Were there any "retaliation" anti-tank weapons widely used by infantry in World War II?
score:4
Anti-tank development is littered with attempts, formal and improvised, at giving your average soldier the ability to blow up a tank at suicidally short range. I'd recommend Ian Hogg's book with the no nonsense title Tank Killing. Unfortunately my copy seems to have taken a walk, so I'll have to do this from memory. I'm going to skip what the other answers have covered.
The most effective and ubiquitous weapon that fits your description is the Panzerfaust 30. Appearing in 1943 with an effective range of just 30 meters, it fired a highly effective shaped charge lobbed along at a pokey 30m/s. The weapon was discarded after a single shot. It was issued to all sorts of troops in great quantity. It was only in late 1944 that Panzerfausts with a range of 100m reached the troops.
The US Army, desperately playing catch up with European armies, got the idea maybe a soldier could shove various pieces of their kit into a tank's wheels and make it throw a track. In Nov 1939 US tanks were scarce, so they brought out a T5E4 combat car as a stand in and shoved rifle stocks, machine gun barrels, and rocks into the tracks. First they figured out this was basically impossible to do on a moving tank, so they slowed it to a crawl. Once they finally got the things jammed in there they discovered that a tank is very good at destroying rifle stocks, machine gun barrels, and rocks. Source: The Chieftain's Hatch: Rifles vs Tanks.
The Molotov c**ktail was mentioned in the question, and I believe this qualifies. While they could be used by dedicated tank hunter teams, their fragility and extremely short range did not make them good weapons in this role. In order to be effective, the burning c**ktail had to strike the engine cover at the rear of the tank. This was best done after the tank had driven past you, or from a second story window, or the firing slit of a bunker.
They could be improvised, but many were manufactured. The Finns, during the Winter War with Russia, lacking anti-tank weaponry, made half a million of them. Rather than a rag in a bottle of gas, it was gasoline or other fuel to make it burn, plus rubber or tar to make it sticky. Rather than using a rag, they used a bundle of wind-proof matches or a glass vial of exothermic chemicals.
The preferred improvised weapon was a bundle of hand grenades, the Germans called them Geballte Ladung. An individual hand grenade wouldn't do much to a tank, but a bundle of six warheads tied to a single stick grenade could. Not a lot of damage, but it would do something. It could be safely carried, created out of materials at hand, and with the handle it could be thrown up to 30 meters.
(Finnish Soldiers with a bundle of grenades, and a Molotov Cocktail using matches as the igniter)
Upvote:1
There were a few devices that were intended to perish with or in the aftermath of the tanks destruction, but none of them were manned:
The Goliath, kind of a bomb on tracks.
The soviets tried with trained dogs but that did not go too well. Although it could be called "MAD", that would be cheated because the dog did not know about neither the mutual, nor the destruction part.
So no, no "retaliation" or MAD weapons were officially issued. Obviously, any weapon not meant for close, suicidal combat can still be used as such. And many weapons were so dangerous, that they were not far from MAD territory. But all of them contained the chance and were issued in the spirit that the user would escape unharmed. As far as I know, no suicide weapons were ever officially sanctioned in WWII land combat.
Upvote:2
My uncle was in France 43/44. Told of hunting German tanks, ambushing them running over his fox hole as he used dynamite to get a track off as his buddies shot at ports and view scopes. Spoke about putting frags in the barrel first, then phosphorous, said that was when it got exciting. I'd call it insanity. I call him a brave man. He got badly wounded but lived to tell the tell.
Upvote:3
Lets not forget the Satchel Charge. This often required the person using it to put themselves in harms way.
The World War II-era United States Army M37 Demolition Kit contained eight blocks of high explosive, with 2 priming assemblies, in a canvas bag with a shoulder strap. Part or all of this charge could be placed against a structure or slung into an opening. It was usually detonated with a pull igniter. When used as an anti-tank weapon, charges were sufficient to severely damage the tracks. 4 kg (8.8 lb) charges were enough to destroy medium tanks.
Upvote:3
In Saving Private Ryan, Hanks' Lieutenant character has his squad improvise a "sticky bomb", which he claims is "in the field manual". It involved a sock, explosives, and grease to make it stick.1
The Germans it seems actually produced devices with a similar purpose, which attached to a tank using magnetisim. The purpose of this device was to penetrate the armor however, whereas Hanks' improvised device's goal was simply to disable the vehicle by derailing one of its tracks.
The British also produced devices for this purpose. It really was sticky, rather than magnetic, which meant soldiers had to be careful not to stick it to themselves (!). Not many of them were used, but some were successfully used in combat.
1 - I'm not sure if that was a real thing, but the attention to historical accuracy in the parts of the movie I do know about was the best I've ever seen.
Upvote:7
The Japanese have the weapon the OP seems to be looking for: the Lunge Mine, which would be fatal for the user, although it isn't well-documented. A similar weapon could have been improvised by attaching a Type 99 mine to a sturdy stick. They also had a cheap shaped-charge anti-tank grenade, the Type 3 which could have been used in a hand-to-hand attack on a tank. They used flamethrowers as anti-tank weapons a few times, with some success.
The Soviet RPG-43 was a shaped-charge hand grenade. This required getting within throwing range of a tank, and was also quite difficult to use correctly.
The British Blacker Bombard had a range of only about 100 yards and frequently threw fragments back towards the weapon crew if it hit. However, it was probably less dangerous than the Smith Gun which killed several crew without ever seeing action against the enemy, or the Northover Projector, whose incendiary ammunition tended to break and ignite inside the weapon.
The most dangerous of the early-war British anti-tank weapons was probably the "Sticky Bomb", which tried to glue a powerful explosive charge to a tank, with a five-second delay fuse for the user to take cover. It was replaced later in the war by the Gammon Bomb, which was still pretty dangerous, but was used to kill several tanks in Normandy. The PIAT wasn't a great weapon, but wasn't in itself terribly dangerous for the user.
More post
- 📝 How were the bodies of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette identified in their unmarked graves?
- 📝 At the Battle of Augusta, how did the French learn that de Ruyter was mortally wounded?
- 📝 How did the Druids learn the Greek language by the time of Caesar's campaign in Gaul?
- 📝 Did the Portuguese get anything in return when they handed back Macau?
- 📝 How Was Roman Military Equipment Created and Distributed
- 📝 Number of artisanal working hours spent on making Terracota Army
- 📝 What "other property" was considered for representation at the Constitutional Convention?
- 📝 Is it true that slavery was endemic in Sub-Saharan Africa previous to the establishment of the trans-Atlantic slave trade?
- 📝 Were there ever actual organizations of pirates?
- 📝 Historical precedent for using bodyguards as special forces?
- 📝 What were the historical antecedents of Russia BTG-based military organization?
- 📝 Quote on chemistry - who is the author?
- 📝 Were Roman marching songs still bawdy during principate/dominate?
- 📝 When did "killing" become wrong in society?
- 📝 When & where were three masted ships invented?
- 📝 Are there historical texts in England querying where Roman structures came from?
- 📝 What did it mean that Italy was an Empire?
- 📝 How did people travel to remote islands like Easter Island?
- 📝 Did Rome conquer the Parthian Empire during the conquests of Trajan?
- 📝 What is a good, authoritative source on the history of Tibet?
- 📝 Were the 19th century decades referred to as 40s, 50s back then?
- 📝 Did the local population in North Africa resent the presence of the Germans during the Second World War?
- 📝 What type of ancient Chinese headgear is this and what more do we know about it?
- 📝 Articles 3 & 5 of the Tripartite Pact are unclearly formulated. Was this standard for the period?
- 📝 How did Kolmogorov help protect Moscow in WW2?
- 📝 When was King Alfred first called 'Alfred the Great'?
- 📝 How did ancient armies keep the route of supplies to their battlefield?
- 📝 Where can I find an English translation of 'Il Fioretto della Bibbia'?
- 📝 What is the context of Lincoln saying: "if I could save the union without freeing any slave I would do it"
- 📝 1901 Boxer Protocol settlement to Norway
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 Were there any "retaliation" anti-tank weapons widely used by infantry in World War II?
- 📝 Were there any Roman villas in Britain which were used rather than destroyed after the Romans left?
- 📝 Are there any examples of balistas, scorpions, or other catapult-like weapons being used in field battles
- 📝 Besides the Hebrews, were there any other ancient cults that used salt in animal sacrifices?
- 📝 In the "Christmas truce" of 1914 were there any football (soccer) matches between British and German troops?
- 📝 Were there any drunk driving laws before the automobile?
- 📝 Were there any travel restrictions during the Black Death pandemic?
- 📝 Were there any Germans in Japan after the surrender of Germany in May, 1945 and if so, what happened to them?
- 📝 Were there any high-ranking female soldiers during the Middle ages?
- 📝 Are there any documented examples of wooden ships which were in active service for 100 years or more? If not, what is the longest?
- 📝 What kind of ink was used by medieval scribes in Iceland, given that there were no plant galls for iron-gall ink?
- 📝 Were there ever wars/battles where infantry were given multiple rifles to speed up rate of fire?
- 📝 Were there any conquests that Ancient Rome undertook explicitly to gain control of a natural resource?
- 📝 Were there any attempts to assassinate Joseph Stalin?
- 📝 Is there any documentation that indicates the Aztecs were as violent as they are made out?
- 📝 Were there any crops and livestock common to both the Old and New Worlds prior to the Columbian exchange?
- 📝 Were there ever any farming societies without a calendar?
- 📝 Were there ever any libraries in medieval villages?
- 📝 Were there any wars in ancient Greece where religion played a major part?
- 📝 Were there any well known royal dynasties that did not in some way cite religious mandate for their rule?
- 📝 Were there any war movies made during WW2 that were well regarded by front-line American soldiers?
- 📝 Were there weapons that a private citizen could not legally own in 1789 in the US?
- 📝 Are there any historians who believe that the crusades were not motivated as a distraction from internal conflicts?
- 📝 Were there any successful attempts by the Allies to "turn" groups of Axis soldiers?
- 📝 Were there any pilots that declined to carry out the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
- 📝 Were there any westerners who entered the soviet bloc to escape capitalism?
- 📝 Were there any German operations to destroy supply routes in the Persian corridor in WWII?
- 📝 Were there any Chinese expeditions to explore the world? If not, why not?
- 📝 Were there any Jewish members of the Roman Senate?
- 📝 Were there any political checks on the U.S. executive during their covert support of the military junta of Pinochet?