Bazookas in Burma and Indochina

I've come across two references to the use of bazookas by 3/1 GR in Indochina. In one (p489 Ch XII, fn36) the text shows 'M9A1s', in fighting at the Docks entrance in Saigon 14th Oct 1945. Not sure if this is actually a plural reference.

The same unit was involved in a series of engagements around the fort at Ben Ho, 22nd Nov 1945 (p567). Here the commentary says 'Rocket Launchers' were used against the gateway. Again plural?

This is was a surprise to me, previously the only man pack AT weapon I knew issued at this period was the PIAT - and they were still current; G M Fraser has wonderful account of using one, and Dunn's thesis notes the French Light Commandos rejected both PIAT and Flamethrower (of which there were some US M2 patterns in Far East Command) when receiving new kit from British sources. Has anyone come across other references to the M9A1 system in use by British/Indian forces in Burma ToO?

If so is there anywhere I may look for scale of issue etc? i assume there's a Bn war diary, but this doesn't seem to be online. I am outside UK.

Thanks

Laochra

 

They began replacing PIATs with M9A1s in late 44 and they were widely used in Burma 1945, both as anti-tank weapons and for bunker-busting. Many training manuals, memoirs and regimental histories refer to their use.
Bazookas are a little more difficult to track down. I have seen general references to them in use at Kohima and by Chindits, but I can't think of any 'hard' references at the moment. I wouldn't dismiss the possibility.

 

I came across a reference, I think, to M9A1s being used in the battle for Mandalay by an Indian battalion. They were being used against Japanese machine guns in bunkers. At first I thought 'Bazooka' but then discovered they may have been rifle grenades.

I'll try to dig out the reference from the war diary.

 

Thanks

So if an M9A1 is not a collapsable pattern Bazooka what is it? The US M9 rifle grenade was adopted with designation No.85 Also I couldn't find (doesn't say much) any development designators for it (A1, A2 etc).

As an aside I've got a photo showing French Light Commandoes boarding a plane in Saigon carrying a No 1 MkIII rifle with 2" grenade cup. So that was still in service as well.

Also one of the actions quoted they specifically say they bring up rocket launchers not rifle grenades.

I'm intrigued now.

Laochra

 

I'm not saying that the bazooka didn't find its way out there but the M9A1 rifle grenade was quite widely used. The launchers are occasionally visible in photos and films with patterns for the Nos. 1 and 4. The No.4 version appears to have been officially adopted, not sure about the No.1 one.

Baker Perkins in Peterborough has a passing reference to their last contract being the manufacture of, I think, 20K grenade launchers but there's no detail of which type they were. See below, possibly...

The 1946-published 1944 Pattern Web Equipment pamphlet incidentally illustrates an M9A1 alongside a launcher that's probably for the No.5 and the unusual No.70 grenade.

The No.85 was to be British-manufactured version of the M9A1 but it was never properly adopted. I imagine it wouldn't pack enough punch against the Soviet hordes.

 

An IWM photo borrowed from FB:

 

This rang a little bell. Years back I got a summary of major items of equipment as found in various types of Division (Br Inf, Armd and Abn, proposed Light Div, and Indian Standard Div). I have seen the same document on the Hertiage Canadian reels but don't appear to have bookmarked it.

Anyway, under the Indian Std Div it has a total for PIAT of 33, with a note saying 'A Tk rifle pending issue of M9A1'.

I'm afraid that's as much as I could glean from the document but it does offer a contemporary reference to the Bazooka in Indian Army service.

Gary

 

Chopped from Burma Victory: a grenade launcher on a wirewound No.1:

 

Ok. Thanks for that info. So we definitely have M9A1 rifle grenades issued, any idea to what scale?

I mean 33 PIAT for a Std Ind Inf Div would be what, 3 per BN (three Bde @ 3, plus Recce and Div HQ) . The A/Tk Rifles are in addition, right?

Is there any indication of scale for A/Tk Rifle? I would have thought ATR would be at least one per Rifle Coy and more likely a A/T section at Coy HQ or one per Pl. Even given the paucity of Japanese AFVs.

