LittleSpeer
Monthly Donor
Would there have been any measurable impact on the war had if the Germans had the Panzerschreck RPzB 54/1(final and latest model) in full-scale production by the start of 1941.
Panzerschreck
- Thread starter LittleSpeer
- Start date
The Panzerschreck, or any short range anti-tank weapon, is a defensive weapon by nature. The impact might have been post-Stalingrad useful, but Germany can't alter the course of the war with it. Maybe at best delay it. A true anti tank guided missile would have been a real game changer in 1943. A standoff weapon like that would have been a serious problem for the Red Army.
Last edited:
That would be weird because the Panzerschreck in OTL was developed from captured US-supplied Russian bazookas which did not wind up in German hands until 1943... unless they put large amounts of effort into the program starting in the 1930s I don't see how this could happen.
If the Germans had somehow gotten them in full scale production by 1941 then it would have been a real help in knocking out Soviet medium and heavy tanks. But then the Allies would probably get some similar weapons of their own.
If the Germans had somehow gotten them in full scale production by 1941 then it would have been a real help in knocking out Soviet medium and heavy tanks. But then the Allies would probably get some similar weapons of their own.
BlondieBC
Banned
Short answer, it would not be a decisive factor in the war, but this weapon widely used in 1942 would have substantially increased Soviet tank losses, and slowed the advance.
Longer Answer: In 1941, the Russian tanks were the earlier, weaker models. The Germans are on the offensive, so this weapon probably is mainly used as infantry weapons to attack hardpoints like machine gun nests. I would guess this weapon would be one per company, and later in the war would be one per platoon. In 1942, as the sixth army was advancing, the Soviets hit the northern flank of the Sixth army with new tank divisions with the T-34. The sixth army had most of their armor fighting to counter this attack. An infantry weapon that could easily kill a T-34 would have been very useful, and would have helped a little. The next big tank attack was the attack that cutoff Stalingrad. The Romanian and other flanking divisions were stretched very thin and had few weapons that could stop the T-34 (between one per battalion and one per regiment. Even at one per platoon, it would not have broken the Soviet attack, but it would have increase losses and maybe slowed it down a lot. Hitler would not have order a retreat anyway, so not a strategic change. The reason it would not stop, is the soviets attacked with something on the order of 1 tank for each 10m of front. Since a covering division would have been covering many miles, we are talking about maybe 5 to 10 weapons per mile of front, on which the soviets would have attacked with 160 or so tanks. This weapon gave out a smoke trial that reveled a soldier position, so more than 3 kills per weapon on average is optimistic, and this assumes the screening divisions get this weapon in quantity, which would be a break from the equipment patterns of the Nazi's. By 1943, the Germans have the tactics worked out, and the weapon would greatly increase soviet losses, but no where near enough to be decisive.
Now if by some unlikely string of events, the weapon had prevented the isolation of Stalingrad, and the troops escaped, AND the Nazi go on the strategic defensive in 1943, then it could have a much larger effect. I just don't see this weapon saving Stalingrad, or being a game changer on the offensive such as Kursk.
Rommel would likely use the weapon well with infantry kill teams supporting his minefields. It might cause Monty some real issues, but in the end, it would only slow down North Africa by a few months at most. Rommel's logistics were just too poor. And higher numbers of these in Italy again increase allied casualties, and slow down operations.
Longer Answer: In 1941, the Russian tanks were the earlier, weaker models. The Germans are on the offensive, so this weapon probably is mainly used as infantry weapons to attack hardpoints like machine gun nests. I would guess this weapon would be one per company, and later in the war would be one per platoon. In 1942, as the sixth army was advancing, the Soviets hit the northern flank of the Sixth army with new tank divisions with the T-34. The sixth army had most of their armor fighting to counter this attack. An infantry weapon that could easily kill a T-34 would have been very useful, and would have helped a little. The next big tank attack was the attack that cutoff Stalingrad. The Romanian and other flanking divisions were stretched very thin and had few weapons that could stop the T-34 (between one per battalion and one per regiment. Even at one per platoon, it would not have broken the Soviet attack, but it would have increase losses and maybe slowed it down a lot. Hitler would not have order a retreat anyway, so not a strategic change. The reason it would not stop, is the soviets attacked with something on the order of 1 tank for each 10m of front. Since a covering division would have been covering many miles, we are talking about maybe 5 to 10 weapons per mile of front, on which the soviets would have attacked with 160 or so tanks. This weapon gave out a smoke trial that reveled a soldier position, so more than 3 kills per weapon on average is optimistic, and this assumes the screening divisions get this weapon in quantity, which would be a break from the equipment patterns of the Nazi's. By 1943, the Germans have the tactics worked out, and the weapon would greatly increase soviet losses, but no where near enough to be decisive.
