Non-game Q: could a rifle grenade take out a tank?

[Mr. Tittles]

http://www.hardscrabblefarm.com/ww2/rifle_grenade.htm

I think accuracy would limit the weapons to 50m or so. The range was greater but the short launch device would make precision shooting limited. In other words, it would take some guts to take on a tank. Especially if it was escorted by infantry.

US RGL could be fired with regular ammo while they were attached (or later versions could). So a rifle grenader would leave it on his weapon if he still had rifle grenades on him.

[flamingknives]

I've seen numerous report of combat troops messing about with their grenade launchers. Particularly, there's a field expedient type thing that involves wiring a 60mm mortar warhead onto a grenade launcher. Plus I've seen a couple of references regarding doing the same thing with WP grenades.

Signal units occasionally used inert projectiles to lob comms wire across rivers and the like as well.

[Dinsdale]

French RGs fired using live rounds.

Rest used Blanks.

The No.68 Mk I/II was relatively ineffective due to its need for close to 90 degree hits to cause proper detonation. Later MKs had better angles but still were hard to get good hits with. They are far from precision targetted devices. They did work OK against Bunkers/walls etc. when not faced with a bunch of different angles in a small area (tank).

I have 2 No.68 Mk IIIs at home. They are quite small and light.

[MikeyD]

The French rifle grenade is the Mecar 'bullet trap' type, designed postwar. I believe someone may have also designed a RG where the bullet passes through, but this wouldn't be optimal for a shaped charge warhead, for sure!

[Mr. Tittles]

The bazooka round, which may or may not be the same as the US M9 RG round, was pretty iffy when striking armor. The results of shooting at a panther showed it was unreliable on sloped armor and sometimes defeated by things like striking mounting points, tracks, etc. Its bad enough the accuracy or weapons like a bazooka made it so trying, but the round even when it struck did not mean penetration.

US RG were very popular for house clearing/bunker busting, etc. They also could deliver WP grenades and 60mm rounds.

The US bouncing betty mine used a 60mm mortar round also btw.

[John Kettler]

A.E.B.,

As I recall, it was found after Lang Vei that the flotation tanks in the PT-76s acted as a kind of spaced armor, dissipating the LAW jet and preventing penetration of the fighting and engine compartments. T-54s would've been in big trouble, though, as street battles years later in An Loc showed. Also, the 106mm RRs were firing HE, not HEAT. The Battle of Lang Vei is covered in detail in Chapter 6 of SEVEN FIREFIGHTS IN VIETNAM, by Cash, Landrum, and Sandstrum.

flamingknives,

My paternal uncle, now deceased, George H. Kettler, MoMM1c, who served in the U.S. Navy's Boat Two (LCMs hauled by Dragon Wagons), with Patton from D+1 at Normandy to the end of the war, described a streetfighting adaptation of the bazooka rocket in which the shaped charge portion was unscrewed from the rocket motor and was replaced with the warhead assembly from the 60mm mortar (2.36 in. = 60mm). Instead of firing the bazooka below a window from which fire's coming, hoping to take the shooter out with the jet or part of the wall, it was now possible to put a 60mm mortar warhead through the window, detonating it on the wall behind the shooter and spraying mortar fragments throughout the room.

Mr. Tittles,

You are quite correct about all the things on an AFV which can prevent or degrade HEAT effectiveness. I've seen the official assessments of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War tank losses, complete with detailed interior and exterior photos, and there are quite a few cases of melted brackets, ricochets, hits on storage boxes, jet paths through noncritical or delayed kill components, shattered lifting eyes, etc. HEAT doesn't handle discontinuities well, and AFVs are full of them. Turrets in particular have so many brackets, flanges, and other protrusions on them that it's a wonder HEAT rounds ever get clean hits directly on the armor. I believe it's also worth noting that a significant portion of the Centurion tank turret is, I believe, made of storage bins outside of the primary turret armor. These alone may well account for much of the reported RPG-2 ineffectiveness.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Mr. Tittles]

http://www.100thww2.org/support/776tankhits.html

HEADQUARTERS

5th TANK DESTROYER GROUP

APO 758, U.S. ARMY

1. To ascertain from first hand observation the effect of bazooka fire on the Mk. V Panther tank, sixteen rounds were fired at a knocked out 130 Pz Lehr Mk. V. which had been immobilized by the 776 TD Bn's 90mm fire.

