Anti Tank Warfare: Strategies, Tactics, and Technology

By Fouad Sabry

What is Anti Tank Warfare

Anti-tank warfare originated during World War I from the desire to develop technology and tactics to destroy tanks. After the Allies deployed the first tanks in 1916, the German Empire introduced the first anti-tank weapons. The first developed anti-tank weapon was a scaled-up bolt-action rifle, the Mauser 1918 T-Gewehr, that fired a 13.2 mm cartridge with a solid bullet that could penetrate the thin armor used by tanks at that time and destroy the engine or ricochet inside, killing occupants. Because tanks represent an enemy's strong force projection on land, military strategists have incorporated anti-tank warfare into the doctrine of nearly every combat service since. The most predominant anti-tank weapons at the start of World War II in 1939 included the tank-mounted gun, anti-tank guns and anti-tank grenades used by the infantry, and ground-attack aircraft.

How you will benefit

(I) Insights, and validations about the following topics:

Chapter 1: Anti-tank warfare

Chapter 2: Armoured fighting vehicle

Chapter 3: Assault gun

Chapter 4: Tank destroyer

Chapter 5: Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon

Chapter 6: Infantry fighting vehicle

Chapter 7: Rocket-propelled grenade

Chapter 8: Self-propelled artillery

Chapter 9: Field gun

Chapter 10: BMP-1

(II) Answering the public top questions about anti tank warfare.

Who this book is for

Professionals, undergraduate and graduate students, enthusiasts, hobbyists, and those who want to go beyond basic knowledge or information for any kind of Anti Tank Warfare.

• Language: English
• Publisher: One Billion Knowledgeable
• Release date: May 29, 2024

Book preview

Chapter 1: Anti-tank warfare

The need for technology and strategies to destroy tanks during World War I gave rise to anti-tank warfare. The German Empire created the first anti-tank weapons before the Allies used tanks in battle in 1916. Since then, military planners have incorporated anti-tank warfare into the doctrine of almost every combat service since tanks represent an enemy's strong force projection on land. The tank-mounted gun, infantry anti-tank guns, anti-tank grenades, and ground-attack aircraft were the most common anti-tank weapons at the onset of World War II in 1939.

During World War II, anti-tank warfare advanced quickly, resulting in the development of self-propelled anti-tank guns, infantry-portable weapons like the bazooka, anti-tank combat engineering, specialist anti-tank aircraft, and infantry-portable weaponry (tank destroyers). In order to oppose tank-led offensives, both the German Army and the Soviet Red Army created static anti-tank weaponry that were embedded in deep defensive positions, shielded by anti-tank barriers and minefields, and supported by mobile anti-tank reserves and ground-attack aircraft.

The United States, the Soviet Union, and other nations thought about the danger of nuclear conflict throughout the Cold War. The personnel of armored vehicles had previously been shielded from explosive damage and projectiles thanks to advances in technology, but now radiation exposure was a concern. Little to no progress was made in the NATO nations in developing a policy for using military force without resorting to tactical nuclear weapons. The legacy doctrine of operational maneuver was being theoretically investigated in the Soviet zone of influence to understand how a force lead by tanks could be utilized even with the threat of limited nuclear use on potential battlefields in Europe. The Warsaw Pact adopted maneuver warfare as a solution while dramatically boosting its anti-tank arsenal. To accomplish this, Soviet military theorists like Vasily Sokolovsky (1897–1968) recognised that anti-tank weapons needed to change from the Great Patriotic War (1941–1945)'s conventional defensive role to an offensive one by becoming more mobility. Even though Western Europe and the United States were working on similar design projects, this resulted in the development of improved guided anti-tank missiles.

Both sides in the Cold War understood the value of the light anti-tank weapon, which spurred the development of man-portable weapons used by infantry squads as well as the mounting of heavier missiles on specific missile tank destroyers, such as specific anti-tank helicopters, and the use of even heavier guided anti-tank missiles launched from aircraft. Additionally, designers created top-attack shells and shells that sprayed areas with anti-armor bomblets, two new types of artillery weapons. Another option for quickly delivering anti-tank mines that are dispersed is to use helicopters.

IEDs employed in asymmetric warfare and weapon systems like the RPG-29 and FGM-148 Javelin, which can penetrate reactive armor or shell armor, have been the only significant new threats to tanks and other armored vehicles since the conclusion of the Cold War in 1992. Both of those weapon systems employ tandem warheads, in which the first stage activates reactive armor and the second stage uses a high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT)-shaped charge to overcome the shell armor.

Tanks were destroyed by drones and loitering weapons during the Ukraine War (2022-?).

The threat posed by the tank's arrival on the Western Front battlefields of the First World War led to the development of anti-tank warfare. The tank was created to counter the German trench system, enable a return to maneuver against the enemy's flanks, and facilitate a cavalry attack on the rear.

The use of the tank was primarily predicated on the idea that, once they were able to destroy the German trench lines with their machine gun and infantry support gun positions, the Allied infantry would follow and secure the breach, and the cavalry would take advantage of the trench line breach by charging deep into German-held territory, eventually capturing the field artillery positions and preventing the transportation of supplies and reserves up from the rear areas. Army men who were more familiar with the infantry tactics that the tanks were supposed to support were brought in to operate the installed naval guns and machine guns in place of the initial naval crews. However, there was no way for the tank's crew to communicate with the infantry that was accompanying it or with the other tanks engaged in battle. Despite the fact that some Mark IVs at Cambrai were equipped with Morse Code transmitters as messaging vehicles, radios were not yet sturdy or portable enough to be fitted in a tank. Only during the following war would it become common practice to attach a field telephone to the rear. More tanks were used by both sides as a result of the realization that the accompanying infantry might be driven to the ground by ambush fire, isolating them from the tanks. The tanks would then advance and come under close-assault by German infantry and sappers.

