Medium Flame-Thrower Tank

M4 Medium Flame-Thrower Tank in action on Okinawa, May 1945 

---

On at least one occasion the two types of flame thrower were employed in the same action. During the battle for Tinian, marines first used the cannon of a medium tank to blast defended caves, then the light flame tanks to spray the openings, and finally assault teams with demolitions and portable flame weapons to actually reduce the positions. ... 

Chemical Section, Pacific Base Command, with help from the Navy, the Marine Corps, other Army elements, and civilians. Briefly, the flame unit, designated the POA CWS Hi, consisted of a Ronson flame thrower installed in a salvaged yy-mm. gun tube and mounted in a medium tank. It had a maximum effective range of about lOO yards (with thickened fuel), a capacity of nearly 300 gallons, and a firing time of 150 seconds. ... 

The 713th Tank Battalion changed over to a flame battalion in Hawaii, and its own troops had assisted in the installation of the POA flame throwers in the medium tanks. Tank crews test fired and adjusted their flame weapons, while others of the battalion received instruction in mixing the fuel. A tentative table of organization and equipment was drawn up to reflect the differences inherent in a flame tank unit. ... 

Before the infantry attack the flame thrower and conventional tanks moved out to burn off the remainder of the foliage from Hill 89 and its approaches, which they left an ugly blackened mass of jagged coral. On the second day the flame-throwing tanks advanced in increasing numbers to pour thousands of gallons of burning fuel into caves and crevices. Then the infantry, supported by flame tanks, medium tanks, and artillery, successfully stormed the hill. 

Patton expressed doubt about the tactical value of a mechanized flame thrower. A September 1944 demonstration of two models of the newly developed auxiliary flame thrower for the medium tank elicited no requirement for the weapon. A series of conferences on the mechanized flame thrower led Allied Force Headquarters in December 1944 also to report that no requirement existed for the auxiliary model. One of the major factors in this conclusion was the fact that the Italian terrain was most unfavorable for the use of tanks. ... 

In the zone of interior the Armored Force Board had never been enthusiastic about any flame-throwing tank that was a special-purpose weapon, that Is, if it had the flame thrower as its main armament, or if it had a distinguishing silhouette. The British Crocodile met the first requirement, but its fuel-carrying trailer certainly made it readily identifiable. In any event, the board urged the Chemical Warfare Service to concentrate its efforts on the auxiliary model, one that main- tained the normal armament of the vehicle, which was then under development. The result was an auxiliary flame thrower which was interchangeable with the bow machine gun of either the light or medium tank. 

As a matter of fact, comparatively little use was made of the E4-3 in France and Germany. Unfortunately, the first reported action was a complete failure, a circumstance which may have helped discourage wider use of the weapon. Two medium tanks with E4-3 flame throwers reported to the y4ist Tank Battalion, First Army, on 13 September 1944. At the time, both tanks were improperly equipped and one had a defective engine. The y4ist Tank Battalion repaired and equipped the vehicles and attached them to Company C. When further trouble developed, one of the tanks was evacuated to an ordnance repair shop. On 18 September, the remaining E4-3 flame tank supported an infantry attack on an enemy pillbox. Because of inadequate pressure the tank had to get within twenty-five yards of the fortification before the flame could reach the embrasure. This action failed to reduce the pillbox, and the infantry did not take the position. In fact, there was doubt whether or not the enemy suffered any casualties from the attack. 

Medium Tank Equipped With Flame Thrower firing on entrance to enemy cave. Picture taken on Okinawa, 1 45. 

In September the Tenth Army, planning an attack—later canceled— on Formosa, requested that large capacity flame throwers be installed in fifty-four M4 medium tanks. In the first model the company installed a Ronson gun like that used on Satan. The Tenth Army pointed out that the silhouette was different from the 75-mm. gun of the regular M4 tank, and this would permit the enemy to spot flame tanks. The problem then arose of obtaining 75-mm. gun tubes to enclose the flame gun. Ordnance did not wish to sacrifice new tubes for the manufacture of flame throwers, and only a few salvaged tubes were available. Seabees machined these items to hold the flame gun, and in the meantime the ASF shipped fourteen salvaged tubes under high priority. Later, Colonel Unmacht obtained authority to use forty-two serviceable tubes for the purpose. 

Lt. Gen. Wilhelm D. Styer standing in front of a flame thrower mounted on a medium tank chassis at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. To the right of General Styer is Col, Jay C. Whitehair, Howard C. Peterson, and Col. George P. Unmacht. 

---