Used a flamethrower tank?

[maddawg308]

Has anyone ever had any user experience in a war zone with the M48-based or M-113 based flamethrower tanks, sometimes called "Zippos"? Just curious about their design, I haven't seen too much on the internet about them. What volume of fuel could the pumps shoot out of flame fuel per minute? Did those vehicles carry an internal tank that held the flame fuel, or did they tow a trailer with the mix in it? Was napalm the primary fuel, or diesel, since the latter was more common in the field? How were the vehicles protected from attack, since they were rolling fuel tanks (i.e. extra armor, protective support from other units, etc.).

Love to hear more about these things...

 

[BLK HMMWV]

Zippo's

I was under the impression that term was given to the flame throwers equipt river boat units in Nam because there ignition system wasn't the best and the guys had to use a zippo to light them. ( thats the story I heard).

No experience with any of them but I'm working on getting my M9 working.

BH

 

[wreckerman893]

They had one at the Chemical Museum when it was at Fort McClellan, AL.

There was a huge fuel tank inside the tank along with all manner of hoses and pumps.

I think there were less crew members since there didn't seem to be a lot of room left...I am thinking a driver, Tank Commander and gunner (flame thrower operator).

I always thought it was dumb as dirt to do away with flame weapons......nothing motivtes the enemy to leave quickly like a wall of flame or seeing your buddies turned into "crispy critters" by a stream of burning fuel.

The Chemical museum was relocated to Fort Leonard Wood (Lost in the woods) when Fort McMuffin was closed. I think they moved all the exhibits out there.
You might try the Chemical Museum website and see what info they have on the "Zippos".

 

[deuceman51]

Wreckerman is right, when I was stationed at FLW the flamethrower APC was on display outside the Engineer Museum. They have plexi on the back door so you can look inside. It basically had the tanks where the soldiers would sit. There was barely enough room to get through the back door and crawl forward. Don't think I have any pics though. Funny you would mention this because I was just working on an M113A3 today at work.

 

[Numbers]

U.S. Army flamethrower vehicles | CML Army Chemical Review | Find Articles at BNET

The M10-8 flamethrower was added to a specially designed cupola on the M113A1 hull. The M10-8 gun was capable of a full 360[degrees] rotation and could fire at angles of +55[degrees] to -15[degrees] from the vehicle turret. With 200 gallons of fuel, the gun could fire up to 200 meters (approximately 650 feet) for 32 seconds. (10) In some cases, the flame gun fired an initial "wet burst" of unignited fuel that stuck to a target and then fired a second "flaming burst" that achieved a more damaging effect.
The rear compartment of the APC was stripped, and a removable rack system was installed in place of the troop seats. Inside the APC, the 200 gallons of fuel were stored in four 50-gallon spherical fuel tanks. This was enough fuel for 32 seconds of continual flame or 200 one-second bursts. With the 200-meter range and a 7.62-millimeter machine gun in a coaxial mount as a secondary armament, the M 132A 1 could effectively suppress and then engage an enemy in fortifications in urban areas or jungles stripped by Rome plows. The M132A1 could also keep pace with M113A1 APCs and M48 tanks. A two-man crew operated the M132-one person drove the APC, and the other operated the flamethrower.
For example, the Navy backed M 132 APCs onto two armored troop carrier (ATC) vessels on the Mekong River and fired the flamethrowers over the sides. The flamethrowers were nicknamed "Zippos" due to the lighter used to ignite the napalm fuel when the electrical igniters failed.

 

[KaiserM109]

Long story, but here goes.

In ’66 an expeditionary force (Marines I think) went south of Saigon, but was repulsed. The US Army formed up the 9th Infantry Division at Ft.Riley with a lot of experimental equipment. One of the engineering battalions was the 15th Combat Engineering Battalion. A CEB is set up to be self-sufficient and has its own security forces. The 9th ID was deployed to Vietnam in the summer of ’67. I joined the 15th CEB in September as the battalion survey party chief. In the 15 CEB we had air boats, Rome Plows (made in Rome, GA) The Tactical Tree Crusher, M290 earthmovers, a fleet of 5 ton dumps, etc, and 4 M113 tracks equipped with flame throwers. See 9TH INF DIV FLAME THROWERS APC The turret was identical to the units on Navy Monitor boats. When we couldn’t get parts through regular Army sources, we traded with the Navy.

We deployed from Bearcat to Dong Tam west of My Tho on the Mekong River in late Dec, ’67. We were the ONLY unit to ever hold ground south of Saigon. Sorry, between being medevac’d out and getting divorced right after I got out, I have lost most of my pics.

