Thia turned into an argument the other day and I would like some input from somebody out there in the know. A buddy of mine claims it is possible to cause a tanks cannon to blow up by firing several .30 caliber rounds (he said a Garand 30-06) down the barrel of the main gun. He claims this will cause an obstruction in the barrel and blow the gun when it is fired. I do not believe him and don't think it is possible to even hit a target that small. The last time I watched a program on t.v. about military tanks this did not seem to be a problem they were worried about and I don't think a few .30 cal. ropunds would obstruct the bore enough to matter. It may sound like a stupid question but I would appreciate some input. Thanks, Jake.
Stopping a tank with a rifle?
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
- Status
Hmm a 7.62mm chunk of metal in a 120 mm barrel would be like a 0.57 mm chunk of metal in a 9mm barrel. Tank optics are pretty good. I doubt the main gun would even be used to deal with you. Maybe some .50 BMG or 7.62mm machinegun fire?
Tanks require fuel, ammo, and tank crews require food and water. Preventing resupply is much more effective.
Tanks require fuel, ammo, and tank crews require food and water. Preventing resupply is much more effective.
That is correct Prib. Restrict them was is needed to run a tank is ideal strategically. And anyways you are not going to waste ammo on something that is armored like a tank, unless you have a A-10 thunderbolt warplane (Tankbuster used in persian gulf war) with maverick missiles and rounds made of acid that eat through armored metal. My .02 cents. Later people. 
mineralman
New member
It is possible to damage or destroy a tank's gun barrel with gunfire. Usually, however a tank travels with it's muzzle plugged, which is then pulled off immediately before action, in order to prevent grit and grime. However, for a bullet to be effective, it must travel most of the way down the tube, which means having the tube pointed at you. This is not a healthy method of dealing with a tank, if for no other reason than they also have thier coaxial machinegun pointed at you. It's really not a good idea to take on a tank from the front, no matter how you're armed. Even a Russian tank main gun round, sabot type, will just stick into the Chobham armor on a modern tank like an arrow into a haybale. From the rear, however, all sorts of nice things can be done. The best weapon for this sort of thing is a repeating .50 BMG sniper rifle. One can severly damage tracks (shooting the links of a stopped tank), jam the turret (shoot into the rim where the turret and hull meet, preventing turret rotation), and possibly cause all their main gun rounds to cook off. The latter would not disable a modern tank, however, merely make it incabable of using the main gun. THe best way is a TOW missile to the rear of the tank. Maybe use a sniper "buddy" as a diversion to get mr. Tank Commander to present his rear to the missile men. A more practical use of rifles is against soft vehicals, such as trucks. A round of .50 BMG AP will shatter an engine block, a tracer will do a hell of a job on a fuel tank, etc.
~~~Mineralman
~~~Mineralman
Jeff White
New member
Big Game hunting or ....how to kill tanks in one easy lesson.
It may be possible to obstruct the bore of a tank main gun enough to cause it to blow up, but I don't think that is a viable tactic.
If you are armed with rifles and you need to stop tanks you will have to trap them rather then hunt them. Ditches, landslides, abattis etc. The problem with this is that tanks don't often fight pure (only armor). If they are in restricted terrain, they will most likely be accompanied by Infantry whose job it is to protect them from people with bad intentions and rifles.
If you succeed in immobilizing the tank, keep the crew buttoned up and build a fire under it (supposedly this was used against the Soviets to good effect in the Afgan war). Set a good fire on the rear deck with molotov cocktails. When the fire extinguishers go off the crew usuall has to bail out then tyou have them.
Jeff
It may be possible to obstruct the bore of a tank main gun enough to cause it to blow up, but I don't think that is a viable tactic.
If you are armed with rifles and you need to stop tanks you will have to trap them rather then hunt them. Ditches, landslides, abattis etc. The problem with this is that tanks don't often fight pure (only armor). If they are in restricted terrain, they will most likely be accompanied by Infantry whose job it is to protect them from people with bad intentions and rifles.
If you succeed in immobilizing the tank, keep the crew buttoned up and build a fire under it (supposedly this was used against the Soviets to good effect in the Afgan war). Set a good fire on the rear deck with molotov cocktails. When the fire extinguishers go off the crew usuall has to bail out then tyou have them.
