Simon Elwen Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Soon we will be going East and in the early years there won't be any panzerscrecks, fausts or the russian equivalents. There will be Anti Tank Rifles though. Are they effective? or will the pbi be in real trouble? As for the famed Molotov how good is that too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 A search will, with a little luck, turn up one or two threads covering this but in short... The Molotov cocktail was an emergency solution (har-har) and as such marginally effective. If you kept a cool head, was smart and had a bit of luck you could successfully engage a tank with it. But the term suicidal does spring to mind. Early on there are only German AT rifles. These did not play a very significant role, firstly because they were not very effective and secondly because the Germans were attacking. In CM they will most probably be available from the start and could play some roles as ultra light anti tank defence (since every conceivable unit setup will be played in QB ME's) . The classical Soviet 14.5mm AT rifles begin appearing in numbers in 1942. Though not by any means a wonder weapon they nevertheless managed to make life sour for German armour crews. Not by blowing up tanks with one shot but rather by subjecting them to "death by a thousand needles". Numerous, rapid firing and hard to spot they were a problem. I imagine the situation will be similar in CM non penetrating hits, immobilisation hits, gun damage and crew kill hits can be expected, outright kills will hopefully me a little more scarce. -- M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
History Buff Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Mattias: A search will, with a little luck, turn up one or two threads covering this but in short... The Molotov cocktail was an emergency solution (har-har) and as such marginally effective. If you kept a cool head, was smart and had a bit of luck you could successfully engage a tank with it. But the term suicidal does spring to mind. Early on there are only German AT rifles. These did not play a very significant role, firstly because they were not very effective and secondly because the Germans were attacking. In CM they will most probably be available from the start and could play some roles as ultra light anti tank defence (since every conceivable unit setup will be played in QB ME's) . The classical Soviet 14.5mm AT rifles begin appearing in numbers in 1942. Though not by any means a wonder weapon they nevertheless managed to make life sour for German armour crews. Not by blowing up tanks with one shot but rather by subjecting them to "death by a thousand needles". Numerous, rapid firing and hard to spot they were a problem. I imagine the situation will be similar in CM non penetrating hits, immobilisation hits, gun damage and crew kill hits can be expected, outright kills will hopefully me a little more scarce. -- M.I'd personally love to see a few Molotov's thrown. I mean after the finns used them in 39, you'd expect the partisan army to have them avaliable. Though suicidal is a very accurate statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conscript Bagger Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Originally posted by Mattias: Early on there are only German AT rifles. These did not play a very significant role, firstly because they were not very effective and secondly because the Germans were attacking. In CM they will most probably be available from the start and could play some roles as ultra light anti tank defence (since every conceivable unit setup will be played in QB ME's) .I'm looking forward to scenario designers providing us with "Russian counterattack" opportunities; they didn't just sit there after being encircled, I hope. "death by a thousand needles"...or take a shower in Bill's bathroom? (apologies if you don't watch King of the Hill; just ignore it and keep moving) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Russian antitank rifles should be fun. Peneetrating PzII and IV sides, even harrassing early thouse Panthers without skirts. Certainly more pesky against halftracks than a .50 cal Browning round. More mobile than the 37mm anti-tank gun and able to fire from enclosed spaces like a PIAT. I wonder if we'll be able to use them for long range sniping against infantry or anti-tank guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Re my message above: I may be the worst freakin' typist in the world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreigner Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 There were two models of WWII Soviet ATRs. The Degtyarov PTRD was a single-loader, but was available (although in limited quantities) as early as couple of months after the launch of Barbarossa (by the end of of 1941, there were thousands produced, IIRC). The Simonov PTRS was a semi-automatic with a five round magazine, was more complex and expensive, and by the time it was put into production the urgency had gone and it never got very popular. Among other things, snipers in Stalingrad routinely used ATRs to take out machine gun nests and fortifications (much easier to hit a firing slit); there were also reports of strafing aircraft shot down by ATR fire. Even "The Big Cats" were not competely immune - lucky or well-aimed shots could easily damage vision devices rendering the crew "blind" (according to one report, one of the very first "Tiger" prototypes troop-tested in the winter of 1942 was captured this way). Although probably not worth modelling all possible uses, in CMBB ATRs might quickly become "the poor man's small caliber Flak". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 This has to be one of the prime sources available on the net covering these things: http://www.battlefield.ru/library/bookshelf/weapons/weapons3.html As can be seen there 677 14.5mm AT rifles were available at the beginning of January 1942, 600 of the Degtyarev and 77 of the Simonov. In contrast 247.308 were available a year later... -- M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 The Molotov cocktails were not as "emergency" as you think. They were in fact manufactured with special fuses in a kind of kit and issued to the infantry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 Keith, Quite right and I am aware of that. Perhaps the word contingency or ad hoc solution would have been better. In any event, from a national weapons production perspective they, in my opinion, represent an emergency measure. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Elwen Posted March 20, 2002 Author Share Posted March 20, 2002 Well I hope to have my Ruskies dropping Molotovs on those German tanks but I was surpised by their lack of AT rifles early on, but boy could they ramp up production!!. I understand that the german forces held AT rifles at Platoon level until replaced of course by hand held rocketry!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeadams Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 The term Molotov cocktail came to cover almost any thrown incendiary device, but I believe the original contained gasoline and white phosphorous. This requires no fuse: it will spontaneously ignite on exposure to air when the bottle breaks. However it must have been horrendously danger to manufacture, or even carry around, and I don't think it was in use for very long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreigner Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 OOOOPS! Faulty memory! Thanks to Mattias for establishing the correct number of ATRs at the end of 1941. As far as how they quickly racked up production, in 1941 a massive amount of industrial equipment and workers were physically being relocated to the Ural Mountains; by the end of 1942 most facilities there were working to capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 What you refer to as Molotov cocktail, in case of RKKA was "KS bottles", and they had nothing to do with gasoine, afaik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rleete Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Care to enlighten us, Skipper? Duh, I kin type. [ March 21, 2002, 08:17 PM: Message edited by: R_Leete ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Head over to the Russian Battlefield again: http://www.battlefield.ru/library/bookshelf/weapons/weapons2.html -- M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 By the way from a very close distance ATR were able to penetrate early PzIV from the front. (Armour was 50mm and ATR were able to penetrate 50mm under 100 meters) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Originally posted by killmore: By the way from a very close distance ATR were able to penetrate early PzIV from the front. (Armour was 50mm and ATR were able to penetrate 50mm under 100 meters)Do you have a source on this or are you making an assumption based on the numbers? My sources (Gander & Chamberlain for example) say 30 mm against a vertical plate at 100 meters, out to 25 mm at 500 meters. -- In any event, to see them in "action" take a look this movie trailer (bottom of the page): http://www.rbcmp3.com/store/product.asp?dept%5Fid=1439&sku=26306 -- M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacheldraht Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Zaloga and Ness in the Red Army Handbook note that Molotov cocktails were "widely used." They also state that "KS bottles" (the manufactured Molotov cocktails someone else mentioned) were "mass produced early in the war." These had "an exterior chemical packet to ignite the weapon after it shattered on the tank." I've also read a German field manual discussing various infantry AT weapons and tactics, and it urges using Molotovs and other improvised or crude weapons of the sort when necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Originally posted by Mattias: Do you have a source on this or are you making an assumption based on the numbers? My sources (Gander & Chamberlain for example) say 30 mm against a vertical plate at 100 meters, out to 25 mm at 500 meters. M.[/QB]The numbers came from discussion long ago - I believe FIONN posted them. My book lists them at 35mm vertical at 500m. No mention of closer ranges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Elwen Posted March 23, 2002 Author Share Posted March 23, 2002 Ta chaps so let me get this right. there were "types" of Molotov,the petrol bomb type and the military version .All in all much the same as each other. As for AT rifles you are looking at flank and rear shots here, with the russians not having many or any at the start of Barbarossa however a year on the steppes were infested. Didn't the russians get bazookas from the americans too, later on? edited due to spelling nightmares [ March 22, 2002, 08:55 PM: Message edited by: Simon Elwen ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 Correction: PTRS and PTRD both 25mm at 500 meters, 37mm at 300m. So it has to be better at closer distances. I do recall strongly 50mm at very close distance like 30-60 meters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 (Sorry I posted it elsewhere too) Soviets has also AT granades. RPG-40 penetrates 20mm (1940) RPG-41 penetrates 25mm (1941) RPG-43 penetrates 75mm (1943) RPG-6 penetrates 120mm (yes 120mm!) october 1943 Throwing range 15-20 meters. Had special stabilization system and worked similarly to Panzerfaust. Sounds like german tanks had other things to worry about than AT rifles. These had to be deadly to german tanks if you could get close enough Source: "Weapons of Red Army" B.H. Shunkov 1999 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 Originally posted by killmore: 37mm at 300m. So it has to be better at closer distances. I do recall strongly 50mm at very close distance like 30-60 meters.I am sorry but do you have a source for these figures? They are the highest I have heard mentioned so far and would like to be able to see them in print somewhere. You mentioned a book giving the ATR's 35mm @ 90 degrees at 500 meters, what book is that? -- M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaska Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 You can find good information about Finnish molotov´s cocktails here: http://www.winterwar.com/Weapons/FinAT/FINantitank2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts