Anti-tank solution

[KrooK]

WW2 was interesting conflict. Tanks were one of the most dangerous weapon there. However people invented some smart and untypical solution for that "problem". Here I'm asking you to post tricks you know....

To start fair - I'm starting.
During battle of Warsaw 1939 german tanks during attack have to drove through railway. Same time boy scout connected railway with ..... high voltage. First tank crew that tried to cross the railway really gone to hell.....

During battle of Mokra 1939 about 30 German tanks prepared to attack on polish position. They were on railway or next to railway. Suddenly they heard something. It was polish armoured train chargin them and firing from all cannons. Tank crew turned into panic and ran into all directions.

During battle of Monte Cassino Anzac commando unit found Tiger hidden into building (some floors). Germans mask this tank very good. However Anzacs were even smaller. To avoid breaking Tiger armour they simply ....... planted dynamite and destroyed building.


And in the end something that is called a way of destroying tanks, however its a myth.
POLISH CAVARLY NEVER CHARGED TANKS. Sometimes cavarly found tanks but it was always by mistake.

[Marshal Murat]

The Soviets tried to strap anti-tank mines to dogs, and then send them at the Krauts, but that backfired...

The Japanese did kamizkaze tank attacks. They would dig a hole, jump in, pull in an artillery shell, and camouflage the trap. As the Allied tanks passed over, they would take a stone or hammer and strike the firing cap on the bomb, destroying themselves and the tank passing overhead.

[PBI]

During battle of Warsaw 1939 german tanks during attack have to drove through railway. Same time boy scout connected railway with ..... high voltage. First tank crew that tried to cross the railway really gone to hell.....

That's interesting; I wonder how it worked? I was always taught that the inside of a car (or any other large metal object) is a very safe place to be in a thunderstorm, since the electric current will pass through the outer surface of the car body and not through the passengers. Did it perhaps cause a spark in the tank which ignited the fuel or ammunition?

[Uesugi Kenshin]

That's interesting; I wonder how it worked? I was always taught that the inside of a car (or any other large metal object) is a very safe place to be in a thunderstorm, since the electric current will pass through the outer surface of the car body and not through the passengers. Did it perhaps cause a spark in the tank which ignited the fuel or ammunition?

I would guess that the crew inside the tank were in contact with metal that was connected to the tank chassis in some way so the current would have passed through them?

Don't the tires of a car have something to do with people being safe in them, and aren't you toast if you touch any part of the car chassis?

EDIT: Oh and I think you could argue that RPG's and rocket launchers were innovative "untypical" anti-tank solutions at the time as they started essentially as huge anti-tank grenades with small rockets attached to give the "thrower" (as they were originally thrown or placed) a little more range. The PIAT is also interesting. An AT grenade launcher powered by a spring.

[Marshal Murat]

The modern automobile has rubber tires that conduct the electricity from the metal chassis to the ground. 1939 Panzer tanks were more metal than really rubber.

[PBI]

Rubber tires work to reduce the damage done by lightning because the increase the overall resistance of the vehicle, and thus decreases the amount of current (which is what kills you in a lightning strike) flowing through the vehicle. The same principle applies to wearing rubber shoes if hit by lightning.

However, even without rubber tires the guys inside the tank should be safe from electrocution because the body of the tank effectively acts as a Faraday cage: When electricity flows through a large conductor, it will naturally flow only through the outer surface of the object. You can even be touching the inner surface and still be unharmed. In fact I believe people who work on high voltage power lines wear protective gear which works off this principle: Basically a suit of silver chain mail, which will conduct current over the surface and leave the wearer unharmed.

Regarding novel anti-tank weapons, surely the classic poor man's homemade anti-tank weapon, the Molotov cocktail has to be worth a mention? And the Soviet anti tank dogs sound great; can't understand why this unit has never made an appearance in any of the Red Alert games.

[Marshal Murat]

The Molotov Cocktail, in the original, only burnt off a little paint before it was rigged with more explosive stuff.

[seireikhaan]

I believe it was Rommel in North Africa who figured out that his anti-aircraft machine guns made quite suitable anti-tank weapons against the British.

[Marshal Murat]

An 88mm cannon is hardly a machine gun.

[PanzerJaeger]

20mm was enough for most of the British tanks.

