10-18-2020, 12:07 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Feb 2014
|
Knocking out a WW2 tank
If I want to knock out a WW2 tank say a Tiger or a Panther and the tools I have at hand are:
A bazooka A Piat A teller mine A panzerfaust At what effective range would I have to be , how realistically near to knock it out and where do I aim the shot or place the mine to do the job? |
10-18-2020, 02:23 AM | #2 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Quote:
As for the rest, you want to avoid attacking the frontal armour, because it's much thicker than the side and rear armour (too thick for a bazooka). As for how far away - they have a minimum range of about 10 yards/metres, so further than that. Because their accuracy is awful, you want to be as close as you dare, plus a bit closer - 10-30 metres if possible. In GURPS terms, as 30 yards you have a -7 for range, +4 for size, +0 for Acc, you can aim for 3+ turns for +2, then AoA for +1, and be braced for another +1. This gives a net +1 to hit. Guns (LAW) is not generally going to be a soldier's primary weapon skill, so they'll probably have Guns (LAW)-10 and thus hit on an 11-, assuming the tank is stationary or moving slowly. A better shot might have a 12-13 to hit, and be able to risk a shot on a moving tank. This seems reasonable to me.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
|
10-18-2020, 03:19 AM | #3 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
A Panzerfaust has enough punch to get through the front of a Tiger, though it might not fare well against the sloped front of a Panther. (A PIAT or Bazooka should expect to fail against the Tiger front.) That said, you probably don't want to be standing in front of the tank regardless of what weapon you brought.
Any of those LAWs should have no problem defeating the side or rear armor of either tank, provided you manage to hit. Knocking out a tank can be a bit of a messy process, in a variety of senses. A penetrating hit will probably wound crew members and/or wreck the engine, and may start a fire. Any of those things is fairly likely to persuade the surviving crew to abandon the tank...but none guarantees that the tank can't fight further. (Igniting the ammunition would very thoroughly render the tank and crew unserviceable. But you're probably not attempting a called shot to the ammo racks with a LAW.)
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
10-18-2020, 04:08 AM | #4 |
Join Date: Feb 2014
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Maybe a one of those Russian Bomb dogs would be a better option?
|
10-18-2020, 04:10 AM | #5 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
One nice thing about the PIAT - while it was difficult to cock for the first shot, if used correctly it automatically cocked after each shot, and could be reloaded very quickly. With it low firing signature (no smoke, only a rifle-shot equivalent for sound) and high rate of fire quick follow-up shots in the event of a miss or ineffective hit were more practical than with other LAWs of the time. HT gives a Bazooka a four turn reload, which is possibly optimistic from what I've read. If we're equally optimistic about the PIAT, we can use the times a crew managed for a training film, and have a reload of about two turns.
Some sources say it was unpopular, but others say it was rated as highly satisfactory by units that used it, so I'm guessing it worked well (for a LAW) but users disliked the cocking system and high recoil. It also had HE available, allowing use as a very basic mortar. Penetration was marginally better than the Bazookas (about the same by the end of the war), and neither would reliably go through a Panther's frontal armour because of its sloping more than its base thickness (which means that at long ranges a PIAT which its banana-shaped trajectory will do better than at short ranges). Against a Tiger both the Bazooka and PIAT would be able to defeat the frontal armour (100mm, unless you hit the much thicker gun mantlet) by the end of the war, if they got a square-on hit. In their early versions they might actually have trouble with the side armour (80mm on upper hull and turret sides, 60mm on the lower hull which was partially covered by the wheels), and would have next to no chance vs the front armour. The Panzerfaust had rather better penetration, especially in theory. In practice the stand-off distance for the warhead wasn't sufficient so penetration was lower than it might've been , which also means that German WWII-style armoured skirts would improve its performance (at the very least don't count them as 'spaced' armour vs a Panzerfaust), and the improvised 'upgrades' many Allied tanks had (sandbags, extra plates, etc.) did nothing but overburden their suspensions and transmissions. Still, it'd be sufficient to penetrate a Panther or Tiger (though not its mantlet) from any angle. Pity about the poor range (not so poor by war's end) and accuracy (always awful). As a single-shot weapon rate of fire was decent if you had someone handing replacements to you, but the launch signature was high - as a recoilless 'rifle' with blackpowder as a propellant it made a very large cloud of smoke.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
10-18-2020, 05:32 AM | #6 |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
They weren't very effective, and had been abandoned by the end of 1942, so they never served against the late-war tanks like the Tiger or Panther.
Rupert has the range calculations correct. The basic way of using WWII LAWs was to conceal yourself, preferably somewhere that the tanks would not try to drive, and ambush the tank. Your odds of being killed by a different tank after you'd attacked could be quite bad. Infantry anti-tank weapons were most effective in towns or cities, where it's easy to get a downward shot onto the thinner top armour and there are a lot of places to hide. The results of successful attacks on tanks are often summarised as a mobility (M) kill, where the tank can't move, but can still fight, a firepower (F) kill, where it can still move, but the weapons are out of action, and a killed (K) kill, when it can't do anything. To try for an M-kill, attack the treads (the easiest target, at -2), or the engine (-3). Hitting the engine will sometimes take out the turret traverse power, giving you a K-kill, or start a fire. To try for an F-kill, attack the sides or rear of the turret (-2). This may well damage the main gun, and can also kill the turret crew or start a fire. K-kills come from very powerful weapons that wreck the tank as a whole, from fires, or from the crew deciding they've had enough. They may well do this if the tank is M-killed and it's safer to abandon it than to stay inside and be shot at with weapons that threaten it. They'll always do this if there's a fire in the crew compartment and they live long enough to bail out.
__________________
The Path of Cunning. Indexes: DFRPG Characters, Advantage of the Week, Disadvantage of the Week, Skill of the Week, Techniques. |
10-18-2020, 08:13 AM | #7 |
Join Date: Jun 2016
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Also keep in mind that crews don’t have a handy HP meter for their tank, have limited views of the outside, and often have rather awkward means of exiting the vehicle. If they are going to bail out, they have to start before a hit penetrates or a fire spreads. A large enough caliber non-penetrating hit could convince them to risk gunfire or capture.
Search for The Chieftan on YouTube. He has done outside and inside walkthroughs of a large number of tanks and his experience as an actual tank crewman gives a great perspective on the layouts of these vehicles and what it’s like in battle. |
10-18-2020, 11:46 AM | #8 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Also, the Tiger and Panther are not typical tanks in 1943-1945, they had very thick (but flat and sometimes brittle) front armour. The Germans built 1,800 Tigers but more than 10,000 StuG IIIs.
Its hard to figure that out about WW II unless you know the sources and filter out the old soldiers' tales, but I think they liked them in Italy for 'mouseholing' stone and brick buildings. They had a nice big charge and no backlash, and its easy to hit the side of a house from the top floor of the next house in the row.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature |
10-18-2020, 12:27 PM | #9 | ||
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Quote:
You probably know, but it's worth mentioning that most of a tank's turret is located inside the main hull, extending most of the way to the floor of the vehicle. While you're less likely to damage the gun itself firing into the side of the hull as opposed to the external turret, you could very easily hit the turret crew that way. Quote:
Certainly it is true neither of them is ever the typical tank. The typical tank in the latter parts of the war is the Panzer IV, a version of which has stats in High Tech. Earlier in the war the typical tanks were significantly less capable and protected than that! Non-tank vehicles like the StuGs were also common, especially later, but if one of those is attacked with a LAW at effective range it's practically guaranteed to lose since it doesn't have the option of traversing the turret to engage.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
||
10-18-2020, 03:17 PM | #10 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Knocking out a WW2 tank
Quote:
The US assumption before D-Day and the invasion of France that the Panther was a 'special issue' tank had a lot to do with their choice to largely stick with the low-velocity 75mm on their M4s. This proved to be less than ideal at least in part because there were a lot more Panthers in service than expected, as it was built in large (for Germany) numbers. The Tiger was, of course, a quite different story - it had never been intended to be made in very large numbers, being intended as a specialist 'assault' tank.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
|
Tags |
tank, wwii |
|
|