Ever since the invention of the tank, various weapons have been used to destroy or neutralise them. These have ranged from the extremely simple - including mixtures of flammable or explosive household chemicals, and even dinner plates - to the highly sophisticated and computerised weapons of today.

Infantry Anti-Tank Weapons

While bullets capable of piercing armour existed before the invention of the tank, anti-tank weapon development began during the Great War shortly after the first use of the tank in combat. Such was the demand in Britain for tanks to be used in combat that, when no true tanks were available, unarmoured training tanks were rushed into combat in 1917. These had 'soft' steel sides rather than heat-treated armoured plate. 26 participated in the failed attack at Arras and some were captured and thoroughly studied. This, combined with the attacks' failure and the failures of the French Schneider tank design, led the German High Command to underestimate the true tank's abilities. Consequently the German anti-tank weapons programme and tank development programme were considered unimportant and in May 1917 they disbanded their anti-tank artillery batteries.

In the Winter War (1939-40) the Molotov Cocktail was developed. This was developed by the Finns for use against the invading Soviets. It consisted of a bottle of petrol and a lit wick. It was named after Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact fame.

Other anti-tank devices of the Second World War included Britain's sticky-bomb hand grenade and German magnetic grenade. Worst of all were suicide techniques developed by the Japanese. One involved a soldier hiding, equipped with a percussion-capped aircraft bomb and a hammer. When spotting an enemy tank he would approach it and hit the top of the bomb with the hammer, thus detonating it. This later developed into the lunge mine, essentially a bomb on a stick. When a tank drove by, the Japanese soldier would lunge the armed mine at the tank in a manner similar to a soldier doing bayonet practice. The impact against the tank would detonate the bomb. In both cases the attacker would die in the hope that the charge would penetrate the tank's armour.

Artillery Anti-Tank Weapons

An anti-tank gun is a specialised artillery piece designed to hit and destroy an Armoured Fighting Vehicle (AFV). They are designed to fire armour-piercing rounds only, rather than the full panoply of shells a dedicated artillery piece would use (high explosive, smoke, anti-aircraft, etc).

At the time of the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939, governments put their faith in the cheap, infantry weapon, the Anti-Tank Rifle (see below). Many armed forces had faced disagreements as to which branch of the military should have control over anti-tank guns: the infantry or the artillery. However, as the war progressed, and tanks grew heavier, anti-tank guns grew to match. Artillery weapons grew from being initially light enough to be moved by two men to becoming longer, larger and heavier in step with the tanks. This culminated in the British 17-pounder, the American 3", and the German 128mm PaK48¹: any of these monsters weighed over three tons and was between 12 and 15 feet in length. Indeed, the British were developing an even larger 32-pounder anti-tank gun as war ended.

In practice, most artillery pieces could be pressed into the anti-tank role with varying degrees of success: the German Flak 88 is the iconic example, although their standard 105mm infantry howitzer also had dual capability and may in the end have destroyed more tanks. The British 25-pounder standard issue field gun was also pressed into the anti-tank role in desperation². What distinguished an anti-tank gun was a necessarily fast reload capacity combined with a range of specialist rounds designed to defeat face-hardened steel armour. Rounds included APDS³, HESH⁴ and the German tungsten-cored rounds.

Anti-Tank Rifle

During the Second World War it is believed only approximately 4% of tanks destroyed were destroyed by enemy tanks. At the start of the Second World War, most infantry anti-tank weapons consisted of an ATR – Anti-Tank Rifle. This was a single-shot infantry weapon firing rounds of up to 20mm calibre, designed to penetrate tank armour. Weighing three or four times as much as a conventional rifle and being more than twice as long, against armoured vehicles they were virtually useless after 1941. Britain's anti-tank rifle at the start of the war was the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle, but despite its name⁵ it was a weapon intended for use by adults not children, male or otherwise. This didn't stop Walt Disney making a cartoon all about it, though, titled, Stop That Tank! (1942).

Anti-tank rifles could not easily get any longer or heavier - for example the Russian PTRS 1941 was almost eight feet long and weighed just under 50 pounds - and dwindled into obsolescence. While ineffective against tanks, they could (for instance) penetrate brickwork and concrete and have a demoralising effect on Germans in fortified infantry positions⁶.

Following the obsolescence of the ATR, experiments continued in providing infantry with mortars as well as cheap and effective anti-tank solutions. The British sticky-bomb was essentially an anti-tank mine covered in glue, and there were also grenades that could be fired from rifles. The Germans used a more-effective magnetic principle to make mines stick to tanks.

Cry 'Havoc!' And Let Slip the Dogs of War

The Soviets adopted a more controversial approach, involving the deaths of dogs. Between 1941 and 1943, they trained dogs to carry explosives to tanks and armoured vehicles. On contact with the tank, the bomb would explode, killing the dog and potentially destroying the enemy vehicle. This plan was a continuous failure and involved the worst military judgement since the invention of Australia's Russell Boomerang Grenade⁷.

Firstly, to save both fuel and ammunition, the dogs had initially been trained with static tanks that did not fire their guns. The first time they were used in action, the dogs refused to run beneath the moving tanks. Many were scared by the gunfire and ran straight back to their handlers, killing many Soviet soldiers in the process. Other dogs were shot by those who had trained them. A few of the bravest dogs simply waited for the tanks to stop rather than approach them on the move. Many of these dogs were also shot, leading to the capture and study by the Germans of many intact bombs.

