home

World War II PTR. Degtyarev anti-tank rifle. Anti-tank rifles of the Second World War. See what "Anti-tank weapons" are in other dictionaries

At the beginning of the Second World War, those in service with the infantry were high-explosive hand grenades and anti-tank rifles, that is, weapons that originated in the last years of the First World War. “Anti-tank rifle” (ATR) is not an entirely accurate term - this weapon would be more correctly called an “anti-tank rifle.” However, this is how it happened historically (apparently as a translation of the German word “panzerbuhse”) and has firmly entered our lexicon. The armor-piercing effect of anti-tank rifles is based on the kinetic energy of the bullet used, and, therefore, depends on the speed of the bullet at the moment it meets an obstacle, the angle of contact, mass (or rather, the ratio of mass to caliber), the design and shape of the bullet, the mechanical properties of the bullet material (core) and armor. The bullet, having pierced the armor, causes damage due to its incendiary and fragmentation action. It should be noted that the lack of armor action was the main reason for the low effectiveness of the first anti-tank gun - the single-shot 13.37 mm Mauser developed in 1918. A bullet fired from this anti-tank rifle was capable of penetrating 20 mm armor at a range of 500 meters. During the interwar period, anti-tank rifles were tested in different countries, but for a long time they were treated more like a surrogate, especially since the German Reichswehr adopted the Mauser anti-tank rifle as a temporary replacement for the TuF machine gun of the corresponding caliber.

In the 20-30s, a light small-caliber cannon or a large-caliber machine gun seemed to most specialists to be the most successful and universal solution to two problems - air defense at low altitudes and anti-tank defense at short and medium ranges. It would seem that this view was confirmed by the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939 (although during those battles, both sides, in addition to the 20-mm automatic cannon, used the surviving 13.37-mm Mauser anti-tank guns). However, by the end of the 30s it became clear that the “universal” or “anti-tank” machine gun (12.7 mm Browning, DShK, Vickers, 13 mm Hotchkiss, 20 mm Oerlikon, Solothurn ", "Madsen", 25-mm "Vickers"), due to the combination of its weight, size and efficiency, cannot be used at the front line by small infantry units. Large-caliber machine guns during the Second World War, as a rule, were used for air defense needs or for shelling fortified firing points (a typical example is the use of the Soviet 12.7-mm DShK). True, they armed light armored vehicles, along with anti-aircraft guns, they were used in anti-tank guns, and were even included in anti-tank reserves. But the heavy machine gun did not actually become an anti-tank weapon. Note that the 14.5-mm Vladimirov KPV machine gun, which appeared in 1944, although it was created for the cartridge of an anti-tank rifle, at the time of its appearance could not serve as an “anti-tank” one. After the war, it was used as a means of combating manpower at considerable ranges, air targets and light armored vehicles.

Anti-tank rifles used during World War II varied in caliber (from 7.92 to 20 millimeters), type (self-loading, magazine, single-shot), size, weight, and layout. However, their design had a number of common features:
- high muzzle velocity was achieved through the use of a powerful cartridge and a long barrel (90 - 150 calibers);

Cartridges with armor-piercing tracer and armor-piercing incendiary bullets were used, which had armor-piercing and sufficient armor-protecting effect. Note that attempts to create anti-tank guns for the developed cartridges of large-caliber machine guns did not give satisfactory results, and the cartridges were specially developed, and converted cartridges for aircraft guns were used in 20-mm anti-tank guns. 20-mm anti-tank guns became a separate branch of “anti-tank machine guns” of the 20-30s of the last century;

To reduce recoil, muzzle brakes, spring shock absorbers, and soft butt pads were installed;

To increase maneuverability, the dimensions of weight and anti-tank guns were reduced, carrying handles were introduced, and heavy guns were quickly disassembled;

In order to quickly transfer fire, the bipod was attached closer to the middle, for uniformity of aiming and convenience, many samples were equipped with a “cheek”, a shoulder pad for the butt, most samples used a pistol grip for control, and it was possible to hold a special handle or butt with the left hand when shooting;

Maximum reliability of the mechanisms was achieved;

Great importance was attached to ease of development and production.

The problem of rate of fire was resolved in combination with the requirement of simplicity of design and maneuverability. Single-shot anti-tank rifles had a rate of fire of 6-8 rounds per minute, magazine-loaded ones - 10-12, and self-loading ones - 20-30.

12.7 mm single-shot "Sholokhov PTR" chambered for the DShK cartridge, manufactured in 1941.

In the USSR, a government decree on the development of an anti-tank rifle appeared on March 13, 1936. The design of 20-25 mm shotguns weighing up to 35 kilograms was entrusted to S.A. Korovin M.N. Blum and S.V. Vladimirov. Until 1938, 15 samples were tested, but none of them met the requirements. So, in 1936 at the Kovrov plant No. 2 named after. Kirkizh produced two prototypes of the 20-mm “company anti-tank rifle” INZ-10 of the M.N. system. Blum and S.V. Vladimirov - on a wheeled carriage and on a bipod. In August 1938, eight company-level anti-tank weapons systems were tested at the Small Arms Research Site in Shchyurovo:
- 20mm anti-tank rifle INZ-10;
- 12.7 mm anti-tank rifle, converted by NIPSVO from the German Mauser;
- 12.7 mm Vladimirov anti-tank rifle;
- 12.7 mm TsKB-2 anti-tank rifle;
- 14.5 mm anti-tank rifle of the Vladimirov and NIPSVO systems (14.5 mm cartridge developed by NIPSVO);
- 25-mm self-loading gun MTs (43-K Tsyrulnikov and Mikhno systems);
- 37 mm DR recoilless rifle.

The INZ-10 light self-loading gun showed unsatisfactory armor penetration and accuracy. The weight of the weapon in the firing position was also large (41.9 - 83.3 kg). The remaining systems were also either considered unsatisfactory or needed serious improvements. At the beginning of 1937, NIPSVO tested an experimental Tula self-loading 20-mm anti-tank rifle (gun) TsKBSV-51 developed by S.A. Korovin. This gun had a tripod and an optical sight. However, it was also rejected due to insufficient armor penetration, high weight (47.2 kg) and poor design of the muzzle brake. In 1938, B.G. proposed his light 37-mm anti-tank gun. Shpitalny, head of OKB-15, but it was rejected even before the tests began. An attempt to convert the Shpitalny and Vladimirov automatic 20-mm cannon (ShVAK) into a “universal” anti-aircraft anti-tank weapon also failed. In the end, the requirements for anti-tank rifles themselves were considered inappropriate. On November 9, 1938, the Artillery Department formulated new requirements. We have modified a powerful 14.5-mm cartridge that has an armor-piercing incendiary bullet B-32 with a hardened steel core and a pyrotechnic incendiary composition (similar to the B-32 rifle bullet). The incendiary composition was placed between the shell and the core. Serial production of the cartridge began in 1940. The mass of the cartridge was 198 grams, the bullet - 51 grams, the length of the cartridge was 155.5 millimeters, the cartridge case - 114.2 millimeters. A bullet at a range of 0.5 km at an impact angle of 20 degrees was capable of penetrating 20 mm cemented armor.

14.5 mm PTR Degtyarev mod. 1941

N.V. Rukavishnikov used this cartridge to develop a very successful self-loading gun, the rate of fire of which reached 15 rounds per minute (the self-loading 14.5-mm anti-tank gun developed by Shpitalny was again unsuccessful). In August 1939, it successfully passed the tests. In October of the same year it was put into service under the designation PTR-39. However, in the spring of 1940, Marshal G.I. Kulik, the head of the GAU, raised the question of the ineffectiveness of existing anti-tank weapons against the “newest of Germany”, about which intelligence data had appeared. In July 1940, the PTR-39 was put into production by the Kovrov plant named after. Kirkizh was suspended. Erroneous views that in the near future the armor protection and firepower of tanks would significantly increase had a number of consequences: anti-tank guns were excluded from the weapon system (order dated August 26, 1940), the production of 45-mm anti-tank guns was stopped, and an order was issued for the urgent design of 107- millimeter tank and anti-tank guns. As a result of this, the Soviet infantry lost an effective close-combat anti-tank weapon.

In the first weeks of the war, the tragic consequences of this mistake became visible. However, on June 23, tests of Rukavishnikov’s anti-tank rifles showed a still large percentage of delays. Finishing and putting this gun into production would require considerable time. True, individual Rukavishnikov anti-tank rifles were used in parts of the Western Front during the defense of Moscow. In July 1941, as a temporary measure, the workshops of many Moscow universities began assembling a single-shot anti-tank gun chambered for the 12.7-mm DShK cartridge (this gun was proposed by V.N. Sholokhov, and it was considered back in 1938). The simple design was copied from the old German 13.37 mm Mauser anti-tank rifle. However, a muzzle brake, a shock absorber on the back of the butt, and a lightweight folding bipod were added to the design. Despite this, the design did not provide the required parameters, especially since the armor penetration of the 12.7 mm cartridge was insufficient to combat tanks. Especially for these anti-tank rifles, a cartridge with an armor-piercing BS-41 bullet was produced in small series.

Finally, in July, a 14.5-mm cartridge with an armor-piercing incendiary bullet was officially adopted. To speed up work on a technologically advanced and effective 14.5-mm anti-tank rifle, Stalin at a meeting of the State Defense Committee proposed entrusting the development to “one more, and for reliability - two designers” (according to the memoirs of D.F. Ustinov). The task was issued in July to S.G. Simonov and V.A. Degtyarev. A month later, the designs were presented, ready for testing - only 22 days passed from the moment the task was received to the test shots.

V.A. Degtyarev and employees of KB-2 plant named after. Kirkizha (INZ-2 or plant No. 2 of the People's Commissariat of Armaments) on July 4 began developing a 14.5-mm anti-tank rifle. At the same time, two store options were developed. On July 14, working drawings were transferred to production. On July 28, Degtyarev’s anti-tank rifle project was discussed at a meeting at the Red Army Small Arms Directorate. On July 30, Degtyarev was offered to simplify one sample, converting it into a single-shot one. This was necessary to speed up the organization of mass production of anti-tank rifles. A few days later the sample was already presented.

At the same time, work was underway to fine-tune the cartridge. On August 15, a version of the 14.5 mm cartridge with a BS-41 bullet having a powder metal-ceramic core (bullet mass was 63.6 g) was adopted. The bullet was developed by the Moscow Hard Alloy Plant. The 14.5 mm cartridges differed in color: the B-32 bullet nose was painted black and had a red belt, while the BS-41 bullet was painted red and had a black nose. The cartridge capsule was covered with black paint. This coloring allowed the armor-piercer to quickly distinguish between cartridges. A cartridge with a BZ-39 bullet was produced. Based on the BS-41, an “armor-piercing-incendiary-chemical” bullet with a capsule with a gas-forming composition of the HAF in the rear part was developed (the German “armor-piercing-chemical” cartridge for the Pz.B 39 served as a model). However, this cartridge was not accepted. Acceleration of work on anti-tank guns was necessary, since the problems of anti-tank artillery units of rifle units worsened - in August, due to a lack of anti-tank artillery, 45-mm guns were removed from the divisional and battalion level for the formation of anti-tank artillery brigades and regiments, the 57-mm anti-tank gun was removed from production due to technological problems.

On August 29, 1941, after a demonstration to members of the State Defense Committee, Simonov’s self-loading model and Degtyarev’s single-shot model were adopted for service under the designations PTRS and PTRD. Due to the urgency of the issue, the guns were accepted before the end of the tests - survivability tests of anti-tank guns were carried out on September 12-13, the final tests of the modified anti-tank guns were carried out on September 24. The new anti-tank rifles were supposed to fight light and medium tanks, as well as armored vehicles at a range of up to 500 meters.

14.5 mm Simonov PTR mod. 1941

Production of PTRD was started at plant No. 2 named after. Kirkizha - in early October, the first batch of 50 guns was put into assembly. On October 10, a special unit was created in the Chief Designer's Department. documentation development group. A conveyor was urgently organized. Equipment and tools were prepared out of turn. On October 28, a specialized production of anti-tank rifles was created under the leadership of Goryachiy - at that time the task for anti-tank weapons was a priority. Later, Izhmash, the production of the Tula Arms Plant, evacuated to Saratov, and others joined the production of anti-tank rifles.

Degtyarev's single-shot anti-tank rifle consisted of a barrel with a cylindrical receiver, a longitudinally rotating sliding bolt, a butt with a trigger box, trigger and impact mechanisms, a bipod and sighting devices. The barrel bore had 8 rifling with a stroke length of 420 millimeters. The active box-shaped muzzle brake was capable of absorbing up to 60% of recoil energy. The cylindrical bolt had a straight handle at the rear and two lugs at the front, which housed a striking mechanism, a reflector and an ejector. The impact mechanism included a mainspring and a hammer with a striker; the tail of the striker looked like a hook and went out. The bevel of its frame, when the bolt was unlocked, pulled the firing pin back.

The receiver and trigger were connected rigidly to the inner tube of the butt. An inner tube with a spring shock absorber was inserted into the butt tube. The moving system (bolt, receiver and barrel) moved back after the shot, the bolt handle “ran” onto the carbon profile mounted on the butt, and when turned, unlocked the bolt. After stopping the barrel, the bolt moved back by inertia, standing on the bolt stop (the left side of the receiver), while the cartridge case was pushed by the reflector into the lower window in the receiver. The shock absorber spring returned the moving system to the forward position. Inserting a new cartridge into the upper window of the receiver, chambering it, and also locking the bolt was done manually. The trigger mechanism included a trigger, a release lever and a sear with springs. Sights were placed to the left on brackets. They included a front sight and a reversible rear sight at ranges of up to and over 600 meters (in the first releases of anti-tank rifles, the rear sight moved in a vertical groove).

On the butt there was a soft cushion, a wooden rest designed to hold the gun with the left hand, a wooden pistol grip, and a “cheek.” Folding stamped bipods were attached to the barrel using a collar with a wing. A handle was also attached to the barrel, with the help of which the weapon was carried. The accessory included a pair of canvas bags each holding 20 rounds. The total weight of Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle with ammunition was approximately 26 kilograms. In battle, the gun was carried by the first or both crew numbers.

A minimum of parts and the use of a butt pipe instead of a frame greatly simplified the production of an anti-tank rifle, and the automatic opening of the bolt increased the rate of fire. Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle successfully combined simplicity, efficiency and reliability. The speed of production was of great importance in those conditions. The first batch of 300 PTRD units was completed in October and already in early November it was sent to Rokossovsky’s 16th Army. On November 16 they were used in combat for the first time. By December 30, 1941, 17,688 Degtyarev anti-tank rifles were produced, and during 1942 - 184,800 units.

The Simonov self-loading anti-tank rifle was created on the basis of the experimental Simonov self-loading rifle of the 1938 model, which worked according to a scheme with the removal of powder gas. The gun consisted of a barrel with a muzzle brake and a gas chamber, a receiver with a butt, a trigger guard, a bolt, a reloading mechanism, a firing mechanism, sights, a bipod and a magazine. The bore was the same as that of the PTRD. The open-type gas chamber was secured with pins at a distance of 1/3 of the barrel length from the muzzle. The receiver and barrel were connected by a wedge.

The barrel bore was locked by tilting the bolt frame downwards. Locking and unlocking was controlled by the bolt stem, which had a handle. The reloading mechanism included a three-position gas regulator, a rod, a piston, a tube and a pusher with a spring. A pusher acted on the bolt stem. The bolt return spring was located in the stem channel. The hammer with a spring was placed in the channel of the bolt frame. The bolt, having received a movement impulse from the pusher after the shot, moved backward. At the same time, the pusher returned forward. The spent cartridge case was removed by the bolt ejector and reflected upward by the protrusion of the receiver. After the cartridges ran out, the bolt stopped in the receiver.

A trigger mechanism was mounted on the trigger guard. The trigger striking mechanism had a screw mainspring. The design of the trigger mechanism included: a trigger sear, a trigger lever and a hook, while the axis of the trigger was located at the bottom. The magazine and lever feeder were hinged to the receiver; its latch was located on the trigger guard. The cartridges were placed in a checkerboard pattern. The magazine was equipped with a pack (clip) of five rounds with the lid folded down. The rifle included 6 clips. The front sight had a fence, and the sector sight had notches from 100 to 1500 meters in increments of 50. The anti-tank rifle had a wooden butt with a shoulder pad and a soft cushion, and a pistol grip. The narrow neck of the butt was used to hold the gun with the left hand. A folding bipod was attached to the barrel using a clip (swivel). There was a handle for carrying. In battle, the anti-tank rifle was carried by one or both crew numbers. The disassembled gun on the hike - the receiver with the butt and the barrel - was carried in two tarpaulin cases.

The production of Simonov's self-loading anti-tank gun was simpler than Rukavishnikov's gun (the number of parts is one third less, machine hours are 60% less, time is 30%), but much more complicated than Degtyarev's anti-tank gun. In 1941, 77 Simonov anti-tank rifles were produced, in 1942 the number was already 63,308 units. Since anti-tank rifles were adopted urgently, all the shortcomings of the new systems, such as tight cartridge case extraction in the Degtyarev PTR or double shots in the Simonov PTR, were corrected during production or “adjusted” in military workshops. Despite all the technology of anti-tank rifles, the deployment of their mass production in wartime required some time - the needs of the troops began to be met only in November 1942. The establishment of mass production made it possible to reduce the cost of weapons - for example, the cost of the Simonov anti-tank rifle from the first half of 1942 to the second half of 1943 decreased by almost half.

Anti-tank rifles bridged the gap between the "anti-tank" capabilities of artillery and infantry.

Since December 1941, companies armed with anti-tank rifles (27, and later 54 rifles) were introduced into the rifle regiments. Since the fall of 1942, platoons (18 rifles) of anti-tank rifles were introduced into the battalions. In January 1943, the PTR company was included in the motorized rifle and machine gun battalion (later - the submachine gun battalion) of the tank brigade. Only in March 1944, when the role of anti-tank rifles decreased, the companies were disbanded, and the “armor-piercing men” were retrained as tank crews (since they were re-equipped with the T-34-85, whose crew consisted of not four, but five people). Companies were assigned to anti-tank destruction divisions, and battalions were assigned to anti-tank destruction brigades. Thus, attempts were made to ensure close interaction between PTR units and infantry, artillery and tank units.

The troops of the Western Front, engaged in the defense of Moscow, were the first to receive anti-tank rifles. Directive of Army General G.K. Zhukov, commander of the front forces, dated October 26, 1941, speaking about sending 3-4 platoons of anti-tank rifles to the 5th, 16th and 33rd armies, demanded “to take measures for the immediate use of this exceptionally effective and powerful weapon... giving their battalions and regiments." Zhukov's order of December 29 also pointed out the disadvantages of using anti-tank rifles - the use of crews as shooters, lack of interaction with anti-tank artillery and groups of tank destroyers, cases of leaving anti-tank rifles on the battlefield. As you can see, the effectiveness of the new weapon was not immediately appreciated; the command staff simply had little idea of the possibilities of its use. It is necessary to take into account the shortcomings of the first batches of anti-tank rifles.

Degtyarev's anti-tank rifles were first used in combat in Rokossovsky's 16th Army. The most famous battle was the clash on November 16, 1941, at the Dubosekovo crossing during the defense of Moscow, between a group of tank destroyers of the 2nd battalion of the 1075th regiment of Panfilov’s 316th Infantry Division and 30 German tanks. 18 tanks that took part in the attacks were knocked out, but less than a fifth of the entire company remained alive. This battle showed the effectiveness of anti-tank grenades and anti-tank rifles in the hands of "tank destroyers". However, he also revealed the need to cover the “fighters” with riflemen and support them with light regimental artillery.

