Seeing how Russian armour are performing against modern antitank weaponry, do you think this is the end of tank warfare as we know it or is it all just down to the ineptitude of the Russians?
@@Mrtweet81 I would love to hear a military person's take on this. You could argue the writing was on the wall in ww2 with the efficiency of anti tank guns and later infantry weapons. Is there a better infantry support weapon that isn't a tank?
@@garyhewitt489 My guys were at risk from the single piece lincoln logs hurled from across the basement. BUT! All through my active duty Army days, I carried the flame thrower man in my toiletry kit. Now my daughter is in the Army and she carries a 'pink' flamethrower man with her stuff. (Her friend gave her a pink set of the soldiers when she enlisted). So now, my veteran flamethrower man sits on a shelf beside one of her pink flamethrower men.
Well either it must be called am M-1, or am M-4. I was once issued an "M-4, Ground Effect implement, 1 Each". You would probably call it what it was, a shovel.
@@badcornflakes6374 Only the Army (and civilians who've never been in the military) call it a "bazooka". In the Marine Corps it was always and still is, called a "rocket launcher".
Just to be That Guy, the M just stands for "model", so M1 just means it's the first in that line. So while both the Sherman tank and the well-known automatic carbine have the designation M4, their proper names would be "carbine, 5.56mm, M4" and "medium tank, M4" respectively to distinguish them from previous models of carbines and medium tanks. Other militaries do it as well, for example the Swedish Carl-Gustaf recoilless rifle has models 1-4.
As someone with significant training practice on one of the spin-off successors to the bazooka concept (the CG recoilless rifle) I can definitely see why the ww2 soldiers loved it.
I can't wait to see the PIAT episode..... I was fortunate to meet (when I was quite young, so at the time I didn't know the significance) Mr "Smoky" Smith - a man who won the Victoria Cross with a PIAT in Italy!
Truely a revolutionary technology. Besides it's armor stopping power it also made enemy armor crews paranoid, a hard to quantify value in war. I recently learned about the use of the rockets inside their packing tubes being used in ambushes without the launcher. Really interesting stuff.
Stuart did a good job! He’s not as relaxed as the Davids but that will come with doing more presentations. Well done. Can’t wait to see more on this topic.
US forces in the Pacific theatre found the original Bazooka useful for taking out Japanese bunkers in the same way Slim's 14th Army in Burma used the PIAT.
The Monroe effect is in essence what is known as 'plastic deformation', the steel is not liquid but rather the sheer concentration of pressure forces the steel out of the way.
Always enjoy Stu's presentations, like being at school and having lessons with one of your favourite teachers. In truth, all TTM staff are like that... Thanks mate!
The perfect time to see an antitank video, showing one more step in how we got from the antitank rock to our modern top-attack, fire-and-forget, thermal sight wonder weapons.
Interesting, i wonder what viscosity copper has at 800C? It melts at about 1,100C so nowhere near it's point of liquidity. It's purely the shock which causes it to _act_ like a liquid, i believe it's called shockwave induced plasticity. It's implied that there's a copper jet followed by a slug, is that correct?
This is why I appreciate TM so much. We get the scientific history as to realizations among scientists at the time and how that directly influenced the weapon designers trying to find new ways of grinding bones to make bread.
My mother worked for the Budd Company in Chester, PA during the war on the bazooka rocket assembly line. She even rose to the position of supervisor of one of the assembly lines.
Oh man, if I had that job, I would insist on having business cards just so I could have the title "Supervisor of Bazooka Rocket Assembly" on them. Print them myself if I had to. :)
My father in-law was sent to Korea by the Army possibly after that war. He had an opportunity to practice with the bazooka on a firing range. His partner and him decided it was a bit warmer than when they got up so they took off their greatcoats before firing the weapon. After a few rounds they noticed that their coats were on fire from the exhaust of the rockets!
As told to me by a veteran of one the 7th U.S. Armored Division Infantry Battalions (and my next door neighbor) who served and fought during the Battle of the Bulge and the "Goose egg" . The Bazooka would penetrate the frontal armor of a German Panther. However, and he held up a dried blade of fine grass (smaller than a pin hole), the penetration was so small that all it did was let the tank crew know you were there. This was only one of the details he told me of, and they were always about someone else doing something which he observed.
yes. and those same type of batteries were used in the bc-611 "handie talkie". there was even an adaptor to use them in the bc-1000 "walkie talkie" backpack radio.
That was it’s original purpose. Hoping for a happy medium of quantity of rounds in a tight grouping of sufficient calibre to penetrate armour. Considering the armour thickness of inter-war AFVs it’s legit.
