Boys anti-tank rifle

When it became obsolete in 1940, would it be possible for it to be used as a long range sniper rifle, similar to the 50 cal Barrett today. They was a shorter barrelled version developed for airborne/commando units. Would this weapon be suitable or would it be ABS?
 
When it became obsolete in 1940, would it be possible for it to be used as a long range sniper rifle, similar to the 50 cal Barrett today. They was a shorter barrelled version developed for airborne/commando units. Would this weapon be suitable or would it be ABS?

While I am sure that it would serve as an excellent 'Anti Material Rifle' I cannot see it being useful as a snipers weapon due to its size weight and muzzle flash

An sniper version of the standard long infantry rifle of the day would be far more practical and so it proved.

Of course it is only obsolete where the opposition no longer uses light tanks and lots of armoured cars and tankettes - which the mass majority of AFVs where in 1940/1941
 
The Boys actually saw service in Somalia and Eritrea as an anti-personal weapon . It was used to shoot at rocks turning them into literal shrapnel . As far as using it for sniping I doubt it was accurate enough for the purpose at a range that would make it superior to a Lee Enfield 0.303 . Their are no actual drivers to make a sniper rifle of larger calibre then the normal battlefield rifle during WW1 or WW2 . In fact it was not until experiences in Korea , Vietnam and also special forces operations that such a large and powerful sniper rifle became worth having .
 
Some troops in NW Europe in 1945 were asking (and sometimes getting) Boys for use in penetrating protected positions. I think the Royal Marines were among those requesting them. Not the sort of thing you lug about in the front line but call up from B Echelon or possibly HQ Coy when required. It saved getting close enough to use a PIAT or being reduced to using a PIAT in the mortar role.The 3.5 Inch Rocket Launcher fulfilled the need post war and the L1A1 LAW in the Falklands. Myself I would prefer a 84mm Charlie G but that is wandering OT.

I fired a Boys once. 4 rounds and I was glad when they were gone but not as bad a recoil as one is led to believe. But then I was/am heavier than the average 1945 squaddie.

A contact once told me that they were requested for use in the mountains in Aden in the mid sixties and again in the Dhofar campaign later on, to outrange the Adoo. The response was that they were long gone from stores.
 
The standard Boys AT rifle recoiled hard enough to discourage the average infantryman from using it on a regular basis ..... that and it weighing more than twice as much as a standard infantry rifle, so would only be used by the hardest-core sniper specialists.
The rare paratrooper version had a shorter barrel and brutal recoil.

A .55 caliber sniper rifle would have been most valuable in the Western Desert or Italian mountains .... most valuable when killing forward artillery spotters on the next mountain ridge.

Modern .50 calibre (firing Browning Heavy Machine gun ammunition) were popular between 2001 and 2010.
.50 caliber sniper rifles were most valuable at the long ranges across Afghan mountain valleys. .50 cals also proved effective when fired from the top of Iraqi 20 story buildings. In both cases .50 cal. sniper rifles helped push the enemy back beyond the effective range of most infantry weapons, giving western troops a breather.
The most recent generation of sniper rifles are smaller and lighter and fire very high velocity .338 Lapua ammunition.
 
The standard Boys AT rifle recoiled hard enough to discourage the average infantryman from using it on a regular basis .

Indeed so Rob. I currently use a Martini-Henry with full service charges which is not something to fire prone in a t shirt very often. My grandfather used the same as a young recruit before he was sent off to South Africa and they were al 2/3 my weight at best so it is no wonder that they found the recoil as brutal as their elders had in action. It betrays it's age in being really designed to be used standing in lines. Far easier standing. Not that I would advise anyone to fire a Boys standing.

Of course the Boys was not designed as along range sniper weapon. Even against early armour it was effective only really out to 300 yards so the emphasis was on effective penetration as long as the accuracy at 300 yards was acceptable to hit the chosen plate of armour. That soon reduced to 100 yards in practice but it was still fit against Japanese light tanks in the Pacific.

When you look at the old Soviet 14.5mm anti tank rifles (the round is still with us in heavy machine gun use) they could still penetrate German tanks from the side and rear right to the end of the war if you were close enough. How you do that and survive is a different issue. I used to spend some time in a Ukrainian Club in the UK years ago and many of the old boys had been in the Red Army and confirmed this is true. On ex tank commander told me he preferred the Valentine to the T34.
 
Last edited:
When it became obsolete in 1940, would it be possible for it to be used as a long range sniper rifle, similar to the 50 cal Barrett today. They was a shorter barrelled version developed for airborne/commando units. Would this weapon be suitable or would it be ABS?

I imagine killing a vehicle's driver would make for a mildly effective brake.:p
 
Modern .50 calibre (firing Browning Heavy Machine gun ammunition) were popular between 2001 and 2010.

And in South Armagh in the 90s, although sadly not for the side wearing the white hats on that occasion...

(urban myth apparently said the sniper team included an ex-USMC sniper but I don't think there was ever any proof that he existed).
 
A .55 caliber sniper rifle would have been most valuable in the Western Desert or Italian mountains .... most valuable when killing forward artillery spotters on the next mountain range.

This was the sort of scenario I was thinking off. Was planning a deep penetration in force by the RMASG's and with plenty of surplus Boys could cause havoc in the Jebel Akhdar in November in HMS Invincible time-line.
 
The standard Boys AT rifle recoiled hard enough to discourage the average infantryman from using it on a regular basis .....

Was it such a heavy recoil. I know popular myth has it that firing it would make your teeth fall out and give you Piles but was it so bad. The US Marines used it in Korea and I have never come across any complaint from them. There is a video on youtube where someone fires the Boys (in New Zealand if memory serves me right) and then says its not much heavier a thump than a game rifle in 7mm Remington Magnum. I have fired plenty of 7mm RM and while its a heavier harsher thump than .30-06 it wouldnt exactly scare the horses.

I dont know how to do the maths but Boys .55 mark II round had a muzzle energy of 15,000 foot pounds from a 36 inch barrel firing a 900 grain bullet. A Boys weighed 35 lbs

7mm Remington Magnum has 3,100 foot pounds of muzzle energy from a 26 inch barrel firing a 150grain bullet. A Remington Model 700 with 26 in barrel weighs 9 lbs.
 
Top