Misplaced Pages

#516483

109-557: The RPG-26 Aglen is a disposable anti-tank rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) launcher developed by the Soviet Union . It fires a one-stage rocket with jack-knife fins, which unfold after launch. The rocket carries a 72.5-millimetre (2.85 in) diameter high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) single shaped charge warhead able to penetrate 440 millimetres (17 in) of armour , 1 metre (3 ft 3 in) of reinforced concrete or 1.5 metres (4 ft 11 in) of brickwork . It has

218-449: A tandem warhead where the first stage of the warhead activates the reactive armor, and the second stage defeats the shell armor by means of a high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) shaped charge . During the Russian invasion of Ukraine , drones and loitering munitions have attacked and destroyed tanks. Anti-tank warfare evolved as a countermeasure to the threat of the tank's appearance on

327-493: A 57 mm QF 6 pounder Hotchkiss light naval gun in the hull barbettes . Hull and track engineering was largely dictated by the terrain —the need to cross wide trenches—although the relationship between ground pressure and soil-vehicle mechanics was not resolved until the Second World War. Turrets were later introduced on medium and light tanks to react to ambushes during the advance. The tank, when it appeared on

436-403: A considerable part of its anti-tank capable cannons. Anti-tank tactics during the war were largely integrated with the offensive or defensive posture of the troops being supported, usually infantry. Most anti-tank tactics depend on the range effectiveness of various weapons and weapon systems available. These are divided as follows: Ground-to-air cooperation was not yet systematic in any army of

545-499: A great diversity, ranging from light tankettes and cavalry tanks to multi-turreted heavy tanks resembling bunkers, all of which had to be considered in training by the anti-tank artillery troops. The development of these doctrines was the most significant influence on the rapid development in anti-tank technology and tactics in the Second World War. Two aspects of how the Second World War commenced helped to delay development of anti-tank warfare: resignation and surprise. After Poland

654-501: A greater range than the Panzerschreck could manage. The Hungarian 44M "Buzogányvető" was a successful unguided rocket used extensively in the Siege of Budapest . After the war, research on infantry anti-tank weapons continued, with most designers focused on two primary goals: first an anti-tank weapon that could defeat more heavily armored postwar tanks and fighting vehicles, and second

763-569: A high- velocity jet of metal flowing like a liquid due to the immense pressure (though x-ray diffraction has shown the metal stays solid ) which hydrodynamically penetrates the armor and kills occupants inside. The depth of the penetration, though proportional to the length of the jet and the square root of its density , is also dependent on the strength of the armor. With the development of this new ammunition begun more advanced research into steel manufacturing , and development of spaced armor that caused "jet waver" by detonating prematurely or at

872-737: A higher velocity L.45 Model 1935 while also making a licensed copy of the German 3.7 cm PaK 36 . However, the Red Army was almost immediately taught a lesson about anti-tank warfare when a tank battalion sent to aid the Spanish Republicans in the Spanish Civil War was almost entirely destroyed in an engagement . At this time, the predominant ammunition used against tanks was the armor-piercing kinetic energy shell that defeated armor by direct pressure , spiking or punching through it. During

981-406: A joystick or similar control system to steer the missile to a target. One disadvantage of this is that an operator must keep the sight's reticle cross hairs on a target and then steer the missile into the cross hairs, i.e., the line-of-sight. To do this, an operator must be well trained (spending many hours on a simulator) and must remain stationary and in view of a target during the flight time of

1090-466: A laser, electro-optical imager ( IIR ) seeker or a W band radar seeker in the nose of the missile. Once the target is identified, the missile needs no further guidance during flight; it is " fire-and-forget ", and the missile operator is free to retreat. However, fire-and-forget missiles are more subject to electronic countermeasures than MCLOS and SACLOS missiles. Examples include the German PARS 3 LR and

1199-425: A limited ability to penetrate modern armour, and other issues. Still, many countries maintain significant stockpiles. Approximately, first generation ATGMs have an effective range of 1500m and the ability to penetrate 500mm of rolled homogeneous armor . Second-generation semi-automatically command guided to line-of-sight, or semi-automatic command to line of sight (SACLOS) missiles require an operator to only keep

SECTION 10

#1732868850517

1308-555: A maximum effective range of around 250 metres (820 ft). The similar sized rocket features a slightly heavier and more powerful HEAT warhead and more powerful rocket engine. The limited extension of the RPG-22 launch tube was found of little use. Thus, the RPG-26 has a rigid non-telescoping launch tube. The RShG-2 (Russian: Реактивная Штурмовая Граната , Reaktivnaya Shturmovaya Granata , Rocket-propelled Assault Grenade) Aglen-2 (Аглень-2)

1417-464: A near miss from field artillery or an impact from a mortar could easily disable or destroy the tank: if the fuel tank was ruptured, it could incinerate the tank's crew. A large caliber gun was recognized as a tactical necessity to attack machine gun positions and defeat any infantry field pieces found in the trench lines which could easily disable tank track with the HE ammunition. This was achieved by mounting

1526-445: A part of a re-design is possible, as in the numerous types derived from the T-72 . Slat armor is lighter and as such can be added to many vehicles after construction but still adds both bulk and weight. Particularly for vehicles that are designed to be transported by cargo aircraft, slat armor has to be fitted in the field after deployment. Either approach can never offer complete coverage over