The next time the dogs were deployed, the Soviets had trained them using moving and firing tanks. However, the tanks that they used were their own, diesel-engined vehicles, while the Germans used petrol-engined tanks. When used on the battlefield, the dogs used their sense of smell to find and run towards the closest Soviet tanks. Even ignoring the ethics of so many pointless dog deaths, which as well as the trained dogs led to the Germans killing every dog they saw in case it carried a bomb, the plan was a disaster.

Projectors and Launchers

In 1942 Britain issued its soldiers with the PIAT (Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank) which, when used correctly, was very effective against Panzers. Six Victoria Crosses were awarded to Allied soldiers using them. The PIAT had vastly increased penetration power over anti-tank rifles, had no back-blast, thus allowing it to be used in confined spaces, and was short and simple. It was extremely difficult to cock the weapon under battle conditions, requiring a strong operator lying on their back and pulling a 200lb/in² spring into place. It had a powerful recoil and launched its bombs at the same velocity as an American M1 Bazooka.

In the USA the Bazooka developed from two different weapons – the shaped-charge warhead and solid rocket propulsion. A shaped charge is a way to concentrate an explosive charge in a focused direction. Swiss engineer Henri Mohaupt developed a grenade that could penetrate thick armour, but needed a way for it to be launched. Spigot mortars were tried, but the accuracy was unreliable. Other researchers had been experimenting with rocket propulsion. It was discovered that a propellant with a fast burn time could launch a projectile out of a long tube and the rocket motor burnt out before exiting (to prevent scorching the operator). The projectile could be fired straight and true and level, like a bullet from a gun, at any intrusive tank. General Barnes, Chief of the Ordnance Technical Staff, said the launcher looked like Bob Burns' musical instrument the bazooka and the name stuck. Unlike the PIAT the Bazooka has a potentially dangerous amount of back-blast, which led to several injuries. This also frequently identified exactly where a Bazooka had fired from. To this day anti-tank weapons are often called by the generic term 'bazooka'.

Germany was also developing shaped-charge weapons of their own, with the one-shot disposable Panzerfaust being developed to replace their anti-tank rifle. Also in development was the Raketenwerfer 43 Püppchen anti-tank gun which, despite an effective warhead, was essentially a small but costly artillery piece and far too difficult for infantry to deploy. The decision was made to keep the Püppchen's rocket warheads but with a new, more portable firing mechanism. This resulted in the Panzerschreck, a rocket-propelled grenade similar to the Bazooka. Manufactured in the hundreds of thousands, it destroyed many Russian tanks in the last year of the Second World War. It was not as effective as the Bazooka - it was heavy to carry and, while it did not have back-blast, the muzzle emitted extensive smoke and flame, giving the firing position away. The Panzerfaust was both easy to conceal-carry, with Hitler Youth boys on bicycles issued the weapon and told to attack tanks, and a highly-effective disposable weapon capable of cutting through up to 200mm of armour, or virtually any Allied tank that came within range.

Russia, the last country to rely on the anti-tank rifle, intensely studied the anti-tank weapons they encountered and chose to combine the best features of the Bazooka and the Panzerfaust. This programme developed into the Russian RPG (rocket propelled grenade) which also uses the shaped-charge principle. These continue to be used around the world.

Anti-Tank Mine

Since the invention of the tank, the biggest threat that tanks have faced is the anti-tank mine. These are usually much larger and more explosive than anti-personnel mines. They are designed to take advantage of the fact that tanks typically have thinner armour at the bottom than the front. A mine that destroys just the track can also disable the tank and prevent its effective use on the battlefield. The use of mines as a defensive weapon was so widespread during the Second World War that purportedly, during Britain's retreat to Dunkirk, one tactic used to buy the retreating army time from the pursuing German tank divisions included putting dinner plates across major roadways – the Germans cautiously treating each plate as if it was an anti-tank mine.

During the Second World War, tanks developed differing techniques for dealing with mines. These included front-mounted equipment, such as ploughs, to push any mines out of the way, or flails intended to detonate any mines before the main body of the vehicle was over it. The Conga was an attempt to fire a hosepipe over a suspected minefield. The hose would then be filled with nitro-glycerine and exploded, destroying any mines in the area. However, its use was ended after an incident in which a nitro-glycerine filled Conga was hit by enemy fire in a Dutch village and resulted in the deaths of several Dutch villagers.

Today mines are banned by many nations worldwide, having led to terrible civilian casualties. However, they have been widely used by both sides in the Russo-Ukrainian War (2022+). They included cluster munitions and artillery-fired mines where a target, such as a road, becomes an instant minefield after the firing of weapons that scatter mines across the intended site.

Top-Attack Weapons

As tanks' armour is designed to be strongest at the very front, where traditional weapons have targeted, new anti-tank guided missiles have been developed to target tanks where their armour is thinner and they are more vulnerable. These top-attack weapons are designed to fly above their target and then plunge down from directly above. They proved particularly effective in the War in Ukraine against Russian tanks that traditionally have ammunition stored in their turrets.

The two most successful top-attack weapons are the NLAW and Javelin missiles. The NLAW (Next-generation Light Anti-tank Weapon) was designed for the British military and developed in Sweden. The NLAW is a short-range line-of-sight lightweight and easily portable weapon that can be deployed anywhere, including in confined spaces. With an effective range of 20m to 1km, it is ideal in extreme close combat such as found in urban warfare ambushes. It is easy to learn how to use, with an hour's training proving sufficient, and has been credited with 30-40% of Russian tanks destroyed. The Javelin is more effective in open areas at longer ranges, up to 2.5km. Its minimum range is 150m so it is less effective in ambushes, heavier and harder to learn how to use. Javelins are far more expensive than NLAWs, but whereas the NLAW is a single-use weapon, the most expensive element is the Javelin's reusable body.