Russian Sniper Rifles

I hope they put into service a development of the SVU since bullpup inproves accuracy and handling by a huge margin.

I've read that the low performance over long ranges with the KSVK is due to there only being machine gun ammo to fire from it.

Has this problem been fixed? If not, are there any steps being taken to do so?

The Russians know how to make match ammo, the main problem for the Russian soldiers was that while the 12.7 x 108mm round is common, actually accurate rounds were quite rare because during the 1990s there were not many weapons designed for single shot accurate long range use.

The accurate ammo was expensive because it was not in mass production because there simply were not enough accurate 12.7 x 108mm rifles to make it commercially viable.

Lots of new weapons in this calibre however have made production of accurate ammo worth while in a range of round types... so if you use the correct ammo the accuracy of these weapons is much much better than with standard MG ammo.

Obviously with MG ammo you can still hit the target, but you do it with Kord where a burst of rounds ensures a hit rather than accuracy.

I hope they put into service a development of the SVU since bullpup inproves accuracy and handling by a huge margin.

Actually the SVDU has a shorter barrel than normal to make it even more compact.

Its purpose is for use by police units and its accurate range is probably about 400m or so, which is plenty for the police, but is shorter than for the standard rifle which is about 600m to about 800m depending on the rifle and the ammo and the shooter.


I have read that they are making another bullpup version with a much longer barrel for longer range accuracy. The bullpup configuration in this case is not to make the weapon compact, but to allow a very long barrel without ending up with a very very long rifle.

I rather suspect that for extreme accuracy they will go for a bolt action and to get range it will likely be in 338LM calibre.

A semi automatic SVD variant might be used in situations where rate of fire is important, but it is equally possible that a 7.62 x 54Rmm AK12 might be used as a spotters rifle.

Actually the SVDU has a shorter barrel than normal to make it even more compact.

Its purpose is for use by police units and its accurate range is probably about 400m or so, which is plenty for the police, but is shorter than for the standard rifle which is about 600m to about 800m depending on the rifle and the ammo and the shooter.


I have read that they are making another bullpup version with a much longer barrel for longer range accuracy. The bullpup configuration in this case is not to make the weapon compact, but to allow a very long barrel without ending up with a very very long rifle.

I rather suspect that for extreme accuracy they will go for a bolt action and to get range it will likely be in 338LM calibre.

A semi automatic SVD variant might be used in situations where rate of fire is important, but it is equally possible that a 7.62 x 54Rmm AK12 might be used as a spotters rifle.

Damn why since the bullpup is the best layout ever there still isnt single bullpup weapon in service with the russian army when examples have been available since the early 90s?

Mainly because the AK is already a good rifle and they have had lots of other things that needed money before they go replacing something that already does the job.

From what I can tell they are introducing the ADS and some units probably already use the Groza too.

The bullpup layout rifles are not super weapons that are perfect.

They tend to either be rear heavy or balanced on the pistol grip, which should make pointing the barrel faster, but some people prefer to have the weight of the rifle they are using in their front hand rather than the pistol grip hand.

The main purpose for the development of the Groza as to be able to add a 40mm grenade launcher without making the weapon too front heavy.

The main problems with bullpups is the short sight base for iron sights.

This of course is best solved by issuing such rifles with scopes which makes shooting easier anyway, though a cheap collimator or reflex sight would do just as well.

http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/23165/

To the end of the year NPZ will supply to the Russian MoD more than 250 laser range finders LDM-28K , more than 250 night monoculars PN-21K and more than 150 thermal imaging monoculars PT-2.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:I hope they put into service a development of the SVU since bullpup inproves accuracy and handling by a huge margin.

Who told you that? A bullpup configuration's advantage is a reduction of the length of the firearm. It has nothing to do with accuracy.

Who told you that? A bullpup configuration's advantage is a reduction of the length of the firearm. It has nothing to do with accuracy.

Normally I would fully agree with you... as I have above, but I think their might be a special case here.

Just looking at the models of the SVD that were adapted to use the new 6 x 49mm round they were looking at to replace the 7.62 x 54R round both weapons have rather long barrels and straight magazines.

Now if you need a very long barrel and have straight magazines the bullpup layout becomes a useful way of preventing the entire rifle from being too long and cumbersome without sacrificing barrel length.

I have no evidence to prove it, but I rather suspect that they might be working on a new model SVDU with a barrel that is actually longer than the SVD, but a shorter weapon overall because of the bullpup design, in a new calibre.

The straight magazines makes it easier to insert and remove without hitting the pistol grip like curved mags sometimes do.

Otherwise, I agree, the bullpup layout is mainly for making a full length barrel rifle as compact as a carbine.

BTW Thanks for posting that article Medo:

PT2

http://www.npzoptics.com/catalog/in_progress/pt_2/

PN21K

http://www.npzoptics.com/catalog/night_optics/pn21k/

Can't find an entry for a 28K but this laser range finder/ballistics computer is probably related:

LDM-2VK

http://www.npzoptics.com/catalog/in_progress/ldm2b_strelec/

New video from orsis sniper rifle.

Buy new sniper rifles will begin in 2013
The Russian Defense Ministry in 2013 will buy new Russian-made sniper rifle. On this, as reported by RIA Novosti , said Deputy Defense Minister of Russia Yuri Borisov. According to him, we are, in particular, is a new sniper complex 6S8-1 12.7-millimeter production plant Degtyarev. In addition, the possibility of buying sniper rifles Orsis of "Survey Systems."

Since 2014, the Russian Defense Ministry plans to start buying the upgraded sniper rifle Dragunov 7.62 millimeter. In addition, the project also incorporated the state defense order purchase upgraded VSS 9 mm caliber and large-caliber sniper rifles KAFP 12.7 millimeters. Borisov also noted that the military are going to buy a "completely new electro-optical sights for sniper complexes."

In December 2012, the representative of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Airborne Forces Col. Alexander Kucherenko said that the Special Forces Airborne Forces adopted the 30 sniper rifles production Austrian Steyr Mannlicher. Mannlicher rifles were the first foreign production of such weapons which came to the Navy. Purchase of rifles started in late 2010.

http://lenta.ru/news/2012/12/26/sniper/

MOSCOW, December 26 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian Defense Ministry will purchase new sniper rifles next year, Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov said on Wednesday.

Under the arms procurement program for 2013, Degtyarev 6S8-1 12.7-mm rifles will be bought for the Russian Armed Forces and from 2014 the ministry will start buying Dragunov 7.62-mm, VSS 9-mm and ASVK 12.7-mm rifles, as well as new optical-electronic sights he said.

The ministry will also consider buying Orsis rifles, he added.

Commenting on the procurement of arms and military equipment this year, Borisov said the Armed Forces will receive 40 warplanes, 127 helicopters, 34 air-defense radar stations, new air-defense missile systems and other equipment before the end of the current year.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin earlier said Russia will soon start producing four new sets of sniper equipment, including surveillance and detection tools, means of suppression and passive protection for snipers.

The first set is designed for use at ranges up to 800 meters, the second – over 800 meters, the third – for snipers in urban police operations, and the fourth – for sniper training.

The sets are being developed by a special team at the Tochmash Research Institute. The team includes instructors from Russia’s special forces who are overseeing the demands for weapons performance.

The Russian military is planning to deploy at least 1,000 snipers by 2016 to motorized rifle and tank brigades. They will be able to hit targets at a distance of 1-2 kilometers.

The next generation of snipers will be recruited from among contract servicemen and undergo long periods of training.

Last December, more than 30 Austrian-manufactured sniper rifles were adopted for service with Russia’s Airborne Forces special task units.

Those were the first foreign made rifles to be officially used by this branch of service.

The rifles were delivered under a 2010 contract. Judging from the specifications provided by the military, the rifle in question could be the Steyr-Mannlicher SSG-69, using 7.62mm rounds with a 10-round magazine and an effective range of more than 2,000 meters.

http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20121226/178415186.html

So from the above they are buying the bullpup bolt action KVSK from Degtyarev in 50 cal... http://world.guns.ru/sniper/large-caliber-sniper-rifles/rus/ksvk-e.html and they are also buying new Dragunovs (presumably the new SVDS with Pic rails and built in bipod and synthetic furnature) as well as new model VSS http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sniper-rifles/rus/vss-e.html and VSSK http://world.guns.ru/sniper/large-caliber-sniper-rifles/rus/vks-vssk-vychlop-e.html and is thinking about Orsis rifles.

