Infantry Warfare, 1939–1945

Simon Forty, Jonathan Forty

• Publisher: Pen & Sword Military
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781526776839
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: World War II
• Index: History

The infantry can always be found at the sharp end of the battlefield. You may be able to crush an opponent with armour or artillery, but there's only one way to take and hold ground and that's with riflemen – the 'poor bloody infantry'. And it is the infantrymen of the Second World War – from all sides, Allied and Axis – who are the subject of this highly illustrated history. It uses over 400 wartime photographs plus contemporary documents and other illustrations to show the developments in equipment, training and tactical techniques and to give an insight into the experience of the infantry soldier during the conflict. Although the infantry were critical to the war effort, their contribution is often overshadowed by the more dramatic roles played by soldiers with more specialized skills – like tank crew, paratroopers and special forces. They also suffered devastating casualties, in particular during the last phase of the war in the west when around 20 per cent of an infantry division's riflemen were likely to die and over 60 per cent could expect to be wounded. So as well as describing how the infantry fought, the authors look at the motivation which kept them fighting in awful conditions and despite brutal setbacks. The result is a thorough, detailed and revealing portrait of infantry warfare over seventy years ago.

1 Mechanisation

The British Mark I tank arrived on the battlefield in 1916. This fighting vehicle combined armour, firepower and mobility (in the form of caterpillar tracks) to overcome the stalemate of the Western Front. It could cross no-man’s land with relative impunity and destroy fortifications, barbed wire and trenches. The stalemate on the Western Front was broken; tanks changed the shape of the battlefield.

One aspect of armoured warfare became immediately apparent – the need for weapons to stop the tanks. The initial German counter to the threat was artillery and mortar fire but results soon showed that while concentrated shelling could damage or incapacitate a tank, it rarely destroyed it. Artillery and mortars are indirect fire weapons: their crews cannot see the target. What was needed was a weapon that could be aimed directly at the target line-of-sight, and one that had a flat trajectory. The drawback, of course, was that this also exposed the weapon to return fire.

The Germans had experimented with a blunt-ended bullet with more propellant added to the cartridge. When the blunt end hit the armour it caused spalling – metal fragments breaking off on the inside, flying around maiming and sometimes killing crewmen. However, it wasn’t popular with those who fired it because of the short range, damage to the rifle and potential injury to the rifleman.

The alternative was the armour-piercing 7.92mm K bullet fired from the Kar98, the standard infantry rifle.The SmK (Spitzgeschoss mit Kern) had a standard steel core and the SmKh (h = hart = hard) saw the steel core replaced by tungsten carbide. The hardened cores were designed to pierce sniper plates and gun shields. These K bullets could disable a tank by destroying the optics or penetrating the vision slits; some armour penetration was also possible to the earlier tanks. However, armour plate improved and with the arrival of the British Mark IV the 7.92mm K bullet became obsolete. What was needed was a heavier-calibre high-velocity anti-tank rifle – it would be some time before Germany or the Allies realised that tanks were the future and rifles wouldn’t be sufficient to stop them.

Known as T-Gewehr 13 anti-tank rifle – and nicknamed Elefanten Buchsen (elephant gun) – this was the first dedicated anti-tank rifle and a new type of firearm. It had a pistol grip and was fired using a removable bipod. It was designed to target systems and tank crew through concentrated fire against vision ports, optics, fuel tanks and weapon systems. One major defect was the huge blunt force to the firer. It could penetrate 22mm (1.25in) at 100m and was used in groups by specially raised and trained anti-tank detachments to maximise damage to the target. It was fired from the prone position often from trenches or shell holes.

Some 25 years later, after having seen the tank dominate the battlefield, anti-tank guns became a major element of the infantryman’s weaponry. Most countries’ military doctrine did not see their tanks’ main function as killing other tanks: they were designed to break through enemy lines and play havoc in the relatively unguarded rear areas. The antitank gun was the main infantry counter to tanks – and there was a continuous race between the improving armour protection of the tank and the improving punch of the antitank guns as 37mm, 2pdr and 50mm gave way to the 6pdr, 75mm and then the heavyweights: the 17pdr and 88mm weapons. From the start the Germans had made use of the flexibility of their Flak 18 antiaircraft gun as a tank killer. However, as well as fixed antitank guns – although they would continue to be an important infantry weapon – other armoured vehicles, dubbed tank destroyers, were designed to kill the tanks. In American doctrine this idea was taken to the extreme and tank destroyers were supposed to be held in reserve awaiting their chance en masse to counter an armoured breakthrough. The Germans had a range of them, from the Marder to the mighty Ferdinand or Jagdpanther.

However, as the war progressed two forms of infantry antitank weapon were developed that, once again, gave the solo infantryman a real chance of closing with the armoured enemy—the bazooka and the Panzerfaust. These man-portable anti-tank weapons gave the infantry an inexpensive, lightweight alternative to the increasingly heavy antitank guns (such as the British 17pdr or German 8.8cm PaK 43). All sides developed them – the American bazooka, the British PIAT and the German Panzerschreck (8.8cm Raketenpanzerbüchse 43). 289,000 of all variants of the latter were built and it proved very successful. But in many ways the Panzerfaust was a more significant step forward. The Panzerfaust 60 reached full production in 1944 when 400,000 were produced each month. A higher velocity was achieved by increasing the diameter of the tube and increased propellant. The sights were improved with apertures from 30m to 80m, as was the squeeze trigger. Virtually anyone could use them and their HESH warheads could kill most AFVs. Postwar, the recoilless rifle and LAW – light antitank weapon – would become the infantryman’s last resort against tanks that got past friendly armour and aircraft.

* * *

Between the wars the viability of mechanised warfare was much debated. It was definitely helped by the growth of industrial capability, civilian use of petrol-driven transport and the development of its accompanying infrastructure. However, for nations exhausted by the previous war – particularly the French, British and American victors – and concerned with their own conservative military requirements it remained for the most part theoretical, a topic for the specialist proponents of mobile warfare.

The Finns were equipped with Panzerfaust while allies of the Germans during the Continuation War of 1941–44. This photograph shows men of Infantry Regiment 12 inspecting a Soviet T-34 tank destroyed during the critical Battle of Tali-Ihantala. This took place in northern Vyborg between 25 June and 9 July 1944. Finnish success – due in no small part to its excellent artillery – helped Finland maintain its independence at war’s end.

Tankgewehr M1918 tank-hunting rifle

Type: Bolt-action, breech-loading, single-shot, man-portable 13mm anti-tank rifle

Numbe...