Anti-tank warfare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anti tank refers to any method of combating military armored fighting vehicles, notably tanks. The most common forms of anti-tank systems are cannon with a high muzzle velocity, any number of kinds of missiles (such as wire guided HEAT), various autocannons firing penetrating ammunition, and anti-tank mines.
In the area of anti-tank warfare two terms are often used: "mobility kill" and "catastrophic kill".
A mobility kill (m-kill) occurs when the vehicle's ability to move has been taken away, for example by breaking a tank track. The target is then immobile but may retain full use of its weapons and still be able to fight to some extent. A catastrophic kill (k-kill) removes the tank's ability to fight completely. This may entail complete destruction of the tank or disabling the weapon system(s) or crew.
Contents |
[edit] Early systems
- See also: Anti-tank rifle
Small cannon and large-calibre rifles were used against the early World War I tanks being introduced by the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), many of which proved to be almost useless. Some weapons included the Armor piercing 7.92 K Bullets, then a larger anti-tank rifle when those became ineffective. Also grenades were used, and the Geballte Ladung (‘Bunched Grenade’), basically several regular grenades bound together. Tanks were also vulnerable to artillery and mortars, especially if they became stuck, which was no miracle at the time with difficult terrain and barbed wire, and they could be targeted more easily.
By the end of the war a number of light guns, typically 37 mm (a 2 pounder in British measure) were being deployed on short carriages that proved to be considerably better. In addition most forces deployed large high-velocity rifles, typically of .50 cal (12.7 mm) calibre, with enough power to puncture the thin armor of the tanks of the era.
[edit] Anti-tank guns
- See also: Tank gun.
Anti-tank guns are guns designed to destroy armored vehicles. In order to penetrate the armor of tanks and other armored vehicles they fire high-velocity shells.
Prior to World War II anti-tank guns were relatively small, with anti-tank rifles primarily used for destroying tanks. Few had barrel diameters larger than 50 mm. With the rapid improvement in tank armor and guns anti-tank guns increased in barrel size, firing larger shells at greater velocities. One of the most widespread and successful of these weapons was the German 88 mm gun, which was originally developed as an anti-aircraft gun but later found widespread use in destroying tanks. Likewise, by the end of the war all sides were using guns with diameters of 90 mm and up.
World War II also saw the mounting of antitank guns on vehicle chassis, sometimes armored, as a cheap substitute for a full-fledged tank. Some had open turrets, while others did not have rotating turrets at all, meaning that the whole vehicle had to be rotated to aim the gun. Americans called these vehicles tank destroyers.
At the start of World War II many of these weapons were still being used operationally, along with a newer generation of light guns that closely resembled their WWI counterparts. In combat both proved entirely useless against the larger and better armored tanks they faced. For instance, the German army had recently introduced a new lightweight 37 mm gun, whose users quickly nicknamed it the "armored door knocker" because all it seemed to do was announce its presence.
All combatants quickly introduced newer and more powerful guns, and the anti-tank rifle had largely disappeared by 1942. The "average" gun by 1943 was 50 mm or larger, the Germans had an excellent 50 mm high velocity design, while the British introduced the "6-pounder" which was also adopted by the US Army as the 57 mm. A year later sizes had grown due to pressure on the Eastern Front, German guns were now 75 mm and the famous 88 mm. The Soviet Red Army used a variety of general purpose 100 mm and 122 mm guns.
As the guns grew in size they dropped in mobility, making the dedicated anit-tank gun less effective in the attack than in defence. This gave impetus to the development of the tank destroyer, an armoured vehicle sacrificing the broader capabilities of the tank (in the German cases) or some protection for a more effective anti-tank capability.
By the end of the war the concept of the dedicated anti-tank gun was essentially dead, the guns were so large that they were essentially immobile.
[edit] Infantry weapons
[edit] Grenades
There were many types and kinds of anti-tank grenades. These ranged from hollow charge designs (eg the UK No. 68 AT Grenade), to ones that simply contained a lot of explosive (UK No. 73 Grenade). To increase the effect some grenades were designed so that they adhered to the tank either through an adhesive (sticky bomb) or with a magnet. The Germans used a magnetic grenade ("Hafthohlladung 3") to ensure that the hollow charge would fire at the required 90 angle to the armour.
