Why the soviets didn't develop a antitank rocket launcher

>>1623019
They used a copied version of the German small anti-tank thing (not bothered to look up the name, forgot) and ones they captured. Not the panzershrek but the other one.

I think they also had some lendlease stuff but I don't think it was used as much.

But really you should be able to find this with a Google search easily. Not going to do that for you, just search "Soviet anti-tank weapons ww2"

>>1623043
Panzerfaust

no need when they captured so many panzerfausts

>>1623092

Speaking of which, how much usable loot was captured during the Battle of Kursk and by whom?

>>1623019
>POS AT rifles
You do realize they're extremely useful as antimaterial-rifles/vs lightly armored vehicles?

14.5 mm anti-tank rifle round could penetrate Pzkw 3 and 4 lower side armor at 200 metres.They were good at urban combat.
Thats the reason germans modified the Pzkw 4 with plates covering the area in later variats.

>>1623224
>>1623251
> good and useful
Early in the war yes. But they weren't effective against later war tanks like the Panther or the Pzkw 4 (later variants).

>>1623019

>AT rifles
>not based

end your life

>>1623377
The question isn't whether they're cool or not you retard

>>1623019

Anti-tank rifles were actually quite effective if fired at the vulnerable side armor of a tank. Even better if you could use terrain or buildings to get above the tank and aim for the top armor.

>>1623342
>But they weren't effective against later war tanks like the Panther
The Germans literally started the Panther II project because the Panther could be penetrated by Soviet AT rifles.

>>1623342
>>1624930

This,first panther variants did not have those plates shielding the weak armor at the lower sides,"inside" the tracks.