Dogface21 Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 I found this excellent siteThe Russian Battlefieldand in it is a brief history of these rifles. They were produced in some number( about 400,000) and apparently were quite common. They fired a 14.5mm bullet, and had success against early german armour, and killed half-tracks like a Ma Deuce.Soviet Anti-Tank Rifles Anyone know if these are planned to be in CMBB? [ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: Dogface21 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 According to a BTS post some months ago most weapons such as that are included, but they dd not publically mention ATRs by name. I am assuming that they will be included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 IT would be bloody hard to have an accurate game based on the Eastern Front without plenty of these ATRs. It would be like having the Americans without their .50 MGs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface21 Posted October 6, 2001 Author Share Posted October 6, 2001 Cool. I had never heard of the things before, what a strange solution to the infantry anti- tank weapon problem. Did the Russians get zooks in the lend-lease act, or did they go through the whole war using ATRs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodimzew Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Did the Russians get zooks in the lend-lease act, or did they go through the whole war using ATRs? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ATRs were used by the russians during the whole war. Alone due to the mass of available weapons. Later they proved quite ineffective against the german tanks and were used to punch holes in everything that needed to be punched. As far as i know they got no bazookas via lend&lease. Note that tanks were widely available in the second half of the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pascal DI FOLCO Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 ALL powers at the outbreak of WWII relied on ATRs, but some had more effective, bigger caliber designs (Japanese and Finns). Russians did'nt develop any zook like weapons, but gave thier troops plenty of "close combat" weapons such as Molotov cocktails (41-42) then Anti Tank magnetic Mines (44+) that were MUCH more effective than ATRs... but obliged the soldiers to come at touch range of the target Panzers :eek: :eek: !! IMO CMBB will HAVE to portray ATRs precisely, ATMMs however can be portayed as Panzerfausts and Gammon bombs are in CMBO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 Pascal, Are you sure the Soviets fielded ATMM's in WWII? (Oh god, not the start of of a JSIII type thread.) I'm aware the Germans created and used the Zimmerit (sp?) coating as a counter, but I thought that was because THEY had ATMM's and did it as a "just in case" their enemies used them. I ask because some of my books specifically state that no one except the Germans had/used ATMM's. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 The Soviet did get several thousand bazookas and PIATS in Lend Lease but they don't seem to have been used with any degree of frequency by the Red Army. The Red Army appeared to depend more on AT guns and assault guns and other tanks. The Soviets did develop some AT grenades but rocket weapons didn't come about until after WW2. However, the Soviets captured plenty of panzerfausts and panzerschrecks as they stomped towards Germany and they used them against German tanks. By the way, panzerfausts are just as good at taking out German armor as they were taking out Allied armor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface21 Posted October 6, 2001 Author Share Posted October 6, 2001 I cant wait to use these things in CMBB, they were usually used in groups with each one giving overlapping cover to the other. I wonder how accurate they were and if they were used regularly against infantry.What size (in mm) is a M2 round, is it much smaller than the 14.5mm used by the Ruskies? Oh, yeah, there were two models of Soviet ATRs, one 5 shot semi-auto, one single shot. The semi auto could squeeze out up to 15 rounds a minute, while the single shot desight was 8-10 rounds a minute. They have about the same muzzle velocity I believe, and were produced in equal numbers. Do you think that there is a possibility we can choose, or just another 'abstract'? [ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: Dogface21 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pascal DI FOLCO Posted October 6, 2001 Share Posted October 6, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by c3k: Pascal, Are you sure the Soviets fielded ATMM's in WWII? (Oh god, not the start of of a JSIII type thread.) I'm aware the Germans created and used the Zimmerit (sp?) coating as a counter, but I thought that was because THEY had ATMM's and did it as a "just in case" their enemies used them. I ask because some of my books specifically state that no one except the Germans had/used ATMM's. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> c3k, I don't think Germans were silly enough to protect their AFVs vs their own ATMMs ! Seriously, Soviets DID have ATMMs at the end of the war... indeed they have in my tactical wargames (ASL, UpFront,...), so ... :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 I think, I've seen some references to soviet AT weapon that was like ATMM, but used some sort of sticky goo to attach to the tank. The references were from 1942. As for ATRs, well... this topic is yet another well-beaten dog. In line with "why MGs dont run", "was T34 better than Pz-V" etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 Assuming an ATR will be modeled similarly to the .50 cal, (not as a crew served weapon) they will probably cost next to nothing. A single AT rifle would be almost useless against infantry, and nowhere near as lethal against vehicles as .50. A single shot is a single shot, not as good as a spray of bullets. So I'd guess well below 10 points. Maybe 5!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinci Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 That depends what your shooting at and from how far. ATR's were quite widespread at the beginning of the war, with several nationalities having them. Caliber went all the way up to 20mm (for the Finns). With that caliber you could hurt most armored things that were driving around in 40/41. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 My references also indicate the Soviets did not have ATMMs. ASL got a lot of things wrong - so did Up Front. Let's be careful what we use for sources, shall we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pascal DI FOLCO Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: My references also indicate the Soviets did not have ATMMs. ASL got a lot of things wrong - so did Up Front. Let's be careful what we use for sources, shall we?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You're right Michael, I stupidly was confident with what my wargames portrayed and did'nt search any real sources about it I'm just a lazy French ya know... So exit the Soviet ATMMs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: My references also indicate the Soviets did not have ATMMs. ASL got a lot of things wrong - so did Up Front. Let's be careful what we use for sources, shall we?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think what ASL had was called ATM or Anti Tank Mine as opposed to the ATMM or Anti Tank Magnetic Mine. The Soviets did have an Anti Tank grenade ... the RPG 43. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 To answer the original question...Yes.. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted October 7, 2001 Share Posted October 7, 2001 It is my understanding that an ATR had considerably (twice?) better penetration than the .50 cal. Extra 2 mm caliber, longer and heavier round, longer barrel. How wrong am I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts