Are anti tank rifles relevent in todays warfare?

Unless your forces are the "army of thieves and whores" then no.

File: image.jpg (9KB, 650x202px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 650x202px

Don't know but damn I'd like a 20mm or ptrd

>>32155343
They make OK anti-material rifles.

Some shitty APC's can be penned in the side/rear by them.

>>32155343
Absolutely. Maybe not for their original purpose but they can still have use.

.50 BMG anti-material rifles you see everywhere, are effectively the same thing put to a different purpose.

Modern large-calibre AP rounds will outperform many of their predecessors from WW2.
Just that tank armour has gone way beyond that.

>>32155343
Anti tank?
Just an anti material rifle that's older than fifty.

Being able to lob a big as chunk of lead will always be relevant in the same way being able to stab someone is always relevant (to warfare)

It can't really be substituted with anything else when you really need that done.

File: 1430506321395.jpg (50KB, 582x469px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 582x469px

>>32155343
yes

File: 1476164947946.jpg (320KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 768x1024px

>>32155343
They are fine...

File: 1446468055430.jpg (242KB, 638x879px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 638x879px

>>32155343

File: 1445576520001.jpg (70KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1024x576px

>>32155343
>Are anti tank rifles relevent in todays warfare?

if you have one in your group for THA HAPPENINGS it will be a srs advantage, especially if it's accurate and has a good scope. it's what you'd want to take humvees out with.

Ask the Ukrainians.
Their tanks and APC's got btfo mainly by separatist anti tank rifles.

>>32155343
>Are anti tank rifles relevent in todays warfare?
oh look, this thread again.

>are you from America?
If so then no
>are you from some country that's not America?
If so then yes

>Against a tank?
no
>Against a soft skin, or lightly armored vehicle?
Yes

It is also bretty gud at punching holes in buildings, KOing IEDs, damaging parked aircraft, damaging telecommunication equipment...basically anything that you would use an anti material rifle for

>>32156461
>KOing IEDs
You need an anti tank rifle for that?

>>32156544
you ain't gonna set off an artillery shell with a 223 mate.

>>32156544
>>32156461
Shooting an IED with a gun is generally a pretty terrible idea if you don't know what you're looking at exactly. It has way more a chance of making things worse not better.

AT guns work for expedient cluster munition clearing though.

>>32156544
need? no. use? yes.

>>32155372
most can be penned from the front by them anon
majority of apcs are only rated against 7.62 nato

>>32155343
Yeah. They're just called anti-materiel rifles now because they can't actually hurt tanks.

>>32157184
you can kill the scopes and illuminators with them, blow up the external fuel tank, damage the bore evacuator, and be a general pain in the ass for the tank.

>>32157201
Sure, but there's not really any situation where a person armed with a man-portable ballistic weapon is more dangerous to a tank than the other way round. Unless you shoot the crew while they're outside taking a piss, I guess?

>>32155343
AT rifles aren't going to kill MBTs, but they can still wreck technicals. As well they can target hard equipment like generators, sat dishes, fixed crew serve weapons, and such.

It's a man portable, multishot, fairly rapid fire weapon system. Imagine hiking it up to get a decent overview of an enemy forward operating outpost with decent range to put you out of the way of them quickly reacting to you. Then you proceed to wreck their commo and power generators before hiking away.

>>32155343
Very much so.
You have to shoot the radios that all western soldiers carry.
Besides, watching your buddies explode is pretty demoralizing.

>>32155673
lolz Go to bed kid and dream about beets.

Is the PTSD accurate enough for anything they claim anti tank rifles could be used for? i.e. hitting a tank's optics at ~200yds

File: 1467990127415.gif (72KB, 175x175px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 175x175px

>>32155362
>t. Fritz

>>32155482
>anti-armor CQB

>>32156461
>>32156544
>Shooting ieds

Boy am I fucking glad you guys aren't soldiers.

>>32157784
It's accurate enough to make a soldier kill themselves

File: 147047251472676575.jpg (25KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 640x480px

>>32155482

File: 1465616994871.jpg (32KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x480px

>>32157784
>>32157939

>>32157929
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51Rgcfw_syY

File: zzzzzzzzastare.gif (421KB, 500x373px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 500x373px

>>32155482
>It's a "PTRS-1 gets the obrez treatment" episode

>>32155505
>>32156461
>>32157171
>>32157184
>>32157302
Pretty much this. /thread

>>32157784
underrated.