To understand the role of anti-tank rifle units, it is necessary to remember tactics. In battle, the commander of a rifle battalion or regiment could leave a company of anti-tank rifles entirely at his disposal or transfer it to rifle companies, leaving at least a platoon of anti-tank rifles in the defense area of the regiment as a reserve. A platoon of anti-tank rifles could operate in full force or be split into half-platoons and squads of 2-4 rifles. The anti-tank rifle squad, acting independently or as part of a platoon, in battle had to “choose a firing position, equip it and camouflage it; quickly prepare for shooting, and also accurately hit enemy armored vehicles and tanks; during the battle, covertly and quickly change the firing position.” Firing positions were chosen behind artificial or natural obstacles, although quite often the crews simply took cover in bushes or grass. The positions were chosen in such a way as to ensure all-round fire at ranges of up to 500 meters, and a flank position was taken to the direction of movement of enemy tanks. Cooperation was also organized with other anti-tank formations and rifle units. Depending on the availability of time at the position, a full-profile trench with a platform was prepared, a trench for all-round firing without or with a platform, a small trench for firing in a wide sector - in this case, shooting was carried out with the bipod removed or tucked in. Fire at tanks from anti-tank rifles was opened, depending on the situation, from a distance of 250 to 400 meters, preferably, of course, in the stern or side, however, at infantry positions, armor-piercing soldiers quite often had to “hit them head-on.” Anti-tank rifle crews were divided in depth and along the front at distances and intervals from 25 to 40 meters at an angle back or forward, and during flanking fire - in one line. The front of an anti-tank rifle squad is 50-80 meters, that of a platoon is 250-700 meters.

During the defense, “armor-piercing snipers” were deployed in echelon, preparing the main position and up to three spare ones. An observer-gunner on duty remained at the squad position until the enemy armored vehicles began to advance. If the tank was moving, it was recommended to concentrate the fire of several anti-tank rifles on it: when the tank approached, fire was fired at its turret, if the tank overcame a barrier, a scarp or embankment - along the bottom, if the tank was moving towards a neighbor - along the engine part, side and external tanks, in if the tank is removed - to the stern. Taking into account the increased armor of tanks, fire from anti-tank rifles was usually opened from a distance of 150-100 meters. When they approached directly to positions or when breaking into the depths of the defense, armor-piercing fighters and “tank destroyers” used anti-tank grenades and Molotov cocktails.

The commander of an anti-tank rifle platoon could allocate a squad participating in the defense to destroy enemy aircraft. This was a common task. For example, in the defense zone of the 148th Rifle Division (Central Front) near Kursk, 93 heavy and light machine guns and 65 anti-tank rifles were prepared to destroy air targets. Anti-tank rifles were often placed on improvised anti-aircraft installations. A tripod machine created for this purpose at plant No. 2 named after. Kirkizh was not accepted into production, and this is perhaps fair.

In 1944, staggered placement of anti-tank rifles in depth and along the front at a distance of 50 to 100 meters from each other was practiced. At the same time, mutual shooting of the approaches was ensured, and dagger fire was widely used. In winter, anti-tank rifles were mounted by crews on drags or sleds. In closed areas with non-shootable spaces for anti-tank rifle positions, groups of fighters with incendiary bottles and grenades were positioned in front of them. In the mountains, anti-tank rifle crews were, as a rule, located at road turns, entrances to valleys and gorges, and when defending heights - on tank-accessible and most gentle slopes.

During the offensive, a platoon of anti-tank rifles moved in rolling formations in the battle formation of a rifle battalion (company) in readiness to meet enemy armored vehicles with fire from at least two squads. The anti-tank rifle crews occupied positions in front between the rifle platoons. During an offensive with an open flank, armor-piercing units are usually kept on this flank. A squad of anti-tank rifles usually advanced on the flanks or in the gaps of a rifle company, and a platoon of anti-tank rifles - a battalion or company. Between positions, crews moved under cover of mortar and infantry fire along or hidden approaches.

During the attack, anti-tank rifles were located at the attack line. Their main task was to defeat enemy fire (primarily anti-tank) weapons. If tanks appeared, the fire was immediately transferred to them. During the battle in the depths of the enemy’s defense, platoons and squads of anti-tank rifles supported the advance of rifle units with fire, ensuring its protection “from surprise attacks by enemy armored vehicles and tanks from ambushes,” destroying counterattacking or dug-in tanks, as well as firing points. The crews were recommended to hit armored vehicles and tanks with flanking and crossfire.

During battles in the forest or populated areas, since the battle formations were dismembered, anti-tank rifle squads were often attached to rifle platoons. Moreover, a reserve of anti-tank rifles remained mandatory in the hands of the regiment or battalion commander. When advancing, anti-tank rifle units covered the rear and flanks of rifle regiments, battalions or companies, firing through vacant lots or squares, as well as along streets. When occupying defenses within the city, positions were placed at street intersections, squares, basements and buildings in order to keep alleys and streets, breaches and arches under fire. When defending a forest, anti-tank rifle positions were placed in depth, so that roads, clearings, paths and clearings were fired upon. On the march, a platoon of anti-tank rifles was attached to a marching outpost or followed in constant readiness to meet the enemy with fire in the column of the main forces. Anti-tank rifle units operated as part of forward and reconnaissance detachments, especially in rough terrain that made it difficult to carry heavier weapons. In the advanced detachments, armor-piercing detachments perfectly complemented the tank brigades - for example, on July 13, 1943, the advanced detachment of the 55th Guards Tank Regiment successfully repelled a counterattack of 14 German tanks with fire from anti-tank rifles and tanks in the Rzhavets area, knocking out 7 of them. Former Wehrmacht Lieutenant General E. Schneider, an expert in the field of weapons, wrote: “The Russians in 1941 had a 14.5-mm anti-tank rifle, which caused a lot of trouble for our tanks and light armored personnel carriers that appeared later.” In general, in some German works about the Second World War and the memoirs of Wehrmacht tank crews, Soviet anti-tank rifles were mentioned as weapons “worthy of respect,” but tribute was also paid to the courage of their crews. With high ballistic data, the 14.5 mm anti-tank rifle was distinguished by its manufacturability and maneuverability. Simonov's anti-tank rifle is considered the best weapon of this class of World War II in terms of its combination of operational and combat qualities.

Having played a significant role in anti-tank defense in 1941-1942, anti-tank rifles had already lost their position by the summer of 1943 - with the increase in armor protection of assault guns and tanks over 40 millimeters. True, there were cases of successful combat between infantry anti-tank formations and heavy enemy tanks in previously prepared defensive positions. For example, a duel between the armor-piercing gunman Ganja (151st Infantry Regiment) and the Tiger. The first shot to the forehead did not produce any results, the armor-piercing officer put the anti-tank rifle in the trench and, letting the tank pass over him, fired at the stern, immediately changing position. While the tank was turning around to move to the trench, Ganzha fired a third shot into the side and set it on fire. However, this is the exception rather than the rule. If in January 1942 the number of anti-tank rifles in the troops was 8,116 units, in January 1943 - 118,563 units, in 1944 - 142,861 units, that is, in two years it increased 17.6 times, then in 1944 it began to decline. By the end of the war, the Active Army had only 40 thousand anti-tank rifles in service (their total resource as of May 9, 1945 was 257,500 units). The largest number of anti-tank rifles was supplied to the army in 1942 - 249,000 units, but in the first half of 1945 there were only 800 units. The same picture was observed with 12.7 mm and 14.5 mm cartridges: in 1942 their production was 6 times higher than the pre-war level, but by 1944 it had decreased noticeably. Despite this, production of 14.5 mm anti-tank rifles continued until January 1945. A total of 471,500 units were produced during the war. The anti-tank rifle was a front-line weapon, which explains significant losses - during the war, 214 thousand anti-tank rifles of all models were lost, that is, 45.4%. The highest percentage of losses was observed in 41 and 42 - 49.7 and 33.7%, respectively. Material losses corresponded to the level of personnel losses.

The following figures indicate the intensity of the use of anti-tank rifles in the middle of the war. During the defense on the Kursk Bulge on the Central Front, 387 thousand rounds of anti-tank rifles were spent (48,370 per day), and on Voronezh - 754 thousand (68,250 per day). During the Battle of Kursk, more than 3.5 million rounds of anti-tank rifle ammunition were used. In addition to tanks, anti-tank rifles fired at firing points and embrasures of bunkers and pillboxes at a range of up to 800 meters, and at aircraft - up to 500 meters.

In the third period of the war, anti-tank rifles of Degtyarev and Simonov were used against light armored vehicles and lightly armored self-propelled guns, which were widely used by the enemy, as well as to combat firing points, especially in battles within the city, right up to the storming of Berlin. Often, guns were used by snipers to hit targets at a considerable distance or enemy shooters located behind armor shields. In August 1945, Degtyarev and Simonov's anti-tank rifles were used in battles with the Japanese. Here this type of weapon could come in handy, especially considering the relatively weak armor of Japanese tanks. However, the Japanese used tanks very little against the Soviet troops.

Anti-tank rifles were in service not only with rifle units, but also with cavalry units. Here, to transport Degtyarev's gun, they used packs for cavalry saddles and pack saddles of the 1937 model. The gun was mounted above the horse's croup on a pack on a metal block with two brackets. The rear bracket was also used as a swivel support for firing from a horse at ground and air targets. At the same time, the shooter stood behind the horse, which was held by the handler. To drop anti-tank rifles to partisans and paratroopers, an elongated UPD-MM parachute bag with a shock absorber and a parachute chamber was used. Cartridges were quite often dropped from low level flight without a parachute in closures wrapped in burlap. Soviet anti-tank rifles were transferred to foreign formations that were formed in the USSR: for example, 6,786 guns were transferred to the Polish Army, 1,283 units were transferred to Czechoslovak units. During the Korean War of 50-53, soldiers of the North Korean army and Chinese volunteers used Soviet 14.5 mm anti-tank rifles against light armored vehicles and hitting point targets at a considerable distance (this experience was adopted from Soviet snipers).

The improvement of anti-tank rifles and the development of new schemes for them continued continuously. An example of an attempt to create a lighter anti-tank rifle can be considered the Rukavishnikov single-shot 12.7-mm anti-tank rifle, tested in February 1942. Its mass was 10.8 kg. The shutter system allowed it to fire at speeds of up to 12-15 rounds per minute. It was possible to replace the barrel with a 14.5 mm one. Lightness and simplicity prompted the range specialists to recommend Rukavishnikov’s new gun for mass production. But the increase in armor protection of enemy assault guns and tanks required a different approach.

The search for anti-tank weapons that would be capable of operating in infantry units and fighting the latest tanks went in two directions - “enlargement” of anti-tank guns and “lightening” anti-tank guns. In both cases, ingenious solutions were found and quite interesting designs were created. Blum's experimental single-shot anti-tank rifles and "PEC" rifles (Rashkov, Ermolaev, Slukhodky) aroused great interest from the GBTU and the GAU. Blum's anti-tank rifle was developed for a 14.5 mm cartridge (14.5x147) in which the muzzle velocity was increased to 1500 meters per second. The cartridge was created based on the cartridge case of a 23-mm aircraft cannon shot (at the same time, a 23-mm shot was developed based on a standard 14.5-mm cartridge to lighten the aircraft cannon). The gun had a rotary, longitudinally sliding bolt with two lugs and a spring-loaded reflector, which ensured reliable removal of the cartridge case at any speed of movement of the bolt. The barrel of the gun was equipped with a muzzle brake. The butt had a leather pad on the back of the head. Folding bipods were used for installation. RES anti-tank rifles were developed for a 20-mm shot with a projectile having an armor-piercing core (without explosives). The RES barrel was locked by a horizontally moving wedge bolt, which was opened manually and closed by a return spring. The trigger mechanism had a safety lever. The folding stock with a buffer resembled Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle. The gun was equipped with a muzzle brake-flame arrester and a wheeled machine with a shield. In April 1943, at the GBTU training ground, a captured Pz.VI "Tiger" was fired upon, which showed that Blum's anti-tank rifle was capable of penetrating 82 mm tank armor at a range of up to 100 meters. On August 10, 1943, both anti-tank guns were fired at the “Vystrel” course: this time they recorded the penetration of 55-mm armor by a bullet from a Blum anti-tank gun at a distance of 100 meters, and from the “RES” 70-mm armor was penetrated (at a distance of 300 meters the projectile RES penetrated 60 mm armor). From the commission’s conclusion: “in terms of armor-piercing action and power, both tested samples of anti-tank guns are significantly superior to the anti-tank guns of Degtyarev and Simonov, which are in service. The tested guns are a reliable means of combating medium tanks of the T-IV type and even more powerful armored vehicles.” Blum's anti-tank rifle was more compact, so the question of its adoption was raised. However, this did not happen. Small-scale production of 20-mm RES was carried out in Kovrov - in 1942, plant No. 2 produced 28 units, and in 1943 – 43 units. This is where production ended. In addition, at plant No. 2, Degtyarev’s anti-tank rifle was converted into a “double-caliber” one with an increased initial speed chambered for a 23-mm VYa cannon (the production of the gun at the plant began in February 1942). Another version of the Degtyarev anti-tank gun with an increased initial speed used the principle of sequential firing of charges along the length of the barrel, according to the multi-chamber gun scheme theoretically calculated in 1878 by Perrault. At the top, approximately in the middle of the barrel of the anti-tank gun, a box with a chamber was attached, which was connected by a transverse hole to the bore. A blank 14.5 mm cartridge was placed in this box, locked with a conventional bolt. When fired, the powder gases ignited the charge of the blank cartridge, which in turn increased the speed of the bullet, maintaining pressure in the barrel. True, the weapon’s recoil increased, but the system’s survivability and reliability turned out to be low.

The increase in armor penetration of anti-tank rifles did not keep pace with the increase in armor protection. In a journal dated October 27, 1943, the GAU artillery committee noted: “The anti-tank rifles of Degtyarev and Simonov often cannot penetrate the armor of a German medium tank. Therefore, it is necessary to create an anti-tank gun capable of penetrating 75-80 millimeters of armor at 100 meters, and nailing 50-55 millimeters of armor at an angle of 20-25°.” Even the “two-caliber” Degtyarev anti-tank rifles and the heavy “RES” had difficulty meeting these requirements. Work on anti-tank rifles was virtually curtailed.

Attempts to “lighten” artillery systems to the parameters of infantry weapons corresponded to the 1942 infantry combat regulations, which included anti-tank guns among infantry fire weapons. An example of such an anti-tank gun would be the experimental 25-mm LPP-25, developed by Zhukov, Samusenko and Sidorenko in 1942 at the Artillery Academy named after. Dzerzhinsky. Weight in combat position - 154 kg. The crew of the gun is 3 people. Armor penetration at a distance of 100 meters - 100 millimeters (sub-caliber projectile). In 1944, the airborne 37-mm ChK-M1 cannon of Charnko and Komaritsky was adopted. The original recoil damping system made it possible to reduce the combat weight to 217 kilograms (for comparison, the weight of the 37-mm gun of the 1930 model was 313 kilograms). The height of the line of fire was 280 millimeters. With a rate of fire of 15 to 25 rounds per minute, the cannon with a sub-caliber projectile penetrated 86 mm armor at a range of 500 meters and 97 mm armor at 300 meters. However, only 472 guns were manufactured - they, like the “reinforced” anti-tank guns, were simply not needed.

A source of information:
Magazine "Equipment and weapons" Semyon Fedoseev "Infantry against tanks"

In this part we will talk about the most massive and successful manufacturer of anti-tank rifles during the entire Second World War.

USSR

The development of anti-tank guns in the USSR began in 1936. several large design bureaus at once. Like potential opponents, developments were carried out in parallel in several directions, namely:

Development of lightweight anti-tank rifles for powerful rifle caliber cartridges (7.62x122 and 7.62x155).

And the development of light anti-tank rifles in more powerful calibers 12.7mm and 14.5mm

In the second half of the 30s, the Soviet command greatly overestimated the armor of the potential enemy’s tanks and immediately decided to design portable large-caliber anti-tank rifles of 20-25mm caliber. At the same time, strictly limiting the developers in the mass of weapons - up to 35 kg. As a result, out of 15 samples examined before 1938. none were accepted into service. In November 1938 The requirements of the Main Artillery Directorate themselves were changed; now a cartridge was ready for the new weapon, which had been developed since 1934.

The powerful B-32 cartridge of 14.5x114 mm caliber had excellent characteristics at that time. An armor-piercing incendiary bullet with a hot core and a pyrotechnic composition left the barrel at a speed of 1100 m/s and pierced 20 mm of armor, at an angle of 70 degrees, at a distance of 300 m.

In addition to the B-32, the BS-41 bullet appeared a little later with even more impressive results. The cermet core allowed the BS-41 bullet to penetrate 30mm armor at a distance of 350m, and from a distance of 100m the bullet penetrated 40mm armor. Also, for the purpose of the experiment, a capsule with an irritating substance - chloroacetophenone - was placed in the bottom part of the BS-41 bullet. But the idea also didn’t really catch on.

The first gun chambered for the new cartridge to be put into service was the development of N.V. Rukavishnikova. His PTR-39 made it possible to fire about 15 rounds per minute and was successfully tested. However, the PTR-39 did not go into mass production. Head of the GAU - Marshal G.I. Kulik, based on erroneous information about new German tanks with reinforced armor, drew conclusions about the unsuitability of anti-tank rifles and even 45mm guns to fight new German tanks.

This decision (1940) actually left the Soviet infantryman without completely effective anti-tank weapons in June 1941. Let me remind you that on June 22, 1941. The main tank of the Wehrmacht was the PzKpfw III of various modifications - the frontal armor of the most modern of them was a maximum of 50mm, taking into account the applied armor plates. The maximum armor of the turret and sides of the newest modification for 1941 was 30mm. That is, most tanks with a high degree of probability were hit by a 14.5mm cartridge from an anti-tank rifle in almost any projection at distances of 300m or more.

This is not to mention the damage to the tracks, optical instruments, tanks and other vulnerable spots of the tank. At the same time, a huge number of German armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers were quite tough for the Soviet anti-tank rifles, especially the “forty-five”.

The PTR-39, designed by Rukavishnikov, was not without its drawbacks - it was quite complex and expensive to manufacture and sensitive to operate. But still, considering that with the beginning of the war, our army was left without any anti-tank rifle and considering that the ersatz Sholokhov rifle (cal. 12.7mm DShK) was used - copies of the same one, only with a muzzle brake and shock absorber, this mistake cost the Red Army a lot Army.

In 1941 at a meeting of the State Defense Committee, I.V. Stalin ordered the urgent development of a new anti-tank rifle for the Red Army. To be on the safe side, the leader recommended entrusting the work to “one more, or better yet two” designers. Both coped with the task brilliantly in their own way - S.G. Simonov and V.A. Degtyarev, moreover, only 22 days passed from the moment he received the assignment to the test firing.

PTRD

July 4, 1941 Degtyarev began developing his PTR and already on July 14 transferred the project to production; 2 store versions of Degtyarev’s PTR were reviewed on July 28 at the Red Army Small Arms Directorate. In order to speed up and simplify production, it was proposed to make one of the options single-shot. Already in August 1941, the cartridge I mentioned with the BS-41 bullet from the Moscow Hard Alloy Plant arrived in time. And in October 1941 A new combat specialty appeared in the ranks of the Red Army - armor-piercing officer.

PTRD - Single-shot bolt-action shotgun. The rifled barrel was equipped with an active box-shaped muzzle brake. The bolt had two lugs, a simple firing mechanism, a reflector and an ejector. The butt had a spring to absorb recoil, which also served as a return spring. The bolt, coupled with the barrel, rolled back after the shot, the bolt handle rotated against a carbon profile mounted on the butt, and when turned, unlocked the bolt. After stopping the barrel, the bolt moved back by inertia and stood on the bolt stop, the cartridge case was pushed out by the reflector into the lower window.

Loading a new cartridge into the chamber and locking the bolt was done manually. The sights were moved to the left and worked in two modes up to 400m and more than 400m. The crew of the gun consisted of two people. The total mass of the anti-tank rifle and ammunition was about 26 kg (Degtyarev’s gun itself weighed 17 kg). For maneuverability, the gun was equipped with a carrying handle. Either both or one fighter carried the gun. Only during 1942. The Soviet defense industry supplied the front with almost 185,000 PTRDs.

PTRS

Sergei Gavrilovich Simonov took a slightly different path. Based on his own developments (for example, ABC-36), he created an anti-tank rifle with automatic gas release. This made it possible to achieve an excellent practical rate of fire of 16 or more rounds per minute. At the same time, this increased the total weight of the weapon to 22kg.

Simonov's design looks, of course, much more complex compared to Degtyarev's design, however, it was simpler than Rukavishnikov's design. As a result, both models were adopted.

So PTRS - Anti-tank self-loading rifle mod. 1941 Simonov systems Weapons designed to combat enemy light and medium tanks at a distance of up to 500m. In practice, it was also used to destroy firing points, mortar and machine gun crews, bunkers, bunkers, low-flying aircraft and enemy personnel behind cover at distances of up to 800m.

Semi-automatic weapons used the removal of part of the powder gases from the barrel bore to operate the automation. The weapon is equipped with a three-position gas regulator. Food was supplied from an integral magazine with clips of 5 rounds. The USM allowed only single fire. Locking - by tilting the bolt in a vertical plane, recoil compensation by means of a muzzle brake, a softening attachment on the butt. In this model, a special shock absorber was not needed, since the muzzle brake paired with the semi-automatic system itself was enough to reduce recoil, although the recoil of the PTRD is less noticeable.

In 1941 Due to the rather complex and labor-intensive production process, only 77 PTRS were delivered to the troops, but already in 1942 production was established and 63,000 PTRS were sent to the front. Production of PTRD and PTRS continued until 1945. During the war years, the USSR produced about 400,000 anti-tank missiles.

The combat use of anti-tank rifles also took place in various parts of the planet even after the end of WWII. Soviet PTRs successfully penetrated the armor of American tanks in Korea, as well as the armor of the M113 armored personnel carrier in Vietnam.

Individual samples of Soviet anti-tank rifles were seized from Palestinian militants in Lebanon. The author saw with his own eyes a Soviet anti-tank rifle in the armory at the Givati infantry brigade training base in the Negev Desert in Israel. The Israelis called this weapon the "Russian Barret".

The 14.5x114 cartridge is still alive and is in service in many countries around the world.

During the Second World War, there were armor-piercing aces who had more than a dozen destroyed enemy tanks and even Luftwaffe aircraft to their credit. Weapons played a very significant role in the Victory of the USSR over Nazi Germany. Despite. that by 1943 it had become extremely difficult to knock out a tank with an anti-tank rifle; the weapon remained in service until 1945. until it was replaced by rocket-propelled grenade launchers.

Work was also carried out to create a new anti-tank rifle chambered for a more powerful cartridge, for example, 14.5x147mm with high penetration power. To hit Wehrmacht medium tanks of later series. But such weapons did not enter service, since by 1943 the Red Army infantry was fully equipped with anti-tank artillery. The production of PTRs began to decline; by the end of the war, only 40,000 PTRs remained in service with the Red Army.

In terms of the combination of basic qualities - maneuverability, ease of production and operation, firepower and low cost, Soviet anti-tank guns significantly surpassed enemy small arms anti-tank weapons. It is worth noting that the early series of PTR were not without problems in operation. With the onset of spring 1942, both design flaws and urgently established production, as well as the lack of proper knowledge regarding operation in the troops themselves, became apparent.

But through the efforts of the designers and workers, the shortcomings were corrected as soon as possible, and the troops began to receive detailed, but quite clear and simple instructions for operating the PTR. Designers Degtyarev and Simonov personally inspected front-line units and observed their operation, collecting feedback from armor-piercing soldiers. By the summer of 1942, the guns had been finalized and became very reliable weapons that work in any climatic conditions.

In conclusion of this part, I will quote the Chief of Staff of the 1st Baltic Front, Colonel General V.V. Kurasova:

“During the Great Patriotic War,” he wrote on October 30, 1944, “anti-tank guns were used in all types of combat to cover tank-dangerous areas, both by entire units and in groups of 3-4 guns. In an offensive battle, anti-tank rifles were used in likely directions of enemy counterattacks, being located directly in the combat formations of the advancing infantry. In defense, anti-tank rifles were used in the most tank-dangerous directions as part of a platoon-company, echeloned in depth. Firing positions were selected taking into account flank fire, and in addition to the main ones there were 2-3 reserve positions taking into account group fire with all-round fire.

The experience of using anti-tank guns during the Patriotic War shows that they had the greatest effect in the period before July 1943, when the enemy used light and medium tanks, and the battle formations of our troops were relatively poorly equipped with anti-tank artillery. Starting from the second half of 1943, when the enemy began to use heavy tanks and self-propelled guns with powerful armor protection, the effectiveness of anti-tank guns decreased significantly. From now on, the main role in the fight against tanks is played entirely by artillery. Anti-tank rifles, which have good fire accuracy, are now used mainly against enemy firing points, armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers.”

At the end of World War II, PTRs gradually turned into large-caliber sniper rifles. Although in some local conflicts, both anti-tank rifles from the Second World War and modern home-made, handicraft models are used to combat lightly armored and other equipment, as well as enemy personnel.

Not all samples that are classified as PTR are mentioned in this article. Conventionally, anti-tank guns can be divided into three categories - light (rifle calibers), medium (caliber heavy machine guns) and heavy (bordering on air cannons and anti-tank artillery). I practically did not touch on the latter because, in my understanding, they no longer resemble a “gun”.

Separately, we need to consider the class of “recoilless” systems, the development of which began in the USSR back in the very early 30s...

But that's a completely different story.

1,0 1 -1 7

In this part we will talk about the most massive and successful manufacturer of anti-tank rifles during the entire Second World War.

USSR

The development of anti-tank guns in the USSR began in 1936. several large design bureaus at once. Like potential opponents, developments were carried out in parallel in several directions, namely:

Development of lightweight anti-tank rifles for powerful rifle caliber cartridges (7.62x122 and 7.62x155).

And the development of light anti-tank rifles in more powerful calibers 12.7mm and 14.5mm

PTRD

PTRS

Simonov's design looks, of course, much more complex compared to Degtyarev's design, however, it was simpler than Rukavishnikov's design. As a result, both models were adopted.

The 14.5x114 cartridge is still alive and is in service in many countries around the world.

In conclusion of this part, I will quote the Chief of Staff of the 1st Baltic Front, Colonel General V.V. Kurasova:

Separately, we need to consider the class of “recoilless” systems, the development of which began in the USSR back in the very early 30s...

But that's a completely different story.

The film “The Ballad of a Soldier” begins with a scene full of tragedy. A Soviet soldier-signalman is being pursued by a young soldier who has not been shot at and has nowhere to hide, he is running, and a steel colossus is about to overtake him and crush him. The soldier sees Degtyarev abandoned by someone. And he takes advantage of the unexpected chance for salvation. He shoots at the enemy car and knocks it out. Another tank is approaching him, but the signalman is not lost and burns him too.

“This couldn’t happen! - other “experts in military history” will say today. “You can’t penetrate tank armor with a gun!” - "Can!" - those who are more familiar with this subject will answer. There may be some inaccuracy in the film narrative, but it concerns not the combat capabilities of this class of weapons, but the chronology.

A little about tactics

Anti-tank rifles were created in the thirties of the 20th century in many countries. They seemed to be a completely logical and reasonable solution to the issue of confronting armored vehicles of that time. Artillery was supposed to become the main means of combating it, and anti-tank missiles - auxiliary, but more mobile. The offensive tactics involved striking with tank wedges involving dozens, even hundreds of vehicles, but the success of the attack was determined by whether it would be possible to create the required concentration of troops without the enemy noticing. Overcoming well-fortified defense lines, equipped with armor-piercing artillery, with a strip of minefields and engineering structures (gouges, hedgehogs, etc.) was an adventurous task and fraught with the loss of a large amount of equipment. But if the enemy unexpectedly strikes a poorly protected section of the front, then there will be no time for jokes. We will have to urgently “patch up the holes” in the defense, transfer guns and infantry that still need to dig in. It is difficult to quickly deliver the required number of guns with ammunition to a dangerous area. This is where an anti-tank rifle comes in handy. PTRD is a relatively compact and inexpensive weapon (much cheaper than a gun). You can produce a lot of them, and then equip all units with them. Just in case. Soldiers armed with them may not burn through all enemy tanks, but they will be able to delay the offensive. Time will be gained, the command will have time to bring up the main forces. Many military leaders thought so at the end of the thirties.

Why did our fighters lack PTR?

There are several reasons why the development and production of anti-tank rifles in the USSR in the pre-war years was practically curtailed, but the main one was the exclusively offensive nature of the Red Army. Some analysts point to the supposedly poor awareness of the Soviet leadership, which overestimated the degree of armor protection of German tanks, and therefore made the wrong conclusion about the low effectiveness of anti-tank guns as a class of weapons. There are even references to the head of the Glavartupra G.I. Kulik, who expressed such an opinion. Subsequently, it turned out that even the 14.5-mm Rukavishnikov PTR-39 anti-tank rifle, adopted by the Red Army in 1939 and abolished a year later, could easily penetrate the armor of all types of equipment possessed by the Wehrmacht in 1941.

What did the Germans come with?

Hitler's army crossed the border of the USSR with over three thousand tanks. It is difficult to appreciate this armada without using the method of comparison. The Red Army had much fewer new tanks (T-34 and KV), only a few hundred. So, maybe the Germans had equipment of approximately the same quality as ours, with quantitative superiority? This is wrong.

The T-I tank was not just light, it could be called a wedge. Without a gun, with a crew of two, it weighed slightly more than a passenger car. Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle, put into service in the fall of 1941, pierced it right through. The German T-II was little better, it had bulletproof armor and a short-barreled 37 mm cannon. There was also a T-III, which could withstand the impact of an PTR cartridge, but only if hit in the frontal part, but in other other areas...

The Panzerwaffe also had Czech, Polish, Belgian, French and other captured vehicles (they are included in the total number), worn out, outdated and poorly supplied with spare parts. I don’t even want to think about what Degtyarev’s anti-tank rifle could have done to any of them.

The Germans acquired “Tigers” and “Panthers” later, in 1943.

Resumption of production

We must pay tribute to the Stalinist leadership; it skillfully corrected mistakes. The decision to resume work on the PTR was made the day after the start of the war. This fact refutes the version that the Headquarters is poorly informed regarding the armored potential of the Wehrmacht; it is simply impossible to obtain such information in a day. Urgently (it took less than a month to manufacture experimental units), a competition was held for two samples, almost ready for launch into mass production. Simonov's anti-tank rifle showed good results, but in the technological aspect it was inferior to the second tested anti-tank rifle. It was more complex in design and also heavier, which also influenced the commission’s decision. On the last day of August, Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle was officially adopted by the Red Army and put into production at an arms factory in the city of Kovrov, and two months later - in Izhevsk. Over three years, more than 270 thousand of them were produced.

First results

At the end of October 1941, the situation at the front was catastrophic. The vanguard units of the Wehrmacht approached Moscow, two strategic echelons of the Red Army were practically destroyed in giant “cauldrons”, vast spaces of the European part of the USSR found themselves under the heel of the invaders. Under these circumstances, the Soviet soldiers did not lose heart. Lacking artillery in sufficient quantities, the troops showed massive heroism and fought tanks using grenades and Molotov cocktails. New weapons arrived at the front straight from the assembly line. On November 16, soldiers of the 1075th Infantry Regiment of the 316th Division destroyed three enemy tanks using PTRD. Soviet newspapers published photos of the heroes and the fascist equipment they burned. A continuation soon followed; four more tanks, which had previously conquered Warsaw and Paris, began to smoke near Lugovaya.

Foreign PTR

Newsreels of the war years repeatedly captured our soldiers with anti-tank rifles. Episodes of battles with their use were also reflected in feature films (for example, in S. Bondarchuk’s masterpiece “They Fought for the Motherland”). Documenters recorded much fewer French, American, English or German soldiers with PTRD for history. Does this mean that WWII anti-tank rifles were mostly Soviet? To some extent, yes. These weapons were produced in such quantities only in the USSR. But work on it was carried out in Britain (Boyce system), and in Germany (PzB-38, PzB-41), and in Poland (UR), and in Finland (L-35), and in the Czech Republic (MSS-41) . And even in neutral Switzerland (S18-1000). Another thing is that the engineers of all these, without a doubt, technologically “advanced” countries were never able to surpass Russian weapons in their simplicity, elegance of technical solutions, and also in quality. And not every soldier is capable of calmly shooting from a gun at an approaching tank from a trench. Ours can.

How to penetrate armor?

The PTRD has approximately the same tactical and technical characteristics as the Simonov anti-tank rifle, but it is lighter (17.3 versus 20.9 kg), shorter (2000 and 2108 mm, respectively) and simpler in design, and therefore requires less time to cleaning and easier to train shooters. These circumstances explain the preference given by the State Commission, despite the fact that the PTRS could fire at a higher rate of fire due to the built-in five-round magazine. The main quality of this weapon was still its ability to penetrate armor protection from various distances. To do this, it was necessary to send a special heavy bullet with a steel core (and, as an option, with an additional incendiary charge activated after passing through an obstacle) at a fairly high speed.

Armor-piercing

The distance at which Degtyarev’s anti-tank rifle becomes dangerous for enemy armored vehicles is half a kilometer. It is quite possible to use it to hit other targets, such as pillboxes, bunkers, and also aircraft. The caliber of the cartridge is 14.5 mm (brand B-32 regular armor-piercing incendiary or BS-41 with a ceramic super-hard tip). The length of the ammunition corresponds to an air cannon shell, 114 mm. The hitting distance of a target with armor 30 cm thick is 40 mm, and from a hundred meters this bullet penetrates 6 cm.

Accuracy

The accuracy of hits determines the success of firing at the most vulnerable areas of enemy equipment. Protection was constantly being improved, so instructions were issued and promptly updated for soldiers recommending how to most effectively use an anti-tank rifle. The modern idea of fighting armored vehicles also takes into account the possibility of hitting the weakest points. When firing tests from a hundred-meter distance, 75% of the cartridges hit the 22-centimeter vicinity of the center of the target.

Design

No matter how simple the technical solutions may be, they should not be primitive. WWII weapons were often produced in difficult conditions due to forced evacuation and the deployment of workshops in unprepared areas (it happened that for some time they had to work in the open air). The Kovrov and Izhevsk plants, which produced PTRDs until 1944, avoided this fate. Degtyarev's anti-tank rifle, despite the simplicity of its design, absorbed all the achievements of Russian gunsmiths.

The barrel is rifled, eight-way. The sight is the most common, with a front sight and a two-position rail (up to 400 m and 1 km). The PTRD is loaded like a regular rifle, but the strong recoil is due to the presence of a barrel brake and a spring shock absorber. For convenience, a handle is provided (one of the carrying fighters can hold it) and a bipod. Everything else: the sear, the firing mechanism, the receiver, the butt and other attributes of the gun are thought out with the ergonomics for which Russian weapons have always been famous.

Service

In field conditions, incomplete disassembly was most often carried out, which involved removing and disassembling the bolt, as the most contaminated unit. If this was not enough, then it was necessary to remove the bipod and butt, then disassemble the trigger mechanism and separate it. At low temperatures, a frost-resistant lubricant is used, in other cases, ordinary gun oil No. 21. The kit includes a cleaning rod (dismountable), an oiler, a screwdriver, two bandoliers, two moisture-resistant canvas covers (one on each side of the gun) and a service form, which records cases of training and combat use, as well as misfires and failures.

Korea

In 1943, German industry began producing medium and heavy tanks with powerful ballistic armor. Soviet troops continued to use PTRDs against light, less protected vehicles, as well as to suppress firing points. At the end of the war, there was no longer a need for anti-tank rifles. Powerful artillery and other effective weapons were used to combat the remaining German tanks in 1945. The Second World War is over. It seemed that the time of the PTRD was irrevocably gone. But five years later, the Korean War began, and the “old gun” began to shoot again, albeit at former allies - the Americans. It was in service with the DPRK and PLA armies, which fought on the peninsula until 1953. American tanks of the post-war generation most often withstood hits, but anything could happen. PTRDs were also used as an air defense weapon.

Post-war history

The presence of a large number of high-quality weapons with unique qualities encouraged them to look for some useful use for them. Tens of thousands of units were stored in lubricant. What can an anti-tank rifle be used for? Modern protective armor of tanks can withstand even a hit, not to mention a bullet (even if it has a core and a special tip). In the 60s they decided that with PTRD it was possible to hunt seals and whales. The idea is good, but this thing is too heavy. Also, from such a gun you can conduct sniper fire at a distance of up to a kilometer, the high initial speed allows you to shoot very accurately if you have it. The armor of an infantry fighting vehicle or armored personnel carrier is easily penetrated by the PTRD, which means that today the weapon has not completely lost its relevance. So it lies in warehouses, waiting in the wings...

(close combat anti-tank weapons in 1939-45)

The main means of fighting tanks - "anti-tank defense" (ATD) - during the Second World War was an anti-tank gun: towed, mounted on a self-propelled chassis with light cover or in the well-armored wheelhouse of a "fighter tank". However, in conditions of highly maneuverable combat operations with the massive use of armored vehicles, the “queen of the fields” infantry needed its own anti-tank (AT) close combat weapons, capable of operating directly in all combat formations. Such anti-tank weapons were supposed to combine “anti-tank” capabilities with the lightness and maneuverability of infantry weapons. In the third period of the war, say, German close combat PTS accounted for about 12.5% of the losses of Soviet tanks - a very high figure.

Let us consider those types and samples of close combat anti-tank weapons that the infantry of the warring armies had at their disposal in 1939-45. Three large groups of such weapons can be distinguished: anti-tank rifles, grenades and grenade launchers, and incendiary weapons.

Anti-tank rifles

By the beginning of the Second World War, the main anti-tank weapons of the infantry were anti-tank rifles and high-explosive hand grenades, i.e. means that originated at the end of the First World War. During the interwar period, anti-tank rifles received serious attention - especially after unsuccessful attempts to create "anti-tank machine guns" - and by the beginning of the war, many armies had this weapon in service.

