Soviet anti-tank rifles!

[Guest Rommel22]

I just got "Fighting for the soviet motherland" and it kicks ass!

Anyway, the book refers to a anti-tank rifle, the ptrs ( protivotankovoye ruzhe simonova). The rifle was self re-loading, had a bore diameter of 14.5mm, it weighted 21 kilos and had a effective fire of 15 rounds per minute. A magazine capacity of 5 rounds and a muzzle velocity of 1012 meters a second and a armor penetrating capability of 35mm at a range of 300 meters.

This AT rifle sounds impressive, I wonder how accurate it really was. The book decribes a soldier using this gun and taking 2 tanks and a troops carier at 150m plus with one shot to each. So it sound like it gaave the Germans a scare.

Anyone alse have any other info on this AT rifle? This rifle will be feared in CM2!

------------------

Rommel22s Kampfgruppe site:

http://rommel22diarys.homestead.com/MyPage1.html

"I saw 5 Germans walking down the side of the road, so I followed them for a few yard to get closer. Then I shot them! Later that day I found out the war has been over for a few weeks." - someone

[Pvt.Tom]

AT Rifles would be very cool in CM2, a must have IMHO, if I remember correctly they were very common on the Soviet side?

Pvt.Tom

[The Commissar]

I dont know much about these AT Rifles. How exactly does it knock out a tank? I assume the bullet goes through the armor, bounces about the insides and makes mashed potatos of everyone in the tank. Is this correct?

This rifle would be nice, but would probably only be effective in the early years of the war and only for soft-skinned vehicles later on.

More info would be highly appreciated.

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[gunnergoz]

Not to sound like a broken record but once again I too must praise Dmitry Loza's book because it is a must read for those contemplating CM2.

I have a Soviet 14.5 complete round in my collection and it is nothing to sneeze at. It is considerably heavier and larger than the US .50 cal round that we all know, love and fear. It is an interesting contrast to the British Boys AT rifle round, .55 cal, which it seems to somehow dwarf also.

I cannot imagine the guts it would take to face a tank, however, especially one that is firing at you. These teams were also armed with AT grenades, so they were expected to close with, and finish, the enemy. Talk about huevos!

[This message has been edited by gunnergoz (edited 03-19-2001).]

[Guest Rommel22]

Well thats 35mm at 300 meters, she knocked out 2 Pz-IV at a range of 150m. So the rifle could penetrate 50mm of armor at closer ranges. So it could be used in 42 effectivly.

Anyone have any pictures of this rifle and the AT round?

------------------

Rommel22s Kampfgruppe site:

http://rommel22diarys.homestead.com/MyPage1.html

"I saw 5 Germans walking down the side of the road, so I followed them for a few yard to get closer. Then I shot them! Later that day I found out the war has been over for a few weeks." - someone

[Cos]

Originally posted by Rommel22:

I just got "Fighting for the soviet motherland" and it kicks ass!

Anyway, the book refers to a anti-tank rifle, the ptrs ( protivotankovoye ruzhe simonova). The rifle was self re-loading, had a bore diameter of 14.5mm, it weighted 21 kilos and had a effective fire of 15 rounds per minute. A magazine capacity of 5 rounds and a muzzle velocity of 1012 meters a second and a armor penetrating capability of 35mm at a range of 300 meters.

Anyone alse have any other info on this AT rifle? This rifle will be feared in CM2!