However what does the collective make of the reference to 'rocket launchers' in 3/1 GR records?

 

One grenadier per platoon would seem reasonable. I think the key difference between the M9A1 and the Boys, PIAT, 2-in mortar, and even the bazooka, was that it didn't require a lump of a weapon to be lugged around.

The cup discharger seems to have continued in use alongside the M9A1. It had the advantage that a time-fuzed grenade wasn't detonated by hitting foliage on the way down.

As for 'rocket launchers', it might depend on how familiar the author was with the available ordnance. The M9A1 certainly looks a bit rockety, or it may be down to how it was described.

 

I agree that M9A1 looks Rockety (great word btw) and it could be short hand for the M9A1 system to avoid using Rifle grenade, which could be confused with the traditional discharger cup set up.

So not probably not Bazookas but A/T rifle grenade, could this knock down a fort's wooden gateway? Certainly if passing into buildings would cause distress in the impacted room. Anyway they had desired effects of facilitating dynamic entry or fire suppression.

BTW The infantry in FIC definitely used 2" mortars. Actually I was honestly surprised at the number of times 114 fired their 25pdrs and it seems 3" mortars were used in counter-sniper role fairly regularly.

Thanks for putting this into context for me.

 

I agree the figure of 33 PIAT is ridiculously small, I'll try and scan the image if I can't find the link to the Canadian record. I've not come anywhere close to finding detailed info on Indian Army organisations yet, though it remains on my 'to find' list.

Re the reference to the M9A1, I did do a very cursory check to make sure I was thinking of the same thing before posting and vanishing to do my evening chores, then on reflection recalled the mention of grenades and grenade launchers in the earlier posts. So thinking I'd completely confused myself I went back and had a look at the US ordnance info.

M9 2.36-in rocket launcher - a development on the original M1 (M1A1) Bazooka, which introduced a launch tube that could be disassembled into two lengths for easier carrying. This was modified version of the M9 was the M9A1.

M9 grenade, antitank - a grenade launched from a rifle, or later carbine, fitted with a launcher device. Superseded by the M9A1.

I will admit I thought the M9A1 listed for the Ind Div referred to the Bazooka, as opposed to the anti-tank rifle grenade, as these documents don't normally refer to munitions.

Gary

 

According to the Lend-Lease record on Hyperwar, Britain received 2,127 bazookas. According to Gordon Rottman's Osprey book on the subject, a batch of 600 were sent to Middle East Command for test in 1942, but were judged unsuitable. Rottman seems to think that the bulk of British bazookas may have been passed on to French and Yugoslav partisans via SOE. The Canadian Army Pacific Force would have gotten some in 1945, and I think the 1st SSF (Canadian-US) had some as well. The photo shows an American demonstrating a bazooka to a couple of Guardsmen in Italy in 1943. The Guards corporal looks doubtful.

 

The scene in post #13 could have been reproduced with my son showing me how to use an Xbox and his sister looking on!

But seriously post #2 suggested issue of Bazooka to Chindits. The M9A1 being a fold down version would be more suited to Jungle, except for minor issue of back-blast. There are 1500+/- from the total sent unaccounted for, although bean-counting is notoriously unreliable. It seems more logical that the would have been deployed in theatres where US supply chain could provide ammo, is it feasible that trials were being conducted in Far East and they'd only been issued to a few Bns. As was remarked earlier US M2 flame-throwers were deployed in Burma. Could have been decided UK forces in NWE/Med aren't going to use them so send them to India, with all the spares and ammo to see if they can use them? Partisans in Yugoslavia would receive re-supply from depots in Med where US logistics chain exist.

One thing that would support this is the Diarist in both instances says they were 'brought up'. This indicated they weren't being carried as standard weapon by squaddies, but does suggest an element of familiarity with the weapon's capabilities.

BTW in post #6, The soldier carrying the launcher modified rifle has spare rounds in containers taped/webbed together and the squaddie to his right seems to be a 'No. 2' with additional rounds. Amusingly (?) the Gurkha left centre at first glance appears to have a long droopy rifle.

Tanks to all contributors.

 

Worst pun ever...