The Faust was pretty innovative. Cheap, quick to produce, and effective. Fire and forget it. A normal infantryman could carry several along with his regular weapon, whereas a Panzershreck (German bazooka) required at least two devoted operators.



I would also argue that the entire Jagdpanther program was a pretty innovative AT solution. The tank hunters were highly effective, cheaper and faster to produce, and far more heavily armoured.

I recently found this original series about the Panther on youtube. Its got some great battlefield footage and deals with AT issues.

Panther Tank

[KrooK]

Hmm guys I meant something else. I didn't mean weapon to destroy tanks (panzerfausts, shrecks and rest) but untypical methods.

[Geoffrey S]

Well, they were untypical to begin with.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I believe it was Rommel in North Africa who figured out that his anti-aircraft machine guns made quite suitable anti-tank weapons against the British.

Not exactly a machine gun.

[Reverend Joe]

How about the Normandy beach defenses? I can't find any good pictures of them, but in addition to the metal "hedgehogs," the Germans set up giant poles designed to tear the bellies out of landing craft coming in at high tide.

Not anti-tank, per se, but certainly related and novel.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I can't find any good pictures of them, but in addition to the metal "hedgehogs," the Germans set up giant poles designed to tear the bellies out of landing craft coming in at high tide.

Rommelspargel?

[Marshal Murat]

Reverend might be refering to the caltrop-esque girders.

[PanzerJaeger]

What about the Panzerturm?

[KrooK]

Seems to be good option :)
I have heard about another untypical method used by Poles during ww2.
Howitzers - most of tanks had thin armour on their top.

[KarlXII]

Seems to be good option :)
I have heard about another untypical method used by Poles during ww2.
Howitzers - most of tanks had thin armour on their top.

Artillery being used for it's purpose is not a Polish invention.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

Reverend might be refering to the caltrop-esque girders.

Those would be the hedgehogs he is referring to, not the poles that were often topped with mines and designed to tear, or blow open the bottoms of landing-craft.

[Reverend Joe]

Those would be the hedgehogs he is referring to, not the poles that were often topped with mines and designed to tear, or blow open the bottoms of landing-craft.

Yeah, I was referring to the poles pictured above.

[Tribesman]

Artillery being used for it's purpose is not a Polish invention.

Yes , Howitzers (and heavy mortars) against tanks goes right back to the first world war , so it could hardly be called untypical .

Now this is a slightly untypical anti-tank solution...
http://www.tankmuseum.org/libraryphotoarchive_0704.html
.......but as it was just chance it doesn't really count

[KrooK]

I did not talk Poles invented it, only that Poles used it.
Anyway I have heard about similar situation into Italy.
Gun - about 220 milimetres - from Battleship hit next to Tiger Tank.
Explosion made big (30 metres) hole, however according to Allied soldiers tank itself
has not suffered serious damage. Good German job.
It was standing at the bottom of hole.
However whole crew cooked itself - there were too hot.

[Flavius Clemens]

Yes , Howitzers (and heavy mortars) against tanks goes right back to the first world war , so it couldNow this is a slightly untypical anti-tank solution...
http://www.tankmuseum.org/libraryphotoarchive_0704.html
.......but as it was just chance it doesn't really count

Crater from combat use of a V1 in a photo from a 1942 report? Is that a typo for the date or are they taking the mickey?

[The_Doctor]

Nukes.

[Tribesman]

Crater from combat use of a V1 in a photo from a 1942 report? Is that a typo for the date or are they taking the mickey?

It says the photos were found in a report , not that they were part of a 1942 report . The earliest possible date would be after march 1944

[Knight of the Rose]

I'm almost a complete ignorant on WWII tanks, but why could it only be after march '44? The site does say "two photographs turned up recently in a War Office report dating from 1942".

Please enlighten me

/KotR

[Conradus]

V-weapons only were used from 1944 onwards as far as I know

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I'm almost a complete ignorant on WWII tanks, but why could it only be after march '44? The site does say "two photographs turned up recently in a War Office report dating from 1942".

Please enlighten me

/KotR

Allied troops weren't in France until '44...

[PanzerJaeger]

Allied troops weren't in France until '44...

This could have occurred in Britain. V-1s were only used in '44 and '45. It doesn't seem like this would be a very difficult mystery to solve as only around 200 Challengers were made... IIRC.