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.
Information