Panzerschreck

i think having to pull AA guns to stop a French stop attack might have made some sit up and take notice. How about a son of a high ranking Wehrmacht general sends a letter or visits his father and tells the horrifying tale on how their 50cm door knocker couldn't handle the French heavies and how the infantry was left holding the bag until Rommel saved their ass. If only we had a weapon to fight he says. This gets the general to start asking questions why are Landsers are so ill equipped .
 
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.

It wouldn't have been as useful in Libya because of the flat open terrain. Of course it would be a lot more dangerous in rougher Tunisian ground. And Italy would be a Panzerschreck operator's dream. But again, not enough to significantly affect campaigns.
 
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.
Because more than a dozen Panzers (11 IIIs, 2 IVs, and 2 PaK 36 anti-tank guns) were destroyed by a single Char-B1 in an ambush (they ambushed it), and the Char was still drivable afterwards. That was 16 May 1940 at Stonne.

Of course the French were defeated, but the British weren't, so maybe they decide midway through the Battle of Britain that since they might not be able to land many tanks early on some man-portable tank-level firepower would be really useful.
 
Because more than a dozen Panzers (11 IIIs, 2 IVs, and 2 PaK 36 anti-tank guns) were destroyed by a single Char-B1 in an ambush (they ambushed it), and the Char was still drivable afterwards. That was 16 May 1940 at Stonne.
And of course Arras, where Matilda II's wreaked havoc on the SS and were only stopped by 88's brought up by Rommel...
 

BlondieBC

Banned
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.

The weapon would also be very useful against enemy hardpoints such as machine gun nests. In the early stages, it could have been seen more as an anti-machine gun weapon that could also be used against tanks. The US Rangers still use a similar weapon today for the portable firepower, so all it really needs is someone in arms production to take a fancy to the the weapon, and then for the weapon to be demonstrated to Hitler at some point between the fall of France and the Invasion of Russia. Or even perhaps Goering, sold as a weapon that can be used by paratroopers to given them a mobile anti-tank weapons.

In any case, if a handful of divisions have the weapon, and the prove useful in stopping an armor assault or helpful in an urban warfare battle (Leningrad, Moscow), the weapon could easily be in high production for the summer of 42. It maybe 20/20 hindsight by me, but once some working models are demonstrated to combat experienced officers, the value of a weapon that can take out machine gun nests, punch holes in walls at range, and kill the heavier tanks know to be in British inventory is obvious, and could have easily been green lighted.
 

Flubber

Banned
The weapon would also be very useful against enemy hardpoints such as machine gun nests.


Because there are no grenades? Or other machine guns? Or mortars? Or...

In the early stages, it could have been seen more as an anti-machine gun weapon that could also be used against tanks.

And, of course, an HE warhead meant to deal with a few sandbags and clear a firing pit is just the thing to bust through tank armor...
 
Because there are no grenades? Or other machine guns? Or mortars? Or...
Hand Grenades have less range and rifle grenades less accuracy

MG under cover versus MG not under cover, cover wins

Mortars, indirect fire, less accurate, need direct hit to kill

Other, too big

Panzerscreck or equivalent fills a useful niiche
 
maybe it could be in response to something in spain? have a condor legion mg platoon get over-run by t-26's or something whilst having their 37mm rounds bounce off
 
And no one saw the need to fill that "niiche" before the war or until captured bazookas made the rounds.

I guess they were all stupid, huh?
No they simply did not make the leap from rocket/recoilless rifle>useful Infantry support weapon in the time period since creating those weapons became practical, that happens, things get overlooked and conceptual leaps are not easy to make
 
maybe it could be in response to something in spain? have a condor legion mg platoon get over-run by t-26's or something whilst having their 37mm rounds bounce off

Actually the Spanish Civil War proved tanks were, if anything, underarmored; the German 37mm had little trouble dealing with Republican T-26's and BT-5's as both had thin armor (although it was learned that the 88 _did_ make a very good stopgap). It did prove that MG-armed tanks had no place on the battlefield while Ebro proved that throwing together untrained tanks and infantry was an invitation to disaster.
 
Actually the Spanish Civil War proved tanks were, if anything, underarmored; the German 37mm had little trouble dealing with Republican T-26's and BT-5's as both had thin armor (although it was learned that the 88 _did_ make a very good stopgap). It did prove that MG-armed tanks had no place on the battlefield while Ebro proved that throwing together untrained tanks and infantry was an invitation to disaster.

maybe the russians could send a company or battalions worth of KV-1's that see action against the condor troops just before the end to get the result I had in mind (37mm had a difficult time penetrating the KV-1 even at short range)?
 