1635-460: A pioneering example of taking on heavy enemy armor from a lightweight slow-flying aircraft. Field artillery were often the first ground combat arm to engage detected concentration of troops which included tanks through artillery airborne observers, either in assembly areas (for refueling and rearming), during approach marches to the combat zone, or as the tank unit was forming up for the attack. Conventional artillery shells were very effective against

1744-490: A recoil that was unsustainable by the mechanism or the rifleman. Stick grenades were used to destroy the tracks by individual pioneers, however this required accompanying machine-gunners to first separate the supporting Allied infantry line from the tanks, which proved difficult. Another tactic was to lure the tank beyond the German trench-line, re-establishing it just as the Allied infantry approached. The tank would then be engaged by

1853-572: A surprise attack and delay any attack while the French Army was mobilized. With the relative numerical inferiority between the France and Germany, it was a more effective use of manpower. Within the line, passive anti-tank obstacles were supported by anti-infantry and anti-tank bunkers. After Belgium declared neutrality in 1936, France began work on extending the line along the Belgian border. Improved artillery

1962-458: A vehicle from any angle of attack. While these may be answered and allow for lightweight, highly maneuverable vehicles that are strongly defended against missiles and rockets that are extremely well suited for urban and guerrilla warfare, such a system is unlikely to be as effective against kinetic energy projectiles, making it a poor choice for fighting against tanks. As kinetic energy projectiles move faster than guided missiles, this often means that

2071-479: A weapon lightweight and portable enough for infantry use. Regular fragmentation grenades were ineffective against tanks, so many kinds of anti-tank grenades were developed. These ranged from hollow charge designs (e.g., the British No. 68 AT Grenade ), to ones that simply contained a lot of explosive (the British No. 73 Grenade ). To increase their effectiveness, some grenades were designed so that they adhered to

2180-559: A wire-guided anti tank missile derived from the Ruhrstahl X-4 air to air missile concept in the closing years of World War II. Known as the X-7, it was probably never used in combat and allegedly had serious guidance to target issues. It never entered service, though a few were produced. First-generation ATGMs use a type of command guidance termed manual command to line of sight (MCLOS). This requires continuous input from an operator using

2289-480: Is a guided missile primarily designed to hit and destroy heavily armored military vehicles . ATGMs range in size from shoulder-launched weapons, which can be transported by a single soldier, to larger tripod-mounted weapons, which require a squad or team to transport and fire, to vehicle and aircraft mounted missile systems. Earlier man-portable anti-tank weapons , like anti-tank rifles and magnetic anti-tank mines , generally had very short range, sometimes on

SECTION 20

#1732868850517

2398-473: Is a RPG-26 variant with thermobaric warhead. RShG-2 is heavier than the RPG-26 at 3.5 kilograms (7.7 lb) and has a reduced direct fire range of 115 metres (377 ft). It is intended for use against infantry and structures rather than armoured vehicles. The warhead contains 1.16 kilograms (2.6 lb) of thermobaric mixture, with an explosive yield roughly equal to that of 3 kilograms (6.6 lb) of trinitrotoluene ( TNT ). The solid rocket booster of

2507-600: Is usually much weaker. Third generation systems and beyond are generally much more expensive than second generation systems. Fourth generation fire-and-forget anti tank guided missiles have larger range and rely on a combination of seeker for guidance. Examples include India's SANT , which has a stand-off range of 15 to 20 km (9 to 12 mi), uses dual seeker configuration of electro-optical thermal imager (EO/ IR ) and millimeter-wave active radar homing for control and guidance with lock-on before launch and lock-on after launch capabilities. Some ATGMs, notably

2616-444: The 1⁄4-ton, 4×4 'jeep' ), French 25 mm and 47 mm guns, British QF 2-pounder (40 mm) , Italian 47 mm and Soviet 45 mm . All of these light weapons could penetrate the thin armor found on most pre-war and early war tanks. At the start of World War II , many of these weapons were still being used operationally, along with a newer generation of light guns that closely resembled their WWI counterparts. After

2725-567: The Cold War of 1947-1991, the United States, Soviet Union and other countries contemplated the possibility of nuclear warfare. While previous technology had developed to protect the crews of armored vehicles from projectiles and from explosive damage, now the danger of radiation arose. In the NATO countries, little if any development took place on defining a doctrine of how to use armed forces without

2834-626: The French Army in 1955. It was also the first anti-tank missile used by the US Army and Israeli Defense Forces . The Malkara missile (named from an Australian Aborigine word for " shield ") was another of the earliest ATGMs. It was jointly developed by Australia and the United Kingdom between 1951 and 1954, and was in service from 1958 until gradually replaced by the Vickers Vigilant missile in

2943-474: The Geballte Ladung ("Bundled Charge") of several stick grenades bound together by pioneers ; early attempts at the small-caliber anti-tank rifles like the bolt-action 13 mm Mauser 1918 T-Gewehr ; 3.7 cm TaK Rheinmetall in starrer Räder-lafette 1916 anti-tank gun on a light carriage which could destroy a tank using large-caliber armor-piercing ammunition issued in 1917 to special commands; and

