Bazooka Oversold?

Comments on the bazooka from Report of the New Weapons Board, Office of the Commanding General, Army Service Forces, Washington, D.C., April 1944.

2.36″ Rocket and Launchers

a. The feeling existed in both theaters that the 2.36″ rocket had been oversold. This feeling was accompanied by question as to the effectiveness and accuracy of the 2.36″ HE AT rocket. In view of this, the Board incorporated a 2.36″ rocket show into each demonstration. The entire renovation of the original launcher and rocket was explained. The explanation included a description of the new wagon-wheel pulpit trap and its function. To demonstrate the safety of the launcher, a launcher which had had two rocket motors exploded within the wire-wrapped portion was exhibited. Two bazookas were then fired at a tank at an 80-yd. range. Amazement was expressed by many spectators at the accuracy and results which were obtained by inexperienced rocket operators. Each demonstration included the firing of six rounds, and it was the exception when there were less than six hits.

b. Many types of eye and face protection have been improvised by combat troops using the 2.36″ rocket launcher. Some enlisted men use motorcycle goggles. Others use a modified gas mask, the bottom of which has been cut away; still others use the gas mask as issued. One officer stated that he had obtained excellent results with the use of a plexiglass shield attached to the end of the launcher. Some enlisted men are using celluloid or plastic face shields. Some shields are made to cover the eyes only, whereas others cover the entire face. It was reported that the frustrum of a cone, which had been placed on some launchers, does not serve its purpose. It is believed that this problem should be solved completely and that an item which will afford ample face protection at all temperatures should be developed and issued without delay.

c. Brigadier General Arthur H. Rogers, of the North African theater, reported that early in the Italian campaign a number of the 2.36″ rockets carried by his men failed to function. General Rogers stated that these rockets had been carried in ammunition carriers, which hold eight rockets, four in back and four in front. He said that these rockets had been carried fins up, with the fins exposed, and that undoubtedly they had been dragged through mud and water. It was General Rogers’ opinion that the rockets which failed to function failed because moisture entered the motor, although he was not certain that the electrical connection had not been loosened. It is believed that in view of this report the 2.36″ rocket should be given thorough proof tests for resistance against moisture. General Rogers also told the Board of a new way in which he employed the bazookas of his organization during the early part of the Italian campaign. He said that he formed bazooka hunting teams. These teams employed 10 to 12 bazookas in one group and went hunting at night. He said that their operation was most successful and that the ambushing of stationary German combat vehicles in this fashion was relatively simple. He spoke very highly of the 2.36″ rocket and launcher.

 

This entry was posted in weapons and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Bazooka Oversold?

  1. Pat Flannery says:

    US troops used Panzerschreck (and even Panzerfaust) antitank weapons in preference to the Bazooka in the European theater of combat when they could get their hands on captured examples of the weapon; not only was the Panzerschreck seen to have greater penetrating power than the Bazooka, but it incorporated a metal blast shield on the side of the launch tube to protect the face of the person firing it from the backblast of the rocket engine.
    Sticking a celluloid face mask on while firing a Bazooka would be a really good way to get severe facial burns, as celluloid is very flammable, and the rocket backblast would be just the thing to set it alight.
    The lackluster performance of the Bazooka against Panther and Tiger tanks led to the adoption of the 3.5″ M20 “Super Bazooka” in the postwar years to deal with heavily armored Soviet tanks:
    http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/bazsup.htm
    A similar situation developed with the 66 mm M72 LAW antitank weapon when it was used in Vietnam, as NVA tanks would take direct hits and keep right on coming.
    It was replaced with the Swedish-designed 84 mm AT4, designated M136 in its US variant.

  2. Panxer says:

    I knew the German soldiers sometimes wore a gas mask with the Panzerschreck, but have never seen any photos showing U.S. or Allied use.

  3. Pat Flannery says:

    There’s a photo from the Life Magazine archives of a Bazooka equipped trooper wearing a cut-down gas mask for eye protection on this webpage:
    http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=34020&st=0&p=257865&#entry257865

  4. George says:

    Thanks for the photo link Pat. After rooting around on Google, here is the whole series of photographs. Some great shots by Margaret Bourke-White in there.
    http://images.google.com/hosted/life/l?imgurl=ab9437f4c5e950e5

    // George

  5. Tom says:

    Good pictures. So much good stuff in the old LIFE photo archives.

Comments are closed.