 

Sorry for the delay in posting the reference I mentioned in post No. 3 above.

Attached is the recommendation for the Military Cross awarded to Jemadar Daryao Singh, ‘A’ Company, 3rd Battalion, 4th Bombay Grenadiers. The Jemadar ‘personally using the M9A1 launcher’ to destroy a Japanese bunker. The action took place on 9th March 1945 just to the north of Mandalay Hill. The Jemadar was leading a platoon providing close protection to No.2 Troop, ‘C’ Squadron, 150th Regiment, R.A.C. which was operating in support of ‘C’ Company, 2nd Battalion, Royal Berkshire Regiment. The action took place to clear Japanese infantry discovered to be defending a chaung from where they were interfering with the re-supply of elements of the 4th Battalion, 4th Gurkha Rifles in their positions to the east of the hill.

The use of the word 'launcher' - 'rocket' or 'grenade'? - that is the question.

Steve

 

My money - unsurprisingly - would be on the rifle grenade, not the bazooka.

If I can find it, I will have a look at Thornton's Handbook of Weapon Training. Published in 1952, he waxes lyrical about the M9A1 rifle grenade, but he was 2i/c of the Indian Small Arms School. Anyway the point was that I can't recall any mention of the bazooka, so I ought to check to see if it gets a mention.

An important point that may escape non-Americans is that the M9A1 grenade could be fired from the shoulder, unlike the Mills bomb cup discharger and the later, larger Energa. Its 'direct fire' capability was what made it so useful for bunker busting.

 

Great stuff. This is demonstrated nicely in this video, albeit they use the M6A1:


Steve

 

I think Idler has hit the nail on the head here.
The Kohima reference may well be to non-specific ‘rockety’ things.
‘Knocker’ White in ‘Straight on for Tokyo’ recalls attacking the Clubhouse at Kohima with what he calls M191A grenades. A few pages later he tells us that;

"We were not so happy with the new-fangled American M191A grenade after Corporal Bottrill had been killed by one as he was trying to fire it; but we found it was a good weapon once we had been issued with the correct ballistite."

This is an extract from AITM 30 ‘Lessons from Burma’;

"M9A1 Grenade
7. This was very popular, and there is a demand for an accurate sight. Some uses were as follows:
(a) Target Indication, infantry to tanks, by smoke. The drawback is that the amount of smoke generated obscures the vision of the tanks.
(b) Against Japs moving in thick country. Being a percussion grenade, air burst is obtained with good effect.
(c) Against Jap snipers in trees. Reported most effective."

The Chindits are a different matter; remember that they were under American command much of the time and received loads of American kit but they most certainly did not have M9A1s or Bazookas, at least initially.
The Chindit reference that I had seen actually referred to their weapon training with flamethrowers and bazookas. Perhaps they decided that the bazooka was not for them, and stuck to their PIATs.

The Chindits, and others, used the British ‘Lifebuoy’ flamethrower in Burma, not the American M2 as suggested above.

 

The mention of ballistite would certainly sway it to being the rifle grenade M9A1 rather than the Bazooka M9A1, as the grenade launcher required a blank cartridge to be used to fire the grenade. I wonder if the unfortunate incident noted in the above referred to a standard round being fired instead?

The M9/M9A1 AT and the M17 HE rifle grenades were used in conjunction with a grenade launcher attachment. The M1 launcher was fitted to M1903, and served as a stop gap until the M7 was introduced for use with the standard M1 rifle, and latterly the M8 appeared for use with the M1 carbine. I'll admit if you'd asked me last week I wouldn't have thought any of these US rifle grenade launchers could be fitted to a Lee Enfield of any type, do we know if if was one of these used by Indian Army units or something else? When the 'Light' WE tables were drafted, in anticipation of British units being transferred from the West to fight against the Japanese, there was a table for the Commando (Light), which included 40 'Garand' rifles and 40 grenade launchers, Mk 8 for the rifles. (I do wonder if that's a typo for Mk 7, as if Mk 8 means M8 then that shouldn't fit to the M1 rifle?). The Commando retained 11 PIATs, and also was to have 20 flamethrowers, portable, No.3.

Gary