Has the RPG been tamed?

[Pursuit Curve]

I would like to start a discussion regarding the effectiveness of the RPG family of warheads versus Armour. I will leave the discussion to the many experts and current military personnel to comment on the effectiveness of RPG's against modern MBT, IFV targets. Yes, RPG's are very effective against soft wheeled and utility vehicles, and in some cases Helicopters and Infantry. What I am looking for is any information or experiences with RPG incidents.

Okay room, fire away!

 

[Aussie Digger]

RPG's effectiveness against quality MBT's has certainly been blunted. Reports (from person's with non-vested interests) have emerged that both Challenger 2 and M1A2's were hit with repeated RPG strikes during GW2 and both were able to "shrug" them off, in the vast majority of instances. RPG's are a vastly overrated weapon in my opinion. They are used because they are simply, cheap and widely available, NOT because of their capability.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Thanks for that Aussie. Just one question for you. With the majority of vehicles now IFV's (Or so it seems) like the M2 and M3 bradley, the LAV and M113, are they adequatley protected? Recently one of our LAV's was reportedley hit by one or two RPG rounds, no casualties except a tire that had to be changed. Does the Australian Army have applique armour packages for APC's in service right now?

I guess the next question is whether the RPG's that are being encountered are the latest generation or are they still the same basic model that goes back to the Yom Kippur war era? I have seen some mention of a tandem warhead version, I believe that it is called the RPG 7R. Have you seen or heard any gen regarding this model?

 

[nuke_em]

i would also like to add that technically rpg doesnt stand for Rocket propelled grenade

RPG stands for "handheld antitank grenade-launcher" in Russian: Ruchnoy Protivotankovy Granatomyot (Ручной противотанковый гранатомёт, РПГ). The English translation of this, "Rocket-Propelled Grenade" — backformed from the acronym RPG — is technically inaccurate, as most western armies do not use this term to describe these weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propelled_grenade

rocket propelled grenades are so effective the incident in mogadishu is evidence. somalian militia shot down our black hawks which were the wrong weaposn used becasue they are meant for night use
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/RPGs.jpg

 

[Aussie Digger]

i would also like to add that technically rpg doesnt stand for Rocket propelled grenade

RPG stands for "handheld antitank grenade-launcher" in Russian: Ruchnoy Protivotankovy Granatomyot (Ручной противотанковый гранатомёт, РПГ). The English translation of this, "Rocket-Propelled Grenade" — backformed from the acronym RPG — is technically inaccurate, as most western armies do not use this term to describe these weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propelled_grenade

rocket propelled grenades are so effective the incident in mogadishu is evidence. somalian militia shot down our black hawks which were the wrong weaposn used becasue they are meant for night use
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/RPGs.jpg

Blackhawks were the wrong platform to be employing in that environment. How many rockets did they fire before they finally managed to down those 2? Probably hundreds.

How many USMC AAVC's were destroyed by RPG fire, before they were pulled out due to a political decision? How many USMC Lav's were destroyed? How many Australian M113's? I could go on, but I think you get the point.

The RPG is a simple weapon that can be employed by persons with vitually no military training. It is also widely available, hence it's popularity amongst terrorists, militia and "gangs". It is not an advanced capability, that is used by anybody (or any Country) that has a choice.

It poses little threat to modern combined armoured forces, compared to newer generation weapons. It is much akin to the AK-47 in my opinion. It is a simple weapon that is capable in it's role. It is not however used by those with access to better weapons. This thread's question is, "how effective is the RPG" against armour?

The simple answer? Not very.

 

[Big-E]

Again I agree with AU digger, the RPG is only good at taking out light vehicles like Hum-Vs. It is the terrorist weapon of choice b/c they are cheap and widely available. For example, my brother was in a convoy in Iraq, they were ambushed, the insurgents got off two dozen RPG rounds which bounced off the MBTs like a ping pong off steel, some didn't even detonate they are so old. The shots that did the damage were to the Hummers, those with side plating did pretty well, those that didn't got torn up.

 

[Moroz.ru]

>how effective is the RPG against armour?


Specifications of RPG-7’s grenades
------------Year---RHA---Range--MaxV
PG-7VM ---1969--300mm - 500m-300mps
PG-7VS ----1973-400mm--500m- 300mps
PG-7VL ----1975--500mm- 200m- 200mps
PG-7VR ----1988--X00mm- 200m (tandem warhead)

RPG – 29 Wampire
RHA-650mm
Range-450mps

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Now considering that the RPG is a copy and refinement of the German Panzerfaust, it is still an effectibe weapon. I just want to point out that the effectiveness on paper does not result in massive American losses in M1a1 or british Challenger tank losses. Yes, the lighter communities such as the HUMVEE and LAV people are more at risk, but again, if the weapon was effective, then why not more losses?

And is the current generation of RPG's that are being encountered in Iraq and Afghnaistan the latest version?

 

[Aussie Digger]

>how effective is the RPG against armour?


Specifications of RPG-7’s grenades
------------Year---RHA---Range--MaxV
PG-7VM ---1969--300mm - 500m-300mps
PG-7VS ----1973-400mm--500m- 300mps
PG-7VL ----1975--500mm- 200m- 200mps
PG-7VR ----1988--X00mm- 200m (tandem warhead)

RPG – 29 Wampire
RHA-650mm
Range-450mps

Wow. Paper statistics. The Sgt York air defence weapon statistics are pretty impressive too. Doesn't equate to a helluva lot of capability though. The performance of the weapon in combat is what counts. Not theoretical capabilities.

The fact is the RPG is predominantly used by poorly trained troops or terrorists/militia/insurgent forces. It is used because it provides relatively high firepower, with little difficulty in it's use.

It DOES cause many injuries, it does disable light vehicles and injures/kills un-protected light infantry force.

To a modern combined arms force of the type employed by US/UK/Israel etc. It is a minor threat at best.

Reliable reports exist of multiple RPG firings against British and American armour in GW2 and scoring multiple hits and having little or no effect, other than alerting the tankers to the presence and location of such weapons. If you think this is an effective tactic, by all means proceed with it....

 

[Moroz.ru]

I’ve never seen on TV Iraqi guerillas use tandem warheads RPG. Thus its most modern RPG grenades could be PG-7VL designed at 1975. Its penetration ability 500mm RHA isn’t enough to kill an Abrams. Iraqi guerillas/rebels/terrorists (What word do you prefer) haven’t modern Russian weapon.

 

[Pursuit Curve]

Wow. Paper statistics. The Sgt York air defence weapon statistics are pretty impressive too. Doesn't equate to a helluva lot of capability though. The performance of the weapon in combat is what counts. Not theoretical capabilities.

The fact is the RPG is predominantly used by poorly trained troops or terrorists/militia/insurgent forces. It is used because it provides relatively high firepower, with little difficulty in it's use.

It DOES cause many injuries, it does disable light vehicles and injures/kills un-protected light infantry force.

To a modern combined arms force of the type employed by US/UK/Israel etc. It is a minor threat at best.

Reliable reports exist of multiple RPG firings against British and American armour in GW2 and scoring multiple hits and having little or no effect, other than alerting the tankers to the presence and location of such weapons. If you think this is an effective tactic, by all means proceed with it....

Aussie, I read a short history about the Syrian Anti Tank Teams in action, Lebanon, 1982. It was made quite clear that their effectiveness was due to the fact that they were using Milan Missile systems and caused alot of damage to Israeli armour, not RPG's!

I guess that the day of the RPG is almost over as a battleield weapon against serious armour opposition.