Advertisement
    Home        Articles        Reviews        Gallery        Contests        Forums     Search Login
Forums
 Introduction
 Posting guidelines
 Forum key
New Messages
Forum List
 News Forums
   GeneralNov 21 
   IndustryNov 21 
   Shows & ClubsNov 18 
 Site Forums
   ArticlesMay 16
   Build LogsNov 20
   ReviewsNov 15
   GalleryNov 20
   ContestsNov 10
 Modelling Forums
   KitsNov 21 
   ConstructionNov 21 
   PaintingNov 18 
   FiguresNov 20 
   DioramasNov 11 
   1-48th ScaleNov 21 
   Small ScaleNov 1 
 Research Forums
   WW2Nov 21 
   Post WW2Nov 21 
   Pre WW2Sep 6 
 Classifieds Ads
   Buy & SellNov 21 
   CommercialNov 19 
 

Forums - Research / WW2

This WW2 forum is intended for asking and discussing reference or historical related issues pertaining to WW2 (1939-1945) subjects.
Topics  3396
Messages  15175
 Subject:  Re: How effective WAS shurzen?List thread.  
  
 Date:  Mar 3, 2006
 From:  Kurt Laughlin 
Remember that its purpose was to defeat Soviet 14.5mm AT rifle projectiles, NOT shaped charge weapons. (It destabilized them so they broke up upon hitting the main armor.) If it was installed, it did what it was supposed to do, so I guess you could say 100% effective.

KL
 
Thread Listing 
  How effective WAS shurzen? - Ken Miller - Mar 3, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 3, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - frank forster - Mar 4, 2006
. . . . . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Jari Lievonen - Mar 4, 2006
. . . . . . . . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - frank forster - Mar 4, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Eric Scurlock - Mar 4, 2006
. . . Re: It wasn't... - Carl Dembrowski - Mar 4, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Adam Weber - Mar 4, 2006
. . . . . . Viet Nam experience different - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 5, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Juan Contreras - Mar 4, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - David Manning - Mar 4, 2006
. . . Re: How effective WAS shurzen? - Alan Eaton - Mar 4, 2006
. . . Why go with "Thoma Schild" or mesh screens? - Steve Campbell - Mar 5, 2006
. . . Close and personal - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 5, 2006
. . . . . . Re: Close and personal - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 7, 2006
. . . . . . . . . Re: Close and personal - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Close and personal - Paul Roberts - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . round & rifles - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: round & rifles - Paul Roberts - Mar 8, 2006
. . . HEAT or AT Rifle? - Frank Forster - Mar 5, 2006
. . . . . . AT Rifle! - Paul Roberts - Mar 6, 2006
. . . . . . . . . Re: AT Rifle! - frank forster - Mar 7, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . Remember the question - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 7, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Remember the question - Bill Goodrich - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Remember the question - frank forster - Mar 10, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . for Paul and Kurt - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: for Paul and Kurt - Paul Roberts - Mar 8, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . more about - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 9, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: more about - Paul Roberts - Mar 10, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Penetration vs. Stand Off - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 10, 2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: more about - Janusz Smolinski - Mar 13, 2006
    Home        Articles        Reviews        Gallery        Contests        Forums     Contact Track-Link