Sniper vs BMP: is it necessary at all?

55
Sniper vs BMP: is it necessary at all?

Specificity is the word most often used to describe the work of a sniper in Ukraine. Indeed, perhaps the sniper is the most complex character, since there are a lot of nuances for his quality work on the battlefield, and beyond.

A video about how a sniper jammed an infantry fighting vehicle turret made me think about some aspects of being a sniper.



On the one hand, why not, if there was such an opportunity, to work on armored vehicles and inflict damage on them. On the other hand, how much does this fit into the general concept of using a person with a specialized rifle?

In principle, a sniper may well work not only on manpower, but also on enemy equipment, especially if this equipment is not properly protected. If we take the same BTR-80, which is quietly used by both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, then its armor is purely conditional, from 10 mm in the frontal part to 7 mm on the sides. The BMP-2 has better armor, as much as 23 mm in the front and 9 mm on the sides.

That is, in principle, a bullet from the 12,7 x 108 mm cartridge of the ASVK rifle will easily penetrate this armor. No worse than a bullet from a PTRD cartridge (14,5 x 118 mm) pierced the armor of German lungs tanks (for Pz.Kpfw.II, the thickness of the armor was almost all-round 14,5 mm).


Here the question of expediency arises. In the Great Patriotic War, until there was a reassessment of the understanding of anti-tank combat as a whole, until there was a saturation of units with anti-tank weapons, the anti-tank rifle was relevant and played a certain role on the battlefield. At least until the advent of new generation tanks of the Pz.Kpfw.IV type, in which the thickness of the frontal armor reached 80 mm, and the side armor - 50 mm. It was then that the anti-tank rifle finally left the arena of battles.

In our time, lightly armored vehicles have appeared that are “too tough” for modern large-caliber rifles. In theory. In practice, there are many questions about the advisability of using such rifles against infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers and they are asked almost every day.

And that's okay. On the one hand, there is a real chance of successfully defeating, say, BMP crew members, which immediately makes it difficult for infantry to complete tasks, which will lose support. Still, a 30-mm automatic cannon and a 7,62-mm machine gun are decent.

On the other hand, there is such a thing as an ATGM, which, in the event of a hit in an infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier, is 95% guaranteed to disable this vehicle. A cumulative jet is reliable, while a 12,7 mm bullet is a very relative matter.


However, of course, when there is no ATGM, but there is a large-caliber rifle, this is also better than nothing at all.

But actually, each motorized rifle squad has a grenade launcher and an RPG-7. Scrap, against which it’s not good with tricks for everyone except tanks. And there is an anti-tank squad with three ATGMs in each motorized rifle company.

More precisely, it must be, because I am sure that if there were anti-tankers on that sector of the front where the events took place, the sniper would not have to pick the BMP from a rifle. So we can say with confidence that all these shooting experiments are out of hopelessness and nothing more.

And then another question arises, it would be something to experiment with. It is generally worth looking at who has more opportunities for such experiments, with us or with the enemy.

It is clear that we will not talk about SVD now, we will talk about modern (and SVD by no means can claim such a title) rifles.

It is clear that the Armed Forces of Ukraine have more opportunities, they receive weapons from all over Europe, if not from all over the world.

Probably the first such example was the already legendary Barrett M82.


The rifle of 1982, invented by Ronnie Barrett for the Browning machine gun cartridge 12,7 x 99 mm, became a classic and “lit up” in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine back in 2014, during the events in the Donbass.

A decent sighting range, a maximum effective range of 1800 meters, and in general, the Barrett company believes that the rifle is capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 4000 meters.

Snipex t-rex


Rifle of Ukrainian development and Ukrainian production. We can say - the heir to the anti-tank guns of the Second World War, since the 14,5 x 114 mm cartridge hints at that. The rifle is single-shot, one feels looking back at the guns of Degtyarev and Simonov. At least the cartridge is still the same, B-32.

The sighting range of the rifle is 2000 meters, the effective firing range is up to 4000 m.

In 2020, the product of the XADO-Holding company from Kharkov was adopted by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The number of troops is small, since the production is almost manual, with individual fitting of all parts.

Snipex Alligator


A rifle that claims that the new is the well-forgotten old. And if the T-Rex is a PTSD, then the Alligator is a PTSD. That is, almost the same, the same cartridge 14,5 x 114 mm, but not single-shot, but magazine. Magazine for 5 rounds. All other characteristics are similar to T-Rex.