Flubber

Banned
No they simply did not make the leap from rocket/recoilless rifle>useful Infantry support weapon in the time period since creating those weapons became practical, that happens, things get overlooked and conceptual leaps are not easy to make


Before the war, Germany led the world in rocketry research of all types. Before the war, Germany knew it would be facing the Maginot Line and fortifications elsewhere. And, before the war, Germany still didn't develop the type of bunker buster you suggest.

Why?

Because, as ranoncles pointed out up-thread, there was no perceived need.

They obviously weren't stupid. Instead, they didn't see the need for such a weapon because the role(s) such a weapon fills were already adequately being filled by existing weapons. There has to be a spur for the kind of development you're suggesting beyond that of someone having "neat idea" and the best spur of all is failure.

That's why BlairWitch's suggestion of German anti-tank weaponry somehow failing in Spain is a much better suggestion than someone having a bright idea out of the blue.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Because there are no grenades? Or other machine guns? Or mortars? Or...

And, of course, an HE warhead meant to deal with a few sandbags and clear a firing pit is just the thing to bust through tank armor...

If a weapon was intended to be both an anti-personnel and anti-tank weapon, then it would be logical to make two types of warheads. Now it is also reasonable if few heavy tanks were seen in 1941, the infantry units carry the weapon might have very few anti-tank rounds on hand.

Range and firepower are the main advantage of this anti-tank weapon. A grenade has an effective range of only 25 to 35 meters. This weapon has a range of 200 meters. It also has a bigger warhead. To take out a machine gun nests, the soldier will need to get within 25 meters or so, probably crawling under direct fire. So imagine you are in open environment and you see a machine gun nest 400m ahead. It will be much easier in many case to approached to within 200m than 25m. The larger warhead also makes it easier to kill some targets. Also a grenade is an indirect weapon, while this is an direct fire weapon. Each has it advantages, and disadvantages. Mortars are great, but they may not be assigned to support your squad and you have to communicate with them. Mortars will take more time to get on target than a direct fire weapon under your control as the squad/platoon leader. This weapon will also be useful in urban environments to take out machine gun nest out of grenade range and also to blow holes in walls to allow entry to buildings. For a grenade, imagine trying to throw a grenade into a 5th story window where a machine gun is located compared to using a direct fire weapon from a block or two away.

As to the perceived needs, it only takes the battle field report about difficulties the heavier British/French tanks presented to the appropriate procurement officer to change the time line. This change is not about the Germans being stupid, it is only about them making slightly better decisions.
 
Or even perhaps Goering, sold as a weapon that can be used by paratroopers to given them a mobile anti-tank weapons.
Alongside the idea of things going wrong in Spain I think this might be one of the best ideas to spur development. Perhaps the mixed results from the invasion of the Netherlands where IIRC there were a couple of dicey moments or the high casualties from the capture of Crete make them look for a light weight weapons with a bit of range, just as the American Rangers use the Charlie G nowadays, to keep from having his troops being considered obsolete and losing power and influence.
 
Before the war, Germany led the world in rocketry research of all types. Before the war, Germany knew it would be facing the Maginot Line and fortifications elsewhere. And, before the war, Germany still didn't develop the type of bunker buster you suggest.

Why?

Because, as ranoncles pointed out up-thread, there was no perceived need.

They obviously weren't stupid. Instead, they didn't see the need for such a weapon because the role(s) such a weapon fills were already adequately being filled by existing weapons. There has to be a spur for the kind of development you're suggesting beyond that of someone having "neat idea" and the best spur of all is failure.

That's why BlairWitch's suggestion of German anti-tank weaponry somehow failing in Spain is a much better suggestion than someone having a bright idea out of the blue.
#1 I never suggested it, I simply answered your questions

#2 That's what I meant, they thought that normal AT guns and infantry guns and assault guns could deal with tanks and bunkers and such for the infantry, and in an ideal world they would be correct, however given the chaotic situations that occur in battle there is a niche for a weapon of this type for allowing isolated infantry to engage these targets at a lower level without requesting support

#3 I never proposed how this would be adopted, simply that it fulfills a useful role
 
maybe the russians could send a company or battalions worth of KV-1's that see action against the condor troops just before the end to get the result I had in mind (37mm had a difficult time penetrating the KV-1 even at short range)?

The 37mm cannon couldn't penetrate the KV-1, nor could the 50mm for that matter.