The term "anti-tank rifle" (ATR) is not entirely accurate - it would be more correct to speak of an "anti-tank rifle". However, it developed historically (apparently as a direct translation of the German “panzerbuhse”) and has firmly entered our lexicon. The armor-piercing effect of an anti-tank gun is based on the kinetic energy of the bullet, and therefore depends on its speed at the moment of impact, the quality of the armor and the material of the bullet (especially its core), the shape and design of the bullet, and the angle at which the bullet meets the surface of the armor. Having pierced the armor, the bullet causes damage due to fragmentation and incendiary effects. Note that the lack of armor action was the main reason for the low effectiveness of the first anti-tank rifle - the 13.37 mm Mauser model 1918. The anti-tank rifles used during the Second World War differed in caliber - from 7.92 to 20 mm; type - single-shot, magazine, self-loading; layout, weight and dimensions. However, their design had a number of common features:

– high muzzle velocity was achieved by using a powerful cartridge and a long barrel length (from 90 to 150 calibers);

– cartridges with armor-piercing incendiary and armor-piercing tracer bullets were used, which had both armor-piercing and sufficient armor-piercing effects;

– to reduce recoil, muzzle brakes, soft butt cushions, and spring shock absorbers were introduced;

– to increase maneuverability, the weight of the PTR and cm dimensions were reduced as much as possible, carrying handles were introduced, heavy guns (Oerlikon, s.Pz.B-41) were made quick-dismountable;

– to quickly transfer fire, the bipod was attached closer to the middle of the weapon, the uniformity of aiming in many samples was ensured by the shoulder pad of the butt, the “cheek”, and it was possible to hold it when shooting with both the right and left hand;

– maximum reliability of the operation of the mechanisms was achieved, primarily extraction (tapering of the cartridge case, cleanliness of chamber processing);

– great importance was attached to ease of production and development.

The problem of rate of fire was resolved in combination with the requirement of maneuverability and simplicity. Single-shot anti-tank rifles had a combat rate of fire of 6-8, magazine-launched ones - 10-12, self-loading ones - 20-30 rounds/min.

In the Soviet Union, after a series of experimental works in 1938. a powerful 14.5-mm cartridge with an armor-piercing incendiary bullet B-32 with a hardened steel core and an incendiary composition was created. Cartridge weight – 198 g, bullet – 51 g, cartridge length – 155.5 mm, cartridge case – 114 mm. N.V. Rukavishnikov developed a fairly successful self-loading gun for this cartridge, which was adopted in October 1939. into service (PTR-39). But in the spring of 1940. Head of the GAU Marshal G.I. Kulik raised the question of the ineffectiveness of existing anti-tank weapons against the “newest German tanks” that intelligence reported. In July 1940 production of the PTR-39 was suspended. Erroneous views on the prospects for increasing the armor protection of tanks led to a number of consequences: the exclusion of anti-tank guns from the weapon system (order of August 26, 1940), the cessation of production of 45-mm anti-tank guns, and the order for the urgent design of 107-mm tank and anti-tank guns. As a result, the Soviet infantry was deprived of an effective anti-tank weapon. The very first weeks of the war showed the tragic consequences of this mistake. However, tests of the Rukavishnikov PTR on June 23 showed an increasingly significant percentage of delays. Finishing and putting it into production would require a lot of time. As a temporary measure, in July 1941, in the workshops of Moscow universities, the assembly of a single-shot anti-tank rifle for the 12.7 mm DShK cartridge was established (at the suggestion of V.N. Sholokhov). The simple design was copied from an old German 13.37 mm PTR And Mauser" (with the addition of a muzzle brake and the installation of a light bipod) and did not provide the required parameters.

Anti-tank rifle PTRD mod. 1941 (!) and anti-tank rifle PTRS mod. 1941 (2)

To speed up work on an effective and technologically advanced 14.5 mm PTR, according to the memoirs of D.F. Ustinov, Stalin at one of the GKO meetings proposed entrusting the development to “one more, and for reliability, two designers.” The task was issued in July to V.A. Degtyarev and S.G. Simonov. A month later, designs ready for testing appeared - only 22 days passed from the moment the task was received to the first test shots. On August 29, 1941, after a demonstration to members of the State Defense Committee, Degtryaev’s single-shot model and Simonov’s self-loading model were put into service under the designations PTRD and PTRS, respectively. The new PTRs were supposed to fight medium and light tanks and armored vehicles at ranges of up to 500 m. The production of PTRs began at the arms factory in Kovrov, later the Izhevsk Machine-Building Plant, the production of the Tula Arms Plant, and others were evacuated to Saratov.

The single-shot PTRD consisted of a barrel with a cylindrical receiver, a stock with a trigger box, impact and trigger mechanisms, sights and a bipod. 8 riflings were made in the barrel bore with a stroke length of 420 mm. The box-shaped active muzzle brake absorbed up to 2/3 of the recoil energy. The barrel bore was locked by a longitudinally sliding bolt when turning. The cylindrical bolt had two lugs in the front part and a straight handle in the rear; a striking mechanism, an ejector and a reflector were mounted in it. The impact mechanism included a striker with a striker, a mainspring; the tail of the striker came out and looked like a hook. When the bolt was unlocked, the bevel of its frame pulled the firing pin back.

The receiver was connected to the trigger, rigidly connected to the inner tube of the butt. The inner tube with the shock absorber spring was inserted into the butt tube. After the shot, the moving system (barrel, receiver and bolt) moved back, the bolt handle ran onto the carbon profile mounted on the butt and turned, unlocking the bolt. After the barrel stopped, the bolt moved back by inertia and stood on the bolt stop (on the left side of the receiver), the reflector pushed the cartridge case into the lower window of the receiver. The moving system was returned to the forward position by a shock absorber spring. Inserting a new cartridge into the upper window of the receiver, chambering and locking the bolt was done manually. The trigger mechanism included a trigger, a trigger lever with a spring, and a sear with a spring. The sighting devices were placed to the left on brackets and included a front sight and a reversible rear sight at ranges of up to 600 m and over 600 m (in the first releases of the PTR, the rear sight moved in a vertical groove).

The butt had a soft cushion, a wooden rest for holding the weapon with the left hand, a wooden pistol grip, and a “cheek.” Folding stamped bipods were attached to the barrel with a collar with a wing. A carrying handle was attached to the barrel with a clip. The accessory included two canvas bags holding 20 rounds each. In battle, the gun carried one or both crew numbers.

A minimum of parts, the use of a stock pipe instead of a frame simplified the production of anti-tank rifles, and the automatic opening of the bolt increased the rate of fire. The PTRD successfully combined simplicity, reliability and efficiency. Simplicity of production was of great importance in those conditions. The first batch of 300 PTRDs was released in October and sent to Rokossovsky's 16th Army. Already in 1941, 17,688 PTRDs were produced, and in 1942 - 184,800.

The self-loading PTRS was created on the basis of the experimental Simonov self-loading rifle of 1938. according to the scheme with the removal of powder gases. It consisted of a barrel with a muzzle brake and a gas chamber, a receiver with a butt, a bolt, a trigger guard, reloading and trigger mechanisms, sights, a magazine and a bipod. The bore was similar to the PTRD. The open-type gas chamber was secured with pins at a distance of a third of the barrel length from its muzzle. The barrel was connected to the receiver by a wedge.

The barrel bore was locked by tilting the bolt frame downward. Unlocking and locking was controlled by the bolt stem with a handle. The reloading mechanism included a gas regulator with three positions, a piston, a rod, a pusher with a spring and a tube. The pusher acted on the bolt stem. The bolt return spring was located in the stem channel. A firing pin with a spring was placed in the channel of the bolt core. Having received a movement impulse from the pusher after the shot, the bolt moved backward, while the pusher returned forward. In this case, the spent cartridge case was removed by the bolt ejector and was reflected upward by the protrusion of the receiver. When the cartridges were used up, the bolt was set to stop (bolt stop), mounted in the receiver.

The trigger mechanism was mounted on the trigger guard. The impact mechanism is hammer-operated, with a screw mainspring. The trigger mechanism included a trigger sear, a release lever and a trigger, with the axis of the hook located at the bottom. The magazine with a lever feeder was hinged to the receiver, its latch was located on the trigger guard. The cartridges were arranged in a checkerboard pattern. The magazine was loaded with a clip (pack) of 5 rounds with the lid folded down. The accessory included 6 clips. Sighting devices included a front sight with a fence and a sector sight, notched from 100 to 1500 m every 50. The PTR had a wooden butt with a soft cushion and shoulder pad, and a pistol grip. The narrow neck of the butt was used for holding with the left hand. Folding bipods were attached to the barrel using a clip (swivel). There was a carrying handle. In battle, the PTR transferred one or both crew numbers. During the hike, the disassembled gun - barrel and receiver with butt - was carried in two canvas covers.

The production of PTRS was simpler than Rukavishnikov’s PTR (one third fewer parts, 60% less machine-hours, 30% less time), but much more complex than PTRD. In 1941 Only 77 PTRS were produced, in 1942 - 63,308. Since PTRs were adopted urgently, the shortcomings of the new systems - tight cartridge case extraction for PTRDs, double shots for PTRS - had to be corrected during production or “finished” the guns in the army. At the end of 1941 The new BS-41 cartridge with a powder-ceramic bullet core (bullet weight -63.6 g) was adopted for the PTR. The 14.5 mm cartridges differed in color: the B-32 bullet had a black head with a red belt, the BS-41 bullet had a red bullet with a black head, and the primer was black.

Transportation of PTRD on a pack saddle, model 1937,

Shooting a PTRD from a horse

In addition to tanks (the main target), PTRs could fire at firing points and embrasures of bunkers and bunkers at ranges of up to 800 m, and at aircraft - up to 500 m. Since December 1941. PTR companies with 54 guns each were introduced into rifle regiments, and from the fall of 1942. in battalions - anti-tank rifle platoons (18 rifles each). PTR companies were also introduced into anti-tank fighter divisions. Platoons in battle were used as a whole or in groups of 2-4 guns. In the defense, “armor-piercing snipers” were positioned in echelon, preparing the main and 2-3 reserve positions. During the offensive, PTR crews operated in combat formations of units in tank-hazardous directions, occupying positions ahead in the intervals between rifle platoons and on the flanks of companies. In 1944 they practiced a staggered arrangement of anti-tank guns along the front and in depth at a distance of 50-100 m from each other with mutual shooting of the approaches, and widespread use of dagger fire. In winter, crews installed anti-tank guns on sleds or drags. Former Lieutenant General of the Wehrmacht, weapons specialist E. Schneider wrote: “In 1941, the Russians had a 14.5-mm anti-tank rifle, which caused a lot of trouble for our tanks and the light armored personnel carriers that appeared later.” With fairly high ballistic data, the 14.5 mm PTRs were distinguished by maneuverability and manufacturability. The PTRS is considered the best anti-tank rifle of the Second World War in terms of its combination of combat and operational qualities. Having played a large role in the PTO in 1941-42, the PTR by the summer of 1943 - with the increase in armor protection of tanks and assault guns over 40 mm - had lost their positions. If in January 1942 their number in the troops was 8,116, in January 1943 - 118,563, 1944 -142,861, i.e. increased 17.6 times in two years, then in 1944 it began to decline, and by the end of the war the Red Army had only 40 thousand anti-tank rifles. The same picture is observed in relation to 12.7- and 14.5-mm cartridges: in 1942 their production was six times higher than the pre-war one, but decreased noticeably by 1944. Nevertheless, the production of anti-tank rifles continued until January 1945, and in total During the war, about 400 thousand 14.5-mm anti-tank guns were produced. PTRDs and PTRS were used to combat light armored vehicles and firing points. Curiously, they were often used by snipers to defeat enemy shooters behind portable armor shields.

In addition to rifle anti-tank rifles, they were also in service with cavalry units. To transport the PTRD, packs for a cavalry saddle and a pack saddle mod. 1937 The gun was mounted on a pack above the horse's croup on a metal block with two brackets. The rear bracket could be used as a support - a swivel for firing from a horse at air and ground targets. The shooter stood behind the horse, held by the handler. To release anti-tank missiles to landing forces and partisans, an “extended” UPD-MM parachute bag with a parachute chamber and a shock absorber was used. The cartridges could be dropped without a parachute from a strafing flight in caps wrapped in burlap. Soviet anti-tank missiles were transferred to foreign formations formed in the USSR: for example, 1283 anti-tank missiles were transferred to Czechoslovak units.

The experienced single-shot anti-tank guns of M.N. Blum and "RES" (Rashkov E.S., Ermolaev S.I., Slukhodkiy V.E.) aroused great interest of the State Agrarian University and the State Technical University. The first was developed for a specially created 14.5 mm cartridge with an initial bullet speed increased to 1500 m/s, the second - for a 20 mm cartridge. Shelling of a captured T-VI "Tiger" tank at the GBTU training ground in April 1943. showed that Blum's anti-tank rifle is capable of hitting the side 82-mm armor of this tank at ranges up to 100 m. On August 10 of the same year, both anti-tank rifles were shot at the "Vystrel" course: this time they recorded penetration of the zeros of the Blum's anti-tank rifle at 100 m of 55-mm armor, and "RES" is 70 mm. Blum's anti-tank rifle with a sliding rotary bolt was more compact, and the question was raised about its early adoption. This, however, did not happen - work on the PTR was actually curtailed.

The Polish army was one of the first to adopt anti-tank rifles before the war. In 1935 under the name "karabin UR wz.35" a 7.92 mm anti-tank rifle was adopted, created by P. Vilniewczyc, J. Maroška, E. S. Tecki, T. Felchin based on the design of a magazine rifle. The special 7.92 mm cartridge had weight 61.8 g, "SC" bullet - 12.8 g. A cylindrical muzzle brake was attached to the end of the long barrel, which absorbed up to 70% of the recoil energy. The relatively thin-walled barrel could withstand no more than 200 shots, but in combat conditions this was quite enough - Anti-tank infantry weapons did not work for long. Locking was done by turning the Mauser-type bolt, which had two lugs in front and one behind, a straight handle. The firing mechanism was striker-type. The original feature of the trigger mechanism was the blocking of the trigger rocker with a reflector when the bolt was not completely locked: reflector raised and released the rocker only when the bolt was fully rotated. The 3-round magazine was attached from below with two latches. The sight was permanent. The PTR had a rifle-like solid stock. The bipod mount allowed the gun to be rotated relative to them. Widespread supplies of anti-tank rifles to the troops began in 1938, in total more than 5,000 were produced. Each infantry company was supposed to have 3 anti-tank rifles, and a cavalry regiment - 13. By September 1939. Polish troops had about 3,500 "kb.UR wz.35", which performed well in the fight against German light tanks.

Before the war, the German army also chose a 7.92 mm “rifle” caliber for the PTR: the single-shot “Pz.B-38” (Panzerbuhse, 1938) was developed by the Gustlow Werke company in Suhl for the powerful 7.92 mm cartridge of the “318” model ", which had an armor-piercing (with a tungsten carbide core) or armor-piercing incendiary bullet. Cartridge weight 85.5 g, zeros - 14.6 g, charge - 14.8 g, length "318" - 117.95 mm, sleeves - 104.5 mm. The barrel was locked with a vertical wedge bolt and could move backwards. The barrel and bolt moved in a stamped box, made integral with the barrel casing, with stiffening ribs. A conical flame arrester was placed on the barrel. Good flatness of the bullet trajectory at ranges up to 4(H) m made it possible to install a constant sight. The front sight with a guard and the rear sight were attached to the barrel. There was a handle on the right side of the barrel breech. Above the pistol grip on the left was a safety lever. At the back of the handle there was an automatic safety lever. The barrel return spring was placed in a tubular folding stock. The butt had a shoulder rest with a rubber buffer, a plastic tube for holding with the left hand, and folded to the right. To speed up loading, two “accelerators” were attached to the sides of the receiver - boxes in which 10 rounds were placed in a checkerboard pattern. A coupling with folding bipods, similar to a single MG-34 machine gun, was attached to the front part of the casing. The folded bipod was fixed on a special pin. A carrying handle was attached above the center of gravity. The PTR was too bulky for its caliber. The design of the Pz.B 38 gave V.A. Degtyarev the idea of using barrel movement to automatically open the bolt and partially absorb recoil. We saw that he applied this idea creatively.

The Pz.B-39 anti-tank rifle that replaced it was noticeably lighter with the same ballistics and locking system. It consisted of a barrel with a receiver, a bolt, a trigger frame with a pistol grip, a butt, and a bipod. The barrel was motionless, the active muzzle brake at its end absorbed up to 60% of the recoil energy. The wedge shutter was controlled by swinging the trigger frame. To extend service life, the bolt had a front replaceable liner. A hammer strike mechanism was mounted in the bolt; the hammer was cocked when the bolt was lowered. The bolt was closed on top with a flap that was automatically folded back when unlocked. The trigger mechanism included a hammer sear, a trigger, and a safety lever. The fuse box was located on top behind the bolt socket; in its left position (the letter “S” is visible), the sear and bolt were locked. On the left, in the receiver window, a mechanism for extracting the spent cartridge case was mounted. The cartridge case was ejected after unlocking (lowering the bolt) with the extractor slide back and down through the window in the butt. "Pz.B-39" had a folding forward-down stock with a cushion and a tube for the left hand, a wooden fore-end, a rotary handle and a carrying strap. The overall length, barrel length, bipod and boosters were similar to the Pz.B 38. Let us note that in September 1939 The Wehrmacht had only 62 anti-tank rifles, and by June 1941. - already 25,298. PTRs were included in almost all units of the Wehrmacht ground forces: in 1941. in the infantry, motorized infantry, mountain infantry and engineer companies there was an anti-tank rifle unit with 3 guns each, 1 anti-tank rifle had a motorcycle platoon, 11 had a reconnaissance squad of a motorized division.

The Czech 7.92-mm MSS-41 PTR chambered for the same cartridge, which appeared in 1941, had an interesting design. The magazine was located here behind the pistol grip, and reloading was done by moving the barrel back and forth. The bolt was part of a fixed butt plate and was engaged with the barrel by a coupling. The clutch rotated when the pistol grip moved forward and upward. Further movement of the handle moved the barrel forward. In the forward position, the barrel with its protrusion hit the reflector slide, and the reflector, turning, threw the spent cartridge down. During the reverse movement, the barrel “ran over” the next cartridge. By turning the pistol grip down, the barrel was locked with the bolt. The impact mechanism is striker type. The trigger mechanism was assembled in the handle, and on its left side there was a safety lever that locked the trigger rod and clutch latch in the rear position. Sights consisted of a folding front sight and sight. An active muzzle brake was attached to the barrel. Magazine – replaceable, box-shaped, sector-shaped, for 5 rounds; after the next cartridge was fed, the remaining ones were held by the cut-off lever. The butt with a cushion, shoulder pad and cheek piece was folded up while on the move. The PTR had a folding bipod and a carrying strap. With the same ballistic qualities as the Pz.B-39, the Czech PTR was compact: length in combat position - 1360 mm, in stowed position - 1280 mm; weight – 13 kg. However, the PTR was difficult to produce and was not widespread. It was used at one time by parts of the SS troops.

The ineffectiveness of the 7.92 mm PTR against Soviet T-34 and KV tanks became obvious in the very first months of the war. At the end of 1941 The Wehrmacht received the so-called "heavy anti-tank rifle" "2.8/2 cm s.Pz.B-41" with a conical bore. The conical bore of the barrel, tapering towards the muzzle, allows for more complete use of the powder charge, obtaining high initial projectile velocities, while simultaneously increasing its lateral load with acceleration. Let us note that a gun with a conical bore, special rifling and a specially shaped bullet was proposed back in 1905 by the Russian inventor M. Druganov and calculated by General N. Rogovtsev, and in 1903 and 1904. A patent for a gun with a conical barrel was received by the German K. Puff. Extensive experiments with conical barrels were carried out in the 20-30s by engineer Gerlich at a testing station, respectably called in German “German Testing Institute for Handguns” in Berlin. In Gerlich's design, the conical section of the barrel bore was combined with short cylindrical sections in the breech and muzzle, and the rifling, which was deepest at the breech, gradually tapered off towards the muzzle. This made it possible to more rationally use the pressure of powder gases - the experimental 7-mm anti-tank gun "Halger-Ultra" of the Gerlich system had an initial bullet speed of 18 (H) m/s. The projectile (bullet) had crushable leading belts, which, when moving along the barrel, were pressed into recesses on the projectile.

