Anti tank rifle?

oleg · Post by **oleg** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:39 pm

In manual for Soviet Partisans , in chapter dealing with use of captured equipent, there is picture of something that is called "anti-tank rifle S-18". It said to have caliber of 20mm an 5 or 10 round clip? What is actual German designation?

Matt L · Post by **Matt L** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 12:41 am

Hi Oleg,

To my knowledge, that's not a German weapon; there are 3 WWII German-made anit-tank rifles: the Panzerbuchse 38, 29 and MSS 41, all of which fired the same tungsten carbide-cored 7,92mm projectile. The case was the size of that of the MG151 15mm/ MG151/20 20mm cannon, but necked-down to 7,92mm. None of these weapons resembles the one in the diagram either. I have heard of a 20mm anti-tank rifle, but I can't remember at the moment which nation(s) fielded it. I'd guess perhaps Japanese or maybe Finnish? They're the other two Soviet adversaries that immediately come to mind.

Matt

oleg · Post by **oleg** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:21 am

Matt L wrote:Hi Oleg,

To my knowledge, that's not a German weapon; there are 3 WWII German-made anit-tank rifles: the Panzerbuchse 38, 29 and MSS 41, all of which fired the same tungsten carbide-cored 7,92mm projectile. The case was the size of that of the MG151 15mm/ MG151/20 20mm cannon, but necked-down to 7,92mm. None of these weapons resembles the one in the diagram either. I have heard of a 20mm anti-tank rifle, but I can't remember at the moment which nation(s) fielded it. I'd guess perhaps Japanese or maybe Finnish? They're the other two Soviet adversaries that immediately come to mind.

Matt

Manual Itself is full of refernces to WW 1 weapons and sytems that were pressd into services by Germans from the stocks they had captured elsewhere. I was thinking maybe something Czhech or Danish? (Madsen?)

dduff442 · Post by **dduff442** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:24 am

sPzB 41 based on the Solothurn S-18, I think. Will try to confirm.

Regardsio,
dduff

Lupo Solitario · Post by **Lupo Solitario** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:55 am

It's the Solothurn S-18 (if my cyrillic is correct it's also written on the right of the Soviet leaflet). A swiss weapon which I believe had a certian commercial success. I have for sure it had been used by italian army but ignore other users

SvenW · Post by **SvenW** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:59 am

Schwere Panzerbüchse Modell Solothurn -

- S18-100 20mm (20x115mm), barrel: 900mm, combat range: 300m,
- S18-1000 20mm, barrel: 1300mm, combat range: 500m,
- S18 - 1100 20mm, like 1000 plus sustained fire option.

All weapons were constructed by German engineers (Rheinmetall) but produced and sold by Solothurn.

Sven.

oleg · Post by **oleg** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:43 am

thank you:) It does indeed says Solothurn but I was afraid to misspell it. So was it common issue among rear guard German troops?

Björn · Post by **Björn** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:45 am

Hello!
The picture looks like a 20mm Finnish Lahti gun.

B

Paul_9686 · Post by **Paul_9686** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:38 pm

No, Bjorn, it's not a Lahti. The Lahti had a top-mounted box magazine much like the British Boys AT rifle, and an odd-looking bipod mount with alternative feet: a spiked set for hard ground, and a curved pair of "skis" for snow.

Oleg, I have with me a copy of Hogg & Weeks, Military Small Arms of the 20th Century, and they say: "A very few PzB41s {the German designation--P.} were tried on the Eastern Front and were immediately discarded since they had no effect on the T-34. The Italian Army took delivery of a number, and used them in the 1943 campaign, and it is from these that the few existing examples were captured. Like all the anti-tank rifles, the PzB41 was enormously expensive to make, and ineffective in use."

I suppose, of course, with you being Russian, you'd have a differing opinion of anti-tank rifles!

Yours,
Paul

oleg · Post by **oleg** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:41 pm

Paul_9686 wrote:No, Bjorn, it's not a Lahti. The Lahti had a top-mounted box magazine much like the British Boys AT rifle, and an odd-looking bipod mount with alternative feet: a spiked set for hard ground, and a curved pair of "skis" for snow.

Oleg, I have with me a copy of Hogg & Weeks, Military Small Arms of the 20th Century, and they say: "A very few PzB41s {the German designation--P.} were tried on the Eastern Front and were immediately discarded since they had no effect on the T-34. The Italian Army took delivery of a number, and used them in the 1943 campaign, and it is from these that the few existing examples were captured. Like all the anti-tank rifles, the PzB41 was enormously expensive to make, and ineffective in use."

I suppose, of course, with you being Russian, you'd have a differing opinion of anti-tank rifles!

Yours,
Paul

Germans fielded quiet a few armored vechicles (APCs for instace) which were well suited tragets for ATRs.

dduff442 · Post by **dduff442** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:52 am

0.5in Barrett rifles are popular with US SF troops to this day. I've always been surprised that this class of weapon passed from use considering the number of vehicles built to withstand 7.62mm and regular ~0.5in/~13mm ammo. Personally I'd always have kept a few around, at least at company level (personally I'd put a few in each platoon), just to up the ante on opposition AFV designers. The 20mm seems a bit of a monster, but a few high velocity 13mm weapons wouldn't go astray. Useless against tanks, but superb for long-range harassment, vs light vehicles, helicopters and aircraft.

I've always wanted to confess this digression from military orthodoxy and almost want someone to point out my foolish errors. Surely I couldn't be right in the face of an overwhelming global consensus...!?

Regardsio,
dduff

Björn · Post by **Björn** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:07 am

@Paul: I stand corrected, and of course it could not be a Lahti! Have compared with pictures I have!

B

Simon Orchard · Post by **Simon Orchard** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:35 am

0.5in Barrett rifles are popular with US SF troops to this day. I've always been surprised that this class of weapon passed from use considering the number of vehicles built to withstand 7.62mm and regular ~0.5in/~13mm ammo. Personally I'd always have kept a few around, at least at company level (personally I'd put a few in each platoon), just to up the ante on opposition AFV designers. The 20mm seems a bit of a monster, but a few high velocity 13mm weapons wouldn't go astray. Useless against tanks, but superb for long-range harassment, vs light vehicles, helicopters and aircraft.

I've always wanted to confess this digression from military orthodoxy and almost want someone to point out my foolish errors. Surely I couldn't be right in the face of an overwhelming global consensus...!?

Regardsio,
dduff

AT rifles are recorded as being used by German snipers to take out members of crew served weapons behind armoured shields. ie. MG and AT guns. They were not popular due to the size, weight and shot dispersion.

Paul_9686 · Post by **Paul_9686** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:09 pm

Bjorn:

No big deal; we all make mistakes, friend.

Oleg:

And isn't it true that the German skirt armor (like on the Pz III, Pz IV, and Panther) was adopted, not so much against shaped-charge bazooka-like weapons, but because the Germans were nervous about damage from Soviet AT rifles?

I'll grant that a lot of softer-skinned armored vehicles were nonetheless vulnerable to the At rifle, even if the German tanks were getting a bit too big for it. The PTRD is my favorite Soviet AT rifle; I tend to like weapons which are robust and simple.

Yours,
Paul