What Happens To Amtraks/amtanks After The Initial Landing Is Made?

[Gavin-Phillips]

A bit of a strange question maybe, but I've recently found a few clips of the 2010 TV series Pacific on youtube which revolves around a number of young Marines deployed to various combat zones in the Pacific Theatre. There's a few good scenes of LVT's being used (both LVT-4's and the turret version armed with the 75mm howitzer (either LVT(A)-4 or LVT(A)-5).

 

Anyway, I was wondering what is supposed to happen with these kinds of amphibious assault vehicles once they reach the shoreline and the troops disembark. Do they continue the fight and support the infantry with their own weapons or do they return to the landing ships to be reloaded again? Surely a later AAV like the LVTP5 is unsuitable for supporting infantry on land? It would make a rather large and thinly armoured target - probably more so than an AAV7A1. I can imagine the turreted variants would be able to better assist the infantry especially in terrain unsuitable for conventional tanks or other armour.

 

So what is the typical function of these early Amtracs (and their successor LVTP5) once the initial landing phase is over?

 

 

[shep854]

They continue as APCs.

[rmgill]

They go back to the ship with casualties and get more Marines or supply. During the assault phases, anything big can't be expected to get into short and deposit material supply so the LVTs and Landing Craft work back and forth.


Some of the specialized units had assault equipment which would stay and fight.

[rmgill]

Hmm. Were they that ideal as APC's given how large they were as vehicles once ashore?

[Richard Lindquist]

In WWII, they were more valuable for resupply and bringing in reinforcements than to be used as APCs. The weapons versions were used ashore, but their thin skins made them very vulnerable. Siince you would need them for the next landing after this one, you didn't want to waste them.

[JasonJ]

I think the assualt versions were made to help the immediate fight near the landing zone in order to help the marines get past the initial beach. For fighting deeper in, would make more sense for the marines to just wait for M4s to arrive. Also, I recall on a couple of the landings that the US wanted the islands to be secured quickly, so the assualt LVTs might have been seen as a way to help speed up taking control of the island. Well I don't directly know,TBH. One more factor might have been availability of M4s. On Guadalcanal, they had only M2A4s, M3 lights, and halftracks with the 75mm. M4s came later. Perhaps M4 numbers were still short on availabilty so maybe assualt LVTs might have helped fill up the role for mobile fire support. LVTs also likely had better performance in getting out of the water onto the beach. I think there were some examples of M4s getting stuck short of getting on the beach.

Edited February 14, 2018 by JasonJ

[shep854]

Ah. I was thinking of current use.

[Gavin-Phillips]

Thank you for the replies.

 

I can easily imagine that especially in the Pacific theatre of operations, the ground conditions could/would be difficult for conventional armour and the mobility of the LVT's with the 75mm howitzers would have been better than nothing as far as infantry support goes - despite their thin armour making them a bit on the vulnerable side.

 

Thanks once again and that's a fantastic picture of an LVT(A)-4 (or -5 maybe), rmgill. The Pacific TV mini-series featured a few (or maybe the same vehicle over and over) of those supporting the advance of the marines on-land which is what inspired me to ask this question.

[rmgill]

I think it was a few of the same vehicles over and over. I'm pretty sure the LVT at VMMV was contracted for use as I have seen Marc post on social media photos from either the Pacific where he was there to tend to a few of the vehicles (on reflection, perhaps it was Eastwoods Iwo Jima Dual Movie set (Flags of our Fathers and Letters from Iwo). Either way, there's not a lot running around still, and they're a bear to move since they're so large and wide. I think Flags/Letters was filmed in Iceland... for the volcanic sand beaches.

[shep854]

I think it was a few of the same vehicles over and over. I'm pretty sure the LVT at VMMV was contracted for use as I have seen Marc post on social media photos from either the Pacific where he was there to tend to a few of the vehicles (on reflection, perhaps it was Eastwoods Iwo Jima Dual Movie set (Flags of our Fathers and Letters from Iwo). Either way, there's not a lot running around still, and they're a bear to move since they're so large and wide. I think Flags/Letters was filmed in Iceland... for the volcanic sand beaches.

