Soviet Anti-Tank Rifle Tactics of WW2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 พ.ค. 2024
- Soviet Anti-Tank Rifle Tactics of World War 2 based on a translated Soviet Manual from 1942. Soviet Anti-Tank rifles like the PTRD 41 and PTRS 41 created some trouble for the German Panzers, this is clearly reflected by the introduction of the so-called “Schürzen” Armor Skirts that protected the side hull and turret armor of most Panzers and Sturmgeschütze. This video covers anti-tank rifle positions, how to lead, weak points to aim for, cooperation with other arms and the general employment of anti-tank rifle units.
Disclaimer I: I was invited by the Panzermuseum to Stahl auf der Heide 2019. Their English TH-cam Channel: / @germantankmuseum
Disclaimer Mk II: I was invited by the Tank Museum at Bovington in 2017. Their TH-cam Channel: / thetankmuseum
Cover design by vonKickass.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon, see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
»» TIMESTAMPS ««
00:18 - Why Armor Skirts - • Why Armor Skirts & why...
00:39 - PTRS-41 - • PTRS-41: Soviet Anti-T...
02:03 - PTRD-41 - • PTRD 41: The Simple So...
03:50 - German Artillery Tactics - • German Artillery Tacti...
06:17 - Urban Combat Fighting Positions - • Urban Combat: Fighting...
07:13 - German Sniper Training - • German Sniper Training...
08:09 - How to Kill a Tiger - • How to fight Tigers - ...
09:50 - Guderian - • Guderian: Father of "B...
15:15 - Defensive Tactics at Kursk - • Soviet Defensive Tacti...
15:37 - PTRS-41 - • PTRS-41: Soviet Anti-T...
15:43 - PTRD-41 - • PTRD 41: The Simple So...
15:58 - www.tankarchives.ca
16:02 - Chieftain - / thechieftainwot
16:09 - German Tank Museum - / @germantankmuseum
16:13 - Top 5 at Tank Museum Bovington - • Military History Visua...
» SOURCES «
Samsonov, Peter: Anti-Tank Rifle Manual. Tank Archives, January, 2016. Accessed: 23rd April 2020. tankarchives.blogspot.com/2016...
Orenstein, Harold S.; Glantz, David M.: Soviet documents on the War Experience. Volume I: The Initial Period of War 1941. Routledge: London, UK, 2015 (1991)
Kast, Bernhard; Bergs, Christoph: German Army Regulation on the Medium Tank Company H. Dv. 470. Austria & UK, 2019.
www.lulu.com/shop/bernhard-kas...
McCollum, Ian: PTRD 41: The Simple Soviet Antitank Rifle of WWII. Forgotten Weapons: TH-cam, wherever that is, May 2018. • PTRD 41: The Simple So...
TsAMO: F 500, Op. 12451, D 407: Merkblatt 25/4: Anleitung für die Ausbildung und den Einsatz von Scharfschützen. Oberkommando des Heeres, Gen. St. d. H. / Gen. d . Inf.: 15. Mai 1943.
Töppel, Roman: Kursk 1943. The Greatest Battle of the Second World War. Helion: Warwick, UK: 2018.
Glantz, David M.: Soviet Defensive Tactics at Kursk, July 1943. Combat Studies Institute. U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, 1986.
Spielberger, Walter; Doyle, Hilary Lous: Sturmgeschütze: Entwicklung und Fertigung der sPak. Motorbuch Verlag: 2014.
Jentz, Thomas L.; Doyle, Hilary Louis: Panzer Tracts 3-3. Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf.J, L, M, und N. Panzer Tracts: Boyds, MD, 2009.
#AntiTankRifle #AntiTankRifleTactics #SovietTactics
You can get the translation of the German Army Regulation on the Medium Panzer Company here:
www.lulu.com/shop/bernhard-kast-and-christoph-bergs/german-army-regulation-on-the-medium-tank-company-h-dv-4707-mittlere-panzerkompanie-from-may-1941-deutschenglish/paperback/product-24459401.html
Can you make a German Untertitel Subscription please
There is an easy answer for the effective range differences.
The PTRD holds one round, and it is a bolt action: this means breaking your hold to reload.
A PTRS does not suffer from that.
Hence, you have to make the round count, when you only can chamber a single round.
And, as Ian and Karl have pointed out, short range is more forgiving to a bolt action rifle.