No mention of SV-98 or SV-338.

They do mention sophisticated optoelectronic sights and 4 sniper kits, one optimised for up to 800m range (much like what the west calls a designated marksman kit) another up to 2km range (western sniper), plus police kit for civilian urban use (that might include suppressed weapons and other exotic weapons like the SV-99), and finally a training kit.

Sounds cool.

GarryB wrote:The Russians really have 3 obvious options, they can do what the South Africans did and take an old relatively low velocity 20mm cannon shell (20 x 82mm) for HE capacity and the high velocity anti tank rifle round (14.5 x 115mm) and base the gun on these two rounds with different barrels and bolts and magazines for each.

That way you could choose for armour penetration or HE power depending on the intended target.

(HE would be effective out to about 1.6km, but would have higher velocity and flatter more accurate shooting than a 30mm or 40mm grenade launcher. The 14.5mm round could be made to be effective to 2.5km or more as it is a very powerful round, though originally it was actually meant for armour penetration at ranges of 300m or less.)

This direction would suit the Russians as they also have the 23 x 115mm shell that was the 14.5mm round necked out to use the 23mm shell used in the 23 x 152mm gun of the Il-2 shturmovick. This is a low velocity round (about 700m/s) with a large heavy projectile that could be made to carry a heavy HE payload and the magazines and bolt could be made interchangable with just a separate barrel for each calibre.
23mm calibre rounds were widely used on Russian and Soviet aircraft and are still used today on the latest model Hind with a twin 23mm cannon in a chin turret.

It also offers the potential to upgrade KPV 14.5mm HMGs to KPVB 23mm light cannon in light Russian armoured vehicle... they would give up anti armour performance for superior HE effect.

The second option of course is to create a new round from scratch using modern technology designed especially for the role, which might make it hard to sell internationally.

A third option of course would be to use the old WWII SHVAK 20 x 99mm rimmed round.

The B-20 automatic cannon fired the 20 x 99mm round full auto and weighed in at about 25kgs, so there should be room to reduce weight by removing the automatic firing mechanism and going for a bolt action.

I still dont understand why the russians use 12,7mm for their AM rifles instead of 14,5 mm , a caliber that has been proven to work well for anti materiel purposes with the PTRS and PTRD, and worst of all, I havent seemed to have heard of any russian talks to creat an AM rifle that uses the completely superior 14,5mm cartridge
Fortunately there has been progress made with the creation of the 50. subsonic silenced VKS vykhlop AM rifle with no analogues(exept some freaky german prototypes I think). Can that thing be fired from the shoulder while standing?

Can anyone tell me why russia lacked any dedicated sniper rifle during the cold war and only started creating them in the 90s?

I still dont understand why the russians use 12,7mm for their AM rifles instead of 14,5 mm , a caliber that has been proven to work well for anti materiel purposes with the PTRS and PTRD, and worst of all, I havent seemed to have heard of any russian talks to creat an AM rifle that uses the completely superior 14,5mm cartridge

The 14.5mm round is twice as "powerful" as the 50 cal, but it is also bigger and heavier and requires bigger and heavier weapons to use it. To make it man portable they have chosen publicly to use 12.7mm calibre weapons which can perform the role required of destroying material out to about 1.5km.

For the 14.5mm to be used the weapons would be bigger, heavier, and more expensive.

Another factor is ammo, there is plenty of 12.7mm projectiles available that are precision cast in bronze... not so many in 14.5mm which is a HMG round.

Personally I actually think they might have a few 14.5mm weapons but they probably don't want to reveal their existence just yet.

In a 23 x 115mm model they could develop a smoothbore version with a sabot design that is highly loaded with powerful propellent... the larger the calibre the more energy you can push down the barrel, so a 23mm calibre barrel with the same case as the 14.5mm round can get higher velocities with heavier projectiles for better penetration results... the smoothbore means higher velocities and a lighter barrel... with such a SLAP round you could probably get 50-60mm penetration at 1.5km with the right projectile.

Can that thing be fired from the shoulder while standing?

I would expect so, though being a sniper rifle it will more likely be fired from a prone position using a bipod.