The rules of engagement state that you may leave a flaming bag of dog excrement on their door step after ringing their bell or otherwise attracting attention with an air horn. However you are expressly forbidden from firing upon them with antitank weapons.
My father invaded Normandy with the 29th ID. During urban fighting, they’d use Shermans and bazooka crews to kill snipers. Infantry would identify a sniper then call for support. Both the bazooka and tank crews fired their rounds under the window to destroy the entire floor. In Isigny-sur-Mer, they used this tactic until German troops realized their life expectancy would be brief, and some 230 surrendered. He would be wounded later that day during the obligatory German counter-attack..
I really enjoyed this. Straight info, concise history. And the best explanation of the shaped charge I’ve seen yet. Looking forward to seeing more of this. Thanks from Australia. Can’t wait to get back to Bovington.
My father learned to use the bazooka in basic training in 1945. He was taught to skip the rocket off the ground up under a tank where the armor was thin. I don’t understand how the shaped charge would work well with that technique, but that’s what they did.
I think its because it won't detonate unless the rocket hits at a close to 90 degree angle. I've heard of a similar idea with Sherman tanks. They'd bounce shots off the gun mantlet of a Panther so it hit the roof armor right above the driver where it was thinner. Although I've only ever heard it anecdotally so take that with a grain of salt.
@@curiousentertainment3008 You learn something new every day! Thanks man. I was always a little uncertain about those stories. But if they had to redesign parts of the tank to counteract it, It shows it happened enough for them to worry about it.
I think someone is trying to pull a leg here. Things bounce differently depending on what they hit, but most of the time the angle is the same or less. Bouncing off a ground is unpredictable. Ground can be soft or hard and most of the time it is not flat, so the impact angle can be what ever. Firing from a standing position, the angle over a 50m+ is so shallow that the projecctile most likely just do minor bounces and keeps going on.
From a linguistic perspective, it seems interesting that portable anti tank rocket launchers did not continue to be called "bazookas" in US service. I wonder if when the M20 super bazooka was in service concurrent with the M67 recoilless rifle and later the M72 LAW if the M20 was "the bazooka" and the others were referred to by their M series numbers. Then, when the M20 went away so did the name bazooka. I would be curious to see if servicemen called the LAW Bazooka ever. I could imagine a world where we still called current SMAW and AT4s Bazookas as the weapon category.
I can't speak for the (swedish) military, where we went by weapon designations (minus the numbers as we only used one type of AT-recoilless rifle and one type of single use AT rocket, so no need to differentiate further). But growing up as a child, every type of tube type weapon was called a bazooka, regardless of origin =)
@@gg.youlubeatube6249 I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or genuinely asking so I will give a serious answer. LAW is an acronym for Light Anti-tank Weapon and when you write about the M-72 you capitalize the LAW. I hope that answered your question.
You have to give the Bazooka Shooter the balls to use one. When in 1944 he wouldn't have seen a German Tank from the City or town where he came from. There just wasn't a quick way to show movie or photos. These were rare to see even in public life. He would only have a basic education which would be relevant to a Primary school kid. They were only in their 20's. Then one day in battle out in a field he hears a Tractor bellowing exhaust noise and screeching tracks near a road or Farm!
Good piece. I suspect Stuart Wheeler may be in demand for his expertise on the history of anti-tank weapons right now ... to help inquiring minds understand the history of this category of weapons ...
love these anti tank weapons gives a whole new perspective on tank warfare and what tank crews would of had to think about. Eager to see the PIAT but would also like to see some axis like the panzerfaust
13:45 I think that's a real stand out point, just shy of half a million Bazookas produced, there were about 10x as many bazookas as Sherman tanks which would be the only other direct fire explosive weapon they could have when on the offence. I could see why General Eisenhower rated this one of his top 4 war-winning weapon (along with C-47. the Jeep and the Atomic Bomb), it was the chief direct fire explosive weapon the US Army had in its arsenal. Maybe indirect explosive weapons like howitzers and mortars were used more but I think Eisenhower was taking them for granted, what was unique and what might not have been was the Bazooka.
I really enjoy these anti-tank videos, they're well put together and informative. Is there an anti-tank section at the museum? I am due to visit there in a few months.
Great video. I prefer the early M1 bazooka for handling. it had two grips and a ambi sight system that could be used with both left or right hand shooters. The last of the 2.36 models was the M18, similar to the M9.
I have to say, from playing the Bazooka army man to a plastic bazooka toy to firing actual AT-4’s during OIF and OEF I had more fun playing with the toy guns as the enemy had significantly less efficiency.