Conversely, a semi can be held and fired until you either hit a target, or run out: making long engagements practical.
...The user simply 'walking' the rounds into the target.
1:00 does it ping still? very important
speaking of ambush tactics what about the T-34 in a haybale? are there any rules for soviet/german tank ambush tactics?
I believe the ptrd used the russian 12.7mm caliber
PTRS + PTRD = PTSD for the tank crew
💯
Brandon Liao
Coincidence?
I THINK NOT
@Phil McCrevice don't expect your life expectancy on the eastern front to be long
@The Last Phoenix good one
@Phil McCrevice better odds than being on stalin's naughty list
One of my relatives that fought in the war was a soviet anti-tank rifleman and got a bravery medal for blowing up a german half-track ammo carrier in Latvia, and the shrapnel piece got stuck in his knee till the day he died.
A true war hero!
@@pxu_190 much braver than anything youve done in life lol
@@pxu_190, that carried supplies for the Germans. Eliminating that...
@@pxu_190 congrats, you don't have to haul a big, fuckoff rifle the size of your body around to take out armored vehicles.
He likely got the medal for the shrapnel stuck in his leg, or that the carrier held some important supplies for the germans.
@@buttahXD a single ammo carrier wouldn't ever be important enough to warrant special attention.
"Destroy fascist tanks with the anti-tank rifle!" would make a nice welcome mat.
BWMChannel Next hoodie pls
The Soviet manuals always had epic catchphrases like that one...
"Communists: May eternal perdition and suffering readily find you. Die in agony. Die screaming." - Sounds better to me.
@@harukasaigusa8906 sounded worse for Lady History
@@harukasaigusa8906
Nah that's too long. The momentum is lost. Doesn't have the spice of the original.
4:44 being able to cite yourself (and Bismarck) must be a nice feeling
Me: "Time to go to sleep"
MHV: *"Time to take a look at Soviet anti-tank rifle tactics ..."*
Also me: "Nevermind"
I am looking on this video at 0:44 at night, true words ...
Fun fact PTRD sounds a lot like "petarda" which means "firecracker" in most of Slavic languages
Which has its root in the "petard" of French origination, which was basically a shaped charge that would be placed on walls or doors in the middle of combat by petardiers. Which was one of the most suicidally dangerous positions in the history of war that wasn't actually intending to suicide themselves. Hence Shakespeare's "hoisted by his own petard", where someone is harmed by their own plan.
Petard also now means firecracker in French as well.
means firecracker in spanish too
In Age of Empires II, it is a unit that runs in with a barrel of gunpowder and suicide bombs. Now I know the real history.
Pae tae err dae and peetardah. So not very alike as for me. Though for a brave and witty soldier Terkin it could be
@@MaxUgly it was essentially an artillery piece that you had to move to the enemy walls
Information about setting sights to 400 might be correct for both rifles. Similar logic is used later on with AKMs ( but at 300m with AKM) and AK-74s.
To zero AK 74 you set the sight to 400m or so called "battle" setting marked P (they are functionally the same) and zero the rifle to shoot high (22 cm above point of aim afair) at 100m - that gives you zero at 400. Soldiers are supposed to use this setting most of the time and aim at belt buckle of the opponent. With 5.45, the highest you will be hitting above POA is 37 cm at 200m, so not much difference in terms of hitting human sized targets. The idea is to not have soldiers fumbling around with their sights during combat, but still give them ability for more precise shots if needed.
With 14.5x114 having even higher velocities than 5.45 - and even flatter trajectory as a result, i would assume same logic would apply. That being said, it's just guess on my part, i might be wrong.
You are completely correct. It's called battlesighting.
The same hold true,
On both M16a1, and M16a2.
The Battle sight is set at 300 yards.
The difference between yards and meters at 300 yards. With 5.56x45[.223 Remington] is not enough to matter with iron sights. For the average shooter. Easy to make up for, with the better than average Stooter.
Beat me to it. I was going o say the same thing. The Soviets were surprisingly finicky about battle zeroing rifle sights.
Back in the Nam days, M-16 s were zeroed at 25 meters At 100 to 150 meters you aimed about 4 inches low. I believe 275 meters brought the projectile to line of sight. If that seems odd, remember Vietnam was a pretty close in affair
Dirty commie.