3052-536: The North African Campaign . Its experience therefore failed to influence the US Army's anti-tank doctrine prior to 1944. From 1941, German anti-tank tactics developed rapidly as a result of being surprised by the previously unknown Soviet tank designs, forcing introduction of new technologies and new tactics. The Red Army was also faced with a new challenge in anti-tank warfare after losing most of its tank fleet and

3161-565: The Spanish Civil War , as did the Bofors 37 mm developed in Sweden, and used by many early Second World War combatants. The British Army accepted for service the (40 mm) Ordnance QF 2 pounder , which was developed as a tank gun . The Soviet Red Army after the Russian Civil War also begun a search for an anti-tank gun with a French Hotchkiss 37 mm L.33 tank gun, but soon upgraded this to

3270-506: The Wehrmacht officers, and the anti-tank guns were incorporated into a system of obstacles that were constructed with the intent to stop an attack by tanks by slowing it down, separating them from supporting infantry (advancing on foot) with machine-gun and mortar fire, and forcing tanks to conduct deliberate head-on assaults with engineer support, or seek a less-defended area to attack. Minefields laid with purpose-designed mines were used for

3379-523: The Winter War , early tanks (such as the T-26 ) being very vulnerable to them, but later tanks required a well-thrown bottle directly over the engine compartment to have any effect at all. On the whole, thrown anti-tank weapons suffered from a variety of drawbacks. In addition to the inherently short range, they required careful aim to be effective, and those that relied on explosive force were often so powerful that

RPG-26 - Misplaced Pages Continue

3488-574: The bazooka , anti-tank combat engineering , specialized anti-tank aircraft and self-propelled anti-tank guns ( tank destroyers ). Both the Soviet Red Army and the German Army developed methods of combating tank-led offensives, including deployment of static anti-tank weapons embedded in in-depth defensive positions, protected by anti-tank obstacles and minefields , and supported by mobile anti-tank reserves and by ground-attack aircraft. Through

3597-419: The infantry tactics with which the tanks were intended to cooperate. However, there was no means of communication between the tank's crew and the accompanying infantry, or between the tanks participating in combat. Radios were not yet portable or robust enough to be mounted in a tank, although Morse Code transmitters were installed in some Mark IVs at Cambrai as messaging vehicles. Attaching a field telephone to

3706-537: The lift struts , against German armored fighting vehicles. During the summer of 1944, U.S. Army Major Charles Carpenter managed to successfully take on an anti-armor role with his rocket-armed Piper L-4. His L-4, named Rosie the Rocketeer , armed with six bazookas, had a notable anti-armor success during an engagement during the Battle of Arracourt on September 20, 1944, knocking out at least four German armored vehicles, as

3815-439: The Allied infantry would follow and secure the breach, and the cavalry would exploit the breach in the trench lines by attacking into the depth of German-held territory, eventually capturing the field artillery positions and interdicting logistics and reserves being brought up from the rear areas. Naval crews initially used to operate the installed naval guns and machine guns were replaced with Army personnel who were more aware of

3924-508: The American BGM-71 TOW , with hundreds of thousands of missiles built, is a second-generation system. Second generation ATGMs are significantly easier to use than first generation systems, and accuracy rates may exceed 90%. Generally they have an effective range of between 2,500 and 5,500 meters and penetration of up to 900 mm of armor. Cost is around $ 10,000 USD per missile. Third-generation " fire-and-forget " missiles rely on

4033-666: The British Army had abandoned them by 1942 and the Wehrmacht by 1943, while the US Army never adopted the weapon, although the USMC used Boys anti-tank rifles in the Pacific Theater. However, the anti-tank rifle remained in Soviet use during the conflict due to the importance it occupied in its doctrine of anti-tank in-depth defense, first demonstrated during the defense of Moscow and again during

4142-701: The Finnish Lahti L-39 (which was also used as a sniper rifle during the Continuation War ), the automatic Japanese Type 97 20 mm anti-tank rifle , the German Panzerbüchse 38 , Panzerbüchse 39 , the Polish wz.35 and the Soviet 14.5 mm PTRD and PTRS-41 . By 1943, most armies judged anti-tank rifles to lack combat effectiveness due to the diminished ability to penetrate the thicker armor of new tanks –

4251-570: The First World War was that now an effective anti-tank weapon was available to support the defending infantry. However, the Soviet tanks armed with 45 mm guns easily destroyed the German light tanks. Ironically, in the early 1930s until the Spanish War, German officers were conducting secret testing of a new way of employing tanks, infantry and artillery offensively in the Soviet Union with

4360-683: The French Akeron MP and the latest variants of the Israeli Spike (such as the Spike LR2 and ER2), have been called "5th generation" by their manufacturers and marketed as such. They appear to have the following additional or amplified attributes: Countermeasures against ATGMs include newer armors such as spaced , perforated , composite or explosive reactive armor, jammers like the Russian Shtora , active protection systems (APS) like

4469-745: The Israeli Spike . Most modern ATGMs have shaped charge HEAT warheads, designed specifically for penetrating tank armor. Tandem-charge missiles attempt to defeat explosive reactive armour (ERA): the small initial charge sets off the ERA while the follow-up main charge attempts to penetrate the main armor. Top-attack weapons such as the US Javelin , the Swedish Bill and the Indian Nag and MPATGM are designed to strike vehicles from above, where their armor

