Good Morning Hanno and Alex.
Curiosity about the Panzerfaust got to me this evening and I did a little reading up on it. An interesting evening.
First discovery, based on battle damage analysis from the USA, Russia, England and Canada was that tank losses from the Panzerfaust earned a very distant 4th place. Number One tank killer was another tank or anti tank gun. Number Two was aircraft. Number three was mines and then the Panzerfaust. It seems its terrifying reputation far exceeded its wartime effectiveness. It was noted to have been most effective in heavily wooded and urban environments, where good cover for the operator was provided. Even in those situations, however, it was noted that the firing gave away the location of the operator due to the black powder propellant charge used.
A well-disciplined tank crew could deal with a Panzerfaust hit in most instances. If fuel, ammunition, or critical mechanicals were hit you had a problem, but records showed more crew were lost to small arms fire exiting a tank following a Panzerfaust hit, than were actually killed by the hit itself.
The molten metal jet created by a Panzerfaust ran out of energy about half way across the inside of a Sherman. The penetration hole is definitive. It tapers from exterior impact point to its breakthrough point on the inside. The force of the jet breaking through the hull may tear metal fitting off the interior hull wall, but does not result in a spall of metal hull being torn free, like a BB Gun pellet on a plate of glass. You would not be able to push an object through a Panzerfaust hole in a tank hull because of this taper.
By comparison, a 20mm solid shot round would have a relatively consistent hole through the metal it hit and would also produce a circular spall on the inside wall.
Studies in Canada and the United States showed adding pieces of track to the outside of a tank hull made no difference at all to Panzerfaust penetrations. Minimum distance for supplemental armour to be effective was 12 inches off the hull and ideally 20 to 30 inches. Interestingly, chain link fencing was the most effective protection at 30 inches.
One account I read of a British Tank Troop overnighting in a town square after being cut off by a German Counterattack. The next morning, the tank to the right of the Troop Commanders exploded in flames suddenly. The Commander had all crews start up and then a Panzerfaust round struck the right side of his turret, just forward of him. He recalled a blinding flash and a piece of kit on the wall hitting him on the forehead and knocking his beret off. A few seconds later a second round struck the lower right front hull and the jet penetrated as far as the gearbox, slightly damaging it. By then the building the shots had come from had been identified and was promptly levelled. The Troop withdrew under fire from the town without further losses. The Commander did comment, however, that their Co-Driver was not with them on that mission and had he been, he would have lost both legs.
It would be interesting to study the hits on the right side of the Crab at Overloon to confirm they are Panzerfaust and to also see exactly where the hits were in relation to crew and critical internal components. If they are all indeed Panzerfaust hits, my guess is what we are seeing now is an accumulation of battle damage over some unknown period of time, and not the result of a cluster of German Infantry shooting everything they had available in a few short minutes at the Crab in an attempt to knock it out.
A careful study of the hits would likely indicate which one or ones were most likely to have ended its action at Overloon.
My thoughts are that a Crab Tank probably drew as much attention from the Germans as a Firefly did when spotted. They would have been a big threat to their defences.
As I said, an interesting evening.
David
|