Here's a link to Panzerfaust and the section on tank rilfes. There's a picture of a PTRS there too.

http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust6.htm

[Tiger]

Here are some comments on these Soviet A-T rifles:

"The lack of a modern infantry anti-tank weapon was one of the singular failures of the wartime Soviet weapons industry. The Red Army was slow in adopting an anti-tank rifle but changed its mind in 1939-40 after having encountering Polish and Finnish anti-tank rifles. After several designs were tested and failed, in August 1941 the Red Army finally settled on the single-shot Degtaryev PTRD 14.5mm anti-tank rifles and the magazine-fed Simonov PTRS rifle. Of the two types, the simpler and cheaper PTRD was more common with 202,488 built through 1942, compared to 63,385 of the more sophisticated PTRS. They were both very large and cumbersom weapons, the PTRS weighing 44.7lb, and the PTRD some 35.2lb, requiring two soldiers to carry them. Their ammunition could penetrate 35mm of armor at 100 m, which made them a viable weapon for the first year of fighting. By the middle of 1942, German tanks were uparmoured to the point where the anti-tank rifles were useless in frontal engagements; however, they could still penetrate from the sides and rear, especially when used from close range. The anti-tank rifles remained the principle anti-tank weapon of the Soviet infantry through to the end of the war due to the lack of a more modern replacement; their main advantage was the sheer number available. Although not powerful enough to destroy a tank, thay were such a painful nuisance that in 1943 the Germans began to place armour skirts around the sides of the turrent and hull of their tanks and assault guns to protect against this nuisance."

from the "Red Army Handbook 1939-1945" by S. J. Zaloga and L. S. Ness.

My personal Notes (just to get the discussion going, no absolutes! ):

1) The Soviet main infantry Anti-tank weapon for CM2, excepting captured panzerfausts later in the war.

2) 2-man weapons team, 1 team casualty should probably make it immobile.

3) Rate of movement should be slow like a LT MG team.

4) ROF should not be too high, 2 or 3 per turn for the PTRD, up to 5 for the PTRS (per usual CM-type abstractions, e.g. sharpshooters)

5) Accuracy shouldn't be overly high as historical notes suggest.

6) Possibility to jam (?)

Any thoughts? Care to make your own Soviet anti-tank rifle likely features in CM2?

[This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 03-19-2001).]

[Wolfe]

The Red Army Handbook lists the single-shot Degtaryev PTRD 14.5mm AT Rifle and the magazine-fed Simonov PTRS rifle. 202,488 PTRDs and 63,385 PTRSs were built through 1942; totalling some 469,000 through the whole war. They also got some 3200 Boys AT Rifles from Britain.

The AT Rifles were an integral part of many Infantry Battalion TO&Es as AT Rifle companies (or platoons) within each Battalion/Regiment. And some of the later Cavalry formations even had them as an integral part of their squadron TO&E (e.g.: 1xHQ, 4xCav Platoons, 1xMG Plt, and 1xAT Rif Plt). With 6 AT Rifles in the AT Rifle platoon.

- Chris

[Edit: fixed last sentence which made it sound like there were 6 AT Rifles in each of the 4 Cav Platoons.]

[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 03-19-2001).]

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

35mm was probably the peak penetration for this fellow. The Germans tanks were not heavily armored in the early part of the war. The Pz II had 15mm of armor, and the III and IV each had 30mm. The slope on the armor on the IIIs and IVs varied, 0 degrees on some of the sides, 7-9 degrees on the upper front hull, 12-15 degrees on the turret, and 10-21 degrees on the front lower hull (the highest for the Pz III).

So front shots would penetrate only at close range and only if the hit was reasonably lucky as to impact angle and such, though any angle it had enough punch for the light armor - Pz IIs, armored cars, halftracks. There would certainly be a number of penetrations that didn't result in kills. The same caliber weapon, incidentally, was used for the AA machineguns on the heaviest Russian tanks, and is still used today in that role. In WW II combat, the main problem with the weapon is simply its weight. I'd expect them to be about the movement speed of a U.S. .50 cal.

[Schrullenhaft]

Although they're heavy weapons, I have seen pictures of Soviet AT-Rifle teams running with their weapons (alongside T34/85s no less). These were most likely shots of exercises rather than actual combat however.

I believe that one of the factors that probably contributes the most to the .50 cal's slow movement is the amount of ammunition for the gun. An AT-Rifle team on the other hand would probably have less than 50 rounds (if even that many) while maneuvering in a combat environment. I'd guess that they're speed would be more along the lines of a Panzerschreck team than a US .50 cal team.