RPG-26 - Misplaced Pages Continue

4578-533: The Israeli Trophy and the Russian Arena , and other methods. Armor systems have continued in development alongside ATGMs, and the most recent generations of armor are specifically tested to be effective against ATGM strikes, either by deforming the missile warhead or fusing to prevent proper detonation (such as in slat armor ) or using some form of reactive armor to 'attack' the missile upon impact, disrupting

4687-455: The Kursk battles. This became particularly true later in the war when the Red Army assumed an almost constant offensive, and anti-tank in-depth defensive deployments were used for protecting flanks of the operational breakthroughs against German tactical counterattacks. By firing on the lighter armored infantry and support vehicles (e.g. artillery tractors ) the anti-tank rifle units helped to separate

4796-573: The M36 tank destroyer continued in service, and was used in combat as late as the Korean War . The third, and likely most effective kind of tank destroyer was the unturreted, casemate -style tank destroyer, known by the Jagdpanzer term in German service, or Samokhodnaya Ustanovka in Soviet service for their own designs. These generally featured a heavy gun mounted on an older or then-current tank chassis, with

4905-512: The Officer Corps , claiming many of the senior proponents of the new doctrine. Anti-tank artillery would be included in mobile tank-led Wehrmacht and Red Army units due to the possibility of encountering enemy tanks in a meeting engagement . The new doctrines of using the tank, were divided into infantry and cavalry schools of thought . The former regarded the tank as a mobile artillery system to be used for infantry support. This suggested that

5014-552: The PTRS-41, the weapons proved too inaccurate at sniping distances (800 m or more), and the recoil too much for effective use of the scopes. The development of light, man-portable, anti-tank weapons increased during the Second World War. Most were based on the Munroe effect which led to the development of the high-explosive shaped charge . These weapons were called high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT). The destructive effect relies fully on

5123-836: The RAF mounted two underwing pod-mounted 40 mm Vickers S cannon on the Hawker Hurricane (as the Mk. IID ), which saw service in North Africa in 1942 and the Hawker Typhoon was given HE rockets though these were more effective against other ground vehicles. From March 1943 the Red Army Air Force produced the more agile Yakovlev Yak-9 T (37 mm cannon) and K (45 mm cannon) bomber interceptor also used for ground attack, with one example of either gun in motornaya pushka mounts attached to

5232-534: The Red Army Air Force fielded the Soviet Ilyushin Il-2 armed with a pair of 23 mm cannons and unguided rockets, but armored to enable the pilots to approach German tanks at very low altitude, ignoring small arms, machine-gun and even small anti-aircraft cannon fire that usually provided tanks with protection against the bombers. Il-2s could also carry large numbers of 2.5 kg shaped-charge anti-tank PTAB bombs. To give it more firepower against tanks,

5341-457: The West. The British were preparing the stop lines and the anti-tank islands to slow enemy progress and restrict the route of an attack. The Red Army however was fortunate in having several excellent designs for anti-tank warfare that were either in final stages of development for production, or had been rejected earlier as unnecessary and could now be rushed into production. The relative ease with which

5450-841: The Western Front in September 1916, was a surprise to German troops, but not the German General Staff . The French Army Staff was highly critical of the British Army's early fielding of the Mark I vehicles in small numbers because the French trials showed the armored vehicles to be highly unreliable. They judged that large numbers had to be employed to sustain an offensive despite losses to mechanical failure or vehicles foundering in intractable no man's land terrain. These losses, coupled with those from enemy artillery fire, later amounted to as high as 70% of

5559-504: The advantage of a reduced silhouette, allowing the crew to more frequently fire from defilade ambush positions. Such designs were easier and faster to manufacture and offered good crew protection, though the lack of a turret limited the gun's traverse to a few degrees. This meant that, if the TD became immobilized due to engine failure or track damage, it could not rotate its gun to counter opposing tanks, making it an easy target. This vulnerability

SECTION 50

#1732868850517

5668-411: The air. One solution adopted by almost all European air forces was to use bomb loads for conventional bombers that were composed from small bombs allowing a higher density during bombing. This created a greater chance of causing a direct impact on the thinner top armor of the tank while also having the ability to damage track and wheels through proximity detonation. The first aircraft able to engage tanks

5777-752: The anti-tank role. By the time of the Invasion of Normandy , the British had the 3 in (76 mm) calibre QF 17 pounder , which design had begun before the 6 pounder entered service, in general use which proved to be a highly effective anti-tank gun and was also used on the Sherman Firefly tank, the Archer self-propelled gun , and on the 17-pdr SP Achilles As towed anti-tank cannon guns grew in size and weight, they became less mobile and more cumbersome to maneuver, and required ever larger gun crews, who often had to wrestle

5886-405: The battlefield against post-war tank designs. The introduction of semi-automatic guidance in the 1960s further improved the performance of ATGMs. As of 2016, ATGMs were used by over 130 countries and many non-state actors around the world. Post-Cold-War main battle tanks (MBTs) using composite and reactive armors have proven to be resistant to smaller ATGMs. Germany developed a design for

5995-467: The battlefields of the Western Front of the First World War. The tank had been developed to negate the German system of trenches , and allow a return to maneuver against enemy's flanks and to attack the rear with cavalry . The use of the tank was mainly based on the assumption that, once they were able to eliminate the German trench lines with their machine gun and infantry support gun positions,

6104-464: The blocks having the manufacturing letters recessed (vs. raised) cut an imprint of the manufacturing letters into the armor plate—the birth of the shaped-charged explosive which focuses the blast energy caused by an indentation on the surface area of an explosive. Although shaped charges are somewhat more difficult to manufacture, the advantage is that the projectile does not require as high velocity as typical kinetic energy shells, yet on impact it creates

6213-553: The cooperation of the Red Army. In Germany, these developments eventually culminated in tactics that later came to be known as Blitzkrieg , while in the Soviet Union they formed the core of the deep battle operational doctrine. The successful test of the latter was during the Battles of Khalkhin Gol although the Red Army foundered on the Mannerheim Line in 1940, largely due to the purge in

6322-419: The divisional 7.7 cm guns brought forward, that would try to disable the tracks with ordinary HE shells (and later AP ammunition). If the crews of the disabled tanks refused to surrender, they were engaged with flamethrowers, or a mortar would be fired on the stricken vehicle until a direct hit was achieved on the top surface, usually resulting in an internal fire. Finally, anti-tank obstacles were prepared on

6431-570: The engine's gear reduction unit, that had either one of them firing through a hollow-center propeller shaft. Following Operation Overlord in 1944, the military version of the slow-flying Piper J-3 Cub high-wing light civilian monoplane, the L-4 Grasshopper, usually used for liaison and artillery-spotting, began to be used in a light anti-armor role by a few U.S. Army artillery spotter units over France; these aircraft were field-outfitted with either two or four bazooka rocket launchers attached to

6540-553: The existing 77 mm field guns (such as the 7.7 cm FK 16 ) of the infantry division's artillery regiment were also eventually issued with special armor-piercing (AP) ammunition. With the appearance of Allied tanks, the German Army were quick to introduce new anti-tank defense detachments within the pioneer battalions of the infantry divisions. These were initially issued 13 mm caliber long barrel rifles firing solid shot. However, these suffered from fouling after 2–3 rounds and had

6649-457: The first time, destroying tank tracks, and forcing combat engineers to clear them on foot. Delay meant that Nationalist field artillery could engage the lightly armored Soviet tanks . This meant a change in Republican operational and eventually strategic planning, and a more protracted combat operations, with more casualties at a greater cost. The only change to the German anti-tank tactics of

SECTION 60

#1732868850517

6758-613: The form of top-attack shells , and shells that were used to saturate areas with anti-armor bomblets . Helicopters could be used as well to rapidly deliver scattered anti-tank mines. Since the end of the Cold War in 1992, new threats to tanks and other armored vehicles have included remotely detonated improvised explosive devices (IEDs) used in asymmetric warfare and weapon systems like the RPG-29 and FGM-148 Javelin , which can defeat reactive armor or shell armor. Both those weapon systems use

6867-408: The gun into position while under heavy artillery and/or tank fire. As the war progressed, this disadvantage often resulted in the loss or destruction of both the antitank gun and its trained crew. This gave impetus to the development of the self-propelled, lightly armored " tank destroyer " (TD). The tank destroyer was usually based on the hull of existing tank designs, using either a gun integrated into

6976-435: The gun pointing forward with a limited degree of traverse. Casemate tank destroyers often had the same amount of armour as the tanks they were based on. The removal of the turret allowed for greater room to mount a larger gun with a larger breech and leave room for crew. Many casemate tank destroyers either originated as, or were dual-purpose vehicles with the duty of a self-propelled gun, which share many (but usually not all) of

7085-669: The hull or a fully rotating turret much like that of a conventional tank. These self-propelled (SP) AT guns were first employed as infantry support weapons in place of towed antitank guns. Later, due to a shortage of tanks, TDs sometimes replaced the former in offensive armored operations. Early German-designed tank destroyers, such as the Marder I , employed existing light French or Czech design tank chassis, installing an AT gun as part of an armored, turret-less superstructure. This method reduced both weight and conversion costs. The Soviet Union later adopted this style of self-propelled anti-tank gun or tank destroyer. This type of tank destroyer had

7194-421: The infantry needed to be armed with integral anti-tank weapons. The latter advocated use of tanks in the traditional cavalry way of high-tempo attacks intended to outflank the enemy infantry and sever its communication lines. This approach suggested that the tank was the best anti-tank system, and only limited anti-tank troops were required to accompany them. For this reason the late 30s tank configurations came in

7303-407: The internal space for the control system and could, in the future, be a near-perfect defense against any missiles. The weaknesses of the systems include potential developments in missile design such as radar or IR decoys, which would drastically reduce their chance to intercept a missile, as well as technical challenges such as dealing with multiple missiles at once and designing a system that can cover

7412-426: The kinetic energy of the explosion rather than the ballistic speed of the round on the damage inflicted to the armor. The effect was also concentrated and could penetrate more armor for a given amount of explosives. The first HEAT rounds were rifle grenades, but better delivery systems were soon introduced: the British PIAT was propelled in a manner similar to the spigot mortar with a blackpowder charge contained in

7521-423: The late 1930s shaped charge ammunition was experimented with that used chemical energy for armor penetration. The shaped charge concept is officially known as the "Munroe Effect" and was discovered by accident decades earlier by Professor Charles E. Munroe at the U.S. Torpedo Station, Providence, RI. Professor Munroe was detonating different manufactured blocks of explosives on a sheet of armor plating and observed

