Anti-tank weapons

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Panzerwurfmine L.

The "antitank trowing mine" was developed because of the problems to stabilize the dedicated anti-tank grenades for flight - the shaped charge needed to be pointed straight at the armor to work efficiently - the Panzerwurfmine ("tank throw mine") or PWM (L) (L for "lang" = "long") was developed by the Luftwaffe weapon's bureau (the Luftwaffe also contained ground forces in the form of it's field units and the paratroopers).



The weapon weighed 1.36kg, had a length of 53.3cm and used a stabilizing assembly of four fins made of canvas at it's rear wich automatically deployed when lauch. It was introduced into service in May of 1943 but proved rather impractical. Still, 203,800 were produced in 1943.


It's successor model was the Panzerwurfmine Kz (Kz = kurz ("short")) that weighed only 1 kg. Flight stabilization now was achieved by a long canvas strip that rolled out when the weapon was thrown and extended from it's rear. The warhead had a diameter of 11.4 cm and carried a shaped charge of 500g that had an armor penetration of 150mm.
 
PIATS were OK, as they had no backblast. They could also kill any tank if used properly/skillfully.

The PzShreck has 2x the AP ability of the 2.36 Bazooka (200mm vs 100mm), the 'Super-Bazooka' of the Korean war was developed from it.

The 'Faust 60 had less penetration than a 'Shreck CB IIRC. I think only the 'Faust 150 outperformed it?

Erich:

just think of a 8.8cm fired at you at around 100 yards. you're dead !
Click to expand...

I wonder if all warheads were HEAT?

Did you see that guy in Black Hawk Down with an RPG in his chest? - Ouch!
 
The 'Faust 60 had less penetration than a 'Shreck CB IIRC. I think only the 'Faust 150 outperformed it?
Click to expand...

Completely WRONG, the shaped charge in the panzerfaust 60 was 150mm diameter compared with the 88 mm diameter in the Schreck.
The armor penetration of the Tank-terror was 100 mm, the Tank-fist pìerce 190-200mm of homogeneous armor.
 
CB it depended on the attacking angle and of course range. Basically with a PzSchreck you could not miss, a Pzfaust on the other hand, no pun here but it was seen unless a direct shot flat out the fist head could actually deflect off of turret armor. the idea of developing further the fist cartridge to be of more pointed design.
 
Maybe but I was talking about the absolute penetration capability in disregard of the aiming, off couse the flatter trayectory of the RPzB 54 make it easy to aim and fire, aniway I think that the advantages of the Schreck did not compensated his bulkier and heavier layout.
 
I'm absolutely, positively certain the 'Shreck could penetrate 200m of armour. The Bazooka could only achieve 100m - that is why the Americans copied it.

The early FaustPatrone's were near useless against sloped armour, but some or all 'Faust 60's solved this problem IIRC.

Anyway, the 'Fausts later than the '60 definately solved this problem.

I know the 'Shreck could suffer deflection too.

My uncles tank was hit by a 'Faust and he survived.

A similar tank to his was KO'd by a 'Shreck.
 
That's more or less it loomaluftwaffe.

Later 'Fausts could be reloaded though.

The 'Fausts also had a more dangerous (to the operator) backblast.
 
Range and accuracy, never heard of a schreck round ever bouncing off Soviet or Western turret or glacis armor, that is not correct. I have the knowledge from someone whom was Waffenmeister in the 1st Infantrie Div. who's unit laid ambush to many Soviet T-34's and JS's in the marsh/tree lines of Ost Preussia using a variety of AT weaponry, especially Faust and Schrek's.

the Faust in every Landsers hands was a deadly weapon but only at close range and the Schrek teams were in two's laying in ambush with prepared and not so prepared positions and would allow the T-34's to come within the 100 yard range, usually hit from the sides either turret or decking and even over the support wheels-tracks. No Soviet armor could withstand the 8.8cm hits according to Helmuth R.

you can imagine during the smoke of battle the men operating the Schreck 54's had to be on their toes and soon as a rocket was bonre had to try and leave their positions due to Soviet retribution this is case in open type country or within the burbs of Prussian village's.
 
"I'm absolutely, positively certain the 'Shreck could penetrate 200m of armour. The Bazooka could only achieve 100m - that is why the Americans copied it"

I know where you might get this from. By any chance did you take this figure from Call Of Duty: Big Red One? I ask because there is information on weapons in the game, and there are a few bad mistakes on a few weapons (i.e. panzerfaust was an explosive that penetrated 44mm of verticle armor plate!) and the Panzershrek is listed as having an armor penetration rate of 200mm. A side note, the game shows Stuarts knocking out a Tiger's frontal armor from a ways away!!
 
I am not really big on anti tank weapons and what not, my knowledge in that area is very limited but if I am mistaken isn't the Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck the 2 deffinitive anti tank weapons of WW2.
 
I'd probably say the Bazooka was DerAdler.

Interestingly, the 'Faust 3 is similar in principle to the PIAT.

The USSR based the RPG on the 'Faust, but has features of the Bazooka (exposed grenade, reloadable respectively).

The M136 (I guess what you 'have'?) is kinda the reverse of the RPG, borrowing the opposite features of the Bazooka/Faust (tube, 1 shot respectively).

Confusing isn't it?



loomaluftwaffe said:
then whats so practical about Shrek?
Click to expand...

The less dangerous backblast.

Hi CharlesBronson,

After a bit of research, it seems that the penetration of the 'Shreck was apparently 160mm of angled armour.

I could have sworn blind it was 200mm though... sorry!

MacArthur said:
I know where you might get this from. By any chance did you take this figure from Call Of Duty: Big Red One?
Click to expand...

Nope,never played it. The super-bazooka used in the Korean war was an answer to the T34's encountered there. The 2.36in WW2 Bazookas proved ineffective against them, the answer was to take design keys from the 'Shreck.

The penetration power was apparently doubled, perhaps that's where I got the 200mm figure from...(though I'm sure it was the 'Shreck).

Thanks anyway MacArther.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Infantry anti-tank weapons: the good, bad and ugly.
Replies
19
Views
2K
WARSPITER
A
Rolls Royce Tank Engines
Replies
2
Views
520
Reluctant Poster
R
P
Which tank is this ?
Replies
2
Views
704
programa
P
Z
Best tank engines of WWII
15 16 17
Replies
335
Views
21K
Reluctant Poster
R
T
The Tank Museum Wins!
Replies
4
Views
1K
WATU
W
Menu
Log in
Register