@17:49 several incorrect statements at this point. 1) "Table of Organization and Equipment No. 7-17: Infantry Rifle Company" dated February 26, 1944, has five, not eight, 'Launcher, Rocket, AT, 2.36-inch' allotted to the company. It seems you were confused; it did not increase BY five but increased TO five. This did change in Changes No. 1, 2, or 3 to the T/O&E dated June 30, 1944; January 30, 1945; and June 1, 1945, respectively. 2) "Table of Organization and Equipment No. 7-17: Infantry Rifle Company," dated February 26, 1944, does not have any dedicated rocket launcher crews. All five were allocated to the Company Headquarters and the weapons pool, to be distributed as needed much like the six 'Gun, Submachine, Cal. .45' added to the rifle company in the June 30, 1944, change. This is reflected in FM 7-10 "Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment" dated March 18, 1944, Paragraph 3(f)(6), which states, in part: "Since personnel designated to operate rocket launchers will normally function in their primary duties until a threat of mechanized attack becomes imminent or used against a secondary target is indicated, timely warning much be received (see par. 12a) in order that rocket teams may secure their launchers and ammunition and move to positions assigned by the company commander." This shortcoming is remarked upon in numerous period reports such as: -HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.17" dated December 21, 1944 -HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.20" dated December 24, 1944- HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.22" dated December 26, 1944 -HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.48" dated January 31, 1945 -HQ ETOUSA "Immediate Report No. 9: Combat Observations" dated December 12, 1944 -HQ ETOUSA "Immediate Report No. 27: Combat Observations" dated January 12, 1945 This eventually led to the Infantry Conference's "Report of Special Committee on Organization of the Infantry Division" in June 1946 to officially recommend that the rifle platoon be provided a dedicated bazooka squad composed of two rocket launchers.
Thanks once again for a great video! One nice addition would be if you could somehow show the measurements also in the format that is used and understood in most part of the world, that is International System of Units.
I had a patient in my training who had operated a bazooka in the pacific theater: he was blind in his right eye and deaf in his right ear from repeated shock waves
I’d always thought the bazooka had its debut in the pacific. I remember reading a Commando or similar Annual back in the 80’s where it had a short comic strip on the Bazooka’s first combat usage in where a bazooka armed U.S. Marine forced a Japanese pillbox to surrender after demonstrating its utility by blowing a hole in their wall.
Hmm, Japanese forces surrendering before 1945 was astonishingly rare. There was no concept of surrender, it was seen as the highest treason and cowardice to "give up". The surrender in 1945 was more of an order to deposit their arms and assemble into camps, it was just another order for them to follow.
Nice to see this series. I assume that the two part bazooka was only used by airborne, but that is not specifically stated. Would like to have seen some comparison to what was developed in other countries, but maybe after go through review of all the weapons, you can have a summary that looks at the advantages and disadvantages of each country's solution.
It was called for in the February 1944 T/O&E for the regular Infantry Rifle Company. However, they do not start appearing in regular rifle companies until August-September 1944, which is similar for parachute units. By the late fall-early winter of 1944, they are the predominant type seen with rifle companies. Some units, like the 2nd Infantry Division, kept their old rocket launchers in order to increase their anti-tank firepower. This lead to devastating effects against German armored forces during the Battle of the Bulge, most notably during the fighting for Krinkelt-Rocherath (aka the Twin Villages) where of the 139 German AFVs knocked out, 37 were from bazookas. The balance of 49 and 35 came from M4 tanks and M10 tank destroyers respectively.
Great, thank you so much; In Person, did shot several times - 1961, - w/US-Bazooka. An Adventure.. Funny Memories... Now, in actual in war Ukraine I can see f.i. the =Javelin + next targets and + Effectiveness...So I guess the tanks - are *Saurier only.. Greetings from Germany.
When talking about American Anti-Tank development you forgot to mention the top secret Anti-Tank rock. Yes they tried using rocks to jam tank tracks, didn’t really work though!
With so little money designated for military development between the wars you could only justify making a weapon that could counter existing targets so of course anti-armor weapons wouldn’t be developed until there was a reason to create them.
I think it’s largely because better armoured tanks were already being devolved even before the war started while it takes time to realise that you’re AT weapons are becoming ineffective and develop new versions.
It barely did, the Germans struggled to field enough of these tanks and these "advances" were simply a greater weight of armour, no real innovations like spaced armour nor composite construction. The failure of the M9 Bazooka in Korea had far more to do with the decaying quality of the munitions as they were built in a hurry to win WW2 with little regard for long term storage and they were stored in terrible conditions in Korea. During WW2, the M9 defeated armour that was as good or better than the armour the Koreans used 5 years later. Remember, even a slight delay in the time for the warhead to detonate would cause the warhead to significantly deform before proper detonation. But the M20 "super" Bazooka may have been overkill in penetration it also had a higher velocity rocket so longer effective range or more reliable hits on moving targets. The latter stages of Korean War saw the communist forces use comparatively few tanks.
A really good episode and I got a lot out of it. I think there is an issue; however, with the inconsistent use of metric and imperial measurements. You speak about feet per second, then kilometers per hour, milimetre armour thickness and yards in terms of range. I understand you are discussing an American weapon but perhaps an ongoing reference to metric equivalents would help younger viewers? Just a thought.
Hello, Tank Nuts! We hope you enjoy this weeks Anti-Tank Chat with Stuart Wheeler, do let us know your thoughts in the comments.
I liked the video but I can't get over the fact that the man looks so distressed in the thumbnail.
He's concerned about how close he needs to get to the Panzer to knock it out.
Seeing how Russian armour are performing against modern antitank weaponry, do you think this is the end of tank warfare as we know it or is it all just down to the ineptitude of the Russians?
When covering the PIAT, please elaborate on the word spigot in this context.
@@Mrtweet81 I would love to hear a military person's take on this. You could argue the writing was on the wall in ww2 with the efficiency of anti tank guns and later infantry weapons. Is there a better infantry support weapon that isn't a tank?
The bazooka-man has long been my favorite little green plastic army-man, ever since I was a kid in the 70s.
I much preferred the prone machine gunner, and he's easier to hide and harder to kill with artillery rocks lobbed from behind the front lines.
@@garyhewitt489 My guys were at risk from the single piece lincoln logs hurled from across the basement. BUT! All through my active duty Army days, I carried the flame thrower man in my toiletry kit. Now my daughter is in the Army and she carries a 'pink' flamethrower man with her stuff. (Her friend gave her a pink set of the soldiers when she enlisted). So now, my veteran flamethrower man sits on a shelf beside one of her pink flamethrower men.
I agree! He’s a good keen man.
I liked the radio guy, 'cause then he could call in support from the dart gun battery.
The day of the tank is over.
"Ahhh, a great new piece of kit. Let's call it the M-1"
- every American procurement officer ever
M-1 Bazooka *
Well either it must be called am M-1, or am M-4. I was once issued an "M-4, Ground Effect implement, 1 Each". You would probably call it what it was, a shovel.
@@badcornflakes6374 Only the Army (and civilians who've never been in the military) call it a "bazooka". In the Marine Corps it was always and still is, called a "rocket launcher".
American Army typewriters must have been replaced when the Letter M wore out pretty soon.
Just to be That Guy, the M just stands for "model", so M1 just means it's the first in that line. So while both the Sherman tank and the well-known automatic carbine have the designation M4, their proper names would be "carbine, 5.56mm, M4" and "medium tank, M4" respectively to distinguish them from previous models of carbines and medium tanks. Other militaries do it as well, for example the Swedish Carl-Gustaf recoilless rifle has models 1-4.
13:50 I Love the Brits: "approximately ..." and then gives a number accurate to 14 decimal places. Awesome work though. Really appreciate it.
The veterans I had the honor of talking with had a real appreciation of the Bazooka especially in regards to machine gun hard points .
As someone with significant training practice on one of the spin-off successors to the bazooka concept (the CG recoilless rifle) I can definitely see why the ww2 soldiers loved it.
I can't wait to see the PIAT episode..... I was fortunate to meet (when I was quite young, so at the time I didn't know the significance) Mr "Smoky" Smith - a man who won the Victoria Cross with a PIAT in Italy!
Oh hey, the guy who took out an armoured platoon by himself. That guy is a local legend here.
Lesser known fact: The bazooka is also effective against giant ants (Them!)
Ah yes, Giant Ants, I prefer the BAR or Flamethrower.
Haha nice.
And killer grizzly bears
Truely a revolutionary technology. Besides it's armor stopping power it also made enemy armor crews paranoid, a hard to quantify value in war. I recently learned about the use of the rockets inside their packing tubes being used in ambushes without the launcher. Really interesting stuff.
It's all the more impressive because unless you take a good close look, everything about it seems childishly obvious and simple.
Stuart did a good job! He’s not as relaxed as the Davids but that will come with doing more presentations. Well done. Can’t wait to see more on this topic.