9:35 I am not so sure about that. It is quite common to train with "battle sight", I did in the Swedish army in th early 2000s". What that means is learning to use only one sight setting for at least the shorter ranges and learning points of aim and not having to fiddle with sight settings unless you are in a well prepared possition with very safe ranges given to different land marks. I can totally belive not using the lower settings below 400 meters. Fiddeling with sight settings is just one more thing to get wrong and take precious time to get you killed.
Nämen
@@thurbine2411 Haha,ja, jag är gammal nog att det fortfarande var typ en tredjedel av alla killar som gjorde lumpen.
Interesting little tidbit from the Soviet Partisans Companion, which includes a section on the PTRD/S positions. “ The anti-tank rifle’s crew must prepare its firing position before engagement to reduce their vulnerability to enemy tank fire. The position should be carefully camouflaged. A simple anti-tank slit trench is a fairly safe shelter. You can take cover in it if a tank comes too close. Immediately after the tank passes over the trench, quickly fire at its rear where the engine compartment is located.” This most likely was only used by partisans, but it’s more information about forest and ambush positions.
wow didnt even know Partisan forces had any sort of literature
@4exgold Partisans were often led or organised by escaped Red Army Officers or officers sent by the HQ to organise resistance behind enemy lines. Though many were just peasants banding up and resisting nazis, they would often meet up with other squads of organized partisans that would often coordinate with the frontline army to sabotage the rear of the nazis in the eve of battle.
@Phil McCrevice The partisans companion was given to the partisans to train with and a few copies after being sent behind the lines. Also, I would like a source for the partisans being shot and gulaged please.
Fun fact, the partisans companion is still used today. “ This secret school prepared thousands of Arab “revolutionaries” over its twenty-year existence. Saddam Hussein, who admired Stalin, implemented Soviet methods of mass indoctrination, totalitarian control and party building. This extended to the Baathist party cellular organization and ubiquitous secret police.21 The Baathist Fedayeen trained to become guerrillas to fight an invader. The US Army ended up fighting guerrillas whose training was based on the 3rd Edition of the Partisan’s Companion.” (Glantz, The Partisans Companion, Foreward)
Tito's partisans ??
Shooting at support rollers and road wheels means your shooting at the hub. They are grease or oil filled. Still a viable tactic to this day
YOU HAVE AN ANTI TANK RIFLE, OVER THERE IS A TANK! FIGURE IT OUT!
*shoots himself*
Hey, what happened?
...A pleasant reference to CoH. Here's another...
"If they were very lucky, they could give us a headache with that AT Rifle."
@@MrJinglejanglejingle Heavy panzer under infantry attack. Why am I shouting this?
You can count on Osttruppen
No really, you can!
1:12 "You have an anti-tank Rifle, Over there is a tank, Figure it out!"
Shooting (and actually hitting) anything smaller then a building att 1500 meters with open iron sights is a feat in itself. Forget to even try to aim at anything specific on a vehicle. A tank would hide nicely behind the forward sight at long distance. Shooting long range is harder then most people who has not tried it believe - even with modern sights. Things like your breathing, good support, the shooter being calm and even your heart rate can and will effect any shots on long ranges. And the calm, controlled breathing and controlled heart rate could be a problem if enemy vehicles was driving your way. I would, for one, be scared and anything but cool. There are a reason snipers are specialists.
So it was probably very prudent to recomend that soldiers waited until the enemy was fairly close, no matter what they were shooting on.
"Millimetres here are metres down range."
I’ve missed pigs at 50 yards cause my heart beat
"Shooting (and actually hitting) anything smaller then a building att 1500 meters with open iron sights is a feat in itself."
If only the people who insisted on the T65 catridge understood this...
Manual suggests 50 meters for a reason.
@Sideshow 44 yup, i have tried long distance shooting. And I am rubbish. Up to somewhere around 4-500 meters were fairly okay, but after that I had trouble develope any further. Before my injury, I was more of a fast shooter on moving targets for sports. Was not fantastic, but good enough to have fun. Nowadays with that destroyed shoulder, I am not even that. The motoric functions in the muscles in the right arm are all messed up.
The 400 meter zero could be battle sight zero... Used on many rifles as the zero you should use when not sure of distance ( for instance the "П" (P) on AK's sight is around 300m zero) this means that if the target is withing 400m you should hit it. High (but a hit) for the first few hundred meters and spot on at 400m. That could be if the ilustrations( at 8:53 ) are from the manual or similar why the sighting is "low" or lower then the center of the tank.