The s.Pz.B-41 barrel had a caliber of 28 mm at the breech and 20 mm at the muzzle. Armor-piercing bullet with a solid core. An active muzzle brake was attached to the barrel. A socket for a horizontal wedge bolt was cut into the massive breech. The system was installed like a light artillery carriage with tubular frames. The barrel and cradle were mounted on axles in the sockets of the upper machine, connected to the lower one by a vertical axis. The absence of lifting and turning mechanisms simplified and lightened the design. There was a shield cover; the sight mounted on the left was also protected by a double shield. PTR was used on two types of installations. The single-chassis lower machine, easy to install, had skids and small wheels could be installed. The carriage provided circular horizontal guidance, and vertical guidance from -5 to +45, the height of the line of fire varied from 241 to 280 mm. The weight of the s.Pz.B-41 on a light machine was 118 kg. For carrying, s.Pz.B-4) was disassembled into 5 parts. The heavy installation had sliding frames and wheel travel, horizontal guidance was provided in a sector of 60°, vertical guidance - 30°. The "heavy anti-tank rifle" was a purely positional - "trench" - anti-tank weapon. However, its appearance at the front was one of the factors that forced Soviet tank builders to once again turn to the issue of improving armor protection. The production of systems with conical barrels was technologically complex and expensive - a property inconvenient for front-line anti-tank weapons.

PTR of foreign countries

Polish PTR UR. wz.35 caliber 7.92 mm

German 7.92 mm anti-tank rifle PzB-39

28/20 mm anti-tank gun mod. 1941 with a conical barrel, which the Germans called a PT gun (s.Pz.B-41)

Boyce anti-tank rifle caliber ".550" (13.37 mm)

Japanese 20-mm anti-tank rifle model 97

Finnish 20-mm anti-tank rifle VKT mod. 1939

Before the war, the British Army received the Mkl "Boyce" magazine-fed anti-tank rifle, developed by Captain Boyce back in 1934, initially chambered for the 12.7 mm Vickers heavy machine gun cartridge. Then the caliber was increased to 13.39 mm (caliber ".550"). The PTR, produced by BSA, consisted of a barrel with a receiver, a bolt, a frame (cradle) with a folding bipod, a butt plate, and a magazine. A box-shaped muzzle brake was attached to the barrel, and the barrel itself could move somewhat along the frame, compressing the shock absorber spring. The barrel bore was locked by turning the longitudinally sliding bolt, which had 6 lugs and a curved handle. The bolt contained a firing pin with a ring on the tail, a mainspring, an ejector and a reflector. The trigger mechanism is of the simplest type. On the left side of the receiver there was a safety lever that locked the firing pin in the rear position. Sights placed to the left on brackets included a front sight and a diopter sight with the diopter set at 300 and 500 m, or only at 300 m. A single-row box magazine was mounted on top. The pistol grip was tilted forward. The butt plate had a rubber cushion, a “cheek”, a handle for the left hand, and an oil can was placed in it. The bipod was a T-shaped support with openers and a screw pin with an adjusting sleeve.

Since 1939 Each infantry platoon was assigned one anti-tank rifle. "Boys" were also transferred to Polish units as part of the British Army; about 1,100 "Boys" were delivered under Lend-Lease to the Red Army, where they, however, were not successful. But the German Wehrmacht used captured Beuys very willingly.

In the USA, at the beginning of the war, they tested a 15.2 mm anti-tank rifle with an initial bullet speed of 1100 m/s. Later, the US Army tried to use a 14.5 mm anti-tank rifle, and it was even proposed to install an optical sight on it. But this gun appeared late and was not successful. Already during the war in Korea, they tested - and very unsuccessfully - a 12.7 mm PTR.

The armies of Germany, Hungary, Japan, and Finland used heavy 20-mm self-loading rifles - a kind of branch of the “family” of large-caliber “anti-tank machine guns” that came close to artillery systems. The 20-mm Swiss self-loading anti-tank gun "Oerlikon" used by the Wehrmacht was created on the basis of the "anti-tank machine gun" of the same company, had automatic blowback recoil, and was magazine fed. PTR weight – 33 kg (perhaps the lightest in this class), length – 1450 mm, muzzle velocity – 555 m/s, armor penetration – 14 mm at 500 m. The automation of the Hungarian S-18 “Solothurn” operated according to the scheme barrel recoil with a short stroke, the magazine was attached to the left side of the receiver.

Soviet tank crews met the Japanese "97" (model 1937) already at Khalkhin Gol in 1939. The gun consisted of a barrel, a receiver, a moving system (bolt, wedge, bolt frame), a recoil device, a cradle and a magazine. The automation operated by removing powder gases.

The barrel in the middle part at the bottom had a gas exhaust chamber with a regulator for 5 positions. The chamber was connected by a tube to a gas distributor with two gas pipes. A muzzle brake in the form of a cylindrical box with longitudinal slots was attached to the barrel; the connection between the barrel and the receiver was a cracker. The barrel was locked with a bolt using a vertically moving wedge. A characteristic feature of the "97" is a bolt frame with two piston rods and two recoil springs. The reloading handle was made separately and was located on the top right. The receiver contained a shutter stop that was turned off when the magazine was attached. The impact mechanism is of the striker type, the impactor received the impulse from the bolt frame post through an intermediate part in the locking wedge. The trigger mechanism, assembled in the machine's trigger box, included a sear, a trigger lever, a trigger rod, a trigger and a disconnector. A safety lever located in the rear of the receiver blocked the firing pin in the upper position. The barrel with the receiver could move along the cradle machine, in the groove of which a recoil device was placed. The latter included a pneumatic recoil brake and two coaxial recoil springs. The PTR could fire in bursts (which is why it is sometimes called a “large-caliber machine gun” in our press), but at the same time its accuracy was too low.

The sighting devices - the front sight and the stand with a diopter - were placed to the left on brackets attached to the cradle. A box magazine with a staggered arrangement of cartridges was attached to the top. The store window could be closed with a lid. Attached to the cradle was a butt with a cushion, a shoulder pad and a “cheek”, a pistol grip and a grip for the left hand. The support was provided by a height-adjustable bipod and a rear stand-lift, their position was fixed with locking bushings. The cradle had sockets for connecting tubular carrying handles - two at the back and one at the front. The bulky "97" was used mainly in defense.

The Finnish anti-tank rifle L-39 of the Lahti system, produced by VKT, also had automatic equipment for the removal of powder gases. The PTR consisted of a barrel with a gas chamber, a flat muzzle brake and a perforated wooden shroud-fore-end, a receiver, a trigger frame, a locking, impact and trigger mechanism, sighting devices, a butt plate, a magazine and a bipod. The gas chamber is a closed type, with a 4-position gas regulator and a guide tube. The barrel was connected to the receiver with a nut. The bolt is connected to the receiver by a vertically moving wedge. Locking and unlocking was carried out by protrusions of the bolt frame, made separately from the rod with the piston. A firing pin with a mainspring, an ejector and a rammer were mounted in the bolt. The swinging reloading handle was located on the right. A distinctive feature of the Finnish anti-tank rifle was the presence of two trigger mechanisms: the rear one for holding the mobile system in combat cocking, the front one for holding the firing pin. In front of the pistol grip, inside the trigger guard, there were two triggers: the lower one for the rear trigger mechanism, the upper one for the front. A safety lever located on the left side of the receiver blocked the trigger lever of the front trigger mechanism when the flag was in the forward position. The sequential release of first the moving system and then the striker reliably prevented an accidental shot and did not allow firing too quickly. Sights included a front sight on the barrel and a sector sight on the receiver. The sector magazine, large for PTR capacity, with a staggered arrangement of cartridges, was attached to the top. The store window on the march was closed with a folding panel. The butt plate had a height-adjustable rubber shoulder rest and a wooden “cheek” pad. The bipod was equipped with skis and was separated from the gun during the hike. Forward-facing stops could be attached to the bipod with screws - with them the PTR rested on the parapet of the trench, hillock, etc. The design of the PTR shows careful consideration of the specific conditions for using weapons - a minimum of holes in the receiver, a magazine window shield, skis on a bipod.

Let us note that the USSR also tried to create more powerful anti-tank guns of “artillery” calibers. So, in 1942 a successful example of the 20-mm RES anti-tank rifle with a wheel drive (similar to the Maxim machine gun) and a double shield appeared. But the path of “enlargement” of the PTR was already futile. In 1945 a prominent domestic weapons specialist A.A. Blagonravov wrote: “In its existing form, this weapon (PTR) has exhausted its capabilities.”

This conclusion, we note, applied to this type of weapon as an anti-tank weapon. However, already in the 80s, a kind of revival of PTRs began in the form of large-caliber sniper rifles - after all, during the Second World War they tried to use PTRs with optical sights. Large-caliber rifles - American M82 A1 and A2, M 87, 50/12 TSW, Austrian AMR, Hungarian "Gepard Ml", Russian B-94 - are intended for combating manpower at long ranges, hitting targeted targets (protected firing points, weapons reconnaissance, communications and control, radar, satellite communications antennas, light armored vehicles, vehicles, hovering helicopters, UAVs).

Interesting are the attempts made during the Second World War to use anti-tank rifles to arm light armored vehicles. So, in 1942 14.5-mm anti-tank guns were installed instead of machine guns on a batch of light armored vehicles BA-64, the German 28/20-mm "s.Pz.B-41" was installed on a light two-axle armored car SdKfz 221 ("Horch"), 14-mm English " Boyce" - on a small tank Mk VIC, an armored car "Morris-1" and "Humber MkJJJ", tracked armored personnel carriers "Yu/sh-versal". "Universal" with PTR "Boyce" were supplied to the USSR under Lend-Lease.

The normal caliber rifle cartridges with armor-piercing bullets available to the troops had armor penetration no higher than 10 mm at a range of 150-200 m and could only be used for shooting at light armored vehicles or shelters.

In the pre-war period, large-caliber machine guns were considered as one of the front-line anti-tank weapons (20mm Oerlikon, Madsen, Solothurn, 25mm Vickers machine guns). Actually, the first heavy machine gun, the 13.37-mm German TUF, appeared as a means of fighting tanks and aircraft. However, during the war, large-caliber machine guns were used much more for the needs of air defense or shelling fortified firing points, and therefore are not considered here. Let us just note that it appeared in 1944. 14.5 mm machine gun S.V. The Vladimirov KPV (for standard 14.5 mm cartridges) was created as an “anti-tank”, but by the time of its appearance it could no longer play such a role. After the war, it became a means of combating air targets, manpower and light armored vehicles.

Table 1 Anti-tank rifles

* – Weight of PTR with two cartridge boxes – “loading accelerators”

**– length in combat position, in stowed position – 1255 mm

*** – The first number is the caliber of the barrel from the breech part, the second – from the muzzle part

Anti-tank hand grenades

To combat tanks, infantry widely used hand grenades - both special anti-tank and fragmentation grenades. This practice also originated during the First World War: then “bundles” of conventional grenades and heavy grenades for destroying wire barriers (such as the Russian Novitsky grenade) were considered as anti-tank weapons. Already in the early 30s, such grenades were considered “an important defensive weapon... especially in cases of a surprise attack by armored units in closed... terrain.” Fragmentation grenades were held together with wire or cord. Thus, in the Soviet “Manual on Shooting” f935 and 1938, it was specifically indicated how to knit hand grenades model 1914/30. and arr. 1933 The grenades were tied together with twine or wire in groups of three or five, so that the handle of the central one would point in one direction, and the handle of the others would point in the opposite direction. F-1 or Milsa type grenades were tied tightly in a bag. It was recommended to throw the bundles over the tracks and chassis of the tank. Such bundles, but only equipped with 3-4 strings with weights, were also used to undermine wire fences. The German infantry used bundles of M-24 hand grenades: the grenades were tied in groups of seven, the wooden handle with the fuse was inserted only into the central one.

Special anti-tank grenades at the beginning of the war were heavy high-explosive projectiles. The Red Army was armed with the RPG-40 grenade, created by M.I. Puzyrev at GSKB-30 at Plant No. 58 named after. K.E. Voroshilov under the leadership of N.P. Belyakov and containing an explosive charge in 760. It had a cylindrical thin-walled body and was capable of penetrating armor up to 20 mm thick. The handle contained an inertial fuse with a safety pin. Before throwing, a detonator was inserted into the axial channel of the body through a hole in the lid. The throwing range is 20-25 m. Instructions for using the grenade were placed on the body. In terms of the “armor-piercing” effect of the grenade, it soon ceased to meet the requirements of anti-tank weapons - when it exploded on the surface of armor over 20 mm thick, it only formed a dent, without causing dangerous spalls of the armor from the inside. In 1941 Based on it, Puzyrev created the RPG-41 grenade with an explosive charge increased to 1400 g and armor penetration increased to 25 mm. However, the reduced throwing range did not contribute to the widespread use of the RPG-41. It was recommended to throw high-explosive grenades on the tracks, chassis, under the turret or on the roof of the tank's engine compartment. Among the soldiers, high-explosive anti-tank grenades were nicknamed “Tanyusha”.

In July 1941 The Military Council of the Northern Front issued an order to develop an anti-tank hand grenade for production at Leninfad enterprises. The famous designer M.D. Dyakonov and inventor A.N. Selyanka, based on the RGD-33 hand fragmentation grenade, created a high-explosive anti-tank grenade with an explosive charge increased to 1 kg, also designated RPG-41. Already in 1941. In Leningrad, about 798 thousand of these grenades were fired. High-explosive AT grenades with an increased charge of factory and semi-handicraft production were also used in the defense of Odessa and Sevastopol; various variants of AT grenades were created in partisan workshops.

The British anti-tank grenade "N 73 AT" with a cylindrical body 240 mm long and 80 mm in diameter had an inertial fuse with a safety lever. The weight of the grenade is 1.9 kg, the throwing range is 10-15 m. The body was painted yellow-brown with a red belt. The grenade was thrown only from behind cover.

From top to bottom: a bunch of M-24 hand grenades; RPG-6 anti-tank hand grenade; anti-tank grenade RPG-43.

German cumulative action anti-tank grenade PMW-1 – general view and sectional view (1 – body, 2 – cumulative funnel, 3 – explosive charge, 4 – wooden handle, 5 – detonator, 6 – fabric stabilizer strips, 7 – cap, 8 - fuse).

Given their large weight, the effectiveness of such grenades soon ceased to correspond to their purpose. The situation has changed radically thanks to the use of the cumulative effect. In 1943 Almost simultaneously, the RG1G-43 hand cumulative grenade appeared in service with the Soviet army, and the PWM-1 (L) with the German army.

PWM-1 (L) consisted of a teardrop-shaped body and a wooden handle. The case contained a charge made of an alloy of TNT and hexogen. A detonator was placed in the handle, and at the end there was an inertial fuse that was triggered at any angle of contact. A fabric stabilizer was placed around the handle, which was opened by four spring plates. In the folded position, the stabilizer held the cap; to remove it, a special tongue had to be pulled back. Expanding after the throw, the stabilizer pulled out the pin of a very sensitive fuse. The grenade head had an eyelet for hanging from a belt. The body was painted gray-beige. Grenade weight - 1.45 kg, charge - 0.525 kg, body diameter - 105 mm, length - 530 mm (handles - 341 mm), armor penetration normal - 150 mm, at an angle of 60" - up to 130 mm, throwing range - 20 -25 m. The training grenade (without equipment) PWM-1 (L) Ub was distinguished by three rows of holes on the body and its red color.

RPG-43 was developed by KB-20 designer N.P. Belyakov at the end of 1942 - beginning of 1943. April 16, 1943 it passed testing grounds, and on April 22-28 - military tests and was soon put into service. Already in the summer of 1943. she began to enlist in the troops. The body had a flat bottom and a conical lid. The sting was placed under the cover and the spring was sunk. The removable handle housed an inertial fuse, a two-band stabilizer and a safety mechanism. The laid stabilizer was covered with a cap. Before throwing, you had to remove the handle and rotate the fuse fuse to tighten its spring. The handle was reattached, and the safety pin was pulled out by the ring. After the throw, the safety bar flew off, the stabilizer cap slid off the handle, pulling out the stabilizer and at the same time cocking the fuse. The stabilizer ensured the correct flight of the grenade with the head part forward and the minimum angle of impact. The weight of the RPG-43 is 1.2 kg, the charge is 0.65 kg, and normal armor penetration is 75 mm.

The appearance of German tanks T-V "Panther", T-VI "Typhus" and the heavy tank fighter "Elephant" ("Ferdinand") in the battles on the Kursk Bulge required increasing the armor penetration of grenades to 100-120 mm. At the Moscow branch of NII-6 of the People's Commissariat of Ammunition, designers M.Z. Polevikov, L.B. Ioffe, N.S. Zhitkikh developed the RPG-6 cumulative grenade, which passed military tests already in September 1943. and put into service at the end of October. The RPG-6 had a teardrop-shaped body with a charge (of two bombs) and an additional detonator and a handle with an inertial fuse, a detonator capsule and a tape stabilizer. The fuse firing pin was blocked by a pin. The stabilizer strips (two long and two short) were placed in the handle and held in place by a safety bar. The safety pin was removed before throwing. After the throw, the safety bar flew off, the stabilizer was pulled out, the firing pin was pulled out - the fuse was cocked. RPG-6 weight – 1.13 kg, charge – 0.6 kg. throwing range – 15-20 m, armor penetration – up to 100 mm. In terms of technology, a significant feature of the RPG-6 was the absence of turned and threaded parts, the widespread use of stamping and knurling. Thanks to this, mass production of the grenade was established before the end of the year. RPG-43 and -6 were thrown at 15-20 m, after throwing they had to take cover.

Total in the USSR in 1942-45. about 137,924 (NU anti-personnel and 20,882,800 AT hand grenades were released. By year: in 1942 - 9232, in 1943 - 8000, in 1944 - 2830 and in 1945 - only 820.8 thousand. You can see a decrease in the share of hand grenades in the AT system of infantry ammunition.

The problem with hand-held anti-tank grenades was the slow response of the fuse - a grenade that hit the target could explode, having already rolled off or bounced off the armor. Therefore, various attempts were made to “attach” grenades to armor. The British used the so-called. "sticky bomb" - high-explosive grenade "N 74 (ST)". The explosive was placed in a glass ball with a diameter of 130 mm. The ball was covered with a woolen bag covered with a sticky substance. A 5-second remote fuse with a pin was placed in a long handle. Grenade weight – 1.3 kg, total length – 260 mm. Before throwing, the tin casing was removed from the ball and the pin was pulled out. The grenade did not stick to vertical, wet armor. The British also created a soft grenade "N 82": its body was a knitted bag, tied at the bottom with braid, and tucked into a metal cap on top, onto which the fuse was screwed. The fuse was covered with a cap. The grenade was thrown at close distances and did not “roll” off horizontal surfaces. Due to the characteristic shape of the "N 82" garnet, it is also known by the nickname "Ham" ("ham" - ham).

