve to be released one by one exactly at the most dramatic moment to save the main hero but not his faithful buddy. Betcha didnt know American war movies were that historical, did you? [:D]

[Terminus]

So that'd be a no, then? Okay...

[JeffroK]

My books have 9 Flamethrower tanks in a Marine "G" style Div of Sept 1945. They are not mentioned in the "F" Series of May 44

IT doesnt say where they fit in the OOB, but as they aren't mentioned elsewhere I assume they are in the Tank Bn

713rd Tank (Armoured Flamethower) Bn (US Army) landed on Okinawa on 7 April 1945 and were attached to the Divisions. Although they were committed to the fighting on 8-12 April they only used their machine guns..... In the attack of 19 April they first used the flamthrowers on the Japanese

From OKINAWA. THE LAST BATTLE by Roy Appleman

[Terminus]

Thanks much, Jeff... I read somewhere that the US wanted to use twice as many flamethrowing tanks during Olympic as they did on Okinawa, where they found out exactly how effective they were...

[Terminus]

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

[el cid again]

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

I would like to understand how you can implement them at all? Flamethrowers have no "range" in the usual WITP sense. And what is their "effect"? They have no "weight" in the usual sense either. Nor can one take the root of weight for explosive value - which I have done for all HE shells in RHS. What theory are you using? And why should flame tanks be put in for the US but not for Japan (which had them earlier)?
And why any flame tanks at all - but not flamethrowers of a tactial sort?
IJN had them organic to the SNLF, and IJA used them in the Engineers (peasant soldiers didn't like them - only educated ones). The "corkscrew and blowtorch" was the main US late war tactic. But we put that in as a part of ordinary squad effects. I am interested in your theory.

[Oznoyng]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

I would like to understand how you can implement them at all? Flamethrowers have no "range" in the usual WITP sense. And what is their "effect"? They have no "weight" in the usual sense either. Nor can one take the root of weight for explosive value - which I have done for all HE shells in RHS. What theory are you using? And why should flame tanks be put in for the US but not for Japan (which had them earlier)?
And why any flame tanks at all - but not flamethrowers of a tactial sort?
IJN had them organic to the SNLF, and IJA used them in the Engineers (peasant soldiers didn't like them - only educated ones). The "corkscrew and blowtorch" was the main US late war tactic. But we put that in as a part of ordinary squad effects. I am interested in your theory.

Devices have anti-armor and anti-soft ratings. A flamethrower tank which traded it's gun for the flamethrower would have a very high anti soft, very low anti-armor rating. A flamethrower in addition to a gun would have both values high.

[Terminus]

I won't be implementing man-portable flamethrowers at all. They'd be a component weapon in an engineer squad. HOWEVER, an M4 flame tank can be easily implemented by modifying a basic Sherman.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

Dont have the reference with me but i do know that not all M4 flames were built as such. One of my tank books has a color pic of a Sherman flame tank in action, with the flame shooting out from the co-axial position normally reserved for the MG.

In fact, i don't recall any M4 model at the moment that mounted it in place of the gun. What reference stated such? (curious)

[Terminus]

It wasn't so much a reference on the flame tanks themselves. I googled the 713th Tank Battalion, and came up with this:

http://www.11tharmoreddivision.com/hist ... _tank.html

[panda124c]

Here:

POA Flame thrower:
US Navy Mk I flame thrower fitted inside a 105 mm barrel with breech removed.

POA-CWS 75-H1:
Used 75 mm barrel.

POA-CWS 75-H2:
Projector attached to right side of 75 mm gun.

E6-R1 Flame gun:
Kit that fit in the periscope aperture in the assistant driver's hatch.

E7-7 Flame gun:
Short projector which replaced main gun. Fuel carried in hull.

Ronson Flame gun:
Canadian Ronson flame thrower.

Component Manual
Flame Thrower, Mechanized, E12-7R1 (Installed in Medium Tanks M4A1 and M4A3) TM 3-360 (20 July 1945)
Flame Thrower, Mechanized, M3-4-3 (Installed in Medium Tanks M4A1 and M4A3) TM 3-362 (23 June 1945)
Flame Thrower, Mechanized, M3-4-E6R3 TM 3-364 (6 June 1945)


I would think that these vehicles would be attached at Divisional level along with Engineering assets. The fact that the 713th was the only flame tank Battalion leads me to believe that the flame tanks were probably deployed from Division in platoons for assault support, normally.