There were also a special type of grenade called Nebelhandgranaten or "Blendkörper" ("smoke hand grenades") which was supposed to be smashed over an air vent and fill the tank with smoke, widely used by both sides. Molotov cocktails also saw much use, especially in Winter War, but it was mainly early tanks that were vulnerable to them, and later tanks required a well thrown bottle directly over the engine compartment to have any effect at all.
[edit] HEAT and HESH
The development in light (as in man-portable) anti-tank weapons took off during the Second World War. Most were based on the Munroe effect (or shaped charge) and called High Explosive Anti-tank (HEAT). The effect was the same irrespective of the speed of the round. The effect was also concentrated and could penetrate more armor than some of the larger anti-tank guns, yet weighed only a few pounds. The first HEAT rounds were rifle grenades but better delivery systems were introduced, the British PIAT was propelled by a heavy spring, the US Bazooka and Panzerschreck designs used rockets; the German Panzerfaust was a small recoilless gun. The Heat warhead was retroactively used to convert the otherwise lmited German 37 mm PaK guns to fire a large shell(that fitted over the barrel rather than it) to a greater range than the Panzershreck could manage.
Another explosive related development was HESH which went hand in hand with British work on recoilless rifles. HESH was a large weight of plastic explosive in a thin shell casing. It detonated on impact with the armor but only after having spread itself over the armor surface. The effect was to knock a similar size piece of armor off the inside which would wreak havoc to the crew and internal components of the tank.
[edit] Infantry close assault
The tank is still vulnerable to infantry, especially in close country or built up areas. The armour and mobility of tanks also make them large and noisy. This can allow enemy infantry to spot, track and evade tanks until an opportunity presents itself for a counter-attack. Since heavy tank losses in some Second World War arenas, tank tactics have generally included close infantry support.
Because tank crews have limited visibility, it is relatively easy for veteran infantry to get close to a tank, especially if the hatch is closed. If a crew member opens the hatch for the better visibility, he can be shot.
An infantryman cannot be targeted by a tank's weapons when close, as the main gun and coaxial machine gun cannot depress sufficiently. Where tanks are operating in groups, this is less of a problem, since they can call on nearby tanks to drive off the infantry with light weapons.
Whilst many handheld infantry anti-tank rockets, missiles and grenades will not penetrate the front armour of a tank, they may penetrate the less heavily armoured top, rear and perhaps the sides. Damage to the running gear can inflict a mobility kill.
Tanks are also vulnerable to hand-placed anti-tank mines. Infantry have even immobilised tanks using a set of plates covered with leaves and dirt as dummy mines (the ruse being augmented by the crew's obscured vision). The infantry can then attack the tank while stopped. This tactic was taught to the British Home Guard during the Second World War since the Home Guard was not often provided with long-range anti-tank weapons.
In addition, in built-up areas the tank is very vulnerable to attack from above and sometimes from below, as the top and floor of the tank have the weakest armour.
[edit] Mines and other explosives
- Hawkins mine
- The Soviet Union employed anti-tank dogs during World War II, although they weren't very successful.
- The Japanese forces employed suicide attacks with pole-mounted anti-tank mines dubbed Lunge Mines during late World War II [1]
[edit] Artillery
Conventional artillery shells are not very effective against tank armour, except a direct hit by a sufficiently powerful shell. A non-penetrating shell can still disable a tank through dynamic shock, internal armour shattering or simply overturning the tank.
In the last thirty years, however, a variety of artillery projectiles have been developed specifically to attack tanks. These include laser-guided projectiles, such as the US's now cancelled Copperhead CLGP (Cannon Launched Guided Projectile), which virtually guarantees a direct hit. Some of these CLGP's (such as the Copperhead) have HEAT warheads instead of common HE.
Guided and unguided scatter munitions and submunitions have also been developed: a single artillery shell containing a number of smaller munitions designed to attack a tank. A six-gun battery might be able to fire several hundred submunitions in a minute or two.
In one form, the shell bursts in the air above the tank and a number of shaped charge (HEAT) or HEDP (High Explosive Dual Purpose) bomblets or grenades rain down. Any that hit the tank have a good chance of causing damage, since they are attacking the thin top armour.
Another form scatters a number of small anti-tank mines in the tank's path, which probably will not penetrate the armour but can damage a track, leaving the tank immobile and vulnerable.