>>32157929
Would you please elaborate? I was never told why we didn't, just to radio it in.

>>32155343
iirc some leftovers from WWII are being used in Ukraine today.
Against an MBT fuck no, but it can still punch a nice hole into an APC.

>>32160364
retard

>>32155482
please tell me there's a gif of that thing being fired.

>>32157907
>>32157958
>>32160364
>>32160575

The PTRS could have its barrel removed to faciliate transport

>>32155482
hope he filled out his stamp for this

>>32156560
>what is a Stand Off Munitions Disruption

>>32155482

This makes me incredibly nervous.

would an anti tank rifle penetrate a M113?

File: BvB0ZgaCcAAHCAk.jpg-large.jpg (10KB, 183x275px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 183x275px

>>32155482
I can't tell what the craziest thing about this picture is.

The monstrosity itself?
The thought of the recoil and concussion wave?
The trigger finger?
The fact that I can't help but find it sexy?

>>32155343

So long as your targets are BMPs, yes.

Hell, did you know that the BMP-1 isn't even proofed against the shitty Puteaux SA 1918 37? A tank from nearly a century ago could punch through it, and this was supposedly the scariest weapon of the Soviets for a decade.

>>32164373

In hindsight, the BMP-1 was pretty overhyped for its relatively unimpressive service record, but you have to remember that >>32162581 was its closest contemporary at the time and was a huge step up from the M113, which answering their question: yes, any AT-weapon that could realistically be expected to punch a hole through a WWI tank could go clean through an M113 because its "protection" was strictly limited to small arms.

File: 1479959116007.gif (1MB, 1756x1960px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1756x1960px

>>32155343
in the top right this does mention "their panzerbsschse"

the most advanced at rifle is probably the Steyr IWS 2000
http://world.guns.ru/sniper/large-caliber-sniper-rifles/at/steyr-iws-2000-e.html

as the denel ntw 20 is a little hard to classify
ill call it something like a highly accurate grenade launcher

File: 9900b74edbcf4a6e4eaea301e00b07f0.jpg (93KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 736x552px

The Danes used to have motorcycle mounted man portable 20mm guns.

Just seems incredibly useful having that amount of firepower in such a small and light package in todays warfare

File: 680514_712817345448385_5487640063956343672_o.jpg (387KB, 3022x1387px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 3022x1387px

one version can swap calibre between 20×82mm and 14.5×114mm
the other only takes 20×110mm

mostly notable for recoil reduction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_mm_caliber

>>32155343
Yes

Against Armata, it is small enough to evade radar detection, yet big enough to damage sensors all over the tank. You can shoot all the sensors on one side of the tank literally making it blind then go near and blow it up.

>material

It's materiel you fucking Chinese communist fucking shits.

>>32164519
Thats exactly what the seps in ukraine did to ukrainian tanks and BTR's, but a tank is rarely alone sitting there waiting to be disabled.
I remember a video of a really weird separatist commander Kedr saying how he and his unit got caught with only having a single RPG shell and a bunch of PTRD and PTRS.
They couldn't penetrate the armor, but the ukrainian unit had inexperienced soldiers so they put their tanks in bad positions letting the seps be more accurate with the AT rifles, letting them fuck the tracks up and even jam the turret.
Its better than nothing but dont expect miracles with it.

File: 1454254043962.jpg (235KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1080x1080px

>>32157253
>locate lone / small group of tanks
>set up in a nice ambush position, preferably with plenty of hiding spots and height advantage
>plant an IED to blow the tracks off of at least one
>tank comes to a halt
>wait in ambush position until the vehicles stop and people get out to assess the damage
>use .308s to take out personnel
>use anti-tank rifle(s) to snipe any vulnerable parts of the tank, such as >>32157201 explains
>lob any explosives you can at the stopped vehicles
>potato cannons that fire grenades, that sorta thing
>guerilla warfare yes

>>32155482
w2c that jacket

File: Cap M1907.jpg (35KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 800x600px

>>32164355
could it be the sandal on his left foot
or how he came to have that strange burlap hat

>>32155343
Only if you're shooting at light skinned vehicles. They were nearly obsolete when they were introduced, they would have a really niche use today. A gun is a gun is a gun, all.depends how you use it.