Great video.
I've read accounts where at battles like Kursk, such rifles were used in numbers, and while not effective at actually destroying tanks, they could be dangerous to half tracks, or provide a distraction that ultimately proves effective.With a clear field of fire, the rounds can damage tracks and running gear as well; of course, as with other specialized weapons like machine guns, or flamethrowers, it tends to attract attention, and shorten user lifespan.
so early the germans still have supply in russia
Not for long though xaxaxaxa
not for long )))))))
Do you believe the germans would of beat Russia if they were only fighting Russia and not on two front's
One front they would have had 2 more armys along with rommel . Sure they would have won . Hitler liked the brittish and said he would pull out of western europe period . But by then churchill the gin soaked pill poper and failiour wanted to make a name for himself and did not share peace deals in paliment and would not budge. Hitler gave the crazzy stop order at dunkirk and was to soft with the uk
@@americafirst7785 No. The Soviet Union basically singlehandedly beat the germans as is. Keep in mind the US and British government delayed a European front for, at best 2 years if you count Italy, 3 until D-Day. But at that point the Soviets already turned the war around
Dear lordy, even those cartridges look nasty!
Like Ian McCullum from Forgotten Weapons mentions, the Soviet 14.7 mm round was maybe the most effective anti-tank-rifle-round ever.
Still used today for air defense guns, on APCs and guns on the back of a Toyota trucks...
Imagine a tank getting ripped with 15mm ammo in 15mm armor plate, now imagine that plate is your body
Sounds like a tough day
@@zepter00 wow, really? I gotta read up on that caliber.
“Long barrel, short life” - Soviet proverb, WWII.
The PTRS was designed by Simonov , who scaled it down to make the SKS 45...a fantastic weapon
I've been pestered by Pz IVs for over a year now, but thanks to this video I have successfully defended my motherland with the use of advanced tactics and weapons. Thank you, MHV!
PS: Do you think this will work on a Leopard 2? I think I see one cresting the hill right now...
yes it will, I used one on a STRV-122plss, just wait for them to start cooking their meatballs !
15:46 "Next time you need to hold the line against the panzer, you know what to do" - Yeah, the first thing is to pull out the smartphone and watch this video.
1 rifle taking pot shots is one thing 10 of them volley firing into a vehicle is a different story
Love how you explain/interpret the translations of terminology. Thanks!
This looks like the type of weapon that would appeal to today's American deer hunters - dispatch, skin, gut and debone in one shot.
The only problem is scooping up the kill with a spoon...
@Phil McCrevice #EndJokesNow
@Phil McCrevice
curmudgeon noun
cur·mud·geon | \ (ˌ)kər-ˈmə-jən \
Definition of curmudgeon
1: a crusty, ill-tempered, and usually old man
*Only, I suspect you are not really all that "old"...
How you think we make sausage and sticks outta em yum
Quick English lesson, the correct pronunciation of "gnaw" is like Naw, the G is silent, because of course it is
Yeah, but I like how he pronounces it.
And echelon is pronounced "eshelon". Why? Because it's French.
And echelon is pronounced "eshelon". Why? Because it's French.
Who asked
Forget about "sounding out" words in English. The spelling is too far divorced from pronunciation. English spelling is chaos, even for native speakers, it is chaos.
Another very good video. Excellent research and very easy to follow presentation. I like how you "team up" with others who have videos on your subject. It really benefits us the audience. Thanks!
My shoulder hurt just watching you compare those 14.5mm rounds to the already sizable hunk of steel-jacketed copper (at the time) put down range by the Garand. And I suspect that if I were to check right now, there would be a bruise there that I don’t remember having before I clicked on the thumbnail. Neat info. Thanks for the video.
Mal wieder super Arbeit! Vielen Dank und Grüße aus Lübeck! :)
incredible information here. huge props to you guys for translating the manuals!
Keep the videos coming my man ! Good job i enjoy them as always . Thank you
Hey at 11:58 ish when you talk of engine and it points to the track components it could be a mistake in translation which might be better translated as drive train. Meaning, all the components which allow the tank to move. I want to make. Clear I do not speak or read the Russian language, but based on the image and the translation given it would make sense.
