 | Anti-tank weapons| WW2 General Discuss Anti-tank weapons in the World War II - General forums; Erich would you put up a pic of it please?
Henk... |
|
03-13-2006, 06:50 PM
|
#61 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: George - South Africa
Posts: 2,665
Country: | Erich would you put up a pic of it please?
Henk
__________________
The ultimate revolution in aircraft designs during WW2 |
| |
03-13-2006, 06:53 PM
|
#62 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | Erich had posted it already...check the first page of this topic. 
__________________ |
| |
03-14-2006, 08:05 PM
|
#63 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | 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.
__________________
Last edited by CharlesBronson : 07-22-2008 at 10:19 PM.
|
| |
03-16-2006, 09:38 AM
|
#64 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| 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: Quote: |
just think of a 8.8cm fired at you at around 100 yards. you're dead !
| I wonder if all warheads were HEAT?
Did you see that guy in Black Hawk Down with an RPG in his chest? - Ouch!  |
| |
03-16-2006, 06:22 PM
|
#65 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | Quote: |
The 'Faust 60 had less penetration than a 'Shreck CB IIRC. I think only the 'Faust 150 outperformed it?
| 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 pģerce 190-200mm of homogeneous armor.
__________________ |
| |
03-16-2006, 06:52 PM
|
#66 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 9,763
Country: | 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. 
__________________ |
| |
03-16-2006, 07:23 PM
|
#67 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | 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.
__________________ |
| |
03-16-2006, 09:29 PM
|
#68 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| 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. |
| |
03-16-2006, 11:13 PM
|
#69 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,848
Country: | the Shreck i reusable right? the faust is kinda like a LAW, drop it after use
__________________ "The German Luftwaffe always fought without any reserves. This is also the reason why we have pilots with extremely high numbers of victories."
- General der Jagdflieger Adolf Galland" |
| |
03-17-2006, 01:02 AM
|
#70 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| That's more or less it loomaluftwaffe.
Later 'Fausts could be reloaded though.
The 'Fausts also had a more dangerous (to the operator) backblast. |
| |
03-17-2006, 01:38 AM
|
#71 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,848
Country: | then whats so practical about Shrek?
__________________ "The German Luftwaffe always fought without any reserves. This is also the reason why we have pilots with extremely high numbers of victories."
- General der Jagdflieger Adolf Galland" |
| |
03-17-2006, 12:07 PM
|
#72 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 9,763
Country: | 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.
__________________ |
| |
03-17-2006, 06:54 PM
|
#73 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | Schwarzpanzer.....what is your source for the 200 mm penetration of the 88 warhead... 
__________________ |
| |
03-19-2006, 01:15 PM
|
#74 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,328
Country: | No answer...? No kidding , in no place said that the panzerschreck could penetrate 200 mm of armor....simple phisics. SpzB 41 in SD.Kfz 221. 
__________________ |
| |
03-20-2006, 09:32 PM
|
#75 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,848
Country: | were those things actually effective?
__________________ "The German Luftwaffe always fought without any reserves. This is also the reason why we have pilots with extremely high numbers of victories."
- General der Jagdflieger Adolf Galland" |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:03 AM. |  | |