Similar climate as well.

[rmgill]

Is it? I'd suspect that Iceland being quite a bit more northerly would be bloody cold in comparison.

[shep854]

At the time of the landings, Iwo was pretty chilly. You're right, of course; I thought Iwo was farther north. In my mind's eye, I always had the Marianas and Iwo more due east of Japan, even after all the years of looking at Pacific maps.

[Rick]

Hmm. Were they that ideal as APC's given how large they were as vehicles once ashore?

By the look of the treads in the photo, I don't see alot of apc use from these vehicles. Looks good for pushing against water though.

[rmgill]

Yeah. I guess they work ok on firm ground. They do however tend to REALLY tear up turf. I suspect the wear rate is rather high on firm ground.

VMMV/Alan Cors' LVT-4 in Nokesville, VA.

[Jeff]

I think there were some examples of M4s getting stuck short of getting on the beach.

 

Tanks in Hell: A Marine Corps Tank Company on Tarawa is an excellent account of the first use of M4s by the Marines and the trouble they had getting ashore and fighting once there.

[rmgill]

I guess this thread needs video..

Edited February 15, 2018 by rmgill

[rmgill]

[rmgill]

[Al]

Weren't they also useful for getting over reefs?

[rmgill]

I suspect they were. I can't recall which landings that the landing craft got stuck, but the LVT's were able to climb up and over and then traverse the lagoons in between.

[shep854]

Tarawa. Lack (and losses) of LVTs forced the Marines to do their fateful wade in when LCVPs grounded on the reefs

[Stuart Galbraith]

One of the Royal Tank Regiments (6th?) was reequipped with them for the crossing of the Rhine.

 

Ive got a nagging feeling I read of them being used at Port Said in 1956, but I cant swear of it.

[JasonJ]

 

I think there were some examples of M4s getting stuck short of getting on the beach.

 

Tanks in Hell: A Marine Corps Tank Company on Tarawa is an excellent account of the first use of M4s by the Marines and the trouble they had getting ashore and fighting once there.

Probably will get that one.

[Ken Estes]

The original amtrac, the LVT1 "Alligator" was purposely armed with open mounts of .50 and .30 cal MGs because it was procured as a supply vehicle, intended to augment the offloading of the shipping by landing craft. There was no armor. The army later became interested and alone procured the LVT(A)-2, an armored version of the follow-on amtrac the LVT2 "Buffalo." The LVT1s at Guadalcanal were also used for inland movement of supplies, because so few vehicles were offloaded when the USN had to break off the landing ops. Their peculiar rollerbearing suspension for the tracks soon became worn out by this [intended for 100 hrs inland]. The landings at Guadalcanal were unopposed, but across the sound at Tulagi, it was a different story and the onboard weapons were put to use from the water and ashore as targets could be identified.

 

The doctrine became unchanged until the Tarawa battle, where the enemy defenses were strong and well-fortified for the time. Because of the reef, the amtrac battalion knew they would be exposed to defensive fire and improvised armor plating for both LVT1 and 2 amtracs, the latter having been designed for bolt-on cab plating. The losses were still heavy especially as the amtracs had to shuttle even more to offload stranded landing craft as well as the shipping. The 2d Amtrac Bn had 325 of 500 men as casualties, including the bn cdr KIA. After 3 days, only 19/75 LVT1 and 16/50 LVT2 remained in service. Needless to say, none ventured inland until the beaches had been secured.