[Terminus]

Nice one, pbear. Thanks!

[Iron Duke]

hi,

From US Marine Corps World War II Order of Battle by Rottman

A-H1B 'Satan' flamethrower tank :M3A1 in lieu of main gun :standardized 1943
range=40-60yds ; fuel=170 gals ; flame duration=120secs
remarks: modified ronson mk1 ,fitted on 20 tanks , first used on Saipan

Mk1 Ronson flamethrower tank :LVT(4) on rear deck;standardized 1944
range=75yds[unthickened] , 150yds[thickened]
fuel=200gals ; flame duration 55secs/80secs
remarks: fitted to 6 LVT(4)'s used on Peleliu by the US Navy Flamethrower Detachment.

M3-4-3 famethrower tank : M4A2 in lieu of bow mg ; standardized 1944
range= 60-70yds ; fuel=25gal ; duration=45secs
remarks: first used on Guam.

E7 flamethrower tank : LVT(A)(1) in lieu of main gun ; standardized 1944

E12-7R1 flamethrower tank : M4 in lieu of bow mg ; standardized 1944
range=125yds ; fuel=290gals ; duration 85-120secs
remarks: first used on Iwo Jima.

[visionstealer]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

From what Ive read in the past, They wanted the flamethrower installed in place of the 75mm breech in order to desguise the true nature of the tank. Flame tanks were pretty devestating against soft targets and bunkers and such and it was found that the enemy would target them first if they could. From the outside an M4 flame tank looked like any old Sherman until it opened up on you.

[JeffroK]

pbear beat me to it.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Found, to my surprise, that the M4 flame tanks had their flame units mounted inside their 75mm gun barrels, rather than co-axially (similar to the British Crocodiles). Can anybody confirm this? It would make a rather substantial difference in how an M4 flame tank was implemented in WitP...

Dont have the reference with me but i do know that not all M4 flames were built as such. One of my tank books has a color pic of a Sherman flame tank in action, with the flame shooting out from the co-axial position normally reserved for the MG.

In fact, i don't recall any M4 model at the moment that mounted it in place of the gun. What reference stated such? (curious)

Nik,

I got my info which is the same as pbears from Tanks of the Untied States & Commonwealth, published by Chamberlain
I'll confirm this tonight

[Nikademus]

thx.

confirmed it in one of my own references: World War II tanks (George Forty)

"A wide variety of flameguns were fitted, either in place of hull MG or in the turret with or in place of main armament. This included using the Canadian Ronson flamegun and the British Churchill Crocodile flame equipment. US non-clematures included E4R2-5R1, E4R3-5R1 (M3-4-3), E4R4-4R 5-6RC, POA, POA-CWS 75-H1, POA-CWS 75-H2, E6-R1 and E7-7. (Geesh we Americanz sure like our numbers)

British designtations were Adder, Salamander, Crocodile and Badger.

[Terminus]

MAJOR WEAPONS AND TRANSPORTATION--MARINE DIVISION
Weapons:

Carbine, .30 cal., M-1 10,953
Flamethrower, portable, M2-2 243
Flamethrower, mechanized, E4-5 24

Gun:
37mm, M3, antitank 36
75mm, motor carriage, Mñ3, w/armament, radio-equipped (TCS) 12

Gun, Machine:
.30 cal, M1919A4 302
.30 cal., M1917A1 162
.50 cal., M2 161

Gun, submachine, .45 cal 49

Howitzer:
75mm pack 24
105mm 24

Launcher, rocket, antitank, M1A1 172

Mortar:
60mm 117
81mm 36

Pistol, .45 cal 399
Rifle, .30 cal., M-1 5,436
Rifle, Browning, automatic 853
Shotgun, 12 gauge 306

Tank, Army medium, with armament 46
Vehicle, recovery, M32B2 3


What the heck is a "flamethrower, mechanised"? Don't think it's a flame tank, given the number, but what then? A half-track?

Found this here: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/II ... III-F.html

[Nikademus]

your best bet may be to go with the combo version. Leave it's anti tank value more or less intact and enhance it's anti soft capability.