Now if by some unlikely string of events, the weapon had prevented the isolation of Stalingrad, and the troops escaped, AND the Nazi go on the strategic defensive in 1943, then it could have a much larger effect. I just don't see this weapon saving Stalingrad, or being a game changer on the offensive such as Kursk.
Rommel would likely use the weapon well with infantry kill teams supporting his minefields. It might cause Monty some real issues, but in the end, it would only slow down North Africa by a few months at most. Rommel's logistics were just too poor. And higher numbers of these in Italy again increase allied casualties, and slow down operations.
The bad meetings they had with the Char B1 in France? Assuming everything else stays the same that shifts the start of the project from mid-late 1941 to mid 1940, so maybe it'll come out late 1942 or early 1943. Not a war-winner by any measure, but will leave the Soviets a bit more bloodied.
Last edited:
Then the weapon's basic design and concept wouldn't resemble the OTL version in pretty much anyway shape or form.
Just like the Hurricane didn't resemble the Spitfire in any...oh wait, it did. With weapons, function defines form, so I don't how it would have looked much different.
It would have been used to supplement the infantries anti tank units and would have had a tremendous impact. I think given the Germany's propensity in supplying the infantry with more firepower at the platoon level you would see more then one. Just as the had more MG then other armies.
Work on Germany's LG40 recoiless rifle began in 1937 and it was given a limited production run and issued to special infantry units during the war, such as Paratroopers and mountain infantry. Perhaps this hypothetical Panzerschreck could be a spinoff of that in response to requests by the German military for a lighter version without the tripod for wider use in the military.
Better yet, have the Germans help develop/copy this, but using their experience from Fall Gelb. I suspect the end product would be a hybrid between the Panzerschreck and the Carl Gustav 84mm recoiless rifle.
I thought it was developed from bazookas captured from the Americans at the Kasserine Pass rout.
Chris
From a technical POV, this might actually work: the LG40 fires 5,75kg shells at 350m/s for a weight of 145kg. Firing a substantially lighter 88mm warhead at the 110m/s of the Panzerschreck, or somwhat faster, would dramatically lower the weight. Probably not the same point as the Panzerschreck, but still.
informationfan
Banned
The panzerschreck is no warwinner....
the needed weapon for the germans is the panzerfaust.
if the germans recognize that their infantry need a cheap and easy working anti-tank weapon for defence and also a weapon for fighting against bunkers (as the maginot line) they could have developt such weapons
starting with the lg40 they could have optimized their funds and "find out" that a cheap "throw away" weapn could give their troops near 100% security against enemy tanks.
So german tank divisions (as used in france) could get a cheap and easy to transport flank defence... just give 40 soldiers 80 panzerfaust and 120 men can defeat against strong tank forces... you dig in, let em come and boom....
if they also develop the lg-weapons they have the solution (say in 1941) for anti-tank-guns with greater range (the 80mm-Antitank-LG), cheap and fast to produce (important), with a deadly penetration at ranges till 500m...
so these weapons can come online in masses in 1942... instead of heavy75mm guns, the infantry has a cheap but deadly anti-t34-weapon.
so russian forces need much more firepower and much more mobile infantry to support their tanks... this means that the stalingrad cauldron could be avoided... panzerfaust are no complicated weapon... make a hole, duck and cover and fire them against the enemy tanks...
if the russians have 200 tanks on 1000m you have 100-200 soldiers with panzerfausts... add to this lightguns for longer range and panzerschreck (another logical development) as special forces to stop the tanks that broke through...
so russian tank losses will skyrock (they had high losses in real life), germans produce more artillery (like the 128mm gun - another allrounderweapon - produce 2000 75mm guns less and 500 128mm guns more)
these weapons don´t need a lot supply (this help to supply the rest)...
in africa such weapons are deadly if the brits try to break through... brave italian forces have no a weapon to fight back. So El Alemain could be a big defeat (still, africa is a gonner cause of the landings, but the germans and italians have much more forces, the brits lost more... you get the thing)
war itself could be changed, but the results would be - in the end the same.