Probably so. In Russian it's called "hodovaya chast", which includes wheels/tracks, transmission and engine.
ceu160193 thank you,
Boah imagine the adrenaline rush after stopping a whole panzer IV with only a PTRS /PTRD
I once read a memoir from a panzer ace. He mentioned a Soviet anti-tank rifle gunner could cause a lot of trouble for the panzers. They would hit vision ports and disable the vehicle/crew.
Tank: I fear no man... but that thing...
It scares me.
Very good and interesting video. Thanks for posting!
Thanks for this video! It's about time I see this issue addressed, as it's little known in the mainstream. I 've seen many photos of troops equipped but never much on their use and effectiveness, though the introduction of shurzen should be self-explanatory!
So cool to see the close-ups on those old rifles - all the casting and machining marks.....
Another outstanding video and presentation.
Glad you enjoyed it
Thank you so much. You gave me a great look at the hows and whys of these weapons. Peace love & jello. TomCat
On the topic of closer than 400m use 400m settings. This type of advice is still used in modern Russian army when training. I remember from being a conscript I read about firing assault/sniper rifle in combat. If the enemy is within 600m range you may not be able to aim properly in time so you just put 600m settings on ak-47 and aim for legs. This way you are covering any distance between 600 and 0 meters due to ballistics.
I observed from the riots in Bahrain that cans of paint can seriously hinder the view from inside a vehicle. Mixing sand into the paint would probably defeat any wipers.
These videos are really useful, thamk you.
love the ammo size comparison!
A fantastic video!
I had a ptrs, at a reenactor event a german panzer commander told me that the german pnzr would stop at edge of, say, a field. With binoculars the tank commander would scan the field looking for the long soviet rifle barrel sticking straight up from the hole that the rifle holder was hiding in...the german vet said that the Soviets never changed that tactic.
something something early
Nice change a pace from all the like magnet copy paste comments.
Just another brilliant piece of stuff. Thanks a lot from Russia!
can you review the BOYS anti tank rifle please? Its just going to be for the boys
edit: thanks alot you guys for liking my terrible joke. you guys have made my day
Let's hear it for the BOYS!
The boys, and any anti-tank rifle besides the russians' was useless against anything beyond of early war light tanks.
I first learned of the Boys AT Rifle while playing "Tobruk" in the 70's
boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/5455/tobruk-tank-battles-north-africa-1942
@@douglasstrother6584 thats quite epic ngl.
@@zepetv589 Wrong. Why ? because the Germans upgraded the side armor of the Panther, so anti-tank rifles were less dangerous to it.
I finally finished the book recently, it was great to brush up on my rusty german
The 6th army has crossed the Volga River in Stalingrad!
Drive the hastily constructed T-34!
Defend the tractor factory!
Destroy fascist tanks with the anti-tank rifle!
NEW Kotluban Series from LEGO Warfare!
Uuuuuraaaaaaa
Wouldn't the tractor factory be cut off?
Jay Tea BS! No German formation ever crossed the Volga
@@maxspirin3945 True. Had they only crossed it a bit upriver and established a beachhead, leaving Stalingrad alone, it would have been mission complete, and they could have kept pushing south to the oilfields. Easy to be a hindsight general though.
The settings in the sights and how they are used in the field can differ. The height of the trajectory up to 400 meters is likely about 25 cm. The Finnish RK62 assault rifle has sights 100-600 m on 100 m intervals and 150 m. We were told only to use 150 m and 300 m settings. It would make sense to create a doctrine that works on both rifles equally.
Many thanks.
No armor vehicles to shoot in my neighborhood but if this coronavirus last much longer I might just need this to relieve some stress.
If you can, aim for those people stealing porch deliveries, loud cars racing on the street, hoarders, night party goers, and the monsters comming out of the forest.
If you want to see manual with a really interesting tone look up "The A10 pilots coloring book Christmas 1977 aka Everything you wanted to know about the T62 but were afraid to ask"
A wonderful gun! Legendary! Shaped charged weapons. Bazooka,panzershrek.....used shaped charge on a rocket! More effective against armor. However.......it’s long range is still impressive! Glad you cherish such history! It’s like Arnold swarsenager is teaching me. I like it!
I've portrayed the PTRD in my own fiction frequently, always assuming futuristic upgrades to the sight and ammunition. It's quite widely portrayed as superior to the PTRS, and it always made sense that it would at least make it easier to switch between different kinds of ammunition. In story telling terms, the single shot, very high powered weapon always made for more drama and tension that an automatic weapon that can just hose the target.
Your videos are great stuff. Thank you for your work. Bis Spater,,, SSK
(6:38) "Mr. Nesbitt has learned the value of not being seen. However, he has chosen a very obvious piece of cover." -- _Monty Python,_ s2e11
Thank you ,
Aah field manuals. Soldiers uplifting emergency toilet paper...Or tobacco wrappers depending the situation..
Assume v = 1000m/s constant, no air resistance. If you zero to 400m, and shoot a tank 500m away, you are 44cm low. But if tank is 300m away, you are only 34cm high. It is greater penalty to have 100m too small zero, than 100m too big zero. This however only applies before the tank is observed, and it is equally likely it will appear at 300 and 500m
The Soviet use "battle setting" for their rifle. For example the AK-47 have a "P" sight setting that about 350m.
When set the sight at P mark, and shooting target at 100m, you only need to aim lower and don't need to reset the sight to 100m sight.
"Destroy fascist tanks with the anti-tank rifle!" is a heck of a mission statement.
a good fascist is a dead fascist😛✊🏻
Was just using the Boys AT rifle yesterday in Post Scriptum. Good times.
I'm just grateful they didn't confuse the proper term "clip" with "magazine"...
... like most legislators.
Would you be willing to do a breakdown/comparison of submarines of those found in WW1, WW2 or Cold War?
I would have appreciated some info on what would have happened, inside the vehicles these weapons were typically used against
When you are dealing with original copies of the various German Military manuals from the 1930's and 1940's which style of print is generally used? The older "Gothic" style that was used in the mid to late 1800's or the more modern style of type like you would find in most documents issued in the 1970's and 1980's? From my stamp collecting I have seen both styles used during early to mid 1900's but type styles used for stamps often are not what is used for general public printing. Most of my books in German are either the 1700's and 1800's or more modern publications from after 1970. Or were modern reproductions of documents from the 18th and 19th centuries and used modern type fonts, in the case of research materials of Staat Hamburg Bibliothek. I don't have much from the war years of either WWI or WWII. Thanks.
Fraktur until late war around 43/44 they switched to regular letters.
The development of the ptrd is probably a reason for it’s reduced range. The thing is basically a barrel and bolt with a trigger lol
I'm slightly disappointed this video hardly mentioned the anti-tank rifle ammunition. Only a size comparison was given; nothing about the construction differences between a normal rifle round, and an anti-tank rifle round. Were they essentially the same only larger, or did they contain a hardened core for penetration?
battle sights often align at close range and 300 yards. the 400 meter setting for sub 400m targets would be correct.
Ive always liked at rifles. Idea of busting tank with overlarge rifle is very appealing
Cough*Panther side armour*Cough
@Simo I can think there would be a lot of situations where just damaging a tank enough to neutralize it as a threat and forcing its crew to retreat and refit would be as good as a kill, especially in a logistical nightmare like Russia. Even convincing the Germans that anti-tank rifle platoons COULD be in the area could have a psychological effect or affect their decision-making. Appropriately/ironically, the cheapness and flexibility of the weapon, and it being designed specifically to be used against expensive, sensitive equipment (it's in the name), was made for a Clauswitzian view on war. You keep the German tankers away from forests, you are effectively limiting their options. Area-denial weapon. Easy to use. Cheap as hell.
@Simo That's what I was thinking. When I was in the US Army in the Vietnam War and commanded a platoon of Armour cars (V-100s) and some M-60 tanks they never mentioned Vietnamese using anti-tank rifles. Nor did they mention anything about anti-rifle defense against the Warsaw Pact countries. I think the armor was way too thick and of better quality by then. We had training on using the TOW wire-guided missile (made in France) and the LAW as the minimum infantry weapon to incapacitate a Soviet Tank.
@@CaptainGyro Maybe at-rifles weren't mentioned because they were so effective that no on lived to tell the tale ;)
"You have an Anti-Tank Rifle, over there is a tank. FIGURE IT OUT"
i spend a good minute or three thinking about the root and translations of 'doorknagen' = 'durchnagen'.
As quoted from a random soldier in Company of Heroes 2: "You have an Anti-Tank rifle, over there is a tank. FIGURE IT OUT!"
What is up with the cörrections around 12:00 ?
G-nawed lol great information as always!
Is there such thing as a British AT rifle tactics of WW2?And if there is,where can I find it at?
There’s a boys AT rifle training film floating around on TH-cam.
Tanker one it’s a bit Micky Mouse though
On the Auto- und Technikmuseum Sinsheim is a Panzer 4 ausf. f2 or g with two holes in the frontal 50mm thick Plate. According to the Museum These holes were caused by a russian anti tank rifle. Is this possible and are there Documents mentioning this? I found it hard to believe. I have not been able to Measure the thickness exactly, i assume it was 50mm, but maybe I am wrong and it is in fact 80mm.
I saw a show interviewing Russian AT guys, and they said they would get inside of 100m and shoot at lower hull at the driver. They could see a glowing spot where they hit, there may not be a hole, but there would be spalling, and this was effective on Panzer III with 40mm armour.
The instruction to use 400m may have been true, given it's a moving target changing ranges uses time better employed for aiming and the trajectory is so flat up to 400m the sight change makes no significant difference.
simple statistic: platoon of these guns, lets say, 10 of them fires at your tank. Each of them can shoot 15 rounds per minute, lets say they shoot 10 per minute.
its 100 rounds per minute.
Tank isbig, so I guess 50% of them hit it.. its 50 hits per minute.
If only 10% of the tank surface is voulnarable - then its about 40-45% probability that at least 1 round hit a voulnarable part of your tank.
Given these assumptions, we can estimate that 10 guns can penatrate 1 tank per 2-3 minutes of intence fight.
cost of 1 T4 and Panther is 300 000 hours, cost of 1 antitank gun is 30-100 hours or something.
cost of tiger is 800 000 hours and it has much less persent of voulnarable surface.
in other words, its cost efficient to use them
war is a statistic for Soviets and art for Germans.
as a Soviet guy I measure it all in cost/efficiency statistic
With regard to the fuel tank location: I presume that the tank is not a flat rectangle against the side of the tank (i.e. it it extends some distance into the tank). As such, from the angle shown in the diagram, a hit at an angle, if it penetrated, might hit the front side of the fuel tank by traversing through the tank. This theory obviously depends upon the dimensions of the fuel tank, the likelihood of penetrating the side armor at a 45 degree angle, and if the other structures between the armor and the fuel tank might stop the bullet vs. providing a bit more items to damage as the projectile passed through.
8:56 gibt es ein Grund wofür "kph" geschrieben wurde (statt km/h)? Wir sind ja keine Amerikaner... oder?
Gutes Video! Danke, daß du es gemacht hast!
Wäre das Video für Amerikaner, dann stünde da mp/h. Im deutschen schreibt man km/h aber die internationale Variante is halt kph und das Video is ja für ein internationales Publikum, sonst wärs wohl auf deutsch.
@@eidechsentyp1236 We sometimes say kph in Canada, so maybe they got it from us? I would think km/h is the standard, it's what is officially used here.
Is "durchnagen" a word associated with beavers (which are rodents)? If so it would seem like a reasonable comparison when trying to get through trees.
Yeah
Ahh German ...the language of romance
My favorite video
Thanks for this. This is a much misunderstood subject, like so many aspects of the Eastern Front.
Why does the thumbnail look like the precursor to stock photos, like the guy on the left is like “hmm yes I see a lovely mallard in that bush” and then the guy on the right goes “what bush” the proceeds to pull the trigger annihilating the bush and a Panzer III H 70 meters behind it.
IMO the most amazing thing about Soviet ATR's is how expedient they were. Now get this: Unlike Germany, Britain, Poland, Finland and many others, the Soviets did _not_ have a pre-war anti-tank rifle at all. They figured that in any future war against a major European opponent (most likely Germany), tank armour would be such that enlargened rifle bullets would be useless. (They even went so far as to stop the production of the 45mm anti-tank gun just before the war in favour of 76.2mm multi-purpose field guns, because they thought even those would become obsolete soon.) This, even though the vast majority of their own tanks (T-26 and BT-7) were still very much vulnerable to such weapons, and having experience fighting Japanese tanks in the Far East, which were no better in that department either.
So, then the shit hits the fan in June 1941. Soviets realize most German tanks actually have armour enough only to keep rifle bullets and shrapnel out. (This, even though quite a few people in Europe already had first-hand experience about fighting the German panzerwaffe for almost two years) July, Degtyarev and Simonov are given orders to design anti-tank rifles. November, such rifles are already in use en masse. And as far as anti-tank rifles go, they are kick-ass, the PTRD especially is a beautiful example of the "KISS and get the job done" principle.
"July, Degtyarev and Simonov are given orders to design anti-tank rifles." Two weeks of development from blueprint to prototype, sort of.
@@Ailasher ...And the result, while being totally stopgap, is cheap and easy to build and can kill most German tanks and hurt all of them.
@@Stripedbottom Another interesting case: designer Grabin and his ZiS-3. This guy offered to make a new and better, easy to produce and cheaper, divisional gun, got a direct denial in response from high command of the Red Army. And independently, as a personal initiative, thanks to the head of the factory which his bureau was worked, he developed and launches into mass production these guns. About no one knew in the whole Red Army, literally.
In case of failure, at best, they would both be arrested and sent to the design bureaus of the “special” regime -- in which various qualified specialists take a prison time for criminal and political condemnation. But most likely, they would be shot for sabotage. After which Grabin personally swears with Stalin, when his actions were revealed. The next day Stalin personally apologizes to him. About 48 thousand of these guns were produced during the war.
The history of Soviet military production during WW2 never ceases to amaze me.
And not only that, they got two brilliant designs in that one-month process.
I can guess at why the arrows in the manual are pointing at the wrong place. The person writing the text and the person doing the illustrations did not communicate. I know this as a translator - sometimes I get a text to translate from an illustrated work, and it can be quite difficult to know what is going on if you haven't got the illustrations to work with. "Slide part A over part B, rotate through 30° and then screw part C onto the flange of part D" is a lot easier to translate if you can see a picture of all the parts.
Could you talk about the german ww2 helicopters like the Fa223 drache?
I always have a smile when I get this weapon in Company of Heroes 2
Here for Hell Let Loose instructional
Not bad very interesting
How severe was the recoil when you fired these things? How loud were they, compared to a normal rifle?
When you shoot the PTRS indoors it as extremely loud and you need double ear protection. it is just one big loud deep boom with a very bright flash. the recoil is a very long hard push, but not so snappy like .338 lapua. more like a shotgun with a super magnums 12/89 load.
the anti tank Boys rifle,was so recoil heavy,that it could break shoulder bones,according to some people,and it became obsolete when heavier armored german tanks were sent to battle,and they replaced them with the new British Rocket launcher
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 Thank you! That's what I thought. The British didn't mind if their troops got banged around a bit. The British .303 Jungle Carbine was reported to kick, so they put a recoil pad on the back end of it. That pad was small and very very hard! They could have used the pointed end of railroad spikes for all the good it did. I heard the PIAT was also a bear to use. And don't even get me started about the Mills STICKY BOMB!!!!!!
Reguarding the mistake on the manual, on a mossin negant rifle the sight has measurements in arson rather than meters, perhaps its the same for the anti tank rifles? Idk just guessing at an explination.
Wieder mal ein sehr cooles Video!
Könntest du mal das Thema 'Partisanen' behandeln und welchen Einfluss sie auf die Lage im Osten hatten? Im folgenden Video werden die durch Partisanen gefährdeten Gebiete im besetzen Osten als sehr groß dargestellt und mich würde interessieren ob es dort nur gelegentlich zu Beeinträchtigungen kam oder ob es die Lage an der Front durch starke Beeinträchtigung der Logistik ( ;-) ) noch weiter verschlechtert hat:
th-cam.com/video/EJcByHRQl24/w-d-xo.html
Auch der Einfluss im Bereich Rschev im rückwärtigen Raum der Front wird in einem Tagebucheintrag von Bacuffz beschrieben...
Weiter so, freue mich über jedes neue Video!
> Könntest du mal das Thema 'Partisanen' behandeln und welchen Einfluss sie auf die Lage im Osten hatten?
eher unwahrscheinlich, wenn dann auf meinem Zweitkanal.
One question: how can we understand the manuals compared to the real conditions? How to interpret the manuals?
?
Wish this was available when I was playing Red Orchestra 2 lol, the tanks were such pain in the asses most of the time instead of the PTRS I just grab a PPSh and some anti tank grenades and yeet
Damn...14.5 mm is a big darn round to send down range!