Early tanks had basic mechanical designs. Generally, the 6- to 12-millimeter (0.24 to 0.47 in) thick armor prevented penetration from shell fragments and small weapons fire. But even a close call from field artillery or a mortar strike could easily cripple or destroy the tank; if the fuel tank spilled, the crew would be burned alive. In order to take out machine gun sites and any infantry field pieces discovered in the trench lines that could readily cripple tank track with the HE ammo, a big caliber gun was identified as a tactical need. A 57 mm QF 6 pounder Hotchkiss light naval gun was mounted in the hull barbettes to do this. Although the relationship between ground pressure and soil-vehicle mechanics was not clarified until the Second World War, the terrain—the requirement to cross broad trenches—largely dictated hull and track engineering. Later, medium and light tanks received turrets to respond to ambushes throughout the advance.

German troops were taken by surprise when the tank first emerged on the Western Front in September 1916, but not the German General Staff. Because the French trials revealed the armored vehicles to be incredibly unreliable, the French Army Staff was strongly critical of the British Army's early fielding of the Mark I vehicles in tiny numbers. In their estimation, massive numbers would be required to support an offensive despite casualties from vehicle breakdowns or impassable no man's land terrain. Later, when these casualties were added to those from enemy artillery fire, the percentage of starters during some missions reached as high as 70%. Small-scale tank deployment would therefore result in the Allies losing the element of surprise, allowing the Germans to create defenses.

Because the only army that required anti-tank weapons was the German Army, They were the first to come up with a workable solution to counter an armored vehicle.

These innovations used three different types of ammunition: using grenades in infantry combat, such as the Geballte Ladung (Bundled Charge), which consists of many stick grenades that pioneers have linked together; small-caliber anti-tank rifles, such as the bolt-action 13 mm Mauser 1918 T-Gewehr, were early attempts; 3.7 cm TaK Rheinmetall in starrer Räder-lafette 1916 anti-tank gun on a light carriage which could destroy a tank using large-caliber armor-piercing ammunition issued in 1917 to special commands; and later, specialized armor-piercing (AP) ammunition was also distributed for the 77 mm field guns of the infantry division's artillery regiment (such as the 7.7 cm FK 16).

The German Army moved quickly to establish new anti-tank defense detachments within the pioneer battalions of the infantry divisions in response to the emergence of Allied tanks. These 13 mm caliber long barrel rifles that fire solid shot were the original issue. These, however, exhibited fouling after one to two rounds and had a recoil that was too strong for either the mechanism or the rifleman to handle. Individual pioneers demolished the rails with stick grenades, but this needed assisting machine-gunners to first distinguish the supporting Allied infantry line from the tanks, which proved challenging. Another strategy involved luring the tank past the German trench-line and then re-establishing it as the Allied infantry drew near. The divisional 7.7 cm guns would then engage the tank and attempt to damage the tracks with regular HE shells (and later AP ammunition). If the crews of the disabled tanks refused to give up, they were attacked with flamethrowers or a mortar until a direct hit was made on the upper surface of the vehicle, generally igniting an internal inferno. Finally, existing ground cratering, which served as the forerunners of the anti-tank trench, was deepened and widened on the expected approaches in order to prepare anti-tank barriers. The 3.7 cm TaK from Rheinmetall was finally hurried to the frontlines in early 1917, and despite its limited elevation and traverse, it proved efficient in destroying the tanks.

The development of the tank's anti-tank countermeasures was also impacted by the lack of agreement over the design and application of the tank after the First World War. However, little advancement in anti-tank warfare occurred until the 1930s because Germany's military capabilities were constrained by the Treaty of Versailles and because France and Britain faced no other threats.

Strategic thinking with fortified borders at its center dominated the interwar era. These comprised both artificial difficulties like anti-tank trenches, minefields, dragon's teeth, and wood barriers as well as natural impediments like ditches, streams, and urban areas. The Maginot Line, which replaced infantry-filled trenches with artillery-filled bunkers equipped with casemates housing 37 or 47 mm anti-tank guns and steel turrets armed with two machine guns and a 25 mm anti-tank gun despite Germany being prohibited from producing tanks, was seen as the pinnacle of this strategic thinking. Although German Command was more impressed by the surprise pulled off by the Canadian troops at the Battle of the Canal du Nord, the construction was partially inspired by the Allied experience with the Hindenburg Line, which was breached with tank support during the battles of Cambrai and St. Quentin Canal. In 1940, this started to affect their planning.

The Maginot line defenses, which extended up to 25 km (16 mi) from the advanced positions to the rear line, were built to deter surprise attacks and buy time for the French Army to organize. It was a more efficient use of labor considering France and Germany's comparative numerical disadvantage. Anti-infantry and anti-tank bunkers supported passive anti-tank barriers within the line. France started work on extending the line along the Belgian border after Belgium proclaimed its neutrality in 1936.

The 25 mm Hotchkiss type from France was one of the first post-war anti-tank gun designs, and it was considered the fastest way to defend against tanks. It was meant to take the place of a machine gun-destroying 37 mm weapon developed by the Atelier de Puteaux in 1916. A 37 mm anti-tank gun was first designed by Rheinmetall in 1924, and the first weapons were built