US forces in the Pacific theatre found the original Bazooka useful for taking out Japanese bunkers in the same way Slim's 14th Army in Burma used the PIAT.
The Monroe effect is in essence what is known as 'plastic deformation', the steel is not liquid but rather the sheer concentration of pressure forces the steel out of the way.
This channel is awesome. Whoever manages this museums digital content/PR is a legend.
That was a fantastic episode. Learned quite a bit. Looking forward to the PIAT!
Always enjoy Stu's presentations, like being at school and having lessons with one of your favourite teachers. In truth, all TTM staff are like that... Thanks mate!
The perfect time to see an antitank video, showing one more step in how we got from the antitank rock to our modern top-attack, fire-and-forget, thermal sight wonder weapons.
Interesting, i wonder what viscosity copper has at 800C?
It melts at about 1,100C so nowhere near it's point of liquidity.
It's purely the shock which causes it to _act_ like a liquid, i believe it's called shockwave induced plasticity.
It's implied that there's a copper jet followed by a slug, is that correct?
Excellent. I wondered when the next episode would be as I've found the series fascinating. The level of detail is excellent as usual, thanks Stuart.
Will the anti-tank series be covering the use of farming equipment to capture enemy tanks?
the GREAT RUSSIAN TANK GRAB!
Would be a good one for 1st April.
John Deere: Military Edition!
You mean that actually happened said absolutely no Ukrainian .
Thank You.
A weapon that I've seen so often in American WW2 movies but knew little about.
This is why I appreciate TM so much. We get the scientific history as to realizations among scientists at the time and how that directly influenced the weapon designers trying to find new ways of grinding bones to make bread.
Nicely done. Thank you Stuart Wheeler.
The ability to use the rockets from their shipping tubes as improvised launchers for boobytrap installation always impressed me as a great feature.
One of the most informative videos on bazookas I’ve watched. Great video. Thanks
Please do more of these. I was worried this series was abandoned since there was so much time between videos. Big fan
Same ❤
I got to fire one of these at cadet camp in the late '50's but by the time I joined up in '68 the Karl Gustav was in service
Who remembers ‘Bazooka Joe’ bubblegum growing up ?
The soundbite at around 17:00 was a great touch! Indeed, a crackerjack story!
Quite a step up from the M1 anti-tank rock.
My mother worked for the Budd Company in Chester, PA during the war on the bazooka rocket assembly line. She even rose to the position of supervisor of one of the assembly lines.
Oh man, if I had that job, I would insist on having business cards just so I could have the title "Supervisor of Bazooka Rocket Assembly" on them. Print them myself if I had to. :)
Thank you Ringo Star.
Starr ;)
A well timed video given the amount of tanks being whacked by NLAW and similar weapons in Ukraine at the moment.
My father in-law was sent to Korea by the Army possibly after that war. He had an opportunity to practice with the bazooka on a firing range. His partner and him decided it was a bit warmer than when they got up so they took off their greatcoats before firing the weapon. After a few rounds they noticed that their coats were on fire from the exhaust of the rockets!
As told to me by a veteran of one the 7th U.S. Armored Division Infantry Battalions (and my next door neighbor) who served and fought during the Battle of the Bulge and the "Goose egg" . The Bazooka would penetrate the frontal armor of a German Panther. However, and he held up a dried blade of fine grass (smaller than a pin hole), the penetration was so small that all it did was let the tank crew know you were there. This was only one of the details he told me of, and they were always about someone else doing something which he observed.
A great concise explanation of the Bazooka. Thank you.
This gentleman's presentation is by far the easiest from The Tank Museum for this Yank to follow.
My favorite video in some time. Looking forward to the PIAT in the next go!
I was surprised at the type of batteries being put into the M1's handgrip. Eveready was around in WW2?
Eveready is from before ww2
Eveready was founded in 1896. D cells date to 1898 and AAs to 1907
yes. and those same type of batteries were used in the bc-611 "handie talkie". there was even an adaptor to use them in the bc-1000 "walkie talkie" backpack radio.
Handheld flashlights used various AA, C, D, etc., cells.
I never knew I needed that much information about the bazooka.
Please more anti-tank chats, this series is awesome.
Time for the "Anti-tank museum"
Very good content! Keep up the good work! This AT-series is fitting addition to this fine channel. Well done!
super-bazooka is the most childishly awesome weapon name in existence.
Panzer Shrek named after the big green Ogre
I served in anti tanks , my service weapons were 95mm recoiless gun, and APILAS.
Thanks + pleased to hear imperial and metric equivalents being given in armour thickness.