The German “sticky” grenade consisted of a body with a shaped charge and a felt pad on the bottom, an “N8” detonator capsule and a grating fuse. The latter were similar to hand fragmentation grenades. The felt pad was soaked in glue and covered with a cap, which was removed only before throwing. The grenade had a length of 205, a diameter of 62 mm and was intended to combat light tanks and armored vehicles. More interesting is the “Haft N-3” magnetic grenade for combating tanks and self-propelled guns of all types. At the bottom of its conical body with a cumulative charge (ghzsogen with TNT), three permanent magnets were attached, which “fixed” the grenade on the armor in the most advantageous position. Before being thrown, they were protected from demagnetization by removable iron fittings. Detonator capsule – “N 8” A1. The handle contained a standard grating fuse with a delay of 4.5 or 7 seconds. The grenade was painted green. Total length – 300 mm, bottom diameter – 160 mm. The grenade was usually “landed” on the tank as it passed over the trench (crack), although it was also allowed to be thrown at a distance of up to 15 m. The Germans themselves in 1944-45. protected their combat vehicles - ganks and assault guns - from magnetic grenades with Zimmerit coating: a 5-6 mm layer significantly weakened the force of attraction of the magnets. The surface was wavy. "Tzimmsrit" also protected vehicles from "sticky" and incendiary grenades.

The magnetic grenade was already close to anti-tank mines. "Grenade mines" were also used by the infantry of the warring parties. Thus, the British had a grenade "N 75" ("Hawkins MKG") with a flat body 165 mm long and 91 mm wide. On top of the body there was a pressure bar, under it there were two chemical fuses-ampoules. When the ampoules were destroyed by the pressure bar, a flame was formed, causing the capsule to explode -detonator, then an additional detonator was triggered, and from it - the explosive of the mine. "Hawkins" was thrown under the caterpillar of a tank or the wheel of an armored vehicle, and was used in minefields. The grenades were placed on a sled, tied to cords, thus obtaining a "moving" mine, " "pulled" under a moving tank. Flat anti-tank mines on bamboo poles and "moving" mines were widely and not without success used by groups of infantrymen - tank destroyers in the Japanese army: our tank crews had to deal with this back at Khalkhin Gol in 1939.

Tank "Royal Tiger" in Zimmerit coating, which protected against magnetic mines and grenades

Rifle anti-tank grenades

In World War II, almost all armies used rifle (rifle) grenades. It is worth noting that back in 1914. Staff Captain of the Russian Army V.A. Mgebrov proposed using his rifle grenade against armored vehicles.

In the 1930s, the Red Army was armed with the muzzle-loading "Dyakonov grenade launcher", created at the end of the First World War and subsequently modernized. It consisted of a mortar, a bipod and a quadrant sight and was used to destroy manpower with a fragmentation grenade. The mortar barrel had a caliber of 41 mm, three screw rifling, and a cup. The cup was screwed onto the neck, which was attached to the rifle barrel, secured to the front sight by a cutout. On the eve of the war, every rifle and cavalry squad had a grenade launcher.

Just before the start of the Great Patriotic War, the question arose about imparting “anti-tank” properties to a rifle grenade launcher. As a result, the VKG-40 grenade entered service. Its body had a streamlined shape, three leading protrusions on the cylindrical part. A bottom fuse was mounted in the conical tail section, which included an inertial body (“settling cylinder”), a detonator capsule, an additional detonator and a wire pin. The bottom part was closed with a cap. Length of VKG-40 – 144 mm. The grenade was fired with a special blank cartridge containing 2.75 g of VP or P-45 gunpowder. The barrel of the cartridge case was crimped with an “asterisk” and, like the head of the grenade, was painted black. The mortar also changed: a special front sight with a guard was attached to the neck, and a screw screwed into the barrel limited the advance of the grenade during chambering. The reduced charge of the blank cartridge allowed the grenade to be fired at direct fire with the butt resting on the shoulder. Shooting was carried out at a range of up to 150 m, without a bipod, using a rifle scope: mark “16” corresponded to a range of up to 50, “18” – up to 100 and “20” – up to 150 m. The total weight of the rifle with a mortar was 6 kg, serviced such a “grenade launcher” by one person. The VKG-40 was used very limitedly, which is partly explained by the low accuracy of fire, and partly by the underestimation of the rifle grenade launcher in general.

Rifle anti-tank grenade VKG-40

German "Schiessbecher" grenade launcher mounted on the barrel of a "U8k" carbine (above) and a general view of the grenade launcher mortar. I – mortar barrel, 2 – cup, 3 – neck, 4 – carbine front sight, 5 – clamping device, 6 – clamping screw, 7 – clamping screw handle, 8 – carbine barrel.

At the beginning of 1942 The ramrod VPGS-41 ("Serdyuk rifle PT grenade model 1941"), created in the design bureau of the People's Commissariat of the Coal Industry, headed by Serdyuk, entered service. VPGS-41 consisted of a streamlined body with a charge and fuse and a “ramrod” tail inserted into the rifle barrel. A clip with an annular stabilizer was put on a cleaning rod equipped with a sealing groove. When the ramrod was inserted into the barrel, the stabilizer was pressed against the body, and after the grenade flew out, it was fixed at the rear end of the ramrod. The shot was fired with a blank cartridge. The firing range is up to 60 m, and against a stationary cluster of equipment – up to 170 m (at an elevation angle of 40 degrees). The accuracy and effective range were low, and the grenade, initially ordered in large quantities, was already in 1942. was withdrawn from production and service.

The partisans also had their own grenade launchers: for example, the PRGSh developed a very successful mortar from a 45-mm shell casing and a high-explosive fragmentation grenade in 1942. T.E. Shavgulidze.

The British Army used a 51-mm muzzle-loading smoothbore rifle grenade launcher to combat armored vehicles. The firing was carried out with the "N 68" grenade, which had a cylindrical steel body with a shaped charge (covered with a flat lid), an inertial bottom fuse, an igniter cap and a detonator cap. A stabilizer with four blades was screwed into the rear part of the body. The body was painted yellow-brown with red and green stripes. Shot - with a blank cartridge, from a rest, lying down, the fuse pin was removed before the shot. The firing range is up to 91 m (100 yards), but the most effective is 45-75 m. The grenade could also be fired from a light 51 mm mortar.

During the war, the US Army developed a system of rifle grenades, which included anti-personnel, anti-tank, training and smoke models. There were no mortars - the grenades were equipped with stabilizer tubes. The tube was mounted on a “throwing device” - a muzzle on the barrel of a carbine or rifle. The grenades were fired with corresponding blank cartridges. The M9-A1 anti-tank grenade had a streamlined body with a cumulative combat charge, a stabilizer tube and a bottom inertial fuse. The length of the grenade is 284 mm, the diameter of the body is 51 mm. The initial speed when firing from a carbine is 45 m/s, the firing range is up to 175 m, from a rifle – 55 m/s and up to 250 m. The accuracy of fire, however, made it possible to effectively fire at armored targets at much shorter ranges. For training, a training Ml 1-A2 without a charge was used, which repeated the M9-A1 in shape, size and weight. Feathered rifle grenades, fired from a small muzzle or from a flash suppressor, have proven to be the most promising direction for development of this type of ammunition.

The German grenade launcher "Schiessbecher" ("shooting cup") was a 30-mm rifled mortar weighing 0.835 kg. The barrel was screwed into a cup that smoothly turned into the neck. The mortar was placed on the barrel of a rifle or carbine and secured with a clamping device. The sight was fastened with a clip with a screw in front of the receiver on the left. Its swinging part had a sighting bar with a front sight and a whole at the ends, a level and a sector rear part with divisions from 0 to 250 m through 50. The weight of the grenade launcher on the "98k" carbine was 5.12 kg, length - 1250 mm. The grenades had ready-made rifling, which, when loaded, was combined with the rifling of the mortar. Each grenade had its own blank cartridge sealed.

The caliber "small armor-piercing grenade" ("G.Pz.gr.") had an ogive-cylindrical body and rifling on the tail. The shaped charge was covered with a ballistic cap and detonated by a bottom inertial fuse through a detonator capsule and an additional detonator. The length of the grenade was 163 mm, the body was black. The grenade was fired with a cartridge containing 1.1 g of gunpowder, a wooden wad and a black ring around the primer. Initial speed – 50 m/s, firing range – 50-125 m.

With the outbreak of the war with the USSR, in order to increase the “armor-piercing” properties of the grenade launcher, the “large armor-piercing” grenade “Gr.G.Pz.gr.” had to be introduced into service. It was an over-caliber grenade with a thickened front part and a long “stem”. The stem had a threaded sleeve at the back (made of plastic or aluminum), which was inserted into the mortar. The bottom inertial fuse was cocked after the shot. Length – 185 mm, diameter – 45 mm, penetration – 40 mm – at an angle of up to 60 degrees, body – black. Shot - with a cartridge with 1.9 g of gunpowder and a black wooden bullet (wad). Initial speed – 50 m/s. With high armor penetration, the grenade had low accuracy, so shooting at moving targets was carried out at a distance of up to 75 m, at stationary targets - up to 100 m. When firing a regular cartridge from a rifle with a mortar, some excess of the sight was taken. Each infantry, tank-fighter and engineer company had 12 mortars, and field batteries had two. Each mortar was equipped with 30 fragmentation grenades and up to 20 “armor-piercing” grenades. However, as in the Red Army, in the Wehrmacht PT rifle grenades were used little, since “the impact of a rifle grenade on the crew and internal equipment of the tank was very insignificant” (E. Middeldorf).

Large rifle armor-piercing grenade Gz.G.Pz.gr. (capping and general appearance)

German anti-tank grenade launcher Gz.B.39

Table 2 Hand and rifle anti-tank grenades

By the end of 1941 the ineffectiveness of the 7.92 mm Pz.B.39 anti-tank rifle became clear, and in 1942. on its basis the Gr.B.-39 anti-tank grenade launcher ("Granatenbuche") was created. The barrel was shortened to 595-618 mm, the breech was simplified, the forend was removed, and a 30-mm rifled mortar was installed at the end of the barrel. Its cup was already screwed onto the PTR barrel. Mortar length – 130 mm, weight – 0.8 kg. Sights included front and rear sights on the left side of the weapon. The rear sight - a rear sight with a slot - was mounted on a bracket in a groove in the receiver. The front one was fastened with a clip on the breech of the barrel and consisted of a grid of six horizontal and one vertical threads: the horizontal ones marked distances of up to 150 m every 25, the vertical one formed sighting crosshairs. A casing with a shield with three holes was attached to the sight frame: the middle one served as an auxiliary front sight (range - 75 m) in the dark. Targeting the tanks was carried out along the lower edge of the turret, in the middle, or with a distance of 0.5-1 corps - when the target was moving. Firing at moving targets was carried out at a distance of up to 75 m, at stationary ones - up to 150 m. The weight of the grenade launcher is 10.5 kg, the length in the firing position is 1230 mm, in the stowed position - 908 mm, crew - 2 people. The shooting was carried out by "Gr.G.Pz.gr." with a reinforced stem and “improved rifling” or a special “large armor-piercing grenade model 1943.” The latter was distinguished by a drop-shaped shape, greater strength, a strong charge, and a fuse that was triggered at any angle of contact. Length of the "grenade model 1943" – 195 mm, diameter – 46 mm. The grenade had a light brown stem color, was fired only from the Sg.V-39 with a cartridge with a black wooden bullet (the cartridge case was for Pz.B.-39), the initial speed was 65 m/s. Firing “small” or unreinforced “large” grenades was not allowed: they could be destroyed when fired.

The desire to use any weapon as a weapon led to the creation of grenades for firing from signal pistols. At the end of the 30s, based on the "Walter" model 1934, the "Kampfpistole Z" ("zug" - rifling) was created. The bore had 5 grooves. The weight of the “pistol” is 745 g, length is 245 mm with a barrel length of 155 mm. It was converted into a grenade launcher by attaching a metal stock and a folding sight. The weight of such a grenade launcher was 1960. The PT over-caliber grenade "42 LP" consisted of a drop-shaped body with a charge (RDX with TNT) and a bottom inertial fuse and a rod with ready-made rifling at the end. The rod contained an igniter primer, an expelling charge of porous pyroxylin powder and a piston that, when fired, cut off the connecting pin and ejected the grenade. The length of the grenade is 305 mm, the largest diameter is 61 mm. To fire it from a conventional rocket pistol, an inserted rifled barrel was used.

Anti-tank finned rifle grenades with a cumulative warhead were actively developed in the first two post-war decades (French M.50 and M761, Belgian Energa, American M-31, Spanish G.L.61). However, already at the end of the 60s, the ineffectiveness of anti-tank rifle grenades against main battle tanks became clear, and further development followed the path of cumulative fragmentation grenades to combat light armored vehicles.

Anti-tank grenade launchers of the Second World War

R.Pz.H.54 "Ofenror" anti-tank rocket gun

The middle of the Second World War was characterized by qualitative changes in the armament of the ground forces, including infantry means of combating tanks at short and medium ranges. The decline in the role of anti-tank rifles was accompanied by the introduction of a new anti-tank weapon - hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers.

Work on light rocket and recoilless anti-tank weapons was carried out back in the 30s. Thus, in the USSR in 1931, the 65-mm “rocket gun” B.S., created at the GDL, was tested. Petropavlovsky for shooting from the shoulder. Its design contained a number of promising elements: an electric igniter for the engine, a shield to protect the shooter from gases. Unfortunately, after Petropavlovsky’s death in 1933, this development was not continued. At the beginning of 1933 The Red Army adopted 37-mm “dynamo-reactive anti-tank guns” by L.V. Kurchevsky (a total of 325 units were delivered), however, they were removed from service just two years later as they did not meet the requirements of armor penetration, maneuverability and safety. Note that the actual failure of Kurchevsky’s work undermined confidence in recoilless systems for some time. In OKB P.I. Grokhovsky in 1934, a fairly simple “manual dynamo-rocket launcher” was developed for firing at lightly armored targets. The armor-piercing effect of the shells was based, like artillery armor-piercing shells of that time, on their kinetic energy and was, of course, insufficient at low speeds. For a number of reasons - including repression against design personnel - such work was stopped. They returned to them during the war.

In 1942, ML.Mil developed a jet AT weapon in a light machine version. At the same time, the SKB at the Kompressor plant took up “machines for 82-mm anti-tank mines” (missiles): under the leadership of A.N. Vasilyev, a double-barreled launching machine was created. At the GAU training ground, the development of a reusable hand-held grenade launcher RPG-l with an over-caliber grenade was carried out (work manager G.P. Lominsky), at GSKB-30 (People's Commissariat of Ammunition) under the leadership of A.V. Smolyakov - RPG-2. During development, the enemy’s experience was naturally used (all captured samples of German RPGs were carefully studied and evaluated), as well as data on Allied RPGs.

RPG-1 included: 1) a 30-mm smooth launch tube with a hammer striker mechanism, a simple trigger, protective pads and a folding aiming bar, 2) a 70-mm cumulative grenade PG-70 with a black powder propellant charge (burned out before the grenade left pipes) and a rigid stabilizer. Aiming, like the German "Panzerfaust" (see below), was carried out along the rim of the grenade. The aimed firing range reached 50 m, armor penetration - 150 mm. In the spring of 1944 The RPG-1 was tested and production of the pilot batch was prepared, but the finalization of the grenade was delayed, and in 1948 work on this sample was stopped. The RPG-2 consisted of a 40 mm pipe and an 80 mm cumulative PG-2 grenade screwed with a propellant charge of black powder. Development lasted about five years, and the RPG-2 entered service only in 1949.

In the special technological bureau NII-6 of the People's Commissariat of Ammunition (NKBP), headed by I.M. Naiman, a group of designers developed the PG-6 hand-held grenade launcher. Using a special blank cartridge (4 g of gunpowder in a rifle cartridge case), an RPG-6 cumulative grenade (armor penetration up to 120 mm) in the pan or a standard 50-mm fragmentation finned mine was fired. By the beginning of 1945, a batch of PG-6 with reduced recoil was prepared for military testing. The weight of the system was about 18 kg, the firing range at tanks with an RPG-6 grenade was up to 150 m, and at manpower with a 50-mm mine - up to 500 m. With the end of the war, work on this system stopped.

Marshal of Artillery N.D. Yakovlev, who was the Head of the GAU during the war, wrote: “There were no active supporters of such anti-tank weapons as the Faustpatron... But it has proven itself perfectly..,” During the Great Patriotic War, our army really never received RPGs, but the foundation for their post-war development was laid.

The situation was different in Germany, where in the 30s they also spent a lot of money on “jet” and “dynamo-reactive” topics. In the middle of the war, Germany adopted the “infantry armament program,” where special attention was paid to anti-tank weapons. As part of the program, the infantry received new anti-tank grenade launchers. At the end of 1943 The Wehrmacht received the RPG "8.8 cm R.Pz.B. 54" ("Raketenpanzerbuchse"), created on the basis of the rocket launcher "Schulder 75" taking into account the experience of American "bazookas" captured in North Africa, and intended for fight against tanks of all types. "R. Pz.B. 54", better known as "Ofenror" ("offenrohr" - open pipe), consisted of a seamless smooth-walled pipe - a barrel, a shoulder rest with a shoulder pad, a handle with a trigger mechanism, a cocking handle with a safety lock, and a shackle with a front holding handle, sighting devices, a contact (plug) box, a latch for holding the grenade in the barrel. A shoulder strap was used for carrying.

Three rectangular guides were stamped along the entire length of the barrel; a wire ring was attached to the rear end, which protected it from contamination and damage and made it easier to insert a grenade from the breech. The electric ignition device was powered by a pulse generator. The rod - the core of the generator - was cocked with a special swinging handle in front of the trigger, while the safety was recessed. The current was supplied by protected wires to the contact box. Sights were attached to the left side of the tube and included a front sight - a front sight - and a rear sight - a frame with a slot. The position of the slot was adjusted during zeroing.

The rocket-propelled grenade "8.8-сш R.Pz.B.Gr. 4322" consisted of a body with a shaped charge (an alloy of TNT with hexogen) and an AZ 5075 impact head fuse with a safety pin, a powder engine, at the nozzle of which a ring stabilizer was attached, and a wooden block with electric igniter contacts. The body and tail were screwed together. The grenade was painted dark green. Before loading, the fuse pin was removed and the adhesive tape covering the contact block was removed. The fuse was cocked after the shot, about three meters from the muzzle. Grenade weight – 3.3 kg, length – 655 m, armor penetration – 150 mm normal. Grenades with an engine adapted to winter conditions had the inscription “arkt” on the tail section. In addition to the “arctic” one, a “tropical” (for North Africa) grenade was also tested. There were also training grenades "4320 Ub", "4340 Ub" and "4320 Ex".

The weight of the Ofenror without a grenade was about 9 kg, length – 1640 mm, firing range – up to 150 m, crew – 2 people, rate of fire – up to 10 rounds/min. The shooting was carried out from the shoulder. To protect against engine powder gases, the gunner had to wear gloves, a gas mask (without a filter), a hood and a helmet. In 1944 The RPG received light cover in the form of a rectangular shield with a window for aiming and a box for small spare parts. A safety bracket was installed on the muzzle of the barrel. The new model “R.Pz.B. 54/1” was called “Panzerschreck” (“panzerschreck” – thunderstorm of tanks). The weight of the Panzerschrek without a grenade is 9.5 kg.

The Ofenror and Panzerschreck were more cumbersome than the American M1 Bazooka, but significantly superior to it in armor penetration. The generator was more reliable than batteries in combat conditions, and the convenient contact box speeded up charging. In 1943-45. About 300,000 RPGs were produced. During the Berlin operation, Soviet troops encountered unusual “self-propelled tank destroyers” - B-IV tankettes armed with several 88-mm Ofenror-type tubes.

R.Pz.B.54II "Panzerschrek" - an improved model of a hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher

Rocket-propelled grenade P, - Pz.B.Gr.4322 for the Ofenror grenade launcher. 1 – fuse, 2 – head nozzle, 3 – body, 4 – explosive charge, 5 – tail part with a reactive charge, b – nozzle, 7 – electrical wire, 8 – wooden block with contact, 9 – cumulative funnel.

Dynamo-reactive anti-tank weapon "Panzerfaust1" (below - "Panzerfaust"-2). I - grenade body, 2 - explosive charge, 3 - cumulative funnel, 4 - detonating device, 5 - fuse, 6 - wooden grenade rod, 7 - barrel , 8 – expelling charge, 9 – trigger mechanism

In 1943, the Wehrmacht also received a very effective weapon - the Panzerfaust dynamo-reactive device, referred to in the literature as the "faustpatrone". The name "panzerfaust" ("armoured fist") is associated with the popular German medieval legend of a knight with an "arm of steel". Several samples of "Panzerfausts" were adopted, designated as F-1 and F-2 ("system 43"), F-3 ("44"), F-4, of fundamentally the same design.

"Panzerfaust" was a disposable grenade launcher, built according to the simplest recoilless rifle design developed by G. Langweier. The basis was an open steel tube-barrel with a propellant charge and a firing mechanism. An over-caliber grenade (mine) was inserted into the pipe at the front. The propellant charge of black gunpowder was placed in a cardboard case and separated from the grenade with a plastic wad. A percussion mechanism tube was welded to the front of the pipe, which included a firing pin with a mainspring, a release button, a retractable stem with a screw, a return spring and a sleeve with an igniter primer. To cock the percussion mechanism, the stem was pushed forward, bringing the primer to the ignition hole, then pulled back and turned, removing the mechanism from safety. The descent was carried out by pressing a button. The firing mechanism could be safely de-cocked. The sight was a folding bar with a hole, and the front sight was the top of the rim of the grenade. In the stowed position, the bar was secured with a pin behind the eye of the grenade. In this case, it was impossible to cock the striking mechanism. To fire a weapon, the weapon was usually taken under the arm; they fired from the shoulder only at short range.

The grenade consisted of a body with a shaped charge (TNT/RDX), covered with a ballistic tip, and a tail section. The latter, when equipped, included a metal cup with an inertial fuse and a bottom detonator and a wooden rod with a 4-blade stabilizer. The folded stabilizer blades opened after leaving the barrel. The caliber of the F-1 grenade is 100 mm, the F-2 is 150 mm, the weight is 1.65 and 2.8 kg, respectively (charge -0.73 and 1.66 kg), normal armor penetration is 140 and 200 mm. The shape of the tip of the F-1 grenade was supposed to improve the formation of a cumulative jet. The total weight of F-1 is 3.25 kg, F-2 is 5.35 kg, length is 1010 and 1048 mm, respectively. The initial speed of the grenade is 40 m/s, the target firing range of the F-1 and F-2 is up to 30 m, hence the names of the models “Panzerfaust-30 Klein” and “Panzerfaust-30 Gross”. The F-3 (“Panzerfaust-60”) had a firing range of up to 60 m. The F-4 (“Panzerfaust-100”) model used a two-beam propellant charge with an air gap, providing a firing range of up to 100 m. The weapon was painted dark green or dirty yellow color. When fired, a sheaf of flame 1.5-4 m long burst out behind the pipe, as warned by the inscription "Achtung! Feuerstral!" ("Attention! Beam of fire!"). A long, hot gas jet made it difficult to shoot from tight spaces.

The first batch of "Panzerfaust" of 8000 pieces. released in August 1943, their widespread use began in the spring, and the most widespread - at the end of 1944. In 1945. a third model appeared (F-3) with a 150-mm grenade, an increased propellant charge, an elongated barrel and a longer sighting range. The F-3 sighting bar had three holes - at 30, 50 and 75 m.

Anti-tank rifle "Bazooka" and a grenade for it: 1 – ballistic ring of packs, 2 – body, 3 – explosive charge, 4 – fuse, 5 – stabilizer, 6 – electric igniter, 7 – propellant charge, 8 – cumulative funnel, 9 – contact ring.

"Panzerfausts" were easy to manufacture and master. In October 1944 400,000 of them were produced, in November - 1.1 million, December - 1.3 million, in 1945. – 2.8 million. Only short training in aiming, shooting and position selection was required. January 26, 1945 Hitler even gave the order to form a “tank destroyer division” from scooter companies with Panzerfausts. In addition to the troops, Panzerfausts were issued in large numbers to Volkssturm fighters and boys from the Hitler Youth. "Faustniks" were a dangerous enemy, especially in urban battles, where Soviet troops widely used tanks. It was necessary to allocate special groups of riflemen and machine gunners to fight the Faustians. Captured Panzerfausts were readily used in the Red Army. Colonel General Chuikov, noting the interest of Soviet soldiers in “Panzerfausts” (“Faustpatrons”), half-jokingly even suggested introducing them into the troops under the name “Ivan-patrons”.

"Panzerfaust", according to British experts, was "the best hand-held infantry anti-tank weapon of the war." Former Wehrmacht Lieutenant General E. Schneider wrote that “only shaped charges connected to a recoilless system... or in combination with a rocket engine... were a fairly successful means of short-range anti-tank defense.” But, in his opinion, they did not solve the problem: “The infantry needs an anti-tank weapon to be operated by one person and to be able to hit a tank and disable it from a distance of 150, and if possible, 400 m.” He was echoed by E. Middeldorf: “The creation of the Ofenror rocket-propelled anti-tank rifle and the Panzerfaust dynamo-reactive grenade launcher can only be considered as a temporary measure in solving the problem of infantry anti-tank defense.” Most experts already saw the “solution to the problem” in light recoilless rifles (such as the American 57 mm M18 and 75 mm M20 or the German LG-40) and guided anti-tank shells. The experience of local wars, however, showed the important importance of light RPGs, and recoilless rifles gradually faded into the background.

In 1942 The Ml "Bazooka" anti-tank rocket launcher ("bazooka" is a wind musical instrument) was adopted by the US Army. According to some reports, during the development, the Americans used information about the German Schulder 75 jet device. The RPG consisted of an open smooth-walled tube, an electric ignition device, a safety box with a contact rod, sighting devices, a pistol grip and a shoulder rest. A wire ring was attached to the rear section of the pipe to protect the pipe from contamination and to facilitate insertion of a grenade; on the front section there was a round shield (eccentric) to protect the shooter from powder gases. On top of the rear section there was a spring latch to hold the grenade. The electric ignition device included two dry batteries, a signal light, electrical wiring, and a contact contactor (trigger in front of the pistol grip). The wiring is made according to a single-wire scheme, the second wire is the pipe itself. The red light of the light bulb (on the left side of the shoulder rest) when pressing the contact contactor indicated the serviceability of the batteries and wiring. The safety box was attached to the top in front of the latch. To turn on the safety (before loading), its lever was lowered to "SAFE", to turn it off (before firing) it was raised to "FIRE". Sights were attached to the left side of the tube and included a rear sight-slot and a front sight - a frame with four front sights at fixed ranges. A shoulder strap was used for carrying. The M9 rocket-propelled grenade consisted of a streamlined body with a shaped charge, a ballistic tip and a bottom inertial fuse with a safety pin, a powder jet engine with an electric igniter and a 6-blade stabilizer. Contact between the grenade engine's electric igniter and the RPG's electric igniter was ensured by a contact ring on the ballistic tip (from the pipe) and a contact behind the body. Grenade body diameter - 60 mm (2.36 inches), weight - 1.54 kg, length - 536 mm, initial speed - 81 m/s, maximum - 90 m/s, armor penetration - 90 mm normal.

Weight Ml "Bazooka" - 5.7 kg, length - 1550 mm, sighting range against tanks - up to 200 m, against defensive structures - up to 365 m (400 yards), rate of fire - 4 rounds/min, crew - 2 people. The shooting was carried out from the shoulder. The Ml Bazooka was easy to use, but the grenade's armor penetration was insufficient. The design of the Ml "Bazooka" determined the development path of RPGs for a long time; the word "bazooka" became a household word.

The Ml Bazooka was first used in 1942 in North Africa. The Bazooka RPG has become the main weapon of the American Army infantry platoon for combating enemy tanks and firing points. Each company of the infantry battalion had 5 RPGs, and another 6 were in the heavy weapons company. In total, about 460,000 of these RPGs were produced. At the end of the 40s, they were replaced by the 88.9-mm RPG M20 "Bazooka", created at the end of the war, but entered service during the battles in Korea. During the war, a single-barrel 115-mm M12 Bazooka rocket launcher was also used - the launch tube was suspended between the supports of a tripod. The accuracy of all shooting was extremely low.

In 1943, a 57-mm recoilless rifle was successfully tested in the USA. It reached the front only in March 1945. The gun weighed 20 kg with a projectile weight of 1.2 kg, and was fired from the shoulder or a light tripod using an optical sight. But the 75 mm gun weighing 52 kg turned out to be more successful.

In 1941, in Great Britain, under the leadership of Colonel Blakker, a “semi-automatic” anti-tank grenade launcher was created, adopted in 1942. into service under the designation "PIAT Mk.G ("Projektor Infantry Ami Tank, Mark I"). The design consisted of a steel pipe with a tray welded to the front, a massive bolt-striker, a recoil spring, a trigger mechanism, a bipod, a shoulder rest with a cushion and sighting devices.When loaded, the grenade (mine) was placed on the tray and covered the tube.

Anti-tank rifle "PIAT" Mk.l and grenade for it

The semi-automatic operated due to the recoil of the bolt-striker: after the shot, it rolled back and stood on the sear of the trigger mechanism. When you press the trigger lever, the sear releases the bolt-striker, under the action of the recoil spring it rushes forward and breaks the primer of the grenade propellant charge, and the shot is fired “from the roll-out”, i.e. until the shutter reaches its extreme forward position. At this time, the sear came off the trigger lever and could have caught the bolt during rollback. Before the first shot, the bolt was cocked manually. The trigger mechanism had a safety lever on the right, which locked it when the flag was turned forward. The guide rod and limiter of the movement of the shutter was the rod of the shoulder stop, which covered the pipe from behind. Sights were attached to the left side of the tube and included a front sight and a folding diopter sight with two diopters - at ranges of 70 and 100 yards (64 and 91 m), an arc sight with a level was attached next to the diopter - for shooting at long ranges. The bipod was attached to the pipe behind the tray with a clip with a wing. In front of the shoulder rest there was a casing for holding the grenade launcher when firing with the left hand.

The grenade (mine) consisted of a streamlined body with a cumulative warhead, a head impact fuse, a bottom detonator capsule and a tail tube with a ring stabilizer. The fuse's fire beam was transmitted to the detonator capsule through a "fire transfer" tube. The propellant charge with a primer was placed in the tail tube. The diameter of the grenade body is 88 mm, weight is 1.18 kg, combat charge is 0.34 kg, initial speed is 77 m/s, armor penetration is up to 120 mm. “PIAT” weight (without grenade) – 15.75 kg, length – 973 mm, firing range at tanks – up to 91 m, at structures – 200-300 m, rate of fire – 4-5 rounds/min, crew – 2 people , standard ammunition - 18 grenades (min). Transferred U PIAT" on the shoulder strap.

The attribution of "PIAT" to reactive or "dynamo-reactive" systems seems erroneous: the propellant charge burned until the grenade completely left the tray, and the recoil was absorbed not by the reaction of the gas jet, but by a massive bolt with a "roll-out", a spring and a shoulder pad. "PIAT" was rather a transitional model between rifle and rocket AT systems. The absence of a gas jet made it possible - unlike rocket systems - to fire from enclosed spaces. The disadvantage of "PIAT" was its heavy weight. "PIAT" was considered as the main infantry anti-tank weapon in terrain where the use of anti-tank guns is difficult. The PIAT crews were part of the infantry battalion support company, the battalion headquarters company. "PIAT" were supplied to resistance units: in particular, the Home Army used them during the Warsaw Uprising of 1944. In the summer of 1947, PIAT's own production was established in Israel. In service with the British Army, the "PIAT" was replaced only in 1951. RPG "British Bazooka".

During the war, such “positional” weapons as heavy mounted grenade launchers appeared. So, in 1944 On the Soviet-German front, 88-mm grenade launchers "Puppchen" ("Puppchen" - doll) appeared, outwardly resembling an artillery gun. "Pupchen" operated on an active-reactive principle: the smooth barrel was locked with a bolt-door, and the powder gases from the grenade engine were used to push it out of the barrel. The grenade differed from the Ofenror in that it was slightly shorter in length and had a different engine ignition device.

The barrel was a 1600 mm long pipe with a socket at the end. A counterweight on the breech made aiming easier. The bolt was locked using a handle and crank. The bolt assembled the ejection, impact and safety mechanisms. The descent was carried out using a special lever. Sighting devices included a front sight and an open sight, notched from 180 to 700 m. The barrel with the breech and bolt was placed on trunnions in the upper carriage machine, welded from stamped parts. A 3 mm thick shield with inwardly curved edges and a window for aiming was attached to the upper machine. The lower machine consisted of a single-beam frame with a constant coulter, a pivot foot and a rule. Skids or stamped wheels with rubber tires were attached to the frame. In a traveling manner, the barrel was attached to the frame by a counterweight. There were no lifting or turning mechanisms. Vertical aiming angles range from – 20 to + 25 degrees, horizontal – +-30 on wheels and 360 on skids. The grenade's flight speed is up to 200 m/s, armor penetration is up to 150 mm. The most effective fire is at a distance of 180-200 m. A sign for firing at tanks was attached to the shield. Weight "Pupchen"

– 152 kg. It could be disassembled into 6 parts: barrel (19 kg), counterweight (23 kg), upper machine (12 kg), lower machine (43 kg), wheels (22 kg each). Calculation – 4 people. "Pupchen" was distinguished by its simplicity of design. The quantitative ratio of hand-held and mounted grenade launchers can be judged by the following figures: on March 1, 1945, the Wehrmacht had 139,700 Panzerschreck and 1,649 Pupchen. A 105-mm anti-tank rocket launcher was also developed - a tube about 2 m long on a tripod. The firing range was 400 m, the crew was 2 people.

Easel reusable grenade launchers with caliber and over-caliber grenades were also created in the USSR: in SKB-36 of the People's Commissariat of the Oil Industry under the leadership of A.P. Ostrovsky - SPG-82, in the Design Bureau of the Moscow Mechanical Institute - SPG-122 (head - A.D. Nadiradze). Ostrovsky presented the prototype of the LNG-82 in May 1942. Nadiradze's model was a continuation of the theme he began at TsAGI - a launcher for firing from the shoulder or a machine gun (code name "System"). To increase accuracy, the projectile was given rotation due to tangential nozzles (turbojet projectile). But the accuracy increased slightly, and the armor penetration of the cumulative warhead decreased during rotation. 408 82 mm "rocket guns" with 80 mm armor penetration were manufactured at the beginning of 1944, but the tests were not successful. Development work on LNG-82 and the same type LNG-122 were completed only in 1948, and in 1950. The SG-82 was put into service.

In 1945 In the Budapest area, an easel grenade launcher designed for firing at especially protected targets was captured from Hungarian units. It had a single-beam wheeled carriage with a coulter and wheels folding up. A light frame with two 60-mm launch tubes and a shield protecting the gunner from grenade engine gases was mounted on the rotating device. The grenades were launched simultaneously. Sighting firing range - up to 240 m. Reactive over-caliber grenade - so-called. “Sawashi’s Needle” consisted of a streamlined body, a powder jet engine and a turbine that provided rotation in flight. Two shaped charges were placed in series in the housing. The first (smaller in diameter) was triggered by an impact fuse and detonator and pierced the screen protecting the target, the second detonated with some delay from the explosion of the first. Characteristically, by the end of the war, weapons for hitting shielded targets appeared, although Soviet troops made little use of shielding vehicles with additional sheets or mesh.

On the left is the Pupchen anti-tank grenade launcher; on the right is the launcher for the Igla Sawashi rocket-propelled grenade.

Table 3 Anti-tank grenade launchers

* Data 854 "Ofenror" will be added in brackets

Work on guided weapons

The Second World War gave impetus to the development of various types of guided (high-precision) weapons. AT-guided weapons were not brought to practical use at that time, but some interesting experiments were made.

The first suitable anti-tank system appeared in Germany. Here in 1943 under the leadership of Dr. M. Kramer, the X-7 "Rotkaphen" guided missile ("Rotk-appchen" - Little Red Riding Hood) was developed. The projectile was a small-sized cruise missile - body diameter 140 mm, length 790 mm - weighing 9.2 kg with a forward-swept wing. The WASAG powder jet engine developed a force of 676 N during the first 2.6 s, and then 49 N for 8.5 s, providing the projectile with a speed of up to 98-100 m/s and a flight range of up to 1200 m. Control system, created on the basis of the X-4 aircraft projectile, included a stabilization unit, a switch, rudder drives, command and receiving units, and two cable reels. Stabilization of the flight position was ensured by a powder gyroscope, the signals from which were sent through a switch to the control relays. Signals from the control unit were transmitted through two wires with a diameter of 0.18 mm, wound on inertia-free coils (“views”) at the ends of the wings. The steering wheel was mounted eccentrically on an arcuate rotary rod and included a gas flow interrupter and stabilizing washers with deflectable plates (trimmers) at the ends. It served simultaneously as an elevator and a rudder. The armor penetration of a cumulative warhead with a contact fuse reached 200 mm. The launcher was a tray mounted on a tripod with contacts for the projectile wires. The installation was connected by cable to a remote command unit. The operator visually accompanied the projectile in flight, controlling it using handles in height and direction. Thus, the principles of the first generation ATGM were laid down in the X-7 Rotkaphen. By the spring of 1945 The Ruhrstal Brekwede company fired about 300 X-7 shells, but reports of attempts to use them in combat are very vague.

The groundwork in this area was created on the eve of the war in the USSR and France. According to some reports, after the war the French received from the Americans a significant part of the information on German developments. In any case, it is no coincidence that in the 50s it was the French who led the development of ATGMs.

Often among anti-tank weapons they mention "remote-controlled wedges" like the wire-controlled German "Goliath" (Sd Kfz 302, "device 302" or Motor-E, explosive charge 60 kg) and "Goliath" B-V (Sd Kfz 303, "device 671" or Motor-V, explosive charge 75 or 100 kg). Indeed, the fight against tanks was named among the tasks of these vehicles, but their main purpose (like similar Soviet developments) was considered to be the demolition of fortifications, reconnaissance of the anti-tank fire system and clearing of minefields. "Goliaths" were in service with special engineering companies as part of the 600th engineering battalion "Typhoon", an assault engineering brigade and cannot be considered among the "infantry close combat anti-tank weapons." The chassis of the controlled "heavy charge carriers" B-IV and "Shprnnger" was planned to be used for small-sized anti-tank self-propelled guns with launch tubes for anti-tank rocket-propelled grenades or recoilless rifles.

Among the Soviet developments during the war, we mention the “electric torpedo” ET-1-627, developed in August 1941 on the initiative of 3rd rank military engineer A.P. Kazantsev with the participation of the director of plant N 627 of the People's Commissariat of Electrical Industry (VNIIEM) A.G. .- Iosifyan. The wedge was assembled on a wooden frame, had elements of the chassis of a small tractor, a caterpillar with a rubber-fabric base and wooden track shoes, and an asynchronous electric motor driving the rear drive wheels. Movement and detonation were controlled via three wires. Already in September 1941. The newly formed plant N 627 received the task of producing the first batch of 30 wedges within a month. According to Kazantsev, the ET wedges were planned to be used on the streets of Moscow, and after the counter-offensive near Moscow they were used in battles on the Kerch Peninsula, where, in particular, they destroyed 9 enemy tanks. In this case, power and signals were supplied from a specially converted light tank. Then the ETs appeared on the Volkhov Front, during the breaking of the blockade of Leningrad. Models of tanks like the MT-34 were built on the ET chassis.

Guided anti-tank projectile "Rotkapfchen"

In a way, dogs were also “controlled”, or rather “living weapons”. The tactics of using demolition dogs were developed throughout the 30s and were tested in 1939 at Khalkhin Gol. The formation of tank destroyer dog squads in the Red Army began in August 1941 at the Central Military School of Service Dog Breeding. The detachment included four companies of 126 dogs each. After the use of the 1st detachment near Moscow in the Klin direction, the commander of the 30th Army, Major General D.D. Lelyushenko reported that “the army needs anti-tank dogs and it is necessary to train more of them.” In July 1942, the composition of individual detachments was reduced to two companies, which made it possible to increase their number and make it easier to manage. In June 1943, the detachments were reorganized into separate battalions of mine-detecting dogs and tank destroyers (OBSMIT) consisting of two companies - a mine-detecting company and a fighter company. Tank destroyer dogs were specially trained to throw themselves under the bottom of tanks, and were taught not to be afraid of explosions and the sounds of gunfire. A pack containing 2-4 kg of explosives with a simple sensitive pin fuse was attached to the dog’s back. The dog was launched under the tank from a distance of 75-100 m. The positions for launching the dogs were prepared next to the riflemen. The dog handlers were armed with machine guns and grenades to destroy enemy tanks and manpower and fought like infantrymen. Tank destroyer dog units were abolished in the Red Army only in October 1943. In total, during the Great Patriotic War, dogs destroyed more than 300 tanks, self-propelled guns and armored vehicles. Discussions about the “humanity” or “inhumanity” of this method of fighting tanks are hardly appropriate in relation to the difficult conditions of war. Among the disadvantages of this method is the need to shoot “missed” dogs (which also involved regular snipers), since they already posed a danger to their own troops.

Incendiaries in the VET system

During the Second World War, various incendiary agents were widely used to combat tanks and armored vehicles. The effectiveness of their use in the anti-tank defense system was explained by the fire hazard of the tanks themselves; American and many British vehicles, whose engines ran on high-quality gasoline, as well as Soviet light tanks, were especially sensitive in this regard.

Incendiary weapons are considered the property of chemical troops, but during the war, “chemists” operated in combat formations of infantry units, so we are considering samples of incendiary weapons among “close-combat infantry weapons.” For the needs of anti-tank weapons, the units used incendiary grenades and bombs, portable and stationary (positional) flamethrowers.

Thus, the US Army had an ANM-14 incendiary grenade with a metal cylindrical body and a standard M200-A1 remote ignition fuse. Soviet tank destroyers used the so-called. “Thermite balls” are small balls of thermite (iron oxide with aluminum) weighing 300 g, with a grating igniter. The ball ignited almost instantly, the burning time reached 1 minute, the temperature was -2000-3000 degrees C. Having no shell, the ball was wrapped in paper to be carried in a pocket or bag.

This type of “grenade” also became widespread, such as Molotov cocktails - a cheap and easy-to-make improvisation that proved its effectiveness during the Spanish Civil War. "Incendiary bottles" were widely used by Soviet troops in the initial period of the war - with an acute shortage of other anti-tank weapons. Already July 7, 1941 The State Defense Committee adopted a special resolution “On anti-tank incendiary grenades (bottles).” To produce them, beer and vodka bottles were used, filled with self-igniting liquids "KS", "BGS" or flammable mixtures N1 and N3 based on aviation gasoline. To prepare the latter, they used gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, thickened with oils or special OP-2 powder, developed in 1939 under the leadership of A.P. Ionov. The burning time of such mixtures (usually having a dark brown color) was 40-60 seconds, the temperature developed was 700-800°C, the mixtures adhered well to metal surfaces, like napalm that appeared later. The simplest “fire bottles” were plugged with a cork. Before throwing, the fighter had to replace it with a rag plug soaked in gasoline and set the plug on fire - the operation took a lot of time and made the “bottle” ineffective and dangerous. Two matches secured to the neck with an elastic band could also serve as a fuse. They were set on fire with a grater or box. In August 1941, a more reliable chemical fuse was adopted for the “bottles” by A.T. Kuchin, M.A. Shcheglov and P.S. Maltster: an ampoule with sulfuric acid, Berthollet salt and powdered sugar was attached to the bottle with a rubber band. The “fuse” ignited as soon as the ampoule broke along with the bottle. Self-igniting liquids “KS” and “BGS” containing phosphorus and sulfur (nicknamed the “Molotov cocktail” by the Germans) were a yellow-green solution with a burning time of 2-3 minutes, a burning temperature of 800-1000°C. To protect the liquid from contact with air, a layer of water and kerosene was poured on top, the plug was secured with electrical tape or wire, and in winter a substance that was flammable even at -40°C was added. Instructions for use were stuck on the bottle. The bottle should have been thrown onto the roof of the tank's engine compartment. Experienced fighters spent 2-3 bottles to destroy a tank. Throwing range - 15-20 m. Bottles were a common weapon of partisans. The “combat count” of bottles is impressive: according to official data, during the war years, only 2,429 tanks, self-propelled guns and armored vehicles, 1,189 bunkers and bunkers, 2,547 other fortified structures, 738 vehicles and 65 military warehouses were destroyed with their help. Since the middle of the war, incendiary bottles have been widely used in the system of anti-tank mines and anti-personnel enclosures to create “fire explosives” - about 20 bottles were placed around a radius of anti-tank mines.

Incendiary bottles - "breakable grenades" - were used by most armies. Thus, the Americans used the MZ “glass grenade” with a breakable fuse on the rim; bottles with a phosphorus-containing mixture were used by the British. Polish Home Army during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944. used “bottle launchers” in the form of spring catapults and easel crossbows.

At the beginning of the war, a special rifle mortar appeared in the Red Army for firing (using a wooden wad and a blank cartridge) Molotov cocktails. Bottles were used with thicker and more durable glass. The target range of throwing a bottle with such a mortar was 80 m, the maximum was 180 m, the rate of fire with 2 people was 6-8 rounds/min. Near Moscow, a rifle squad was usually assigned two such mortars, and a platoon had 6-8 mortars. Shooting was carried out with the butt resting on a pound. The shooting accuracy turned out to be low, and the bottles often broke, so the mortar did not find wide use. At the fronts, it was adapted for throwing delayed-action thermite bombs of the “TZSh” type or smoke bombs when shelling bunkers or bunkers. During the battles in Stalingrad, the “Barricades” plant produced a “bottle launcher” designed by worker I.P. Inochkin.

The original incendiary weapon of the Red Army was the so-called. "Amullomet", used to combat manpower, destroy or blind enemy tanks and armored vehicles, shelling fortified buildings, etc. The ampulomet consisted of a barrel with a chamber, a bolt, a firing device, sighting devices and a carriage with a fork. The barrel is a pipe rolled from 2 mm iron sheet. Sights included a front sight and a folding sight post. The barrel was attached with pins to the fork of a carriage - a tripod, a wooden block or a frame on skis. The projectile was a metal ampoule AZh-2 or a glass ball with 1 liter of the “KS” mixture, fired with a 12-gauge blank hunting cartridge. The weight of the ampoule gun was 10 kg, the carriage - from 5 to 18 kg, the target firing range - 100-120 m, the maximum -240-250 m, crew - 3 people, rate of fire - 6-8 rounds/min, ammunition - 10 ampoules and 12 knockout rounds. Ampulometres were very simple and cheap “flame-throwing mortars”; special ampulette platoons were armed with them. In battle, the ampoule gun often served as the core of a group of tank destroyers. Its use in defense generally justified itself, but attempts to use it offensively led to large losses of crews due to the short firing range. At the end of 1942 ampoule guns were removed from service.

Table 4 Flamethrowers

Attempts made in the USSR at the beginning of the war to create “armor-burning” warheads based on a thermite charge accelerated by powder gases were unsuccessful and stopped with the transition to cumulative warheads.

The possibility of using flamethrowers in the fight against tanks was considered back in the First World War, but only theoretically. It was emphasized in a number of works and manuals on VET in the 1920s, with the caveat that this could occur “in the event of a lack of other means.” But in World War II, armies used flamethrowers quite widely as an anti-tank weapon in a variety of conditions.

Soviet troops used backpack pneumatic and "positional" high-explosive flamethrowers. The flamethrowers were equipped with viscous fire mixtures of A.P. Ionov. The ROKS-2 backpack flamethrowers had a capacity of 10-11 liters of fire mixture, designed for 6-8 shots, and a flame-throwing range of up to 30-35 m. Introduced in 1942. ROKS-3 had a weight of 23 kg, 8.5 liters of fire mixture were designed for 6-8 short (about 1 s) or 2-3 long shots, the flame-throwing range of the viscous mixture was up to 40 m. Separate companies (orro) and even battalions were formed (new) backpack flamethrowers. Companies were usually attached to a rifle regiment in battle and were included in engineering assault battalions. High-explosive flamethrowers of the FOG type (the fire mixture was ejected by the powder gases of the expelling charge) were less maneuverable, but had a more powerful jet; charging was designed for one shot (up to 2 s). FOG-2 (1942), for example, had a weight of 55 kg, a capacity of 25 liters of fire mixture, a flamethrowing range with a viscous mixture from 25 to 100-110 m. At the position, a high-explosive flamethrower was installed in a hole, fixed with pegs and camouflaged. The flamethrower squad (16 FOG) was located in the defense in three “bushes”. In the first winter of the war, the FOG was sometimes mounted on sleds or drags and used as a “mobile” in offensive battles. In 1943 Separate motorized anti-tank flamethrower battalions (omptb, in service -540 FOG) and separate flamethrower battalions (oob, 576 FOG) were formed, the main task of which in the offensive was to repel counterattacks of enemy tanks and infantry, and in defense - to fight tanks and manpower in the most important tank-hazardous directions.

In defensive battles, improvised flamethrowers were also used to repel enemy tank attacks. In besieged Odessa, for example, at the suggestion of engineer A.I. Leshchenko, trench flamethrowers were produced based on gas cylinders with a fire hose and a flamethrowing range of up to 35 m.

The German infantry had light and medium flamethrowers. Light backpack "kl.Fm.W." 1939 models weighed 36 kg, included a cylinder for 10 liters of fire mixture and 5 liters of nitrogen, a cylinder for 1 liter of hydrogen, a fitting with a fire hose, and could fire up to 15 shots at a distance of 25-30 m. It was supplied to chemical units of infantry units, and was also supplied to parachute units. landing units. He was replaced in 1944. came "F.W.-1" weighing 2^> kg, with 7 liters of mixture, with the same flame-throwing range. Note that in the “infantry armament program” the F.W.-1 appeared primarily as an anti-tank weapon. Medium flamethrower "m.Fm.W." (1940) weighing 102 kg, with a capacity of 30 liters of fire mixture and 10 liters of nitrogen, could fire up to 50 shots at a distance of up to 30 m, was transported by a crew of 2 people on a two-wheeled cart, and was used in defense.

An original thermite mine (land mine) was also designed in Germany: due to the shape and uneven strength of its body, a directed jet of high-temperature flame was formed during the explosion. Documentation on these developments was transferred to Japan, where, based on them, they created a heavy device supposedly capable of hitting a medium tank at 300 m. Soon, however, the device was converted into the Sakuradan bomb for kamikaze aircraft.

Tank destroyer tactics

Any weapon is effective only with appropriate tactics. Naturally, the VET system developed during the Second World War not only in “technical” but also in “tactical” terms. A new specialty was identified in the infantry - “tank destroyer”. Tank destroyers were respectively armed, organized, and the order of their combat work within the unit and interaction with other units was determined. Let's briefly consider some tactical points.

In the USSR already on July 6, 1941. An order from the Supreme High Command Headquarters demanded the creation of “tank destruction teams,” added “packets of explosives and... flamethrowers for light tanks” to grenades and bottles, and also recommended “night attacks against tanks.” To combat tanks, the most experienced “grenade launchers” were assigned to rifle units. They were supplied with anti-tank grenades and incendiary bottles and were located in single trenches and crevices in tank-hazardous directions. Interaction with anti-tank artillery, even where it was available, was poorly organized - according to pre-war views, batteries of anti-tank guns should have been located behind natural obstacles, and not moved into tank-dangerous directions. In combination with the short - no more than 25 m - range of grenades and bottles, this reduced the effectiveness of the “tank destruction teams” and led to large losses of personnel.

In the autumn of 1941 tank destroyer groups began to be created in all rifle companies in the Red Army. The group included 9-11 people and, in addition to small arms, was armed with 14-16 anti-tank grenades, 15-20 fire bottles, and acted in battle together with armor-piercing units - it was assigned 1-2 anti-tank gun crews. This allowed the infantry “during a tank attack not only to cut off enemy infantry, but also to take an active part in the fight against the tanks themselves.” Japanese troops in the Pacific Islands and Manchuria widely used suicide fighters who threw themselves under a tank with a powerful charge. Although cases of being thrown under a tank with a grenade at particularly tense moments of battle occurred in all armies, perhaps only the Japanese made them a permanent element of the anti-tank weapons.

Table 4 Development of individual performance characteristics of Soviet and German tanks in the period 1939-1945

Infantry anti-tank weapons closely interacted with artillery weapons in battle. In the initial period of the war, the Red Army practiced “anti-tank units” in defense, in which anti-tank guns and anti-tank guns were located, covering them with rifle or machine-gun units. During the Battle of Moscow, within the battalion defense areas, anti-tank strongholds (PTOP) were created in tank-hazardous directions, which included 2-4 guns and PTS of rifle units. In the defense zone of the 316th Infantry Division from October 12 to October 21, 1941. PTOP destroyed up to 80 tanks. During the Battle of Stalingrad, the PTOP already included 4-6 guns and a platoon of anti-tank guns. In 1942, the magazine "Military Thought" wrote: "Anti-tank artillery...it is better to place groups of 2-6 guns in so-called anti-tank strongholds, reliably covered by anti-tank obstacles...provided with armor-piercing troops and tank destroyers." The order to all army commanders, division and regiment commanders of the Western Front in relation to anti-tank missiles stated: “Anti-tank missiles are also assigned to strong points, and it must be taken into account that the greatest effectiveness of their fire is achieved when used in groups (3-4 guns) ... Tank destroyers with anti-tank grenades, bunches of conventional grenades and bottles with flammable liquid are an effective means of close combat against tanks. Groups of tank destroyers must be prepared at each strong point...” The VET instruction, issued by the General Staff in the fall of 1942, distinguished company VET units and battalion AT units in the VET system of regiments and divisions. According to the draft Field Regulations of 1943, the basis of the PTO were PT strongholds and areas. The PTOP usually included 4-6 guns, 9-12 anti-tank guns, 2-4 mortars, 5-7 machine guns, up to a platoon of machine gunners and a squad of sappers, sometimes tanks and self-propelled guns. 2-3 company PTOP were united into battalion nodes (4-6 in the division zone), covered by PT barriers and obstacles. Such a system fully justified itself during the defensive battle of the Battle of Kursk. Groups of tank destroyer sappers also worked closely with the rifle units, setting up explosive barriers directly in front of the advancing enemy tanks. For this, standard TM-41 mines, “mine belts,” were used. In defense, fighter sappers often installed anti-tank mines on sleds or planks pulled up by ropes. The mobile anti-tank reserve units also included platoons of tank-destroying dogs - they were located in tank-hazardous directions not far from anti-tank artillery positions. Such platoons also included crews of anti-tank rifles and light machine guns.

Infantry and artillery anti-tank weapons were often brought together and organizationally. The anti-tank division of the Soviet rifle division, according to the 1942 staff, had 18 45-mm anti-tank guns and an anti-tank rifle company (36 guns). And the US Army infantry regiment at the end of the war had a standard anti-tank battery (company), armed with nine 57-mm anti-tank guns and nine Ml Bazooka RPGs.

During the war, ideas of “enlargement” of tank destroyer units were repeatedly expressed. So, according to the memoirs of N.D. Yakovlev, in March 1943. The commander of the Volkhov Front, K.A. Meretskov, proposed introducing special “grenadier” units armed with anti-tank rifles and anti-tank grenades into the rifle troops. On the other hand, G. Guderian recalled that on January 26, 1945, Hitler gave the order to form a “tank destroyer division.” Given the formidable name, it was supposed to consist only of companies of scooter riders (cyclists) with “panzerfausts”, i.e. be another improvisation of the end of the war.

PTR, anti-tank grenades and mines were successfully used by the partisans. From June 20, 1942 to February 1, 1944 The Soviet Central Headquarters of the partisan movement handed over 2,556 anti-tank rifles, 75 thousand anti-tank missiles and 464,570 fragmentation hand grenades to the partisan detachments. The partisans made especially extensive use of incendiary bottles and homemade “moving” mines. Soviet partisans used PTRs to fire at enemy trains: steam locomotives or fuel tanks.

Some conclusions can be drawn regarding the development and combat use of anti-tank infantry weapons during the Second World War:

1. Combat experience has shown the urgent need to saturate infantry units (squad-platoon-company) with weapons capable of effectively hitting all types of tanks and armored vehicles at ranges up to 400 m.

2. During the war, the “range” of such weapons grew - both through the creation and improvement of special anti-tank weapons (PTR, RPG), and through the adaptation of “multi-purpose” weapons (flare pistols, rifle grenade launchers, flamethrowers) to the needs of anti-tank weapons. At the same time, anti-tank weapons differed: in the principle of the destructive action of ammunition (kinetic energy of a bullet, cumulative effect, high-explosive or incendiary effect), the principle of “throwing” action (small and rocket weapons, hand grenades), range (PTR - up to 500, RPG - up to 200 , hand grenades - up to 20 m). Some means were in service at the beginning of the war, others appeared during it and rapidly developed subsequently, while others (incendiary bottles, “sticky bombs”, ampulomet) were only “wartime improvisations”. German specialists most fully developed the new anti-tank weapon system for infantry in the middle of the war, but rapidly depleting resources and the rapid actions of the Red Army did not give the Wehrmacht the opportunity to fully use this advantage. Regarding the anti-tank weapon system of the Red Army, it is worth noting that the rifle units at the end of the war, as at the beginning, had hand grenades as their main means, applicable at ranges of up to 20-25 m. The anti-tank guns were not replaced by new weapons with a range until the end of the war up to 500 m. The fight against enemy tanks was again entrusted entirely to the artillery, which received in 1942-43. new anti-tank guns (45-mm M-42 cannon, 57-mm ZIS-2, 76-mm ZIS-3), as well as cumulative shells for regimental guns and divisional howitzers. However, neither the growth of anti-tank artillery nor its closer interaction with the infantry relieved the latter of the need to fight enemy tanks in front of its positions with its own means.

3. The infantry anti-tank weapon system began to change dramatically from mid-1943. - the main role passed to models with a cumulative warhead, primarily to RPGs. The reason for this was a change in the armored armament system of the armies - the removal of light tanks from combat units, an increase in the thickness of the armor of medium tanks and self-propelled guns to 50-100 m, heavy ones - to 80-200 mm. The complex of anti-tank weapons that developed in the post-war period had already taken shape almost by the spring of 1945. (taking into account experiments with a guided anti-tank projectile).

4. The increase in the saturation of troops with light anti-tank weapons operating in infantry combat formations increased the survivability, independence and maneuverability of units and units, and strengthened the overall anti-tank system.

5. The effectiveness of anti-tank weapons in combat was determined not only by their performance characteristics, but also by the complex use of these weapons, the organization of close interaction between infantry, artillery and sappers in both defensive and offensive combat, and the degree of preparedness of unit personnel.