My favorite story was (IIRC) in Martin Caiden's book on Kursk: _one_ KV-1 was blocking a road in a marshy area. Tank shells failed to kill it, a 50mm cannon got run over. An 88 crew started to set up only to be destroyed before they could fire. Finally, desparate to open the road, about 50 tanks and SPG's fire at it from all directions to distract the crew allowing another 88 to set up. It fires 14 rounds which _finally_ destroy it. A closer inspection is chilling: of the fourteen 88mm rounds only two actually penetrated, the 37mm and 50mm shells just left blue marks on the armor. As the author said, "and this was just _one_ KV-1."

Unfortunately the KV-1 wasn't available yet, nor was the T-34. It would be interesting if T-28's or T-35's were sent to Spain but their armor was also thin, which was typical of most armor around this period. I'll look around my library tonight and see what (if any) heavily armored tanks existed during this time period.
 
Because more than a dozen Panzers (11 IIIs, 2 IVs, and 2 PaK 36 anti-tank guns) were destroyed by a single Char-B1 in an ambush (they ambushed it), and the Char was still drivable afterwards. That was 16 May 1940 at Stonne.
And of course Arras, where Matilda II's wreaked havoc on the SS and were only stopped by 88's brought up by Rommel...

Sure, these were nasty shocks but hardly sustained defeats for the German infantry. It wasn't a secret to the German High Command that their tanks were only average. And they took steps by increasing production of Mk III and Mk IV tanks to replace the Mk II light tank and upgunning the mk III from a 3.7cm gun to a 5.0cm gun.

Nothing in those two tactical encounters suggests the Germans needed a new weapon type for their infantry. Just better tanks or better AT guns.

My suggestion is that when faced with huge numbers of enemy tanks in 1941, the divisional and regimental assets (a few batteries with 3.7cm and 5.0cm AT guns) of the average infantry division (which did not have 88's) are not sufficient and the panzer units are not able or willing to come to the infantry's assistance. So now they do need something to help infantry cope with tanks. AT guns (either towed or SP) are the obvious solution but cannot be afforded in sufficient numbers due to shortages of steel, rubber and fuel for their trucks (AT guns need to be at least motorized to be effective). So something cheap and portable is needed....
 
Sure, these were nasty shocks but hardly sustained defeats for the German infantry. It wasn't a secret to the German High Command that their tanks were only average. And they took steps by increasing production of Mk III and Mk IV tanks to replace the Mk II light tank and upgunning the mk III from a 3.7cm gun to a 5.0cm gun.

Nothing in those two tactical encounters suggests the Germans needed a new weapon type for their infantry. Just better tanks or better AT guns.
Except they couldn't fit tanks on the invasion barges for Sealion (originally planned to happen in late 1940).
 
Did a little research last night, most of the heavy tanks were post Spanish Civil War. But there are a few interesting exceptions:

1) Three Char B prototypes were built in 1930. Armed with a bow-mounted 75mm howitzer and 4 MG's (two bow, two in a turret). It would have been interesting if they were sold to the Republicans. The Char B1 had just entered production and it could be possible that a few of those might make their way to Spain. The Char B1bis was post SCW.

2) The S35 SOMUA medium tank prototype was built by this time, a few pre-production machines might also exist. Again, be interesting if the prototype made it's way to Spain for field testing...

3) The FCM 36 was a vehicle with fairly good armor that was sloped as well. Order cut short as it was expensive and replaced with the S35. Again, a few could have made their way to Spain.

4) The Soviets had built a T-46-5 (aka T-III) medium tank prototype. Similar in appearance and armament to the T-26 it had 60mm armor (although not well laid out). It's smaller Christie-type running gear proved a problem and it wasn't chosen for production. It would be _quite_ interesting if the sole prototype got to Spain.

5) T-32 and T-35 super tanks (both had 5 turrets; main with a short-barreled 76mm howitzer; two with 37mm [T-32] or 45mm [T-35] cannons and two with MG's). These had 35mm armor, slightly better than the T-26. Again, a few sent to Spain for testing would be interesting though with untrained crews I see spectacular fail on the horizon.

6) The T-28 medium tank (one short-barreled 76mm cannon plus 2 MG's in bow turrets) was in production, armor slightly better than the T-26. One of my older books says some might have gotten to Spain but this is the only place that I've ever heard this and I seriously doubt it.

This helps the Republicans, the Nationalists are hosed as there isnt anything heavier in Germany or Italy yet. I'm not sure the Italian 47mm ATG is even in production yet.
 
Top