Anti-Tank Chat! SWEET!!
Wait, they actually tried using the 50cal mg to counter vehicles?!
That was it’s original purpose. Hoping for a happy medium of quantity of rounds in a tight grouping of sufficient calibre to penetrate armour. Considering the armour thickness of inter-war AFVs it’s legit.
Thank you for a very informative presentation on the bazooka.
Nice presentation! You are getting there!
Sterling content, as usual. Clear and concise explanations. Think I have to get one of those, now. Neighbours are getting noisy.
Please be aware that back blast may cause minor damage to wallpaper and soft furnishings.
@@webtoedman Planned on using it from the street, so the house should be ok. Thanks for the reminder, anyway. Very kind of you.
The rules of engagement state that you may leave a flaming bag of dog excrement on their door step after ringing their bell or otherwise attracting attention with an air horn. However you are expressly forbidden from firing upon them with antitank weapons.
@@PadraigTomas a darn shame.
My father invaded Normandy with the 29th ID. During urban fighting, they’d use Shermans and bazooka crews to kill snipers. Infantry would identify a sniper then call for support. Both the bazooka and tank crews fired their rounds under the window to destroy the entire floor. In Isigny-sur-Mer, they used this tactic until German troops realized their life expectancy would be brief, and some 230 surrendered.
He would be wounded later that day during the obligatory German counter-attack..
I really enjoyed this. Straight info, concise history. And the best explanation of the shaped charge I’ve seen yet. Looking forward to seeing more of this. Thanks from Australia.
Can’t wait to get back to Bovington.
My father learned to use the bazooka in basic training in 1945. He was taught to skip the rocket off the ground up under a tank where the armor was thin. I don’t understand how the shaped charge would work well with that technique, but that’s what they did.
I think its because it won't detonate unless the rocket hits at a close to 90 degree angle. I've heard of a similar idea with Sherman tanks. They'd bounce shots off the gun mantlet of a Panther so it hit the roof armor right above the driver where it was thinner. Although I've only ever heard it anecdotally so take that with a grain of salt.
@@johnsturm9344 the earlier variants of the panther and I want to say panzer 4 had a shot trap on the mantlet that were later fixed
@@curiousentertainment3008 You learn something new every day! Thanks man. I was always a little uncertain about those stories. But if they had to redesign parts of the tank to counteract it, It shows it happened enough for them to worry about it.
I think someone is trying to pull a leg here.
Things bounce differently depending on what they hit, but most of the time the angle is the same or less. Bouncing off a ground is unpredictable. Ground can be soft or hard and most of the time it is not flat, so the impact angle can be what ever.
Firing from a standing position, the angle over a 50m+ is so shallow that the projecctile most likely just do minor bounces and keeps going on.
I wonder if this is actually referring to the tactic of aiming at the underside of a tank as it climbs over the crest of a ridge.
From a linguistic perspective, it seems interesting that portable anti tank rocket launchers did not continue to be called "bazookas" in US service. I wonder if when the M20 super bazooka was in service concurrent with the M67 recoilless rifle and later the M72 LAW if the M20 was "the bazooka" and the others were referred to by their M series numbers. Then, when the M20 went away so did the name bazooka. I would be curious to see if servicemen called the LAW Bazooka ever. I could imagine a world where we still called current SMAW and AT4s Bazookas as the weapon category.
I can't speak for the (swedish) military, where we went by weapon designations (minus the numbers as we only used one type of AT-recoilless rifle and one type of single use AT rocket, so no need to differentiate further). But growing up as a child, every type of tube type weapon was called a bazooka, regardless of origin =)
No, I joined in 1980 and we just called it the LAW, by that time a bazooka was something our grandfathers used.
@@korbell1089 How do you express the CAPITAL letters in an ordinary spoken sentence?
@@gg.youlubeatube6249 do you mean LAW as law or L-A-W?
@@gg.youlubeatube6249 I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or genuinely asking so I will give a serious answer. LAW is an acronym for Light Anti-tank Weapon and when you write about the M-72 you capitalize the LAW. I hope that answered your question.
You should defiintely have Squire do the PIAT episode after his hilarious German Fury skit.😅😅😅
You have to give the Bazooka Shooter the balls to use one. When in 1944 he wouldn't have seen a German Tank from the City or town where he came from. There just wasn't a quick way to show movie or photos. These were rare to see even in public life. He would only have a basic education which would be relevant to a Primary school kid. They were only in their 20's. Then one day in battle out in a field he hears a Tractor bellowing exhaust noise and screeching tracks near a road or Farm!
