The history of US light tanks during World War II is a chequered one. The Light Battalions of US Armored Divisions were initially filled with M3A1 and M5 Stuart tanks, however, on the battlefields of North Africa it was realised that these were disastrously under armoured and gunned, and a replacement, or the abandonment of light tank doctrine, was desperately needed. It wasn't until the last few months of WWII that the M24 Chaffee came into service and it was extensively used in combat from the Battle of the Bulge to the final campaigns in Germany. This book will trace the history of this design, its combat record in World War II, its many variants, and its extensive combat record post 1945.

The history of US light tanks during World War II is a chequered one. The Light Battalions of US Armored Divisions were initially filled with M3A1 and M5 Stuart tanks, however, on the battlefields of North Africa it was realised that these were disastrously under armoured and gunned, and a replacement, or the abandonment of light tank doctrine, was desperately needed. It wasn't until the last few months of WWII that the M24 Chaffee came into service and it was extensively used in combat from the Battle of the Bulge to the final campaigns in Germany. This book will trace the history of this design, its combat record in World War II, its many variants, and its extensive combat record post 1945.

The cavalry regiments of the US Army were in the process of being transformed into a mechanized force when the USA entered World War II. While those cavalry regiments deployed to the Pacific to fight the Japanese were turned into infantry units, those sent to Europe were employed as light armor in the cavalry's traditional spearhead roles – reconnaissance, the screening of advances and flanks, and the pursuit of beaten enemy forces. Equipped with M8 Greyhound armored cars, M5 Stuart and M24 Chaffee light tanks, and halftracks, these units were designated cavalry groups (mechanized), each c. 1,700 strong and divided into two heavily armed squadrons. They were seldom attached to divisions, but to higher-level corps commands, meaning they could be shifted around quickly and independently and be formed at need into flexible battle groups with armored, infantry, and other units, depending on the mission. Featuring specially drawn full-color illustrations depicting uniforms, insignia, armored vehicles, and tactical scenarios, this is the story of the US cavalry units that led the advance to victory in Europe during World War II.

A comprehensive and detailed illustrated examination of the development and combat performance of US battle tanks from World War I to the end of World War II. In this, the first of two highly illustrated volumes examining the complete history of US Army and US Marine Corps battle tanks, Steven J. Zaloga focuses on the history of the tank in American service from the first experiments with armored vehicles in the early years of the 20th century through to the end of World War II. Expanding on material published in Osprey series including New Vanguard, Campaign, and Duel, US Battle Tanks 1917–1945 explores the concepts and practice of tank development from the Renault FT, through the M4 Sherman to the M26 Pershing. It describes the experiences of the crews who saw combat, the performance of each tank in battle, and how each American armored fighting vehicle compared with the enemy armor it faced, as well as the key lessons learned from combat that led to new concepts and technological breakthroughs.

The US Army and Marine Corps experimented with a wide range of flame-thrower tanks through World War II in both the European and Pacific theaters. Although the US Army deployment of flame-thrower tanks in the ETO was problematic at best, flamethrowers were much more widely used in the Pacific theater and became ubiquitous by 1945, including an entire Army flamethrower tank battalion on Okinawa in 1945, the largest single use of flamethrower tanks in World War II. This will cover the initial attempts at the use of auxiliary flamethrowers by both the US Army and Marine Corps in 1943, the standardized adoption of the Satan flamethrower tank by the Marines in 1944, the development of main gun flamethrowers by the Marines and US Army based on the POA-CWS designs, and the myriad other types tested in combat including the powerful LVT-4 design using Navy flamethrowers at Peleliu in 1944. Due to the extensive Japanese use of fortifications in the final year of the Pacific war, Flamethrower tanks became one of the most important solutions in American tactics.

The Western European and Mediterranean Theaters in World War II is a concise, comprehensive guide for students, teachers, and history buffs of the Second World War. With an emphasis on the American forces in these theaters, each entry is accompanied by a brief annotation that will allow researchers to navigate through the vast amount of literature on the campaigns fought in these regions with ease. Focusing on all aspects surrounding the U.S. involvement in the Western European and Mediterranean theaters, including politics, religion, biography, strategy, intelligence, and operations, this bibliography will be a welcome addition to the collection of any academic or research library. Routledge Research Guides to American Military Studies provide concise, annotated bibliographies to the major areas and events in American military history. With the inclusion of brief critical annotations after each entry, the student and researcher can easily assess the utility of each bibliographic source and evaluate the abundance of resources available with ease and efficiency. Comprehensive, concise, and current—Routledge Research Guides to American Military Studies are an essential research tool for any historian.

Following World War I, horse cavalry entered a period during which it fought for its very existence against mechanized vehicles. On the Western Front, the stalemate of trench warfare became the defining image of the war throughout the world. While horse cavalry remained idle in France, the invention of the tank and its potential for success led many non-cavalry officers to accept the notion that the era of horse cavalry had passed. During the interwar period, a struggle raged within the U.S. Cavalry regarding its future role, equipment, and organization. Some cavalry officers argued that mechanized vehicles supplanted horses as the primary means of combat mobility within the cavalry, while others believed that the horse continued to occupy that role. The response of prominent cavalry officers to this struggle influenced the form and function of the U.S. Cavalry during World War II.