Antitank Rifles.

Discussion in 'Weapons, Technology & Equipment' started by von Poop, May 8, 2008.

Tags:
Page 1 of 4
  1. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    This chap collects and shoots WW1&2 AT Rifles... in the UK!
    Good site:
    Antitank

    Cheers,
    Adam.
     
    von Poop, May 8, 2008
    #1
  2. kfz

    kfz Very Senior Member

    Good little find VP. I stil doubt you could hit a tank never mind a visiowith the Russian PTRS. The sightsa look like Dimitri knocked them up after vodka Rashion out of some old gas pipe.

    Kev
     
    kfz, May 8, 2008
    #2
  3. Warlord

    Warlord Veteran wannabe

    What good was the Boys, anyway? Did it ever knock out a can, beyond italian CV33 tankettes?
     
    Warlord, May 17, 2008
    #3
  4. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    Was the Boy not used with good effect in France in 1940, I know that Dutch army had some in 1940
     
    Philip Reinders, May 17, 2008
    #4
  5. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    Lets hear it for 'Charlie the bastard'.
    We should not forget just how rapidly armoured tecnology advanced during the war years. When designed the Boys AT rifle could penetrate most enemy armour at decent ranges. A well aimed shot could still be useful later in the conflict too.
    Given the choice of a Boys in 1940 or a PIAT in 1944 I know what I would choose.
     
    Bodston, May 17, 2008
    #5
  6. kfz

    kfz Very Senior Member

    Was the Boy not used with good effect in France in 1940, I know that Dutch army had some in 1940


    What Bod says..

    20 years before the anti tak rifle was probably the best defence against tanks, full stop. 20 years is nothing, we still have fornt line aircraft 20 years old, never mind rifles. Not surprising that in WW2 they stil thought the rifle was relevent.
     
    kfz, May 18, 2008
    #6
  7. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    I like that thought about the longevity of weapons systems kev, worth bearing in mind when looking at the obsolescence of a given device. Though the sheer scale & 'total war' nature of WW2 created a hothouse atmosphere in terms of technological progress there were still often roles to be found for weapons that were superceded in their primary role. Just thinking of red Army soldiers sniping with PTRS/Ds.
    Don't often see the Boys in late war pictures though, I suppose as the Soviets never seem to have developed the man-portable rocket weapons like the panzerfaust & Bazooka they'd be less likely to put the next best thing aside.
     
    von Poop, May 18, 2008
    #7
  8. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    Charlie the bastard lives on:
    Steyr AMR/IWS 2000
    [​IMG]
    At 1000 meters this projectile will penetrate a 40 mm of RHA (rolled homogenous steel armour) and will result in serious secondary fragmentation effect behind the armour. That said, it will penetrate two walls of any modern APC at one kilometer range.
    (And discarding sabot too.)

    [​IMG]
     
    von Poop, Oct 22, 2008
    #8
  9. deadb_tch

    deadb_tch the deadliest b#tch ever

    Guys, I've finished not long ago an Otto Carius book "tigers in the mud" where in appendix section he is providing after battle reports of his unit, and according to 'em PTRS/PTRD could penetrate Tiger's side armour and even not in rear cases..
     
    deadb_tch, Oct 23, 2008
    #9
  10. Bodston

    Bodston Little Willy

    Nice picture of 'Charlie'

    [​IMG]
     
    Bodston, Mar 1, 2009
    #10
  11. Smudger Jnr

    Smudger Jnr Our Man in Berlin

    This is my favourite little WW2 German Anti Tank gun, which used the Tapered "squeeze" bore.
    Although officially described as a Heavy anti-tank rifle, it was more a Light Anti-tank gun.

    2.8 cm sPzB 41 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The light weight paratroop and Mountain troop version looks neat.

    Regards
    Tom
     
    Smudger Jnr, Mar 1, 2009
    #11
  12. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    von Poop, Mar 2, 2009
    #12
  13. GPRegt

    GPRegt Senior Member

    In the 17th Airborne Division the "...155th AAB fielded four batteries, which would support the three infantry battalions. Batteries A, B, and C were equipped with British six-pounders whilst E had .50 cal machine guns and 57mm anti-tank guns. It was one of three Heavy Weapons Batteries. Ten days before the operation, Batteries B and C each gave up one six-pounder to be replaced with a 75mm Recoilless Rifle." (The Last Drop p. 9).

    The 75mm was "...mounted on a standard MG tripod which was in turn mounted in the rear of a jeep. 20 rounds of ammunition, HE and HE AT mixed, were taken in the jeep. By merely loosening a turnbuckle the gun and mount could be dismounted and carried by hand. In effect this was a fast, hard hitting airborne self-propelled 75mm rifle, capable of giving instantaneous fire support to attacking or defending infantry." (17th Airborne Division Historical Report of Operation Varsity p. 36) [FONT=&quot]

    [​IMG]
    [/FONT]
     
    GPRegt, Mar 2, 2009
    #13
  14. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    from 'life'
    [​IMG]
     
    Drew5233, Jul 6, 2009
    #14
  15. Neuntoter

    Neuntoter Junior Member

    I've been thinkin this for weeks now.

    How are anti-tank rifles capable to do any damage to tank? even when hitting weak spots. becuz as far as i know, tanks are all around very well armored and specially designed to be immune to light ammunition and explosives. ofc situation was different in WW1, but in WW2 and after? i know there are some ATR:s designed even after 1980 and i cant find any information about their effectiveness @ warfare today.

    sure, if anti-tank means infantry or light armored vechiles, there is no question but the name itself, anti-tank rifle, but...yea. any1 knows?

    ..and if it comes up that they are not capable for destroying tanks, what is their purpose at battlefield then?

    :confused:
     
    Neuntoter, Mar 2, 2012
    #15
  16. CL1

    CL1 116th LAA and 92nd (Loyals) LAA,Royal Artillery

    CL1, Mar 2, 2012
    #16
  17. Neuntoter

    Neuntoter Junior Member

    Neuntoter, Mar 2, 2012
    #17
  18. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA

    Hello Neuntoter

    A very rough rule of thumb thumb that I use is that an AP projectile can penetrate armor of about the same thickness as the diameter of the projectile. This doesn't include shaped charges or penetrators, etc. Just a rough rule that I use when reading.

    So WWI .50 caliber and 12mm anti tank rifles could penetrate a little over 1/2 thick armor. 3" gun a little over 3", etc.

    In WWI the anti-tank rifles could give the tanks a hard time but soon became obsolete as armor became thicker.

    Dave
     
    Dave55, Mar 2, 2012
    #18
  19. Orwell1984

    Orwell1984 Senior Member

    Orwell1984, Mar 2, 2012
    #19
  20. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    2 post action opinions from May 1940

    http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/irish-guards/16709-2nd-battalion-irish-guards.html
    9. Anti-tank Rifle.
    The consensus of opinion is that the anti-tank rifle does not live up to the reputation given to it at home. Only one instance can be recorded of any success having been gained by this weapon. This incident occurred on No. 1 Company’s front when the enemy brought up a tank with which they hoped to tow out the other tank which had been put out of action by an anti-tank gun at an earlier stage of the fighting. The undamaged tank was fired at and to some extent set on fire by a shot from an anti-tank rifle. Apart from this incident I cannot record any other successful shots, though many are known to have hit the vehicles at which they were aimed.



    http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/welsh-guards/36839-report-2nd-bn-welsh-guards-boulogne.html
    1. A/T RIFLES.
    It is not possible to say accurately if A/T Rifles actually knocked out enemy tanks as they always fired in conjunction with the A/T Guns supporting the Bn. Certainly a good deal of damage was done to enemy tanks at least five being put out of action by fire. One tank was put out of action by 3” Mortar fire.
     
    dbf, Mar 2, 2012
    #20
Page 1 of 4

Share This Page