2. Diagram of tank indicating location of hits:

(see website)

Description of Hits

a. Ricochet into wheel rim completely severing the tire and blasting an 8" hole in the wheel. There was no damaging effect upon the inner wheel immediately behind the one hit.

b. Direct hit upon a wheel. A 3 x 5" hole was blasted out of the wheel and two 10" radial cracks were made. There was no damaging effect upon the wheel immediately inside the one hit.

c. & d. Direct hits upon wheels. 6" diameter holes blasted - no effect upon inner wheels.

e. Hit scored one inch below upper edges of side skirt. While the deck plating served to add thickness at the point of contact, a complete penetration was made, the hole being of sufficient diameter at this smallest point to allow an ordinary pencil to pass completely into the interior.

f. A hit upon the bolt holding two adjacent track plates together. The head of the bolt was sheared away completely, though the track plates were not damaged. It is possible that the bolt could have worked out, thus severing the track.

g. A hit upon the corner of the turret, making a complete penetration, The hole was cylindrical, 3/4" in diameter, with little flaking or enlargement on the inner surface. The blast effect was evident on the inside by the particles of steel having ricocheted from one side to the other.

h. A turret hit making a similar 3/4" hole with flaking on the inner surface of about 4" in diameter around the hole. There were approximately 36 small craters on the inner surface of the opposite turret armor, each at least 1/16" deep and from 1/8" - 3/8" in diameter. As the face of each pit was smooth, the blast effect of the flying particles must be terrific. The area covered by these craters was roughly 8' - 10' in diameter.

i. A hit upon the very bottom edge of the rear plate, The projectile just grazed the armor and only a small nick was chipped out of the armor. The projectile did detonate, but the effect was underneath the tank in the ground.

j. A hit upon the towing-jack device on the rear of the tank. A small portion was chipped away, but there was no effect upon the armor plate.

k. A hit upon one of the exhaust pipes, completely blasting it away, but there was no effect upon the armor plate inasmuch as the blast had been dissipated upon the exhaust pipe.

l. A ricochet off the rear armor, detonating in the ground. m.& n. Two hits in the rear armor, each making a clean penetration, the hole being 1/2" in diameter through armor plate 2" thick.

o. A hit upon the lower portion of the front armor plate. No penetration was made. A 1-1/2" long gash, 1/2" deep, and 1/4" wide was gouged away.

p. A hit upon the towing hook on the front of the tank. No damaging effect upon the armor plate.

3. CONCLUSIONS:

The bazooka will penetrate the armor on the side, rear, and side of the turret on the German Mk. V Panther tank. The turret is very effectively penetrated and the blasted particles on the inside most certainly are lethal. The side armor is of less thickness than the turret and can be penetrated more easily.

The wheel and tracks are not profitable targets. Pieces may be blown out of the wheel or tires cut, but the possibility of stopping the tank is remote.

The rear armor is a profitable target, because the engine compartment is very susceptible to fare, even though the tool boxes, jacks and exhausts are reduce the area of vulnerability.

Upon the front armor, it is difficult to get an effective burst, as the slope of the armor will ricochet the rocket. No perpendicular hits were obtained during the trial.

For the Group Commander:

EDWARD N. STIVER

Major, F.A.

S-2

DISTRIBUTION:

Combat Observer, XV Corps - 2

CG, XV Corps - 2

1st TD Brigade - 1

Arty Sec, Seventh Army - 2

Each Division, XV Corps - 1

Each TD Battalion, XV Corps - 1

File - 2

[ July 15, 2004, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[Mr. Tittles]

I think that part of the bazooka problem is that the base detonating fuse was too slow AND hard to initiate. In a AP round fired by a rifled gun, you want some delay (so the round passes through and detonates inside). But in a shaped charge weapon, it has to be superquick. The Germans certainly solved the problem but the US bazooka round clearly had problems when striking soft earth, sloped armor, sharp objects.

When striking earth or sloped armor, it would ricochet off. I believe the first round fired ricochets off the ground into the wheels. It would be nice to know what range they were fired at.

If striking a sharp object, the nose could be deformed before the explosive started to form. The description of some of the holes made are rather large and I wonder if it is because the SC is not being formed completely.

Examples of slow delay is the shot that nicks the rear armor and then turns and shoots the shaped charge into the ground.

[ July 16, 2004, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Tittles ]

[John Kettler]

Mr. Tittles,

A most interesting link. Great find!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Mr. Tittles]

Heres a WP type rifle grenade. Perhaps this adapter was used to throw a 60mm mortar round also.

[John Kettler]

Mr. Tittles,

I keep meaning to contact Gordon Atwater, Curator of the APG Ordnance Museum, to see whether the thread pattern for the warhead part of the 60mm mortar shell matches that of the warhead portion of a bazooka rocket. If so, the field expedient would've been trivial to implement.

Regards,

John Kettler

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by aco4bn187inf:

[snips] There's a story in a history of the 101st of a soldier scoring a rifle grenade hit through the open top hatch of a german tank. The narrator wrote "we out-hollywooded Hollywood." Despite this, I don't think this was considered a very serious or dependable AT weapon.

There is also an account in Shatai Teveth's "The Tanks of Tammuz" of an Israeli para in the 1967 war taking out an Egyptian IS-3 by the same method -- a rifle grenade through a turret hatch at 40 metres, after 2 bazooka hits had proven ineffective.

All the best,

John.