M26 Pershing vs Japan

[Mil-tech Bard]

And a picture of the T-35 flame throwing Pershing can be found at his link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/skyliner72/3708979197/

[Mil-tech Bard]

I now have a good idea where and with what formations the M26 Pershings for the Operation Olympic landings would be located

1) M26/M46 Pershing Tank 1943-53 Tony Bryan, Jim Laurier, & Steven Zaloga Osprey Publisher New Vanguard 35
@2000

Page 16 shows Pershings arrived on Okinawa July 21, 1945 with picture of debarkation from Landing ships

Page 23 There were 12 divided between 193rd & 711th Tank Battalions for combat training for Operation Olympic.

2) DOWNFALL -- The End of The Imperial Japanese Empire, by Richard Frank Page 398
125 Pershings issued thusly:
706th Tank Btn -- 71xM26 Pershing, 6xM4A3(105mm) Shermans
767th Tank Btn -- 54xM26 Pershing, 6xM4A3(105mm) Shermans, 17 M24 Chaffee

[Carl Schwamberger]

Did a quick search of this thread and found no mention of the T23. According to Hunnicutt & Zalogas seperate histories of the M26 some 250 of T23 were built by mid 1945. Rejected for use in the ETO the T23 tanks were scheduled for shipment to the PTO for use in Cornet/Olympic. Anyone have any additional info on this? Were any companys or battalions stood up or any of the T23 actually shipped to the PTO?

The T23 was equipped with a electric drive with a system of generators/electric motors substituting for the mechanical or hydralic transmissions in most other US tanks. Tests of the electric drive in other tanks in 1942 had been considered very sucessfull and priority was given to developing a prototype suitable for production. The chassis hull design was taken from the plans for the T20. The same plans/armor specs for the hull were used and the same track suspension and motor. The 76mm gun was designated for the T23. Several expermental turrets were tested & a modified version of the turret used on the M4 for mounting the 76mm gun was used in the production series of the T23.

The priority given to the T23 caused its first prototype to be in running order in January 1943. Initial road tests were completed in March.

[binder001]

T23s never left the CONUS (AFAIK). The elctric transmission was a bit ahead of its time for the Army. It would have required new training for all the maintenace people in the battalion as well as the crews. Some turret castings that were intended for T23s were diverted to M3A3 76mm production. As opposed to the whole 76mm design being referred to as a "T23 turret" the actual T23 turrets had an extra lift ring on left front of the turret, ahead of the loader's hatch - this was intended to mount an engine lifting boom on T23s. T23s that were intended for production also mounted the 76mm gun. No 76mm tanks saw combat in the PTO, the 75mm was preferred for its better HE shell. From the material available it looks like Olympic/Coronet would have been supported by M4A3 variants, M26s, M24s and probably some M4/M4A1s with 75s or flamethrowers.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Thanks. I had been curious since there are remarks in the literature about them being scheduled for transport.

The T23 sounds like a cutting edge technology stalled by the modern industrial efficiency philosphy AGF was operating under.

[Mil-tech Bard]

There was another M4A3E2 variant with HVSS suspension.

It was the T33 flame thrower tank with 75mm gun and coaxial main armament flame thrower.

I found a number of pictures of it on flicker.

There were to be about 600 of them for the assault on Japan.

[Mil-tech Bard]

You can find photos of this M4A3A2 T33 variant at photo bucket at the following link:

http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f25/D ... lt%20tank/

[Mil-tech Bard]

The US Army appears to have developed a prototype Ritchie Device model T8 ridged float system for the M26, M-46 or M-47 series tank (See the "Other Amphibious sherman" thread).

The project was dropped after it was determined to have even more problems than the T6/M19 did on the Sherman.

[Mil-tech Bard]

The US Army's 98th Infantry Division report on it occupation duties in Japan was in the US Army's Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library.

The following was in the chemical warfare section of the document on page 20:

"...arrangements were made with Central Pacific Base Command to divert 10 POA model flame throwers and one E8 service unit from the Marines to the 767th Tank Battalion. These Flamethrowers were similar to the E12R1 model, have a fuel capacity of 300 gallons, maximum effective range of 150 to 175 yards, and approximately 120 seconds duration of fire. They were manufactured by the POA Flamethrower Group on Oahu.