7630-416: The late 1960s. It was intended to be light enough to deploy with airborne forces , yet powerful enough to knock out any tank then in service. It used a 26 kilograms (57 lb) high-explosive squash head (HESH) warhead. Other early first generation ATGMs include the West German Cobra and the Soviet 9M14 Malyutka . In 2012, first-generation systems were described as obsolete due to low hit probability,

7739-464: The likely approaches by deepening and widening existing ground cratering, the precursors of the anti-tank trench . Finally in early 1917 the 3.7 cm TaK from Rheinmetall was rushed to the frontline, and proved effective in destroying the tanks despite limited elevation and traverse. Lack of consensus on the design and use of the tank after the First World War also influenced the development of its anti-tank countermeasures. However, because Germany

7848-832: The longer term. Because tanks were usually accompanied by infantry mounted on trucks or half-tracked vehicles that lacked overhead armor, field artillery that fired a mix of ground and air-burst ammunition was likely to inflict heavy casualties on the infantry as well. Field guns, such as the Ordnance QF 25 pounder , were provided with armor-piercing shot for direct engagement of enemy tanks. Anti-tank guns are guns designed to destroy armored vehicles from defensive positions. In order to penetrate vehicle armor, they fire smaller caliber shells from longer-barreled guns to achieve higher muzzle velocity than field artillery weapons, many of which are howitzers . The higher velocity, flatter trajectory ballistics provide terminal kinetic energy to penetrate

7957-463: The missile. Because of this, the operator is vulnerable while guiding the missile. In addition to the low kill probability, other problems with first generation ATGMs include slow missile speed, high minimum effective range, and an inability to use top attack missiles. The first system to become operational and to see combat was the French Nord SS.10 during the early 1950s. It entered service in

8066-624: The morale of the infantry by providing a weapon that could actually defeat a tank. Anti-tank rifles were developed in several countries during the 1930s. By the beginning of WW2, anti-tank rifle teams could knock out most tanks from a distance of about 500 m, and do so with a weapon that was man-portable and easily concealed. Although the AT rifle performance was negated by the increased armor of medium and heavy tanks by 1942, they remained viable against lighter-armored and unarmored vehicles, and against field fortification embrasures. Notable examples include

8175-544: The moving/static target's armor at a given range and contact's angle. Any field artillery cannon with barrel length 15 to 25 times longer than its caliber was able also to fire anti-tank ammunition, such as the Soviet A-19 . Prior to World War II , few anti-tank guns had (or needed) calibers larger than 50 mm. Examples of guns in this class include the German 37 mm , US 37 mm (the largest gun able to be towed by

8284-410: The much larger return from the jammer, with the operator unlikely noticing the difference without a radar screen to see the return. However, any missile that has a backup tracking system can defeat jamming. Active protection systems show a great deal of promise, both in counteracting ATGMs and unguided weapons. Compared to armor systems, they are very lightweight, can be fitted to almost any vehicle with

8393-599: The older models of Red Army's tank fleet were destroyed by German anti-tank weapons, using tactics already seen in Spain, once and for all focused Stavka attention on anti-tank warfare as Soviet armies were repeatedly encircled by panzer-led strategic pincer maneuvers. Of the major iconic Soviet weapons of the Second World War, two were made exclusively for anti-tank warfare, the T-34 and the Ilyushin Il-2 Shturmovik . The former

8502-610: The opportunity to even reach combat. Field artillery was particularly effective in firing against tank formations because although they were rarely able to destroy a tank by direct penetration, they would severely crater the area preventing the tanks from moving therefore causing them to become nearly stationary targets for the ground attack aircraft, or disrupting the enemy schedule and allowing own troops more time to prepare their defense. Anti-tank guided missile An anti-tank guided missile ( ATGM ), anti-tank missile , anti-tank guided weapon ( ATGW ) or anti-armor guided weapon

8611-548: The order of metres or tens of metres. Rocket-propelled high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) systems appeared in World War II and extended range to the order of hundreds of metres, but accuracy was low and hitting targets at these ranges was largely a matter of luck. It was the combination of rocket propulsion and remote wire guidance that made the ATGM much more effective than these earlier weapons, and gave light infantry real capability on

8720-408: The period, but given sufficient warning ground attack aircraft could support ground troops even during an enemy attack in an attempt to interdict the enemy units before they come into tactical combat zone. Various bomb loads can be used depending on what type of tank unit is engaged in at the time or who its accompanying troops are. This is an indirect form of anti-tank warfare where the tanks are denied

8829-548: The rear would become a practice only during the next war. With greater use of tanks by both sides it was realized that the accompanying infantry could be forced to ground by ambush fire, thus separating them from the tanks, which would continue to advance, eventually finding themselves exposed to close-assaults by German infantry and sappers . The early tanks were mechanically rudimentary. The 6-to-12-millimetre (0.24 to 0.47 in) thick armor generally prevented penetration by small arms fire and shell fragments . However, even

8938-529: The same features and layout. Some examples are the German Sturmgeschütz III – the most-produced German armored fighting vehicle of WW II — and the Soviets' SU-100 , itself based on the T-34 tank 's hull and drivetrain. Anti-tank rifles were introduced in some armies before the Second World War to provide infantry with a stand-off weapon when confronted with a tank assault. The intention was to preserve