Jeff
Ive posted on this subject before but it bears stating again:
In my lifetime I saw a man stop a tank armed with nothing more than a shopping bag. Little old ladies disarmed trucks full of troops. School teachers scolded commandos. without a shot being fired.
What is STEEL to the hand that wields it??
Talk about courage, symbolism and sacrifice.
my 2¢
Dr.Rob
In my lifetime I saw a man stop a tank armed with nothing more than a shopping bag. Little old ladies disarmed trucks full of troops. School teachers scolded commandos. without a shot being fired.
What is STEEL to the hand that wields it??
Talk about courage, symbolism and sacrifice.
my 2¢
Dr.Rob
CHECHNYA - THE BATTLE OF GROZNYY - - - - Russian generals are
re-learning the lessons of their first effort (in 1995) to take Groznyy,
the capital of Chechnya. The following observations provide a better
overview of the situation and the problem than many other reports
available in the public media, most of which contain slants that
decrease credibility. It is uncertain how many times the Russians will
need to re-learn the lessons, but by the same token, some of these
observations have validity for fighting local wars by other than
Russians.
1. The general's found that you need to culturally orient your forces
so you don't end up being your own worst enemy simply out of cultural
ignorance. Many times, Russian soldiers made serious cultural errors in
dealing with the Chechen civilians. Once insulted or mistreated, they
(the Chechens) either became active fighters or began to support the
active fighters. Russians also admit they underestimated the importance
of religion (Islam) on the conflict.
2. Chechens were brutish, especially with prisoners. The battle
degenerated quickly to one of "no quarter asked, none given." Russian
wounded and dead were hung upside down in windows of Chechen positions.
Russians had to shoot at the bodies to engage the Chechens. Russian
prisoners were decapitated and at night their heads were placed on
stakes beside roads leading into the city, over which Russian
replacements and reinforcements had to travel. Both Russian and Chechen
dead were routinely booby-trapped. The Russians were not surprised by
the ferocity and brutality of the Chechens, they expected them to be
"criminals and animal brutes." But they were surprised by the
sophistication of the Chechen use of booby-traps and mines. Chechens
mined and booby-trapped everything, showing excellent insight into the
actions and reactions of the average Russian soldier. The Russians found
that mine and booby-trap- awareness discipline was hard to maintain.
3. You need some way of sorting out combatants from non-combatants. The
days of uniformed and organized units are past - soldiers and civilians
meld together . To find the combatants, Russians had to resort to
searching the pockets of civilians and examining them for shoulder
bruises and flashburns, and to sniffing them for the smell of gunpowder
and gun oil. Trained sniffer dogs were used, but were not always
effective. Nevertheless, dogs probably are the best way to determine if
a person has been using explosives or firing a weapon recently.
4. Both the physical and mental health of the Russian units began to
decline almost immediately upon initiation of high intensity combat. In
less than a month, almost 20% of the Russian soldiers were suffering
from viral hepatitis (very serious, very debilitating, slow recovery).
Most had chronic diarrhea and upper respiratory infections that turned
to pneumonia easily. This was blamed on the breakdown of logistical
support that resulted in units having to drink contaminated water. In
many instances unit sanitary discipline broke down almost completely.
The psychological impact of high intensity urban combat is so intense
that units must maintain a large reserve that will allow them to rotate
units in and out of combat. If you do this, you can preserve a unit for
a fairly long time. If you don't, once it gets used up, it can't be
rebuilt. (NOTE - a lesson from the first world war!)
5. Training and discipline are paramount. You can accomplish nothing
without them. If necessary, you need to do the training in the combat
zone. Discipline must be demanded. Once it begins to slip, the results
are disastrous.
6. The Russians were surprised and embarrassed at the degree to which
the Chechens exploited the use of cell phones, Motorola radios,
improvised TV stations, lightweight video cameras and the internet, to
win the information war. The Russians admitted that they lost control of
the information coming out of Grozny early in the operation and never
regained it.
7. The proliferation of rocket propelled grenade (RPG) launchers
surprised them, as well as the diversity of uses to which they were
put. RPGs were shot at everything that moved. They were fired at high
angle over low buildings and from around buildings with little or no
attempt made to aim. They were sometimes fired in very disciplined
volleys and were the weapon of choice for the Chechens, along with the
sniper rifle. Not only were the Russians faced with well-trained, well
equipped Chechen military snipers, there were also large numbers of
designated marksmen who were very good shots using standard military
rifles. These were very hard to deal with and usually required massive
firepower to overcome.
8. As expected, the Russians rediscovered the need for large numbers of
well-trained infantrymen. They said that some tasks, such as conducting
logpack operations, could only be conducted by infantrymen, but that
many of the poorly trained draftee soldiers and units, including
logistics troops, were hopelessly inept at basic military skills, such
as perimeter defense, establishing security overwatch, etc. and thereby
fell easy prey to the Chechens.
9. They found that boundaries between units were still tactical weak
points, but that it wasn't just horizontal boundaries they had to worry
about. In Grozny, in some cases, the Chechens held the third floor and
above, while the Russians held the first two floors and sometimes the
roof. If a unit holding the second floor evacuated parts of it without
telling the unit on the ground floor, the Chechens would move troops in
and attack the ground floor unit through the ceiling. Often this
resulted in fratricide as the ground floor unit responded with
uncontrolled fire through all of the ceilings, including the ones below
that section of the building still occupied by Russians. Entire battles
were fought through floors, ceilings, and walls without visual contact.
10. The most common response by the Chechens to the increasingly
powerful Russian indirect and aerial firepower was" hugging" a Russian
unit. If the hugging tactics caused the Russians to cease artillery and
air fires, it became a man-to-man fight and the Chechens were well
equipped to fight it. If they didn't cease the supporting fires, the
Russian units suffered just as much as the Chechen fighters did,
sometimes even more, and the morale effect was much worse on the
Russians.
11. Chechens developed tactics to deal with tanks and BMPs. They
assigned groups of RPG gunners to fire volleys at the lead and trail
vehicles. Once they were destroyed, the others were picked off,
one-by-one. The Russian forces lost 20 of 26 tanks, 102 of 120 BMPs,
and 6 of 6 ZSU-23s in the first three days of fighting in Grozny.
Chechens chose firing positions high enough or low enough stay out of
the fields of fire of the tank and BMP weapons. Russian conscript
infantry simply refused to dismount and often died in their BMP without
ever firing a shot. Russian elite infantry did much better, but didn't
coordinate well with armored vehicles initially.
12. The Russians were satisfied with the combat performance of most of
their infantry weapons. The T-72 tank, however, was dead meat. Too
vulnerable, too awkward, not agile, no visibility, poor weapons
coverage at close ranges. The Russians removed them from the battle and
replaced them with smaller numbers of older tanks and more
self-propelled artillery, more ADA weapons, and more BMPs. Precision
guided weapons and UAVs were very useful. There was some need for
non-lethal weapons, but mostly riot gas and tranquilizer gas, not stuff
like sticky foam. The Russian equivalent of the M202 Flash flame
projector and the Mk 19 grenade launcher were very useful weapons.
Ultimately, a strong combined arms team and flexible command and
control meant more than the individual weapons used by each side.
re-learning the lessons of their first effort (in 1995) to take Groznyy,
the capital of Chechnya. The following observations provide a better
overview of the situation and the problem than many other reports
available in the public media, most of which contain slants that
decrease credibility. It is uncertain how many times the Russians will
need to re-learn the lessons, but by the same token, some of these
observations have validity for fighting local wars by other than
Russians.
1. The general's found that you need to culturally orient your forces
so you don't end up being your own worst enemy simply out of cultural
ignorance. Many times, Russian soldiers made serious cultural errors in
dealing with the Chechen civilians. Once insulted or mistreated, they
(the Chechens) either became active fighters or began to support the
active fighters. Russians also admit they underestimated the importance
of religion (Islam) on the conflict.
2. Chechens were brutish, especially with prisoners. The battle
degenerated quickly to one of "no quarter asked, none given." Russian
wounded and dead were hung upside down in windows of Chechen positions.