The 767th Tank Battalion departed for the operation with ten POA model Flamethrowers, mounted on M4A2 tanks with 105mm Howitzers and eighteen (18) periscope model Flamethrowers mounted on M4A3 Tanks with 76mm guns."

I found elsewhere already that the 767th battalion was to have M26's for that Operation Olympic.

Now I know a number of other things as well.

First, the 98th Infantry division was under the impression that 767th Tank Battalion would be getting ten E12R1 main armament kits for installation in 10 M26 Pershings as a Part of Operation Olympic in Nov 1945. RP Hunnicutt's "Sherman" reports that the E12R1 was only for the M5-4/M42B1 main armament flame thrower Sherman tanks. (Was the POA-CWS group going to make yet another Flamethrower tank out of available Pershings and E12R1 main armament flamethrower kits?)

Second, the US Army's immediate replacement Shermans on Hawaii for Operation Olympic were M4A3 Tanks with 76mm guns!

Third, it looks like the Zone of the Interior "Flame Thrower, Mechanized, M3-4-E6R3" (M4A3 Tanks with 76mm guns and periscope flamethrowers) made it to the Pacific just in time for the Japanese surrender.

Forth, the 767th's Persings were not in Hawaii when it left for Occupation duty in Early Sept 1945.

Link:

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm4/item_viewe ... X=1&REC=20

Title Occupation of Japan.

Abstract Report of the part played by the 98th Infantry Division in the Occupation of Japan. It covers the transition of the Division from preparation for combat to planning for occupation; the rapid planning and execution of an overseas movement and amphibious land; and finally, the establishment of control over the Osaka Area of Honshu, Japan.

Keyword World War, 1939-1945; World War Two; WWII; Post-World War II; Japanese occupation; Allied occupation; Japanese constitution; Stability and reconstruction operations (SRO); Japan; Japanese history; Japanese culture; Pacific Theater of Operations
Publisher Osaka, Japan : Headquarters 98th Infantry Division,
Date, Original 1945
Date, Digital 2008-07-21
Resource Type Textual; Maps
Format PDF; Adobe Acrobat Reader required; 76 p.; 7.41 MB.
Call number N12834-A
Language eng
Release statement Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Repository Combined Arms Research Library
Library Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created 2009-06-02

[binder001]

Thanks for pulling out some of the obscure records. The constitution of the potential armor units for Olympic/Coronet area rarely mentioned. The only verification that I knew of was that the initial group of M26s arrived at Okinawa, but due to delays they saw no combat. Given that the ETOUSA had accumulated about 300 M26s between Febr and May, it's easy to believe that a large batch of M26s could have been gathered in Hawaii and/or Okinawa before the projected invasions of Japan.

Based on previous experience in the Pacific it makes sense that each tank unit would be gathering as many main-gun or auxilliary flamethrowers as possible.

THe gathering of 76mm M4A3s for Olympic/Coronet also makes sense. Even if the 76mm was not the preferred weapon for the PTO, the 75mm gunned tanks had ceased production so any new tanks would have to be 76mm or 105mm types. There are photos of some M4A3 75mm tanks with HVSS in Hunicutt's "Sherman" that were captioned as being held for the invasion of Japan. I also have seen a shot of M4A3 75mm Wet Stowage tanks in the ETO being prepped for shipment to the PTO. The USMC would have had a requirement for quite a few M4A3s also, so some new or reconditioned 75mm tanks might have been for them. According to Ed Gilbert's book the USMC didn't have much interest in the M26 at the time.

A fair number of the M4A3E2s survived the war in Europe. So far I have not heard anything about plans to move any to the PTO, have you? I imagine the M26 was viewed as filling the role of the M4A3E2 in the Pacific.

[Mil-tech Bard]

There were a number of other very important armored vehicles for Operation Downfall missed by the academics.

1)I found that 10th Army requested canal defense light (CDL) tanks for Okinawa (Ordnance's "Beachhead to Battlefront") and RP Hunnicutt's "Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank", said that 18 M3 Grant based CDL's arrived after Okinawa was over, in time for the Olympic landings.

CDL's were the greatest "Allied security blew a good idea program" of WW2 as the CDL in testing proved to be very able to blind anti-tank guns, but it was kept so secret no American field commanders knew about their capabilities. They would have been on the beaches of Kyushu.

2) RP Hunnicutt's "Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank", said there were 100 kits for making M4 Sherman based armored engineering vehicles in the USA and two were on a ship in San Francisco with instructors on V-J Day.

3) There were also about one hundred more US Army main armament flame thrower tanks to be used in Olympic made up of
a) About 39 surviving M4A1 POA-CWS-H1 in the 713th tank battalion
b) About 40 of M5-4 main armament flame thrower tanks with E12-7R1 flame throwers from factories in America, and
c) About 56 M4A1 or M4A3 Hawaiian made POA-CWS-H5 (main gun plus flame thrower)
d) The USMC had an additional 70 of 72 ordered USMC flame thrower tanks [M4A3 75mm or 105mm POA-CWS-H5].

Since a Typhoon was going to delay the Kyshu landings until 15 December 1945,
a) Those two AEV plus a portion of the remaining 100 kits would be on Japanese beaches,
b) More M5-4 and POA-CWS-H5 Sherman main armament flame thrower tanks and
c) More CDL tanks would have arrived in the 45 days between the scheduled and storm delayed landings would have taken
place.

All in all, there are some interesting TO&E stats for any invasion of Japan war game.

[binder001]

"a) About 39 surviving M4A1 POA-CWS-H1 in the 713th tank battalion"

Trivia - the tanks of the 713th (at least all of them in photos) were late M4s from DTA with the cast front to the upper hull (called "composites" by modelers).

I had forgotten about the potential use of the CDL against Japan. The US had built over 300 CDLs based on the M3 medium ("Tractor, Shop, T10", also known as "Leaflets") as well as experimenting with some updated versions on M4A3 hulls. The CDLs were shipped to Europe to equip the 6 battalions that had been trained on them but only a few were ever used in combat, most in the Rhine crossings.

[Mil-tech Bard]

"a) About 39 surviving M4A1 POA-CWS-H1 in the 713th tank battalion"

Trivia - the tanks of the 713th (at least all of them in photos) were late M4s from DTA with the cast front to the upper hull (called "composites" by modelers).

I had forgotten about the potential use of the CDL against Japan. The US had built over 300 CDLs based on the M3 medium ("Tractor, Shop, T10", also known as "Leaflets") as well as experimenting with some updated versions on M4A3 hulls. The CDLs were shipped to Europe to equip the 6 battalions that had been trained on them but only a few were ever used in combat, most in the Rhine crossings.

What I am looking at here is the shipping time lines for priority fast merchant ships.

The 10th Army asked for more tanks in mid- May 1945 and got 12 Pershings from the "Zone of the Interior" -- AKA the USA -- by Mid-June 1945. That was 30-45 days. The Pershings were landed by LCT coming from Hawaii.

The 10th Army also asked for the CDL's as soon as they knew they existed from Ordnance (Let's call that mid-May 1945) and per Hunnicutt, they arrived between late-June 1945 and VJ-Day from Depots in England. That means 45 days to 90ish days. More likely it is the latter than the former.

The ability of fast merchant ships operating outside of convoys from Europe and the West Coast to get to Hawaii, or from England to the East Coast by train to the West Coast and then by ship to Hawaii, means some really big things in terms of American 1945 logistical capability.

No convoys in the Atlantic, Indian Ocean and South Pacific is a huge increase in Allied shipping capacity, especially faster long distance shipping capacity.

[Mil-tech Bard]

Whoops, it wasn't mid-May when 10th Army asked for more tanks.

It was 28 April 1945

See:

OKINAWA: THE LAST BATTLE
page 411

http://www.history.army.mil/BOOKS/WWII ... 16.htm#b1

<i>The loss of light and medium tanks during the campaign, much heavier than had been expected, caused another critical shortage and replacements could not be secured in time. Tenth Army reported the complete loss of 147 medium tanks and q. light tanks by 30 June; replacements were requested from Oahu on 28 April but these had not arrived by the end of the campaign. As an emergency measure, all the medium tanks of the 193d Tank Battalion, attached to the 27th Division, were distributed to the other tank battalions on the island. XXIV Corps tank units received fifty of these tanks which contributed materially to combat effectiveness. The 193d, however, could not be reequipped and returned to combat. </i>

[Mil-tech Bard]

It turns out the T-35 flame throwing Pershing is actually in RP Hunnicutt's Patton: A History of the American Main Battle Tank.

What is interesting is that Hunnicutt listed five different flame thrower configurations, but none of them are the bow mounted version in the article from the military base I posted up thread.