just add 20-50000 more killed allied tanks on the loss list, around 2-4 million more soldiers and - around 1-2 million more killed germans, how many people die cause hitler and the nazis have more time to do their evil things is another thing.
the needed weapon for the germans is the panzerfaust.
if the germans recognize that their infantry need a cheap and easy working anti-tank weapon for defence and also a weapon for fighting against bunkers (as the maginot line) they could have developt such weapons
starting with the lg40 they could have optimized their funds and "find out" that a cheap "throw away" weapn could give their troops near 100% security against enemy tanks.
So german tank divisions (as used in france) could get a cheap and easy to transport flank defence... just give 40 soldiers 80 panzerfaust and 120 men can defeat against strong tank forces... you dig in, let em come and boom....
if they also develop the lg-weapons they have the solution (say in 1941) for anti-tank-guns with greater range (the 80mm-Antitank-LG), cheap and fast to produce (important), with a deadly penetration at ranges till 500m...
so these weapons can come online in masses in 1942... instead of heavy75mm guns, the infantry has a cheap but deadly anti-t34-weapon.
so russian forces need much more firepower and much more mobile infantry to support their tanks... this means that the stalingrad cauldron could be avoided... panzerfaust are no complicated weapon... make a hole, duck and cover and fire them against the enemy tanks...
if the russians have 200 tanks on 1000m you have 100-200 soldiers with panzerfausts... add to this lightguns for longer range and panzerschreck (another logical development) as special forces to stop the tanks that broke through...
so russian tank losses will skyrock (they had high losses in real life), germans produce more artillery (like the 128mm gun - another allrounderweapon - produce 2000 75mm guns less and 500 128mm guns more)
these weapons don´t need a lot supply (this help to supply the rest)...
in africa such weapons are deadly if the brits try to break through... brave italian forces have no a weapon to fight back. So El Alemain could be a big defeat (still, africa is a gonner cause of the landings, but the germans and italians have much more forces, the brits lost more... you get the thing)
war itself could be changed, but the results would be - in the end the same.
just add 20-50000 more killed allied tanks on the loss list, around 2-4 million more soldiers and - around 1-2 million more killed germans, how many people die cause hitler and the nazis have more time to do their evil things is another thing.
BlondieBC
Banned
Excellent point. With the German infantry arrange around a machine gun with supporting infantry, it is easy to see the Germans adding one anti-tank weapon to match each machine gun. This is a powerful combat combination. Based on how they distributed arms, the SS and other elite units get them first, until 100% equipped, the some of the German regular army units. The associated forces see few of them, probably more like 3 or 4 per battalion.
Like I posted earlier, the Swedish developed a 20mm shoulder-fired recoiless rifle between '40 and '42, the Carl Gustav M/42. It's not inconcievable for the Germans to find out about the project and use the technology to develop a viable shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon by '42.
a early Panzerschreck ( i have my doubt) could make some changes, like
Battle of Kursk
D-day
Battle of the Bulge
were Wehrmacht or SS got Panzerschreck
it would delay the Allies, but not stop them on long term
Battle of Kursk
D-day
Battle of the Bulge
were Wehrmacht or SS got Panzerschreck
it would delay the Allies, but not stop them on long term
Indeed, the main question is why the Germans would have developed a squad anti-tank weapon by 1941? It seems unlikely as everything went swimmingly for them up to late 1941.
But let’s assume they encounter problems in Russia in 1941. The Russians have 35,000+ tanks (as said by Hitler to Mannerheim) and throw them against the Germans in wave attacks much like their human wave attacks. German divisional AT assets are not sufficient to hold the entire divisional line and army assets are too slow to intervene in time. And forget about the panzer divisions, they are too busy gallivanting about to slow down and help the poor bloody infantry.
Several front line soldiers complain to Hitler during award’s ceremonies and Hitler orders that ‘something must be done’. Ramping up AT gun production would help but the German army simply doesn’t have the steel, rubber and fuel to produce sufficient AT assets for every Infantry division. Much like the Americans were seduced by German propaganda and believed the Germans fielded thousands of panzers and thus felt they needed a squad AT weapon, the Germans now identify the same need.