9047-479: The sensors attached to an active protection system can not keep up. Traditionally, before "fire-and-forget" ATGMs were used, the most effective countermeasure was to open fire at the location where the missile was fired from, to either kill the operator or force them to take cover, thus sending the missile off course. Smoke screens can also be deployed from an MBT's smoke discharger , and used to obscure an ATGM operator's line of sight. Other improvised methods used by

9156-416: The shaped charge that makes the warhead effective. Both come with the downside of significant weight and bulk. Reactive armor works best when a vehicle is specifically designed with the system integrated and while developments continue to make armor lighter, any vehicle that includes such a system necessitates a powerful engine and often will still be relatively slow. Inclusion of such armor in older vehicles as

9265-596: The sights on the target until impact. Automatic guidance commands are sent to the missile through wires or radio , or the missile relies on laser marking or a TV camera view from the nose of the missile. Examples are the Russian 9M133 Kornet , Israeli LAHAT , the NLOS version of Spike , and the American Hellfire I missiles. The operator must remain stationary during the missile's flight. The most widely used ATGM of all time,

9374-692: The standard M4 Sherman tanks, but with more powerful cannon. A 76 mm long-barrel tank cannon was fitted to the Sherman-based M10 GMC and all-new design M18 designs, with the M18 being the fastest-moving American AFV of any type in World War II. Late in 1944, the Sherman-origin M36 appeared, equipped with a 90 mm cannon. With rotating turrets and good combat maneuverability, American TD designs generally worked well, although their light armor

9483-481: The starters during some operations. Deploying small numbers of tanks would therefore cause the Allies to lose the element of surprise , allowing Germans to develop countermeasures. Because the German Army was the only force in need of anti-tank weapons, they were first to develop a viable technology to combat the armored vehicle. These technologies took three ammunition approaches: use of grenades by infantrymen, including

9592-429: The supporting infantry ( panzergrenadiers ) and artillery of the German tanks and so forced the tanks to halt at short distances from the concealed anti-tank guns leaving them exposed to fire from larger, longer ranged anti-tank guns. PTRS-41 semi-automatic anti-tank rifles were also used for sniping since an additional tracer round enabled rapid fire adjustment by the gunner. Although optical sniper scopes were tried with

9701-585: The tailfin assembly, the US bazooka and the German Panzerschreck used rockets, and the German Panzerfaust was a small recoilless gun . The HEAT warhead was retroactively used to give more power to smaller calibre weapons such as in the conversion of the otherwise limited German 37 mm PaK guns to fire a large shell, called Stielgranate 41 , that fitted over the barrel rather than down in it, to

9810-502: The tank – for instance 30 feet (9.1 meters) or less – it might be impossible for the tank crew to see the attacker. Anti-tank tactics developed rapidly during the war but along different paths in different armies based on the threats they faced and the technologies they were able to produce. Very little development took place in UK because weapons available in 1940 were judged adequate for engaging Italian and German tanks during most of

9919-621: The tank either through an adhesive ( sticky bomb ) or with a magnet. The Germans used a magnetic grenade, the Hafthohlladung to ensure that the shaped charge would fire at the optimal 90° angle to the armor. There was also a special type of grenade called the Nebelhandgranaten or Blendkörper ("smoke hand grenades"), which was supposed to be smashed over an air vent and fill the tank with smoke, widely used by both sides in World War II . Molotov cocktails also saw much use, especially in

10028-477: The tank's thinner top armor if fired in appropriate density while the tanks were concentrated, enabling direct hits by a sufficiently powerful shell. Even a non-penetrating shell could still disable a tank through dynamic shock, internal armor shattering or simply overturning the tank. More importantly the tanks could be disabled due to damage to tracks and wheels, and their supporting vehicles and personnel could be damaged and killed, reducing unit's ability to fight in

10137-796: The traditionally defensive role used in the Great Patriotic War (1941–1945), becoming more mobile. This led to the development of improved guided anti-tank missiles , though similar design work progressed in Western Europe and the United States. Both sides in the Cold War also recognized the utility of light anti-tank weapons, and this led to further development of man-portable weapons for use by infantry squads, while heavier missiles were mounted on dedicated missile tank-destroyers , including dedicated anti-tank helicopters , and even heavier guided anti-tank missiles launched from aircraft . Designers also developed new varieties of artillery munitions in

10246-624: The use of tactical nuclear weapons . In the Soviet sphere of influence the legacy doctrine of operational maneuver was theoretically examined to understand how a tank-led force could be used even with the threat of limited use of nuclear weapons on prospective European battlefields. The Warsaw Pact arrived at the solution of maneuver warfare while massively increasing the number of anti-tank weapons. To achieve this, Soviet military theorists such as Vasily Sokolovsky (1897–1968) realized that anti-tank weapons had to assume an offensive role rather than

10355-413: The user had to take cover immediately. Additionally, with hand-thrown grenades, the requirement for the attacker to get close to the tank made the attacker exceptionally vulnerable to counter-attack from the tank (typically by machine gun), or from infantry – mounted or dismounted troops – accompanying the tank. However, if the attacker were very low to the ground, and in very close proximity to