More sophisticated are submunitions with a homing capability. Once again the shell explodes above the tank position and dispenses a number of submunitions. The munitions contain some circuitry to identify tanks, such as IR or millimetre radar; when a tank is identified, a rocket propellant is fired to shoot the projectile at the tank. These munitions will often descend by parachute, to allow time for target acquisition and attack.
All of the above but the CLGP can be fired from medium (122/152/155-mm) artillery, both tube and rocket.
There has also been development of large calibre (81-mm and larger) guided mortar munitions with both internal (e.g., IR or radar) or external (i.e. laser designator) guidance.
[edit] Developments since World War II
In the post-WW II era HEAT became the almost universal choice outside of artillery and tank units. The British had developed the HESH, or high explosive squash head, warhead as an anti-concrete device for attacking fortifications during the war, and found it surprisingly effective against tanks. Like HEAT its effectiveness was the same at long range as it was at short range. In general these systems allowed infantry to take on even the largest tanks, albeit at short ranges. But the short range of the delivery systems remained a problem. Increasing use of combined arms tactics allowed the attacking infantry to suppress the anti-tank crews effectively, meaning that they could typically get off only one or two shots before being countered or forced to move.
The search for a suitable longer-range delivery system took up much of the immediate post-war era. The US invested in the recoilless rifle, delivering a widely used 75 mm design, and less-common 90 mm and 106 mm designs (this last one was usually mounted on a jeep rather than hauled across the battlefield by infantrymen). The 106 mm formed the basis of a dedicated anti-tank vehicle, the Ontos tank, which mounted six. The Soviet Union also built recoilless rifles in various calibers intended to be used as antitank weapons, most commonly 73 mm, 82 mm, and 110 mm (only the 73 mm remains in service with the Russian military today, though the other two can be found all over the world due to Soviet military aid during the Cold War). The British used a massive 120 mm (4.7 inch) design the BAT series which served from the 1950s until replaced by MILAN, but it was generally too heavy for infantry use and had to be towed by or mounted on a vehicle for manuvrability.
The successor to the recoilless rifle lay in the development of the (wire) guided missile - the Anti-tank Guided Weapon (ATGW). Systems came into use in the late 1950s and 1960s that could defeat any known tank at ranges outside that of the guns of the accompanying infantry. The United Kingdom, France, and other NATO countries were among the first to develop such weapons (eg Malkara missile UK/Australia 1958). The United States was one of the last, coming up with the BGM-71 TOW in 1970, which was more powerful and easier to use than all the previous missiles, and eventually came to be the most widespread wire guided anti-tank weapon in the West.
Of the world's major armies, primarily the Soviet Red Army, and some other countries retained antitank guns in significant quantities, mostly in 100 mm, 115 mm, and 125 mm calibers. The 125 mm antitank guns are extremely bulky and massive, and require large tractors to tow them for any significant-distance cross-country, but they're relatively cheap, potentially deadly (particularly now that they've been upgraded with laser rangefinders and depleted uranium ammunition), though it is not clear what their tactical usefulness is in many types of warfare would actually be. In Desert Storm for example, tanks set up in emplacements were very vulnerable to many weapon systems and could be spotted well in advance. In an environment with more cover they would be harder to spot.
For a time it appeared that the tank was a dead end, a small team of infantry with a few missiles in a well hidden spot could take on a number of the largest and most expensive tanks. In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Soviet first-generation wire guided missiles being fired by the Egyptian forces inflicted heavy casualties on IDF tank units, a battle that caused a major crisis of confidence for tank designers.
[edit] Aircraft
Starting in World War II with the Hawker Hurricane MK. IID, the Hawker Typhoon, the Henschel Hs 129, the Ilyushin Il-2, and the Junkers 87 Stuka G-1 and G-2; many aircraft, including the A-10 Thunderbolt II and SU-25 Frogfoot, have been specifically built for close air support, including tank destruction. They can use weapons similar to helicopters, large caliber anti-tank guns, air-to-surface missiles ( i.e. AGM-65 Maverick), and various bombs -- unguided or laser-guided and with or without submunitions.
[edit] Helicopters
When the anti-tank helicopter arrived (able to attack the more lightly armoured top of the tank), some claimed that the tank was essentially obsolete. There has not been tank and helicopter combat between evenly matched forces for many years, so this conclusion may be premature.
The single biggest threat to the tank today is the anti-tank helicopter armed with ATGWs (Anti-Tank Guided Weapons) or anti-tank cannons.