Fort-301


Behind this beautiful name lies an Israeli sniper rifle chambered for NATO 7,62 x 51 mm. In general, the State-owned enterprise “Scientific and Production Association “Fort” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine is famous for the fact that the specialists of the enterprise (high level of training) will copy everything that falls into their hands.

In our case, this is the Israeli Galatz rifle. Very decent weapon, however, like everything that is produced in the weapons establishments of Israel.

Fort-301 is an interesting phenomenon, because, in fact, it is a licensed (or not so) copy of Galatz, which, in turn, has the classic Galil as its base, and Galil, in turn, is no more than AK chambered for 5,56 x 45 and 7,62 x 51.

That is, not that a sniper rifle, but rather a carbine in itself. And about the declared 1000 meters of confident combat, to be honest, there are doubts. It is believed that the same 300-400 meters as the SVD, but with less accuracy.

And because "Fort-301" did not go to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, various "left" units such as the same "Azov" are equipped with it.

Zbroyar Z-10, she is UAR-10, she is also "Dill".


From the name it is clear that this is another copy of the American semi-automatic rifle AR-10. The cartridge is still the same 7,62 x 51 NATO, effective range from 400 to 800 meters. A firing range of up to 2 km is declared, but it is clear that this is a theory. In practice, everything is more modest.

savage 110


This is a classic. The rifle, being modernized, has been produced since 1957. The fact that in the United States the products of this company were at one time (the Savage Arms Company was founded in 1894) more common than the products of Remington suggests that Savage's gunsmiths knew their business. Modernizations, especially the replacement of old materials with more advanced and improved ones, have made the 110 one of the lightest rifles in the class.

The Savage 110 can fire per kilometer, with a maximum range of about 1500 meters.

Zbroyar z-008


Another brainchild of Ukroboronprom, this time, for a change, the ideas of the Belarusian designer Konev were used. The rifle uses a variety of types of cartridges, for this the design provides for two types of receiver boxes and several types of barrels.

The funny thing is that until recently, Zbroyar actively denied the production of rifles for the army, declaring itself to be a developer of civilian weapons.

In Russia, the situation is somewhat different.

On the one hand, there are quite a lot of used models of domestic development, it’s easier to say that from the imported ones, only the Mannlichers, which entered service with the special forces in 2012, have taken root. It is clear that now these rifles are finalizing their resource on the ground, what will happen next is the question.

In principle, there are enough accurate weapons. One of the meticulous military bloggers calculated that as many as 24 types of sniper rifles are used by the Russian side. This is a lot, but if you look at official reference books, in addition to the SVD, the Russian army is armed with a large-caliber ASVK, a 9-mm Vintorez (actually a rifle for urban special operations) and a 7,62-mm SV-98. All.


"Exhaust", "Dusk", "Ugolek", "Accuracy" (this is the T-5000 from "Orsis"), "Stalingrad", "Sevastopol", "Retribution" and so on - these are all weapons that, on the one hand, perfectly used in combat, on the other hand, it does not have an official "registration".

In general, the situation itself is more than strange and striking in its depth: in Russia, the people buy themselves not only clothes, shoes, first aid kits, Drones, but also sniper rifles, optics, collimator sights, cartridges. So to speak - complete self-sufficiency.

And what, everything is really not easy with cartridges. Lobaev makes excellent rifles, but .338 Lapua Magnum cartridges, of course, do not lie in crates in MTO warehouses. With all the ensuing consequences. About cartridges .408 Cheyenne Tactical, which is 10,7 x 77 mm, I just keep quiet.

Is it logical? Not really. But if shooting professionals can afford this, then they should not interfere.

The fact that the army sniper rifle in the Russian army needs to be changed to something modern has already been written tons. But when things get off the ground (and we will not consider microwave as a movement, for the reasons described at one time here:Chukavin sniper rifle: how to understand it?), it's hard to say.

So far, the leadership of the army is satisfied with the current situation: the army has SVD and SV-98, there is ASVK. If you don't like it, go to merchants and buy whatever you want there. There is always a choice.

In fact, does the Russian army need a rifle of such a monstrous caliber as 14,5 mm? With a combat range of 2-3 kilometers?

On the one hand, it seems like yes, the destruction of enemy manpower and equipment from prohibitive distances ... is unprofitable. Yes, it's simple. Unprofitable.

