112kg for the total projectile, including propellant - this will make the warhead 20-50kg. So it is in the same category as a FAB-100, and that is pretty useless against tanks, and even direct hits may not show results

That I doubt. Shaped charges are not good against soft vehicles, there is not much fragmentation. Shaped charges generate a supersonic metal jet that punches holes in armour, and ignites or damages things inside - but their area effects are null.

My bad, I was doing a fast search on the rocket weight, and pick the first number I spotted.
The anecdote still stands.

Now, not even the USA will drop 500Kg to kill some tanks. It will be seen as an absolute loss of resources. 250Kg will be much more popular with them for level bombing. And it was still shown on Normandy to be a total waste of bombs.

The PTAB were innertially armed, so on a crash landing it would have been very important for the pilot to release them before crashing. Do not confuse them with the safer PTAB 2.5m.
The first use by germans of the SD-2 was with a primitive releasing system from the wings that happened to be not fully efective, having the bad habit of keeping some SD-2 back to base underwing. They will become free on landing and exploding on hitting ground. The container use was a return to base free of bomblets insurance.

You are right, but the PTAB was large enough to do considerable damage to soft vehicles. An RPG-7 can easily destroy a truck, even though it is primarily an anti tank weapon. In terms of weight, its warhead is comparable to the PTAB (2.2kg vs 2.5kg)

With bad against soft targets I meant to say not as good as fragmentation warheads/incendiary warheads of the same weight class.
Now I get the point.