[Bullethead]

As to the nusiance value of Russian anti-tank rifles, I've read several memoirs of Tiger commanders. While the ATR had no hope of penetrating a Tiger, this isn't what the Russians were after.

The ATR was apparently just as accurate as any large-bore rifle. This made it capable of hitting very small targets at fairly long range. So the Russians used the ATR to snipe at the vision blocks and weapon sights of thick-skinned AFVs. If the vision block or sight went straight through, such a shot might actually penetrate into the tank. But even if it didn't, and even it it was the top of a periscope, the big bullet would cause a serious degradation of view out of the vision block.

AFVs often carry spare periscopes and such that can be changed from the inside. However, enough ATR hits and the tank would be blind, even if physically undamaged. This left the tank crew the option of unbuttoning or withdrawing from action. Unbuttoning was often not an option, so in this way an ATR could mission-kill even vehicles as heavy as Tigers. That's nothing to be sneezed at.

------------------

-Bullethead

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there is bacteria.

[CATguy]

Most armies in the late 30's had adopted the ATR as the main anti-tank weapon for infantry. By the start of the war it was already obsolete. They are quite effective at taking out lightly armored vehicles though. They can punch holes through radiators and engine blocks with ease, but with any serious armor thickness it could not pentrate. I believe either the Japanese or the Finish army fielded a 20mm ATR. I can only imagine that it was extremely bulky and heavy. Currently right now you can still find Boys ATR's (55 cal) on the market in good to poor condition.

[Guest Rommel22]

Thanx for the info!

[GriffinCheng+]

A little bit of salt: I remember from Ospey Books on Battle of Kurst, the Sovets AT rifle teams were still active by that time. It was essentially a two-men team. The rifle was really long and it had muzzle brake. Gotta search for more info back home.

Griffin.

------------------

"When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI."

"Can't get enough Tank?"

Come to my Combat Missing Command Post (CMCP) at http://www.angelfire.com/games3/CMCP/

[Guest Mike the bike]

From memory the magazine fed PTRS was signifcantly less reliable than the PTRD, and offered no great advantage in rate of fire.

And of course they were "hell on wheels" to lighter armoured vehicles such as half-tracks.

The Koreans reportedly used them as sniper weapons during the Korean war, and the ammunition is still used in russian 14.5mm machine guns commonly fielded as AAMG's on tanks and in some old ('50's vintage) twin and quad AA mounts.

[ADAman]

Two books, one by Hogg, the other by Bishop indicate 25 mm at 500M.

Hogg indicates it originally fired a steel-cored bullet with an incindiary in the tip to indicate impact point. He says a tungsten carbide cored round was introduced in 1941 but doesn't indicate whether this was used to derive the 500M data.

------------------

Air Defense: Shoot 'em down, sort 'em out on the ground (AKA - if it flies, it dies)

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Schrullenhaft:

Although they're heavy weapons, I have seen pictures of Soviet AT-Rifle teams running with their weapons (alongside T34/85s no less). These were most likely shots of exercises rather than actual combat however.

I believe that one of the factors that probably contributes the most to the .50 cal's slow movement is the amount of ammunition for the gun. An AT-Rifle team on the other hand would probably have less than 50 rounds (if even that many) while maneuvering in a combat environment. I'd guess that they're speed would be more along the lines of a Panzerschreck team than a US .50 cal team.

The .50 cal weighs 85+ pounds unloaded and without tripod (without which it can't be fired, or fired effectively at the least). It is an automatic weapon and consumes great amounts of ammo.

The PTRS ATR weighs 45 pounds unloaded.

Can anyone speak to the rate of consumption of ATR ammo in a given engagement?

I would suggest a .50 calibre team and an ATR team are worlds apart with regards to how fast they can move the weapon, its component parts, and ammunition.

