Agentorange Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Just a brief question. AFAIK the panzerfaust and panzershreck came into service in 1944 ?. What did german infantry do before that, did they hang to anti tank rifles on the basis that even a rubbish AT weapon was better than no weapon at all, or did they abandon them and rely on AT guns and artillery for defemse until the PF and PS came into service . Just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 PF, troop trials in July 1943. 350.000 built the same year. PSchr. deployed in numbers at end of 1943. They did not hang on to the AT rifles, much, but rather relied on the organic PaK units and fought as best they could with a host of different production and ad hoc close in AT weapons. When there was no armoured units at hand to counter attack with that is. Head over to this great site to learn more about the weapons used. M [ May 09, 2002, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 The Russians were the ones who kept their AT rifles past all "Use By" dates on the labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted May 9, 2002 Author Share Posted May 9, 2002 Thanks for the info guys, I was curious as I knew that British troops held onto the Boyes AT rifle long after it was effective since there was simply nothing better on offer. Nice site Matthias !. had a quick peek, but will investigate more later, is it part of a bigger site ? Couldn't see any links to one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWB Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 One must remember that while ATRs soon became ineffective against tanks and other true AFVs, they were (and are) still quite effective against lighter armored vehicles. Things like halftracks and armored cars have to fear them for the duration. WWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John D Salt Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by Mattias: PF, troop trials in July 1943. 350.000 built the same year. PSchr. deployed in numbers at end of 1943. They did not hang on to the AT rifles, much, but rather relied on the organic PaK units and fought as best they could with a host of different production and ad hoc close in AT weapons. [snips]Indeed. The sheer variety of German weaponry, in ATk devices as elsewhere, is staggering. One of the improvisations attmepted as a means of making some use of the obsolete Panzerbusche 39 ATRs was to fit them with a "Scheissbecher" grenade-launching attachment. This got you a bulkier projector for the same ATk rifle grenades that could be fired off the usual Kar 98K attachment. One hopes that it had some compensating advantage in terms of range and accuracy. While I wouldn't miss not having those appear in future editions of CM, I would rather like to see the Stielgranate hollow-charge stick-bombs that prolonged the useful life of tiny ATk guns like the 3.7cm PaK 36. All the best, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Don't knock anti-tank rifles. The U.S. military started to bring them back around 1990-ish in the form of the .50 cal Barrett "anti-material" rifle. Puts a nice hole into troop carriers that were only designed to withstand 7.62 AP (most all were), and can put a HE round into a mobile AA missile body from more than a mile out. I suspect if the Germans had issued them on the western front the thin-skinned U.S. T.D.s and halftracks would've positively HATED them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by MikeyD: I suspect if the Germans had issued them on the western front the thin-skinned U.S. T.D.s and halftracks would've positively HATED them!So why, do you suppose they didn't? M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by John D Salt: ...fit them with a "Scheissbecher" grenade-launching attachment. Uh-oh! I'm not sure I really want to know what kind of grenades were fired with this thing. :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by Kurtz: LOL.. I missed that one Ehhrrmm, no really, it's no laughing matter, a simple mistake to make when writing in a foreign language. J.D. is a nice fellow, I am sure he will change it at the first opportunity. -- Then again.. if you made the sufficiently big.. it might have some effect on troops that have just recently reached the front, eh, fresh from leave. Nah.. M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apex Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Ehhrrmm, no really, it's no laughing matter, a simple mistake to make when writing in a foreign language. J.D. is a nice fellow, I am sure he will change it at the first opportunity.My guess he doesn't know what it means but it's correct Contrary to popular opinion, germans DO have a sense of humor. apex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John D Salt Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 Originally posted by Kurtz: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John D Salt: ...fit them with a "Scheissbecher" grenade-launching attachment. Uh-oh! I'm not sure I really want to know what kind of grenades were fired with this thing. :eek: </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 Here's some info on a couple of antitank rifles that I thought might be of interest. I'll skip talking about the Polish 7.92 mm Mascerzek Mod.35 since they were captured in large numbers and used extensively in the earlier part of the war. This weapon however led to the development of the German rifles known as the Pz. B. 38 and Pz. B. 39. The 7.92 mm Panzerbuche 39 (Pz. B. 39) was a bolt action rife it fired a cartridge similar to the Polish Mascerzek. The projectile has a tungsten carbide core and is known to have a small pellet of a lachrymator as well as a tracer mixture. Penetrating power of the bullet at 300 yards is 3/4 inch at 20 degrees, and 1 inch at normal against face-hardened plate. At 100 yards , penetration is 1 1/4 in. at normal. It is fired single shot from the shoulder with the aid of a bipod. It uses ammo boxes holding 10 rounds each, mounted on brackets on each side of the wood stock. There are not magazines but serve to hold the ammo so that it can be quickly and earily removed for hand loading. The rifle weight was 27.25 lb. Muzzle velocity was 3,540 fps. The book then goes on to talk about the 7.92 mm Granatbuchse 39 (Gr. B. 39) This was a grenade throwing rifle and a modification of the Pz. B. 39. The launcher is threaded to the barrel is the Scheissbecher, which is also used on the Mauser Kar 98K rifle to fire the same grenades. Three types of grenades can be fired from it. (1.) antipersonnel (Gewehr Sprenggarnate): (2.) small antitank grenades (Gewehr Panzergranate): (3.0 large antitank grenades ( Gross Gewehr Panzergranate). Effective ranges; 80 yards on moving targets and 136 yards on stationary targets. Anyway that's about all it says except for describing the rifles in detail, but basically a very long rifle with a handle on top so it can be carried. Oh yeah one last thing that might be of interest to some is that it uses a 13mm cartridge necked down to 7.92 mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewallen Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 On a related note, what did the Soviets use? I've heard the Amis gave them 'zooks through the Lend-Lease program; any idea when (or if) they appeared in quantity? Other than that, did the Soviets independantly develop any AT rockets during the war? I'm thinking of the predecessor to the RPG-7 (might have been the B-40 or something; I'm pretty sure it started with a B ), or will we be stuck with close assaults with Molotovs and AT mines for the most part when AT rifles become useless against later tanks? ~Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 Mattias I can thnik of a couple of reasons why the Germans didn't use ATR's vs the Americans: 1/ by the time American troops weer common enemies in the West (Africa-italy), the ATR had already been dispensed with 2/ The ATR used Tungsten in it's bullet, and by 1942-43 the Germans were no longer using tungsten in ammunition - it was too valuable for machine tools. 3/ Panzerfausts weer becoming common about then too, so why bother reintroducing something that's not as useful? All are supposition of course, but IMO there' no real need to worry about the question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 Mattias I can thnik of a couple of reasons why the Germans didn't use ATR's vs the Americans: 1/ by the time American troops weer common enemies in the West (Africa-italy), the ATR had already been dispensed with 2/ The ATR used Tungsten in it's bullet, and by 1942-43 the Germans were no longer using tungsten in ammunition - it was too valuable for machine tools. 3/ Panzerfausts weer becoming common about then too, so why bother reintroducing something that's not as useful? All are supposition of course, but IMO there' no real need to worry about the question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 lewallen ATR's from the point the become available, all the way to the end of the war. Like you say, Molotov cocktails, different explosive charges and eventually hand thrown hollow charge grenades. But no rocket propelled or recoilless hand held weapons. You will however have quite effective backing from AT guns and tanks... These matter have been discussed at length on this board but so far I have not seen anyone being able to give any real details about the use of lend lease bazookas by Soviet forces. Apparently they got them but it seems unlikely, since we don't hear about them, that they were used in any significant numbers. -- Stalins Organ It was a bit of a rhetorical question on my part, the pros and cons of AT rifles have been discussed quite extensively over the last few years I for one favour the your point 3. The wheel of time had turned away from the ATR's and towards the rocket and RCL hand held AT projectors and any force has a limit to the number of weapons it can deliver, supply and deploy effectively. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted May 10, 2002 Share Posted May 10, 2002 Well, a little more to add here. One of the questions was what did the Germans use to cover the infantry anti-tank gap between Panzerfaust/panzershreck issuance and the retirement of the ATR's. Simple: they invented the anti-tank close assault badge. Seriously, this was the period of great feats of personal bravery with a series of jury-rigged weapons. Teller mines, grenade bundles, demo charges, etc. I understand from my reading that an oft used device was tying two smoke grenades together by a length of string and draping it over the main gun barrel to obscure the vision of the tank crew while another member set the explosive. I'm sure others know more about the German assault badge than I. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted May 13, 2002 Share Posted May 13, 2002 Originally posted by Slapdragon: The Russians were the ones who kept their AT rifles past all "Use By" dates on the labels.... and Sweden issued it's first ATR late 1942! A backblast 20mm rifle, firing a solid steel penetrator with an effective range of about 300m. (Had also a HE round.) As an antitank weapon it was obsolete even before entering service, but technically it was a masterpiece leading up to the 84mm RR used worldwide today. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts