Why it is not RPG?

[Dragkon]

Why it is not RPG? After it hits remains only a small hole - diameter about several cm. Then the gases get inside. But I am not absolutely shure that RPG can break the armor of M1A1.

[Gen. Sandworm]

Replied under "What hit this tank???" Topic

[South African Military]

how about an anti tank gun? The germans made a rifle gun to destroy tanks in WW2, cant a small bullet pierce throught it?

[Preatorian]

how about an anti tank gun? The germans made a rifle gun to destroy tanks in WW2, cant a small bullet pierce throught it?
Anti-tank guns, those was made in German:
PbZ-39 (7.92 mm, velocity 1275 m/s, can be effective against about 20-30mm of armor, MSS-41, equal by caliber and affect with PbZ -39, 400 m of effective range). Useless.
Russian ATG:
PTRD, 14.5 mm, vel. 1012 m/s, bolt action, one shoot, eff. for 35-40 mm armor, 1500 m effective range
PTRS, 14.5 mm, vel 1012 m/s, semiauto gas operated, 5 loads, eff. for 35-40 mm armor, 1500 m effective range
Brittish ATG: Boyse (i can be wrong with name) Mk1, 13.9 mm, vel. 980 m/s, bolt action, 5 loads, eff. for 21 mm of armor, 100 m effective range. Was used during WWII by Brittish and Soviet Armys (about 1000 Boyse Mk1 was sent in USSR by Lend-Lise)

By the way, soldier, who will shoot from PTRD or PTRS got great risk for broke his shopulder's bones by pretty damn powerful recouil, most lucky people has broked his jaw after shoot. Gas operated mechanism of PTRS also sometimes can cut out shoter's fingers on left arm by bolt handle, because this gun needed to be pressed down by non-firing arm during shoot.
In the middle of russian part of WWII those ATG become useless against tanks, but used as great anti-sniper guns and anty-vechicle guns.

[Dragkon]

PTRD and PTRS could be used only against light and middle tanks - maximum T-4.(with great luck)

[Gen. Sandworm]

how about an anti tank gun? The germans made a rifle gun to destroy tanks in WW2, cant a small bullet pierce throught it?

Ill reply in the "What hit this tank" forum to keep things clear.

Would appear this one might need to be renamed Anti Tank Guns. Does anyone have pics of these guns??

[Dani]

Soviet PTRD:
http://img181.exs.cx/img181/7755/ptrd8qx.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
German PBZ 39:
http://img181.exs.cx/img181/6083/xgermanantitank15riflegrenade3.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
German Ofenrohr
http://img181.exs.cx/img181/9487/xgermanantitank16ofenrohrbazoo.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
German Panzerfaust:
http://img181.exs.cx/img181/7580/tttfaustimg1lab0rf.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

[South African Military]

If any of you played United offensive you will have some experience using those PTRDs. (no broken shoulders though.)

[Preatorian]

If any of you played United offensive you will have some experience using those PTRDs. (no broken shoulders though.)
Yeah, as well no mashed brains on walls after good sniper's hit... :lol:
Thats great for gamers, anyway.

[Gen. Sandworm]

What do you think was a better anti-tank weapon?..........The German Panzershreck....... Panzerfaust or the American Bazooka. I believe the British had the Piat but this was hard to arm and inaccurate. However I did hear if it hit something it did alot of damage.

[Dani]

I'd vote for bazooka :lol:

[South African Military]

As I know nothing of that field, I will have to not vote. (and i have no time to learn) lol.

[Dragkon]

Interesting, perhaps someone has statistic about the nummer of tanks destroied by different kinds of weapons?(especially - for infanry(i don't mean AT guns- just granades, bazooka e.t.c.))

[BDL]

PIAT was the best of the lot - no launch signature to give the firer away means no nasty machine guns tearing you in half just after you fire.

[Walther]

Did any of you guys ever have a real PIAT in your hands? Do you know how f*cking heavy this thing is? Also, cockimng this thing is a nightmare. I tried it and didn´t succeed (though there might have been a trick with it). The PIAT I had the oportunity to handlebelongs to the Prinses Irene Brigade Museum of the Royal Dutch Army.

Jan

[Gen. Sandworm]

Did any of you guys ever have a real PIAT in your hands? Do you know how f*cking heavy this thing is? Also, cockimng this thing is a nightmare. I tried it and didn´t succeed (though there might have been a trick with it). The PIAT I had the oportunity to handlebelongs to the Prinses Irene Brigade Museum of the Royal Dutch Army.

Jan

Exactly what I heard. But i have never fired or seen one up close. A complete mess but did hear if you did get thru all the crap and hit something it was usually quite effective.

[South African Military]

Did any of you guys ever have a real PIAT in your hands? Do you know how f*cking heavy this thing is? Also, cockimng this thing is a nightmare. I tried it and didn´t succeed (though there might have been a trick with it). The PIAT I had the oportunity to handlebelongs to the Prinses Irene Brigade Museum of the Royal Dutch Army.

Jan

Exactly what I heard. But i have never fired or seen one up close. A complete mess but did hear if you did get thru all the crap and hit something it was usually quite effective.

Id say most likely the Panzerfaust, but i am just guessing.... What did the Russian army have as an anti-tank weapon? did they just steal the large quantities of German Panzerfausts? or did they make thier own?

[Walther]

Did any of you guys ever have a real PIAT in your hands? Do you know how f*cking heavy this thing is? Also, cocking this thing is a nightmare. I tried it and didn´t succeed (though there might have been a trick with it). The PIAT I had the oportunity to handle, belongs to the Prinses Irene Brigade Museum of the Royal Dutch Army.

Jan

Edit for typos (was a bit tired last night when I wrote it)

[IRONMAN]

If any of you played United offensive you will have some experience using those PTRDs. (no broken shoulders though.)

You're a gamer? Glory be. I thought you said mentioning a game when discussing these things...

I think the thing that hit the Abrams was an anti-tank gun. If you eliminate other things...

Would an RPG leave no explosive damage to speak of on the exteriior? Nope. Would it make a tiny hole and shove something small through so much of the tank? Nope. It seems to me to be something like in one of the pictures posted by Preatorian. Consider also where it was hit: right on the flat side of the armor. Someone was taking aim at it there for good reason.

how about an anti tank gun? The germans made a rifle gun to destroy tanks in WW2, cant a small bullet pierce throught it?
That's my thinking about it.

[bas]

Id say most likely the Panzerfaust, but i am just guessing.... What did the Russian army have as an anti-tank weapon? did they just steal the large quantities of German Panzerfausts? or did they make thier own?

The Russians had the aforementioned PTRD and PTRS 14.5mm anti-tank rifles. Not much use against the larger German tanks but still useful against personal carriers and scout cars.

Also a lucky shot could penetrate armoured glass and kill crew or throw tracks to disable a medium tank.

To be effective on even a lightly armoured target an anti-tank rifle needs to hit a critical part like the engine, crew or fuel otherwise it will only help to improve ventilation.

Apart from those, the Russians used anti-tank grenades and captured panzerfausts. I don't know of any Russian made copies.

[Zzarchov]

I'd also have to say the PIAT, Followed by the Panzerfaust, PanzerShrek and finally Bazooka.


Why the PIAT:

1.) Cheap to make
2.) Effective charge
3.) Not a rocket
- Can be fired from inside an enclosed space (aka a building)
- No smoke trail
4.) Re-Cocks itself after each shot (only needs to be cocked once)

Why the Panzerfaust was next.
1.) Cheap
2.) Effective
3.) Disposable
4.) Simple to Use

Why the Panzershrek was next

1.) Very Effective
2.) Long Range

Why the Bazooka was Last.

1.) Rounds too small to hurt german armour to the front armour.

* Note the original design caused for a rocket the same size as the Panzershrek, but the war dept scaled it down to make it cheaper and lighter, one more great invention whittled down to second rate (then ripped off by the germans and done right)

[Man of Stoat]

What about the 57mm recoilless rifle M18? More accurate & longer-ranged (can hit a tank at 1000yds) than the lot of what you've just talked about.

[Firefly]

Why it is not RPG? After it hits remains only a small hole - diameter about several cm. Then the gases get inside. But I am not absolutely shure that RPG can break the armor of M1A1.

I have no idea what this thread is about? Anyone enlighten me?

[Dani]

I have no idea what this thread is about? Anyone enlighten me?
Are you joking Firefly? :D

RPG = Rocket propelled grenade http://science.howstuffworks.com/rpg3.htm

Generally - anti-tank weapons. :D

Edited: in connection withhttp://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=54
(What hit this tank??)

[Firefly]

Why it is not RPG? After it hits remains only a small hole - diameter about several cm. Then the gases get inside. But I am not absolutely shure that RPG can break the armor of M1A1.

Dani I understand what an RPG is, but what is the thread about, in relation to the quoted here. What are you all saying an RPG has/hasnt done?

[Dani]

Yep, we should rename the thread in "Anti-tank weapons"

Edited: Please check the link posted in my last post.

[2nd of foot]

Why it is not RPG? After it hits remains only a small hole - diameter about several cm. Then the gases get inside. But I am not absolutely shure that RPG can break the armor of M1A1.

Dani I understand what an RPG is, but what is the thread about, in relation to the quoted here. What are you all saying an RPG has/hasnt done?

Firefly the original post had a picture of an M1 with a small hole going through it. It travelled through the skirt, side, bits of equipment in the tank (boxes) and stopped on the far side. It was about .5 size that’s why the thread starts with A/T rifles. The pictures may have been moved.

[Dani]

Edited: in connection withhttp://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=54
(What hit this tank??)
Thanks 2nd of foot!
The initial thread was splitted by Gen Sandworm (and the first part of the original thread you could find checking the link above).

[Fuchs66]

[quote=Firefly]Firefly the original post had a picture of an M1 with a small hole going through it. It travelled through the skirt, side, bits of equipment in the tank (boxes) and stopped on the far side. It was about .5 size that’s why the thread starts with A/T rifles. The pictures may have been moved.

Hmm been tempted to answer this IF it was an anti-tank rifle then that's a poor advert for the M1's armour as AT rifles were deemed inneffective at the start of WW2. My only idea is that it was some sort of hollow charge (HEAT) round that hit the side skirt and the slug was sufficiently narrow to produce such a small hole but I'm not 100% convinced with this theory.

[Firefly]

Thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately I have nothing to add to the conversation on this as I have no idea what it could have been, except that Im positive it wasnt an AT rifle.

[Gen. Sandworm]

Thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately I have nothing to add to the conversation on this as I have no idea what it could have been, except that Im positive it wasnt an AT rifle.

I honestly think that we accidently shot ourselves with some new weapon we have. Anyhow whatever is was is mean as fuck. Ill tell ya this thing has enough to penetrate any tank in world. Coz whatever the projectile was fell just a couple of inches shy of exiting the tank. :shock: