Page 1 of 1

AT rifles....

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:56 am
by Ross_Moorhouse
Hi Sean.

Can you include AT Rifle teams? Boys, Pz B?chse 39, PTRD-41 etc etc?

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:49 am
by Sean OConnor
AT rifles has been on my "to-do" for longer than anything else! I think it would make the early years more interesting too as there would be something that infantry would posses that could hassle tanks.

I'll have a go at adding them today...

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:26 pm
by Sean OConnor
OK, they're done!

They'll be in the next update I put up (3.99o). I just gave them a quick test with 6 AT rifle teams against a Panzer IIId. They peppered the Panzer all over but they can't penetrate the armour so they got massacred.

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:44 pm
by Paolo Sforza
Hi Sean,

Glad ATRs have been added for the early stuff - for which I have ATR teams on the drawing boards (for almost all nations). The US Marine Corps used these throughout the war (even after they'd received bazookas) to penetrate Japanese armour as did the Soviets on the Eastern Front (they had produced about 900,000 of them and continued to do so right up to 1945). They'd found another use for them against machine gun nests, etc.

The great thing about an ATR is that it has a flatter trajectory and so easier to aim and most of all, that it can be used from indoors (a bazooka couldn't, although PIAT and panzerfausts could). Doing a bit of earlier research, the penetration for a 'generic' ATR should be around 33mm/30degree at 100m and 15mm/30degree slope at 100m, but the trick about the ATR is that it is rather like a sniping rifle - usually given to the best marksmen and in good hands could blow any tank's track at reasonable distance (possibly up to 300m, but more probably 150m). Immobilizing a tank should, therefore, ideally be an option. The tank could still function with a brave crew, but would be a sitting duck. Probably the crew would bail out if no supporting infantry around.

Many Panzer IIIs were knocked out by ATRs in Poland in 1939, but these were possibly early models with thinner armour. Even in a Ausf J being hit by several ATR shells at close range should make a tank crew think twice. The shell doesn't need to penetrate, just transfer enough energy to make some of the inner skin of the armour flake off and whizz around the cabin like shrapnel.

After about 400m ATRs are pretty useless against almost all armour (as the shells lose velocity very rapidly and have no explosive component), but should be great at long-range picking off of AT guns, strongpoints and heavy weapons squads (that's exactly why the Soviets kept them). Most nations seemed to deploy them in 2-man teams - the guy with the ATR and a rifleman to cover the ATR man while he reloaded.

Hope this helps.


Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:48 pm
by Paolo Sforza

I said:
the penetration for a 'generic' ATR should be around 33mm/30degree at 100m and 15mm/30degree slope at 100m
But it should read:

the penetration for a 'generic' ATR should be around 33mm/30degree at 100m and 15mm/0degree slope at 300m