3.5 Bazooka

[Ed Evanhoe <ede@oio.net>]

JB,

The 3.5" Bazooka had already passed the development/test stage and was in
limited production when the Korean War broke out. The first 3.5s arrived in
Korea a few days after Task Force Smith was clobbered. First mention I can
find of its use in combat is the battle of Taejon.

At 01:37 AM 3/3/2000 -0500, you wrote:
 > I have followed the several discussions RE: the non-effectiveness
 > of the 2.36" Bazooka against the NK T-34/85 tanks, during the early
 > months of the Korean Conflict, with great interest. One of the volumes of
 > the "US Army in WW II" historical series, Planning Munitions for War,
 > contains considerable info pertaining to the many problems with the
 > launchers & ammo encountered by the using units in the last years of WW
 > II. Many changes in the launcher firing mechanisms were necessary,
 > principally due to the effects of cold weather. The shaped-charge rocket
 > projectile required a base-detonating fuze, which had reliability
 > problems, from the beginning stages of development. The BD fuze was
 > complicated, difficult to manufacture & tended to corrode & "freeze up",
 > in storage. The US Army utilized existing ammunition storage facilities,
 > inherited from the former Japanese Army, to store ammunition, in Japan.
 > The 2.36" rockets, which were used in the early days in Korea, had then
 > been stored, in less than optimum conditions, for approx 5 yrs. On paper,
 > the 2.36" rocket will penetrate tthe frontal armor of the T-34/85 tank,
 > anywhere it strikes. The "official" thickness of the glacis plate is
 > listed as "45MM [1.8"] at 30 degrees slope". The sides & rear of the tank
 > are, of course, thinner. However, shaped-charge penetration is calculated
 > on the theory that the projectile will stike the target surface on the
 > perpendicular. Sloped armor tends to dissipate the penetrating jet, so
 > that the "equivalent" thickness may easily overmatch the 2.36" rocket.
 > One last comment on the ammunition: My EOD colleagues, in Japan, kept
 > quite busy destroying the tons of obsolete
 >rockets, which remained in storage, in 1954-55.
 > The development of the 3.5" Bazooka was a very high priority
 > project, in 1945. The German heavy tanks had proven to be practically
 > impervious to the 2.36" rockets. However, the end of European fighting
 > caused the termination of that program & no further work was done until
 > the need, again, arose in 1950. According to my instructor, at The
 > Ordnance School, in 1953, the 3.5" Bazooka was considered to be a modern
 > weapons production "miracle", going from blueprint to issue in Korea. in
 > approx 6 months.
 >The ChiComs immediately captured a sample, produced a slightly modified
 >version & had it in Korea, in approx 90 days. Our testing of captured
 >ChiCom 3.5" launchers & ammo showed them to be inferior to our weapon, in
 >range & penetration, but much less expensive to manufacture. The moral to
 >the story: If you have oceans on both sides & friendly, peaceful
 >countries, top & bottom, why spend money on modern equipment? Best
 >regards, JBaker

Ed Evanhoe, PO Box 916, Antlers, OK, 74523
Author: DARKMOON: Eighth Army Special Operations in the Korean War
Member: American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA)
Life Member:  Special Forces & Special Operations Associations
Web Site:  http://www.korean-war.com
Co-list owner: KOREAN-WAR-L (University of Kansas listproc)