No mentions of "Bazooka Charlie"?
The first known usage of a "Anti-Tank Air-to-Ground Rocket", or better 6 of them?
A great story, but a bit off topic-ish.
Good piece. I suspect Stuart Wheeler may be in demand for his expertise on the history of anti-tank weapons right now ... to help inquiring minds understand the history of this category of weapons ...
15:38 that poor renault ft 17 got uptiered lmao
love these anti tank weapons gives a whole new perspective on tank warfare and what tank crews would of had to think about. Eager to see the PIAT but would also like to see some axis like the panzerfaust
Great video as always
13:45 I think that's a real stand out point, just shy of half a million Bazookas produced, there were about 10x as many bazookas as Sherman tanks which would be the only other direct fire explosive weapon they could have when on the offence. I could see why General Eisenhower rated this one of his top 4 war-winning weapon (along with C-47. the Jeep and the Atomic Bomb), it was the chief direct fire explosive weapon the US Army had in its arsenal.
Maybe indirect explosive weapons like howitzers and mortars were used more but I think Eisenhower was taking them for granted, what was unique and what might not have been was the Bazooka.
YAY more antitank chats I really like these.
I really enjoy these anti-tank videos, they're well put together and informative. Is there an anti-tank section at the museum? I am due to visit there in a few months.
What a great video! Very educational!
You need to do more of the anti tank chats they're great
I feel very well entertained indeed.
Thank you for that.
That poor unsuspecting Renault FT that got hit by a Bazooka.....
Great video. I prefer the early M1 bazooka for handling. it had two grips and a ambi sight system that could be used with both left or right hand shooters. The last of the 2.36 models was the M18, similar to the M9.
Excellent. Thank you very much
Excellent video, so action packed with knowledge
I have to say, from playing the Bazooka army man to a plastic bazooka toy to firing actual AT-4’s during OIF and OEF I had more fun playing with the toy guns as the enemy had significantly less efficiency.
Very interesting, thanks for this video - Anti-Tank Chats is an enlightening series.
@17:49 several incorrect statements at this point.
1) "Table of Organization and Equipment No. 7-17: Infantry Rifle Company" dated February 26, 1944, has five, not eight, 'Launcher, Rocket, AT, 2.36-inch' allotted to the company. It seems you were confused; it did not increase BY five but increased TO five. This did change in Changes No. 1, 2, or 3 to the T/O&E dated June 30, 1944; January 30, 1945; and June 1, 1945, respectively.
2) "Table of Organization and Equipment No. 7-17: Infantry Rifle Company," dated February 26, 1944, does not have any dedicated rocket launcher crews. All five were allocated to the Company Headquarters and the weapons pool, to be distributed as needed much like the six 'Gun, Submachine, Cal. .45' added to the rifle company in the June 30, 1944, change. This is reflected in FM 7-10 "Rifle Company, Infantry Regiment" dated March 18, 1944, Paragraph 3(f)(6), which states, in part:
"Since personnel designated to operate rocket launchers will normally function in their primary duties until a threat of mechanized attack becomes imminent or used against a secondary target is indicated, timely warning much be received (see par. 12a) in order that rocket teams may secure their launchers and ammunition and move to positions assigned by the company commander."
This shortcoming is remarked upon in numerous period reports such as:
-HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.17" dated December 21, 1944
-HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.20" dated December 24, 1944-
HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.22" dated December 26, 1944
-HQ ETOUSA "Battle Experiences No.48" dated January 31, 1945
-HQ ETOUSA "Immediate Report No. 9: Combat Observations" dated December 12, 1944
-HQ ETOUSA "Immediate Report No. 27: Combat Observations" dated January 12, 1945
This eventually led to the Infantry Conference's "Report of Special Committee on Organization of the Infantry Division" in June 1946 to officially recommend that the rifle platoon be provided a dedicated bazooka squad composed of two rocket launchers.
excellent episode! very informative.
Great work Sir thank you
Band of Brothers episode 3 had a great portrayal of a bazooka in action.
Thanks once again for a great video! One nice addition would be if you could somehow show the measurements also in the format that is used and understood in most part of the world, that is International System of Units.
I had a patient in my training who had operated a bazooka in the pacific theater: he was blind in his right eye and deaf in his right ear from repeated shock waves
I’d always thought the bazooka had its debut in the pacific.
I remember reading a Commando or similar Annual back in the 80’s where it had a short comic strip on the Bazooka’s first combat usage in where a bazooka armed U.S. Marine forced a Japanese pillbox to surrender after demonstrating its utility by blowing a hole in their wall.
