Tank Battalions

A second choice for a comparable situation is to compare the accident situation with a similar accident-free operation. For example, two similar plants producing the same products from the same raw materials in the same environment could be compared, or two military units with the same mission, same organization, same type of equipment, vehicles, or aircraft, subject to the same regulations, and in the same physical and command environments (for example, side-by-side tank battalions or fighter squadrons) can be compared. 

There were several attempts in the Pacific to mount portable flame throwers in some sort of armored vehicle, a combination made the more appealing by the lack thus far of cannon or other antitank weapons in the enemy bunkers. In the South Pacific Area, for example, the commander of a tank battalion in New Caledonia installed a flame gun in the pistol port of a tank, and a chemical officer on New Georgia modified the flame gun so that it could be fitted into the aperture for the tank s bow machine gun. The tst Marine Tank Battalion, serving in the Southwest Pacific, mounted several portable flame throwers on its tanks in preparation for the New Britain operation. None of these improvisions could have been called successful. The portable flame thrower was not constructed to withstand the vibrations and jarrings... 

The Luzon fighting saw the arrival of both auxiliary and main armament flame throwers from the zone of interior. The XIV Corps included a tank battalion, equipped with bow gun flame throwers, that was employed in the house-to-house fighting in Manila. In one instance a flame tank neutralized in a few minutes a barricaded building which had defied the infantry for two days. Twenty-five more bow gun flame throwers reached the Sixth Army in mid-April. ... 

The 4th and 5 th Marine Divisions emphasized the greater eflfective-ness of the main armament type as opposed to the auxiliary flame thrower, of which the 4th Division had twenty-four. These divisions recommended more large capacity flame throwers and their incorporation as organic equipment in ail tank battalions. Although the 3d Marine Division entered the Iwo Jima operation without main armament flame throwers, it was later on able to borrow some from the other divisions. In its opinion this type was better against enemy defenses than the auxiliary bow gun flame throwers with their shorter range and limited traverse. ... 

Okinawa was the last battle of the war and one of the hardest. Conducted by Tenth Army on the very doorstep of Japan, it was to involve more CWS equipment than any other Pacific campaign. Each of the four Army divisions of XXIV Corps had 141 portable flame throwers each of the three Marine divisions of III Amphibious Corps had 243, the same number as had been taken to Iwo Jima. The 713 th Tank Battalion, converted to a provisional flame thrower unit for the operation, received a complement of 34 POA main armament flame throwers. ... 

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. ... 

In general, each of the three companies of the 713th was attached to a standard tank battalion in support of a division. In turn, flame platoons joined tank companies, and sections joined standard platoons. 

During the Ryukyus Campaign the 713th Tank Battalion saw almost continuous action for seventy days and officially received credit for the death of 4,788 Japanese and the capture of 49. At the same time the battalion lost 7 men killed and no men wounded, injured, or missing. No one was killed inside a main armament flame tank as a result of enemy action, although 41 tanks were knocked out during the 630 flame tank sorties. ... 

Tank crews developed a fear of the periscope type after the fuel container of one burst and ignited upon being struck by an enemy shell, burning the tank crew to death. This type of auxiliary flame thrower, therefore, was never fully tested in battle. Nor was the bow gun type, with which the III Amphibious Corps was equipped, put to much use, for main armament flame tanks of the 713th Tank Battalion were preferred by Marine as well as Army units. ... 

The Tenth Army and the 713th Tank Battalion agreed that the 7 5-mm. gun should be retained in flame tanks and mounted coaxially with the flame thrower, but that there should be no reduction in fuel capacity and no decrease in the effectiveness of the flame gun. ... 

Each of the four Army tank battalions had eighteen periscope flame throwers each Marine tank battalion carried sixteen E4R2-jRi s. Tenth Army Action Rpt, Ryukyus, 26 Mar-30 June 4J, p. 4< 713th Tank Bn Armored Flame Thrower (Provisional) AAR ch. IX, in McKinney, Mechanized Flame Thrower Opns, app. 6, p. 374. 

For the Kyushu operation (Olympic) over twice as many main armament flame tanks per division were to be used as had been employed on Okinawa. A tank battalion was to be attached to each assault division and Sixth Army requested sufficient main armament flame throwers to equip one company in each of these battalions. At this time the Sixth Army understood that some 600 main armament flame throwers were being manufactured in the zone of interior, but that only 40 of these would be available in time for Olympic. Therefore, the plan called for the distribution of armored flame throwers in equal lots to each tank battalion as soon as the weapons arrived in the theater. Some 56 additional main armament flame throwers of the POA model were to be obtained from Hawaii. Thus a total of 96 main armament... 

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. 

The tank battalion commander was decidedly unimpressed with the possibilities of the flame tank, although he admitted that the lack of training experience of the crew (it had had one day of preparatory training) might have contributed to the inefficiency of the weapon. Another factor was the distinct, if unwarranted, reluctance of the crews to enter combat with the flame tanks, a reluctance also attributable to a lack of training and indoctrination. ... 

Army about 1 November. The weapon used compressed carbon dioxide gas to propel the fuel, had a fuel capacity of 290 gallons, a range of 40 yards with oily fuel and 60 to 80 yards with thickened fuel. Eight tanks were sent to the Fleet Marine Force, Pacific, for the Iwo Jima operation and 54 were supplied to the 713th Provisional Flame Thrower Tank Battalion for the Ryukyus operation. 

On Iwo Jima, marines found the flame tanks particularly helpful in the later stages of the operation when they had to take a network of caves. By the time the marines had reached the northern end of the island, flame tanks had proven so useful that demands for them exceeded the supply. On Okinawa the operations took place on the hilly southern portion of the island where Japanese troops had defenses in cliffs, hills, and escarpments. The tank battalion carried out more than six hundred attacks, and fired almost 200,000 gallons of napalm thickened fuel. ... 

---