 

The lessons of Tarawa governed the rest of the war. The personnel/cargo tractors would be armed and armored and an amphibious tank variant, forever termed armored amphibian in the USMC was procured, beginning with the LVT(A)1 produced by Borg-Warner. The inventor Donald Roebling (who used FMC for production) had interest in an amphbious tank version before the war, making first sketches in Jan40 which received no interest. The commandant of the amtrac driving school, located near Roebling's shops, requested light tank turrets from HQ on 3Nov41. He was provided with an M3 light tank turret and drawings for the turreted Marmon-Herrington's twin .50 turret. The Corps thought protection vs. .50 cal fire would suffice in overcoming beach defenses as were understood in those days. Borg-Warner's successful entry for the new vehicle integrated an M3A1 turret, and had 1/4 inch hull armor, 1/2 inch cab armor. They first appeared in action at the Roi-Namur landings [Feb44]. Some 500 were delivered to the USMC and Army.

 

With the amtracs upgraded with light tank radial engines, transmissions and final drives, plus torsilastic suspensions for roadwheels, operations inland from the highwater mark could be contemplated. The USMC wanted 300 armored amphibians delivered by Jun43, but the first of three armored amphibian battalions (staffed mostly by tank officers) did not stand up until Aug43. Amphibious planners in the Pacific first wanted to have the troops carried to an inland phase line by amtracs at Roi-Namur, escorted by the armored amphibians. However, all units at this operation were in their first battle and navigation problems dominated, preventing such actions. A valid attempt was made at Saipan by V Amphibious Corps to move inland with mounted assault infantry. In favor of this initiative, the 5 USMC and 3 Army amtrac battalions featured the latest LVT4 (1/3 of the total LVT available) as well as the first of the advanced 75mm armed LVT(A)4 with the 2d Armored Amphibian Bn and part of the Army's 708th Amphibious Tank Bn. In the third waves would arrive the USMC M4A2 medium tanks, now standard in all USMC tank battalions. The plan was for the armored amphibians to spearhead the attack by amtrac-mounted assault infantry, to a depth of one mile, thereby bypassing enemy positions and avoiding the usual cluster on the beach.

 

As usual, Japanese tenacity interrupted the planned operation on D-Day 15Jun44. Terrain inland included steep inclines and swamps. Only the 4th Marine Division attempted the mechanized attack, 2d Marine Division opted to dismount at the water's edge, owing to terrain. A number of LVT(A) in fact reached the inland line, but most remained in the first 100 yards of the beach, suffering significant losses because of light armor and vehicle size/height. The Army 708th lost 30/68 of its vehicles at Saipan and Tinian combined. The commander of 1st Bn, 24th Marine Regt reported that "on five different days LVT(A)'s reinforced our tanks in the attack in our sector. Though they received many casualties they were very aggressive and their firepower very effective."

 

In the aftermath of the Marianas battles, a final doctrine for the armored amphibians was proposed and executed by their pioneer commander, LtCol Louis Metzger. The armored amphibians would support the waterborne assault, remaining half immersed to support the beach assault, then, when relieved by the tanks, they would revert to general support of the landing force, using their 75mm cannon as artillery under fire direction of the landing force artillery.

 

This was the final doctrine enshrined post-WWII under which the LVT3 and LVTP-5 personnel carriers and LVT(A)5 and LVTH-6 armored amphibians operated. Inland mechanized ops usually centered upon armored columns closely supported and led by tanks (first used at Guam), with eventual flank support to be provided by the antitank units (M-50 Ontos).

 

Mechanized ops had a final boost with the arrival of the much more agile LVTP-7/AAV-7 series vehicle, and appropriate doctrine merged in the 1980s for ad hoc operations with tanks, amtracs and infantry, but the only permanently mounted infantry in the USMC remains to this day exclusively in the Light Armored battalions, variously designated LAV, LAI and now, LAR Bns.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Ken Estes

[Gavin-Phillips]

Thank you for the continuing replies and great to see those videos. I'm surprised at the apparent speed of that LVT-4, I thought they were quite slow machines but apparently not. Quite manoeuvrable on the water as well.

 

I have seen footage of LVT's being used to cross the Rhine, I think it may well have been on the World At War TV series or something very similar to that.