In order for an armor-piercing bullet to hit an infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier from a distance of more than 1,5 km, the rifle must be non-ordinary.


This is clear. And the bullet too. For example, Lobaev's "Dusk" costs from two million rubles. Sights "pull" about the same amount for a set of "day / night". Ammo cost...

Plus, a person who shoots from such a rifle is also a very expensive specialist.

As a result, shooting from such a rifle at a distance of 1,5-2 km should at least pay for everything. Each shot has a cost in weapon costs and depreciation. The trunk, as it were, is not eternal, is it?

Any armored vehicle can be hit with a much greater effect by the most common ATGM at such a distance. And a cumulative grenade will smash everything, including the landing force, which will be inside or on the armor. And the effect will be much greater than from hitting a pair of large-caliber bullets.

A sniper should not work on armored vehicles. This is just stupidity, which is happily picked up by the media in order to file another victory. The fact that the sniper was able to damage something at the BMP speaks of his excellent preparation. But an equally well-trained anti-tanker with the help of one missile would have turned this BMP into a pile of metal.


But in our country, instead of thinking, it is more customary to loudly proclaim the victory. And for an intelligent person, the first question would be: why did the sniper shoot at armored vehicles? Where were the anti-tankers? And that's it, all the joy would instantly disappear.

But our media write that “the Russian army is armed with the Krot rifle. I don’t believe that the weapons expert and editor of the Kalashnikov magazine Mikhail Degtyarev, to whom this is attributed, could say this, most likely, the illiteracy of the staff of one of our newspapers played a role. There is a large-caliber development of "KORD", "Kovrov gunsmiths of Degtyarev", who made just a machine gun "KORD" and an ASVK rifle on this development.

Of course, if we are talking about the fact that tomorrow the Russian army should take the place of one of the best armies in the world, then the issues of training snipers and the production of weapons and ammunition for them must be approached accordingly.

A sniper should not take a weapon from a merchant. And do not buy cartridges at your own expense or at the expense of compassionate citizens. This is savagery and nonsense, we laughed so happily at the Ukrainians, who, with the help of SMS, collected money for bulletproof vests, and now people are buying Russian soldiers, among other things, weapons and ammunition.

The army should not have 20 types of rifles for all occasions, from shooting at tanks to destroying manpower three kilometers away. For this, there are other types of troops, suitably equipped. We need 3-4 types, it just has to be the best weapon in the world, that's all.

When the Russian army becomes the first in Europe, then, of course, rifles will be received from warehouses. And the head of the ammunition depot should give out cartridges, and not bring a volunteer in a backpack. But it will be a little later, when the sniper will destroy important targets, and not eliminate the breakthrough of the enemy group on the BMP with a rifle.

When everyone in the army begins not just to do their own thing, but to do it efficiently and with meaning. I hope to see times like this again.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +28
    9 November 2022 05: 34
    What can you say? The author mixed together sniper and anti-material rifles that have different purposes, although they may partially overlap the scope.
    And if the T-Rex is a PTSD, then the Alligator is a PTRS.

    These are modern rifles equipped with effective recoil dampening devices - one of the main problems of hand weapons chambered for such powerful cartridges.
    “After graduating from the third year of the weapons and machine gun faculty of the Tula Institute, we had an internship at the NIIPSMVO training ground, which was then located near Kolomna.
    Languishing under the scorching rays of the sun, I took off my shirt and watched how the shooter, with long pauses and smoke breaks, fired from the PTRD at zinc cartridges filled with liquid fuel - this was to test the incendiary effect of bullets. When I asked why he fired only a dozen rounds for almost an hour, the shooter broke into a tirade, which I cannot reproduce here, and then offered me to replace him. Not feeling the trick, I gladly agreed. I arranged a position for myself by placing a cleaner sheet on a sheet of dirty plywood lying nearby, and tried on a gun. Then I loaded the PTRD, carefully aimed the zinc and fuel, and smoothly pulled the trigger. Simultaneously with the shot, I felt a strong blow to the right cheekbone and shoulder, powerful recoil turned me along with the top sheet of plywood by thirty degrees. Against the background of sparks from the eyes, I saw a flaring jar.
    I politely declined the offer to continue shooting. As a result, my jaw hurt for a long time, but the bruise on my shoulder didn’t go even longer.
    1. +11
      9 November 2022 06: 34
      Quote from solar
      What can you say?

      The review of sniper rifles is not bad. Everything else is at the level of an amateur, who reads a lot, but does not practice. If a sniper or a group of snipers work in battle formations, then their goals are what poses the greatest danger at the moment of the battle (based on the capabilities of the weapon) hi
      1. +5
        9 November 2022 09: 48
        There are goals and objectives for each sniper or group, disabling armored vehicles - it completely falls into them. Moreover, ATGM crews are now also covering sniper groups.
        An article about everything and nothing.
        1. +1
          9 November 2022 13: 23
          Show me the combat schedule, which says that the sniper has a goal of disabling armored vehicles.
          It never happened.
          Destroy the crew - yes, but not the withdrawal of armored vehicles as such.
          1. +1
            9 November 2022 16: 32
            Dear Denis, now is a wonderful time, they write tactical tasks on their knees.
            Actually, even earlier, the disabling of surveillance devices and communications fell into the tactics of preparing a sniper. Of course, this is not about the level of platoon snipers with SVD. They rule a different degree of training Fighters and other calibers.
            1. +1
              13 November 2022 10: 55
              Now I understand, thank you, dear Alex.
        2. 0
          10 November 2022 19: 39
          The phrase about the price of a rifle, a sight and cartridges was especially touched. And how much is an ATGM missile, how much does it cost to train a gunner, and what is the damage from his death?
          About how fun it is to drag a TPK "cornet" around the area, compared to a box of cartridges in a pouch, is also somehow missed.
          A sniper can be trained in the rear, within the framework of ROSTO / DOSAAF, there is wind at any shooting range. But where in ROSTO can you teach pre-conscripts to handle ATGMs, how much will it cost and what training ground is needed?
      2. 0
        28 January 2023 02: 16
        Yes sir))). Everything that can hit armored vehicles hits it. Another thing is that it is easier to reliably shoot an armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle from a machine gun such as a cliff or a cord. Trite a few bursts will give more damage. By itself, a hole in the armor does not mean that the vehicle has been destroyed.
  2. +11
    9 November 2022 05: 58
    Everything was mixed up in a heap, apparently the pursuit of the number of letters. Minus the author
    1. +1
      9 November 2022 16: 15
      Quote: Roman Skomorokhov
      could say this, most likely, the illiteracy of the staff of one of our newspapers played a role

      This is one of the undeniable thoughts in this article. Sometimes you read something here that makes you wonder. Yes
      But I, according to the site administration, am not as smart as they are, and therefore I will not climb into the Kalash row. feel
  3. +7
    9 November 2022 06: 16
    The best sniper rifle is a machine gun, and even then if there is no tank at hand! laughing
    Something the author of the BMP pulled strongly by the hatches to the article.
    1. +7
      9 November 2022 10: 53
      The best sniper rifle is a 152mm gun with DShR173-12-0,9 on limbs + K1986BE91T + K1986BE91T with encryption and a radio module.
      He poked his finger in the tablet on the map, and where he poked something exploded there.
      We can do more, better and cooler than any west, if thieves, tyrants and "watchmen" according to Zadornov are calculated and removed.
      1. +1
        9 November 2022 11: 04
        Quote from SincerityX
        The best sniper rifle is a 152mm gun with DShR173-12-0,9 on limbs + K1986BE91T + K1986BE91T with encryption and a radio module.

        Very interesting, but nothing is clear! laughing (stepper motor wink )
        1. +7
          9 November 2022 13: 41
          Very interesting, but nothing is clear! laughing (stepper motor wink )

          I explain. SD, this is a device with settable coordinates, i.e. predictable. If there are contact sensors in a certain position of the tool, or if there is any other way to get the coordinates (ruler, encoder), as well as at what angle the tool will move when applying 1-10-100 pulses (fixed value), we can at any time by transmitting coordinates aim the tool at the desired angle. Understood with guidance. Now, with the help of simple mathematical calculations, we can convert the angle of the gun and its azimuth into coordinates on the plane, since we know the projectile, and its trajectory is constant without external factors. It remains only to add the ability to make corrections for the wind by indicating its direction and strength in this formula, depending on the projectile used and voila, we get the quo measured in decimeters. And the reaction of the gun is within a minute.
          Next, we add object recognition on the image (camera manufacturers of one Russian brand ate a dog on this one) and calculate the corrections for the projectile's approach to the object's speed. Voila, you can hit movable vehicles.
          I’ll add right away that, of course, in this form it will only work if the gun knows its direction and its coordinates, for this you need to have a gun, for example, two + tablet coordinates, then we get the coordinates of the target without any satellites there.

          I repeat once again, if you remove the pests, you can make it much cooler than any West, we definitely have brains (and if not, mine will be enough for everyone wassat ), because not all "wise men" fled, many eke out an existence here fueled solely by love for their homeland.
          1. +3
            9 November 2022 16: 35
            Yes, that's exactly what I thought. )))
            Who only gave you a minus? I corrected this...
            1. +2
              10 November 2022 08: 41
              Thank you! Khokhols are probably trying to undermine, so to speak laughing

        2. +4
          9 November 2022 16: 23
          This is when not an officer calculates through a fire control device (43 years old) ... but a computer through a program determines the calculated settings for firing quickly and accurately without the rule of the right hand or a gimlet.
    2. +4
      9 November 2022 13: 13
      And in fact, why not a sniper? The effectiveness of the fire will be more.
      1. 0
        10 November 2022 08: 43
        Cost per defeat, only a little more, insignificantly, I would even say wassat
  4. +7
    9 November 2022 06: 18
    the author of something here wrought all together
    then he writes about the high cost of depreciating a shot from a large-caliber sniper rifle at AFVs, they say it is expensive and immediately writes that ATGMs should be used on AFVs, as if it were not expensive laughing
    Of course, I’m not an expert, but it seems to me that everything that is equal to and above 12.7mm is rifles designed to work on a highly protected target and not necessarily on a specific person (that is, an open body). but including armored vehicles or protected (armored) shelter.
    And in battle, as I understand it, they hit from what is at hand at this very moment
  5. +1
    9 November 2022 06: 37
    And for an intelligent person, the first question would be: why did the sniper shoot at armored vehicles?
    Asking such questions, it is difficult to consider smart. hi
  6. +1
    9 November 2022 06: 50
    Author +! With an article about sniper rifles in the Russian army, he simply showed what is generally happening with the acquisition of weapons and equipment of the Russian army. Just small arms is the most obvious example. It’s just that critics are periodically not allowed to study TTT (tactical technical requirements) for newly developed equipment in the interests of the Moscow Region. There are such "pearls". We have entered the era of effective managers and competent military experts. As my wife says, we will soon get to the point where many technical things will be considered magic, and she works in science and sees the quirks of the "young leadership growth" every day. So the author is right, the article is relevant, it just needs to be understood correctly.
  7. -1
    9 November 2022 07: 51
    Sub-caliber bullets for assault rifles have long been known. If desired, you can give each infantryman a clip. And he will make a sieve out of an armored car
  8. +1
    9 November 2022 08: 33
    In general, the situation itself is more than strange and striking in its depth: in Russia, people buy not only clothes, shoes, first-aid kits, drones, but also sniper rifles, optics, collimator sights, and cartridges. So to speak - complete self-sufficiency.

    looking at the face of the representative of the financial block of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation S. Mikischenko - there is nothing to be surprised
    I am not a physiognomist, but I am amazed by the faces from the RF Ministry of Defense
  9. +1
    9 November 2022 08: 38
    So far, the leadership of the army is satisfied with the current situation: the army has SVD and SV-98, there is ASVK. If you don't like it, go to merchants and buy whatever you want there.

    yes, there is such a thing - they are trying to drive it into our heads that we should fight for the Motherland like Don Cossacks - with all our own ... but they forget about the preferences (liberties) for them ... i.e. on the face again "substitution of concepts" or double standards
  10. +4
    9 November 2022 11: 41
    Yes, the author wrote everything in general correctly. It just didn't cover the topic a bit. IMHO, the purpose of large-caliber sniper rifles is not armored vehicles, but primarily counter-sniper combat, and only then work on any lightly armored vehicles. Another thing is that the quality of domestic ammunition does not allow us to talk about any high-precision shooting in principle. And the 338 LM ammunition has long been mastered by the Novosibirsk PZ and is mass-produced.
    1. +4
      9 November 2022 16: 39
      Quote: KSVK
      IMHO, the purpose of large-caliber sniper rifles is not armored vehicles, but primarily counter-sniper combat, and only then work on any lightly armored vehicles.

      And why a large-caliber rifle for counter-sniper combat?
      In this fight, 90% of the solution to the problem is to find the position of the sniper. And the task of defeating is solved by the standard weapons of the MSO - 14,5 mm, 30 mm, 100 mm, for a particularly enraged sniper, they may not regret ATGMs.
      For counter-sniper combat, means of detection, communication and target designation are vital. And there is something to hit to the depths of the soul.
  11. +2
    9 November 2022 11: 42
    Instead of a sniper who needs to be selected, trained for years, kept in shape with a rifle optics and a body kit that costs a lot of money at the current stage of civilization, it is much easier to have a bunch of a spotter + adjustable ammunition / UAV (and you don’t need correctable ones for a kilometer or two). And in the event of a loss of a spotter, you can train in six months, and not rush around for years like with a written bag with single gifted shooters.
    Of course, snipers shooting per kilometer are needed, as are "Marksmans". But exchanging a piece of hard-to-produce product for jamming an infantry fighting vehicle turret, well, that's just it.
    1. +4
      9 November 2022 13: 17
      Somewhere it came across that the cost of the BMP-3 was about 90 million rubles. Even if the BMP-2 is half the price, how does this compare with the cost of a rifle and the cost of training a sniper.
  12. +3
    9 November 2022 12: 09
    A civilian man has been shooting the same rifle and cartridge for years. I went to the army, changed weapons and there are no longer those naviiks. Risk your life ? No, it's easier to take a shot specimen.
  13. +2
    9 November 2022 12: 45
    Sniper vs BMP: is it necessary at all?

    Counter question - and if it can, then why not? It's just that legs grow not from a rifle, but from a change in the situation on the battlefield. Anti-material rifles did not just appear.
    The trend of the increasing introduction of computer technology on the battlefield has already led to the fact that small arms (that is, available to a fighter, even if not Russian) can confidently hit targets at noticeably greater ranges than before, in addition, the security of fighters has noticeably increased from defeat.
    All this together leads to the need to significantly increase the energy of the shot in order to hit protected targets at the ranges that have become available. Then, at shorter ranges, you have the opportunity to hit more protected targets. Well, why not use it?
    Just because we don't get it yet doesn't mean others won't use it.
    And, yes, it is not the BMP armor that is affected by the rifle, but its driver behind the armor, or the gunner in the turret, or the engine. These targets are no less than those that the sniper hits "normally", i.e. they do not present additional difficulties if the rifle pierces the armor.
  14. +2
    9 November 2022 12: 56
    Rather, instead of RPGs, there will be cheap short-range kamikaze drones (five kilometers) with light acc and homing. The drone operator will only have to launch it without leaning out, then find and indicate the target on the screen.
    1. 0
      9 November 2022 14: 59
      The reconnaissance drone will give the coordinates, and it will be able to highlight.
  15. Alf
    +2
    9 November 2022 13: 00
    This is clear. And the bullet too. For example, Lobaev's "Dusk" costs from two million rubles. Sights "pull" about the same amount for a set of "day / night". Ammo cost...

    Plus, a person who shoots from such a rifle is also a very expensive specialist.

    As a result, shooting from such a rifle at a distance of 1,5-2 km should at least pay for everything. Each shot has a cost in weapon costs and depreciation. The trunk, as it were, is not eternal, is it?

    Any armored vehicle can be hit with a much greater effect by the most common ATGM at such a distance.

    As I understand it, ATGMs are free?
    Plus, a person who shoots from such a rifle is also a very expensive specialist.

    And can any person, even a civilian, shoot from an anti-tank system? Although, maybe he can shoot, as they say, you don’t need to press a big button, but to hit it?
  16. 0
    9 November 2022 14: 40
    The article forgot about the "silver" bullet Raufoss Mk 211.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raufoss_Mk_211
  17. +2
    9 November 2022 14: 56
    Quote: Dedok
    yes, there is such a thing - they are trying to drive it into our heads that we should fight for the Motherland like Don Cossacks - with all our own ... but they forget about the preferences (liberties) for them ... i.e. on the face again "substitution of concepts" or double standards

    In the XNUMXth century, the boyars received land and money and were obliged to appear on horseback and in arms with their detachment. For some reason, I don’t observe the divisions of Gazprom, Rosneft, Sberbank, VTB and nominal Boris Rotenberg ... But they offer exactly the opposite. you are at war, and we continue to saw babos.
    1. +2
      9 November 2022 16: 46
      Quote: clou
      In the XNUMXth century, the boyars received land and money and were obliged to appear on horseback and in arms with their detachment. For some reason, I don’t observe divisions of Gazprom, Rosneft, Sberbank, VTB and named Boris Rotenberg ...

      Well, we know the two boyars for sure. smile

  18. +7
    9 November 2022 15: 50
    It's time to come up with a "error response" function.
    If the author in his article made a bunch of assumptions of errors and forgeries. And EVERYONE noticed it in the comments. Then he cannot write a new article on the desired topic until he writes an answer article in which he admits all his mistakes, assumptions and haste
  19. +2
    9 November 2022 16: 35
    Sniper vs BMP: is it necessary at all?

    As the saying goes, "In the absence of fish, you yourself will become cancer!" laughing lol
    Well, in the case - KPVT at a distance of 2 km easily and naturally makes minced meat from BMPs, it has been tested for decades good Can be installed up to the UAZ-tadpole - verified by the Mujahideen in Afghanistan
    1. +4
      9 November 2022 17: 52
      Who checked? Oh, these storytellers to me :) But D.N. Bolotin in the book "Soviet Small Arms" and "The History of Soviet Small Arms and Cartridges" put it this way:
      “Soviet anti-tank guns were designed for powerful cartridges with a hardened steel core (B-32) and a ceramic-metal core (BS-41), which, along with high armor penetration, had a good incendiary effect. They reliably hit enemy light and medium tanks when they hit the gas tank, engine compartment and ammunition, penetrating 35-40 mm armor at a distance of up to 300 m.

      Well, i.e. already at 1 km KPVT 100% will not penetrate the frontal armor of the infantry fighting vehicle. And you tell stories about 2 km. And the KPVT bolted to the jeep is a very, very crooked thing in terms of accuracy. God forbid one shot at least get somewhere. The Mujahideen mostly had DShKs. So DShK bullets, even from 50 m, do not penetrate the frontal armor of the infantry fighting vehicle (including the armor of the tower).
      1. -1
        9 November 2022 20: 31
        4 bullets hitting from a distance of a kilometer and a half from top to bottom on the roof and sides of the infantry fighting vehicle make minced meat inside. for they do not come out of the armored personnel carrier through and through, but ricochet inside. 5 Afghans told people, one of them from the "funeral team"
        1. +1
          11 November 2022 01: 27
          What other ,, funeral teams, ,, who told you, what kind of ,, Afghans ?,, You were not,, across the river, so don’t whistle about what you have no idea. 4 bullets blah blah .... you didn’t see it with your own eyes, because you didn’t smell there, so why the hell are you replicating this nonsense? Worse than women - gossips ....
          1. 0
            11 November 2022 12: 40
            Quote: berd
            What other ,, funeral teams, ,, who told you, what kind of ,, Afghans ?,, You were not,, across the river, so don’t whistle about what you have no idea. 4 bullets blah blah .... you didn’t see it with your own eyes, because you didn’t smell there, so why the hell are you replicating this nonsense? Worse than women - gossips ....

            1. Yes, I was not in Afghanistan, the Motherland considered that I had to repay her debt in the autobat, serving our "vigorous loaves" soldier
            2. But three of my friends were there, and I believe their stories, then there were no tyrnets, and they told what they themselves saw and what they participated in.
            3. Yes, officially, of course, my friend served in a hospital security platoon. Well, in fact, this was the "funeral team" for us. From going to the place of emergency, collecting what was left of our fighters around the district, collecting the remains as completely as possible into one body and soldering them into a zinc coffin to be sent to the Union ... And he told me how an infantry fighting vehicle was brought to the hospital on a hitch , outwardly kissing, with the exception of 4 holes ... And he was most directly involved in getting the bodies of our fighters to collecting body parts from zinc coffins ... By the way, he spent less than a year in Afghanistan, they came to one outpost to collect 200- x, the spirits and their mortars were covered, shell-shocked and demibilized, an absolutely gray-haired alcoholic at 19,5 !!! years recourse
            1. +2
              11 November 2022 14: 52
              You are the usual yap. You even spread fables not of your own composition, but repeat someone else's nonsense, and puff up something else. And ,, your friend ,, from the hospital ,, - the same filthy nonsense --- no ,, remnants ,, he, ,, did not collect . losses of 1 SME 682 SMEs in the Khazar gorge (Panjer Valley) --- 47 people died there, our boys pulled out all the bodies, there were no teams from hospitals close to 100 km away !! Our losses, across the river, are actually not that great - and rear figures like your friend from the hospital guards are scratching suckers on the ears over a glass, like you - what cool warriors they are !!! I served in that regiment (682 MSP) for 2 full years, and everything is fine with me --- I don’t smoke and I don’t drink., and I never tell, like, heroic, actually false stories from of the past .
  20. 0
    9 November 2022 17: 58
    Yes, already attach the optics and the silencer to the KPV (Tank).
    And call it CPVS, like a sniper.
    One bullet or a heel is not so important, but the lethality and armor penetration are epic.
  21. +2
    9 November 2022 21: 15
    with a successful shot, the sniper jammed the BMP turret.

    some crap ...
    it's hard to imagine where you need to get to jam the tower ...
    if we are talking about a "sniper" rifle, and not about newfangled large-caliber monsters ...
    speaking of a classic sniper, he can easily disable modern armored vehicles ...
    considering that it is all hung with devices of various kinds of vision, from a sight to other "measures" ...
    it’s enough to hit the sight - and that’s it, the tank is considered out of order, especially if the modules are uninhabited ...
    moreover, according to the news from the fields, the dill have "reserves", while ours have nothing at all ...
    and jam the tower ... dastish fantastic ...
  22. TIR
    +1
    9 November 2022 22: 25
    Microwave and AK-12 generally consider a step backwards. With their introduction into the troops, they only block completely breakthrough rifles and machine guns. So to speak, for another 50 years we are left with weapons of the 1950s model. Ergonomics should not be considered a breakthrough. You need to look at the most important thing np ammo and barrel
  23. -1
    10 November 2022 22: 03
    Sniper vs BMP? Like why, when there are ATGMs and grenade launchers? And then, that it is better to be able and not need, than to need, but not be able to.
  24. 0
    15 November 2022 10: 27
    Ukrainian special forces destroyed two Russian anti-missile combat vehicles with precise strikes
  25. 0
    21 November 2022 15: 10
    The article, as well as most of the articles of this author, is very chaotic. Weapons are weapons. And its goal is any material object that it hits. If a rifle can hit armored vehicles or its crew / troops. and this solves the combat mission - why not? It is foolish to judge the cost of a rifle, and compare its cost with an ATGM. Military equipment is more expensive, and the damage causes much more than the cost of a rifle.
    The article is rubbish. It is a pity that you can not put minuses to the authors
  26. -1
    14 December 2022 20: 17
    Still, it's better to kill tanks by throwing stones. When the stone kg. hits the armor of the tank with a terrible sound on 20, then we can already consider him killed. For the whole carriage is glued to the place on which, out of fear, it crouched and stuck, just like the field clerk Oto Katz. You can wash them off the tank only with a strong jet or tear them off with a lift, along with a sticky place.
  27. 0
    30 December 2022 13: 35
    "Sniper vs BMP: is it necessary at all?" Let's start with the fact that 12,7 anti-materiel rifles were created, in particular, to combat armored vehicles. And if there is no anti-tank system at hand, but there is a 12,7 rifle, then why not use it against infantry fighting vehicles.
    1. -1
      6 January 2023 08: 05
      And if there is no anti-tank system at hand, but there is a 12,7 rifle, then why not use it against infantry fighting vehicles.
      Well, at least by the fact that large-caliber rifles have such DTs that in most cases they completely unmask the position. And taking into account the probability of hitting an infantry fighting vehicle and its weapons with which it will open return fire ... The problem is not that it cannot be changed, but how then to fight in order to remain whole yourself. Let's say, so-so Russian roulette, with far more than one cartridge in the drum.
  28. 0
    23 January 2023 22: 54
    A rifle is needed to kill a driver: a diesel locomotive, an electric train. A cargo plane pilot. A truck driver. But then the war will end quickly. That's all.
  29. 0
    28 January 2023 02: 00
    The author certainly gave jazz.
    Then he has 14,5 * 118,
    Then his osv-96 is not in service. In fact, there is a lot more, just osv-96 is the very first and massive, it is strange that the author has never heard of them.
    There is a whole series of svds, including svd-k ...
    Well, rifles and in caliber 7,62 make no sense to work ...
    But anti-material rifles are anti-material for that, in order to work according to technology, and not l / s.
    The author also does not know about anti-tank rifles. Not only did pz4 not appear, but were already there at the beginning of the war, but the guns did not go away and were used, including in the battle with the Japanese ... It’s just that no one fired them at medium and heavy tanks, but there were enough targets, including like German armored personnel carriers ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"