RPG-7: Fact or Fiction?

[SpartanWarrior198]

Yes, I know the RPG-7 exists, but my question is this: Can it really disable a tank, or is the description "Just a hand grenade attached to a rocket" I've heard before true?

[Matrix33]

Yes, I know the RPG-7 exists, but my question is this: Can it really disable a tank, or is the description "Just a hand grenade attached to a rocket" I've heard before true?

The question is too general. of course it can disable older generation main battle tank like M-60, T-55 even hitting fron armour due to its shaped charge load. However if we talk about newer generation of tanks the specific tank areas should be targeted to be able to do any harm. Rear and top areas are especially vulnerable, the side armour betewwe wheels tend to be thiner too but is often protected by additional external plates.
Additionally there are various AP grenades produced. The very basic ones aren't too efficient but the newer ones have considerable greater punch power even with additional precursor charge to disable reactive protection.

Try this: http://www.g2mil.com/RPG.htm

Somehow hyped but contains some info regarding this subject.

[SpartanWarrior198]

Thanks for the link. That does clear up a couple lingering RPG myths I've been wondering about.

[Kadrun]

Is there any tank that can stand against RPG-7 when it penetrates rear and hits engine?

More than that, using RPG-7 requires bravery (due to its accuracy, launchers must be in close range from target, which is a suicidal action).

[Lokos]

One can only wonder why so many are convinced that the RPG-7 is used against armored vehicles, mainly... Since its inception, this weapon has seen more use against structures and soft targets - and is very popular in that role. Yet, in the AT role, newer warheads have also made this venerable system quite potent, even against modern MBTs. It's an incredibly versatile weapon. Which is why guerrilla forces, for example, will often base their small unit tactics around a two-man RPG team (similar to the construction of a WW2 infantry squad around a GPMG).


Can it really disable a tank, or is the description "Just a hand grenade attached to a rocket" I've heard before true?

1) Of course it can, given luck and skill.

2) That's a very foolish description of a highly dangerous weapon.

The individual who crafted that description has most likely never experienced the TBG-7VL 105mm thermobaric round, or the OG-7V anti-personnel fragmentation round. And the PG-7VR is no slouch when it comes to defeating tank armor...

L.

[Britboy]

You also wouldn't neccessarily need to 'kill' a tank with an RPG for it to be an effective ATk wpn...

I'm pretty sure it could cause a mobility kill through destroying a track or such.

In close country that could be as bad as a complete kill, for then the tank is ineffective and vulnerable - the en is at leisure to approach from whichever direction, whenever they choose, and finish the job.

I'm not sure if it is a deadly AT weapon like the RPG29 is meant to be, but I'm sure it can still be effective against tanks, reducing their effectiveness, if you will.

[GazB]

I'm not sure if it is a deadly AT weapon like the RPG29 is meant to be, but I'm sure it can still be effective against tanks, reducing their effectiveness, if you will.

The current RPG-7 best warhead is a 105mm calibre warhead the same size and shape and performance to the RPG-29. The difference is that the RPG-29 has a rocket that is thicker than the 40mm calibre rocket that the RPG-7 has. The result is that the RPG-7 is effective out to maybe 200m with a 105mm warhead, while the RPG-29 can fire the same warhead to three times that range.
The RPG-28 disposable rocket launcher has a 125mm warhead, but that might be too heavy to bother fitting to an RPG-7 and of course it wont fit in an RPG-29.
There is a small device you can attach to the sight base of an RPG-7 that increases the angle of the sight. This means the newer heavier ammo can be fired to much greater ranges.
I remember reading something about the Vietnam war and during one urban fight a US commander described the RPG as the greatest threat on the battlefield for his men.

[deagle]

if tanks are hit at vulnerable spots, it might disable it. rpg's are most effective against soft-skinned vehicles, and are basically indefensible agasint them.

[GazB]

There are various types of protection that are specifically designed to stop HEAT warheads, whether they are from a missile like TOW or a rocket like an RPG-7. Things like ERA, and rail armour etc are widespread... the latter dates back to WWII when the Soviets put inner springs of beds on their tanks to prematurely set off panzerfausts etc.

[Raven_gr]

A more detailed description of the RPG-7 and its warheads.

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl02-e.htm

Have in mind the system is CHEAP, very sturdy and one can carry a lot of rockets on a backpack. The rockets are not that big to require for the operator to carry the launcher and another soldier to carry the reloads. Check this out

http://www.imageshack.gr/files/1rvwp5a8p30usv90fvlo.jpg (http://www.imageshack.gr/view.php?file=1rvwp5a8p30usv90fvlo.jpg)

Have in mind that a British Challenger 2 was penetrated by an RPG-29 warhead in the forward hull. The PG-7VR rocket of the RPG-7 has basicly the same penetration capabilities.

[Hun Ranger (not real)]

Damn, that afghani guy carring a huge load of c*ap!!
8 warheads thats around 16-18 kgs at least plus the launcher with warhead 8 kgs.

I think this describe how effective the RPG are.

"Update: The US Army has lost almost 100 helicopters to RPGs and small arms fire in Afghanistan and Iraq, including some armored Apache attack helicopters. Most of these were not shot down, but damaged so badly they were scrapped."

[Tanker31B]

Yes, I know the RPG-7 exists, but my question is this: Can it really disable a tank, or is the description "Just a hand grenade attached to a rocket" I've heard before true?


Disable is a little broad. Maybe combat ineffective.

I can knock my track off with a hammer and steel punch, however a RPG with a shape charge is perhaps a little bit faster.

At the start of the Afghan war a majority of the RPGs where the HE frag type, not shaped charge. But once you throw in the shape charge all bets are off....if you can get close enough or accurate.

Perhaps what are the Odds of an RPG knocking out a tank would be more accurate?

[dangerdan87]

The HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) rocket can penatrate up to 7 inches of armor. It works kind of like a shape charge because of the molten copper jet ripping through metal. Tandem rockets are for explosive reactive armor. Basically the rocket has 2 explosive. A smaller explosive on the nose to "kill" the ERA while the large explosive in the rear of the rocket kits the bare armor. Thermo Barrack is for buildings and can level a building much like the Thrmo Barack type rocket for the SMAW and everyone in that building will be toasted. There are several other rockets, but not as dangeras such as the anti-personell frag rocket.

An RPG ricket to time itselve to explode has several complicated steps before it is armed. I forget how to explain it, but I did see a video. Lost of complicated parts.

[Lokos]

Thermo Barrack

I like that you tried to do this phonetically, but the term is 'thermobaric'. It will rarely level a building, but it will very likely kill anyone inside your standard two story house - or injure them very badly.

L.

[GazB]

The Russians and Soviets call it thermobaric, which just means heat and pressure. Western term is fuel air explosive, which I think is more descriptive.
Basically the weapon contains the fuel and the air to burn that fuel is taken from around the target during the explosion.

Most of the deaths or injuries will be via either burns or suffocation as well as blast effects.


At the start of the Afghan war a majority of the RPGs where the HE frag type, not shaped charge.

Are you sure? The vast majority of warheads in widespread use are the HEAT warheads of 73-85mm. The newer 93mm and 105mm warheads are much more rare in the hands of non professionals. (ie the Afghan army were probably armed with the 73mm and 85mm rockets as standard. The Anti personel model is a 40mm calibre warhead version whose warhead barely pokes out the muzzle when loaded.

The Standard HEAT model generates enough blast to be effective in both anti armour and anti personel roles.

[Tanker31B]

The info I have seen points to the bouncing anti personnel round. Made in China. Thats only one of many reports. In the end, hope it doesnt burn a large hole in you vehicle. Found this ref.

Bouncing anti-personnel round: This round works in a similar way to the bouncing anti-personnel fragmentation mines. On impact, it bounces off the ground to a chest to 2m height then airbursts over the target area. The airburst is much more effective than typical blast warheads especially toward entrenched troops. The airburst has a lethal radius of 18m.

I remember some time back seeing the effects of a M72 on a M113. They put a 2mm witness plate in the middle of the troop area. A sheet about 4 feet by four. And fired a M72 at the side of the vehicle. The witness plate was full of holes about a meter across. Repeated the trial with a M113 with the spall liner. (spelling?)
There was only one hole in the witness plate. The centre of the shape charge.
So if the fire is controlled (halon) and the vehicle has a spall liner (kevlar?) You have increased your chances by quit a bit.

[martinexsquaddie]

my brother was near a warrior that took a hit from an rpg didn't kill it and the chain gun turned the rpg user into red mist
the crew were most disappointed when they got back to camp as there was nothing worth photographing

[trunk_munkey28]

I've seen tanks shrug off well aimed RPG shots, but I honestly couldn't tell you what warhead it was (not the anti-pers). A lot of information along this line is OPSEC, none of us want Timmy to know what works and what doesn't.

[LineDoggie]

This has some good information on the system:

http://www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/RPGDec06.pdf

[pekka elo]

Tandem warheads with a penetration of ERA & 500mm RHA exist for the RPG-7. Such warheads are very dangerous to any tank, particularly from the side and rear where penetration would be almost guaranteed.

[kamaz]

depends on armor and point of impact. Most modern (last 20 years) tanks have enough armor to withstand direct hits from RPG 7 on sides, front and most of rear.

RPG -29 is another story.

[Tanker31B]

depends on armor and point of impact. Most modern (last 20 years) tanks have enough armor to withstand direct hits from RPG 7 on sides, front and most of rear.

RPG -29 is another story.


And it depends on the make up of the armour.

Metal cells are mixed matched and short, the shape charge can burn a hole quicker. Ceramic, has longer cells, disapates heat better, having a longer burn time to penetrate. I remember reading something about the t-72 having fibre glass in the armour. However I dont believe that it helped.

The shape charge must also have enough energy to damage the inside of the vehicle.

At 500mm the heat in the vehicle maybe a glow. However at 450mm the crew may get fried or covered in spall. With a spall liner, maybe not.

Remember Star bright? I think that was the name, I wonder how well that works against a shape charge?

In the end RPG=pain in the .....

[DF]

The question is too general. of course it can disable older generation main battle tank like M-60, T-55 even hitting fron armour due to its shaped charge load. However if we talk about newer generation of tanks the specific tank areas should be targeted to be able to do any harm. Rear and top areas are especially vulnerable, the side armour betewwe wheels tend to be thiner too but is often protected by additional external plates.
Additionally there are various AP grenades produced. The very basic ones aren't too efficient but the newer ones have considerable greater punch power even with additional precursor charge to disable reactive protection.

Try this: http://www.g2mil.com/RPG.htm

Somehow hyped but contains some info regarding this subject.

Its destroyed many tanks. A cople shots at the engine could destroy a M1a1. its happend before

[gosciu555]

This should clear things up. A little dated but very clear and useful:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/rpg-7.pdf

[Kadrun]

I read recent article at http://www.emilitarynews.com/board/sboard.php?brd_code=d0003&no=36&mode=view&cpage=1 (Korean).

The experiment was performed in 2005. They used 6 retired M48A2C against T-80U, BMP-3, 90mm, and RPG-7.

The RPG-7 was made in China, and the type of the warhead is HEAT. They said that the warhead has around 300mm penetration; therefore, I assume it is PG-7V.

The experiment showed that the RPG-7 was not able to penetrate successfully unless it hits the wide open turret.

[GazB]

depends on armor and point of impact. Most modern (last 20 years) tanks have enough armor to withstand direct hits from RPG 7 on sides, front and most of rear.

RPG -29 is another story.

The effectiveness in armour penetration of a HEAT weapon is largely based on its warhead. The RPG-7 has no warhead diameter limit, unlike the RPG-29. The RPG-28 disposable rocket already has a warhead larger than the RPG-29. The RPG-29 is 105mm, the RPG-28 is 125mm. The current RPG-7 rocket is 105mm and the same as the RPG-29. The only difference between the RPG-7 and the RPG-29 is the latter has a longer effective range with a 105mm warhead. The RPG-28 is reported as 900mm+ and it has a precursor charge to remove ERA.

[jemesouviens]

Well the RPG-7 had proven himself in Afghanistan against light armoured vehicle, mud wall and house. The RPG-7 also proven himself against Merkava in Lebanon War 2006 , over 50 Merkava lasted generation were badly damage (Behind the Merkava the doors for troops) , and two destroyed by RPG-29 (more modern version). But the RPG-7 is definitively not a good anti-tank, but seriously good against mud-wall in Afghanistan.

[Lokos]

As jemesouviens pointed out, the RPG-7, whilst being more a weapon of deterrence in the AT role than anything else, is an extremely reputable infantry squad weapon, which affords a serious level of utility and tactical flexibility to the user.

L.

[RoyB]

Well the RPG-7 had proven himself in Afghanistan against light armoured vehicle, mud wall and house. The RPG-7 also proven himself against Merkava in Lebanon War 2006 , over 50 Merkava lasted generation were badly damage (Behind the Merkava the doors for troops) , and two destroyed by RPG-29 (more modern version). But the RPG-7 is definitively not a good anti-tank, but seriously good against mud-wall in Afghanistan.
Huh? where do you get your info?

[damaja]

my brother was near a warrior that took a hit from an rpg didn't kill it and the chain gun turned the rpg user into red mist
the crew were most disappointed when they got back to camp as there was nothing worth photographing

:lol:

Haha, nice one.

My unit in the early days of the Iraq war took quite a few hits on their Chally 2s. Very little damage and no injuries. One incident where a tank threw it's tracks after going into a ditch withstood nearly 10 RPGs and also a milan hit and not much happened to anyone or anything.

Not to say the more modern warheads won't cause some real damage (as shown in at least 1 attack on a Chally).

[jemesouviens]

Huh? where do you get your info?

No light armoured vehicle,main battle tank and building are invincible remember that. The Merkava have some fragile point like every Main Battle Tank. Here an example of a Merkava damage by RPG. What i said is only the RPG have proven himself to be a good weapon, and can damage or destroy some light armoured vehicle or main battle tank like this one and difinitivly good against mud-wall founded in Afghanistan.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/8798/78968662or2.jpg

[RoyB]

I read reports saying that it was hit by an ATGM, blown off accidentally, etc..
I just want to know your sources.

[jemesouviens]

I read reports saying that it was hit by an ATGM, blown off accidentally, etc..
I just want to know your sources.

AT-3?...i read something 2 years ago that was an Lebanese RPG..oh well maybe my sources was pro-Hezbollah. What ever my point was the RPG have a good capacity against several treat and the Main Battle Tank are one of them and can do some damage.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

As jemesouviens pointed out, the RPG-7, whilst being more a weapon of deterrence in the AT role than anything else, is an extremely reputable infantry squad weapon, which affords a serious level of utility and tactical flexibility to the user.

L.Which raises the question, why don't NATO armies adopt an equivalent (and relatively cheap) infantry support weapon similar to RPG? Or do they see no need? Or are current NATO infantry AT weapons also capable in that role?

[jemesouviens]

Which raises the question, why don't NATO armies adopt an equivalent (and relatively cheap) infantry support weapon similar to RPG? Or do they see no need?

NATO use the M72, is a cheap anti-tank, and seriously good enough against mud-wall,building and vehicle such G-wagon or LAV-25.

[RoyB]

AT-3?...i read something 2 years ago that was an Lebanese RPG..oh well maybe my sources was pro-Hezbollah. What ever my point was the RPG have a good capacity against several treat and the Main Battle Tank are one of them and can do some damage.
Of course it posses a threat, but I just want to know your sources for the figures about the Israeli tanks in Lebanon..

[jemesouviens]

Of course it posses a threat, but I just want to know your sources for the figures about the Israeli tanks in Lebanon..

I don't have sources ,i told you i read that in Lebanon war in 2006.

[RoyB]

Well the RPG-7 had proven himself in Afghanistan against light armoured vehicle, mud wall and house. The RPG-7 also proven himself against Merkava in Lebanon War 2006 , over 50 Merkava lasted generation were badly damage (Behind the Merkava the doors for troops) , and two destroyed by RPG-29 (more modern version). But the RPG-7 is definitively not a good anti-tank, but seriously good against mud-wall in Afghanistan.
Over 50 badly damaged? 2 destroyed by RPG-29? what's that has to do with RPG-7?
And this is the thing I want your sources for..if you don't have anything to back your claims than don't claim it..

[Breakfast in Vegas]

NATO use the M72, is a cheap anti-tank, and seriously good enough against mud-wall,building and vehicle such G-wagon or LAV-25.Yeah, the LAW. It's been outphased in the US by the AT-4...

I haven't been in the army for a decade now and am just curious how widespread and effective they are.

[jemesouviens]

Over 50 badly damaged? 2 destroyed by RPG-29? what's that has to do with RPG-7?
And this is the thing I want your sources for..if you don't have anything to back your claims than don't claim it..


Well i have a video here i don't understand what they said but everyone talk about RPG the first one its a AT-3 or Kornet but the rest i'm probably sure its a RPG http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ltCxHIWj658

[dangerdan87]

Yeah, the LAW. It's been outphased in the US by the AT-4...

I haven't been in the army for a decade now and am just curious how widespread and effective they are.

I used a LAW last year in Iraq.
Not the same LAW as back in the day, but it was still a LAW.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

I used a LAW last year in Iraq.
Not the same LAW as back in the day, but it was still a LAW.Yeah? Good to know. Thanks for the info.

[F16]

The individual who crafted that description has most likely never experienced the TBG-7VL 105mm thermobaric round, or the OG-7V anti-personnel fragmentation round. And the PG-7VR is no slouch when it comes to defeating tank armor...
L.
OG-7V was introduced in 1999, I think it was designed to minimize civil casualties during the second Chechen war. It isn't as powerful as PG-7V (HEAT). I think that OG-7V is even unable to penetrate an IFV of any type.

[F16]

At the start of the Afghan war a majority of the RPGs where the HE frag type, not shaped charge.

The only RPG HE frag is this one:
http://rf.foto.radikal.ru/0707/e6/607bad3d834b.jpg
I doubt whether it was ever exported...

[GazB]

OG-7V was introduced in 1999, I think it was designed to minimize civil casualties during the second Chechen war.

It is a dedicated anti personel rocket designed to kill personel wearing flak jackets with much heavier fragments than the normal RPG HEAT rounds generate.
It was designed to kill exposed personel and I have seen pictures of it in the 1980s though it was rarely seen.

[F16]

It is a dedicated anti personel rocket designed to kill personel wearing flak jackets with much heavier fragments than the normal RPG HEAT rounds generate.

HEAT rounds haven't any shaped frags at all, there are some frags at high velocities, but it's not enough to kill anybody nearby.
It's primarily designed to penetrate armour, concret, whatever with shaped charges, all the rounds blast power goes into one direction, nearby frag effects are minimal. But they are certainly existent.


It was designed to kill exposed personel and I have seen pictures of it in the 1980s though it was rarely seen.
It's rarely seen because it's way too dangerous to fire a OG-7V round. HEAT effect of OG-7V is as good as nonexistent.

By firing RPG you must have high level of certainity to disable enemy's opportunities to engage you. Otherwise, after firing an RPG round and missing enemy, you can be sure that the next second enemy will engage you using all the firepower he has.

RPG is great as infantry's support weapon.
But as far as I know, even low budgeted insurgents are using ATGM's for AT purposes. If you want to destroy some modern MBT using RPG with say a PG-7V round, you must have at least 3 firing teams, you must attack simultaneously. And that must be some urban combat, in fields nobody will let you to approach MBT to hit its rear or sides. All modern MBTs have special equipment for detecting incoming threats.

Much more effective for guerrila warfare against MBT is this one, primarily made in Iran.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Improvised_explosive_device_explosively_formed_penetrator_Iraq.jpg

Explosively formed penetrator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator)

[m-37b1]

RPG-7's against MBT's have very inconsistent results. Even against older armor. The record of the M-48 in Vietnam reveals this to an extent. While the RPG-7 hull/turret penetration would probably stop the M-48, and injure/kill some of the crew, it rarely destrouyed the tank. Only in cases where secondary ignition of the tank's main gun rounds occured was the tank totaly destroyed, (a very rare occurance).

I'll try to dig up my source, (a book on armored combat in Vietnam). Has good detail on RPG effectivness.

[TheArmenian]

RPG-7's against MBT's have very inconsistent results. Even against older armor. The record of the M-48 in Vietnam reveals this to an extent. While the RPG-7 hull/turret penetration would probably stop the M-48, and injure/kill some of the crew, it rarely destrouyed the tank. Only in cases where secondary ignition of the tank's main gun rounds occured was the tank totaly destroyed, (a very rare occurance).

I'll try to dig up my source, (a book on armored combat in Vietnam). Has good detail on RPG effectivness.

Mind you, a lot of the RPGs used by the Vietnamese were the older and less effective RPG-2 model.

[GazB]

HEAT rounds haven't any shaped frags at all, there are some frags at high velocities, but it's not enough to kill anybody nearby.

It has no preformed fragments but it is still 2kgs of HE exploding in front of you. Even if the sheet metal doesn't create a nice even pattern of fragments it is still not safe to be next to when it explodes.


It's primarily designed to penetrate armour, concret, whatever with shaped charges, all the rounds blast power goes into one direction,

In the direction of travel the blast effect is focussed but in the rear area the blast is basically normal... ie roughly spherical.


It's rarely seen because it's way too dangerous to fire a OG-7V round. HEAT effect of OG-7V is as good as nonexistent.

It is not an anti armour round. It is purpose designed to engage enemy infantry. It is much lighter and has a much flatter trajectory and can be used out to about 700m. If you hit the side of an armoured vehicle it will not penetrate. It will however kill and injure any soldiers sitting on the top of the vehicle or walking near the vehicle.


By firing RPG you must have high level of certainity to disable enemy's opportunities to engage you. Otherwise, after firing an RPG round and missing enemy, you can be sure that the next second enemy will engage you using all the firepower he has.

The fact that after you fire the enemy will concentrate firepower on your position is a given no matter what rocket you fire. If you are operating in normal conditions you will have either tank hunting teams with groups of 4 men with a PKM, an SVD and two guys with AKs and an RPG and rockets. The guys with the sniper rifle and MG go for the enemy infantry while the RPG team hits the armour and then moves after each rocket. There will be a minimum of a dozen teams operating at once.


The other tactic they use for the RPG is to use it as close range protection for longer range ATGMs like Konkurs, Kornet and Fagot. In that role it is used as cover to fill in the close range gaps. In both roles a direct fire anti personel round is very useful at different times in the engagement.

For a start you can carry more than three warheads in a backpack when they are only 40mm calibre rockets.


If you want to destroy some modern MBT using RPG with say a PG-7V round, you must have at least 3 firing teams, you must attack simultaneously.

That is normal Soviet practise to have volley attacks from different flanking directions where possible.


And that must be some urban combat, in fields nobody will let you to approach MBT to hit its rear or sides. All modern MBTs have special equipment for detecting incoming threats.

The world is not flat open deserts. Undulations in the ground means on most battlefields there are plenty of places to hide. In the worst case scenario they can dig their own cover.


Much more effective for guerrila warfare against MBT is this one, primarily made in Iran.

That is just a variation on the HEAT warhead. A static charge can be heavier than a rocket propelled grenade. The Soviets use them too. The TM-83 mine is an example. 20.4kgs in weight it has a 9.6kg HE charge with a 250mm diameter disc. As effectiveness is determined by the diameter and the weight of explosives as well as materials and shaping of course the TM-83 can blow an 80mm diameter hole through armour 400mm thick from a range of 50m.

Perhaps if the 105mm warhead of the later RPG-7 rockets (which is the same warhead as used in the RPG-29) was being used in Iraq or Afghanistan then there might be a bit more respect for it than there currently is. It is a very good thing that it is not available to the Opforces in those places.


RPG-7's against MBT's have very inconsistent results. Even against older armor. The record of the M-48 in Vietnam reveals this to an extent.

Indeed. Shaped charge warheads lose effectiveness rapidly if not detonated at the right distance and at the right angle and they have to have a very good fuse. LAWs performed poorly in Vietnam against PT-76s because of the spaced armour for floatation.
There have been a huge number of rocket types developed and deployed with the RPG-7 and some of the older rockets were not very good. It also depended upon where they were made and how they were stored and handled. Proper training in the use of the weapons was also crucial to their performance too.

[m-37b1]

Indeed. Shaped charge warheads lose effectiveness rapidly if not detonated at the right distance and at the right angle and they have to have a very good fuse. LAWs performed poorly in Vietnam against PT-76s because of the spaced armour for floatation.
There have been a huge number of rocket types developed and deployed with the RPG-7 and some of the older rockets were not very good. It also depended upon where they were made and how they were stored and handled. Proper training in the use of the weapons was also crucial to their performance too.


Agreed, thanks for the info!

[perdurabo]

Mind you, a lot of the RPGs used by the Vietnamese were the older and less effective RPG-2 model.
also RPG-7 has meany tupes of rockets so it depends on what you load in it...

[MCGunner]

The only RPG HE frag is this one:
http://rf.foto.radikal.ru/0707/e6/607bad3d834b.jpg
I doubt whether it was ever exported...

Actually, there are over 20 different versions of the OG-7 and over 30 other "RPG HE Frags" and they have been most definitely exported to just about everywhere. In addition to the Bulgarian / Russian OG-7V Oskolok (40mm) you have enclosed above, here are some (and only some) of the others:

Soviet / Russian
OG-7
OG-7V (40mm)

Bulgaria
KO-7V (65mm)
OG-7BG (73mm)
OG-7 (40mm)
OG-7V (40mm) [Slight internal differences from the Russian model]
OG-7VE (93mm)
OG-7VN (40mm)
OG-7VMZ (40mm)
OG-7VM3 (40mm)
OFG-7V (65mm)
RF-7MA (40mm)

China
Type 69 Frag (40mm) Bulgarian OG-7V clone
DZGI 40 Bounding (75mm)
HEI-Frag (70mm)

Poland
PG-7KO (85mm)
PG-7OD (85mm)
ZG-HE Frag (60mm)

Romania
RomArm AG-7 40mm Frag (40mm)
RomArm AG-7 60mm Frag (60mm) Also produced in Peru as the DC-M401
RomArm AG-7 PGI (71mm)

Iran
Saegheh (40mm)

Egypt
Home Guard (40mm)
SAKR-Frag (80mm)

Pakistan
RPG-7AP (80mm)

North Korea
F-7 (85mm)

Republic of Georgia
Kodori 3 (43mm)
Kodori 4 (40mm)

Hamas
Yassin Frag (40mm)

There are more of course, but these are the ones that have gone into full-scale or near full-scale production. All are exported either officially of unofficially.

[F16]

It has no preformed fragments but it is still 2kgs of HE exploding in front of you. Even if the sheet metal doesn't create a nice even pattern of fragments it is still not safe to be next to when it explodes.

It isn't certainly safe to be near any explosion, what I meant is that it's far more safer to be 10 meters away from RPG-7 HEAT hit, than to be 10 meters away from explosion of F-1 fragmentation grenade, in last case target is as good as hit with multiply frags at extreme high velocities.
Because F-1 is frag. There are RGD-5, HE grenade, not frag, you can survive when RGD-5 goes off 3 meters away from you, but you can't survive F-1 at 10 meter distance.

It is not an anti armour round. It is purpose designed to engage enemy infantry. It is much lighter and has a much flatter trajectory and can be used out to about 700m. If you hit the side of an armoured vehicle it will not penetrate. It will however kill and injure any soldiers sitting on the top of the vehicle or walking near the vehicle.
Yes, you can kill or injure unprotected soft targets, say sitting on the top of BMP-2, but the next second after you engaged soft targets, BMB-2 will put 20-40 frag shells near you destination. So firing an OG-7V even at BMP-2 is something like suicide mission. However, if you have HEAT PG-7V, you can penetrate BMP-2, disable its ability to fire its main gun, you can probably hit some soft targets at the same time, and most importantly, you have a chance to survive after firing PG-7V.
That's why HEAT PG-7V is more popular, more asked, than OG-7V.


The fact that after you fire the enemy will concentrate firepower on your position is a given no matter what rocket you fire.

If we assume, that our enemy is driving a BMP-2 with infantry riding atop,
after firing PG-7V, we can successfully disable to firepower, kill some of its crew, and probably some infantry atop.

[GazB]

Yes, you can kill or injure unprotected soft targets, say sitting on the top of BMP-2, but the next second after you engaged soft targets, BMB-2 will put 20-40 frag shells near you destination. So firing an OG-7V even at BMP-2 is something like suicide mission. However, if you have HEAT PG-7V, you can penetrate BMP-2, disable its ability to fire its main gun, you can probably hit some soft targets at the same time, and most importantly, you have a chance to survive after firing PG-7V.
That's why HEAT PG-7V is more popular, more asked, than OG-7V.

I think you are missing the point. Look at British experience in the Falklands... or even the western experience now. RPGs are used against armour... that is for sure, but they are also used against infantry. As you have mentioned the average RPG round is not hugely effective agaisnt infantry even if it is not pleasant to be near when they go off.
The Brits used the Milan ATGMs against everything except tanks in the Falklands because there were few Argentine tanks to shoot at. They fired them at snipers and bunkers and MG positions etc etc. When the target is not a tank or APC then the OG is much more use. For every tank and APC in a military force there are probably 10 light unarmoured vehicles like trucks and tankers of various types where a beam of plasma will burn a small hole in it and might set it on fire but a 40mm stick of HE and fragments will be much more effective against.
An RPG is not guided... you point, squeese the trigger and then run away from that launch position to the next launch position while another team fires from a different direction and the target is shooting at the smoke in the position you just left.
If the target is an armoured vehicle with enemy troops then a combination of anti tank and anti personel rockets as well as bursts from MG and shots from an SVD will be how the attack starts and finishes. A short attack and then gone.


If we assume, that our enemy is driving a BMP-2 with infantry riding atop,
after firing PG-7V, we can successfully disable to firepower, kill some of its crew, and probably some infantry atop.

Assuming those infantry don't see you first and the BMP-2 is operating alone. If they call in reinforcements and do a sweep of the area you could be in trouble.

Remember the RPG is designed for war... but WWIII, not guerilla war. It has been adopted by Guerillas world wide and much of the modern use of the weapon was not developed by its designers. Many of the ambush techniques used today were developed by western special forces to deal with Soviet armoured forces using guerilla forces... ie Afghans. The west is now dealing with that now.

[F16]

When the target is not a tank or APC then the OG is much more use. For every tank and APC in a military force there are probably 10 light unarmoured vehicles like trucks and tankers of various types where a beam of plasma will burn a small hole in it and might set it on fire but a 40mm stick of HE and fragments will be much more effective against.

When we have some sort of soft multiply targets, if possible, we have to engage them with something high flammable, for example, RPO-A "Shmel".
If we successfully hit a truck with troops in it with RPO-A, we can assume, that nobody survives after our hit. Ever.
The kill power of OG-7V is not sufficient to disable multiply targets, even 82 mm mortar shell must be much effective in comparision with OG-7V.
So, we can certainly fire OG-7V at a truck with soldiers, we will kill some of them, injure some, and some quantity may stay alive and fully operational. Anyway, I fully agree with you, than OG-7V is much more effective against soft unprotected targets than PG-7V. There is no doubt in that.


An RPG is not guided... you point, squeese the trigger and then run away from that launch position to the next launch position while another team fires from a different direction and the target is shooting at the smoke in the position you just left.

When there is nobody with SVD, MG, or any other RPG, say you are acting alone. And there is 1 BMP-2 with troops atop, and say two trucks with soldiers behind. In this situation, if you do not manage to destroy BMP-2's main 30 mm gun or kill the crew in it, or both of them, then after firing and not destroying the BMP, say you fired OG-7V, chances are they will manage to cut you in two pieces with their 30 mm main gun, which fires 30 mm frag shells. 30 mm frag shells are very dangerous, more dangerous than 7,62 bullets of AKM or MG.

[flanker7]

Well F16, this is how war works. You kill some, you injure some, but you may also die or get injured. No magical solutions or do all weapons.

Fact remains tha the RPG-7 is one of the most versatile weapons around, capable of firing a wide range of projectiles.

[GazB]

Anyway, I fully agree with you, than OG-7V is much more effective against soft unprotected targets than PG-7V. There is no doubt in that.

That is all I meant. The OG rounds are not super all powerful weapons that will wipe out everything... just like the PG rounds are not super weapons that will kill any tank. The OG rounds however make the RPG-7 a better system because it makes it more flexible. Compared to the PG rounds the OG rounds take up little space and are effective out to about 700m. Against an infantry unit that means it is beyond normal small arms return fire range. Ask anyone who has fired a rifle and they will tell you hitting an area target at 700m is not impossible but firing a rifle at a target at 700m that is moving is not so easy.


So, we can certainly fire OG-7V at a truck with soldiers, we will kill some of them, injure some, and some quantity may stay alive and fully operational.

If you kill more than about 30% of a unit then that unit stops functioning as a unit and pretty much spends the rest of its time on the battlefield carrying its dead and injured out of there.


When there is nobody with SVD, MG, or any other RPG, say you are acting alone. And there is 1 BMP-2 with troops atop, and say two trucks with soldiers behind. In this situation, if you do not manage to destroy BMP-2's main 30 mm gun or kill the crew in it, or both of them, then after firing and not destroying the BMP, say you fired OG-7V, chances are they will manage to cut you in two pieces with their 30 mm main gun, which fires 30 mm frag shells. 30 mm frag shells are very dangerous, more dangerous than 7,62 bullets of AKM or MG.

The thing is that even in a Guerilla war you don't operate alone. Even snipers operate with spotters. The only combatant that operates alone is a suicide bomber... and even then they often have people helping them.
RPG gunners in armies have guys with them carrying extra ammo. Even still they will find a launch point and fire a rocket and then move out of that launch position immediately. Part of the reason for picking that launch point is a clear unobstructed view of the target, but the biggest part is because it has a covered area nearby that you can escape through after you fire. You launch and your team runs to the next fire position. Sorry to say only an amature would stand there and reload and fire again from the same position... whether they even hit the target or not.

The tactics of ambush were established before the RPG-7 even existed and have been constantly modified since then based on developments. RPGs are portable cheap firepower that swings an advantage to the Guerilla... but that advantage can be negated with airpower monitoring places where ambushes are likely or where they have been used before. Some high flying UCAV firing a hellfire at your IR signature as you line up that BMP can ruin your day... and RPG is a distinctive weapon that is not likely to be confused with a fishing rod.

[F16]

That is all I meant. The OG rounds are not super all powerful weapons that will wipe out everything... just like the PG rounds are not super weapons that will kill any tank. The OG rounds however make the RPG-7 a better system because it makes it more flexible.

You are one hundred percent right.


Compared to the PG rounds the OG rounds take up little space and are effective out to about 700m. Against an infantry unit that means it is beyond normal small arms return fire range. Ask anyone who has fired a rifle and they will tell you hitting an area target at 700m is not impossible but firing a rifle at a target at 700m that is moving is not so easy.

Yes, it's quite difficult to hit a moving target, it's even more difficult to do so at long ranges. A OG-7V projectile is advantageous, because you can carry a lot more ammo, than with HEAT projectile, sometimes the more ammo you have, the more chances to survive, sometimes it's crucial!


The thing is that even in a Guerilla war you don't operate alone. Even snipers operate with spotters. The only combatant that operates alone is a suicide bomber... and even then they often have people helping them.
RPG gunners in armies have guys with them carrying extra ammo. Even still they will find a launch point and fire a rocket and then move out of that launch position immediately. Part of the reason for picking that launch point is a clear unobstructed view of the target, but the biggest part is because it has a covered area nearby that you can escape through after you fire. You launch and your team runs to the next fire position. Sorry to say only an amature would stand there and reload and fire again from the same position... whether they even hit the target or not.

Thank you for your very helpful information. It's quite important side of using rocket-propelled grenade.


The tactics of ambush were established before the RPG-7 even existed and have been constantly modified since then based on developments. RPGs are portable cheap firepower that swings an advantage to the Guerilla... but that advantage can be negated with airpower monitoring places where ambushes are likely or where they have been used before. Some high flying UCAV firing a hellfire at your IR signature as you line up that BMP can ruin your day... and RPG is a distinctive weapon that is not likely to be confused with a fishing rod.

Yes, a UCAV firing a hellfire is really bad.