Hmm, Japanese forces surrendering before 1945 was astonishingly rare. There was no concept of surrender, it was seen as the highest treason and cowardice to "give up".
The surrender in 1945 was more of an order to deposit their arms and assemble into camps, it was just another order for them to follow.
Thank you
Good video. Thank you.
Love this series
Excellent video i hope to see more on this series
you have brought back many happy memories of beating my brother at worms on the ps1, thank you.
Thanks for a very interesting video.
It was so revolutionary that the Germans managed to copy the captured Bazooka and with it designed the Panzershreck.
Nice to see this series. I assume that the two part bazooka was only used by airborne, but that is not specifically stated. Would like to have seen some comparison to what was developed in other countries, but maybe after go through review of all the weapons, you can have a summary that looks at the advantages and disadvantages of each country's solution.
It was called for in the February 1944 T/O&E for the regular Infantry Rifle Company.
However, they do not start appearing in regular rifle companies until August-September 1944, which is similar for parachute units.
By the late fall-early winter of 1944, they are the predominant type seen with rifle companies. Some units, like the 2nd Infantry Division, kept their old rocket launchers in order to increase their anti-tank firepower. This lead to devastating effects against German armored forces during the Battle of the Bulge, most notably during the fighting for Krinkelt-Rocherath (aka the Twin Villages) where of the 139 German AFVs knocked out, 37 were from bazookas. The balance of 49 and 35 came from M4 tanks and M10 tank destroyers respectively.
Great stuff, really interesting.
Fantastic and informative thanks.
Can't wait for a video on the Panzefaust or Panzerschreck.
Saw one of the prototypes fitted with grips and stock from an M1928 Thompson SMG.
Great video, very interesting 👍🏻🇦🇺
The munroe effect is best displayed when doors open on Black Friday.
Was the bazooka btw the first rocket propelled shaped charge? Big innovation in military equipment
Hey, we have this new rocket launching device, what should we call it?
M1
I would have never guessed...
There with come a time whey TH-cam videos like these form school history lessons. Keep up the good work guys. 👍
Is this a joke or have you not got a spelling check?
@@tonyjedioftheforest1364 will* 😁
Great, thank you so much; In Person, did shot
several times - 1961, - w/US-Bazooka. An Adventure..
Funny Memories... Now, in actual in war Ukraine
I can see f.i. the =Javelin + next targets and + Effectiveness...So I guess the tanks - are *Saurier
only..
Greetings from Germany.
interesting history!
i would like to see more anti tank chats pls
thought you would be more into bunkers and stuff ;-)
@@amazinghuppifluppi359 sorry i have a next project to steal 4 more russian submarine and put at my pasha liman base
When talking about American Anti-Tank development you forgot to mention the top secret Anti-Tank rock.
Yes they tried using rocks to jam tank tracks, didn’t really work though!
Clearly it was a development of the French Rock that Ian covered a few years back.
Well, Sgt Rock was expert at shooting his Colt 1911 down the gun barrels of tanks.
I’m surprised that armor protection seemed to advance faster than anti-armor weapons like the bazooka. Thanks for sharing this story.
With so little money designated for military development between the wars you could only justify making a weapon that could counter existing targets so of course anti-armor weapons wouldn’t be developed until there was a reason to create them.
@@mavfan1 I’m referring to evolution during the war. Look at the evolution of armor level from start of war to end of war.
I think it’s largely because better armoured tanks were already being devolved even before the war started while it takes time to realise that you’re AT weapons are becoming ineffective and develop new versions.
It barely did, the Germans struggled to field enough of these tanks and these "advances" were simply a greater weight of armour, no real innovations like spaced armour nor composite construction.
The failure of the M9 Bazooka in Korea had far more to do with the decaying quality of the munitions as they were built in a hurry to win WW2 with little regard for long term storage and they were stored in terrible conditions in Korea. During WW2, the M9 defeated armour that was as good or better than the armour the Koreans used 5 years later.
Remember, even a slight delay in the time for the warhead to detonate would cause the warhead to significantly deform before proper detonation.
But the M20 "super" Bazooka may have been overkill in penetration it also had a higher velocity rocket so longer effective range or more reliable hits on moving targets. The latter stages of Korean War saw the communist forces use comparatively few tanks.
A really good episode and I got a lot out of it. I think there is an issue; however, with the inconsistent use of metric and imperial measurements. You speak about feet per second, then kilometers per hour, milimetre armour thickness and yards in terms of range. I understand you are discussing an American weapon but perhaps an ongoing reference to metric equivalents would help younger viewers? Just a thought.