Our Flame Tracks, as we called them, operated on the Mekong Delta from ’67 until ’69 when the 15th was brought home. Frequently they were called upon by regular infantry units to assist or to go in and secure (destroy) a downed aircraft. Our guys called them Zippos. Our Flame Platoon claimed 250 confirmed kills in one mission alone.

In a flash of brilliance high brass thought that it would be a great idea to deploy a couple of our tracks on the Mekong on barges, the idea being that when they encountered action they would land and pursue the enemy ashore. They setup a joint Navy/Army operation in the summer of ’68. The Navy called their monitors Zippos and didn’t like the Army using the same name. A shoot-off was arranged between one of our tracks and a monitor boat. The targets would be the little red flags that Charlie liked to hang in trees all over the place. At the end of the day our track won and the Navy agreed that we could call that one track Zippo.

In late ’68 we received 4 new M113s with orders to move the flame equipment to them. That did happen with 3 but not with Zippo. One new and 3 old M113s were salvaged to repair it and it became known as Granddaddy Zippo. Our original tracks were manufactured by Continental Can Company.

Except for Forest Gump, you see very few videos of the 9th Infantry because the correspondents didn’t go south of Saigon. God bless the souls of the men of the 9th ID, paraticularly the 15th CEB who never made it back.

 

[Numbers]

Lots of respect goes out to you and those who did. Just waded through loads of photos and just simply awed by the amount of things they accomplished.

New Page 2

untitled

The Vietnam Center & Archive: Virtual Archive

Search for: 15th Engineer Battalion
http://www.virtualarchive.vietnam.ttu.edu/starweb/virtual/vva/servlet.starweb
At the bottom of the page is about a 30 minute movie with shots of the fire breathing APC (about 10 minutes or so into the movie) and other items. Title: Vietnam Part II, 1969 (Richard Coogan Film)

 

[L1A1]

MD308
The flame thrower variant of the M48 family was the M67. There is/was an example sitting behind the APG museum a couple of years ago. I'd have to check my references again, but I think the fuel used was napalm and the crew was reduced to three-no need for a loader.

I've been inside of an unrestored M4A1 Sherman flame thrower conversion. There were two very large tanks in racks mounted to the bottom of the hull and no turret basket in there.

Regards,
L1A1

 

[papabear]

I'm glad Kaiser109 answered my question before it was asked.
When Maddawg brought up the M113 flamethrower I was thinking...dang...I spent six of my nearly 21 years in Mechanized Infantry units and never even heard of one.
I could see where they would be a sought after asset in combat...betcha they were also a priority target by the other side.
As NUMBERS said Kaiser 109, my respect and thanks for your service.
I served in 9th Inf Div. (2/1 Recondo Bridade.Light Infantry) after the war..1976-1979
I would love to see one of those puppies in person.

 

[KaiserM109]

At the bottom of the page is about a 30 minute movie with shots of the fire breathing APC (about 10 minutes or so into the movie) and other items. Title: Vietnam Part II, 1969 (Richard Coogan Film)

Thanks for posting that. You may have spent more time looking up the 15th's history than I have. I only recently wanted to go back over any of that. A few months ago I opened a box of about 500 slides that has been sealed up since 1969. There may be some pic’s of the flame tracks in them. I need to find a way to digitize them.

Richard Coogan and I missed each other in the 15th by about a month but from 2002 to 2004 we corresponded regularly. I was in the 1/11th Artillery by the time that film was shot. When I was at the 15th there were no palm trees outside the TOC; we barely had a TOC.

 

[Numbers]

KaiserM109, my father was in Korea and Vietnam in the Air Force and he was a picture hound. Luckily he is also a pack rat and kept everything stored and sort of cataloged (only by year, sometimes month, and rarely place). I have approximately 4000 to 5000 pictures (old slide type pictures) to digitize. Most is of the family but alot is aerials and ground shots of the equipment they used. I am using a VuPoint Solutions Filmscanner (slidescanner also) FS-C1-VP, built in back lighting, 3600 dpi image enhancement. www.vupointsolutions.com
They run anywhere from 45 to 100 dollars but this one was a gift. Here is a sample of a digitized slide... Hope this helps.

This is a picture my father took in 1969 of the Voodoo airplane that crashed while on deployment, it is now a static display at the Air Guard here in Louisville. I had to resize it from 11 MB file to fit the requirements of the site but the scan is awesome and I do not know the type of truck in the background next to the aircraft.

 

[KsM715]

Being in the USAF and never seeing any combat I would like to think that if I were ever in a gun fight I would stay til the end. But, if I was faced with that I would turn tail and run screaming like a little girl. I know I would rather take the chance at being shot than than burned alive.