10464-423: The vehicle, leaving tracks or wheels particularly vulnerable to attack. Jamming is potentially an effective countermeasure to specific missiles that are radar guided, however, as a general purpose defense, it is of no use against unguided anti-tank weapons, and as such it is almost never the only defense. If jamming is used continually, it can be extremely difficult for a missile to acquire the target, locking on to

10573-643: The war. By late 1942, the Germans had an excellent 50-mm high-velocity design , while they faced the QF 6-pounder introduced in the North African Campaign by the British Army, and later adopted by the US Army . By 1943 Wehrmacht was forced to adopt still larger calibers on the Eastern Front , the 75 mm and the famous 88 mm guns. The Red Army used a variety of 45 mm, 57 mm , and 100 mm guns, and deployed general-purpose 76.2 mm and 122-mm guns in

10682-556: The warhead was taken from the RPG-26 and the fuse taken from the TBG-7 warhead used by the RPG-7 . The warhead has a stated penetration ability of 300 millimetres (12 in) of concrete and 500 millimetres (20 in) of brickwork. This article related to weaponry is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . Anti-tank warfare Anti-tank warfare evolved rapidly during World War II , leading to infantry-portable weapons such as

10791-437: The well-armoured Soviet T-34 medium and KV heavy tanks were encountered, these guns were recognized as ineffective against sloped armor , with the German lightweight 37 mm gun quickly nicknamed the "tank door knocker" ( German : Panzeranklopfgerät ), for revealing its presence without penetrating the armor. Germany introduced more powerful anti-tank guns, some which had been in the early stages of development prior to

10900-454: The wrong angle to the surface of the main armor. The only significant attempt to experiment in the use of tanks in the late 1920s was that of the British Army's Experimental Mechanized Force that influenced future development of tanks, armored troops and entire armies of both its future enemies and allies in the next war. In Spain, the anti-tank defense of the Nationalists was organized by

11009-558: Was attacked, its allies in the West were resigned to its defeat by a numerically superior Wehrmacht. The little information that was brought out about the conduct of combat during that campaign did nothing to convince either France, Britain or the USSR of the need for improved anti-tank technology and tactics. The reliance on the Maginot Line, and the subsequent surprise of the German offensive left no time to develop existing abilities and tactics in

11118-500: Was breached with tank support during the battles of Cambrai and St. Quentin Canal , although German Command was more impressed by the surprise achieved by the Canadian troops at the Battle of the Canal du Nord . This came to influence their planning in 1940. The Maginot line defenses – up to 25 km (16 mi) deep from the forward positions to the rear line – were intended to prevent

11227-514: Was considered to be the Maginot Line which replaced infantry-filled trenches with artillery-filled bunkers , including casemates housing 37 or 47 mm anti-tank guns, and steel turrets armed with a pair of machine guns and a 25 mm anti-tank gun, although Germany was forbidden to produce tanks. The construction was partially based on the Allied experience with the Hindenburg Line which

11336-415: Was later exploited by opposing tank forces. Late in the war, it was not unusual to find even the largest and most powerful tank destroyer abandoned on the field after a battle, having been immobilized by one high-explosive shell to the track or front drive sprocket. US Army pre-war infantry support doctrines emphasized the use of tank destroyers with open-top fully rotating turrets, featuring less armor than

11445-493: Was no match for enemy tank cannon fire during one on one confrontations. Another disadvantage proved to be the open, unprotected turret, and casualties from artillery fire soon led to the introduction of folding armor turret covers. Near the war's end, a change in official doctrine caused both the self-propelled tank destroyer and the towed antitank gun to fall from favor in U.S. service, increasingly replaced by conventional tanks or infantry level antitank weapons. Despite this change,

11554-444: Was one of the most manufactured tanks in history, and the latter, itself dubbed the 'flying tank', was one of the most manufactured aircraft. The war also saw the creation and almost immediate abandonment of the self-propelled tank destroyer which would be replaced post war by the anti tank guided missile. As tanks were rarely used in conflicts between the two World Wars, no specific aircraft or tactics were developed to combat them from

11663-598: Was restricted by the Treaty of Versailles in its military capability, and there were no other challenges to France and Britain, very little development took place in anti-tank warfare until the 1930s. The Interwar period was dominated by the strategic thinking with fortified borders at its core. These included obstacles consisting of natural features such as ditches , streams and urban areas , or constructed obstacles such as anti-tank ditches, minefields , dragon's teeth , or log barriers. The pinnacle of this strategic thinking

11772-500: Was seen as the quickest solution to anti-tank defense, and one of the earliest post-war anti-tank gun designs was the 25 mm Hotchkiss model from France. It was intended to replace an Atelier de Puteaux 37 mm weapon designed in 1916 to destroy machine gun positions. Rheinmetall commenced design of a 37 mm anti-tank gun in 1924 and the first guns were produced in 1928 as 3.7 cm Pak L/45, later adopted in Wehrmacht service as 3.7 cm Pak 36 . It made an appearance during

11881-557: Was the Junkers Ju 87 "Stuka" using dive bombing to place the bomb close to the target. Some French and German fighters fitted with 20 mm cannon were also able to engage thinner top armor surfaces of the tanks early in the war. The Stuka was also given cannons for anti-armor role though it was obsolete by 1942, and was joined by the Henschel Hs 129 that mounted a podded 30 mm (1.2 in) MK 101 cannon beneath its fuselage, while

#516483