[Gregory Deych]

There was a booklet issued in 1942, called "Destroy Fascit tanks with your AT Rifle". Here is what it has to say on the matter:

The rateate of fire of the self-loading gun is 15 shots, bolt-action 8 shots per minute.

The sighting range of shooting from the self-loading gun (PTRS)is 1500 m, from the

PTRD 1000 m. The best results of shooting are reached at the distance of 3-400 m and

closer.

The armor-piercing incendiary bullet upon the entry into vulnerable place is capable of disabling the tank, or setting it on fire.

Weight of the guns: PTRS 20,3 kg, PTRD 16 kg;

Skillfully create firing positions!

Select place and organize position as to:

Have clear LOS/LOF to the distances from 500 to 1500 m;

Be well disguised from the ground and aerial observation;

Have concealed passages and shelter in the event of artillery and mortar fire;

Have your commander and neighbors in sight.

Create firing position in the open country from from wooden bars or another improvised material within an earthen mound. From this shelter to the two sides, create passageways 15- 25 m in length to alternate emplacements. Arrange these "nests" with the calculation of the possibility to conduct fire in all directions.

In all cases disguise entrenchments in the local terrain. At the moment of strong firing by artillery and by mortars cover into the shelter; with the approach of the enemy tanks immediately engage them.

With the placement of firing position on the edge of the woods your position should be somewhat forward, disguised by bushes. Remove the excess grass and bushes in your sector, so as to have a clearer field of fire.

In the populated area firing position should be organized in the houses, the sheds, the ruins and other construction near them.

Do not occupy a position, where the enemy easily can reveal/detect you.

After making an embrasure in the wall of building, disguise it by improvised material, straw, boards, plywood and other material.

If there is no time to the equipment of firing positions, use local items unevennesses of terrain, ditches, bushes, stumps, funnels/hoppers, etc.

When concealing yourself behind an earthen hillock do not fire then gun from the top of the hillock, but from the left or right side of mound.

Do not use as shelter objects well seen by enemy , such as a lone tree, single

house, stone, stump, etc.

Let the enemy tanks close (50-100)

Manuvrability and team action of the ATR team and riflemen,grenadiers and molotov cocktail throwers.

The main feature of using an ATR in battle is it's agility.

Light weight of the rifle, easy carry,simpleness of the firing positions, possibility of using natural obstacles as camuflage - all this makes the ATR team practically invulnerable.

Keep this in mind:

- Allways have alternate firing positions.

- Having made 5-10 shots from one position, move to the next.

-If tanks are approaching head on,move to a firing position which will let you fire into the side.

-Moving on the battlefield, try to make the tank show it's side to other ATR teams.

-If a tank is stock, first priority is to disable it's armament.

From an attached drawing the main targets are:

-If the tank is approaching frontally - main gun, MG, observation slits.

-From the side - fuel tank, suspension, engine and turret in general.

[Jarmo]

The 20mm weapon was the finnish "Lahti".

I wonder how the weapons will be treated. I suppose they'll have to be light guns, not small arms like the .50 cal.

In real use the .50 cal would probably be a lot more effective than the heavier calibre AT rifles. At least against the most probable targets, the german AC's. Putting in 20 shots instead of one makes the world of difference...

[109 Gustav]

Excellent post, Gregory.

I wonder if BTS will model these weapons as hard for the tanks to spot. The muzzle flash wouldn't look any different from a rifle or MG, so it would be practically impossible for a tank crew to distinguish a well concealed ATR from a grunt with a rifle.

------------------

The Last Defense- Mods, Scenarios, Classic threads, and more!

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

[Guest tero]

>The Red Army was slow in adopting an anti-tank rifle but changed its mind in 1939-40 after having encountering Polish and Finnish anti-tank rifles.

That is interesting. The amount of Finnish AT rifles in service during the Winter War was negligible, far below the demand. The 37mm Bofors ATG was the most effective AT weapon in the arsenal and it could take on all the light armour and even the T-28 medium.

The ATR's that were in service were the Polish 8mm ATR and the British Boys ATR. It was found that these calibers could only take out the small ambfibious tankettes reliably. Their penetrating power could not penetrate the T-26 armour unless you were able to score a lucky hit.

The domestic 20mm ATR was being developed but it did not reach front line troops in time to see combat. It did see service later on but it was made redundant as an AT weapon when the T-34 and KV-1 entered service. It was relegated to AA role in the infantry units as it was semi-automatic and it could drive off or even bring down a Shturmovik.

>2) 2-man weapons team, 1 team casualty should probably make it immobile.

Not in my opinion.

>3) Rate of movement should be slow like a LT MG team.

Even slower

>5) Accuracy shouldn't be overly high as historical notes suggest.

Yes. But first shot hit propability and accuracy should be quite high, given the stalker nature of the team.

One additional suggested feature :

AA capability. I have this notion of a Soviet war movie I saw years ago where they used an ATR to bring down a German aeroplane. There are several recorded incidents when the Finnish 20mm ATR was used in AA role with some success.

[This message has been edited by tero (edited 03-20-2001).]

[M Hofbauer]

Even though the PTRD and PTRS are probably among the best ATRs ever made, they are still ATRs and you would not kill a tank with one single round, even with penetrating hits you would need several ones.

So the intitial post to the effect that a PTRS took out three vehicles with one round each does not look very believable to me.

The M41/44 ammo used by the PTRD and PTRS has a much higher punch than the .50cal ammo, it's projectile is faster (1000m/s vs. 850m/s) and heavier (199g vs 140g) than the 50cal, making for considerable more punch (Eo of almost 32 kJ vs barely 19kJ for the 50cal). However, the 50cal is fully automatic, so in essence would be more effective IMHO.

[Mattias]

Interesting thread..

Gander/Chamberlain list the penetration capabilities of theses ATR's as follows:

(vertical) 30 mm at 100 m, 27.5 mm at 300 m and 25 mm at 500 m.

M.

[Zakalwe]

The Finnish Lahti 20mm ATR was a heavy weapon, and probably should be portrayed in CM2 as a 2 or 3-man team. The rifle weighed around 50 kg unloaded, and it was 225 cm long. The magazine was 10-round box magazine, mounted on the top of the weapon (making it look somewhat like a monstrous Bren gun), loaded magazine weighed around 7 kg.

The ATR was commonly called as 'the Elephant Gun' by Finnish soldiers. While it was perfectly adequate for killing most Soviet tanks encountered in 1941, it was almost useless against the T-34 and KV. (Though at least one immobilized KV was brewed up by a Lahti ATR - taking over 80 shots to kill the tank at close range.) It was a good weapon against Soviet machine gun nests and direct firing guns - it could often punch through log bunkers and gunshields (the Red Army often used AT guns as infantry support pieces.) Some of the ATRs were relegated to AA use (a special mount was developed for this use). There was also a fully automatic version of the weapon for AA use.

The Lahti rifle was quite unpopular among the troops. Of course it was very awkward to haul around; I've seen pictures of it being carried by two men in a marsh, and they certainly don't seem too happy with their load. In winter, it was mounted on skis, and could be pulled by a skier. Apparently the weapon had a particularly nasty recoil; making the semi-automatic function somewhat moot, as the firer was violently thrown back by gun, and had to resume firing position between each shot. There are some references to 'the Lahti spine', a spinal injury caused by repeated firing of the ATR.

[This message has been edited by Zakalwe (edited 03-20-2001).]

[tss]

tero wrote:

There are several recorded incidents when the Finnish 20mm ATR was used in AA role with some success.

There was actually an actual AA gun that was made by mounting two 20mm ATRs onto a chassis. One surviving example is preserved in the Suomenlinna maneesi museum. (I have a photo of it somewhere, I guess I could scan it if I can find it).

- Tommi