The helicopter can position itself where it is not easily seen from a tank and then attack from any quarter. The limited visibility from a closed-down tank makes sighting a helicopter harder.
Most helicopter-launched ATGWs have sufficient range that they can under the right conditions be fired at a range too long for the tank to retaliate with its own weapons. This may change: it is believed that some countries are developing anti-helicopter weapons that can be fired from a main gun. Some tank gunnery systems are also probably capable of hitting a hovering or slow-moving helicopter at considerable range.
Even the light cannon of a helicopter gunship can be effective, as it can target the thinner top armour of the tank.
Although putting weapons on helicopters (probably) dates back to the 1955 with the Bell 47; the first specific anti-tank, attack helicopter that went into mass production was the Bell AH-1 Cobra in 1966.
[edit] Tactics
Even with anti-tank capability, correct military tactics are vital when defending against tank divisions, whether the defensive force has tanks or not. Tanks generally defeat any force that attempts to defeat them "head on", but can even be vulnerable to large infantry divisions without tank or aircraft support.
[edit] El Alamein
Bernard Montgomery showed the importance of correct tactics combined with a deep understanding of the logistical needs of tanks at The Battle of El Alamein. At this crucial point of the war, Erwin Rommel's forces had essentially gone unchecked over North Africa and threatened to overrun British forces in Egypt as well. However, Rommel's supply lines were extremely long due to his inability to capture the key port of Tobruk. Montgomery was aware that a breakthrough would allow Rommel to re-supply his tanks from Egyptian ports.
Montgomery chose El Alamein as it was a choke-point with the Mediterranean Sea to the north and wetlands impenetrable to tanks to the south. This prevented Rommel from using flanking tactics (which had been remarkably successful) to attack either end of the British line. When Rommel was unable to break through, he was forced to retreat back to his supply lines, as Montgomery had ready stores of fuel in Egypt, and would also be able to resupply from Tobruk all the way. As a result, Montgomery was able to reverse Rommel's gains.
[edit] The Eastern Front in WWII
Early German advances on the Eastern Front during 1941 were as impressive as their earlier attacks in Poland and France. While the immense logistics of the task obviously worked against the Germans, the Soviets soon learned the vulnerabilities of German tanks and exploited them wherever possible. Knowing that in certain areas tanks could not operate off of roads due to mud or wet ground, Soviet forces identified key choke points and would often ambush the first and last tank first, trapping any remaining tanks which were unable to advance or retreat.
[edit] Tank traps
With sufficient time, ground could be prepared to make it unsuitable for tanks. In Normandy, the Germans spread large metal structures on the beach which could easily become stuck in a tank's tread or understructure. It was also possible to dig steep trenches that would prevent tanks from traversing them without help from military engineers.
[edit] Korean War
The Korean War highlighted the difficulties that can arise with tank forces when vulnerable logistical support is combined with poor terrain. In the early stages of the war, North Korea's well equipped tank divisions were pushed back to the Yalu River, the border with China, by superior American tank power combined with air and infantry support. However, when the Chinese entered the war, they managed to reverse the American advances with infantry power alone. Because of the terrain and the need to keep the tanks supplied, American tanks were limited to two main roads. The Chinese merely occupied the land between the roads and harried the American supply lines and troop transports along the road. The Chinese infantry stuck to land that was impassable to tanks, such as rocky prominences and rice paddies, neutralizing the advantage of both American armoured divisions and air support. The only thing that saved the Americans from a rout was a well coordinated and disciplined retreat by the U.S. Marines, who managed to inflict much greater casualties than they suffered despite being outnumbered.
[edit] Future anti-tank
As bad as it looked for the tank in the 1960s, increases in depth of armor and improvements in armor technology meant that hand-held systems were no longer large enough to deliver enough power by the 1970s, and the introduction of Chobham armour by the UK and reactive armor by the USSR, forced the HEAT rounds to be so large that in many cases they are not man-portable.
Today the anti-tank role is filled with a variety of weapons, from portable "top attack" missiles, to larger HEAT based missiles for use from jeeps and helicopters, a variety of high velocity autocannon, and ever-larger heavy tank guns.
One of the first lessons of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict is the effectiveness of portable antitank missiles (in particular, Russian-made Metis-M and European MILAN).
 |
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: |