But luckily, the Germans have been developing a hand held AT weapon for some time but with little urgency much like they have been slowly developing a heavy tank. Like the sudden crash development of the Tiger tank after encountering the T34, the handheld AT weapon (faustpatrone or panzerfaust or other similar gizmo since the panzerschreck was indeed a copy of the Bazooka and not yet been encountered) is now pushed through.
By summer 1942, this cheap and easy to produce weapon is in full mass production. The first production numbers are given to Army Group South in 1942 to assist in their ‘war winning’ push in the south. Initially, they are of little use as the Russians generally flee and the Landsers mostly march after them but the new weapon proves extremely valuable in the city fighting in Stalingrad. Russian defensive positions which would have cost a lot of time and blood to subdue are now quickly (if not cheaply) overrun with the assistance of the new ‘bunker-busters’. No longer do the Landsers need the assistance of a StuG or Stuka to advance, they carry their own heavy firepower.
The Russians are expelled from Stalingrad which leads to the collapse of their southern front. Although they manage to destroy the oil wells, the Germans now have captured the south.
So is this enough to win them the war? That depends on your own views of the subsequent actions.
With the Germans on the Turkish border, the old dream of a pincer movement against Iraq/Iran with AG South and the Afrika Korps becomes attractive again. Perhaps Rommel will get the (logistical) support he needs?
Maybe the Germans will devote the necessary resources to extract oil and ease their supply problems?
The Russians will now experience fuel problems. Their massed and fuel hungry attacks are no longer possible. While the Western allies have the fuel to supply the Russians, this means they have to divert a lot of their fuel tankers to do so, causing them problems in the field. A fuel strapped 8th Army? And if the allies are sending fuel to Russia, what aren’t they sending instead? Trucks? Gold bullion? Shoes? Food? However you look at it, the Russian war machine will be effected.
But let’s assume they encounter problems in Russia in 1941. The Russians have 35,000+ tanks (as said by Hitler to Mannerheim) and throw them against the Germans in wave attacks much like their human wave attacks. German divisional AT assets are not sufficient to hold the entire divisional line and army assets are too slow to intervene in time. And forget about the panzer divisions, they are too busy gallivanting about to slow down and help the poor bloody infantry.
Several front line soldiers complain to Hitler during award’s ceremonies and Hitler orders that ‘something must be done’. Ramping up AT gun production would help but the German army simply doesn’t have the steel, rubber and fuel to produce sufficient AT assets for every Infantry division. Much like the Americans were seduced by German propaganda and believed the Germans fielded thousands of panzers and thus felt they needed a squad AT weapon, the Germans now identify the same need.
But luckily, the Germans have been developing a hand held AT weapon for some time but with little urgency much like they have been slowly developing a heavy tank. Like the sudden crash development of the Tiger tank after encountering the T34, the handheld AT weapon (faustpatrone or panzerfaust or other similar gizmo since the panzerschreck was indeed a copy of the Bazooka and not yet been encountered) is now pushed through.
By summer 1942, this cheap and easy to produce weapon is in full mass production. The first production numbers are given to Army Group South in 1942 to assist in their ‘war winning’ push in the south. Initially, they are of little use as the Russians generally flee and the Landsers mostly march after them but the new weapon proves extremely valuable in the city fighting in Stalingrad. Russian defensive positions which would have cost a lot of time and blood to subdue are now quickly (if not cheaply) overrun with the assistance of the new ‘bunker-busters’. No longer do the Landsers need the assistance of a StuG or Stuka to advance, they carry their own heavy firepower.
The Russians are expelled from Stalingrad which leads to the collapse of their southern front. Although they manage to destroy the oil wells, the Germans now have captured the south.
So is this enough to win them the war? That depends on your own views of the subsequent actions.
With the Germans on the Turkish border, the old dream of a pincer movement against Iraq/Iran with AG South and the Afrika Korps becomes attractive again. Perhaps Rommel will get the (logistical) support he needs?
Maybe the Germans will devote the necessary resources to extract oil and ease their supply problems?
The Russians will now experience fuel problems. Their massed and fuel hungry attacks are no longer possible. While the Western allies have the fuel to supply the Russians, this means they have to divert a lot of their fuel tankers to do so, causing them problems in the field. A fuel strapped 8th Army? And if the allies are sending fuel to Russia, what aren’t they sending instead? Trucks? Gold bullion? Shoes? Food? However you look at it, the Russian war machine will be effected.