Russians had to shoot at the bodies to engage the Chechens. Russian
prisoners were decapitated and at night their heads were placed on
stakes beside roads leading into the city, over which Russian
replacements and reinforcements had to travel. Both Russian and Chechen
dead were routinely booby-trapped. The Russians were not surprised by
the ferocity and brutality of the Chechens, they expected them to be
"criminals and animal brutes." But they were surprised by the
sophistication of the Chechen use of booby-traps and mines. Chechens
mined and booby-trapped everything, showing excellent insight into the
actions and reactions of the average Russian soldier. The Russians found
that mine and booby-trap- awareness discipline was hard to maintain.
3. You need some way of sorting out combatants from non-combatants. The
days of uniformed and organized units are past - soldiers and civilians
meld together . To find the combatants, Russians had to resort to
searching the pockets of civilians and examining them for shoulder
bruises and flashburns, and to sniffing them for the smell of gunpowder
and gun oil. Trained sniffer dogs were used, but were not always
effective. Nevertheless, dogs probably are the best way to determine if
a person has been using explosives or firing a weapon recently.
4. Both the physical and mental health of the Russian units began to
decline almost immediately upon initiation of high intensity combat. In
less than a month, almost 20% of the Russian soldiers were suffering
from viral hepatitis (very serious, very debilitating, slow recovery).
Most had chronic diarrhea and upper respiratory infections that turned
to pneumonia easily. This was blamed on the breakdown of logistical
support that resulted in units having to drink contaminated water. In
many instances unit sanitary discipline broke down almost completely.
The psychological impact of high intensity urban combat is so intense
that units must maintain a large reserve that will allow them to rotate
units in and out of combat. If you do this, you can preserve a unit for
a fairly long time. If you don't, once it gets used up, it can't be
rebuilt. (NOTE - a lesson from the first world war!)
5. Training and discipline are paramount. You can accomplish nothing
without them. If necessary, you need to do the training in the combat
zone. Discipline must be demanded. Once it begins to slip, the results
are disastrous.
6. The Russians were surprised and embarrassed at the degree to which
the Chechens exploited the use of cell phones, Motorola radios,
improvised TV stations, lightweight video cameras and the internet, to
win the information war. The Russians admitted that they lost control of
the information coming out of Grozny early in the operation and never
regained it.
7. The proliferation of rocket propelled grenade (RPG) launchers
surprised them, as well as the diversity of uses to which they were
put. RPGs were shot at everything that moved. They were fired at high
angle over low buildings and from around buildings with little or no
attempt made to aim. They were sometimes fired in very disciplined
volleys and were the weapon of choice for the Chechens, along with the
sniper rifle. Not only were the Russians faced with well-trained, well
equipped Chechen military snipers, there were also large numbers of
designated marksmen who were very good shots using standard military
rifles. These were very hard to deal with and usually required massive
firepower to overcome.
8. As expected, the Russians rediscovered the need for large numbers of
well-trained infantrymen. They said that some tasks, such as conducting
logpack operations, could only be conducted by infantrymen, but that
many of the poorly trained draftee soldiers and units, including
logistics troops, were hopelessly inept at basic military skills, such
as perimeter defense, establishing security overwatch, etc. and thereby
fell easy prey to the Chechens.
9. They found that boundaries between units were still tactical weak
points, but that it wasn't just horizontal boundaries they had to worry
about. In Grozny, in some cases, the Chechens held the third floor and
above, while the Russians held the first two floors and sometimes the
roof. If a unit holding the second floor evacuated parts of it without
telling the unit on the ground floor, the Chechens would move troops in
and attack the ground floor unit through the ceiling. Often this
resulted in fratricide as the ground floor unit responded with
uncontrolled fire through all of the ceilings, including the ones below
that section of the building still occupied by Russians. Entire battles
were fought through floors, ceilings, and walls without visual contact.
10. The most common response by the Chechens to the increasingly
powerful Russian indirect and aerial firepower was" hugging" a Russian
unit. If the hugging tactics caused the Russians to cease artillery and
air fires, it became a man-to-man fight and the Chechens were well
equipped to fight it. If they didn't cease the supporting fires, the
Russian units suffered just as much as the Chechen fighters did,
sometimes even more, and the morale effect was much worse on the
Russians.
11. Chechens developed tactics to deal with tanks and BMPs. They
assigned groups of RPG gunners to fire volleys at the lead and trail
vehicles. Once they were destroyed, the others were picked off,
one-by-one. The Russian forces lost 20 of 26 tanks, 102 of 120 BMPs,
and 6 of 6 ZSU-23s in the first three days of fighting in Grozny.
Chechens chose firing positions high enough or low enough stay out of
the fields of fire of the tank and BMP weapons. Russian conscript
infantry simply refused to dismount and often died in their BMP without
ever firing a shot. Russian elite infantry did much better, but didn't
coordinate well with armored vehicles initially.
12. The Russians were satisfied with the combat performance of most of
their infantry weapons. The T-72 tank, however, was dead meat. Too
vulnerable, too awkward, not agile, no visibility, poor weapons
coverage at close ranges. The Russians removed them from the battle and
replaced them with smaller numbers of older tanks and more
self-propelled artillery, more ADA weapons, and more BMPs. Precision
guided weapons and UAVs were very useful. There was some need for
non-lethal weapons, but mostly riot gas and tranquilizer gas, not stuff
like sticky foam. The Russian equivalent of the M202 Flash flame
projector and the Mk 19 grenade launcher were very useful weapons.
Ultimately, a strong combined arms team and flexible command and
control meant more than the individual weapons used by each side.
"A Marine cannot kill the enemy tank with his M-16A2, but he can surely kill the tank commander who pops his head out of the hatch." -unknown Marine
There is the 20mm Lahti anti-tank rifle, pretty nasty round. The best a rifle man could hope for when engaging a tank with one of these was to place a round in the tank magazine or fuel tank. The secondary's would terminate the crew and tank.
There is the 20mm Lahti anti-tank rifle, pretty nasty round. The best a rifle man could hope for when engaging a tank with one of these was to place a round in the tank magazine or fuel tank. The secondary's would terminate the crew and tank.
Okay, I'll pipe up and relay my experiences. My primary MOS when I first enlisted in the Army was 19K-Armor Crewman. I later became a TC on the M1A1. I was attached to Infantry, Armored Cavalry, and Heavy Armor units. I never mobilized with any kind of "plug" over the muzzle of the main gun. The only time I ever saw a "plug" was on a show company in Berlin. Those tanks were black with a red stripe. Very cool! Anyway, if you happen to have the skill to get a .30 caliber bullet into the main gun, I don't think that it would do any significant damage. The sabot(pronounced say-bo) projectile is encased in plastic, just like rifle round. The casing and projectile start to separate at approximately 50 feet from the muzzle. I would think that the bullet would end up in the plastic somewhere. Jeff White is right on about using the environment to stop or trap a tank. Disguised ditches and herding via artillery/mortar fire are extremely effective. A few rounds of 50 cal. in the pack(turbine engine) may stop engine power, but remember that there are 2 backup hydraulic systems to keep the turret moving along with the manual crank. One of the first things I learned about defense against Eastern Bloc countries, at the time, was to neutralize the Soviet built SU-23's first. These sport 4-23mm cannons that can literally eat through the armor and get inside. Two are attached to a Battalion. Next are any type of aircraft, heavy armor, light armor, and infantries. In that order. All crew members are highly aware that the lifespan of a tank in battle is said to be 20 seconds or so, depending on the enemy and their resources. The only thing I didn't like where those Bradley "fighting" POS's. They were always in the way. Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest. Well, I hope this info helped, Jake. Ask away. I'll try to remember to check this thread.
Steve
Steve
Jeff White
New member
Pete,
Unless you are facing WWI or early WWII tanks, the Lahti antitank rifle will do you no good. It takes a shaped charge or very high velocity kinetic energy type round to punch throuh modern armor. Most modern tanks are only vulnerable on the top and rear to shaped charges now anyway. That is why handheld antitank weapons are fired in volleys. The newest American hand held anti armor weapon, the Javelin, flies above the target and dives into the top of it. It weighs almost 50 pounds.
Jeff
Unless you are facing WWI or early WWII tanks, the Lahti antitank rifle will do you no good. It takes a shaped charge or very high velocity kinetic energy type round to punch throuh modern armor. Most modern tanks are only vulnerable on the top and rear to shaped charges now anyway. That is why handheld antitank weapons are fired in volleys. The newest American hand held anti armor weapon, the Javelin, flies above the target and dives into the top of it. It weighs almost 50 pounds.
Jeff
Marko Kloos
Inactive
Ed Chavez,
sorry, but I just have to stick in my $0.02. The GAU-8 cannon used in the A-10 does not fire "acid" rounds. It fires a 30mm round with a depleted uranium core, which is a fair armor piercing projectile. Even so, we saw a lot of Iraqi tanks that had a lot of spall at the bottom of the turret, with little to no penetration of the round. The spall (armor chips knocked loose off the inside of the armor) flitzing around the inside of the turret did the crew in rather than the round penetrating.
Bear in mind that even the 25mm Bushmaster on the LAV/Bradley can do nasty things to a modern MBT. The round itself may not penetrate the tank's hide, but you are going to knock out computers, shoot off optics and antennae, and give the crew a nice headache. Imagine having a metal pot over your head and having somebody bang a bat on it repeatedly.
[This message has been edited by lendringser (edited January 19, 2000).]
sorry, but I just have to stick in my $0.02. The GAU-8 cannon used in the A-10 does not fire "acid" rounds. It fires a 30mm round with a depleted uranium core, which is a fair armor piercing projectile. Even so, we saw a lot of Iraqi tanks that had a lot of spall at the bottom of the turret, with little to no penetration of the round. The spall (armor chips knocked loose off the inside of the armor) flitzing around the inside of the turret did the crew in rather than the round penetrating.
Bear in mind that even the 25mm Bushmaster on the LAV/Bradley can do nasty things to a modern MBT. The round itself may not penetrate the tank's hide, but you are going to knock out computers, shoot off optics and antennae, and give the crew a nice headache. Imagine having a metal pot over your head and having somebody bang a bat on it repeatedly.
[This message has been edited by lendringser (edited January 19, 2000).]
Except for a couple of folks who know what they are talking about, I get the feeling that most of the people on this one have never seen a tank. A few rifle bullets down the bore of the main gun won't matter a bit, nor will a few grains of sand. (Of course, if you hung from the end of the gun with one hand and poured 10 pounds of wet sand down the barrel, that is a different story. Assuming that no one bothers you.) The 20mm anti-tank gun can't even penetrate today's "light armor", let alone an MBT.
Jim
Jim
I think it is odd that no one has mentioned the fact that tanks also have machineguns. The m1 has three: coax next the main gun 7.62mm, commanders weapon .50 caliber, and the loaders 7.62mm. So if it is possible which I highly doubt you are not going to survive the attempt if I am on the crew
Thanks guys,
I was beginning to think I would have to apologize to my buddy. It just didn't seem possible to do what he said. I'm not even sure how the subject came up while we were talking but he was adamant that a good rifleman could put enough rounds down the bore to cause the main gun to blow.. My question for him was what did he think the tank was going to do, just sit there?. Jake.
I was beginning to think I would have to apologize to my buddy. It just didn't seem possible to do what he said. I'm not even sure how the subject came up while we were talking but he was adamant that a good rifleman could put enough rounds down the bore to cause the main gun to blow.. My question for him was what did he think the tank was going to do, just sit there?. Jake.
Edmund Rowe
New member
Some definitions first:
"Tank": I assume we're talking about Main Battle Tank types. (MBT) These are the big monsters with a crew of 3-4, a single BIG turret with a BIG cannon and a few machine guns. MBTs are not normally designed to carry more than their crew inside (Israeli Merkava a notable exception).
OK, rifleman vs. tank: I'm not sure if the original question is if a rifle shot can ruin the main gun by denting the inside of the bore or by exploding the loaded ammunition, or by ricocheting bullets inside the tank while the breech block is open. Talking about all 3:
1) Denting the inside of a main gun barrel enough to ruin the gun is very iffy. This is a .30 caliber bullet vs. a 105mm, 115mm, or 120mm high velocity cannon. Maybe denting the bore WILL cause problems such that it bursts on firing. Problems: The tank will get off at least one shot, and the crew may not realize the cannon bore is damaged. OK, so maybe you hit it just right. Picture the cartoon: KABOOM! "Boris, I think there is something wrong with the main gun." "Da, comrade." Meanwhile, in the background a smoking crater is all that's left of the rifleman.
For all we know a dinged bore is like shooting from a rifle barrel that's been pitted by rust. Might burst someday, but still a lotta life left in it.
2) Exploding the loaded ammunition: OK, let's just say our hero put a bullet right down the bore. If it's slightly offline it will carom off the sides and probably won't hit the fuse on the nose of the shell dead-on. This is just me, but I think you'll be shooting a LOT trying to hit the fuse. If somebody thinks this is easy bring him to the range and get him to hit the bulls-eye at 75 yards. Tell him he's got 4-5 shots or 15 seconds (I'm being generous) before the tank blasts him to pieces.
OK, say you DO hit the fuse on the nose? Most large cannon ammunition have safety features such that the detonator isn't armed until the round is fired. I think some linkages internally get sprung by the spinning action of the shell and don't get armed until they are some distance downrange. I'm half guessing here. Maybe they don't have such safeties but if not then any bump on the nose would make the ammo go KABOOM!!
The above assumes an explosive round like HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) or something. One of the solid shot ones like APFSDSDU-T (Armor Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot Depleted Uranium - Tracer) (mouthful, isn't it??) has a solid dart in the middle and nothing to blow up.
Side note: just because it's not explosive doesn't mean it's not dangerous to personnel. Imagine something weighing about 10-20 lb goes by you at 4 times the speed of sound. The sonic boom might blow out your eardrums or cause internal injuries. I dunno for sure and I sure don't want to find out the hard way.
3) Ricocheting rounds through the open breech inside the tank: Simple response: close the breech block. Maybe you'll zing one of the crew, and maybe they'll be upset for a minute or two, but then they'll again blow you into a smoking crater or chop you in half with one of the MGs.
OK, more problems with fighting tanks:
-Unlike the movies, tanks don't travel alone. They travel in groups with infantry.
-Supposedly it takes a 20mm at the least to break a track.
-Vision blocks can be shot and maybe cracked, but there are a lot of them on each tank and you haven't got all day to ping them all.
-Tanks usually don't oblige you by standing still. They move, sometimes very quickly. Also, the turrets can traverse pretty fast, so trying to lead that periscope block with your .308 is going to be tough.
I've heard of soldiers in WW2 sometimes ruining tank gun barrels by wrapping a big block of explosives around it and detonating it. Obviously, if you can get right on top of the tank many options appear, but like I mentioned above, Ivan brought a lot of foot soldiers to the party, and they don't like Amerikanski grunts climbing on their tankski. Also, tank barrels today are a lot tougher.
Generally, if the enemy force is alerted, or you cannot separate the tanks from the infantry, and you haven't got modern anti-tank weapons or some BIG explosives (like 50 lbs of military grade stuff just to blow the track off) when you engage tanks, YOU LOSE.
Best way to take out a tank is kill the crew when they're outside working maintenance or eating dinner or something, then drop something down the hatch that ruins the tank. (thermite?)
Jake, hope this helps.
Edmund
[This message has been edited by Edmund Rowe (edited January 19, 2000).]
"Tank": I assume we're talking about Main Battle Tank types. (MBT) These are the big monsters with a crew of 3-4, a single BIG turret with a BIG cannon and a few machine guns. MBTs are not normally designed to carry more than their crew inside (Israeli Merkava a notable exception).
OK, rifleman vs. tank: I'm not sure if the original question is if a rifle shot can ruin the main gun by denting the inside of the bore or by exploding the loaded ammunition, or by ricocheting bullets inside the tank while the breech block is open. Talking about all 3:
1) Denting the inside of a main gun barrel enough to ruin the gun is very iffy. This is a .30 caliber bullet vs. a 105mm, 115mm, or 120mm high velocity cannon. Maybe denting the bore WILL cause problems such that it bursts on firing. Problems: The tank will get off at least one shot, and the crew may not realize the cannon bore is damaged. OK, so maybe you hit it just right. Picture the cartoon: KABOOM! "Boris, I think there is something wrong with the main gun." "Da, comrade." Meanwhile, in the background a smoking crater is all that's left of the rifleman.
For all we know a dinged bore is like shooting from a rifle barrel that's been pitted by rust. Might burst someday, but still a lotta life left in it.
2) Exploding the loaded ammunition: OK, let's just say our hero put a bullet right down the bore. If it's slightly offline it will carom off the sides and probably won't hit the fuse on the nose of the shell dead-on. This is just me, but I think you'll be shooting a LOT trying to hit the fuse. If somebody thinks this is easy bring him to the range and get him to hit the bulls-eye at 75 yards. Tell him he's got 4-5 shots or 15 seconds (I'm being generous) before the tank blasts him to pieces.
OK, say you DO hit the fuse on the nose? Most large cannon ammunition have safety features such that the detonator isn't armed until the round is fired. I think some linkages internally get sprung by the spinning action of the shell and don't get armed until they are some distance downrange. I'm half guessing here. Maybe they don't have such safeties but if not then any bump on the nose would make the ammo go KABOOM!!
The above assumes an explosive round like HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) or something. One of the solid shot ones like APFSDSDU-T (Armor Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot Depleted Uranium - Tracer) (mouthful, isn't it??) has a solid dart in the middle and nothing to blow up.
Side note: just because it's not explosive doesn't mean it's not dangerous to personnel. Imagine something weighing about 10-20 lb goes by you at 4 times the speed of sound. The sonic boom might blow out your eardrums or cause internal injuries. I dunno for sure and I sure don't want to find out the hard way.
3) Ricocheting rounds through the open breech inside the tank: Simple response: close the breech block. Maybe you'll zing one of the crew, and maybe they'll be upset for a minute or two, but then they'll again blow you into a smoking crater or chop you in half with one of the MGs.
OK, more problems with fighting tanks:
-Unlike the movies, tanks don't travel alone. They travel in groups with infantry.
-Supposedly it takes a 20mm at the least to break a track.
-Vision blocks can be shot and maybe cracked, but there are a lot of them on each tank and you haven't got all day to ping them all.
-Tanks usually don't oblige you by standing still. They move, sometimes very quickly. Also, the turrets can traverse pretty fast, so trying to lead that periscope block with your .308 is going to be tough.
I've heard of soldiers in WW2 sometimes ruining tank gun barrels by wrapping a big block of explosives around it and detonating it. Obviously, if you can get right on top of the tank many options appear, but like I mentioned above, Ivan brought a lot of foot soldiers to the party, and they don't like Amerikanski grunts climbing on their tankski. Also, tank barrels today are a lot tougher.
Generally, if the enemy force is alerted, or you cannot separate the tanks from the infantry, and you haven't got modern anti-tank weapons or some BIG explosives (like 50 lbs of military grade stuff just to blow the track off) when you engage tanks, YOU LOSE.
Best way to take out a tank is kill the crew when they're outside working maintenance or eating dinner or something, then drop something down the hatch that ruins the tank. (thermite?)
Jake, hope this helps.
Edmund
[This message has been edited by Edmund Rowe (edited January 19, 2000).]
Lendringser,
I am only human. Sorry for not being a rocket scientist. Acid or uranium it is all the same to me, it is all science crap. All I know to stop a tank, Is to dig a big hole in the dirt and camo the dirt and let the tank roll over-it and drop right in. 
:sarcastic: Just like the cavemen just to do it to big animals back in the time of dinosaurs. HA
I am only human. Sorry for not being a rocket scientist. Acid or uranium it is all the same to me, it is all science crap. All I know to stop a tank, Is to dig a big hole in the dirt and camo the dirt and let the tank roll over-it and drop right in.
:sarcastic: Just like the cavemen just to do it to big animals back in the time of dinosaurs. HA - Status