I've read about German machine gunners using armour piercing K bullets on British tanks. Can everyone confirm this? Is there any pictures or references I could use?
I have no direct information but some thoughts, for what they're worth.
It is sometimes asserted that the S.m.K bullet (Spitzgeschoss mit Kern) was developed even before the first tanks were fielded and that it was issued as rifle ammunition - 10 rounds per man is mentioned in some accounts of uncertain authority - as well as MG. It was undoubtedly capable of penetrating the early armour under ideal conditions (range less than 100 m, vertical surfaces).
In parallel with the K bullet was the "sniper's trick" of reversing the projectile of the regular JS ball round - the confirmation that this would, at very short range (~ 15m), penetrate vertical armour that can easily resist a regular round under identical conditions has been demonstrated (and filmed) in recent times. That trick was said to have been necessitated by the shortage of AP rifle ammunition. Whether this was because the machine-gunners were hogging it all or not, I don't know. But machine-gunners can't reverse their projectiles so maybe they got priority.
Considering the short effective range - this is not the preferred territory for MMG/HMG weapons operation - for those the use of K bullets would have to be considered a "last-ditch" proposition. Well, the same could be said for LMGs and rifles too, but those have greater mobility therefore better survivability at close quarters and could be quite deliberately sent forward as a desperate offensive tactic. So maybe rifles got priority.
So there is reason to suppose either way in terms of MG use. Some cool-headed contemporary accounts, if there are any, are needed. Armour-piercing fire from rifle-calibre weapons would certainly have been a serious concern as perhaps evidenced by the progressive escalation of armour thickness and quality which seems to specifically counter that particular threat (and not much more) initially.
Tanks were a high enough value target to attract aimed artillery attention in any battle (and early types lacked the speed and manoeuvrability to dodge around - and even in fog/smoke the tactic was soon adopted for close-in troops to fire illuminating flares at them to "mark" them for artillery. It is my impression that the greater number of tanks and their crews were incapacitated or destroyed by artillery, not surprisingly, photos of 'penetrated' tanks tend to indicate strikes by larger-calibre weapons, including HE or large shell splinters.
But what about captured tanks? There could be some evidence of effective rifle-calibre penetration with those. Someone will know ... Heh, what would the takeover crew of a beutepanzer think about that?
-- Edited by Rectalgia on Friday 30th of July 2010 05:49:14 AM