Can anyone tell me why russia lacked any dedicated sniper rifle during the cold war and only started creating them in the 90s?

The Soviet Union was the first country in the world to design and build and put into service a custom designed dedicated sniper rifle. Previous rifles were based on existing service rifles and were inferior to dedicated designs like the SVD.

The VSS was also in service during the cold war too.

The main difference between east and west was that the Soviets were less enamoured with very long range sniper shots like the west was.

So your're saying the USSR actually had 50. sniper rifles?
The SVD is considered a marksman weapon by post ww2 standards, not a sniper rifle. It was just like the scoped M-14. So technically the USSR had only marksmen , not snipers.

So your're saying the USSR actually had 50. sniper rifles?

They actually had 14.5mm sniper rifles... the difference was that they used them in cities like the battle of Stalingrad... they didn't have the accuracy for shooting at targets 2km away, but they had the power to blast through thick brick walls across the street and kill the German MG team behind it. (The rifles I am referring to were the PTRS-41 and PTRD-41 anti tank rifles which were used against all sorts of targets including armoured ones in both WWII and the Korean war.

The US use of 50 cal sniper rifles actually originated from captured 14.5mm anti tank rifles captured in Korea that were rebored to 12.7 x 99mm. Before that they were experimenting with 50 cal HMGs firing single shots.

The 12.7mm bolt action rifle was tested during the end of the cold war after certain 12.7 cal western rifles were used against Soviet forces in Afghanistan.

The SVD is considered a marksman weapon by post ww2 standards, not a sniper rifle. It was just like the scoped M-14. So technically the USSR had only marksmen , not snipers.

The west has different criteria... are you going to use western criteria to define Soviet systems or Soviet criteria?

The SVD was a sniper rifle. If it was a western rifle it would likely have been designed to hit targets at 1km, but it isn't.

It is not like an M14 with a scope because an M14 is just an M1 with a proper box magazine. The Soviet equivalent of an M14 with a scope is a Tokarev ST-40 with a scope and even then it was a sniper rifle.

The SVD is a custom designed sniper rifle, there is no standard battle rifle version and never will be.

The fact that there is no western equivalent means they might call it a DMR, but that just shows the limitation and inflexibility of the west.

if the soviets had sniper rifles that could hit targets at 1+ km in afghanistan they would've had a much easier time.

How many kills actually happen at that range? Several a year?

I don't think it would have changed much.

Killing at 1km+ is easy... it is called artillery.

To use a rifle to do it, it suddenly becomes very expensive... you need a very high quality rifle and very high quality ammo, and very high quality training, and even then in the mountains there is no guarantee of a kill.

Trade that expensive rifle and those 2-3 rounds of expensive ammo and years of training for a PKM or PKP and 50 rounds, or more interestingly replace it for a Metis-M launcher with a 2km range and power to take out a vehicle or room with a HE warhead.

Don't get me wrong... a sniper that can kill at 1.5km is a fearsome thing, but the main problem in Afghanistan was not killing at long range, it was working out the fighters on your side, the fighters on their side and the civilians... which was hard because many jumped from state to state rapidly and frequently.

The US military used traps... put some wires and electronic components on the ground and set up a sniper team nearby. Anyone who picks up the bait is fair game... pretty easy to get lots of kills that way. They also put weapons and other things on the ground... the penalty for picking them up was death...

Their problem was that if they didn't do that they would have very little to shoot at... they needed to make the bad guys stand out... even though most responsible adults would pick up live ammo left in the street so children wouldn't find it and play with it.... bang.

Do you think the soviets, with their lack would be in a disadvantage against NATO on a european battlefield?

GarryB wrote:Killing at 1km+ is easy... it is called artillery.

Did soviet grunts have the authority to call in arty strikes?

On a little offtopic: I've read that one of the main disadvantages of the soviet airforce was its complete lack of coordination with the ground forces while western and german soldiers could call in CAS. This was one of the reason the soviets lost so much tanks at Kursk. In afghanistan and chechnya could the soviet or russian army infantry and tankmen call for air support or was for the high command to decide where its necessary?

German soldiers calling in CAS? What sort of fantasies are these?

The average German officer, let alone soldier, had zero actual power to call in airstrikes.
This isn't Call of Duty, Modern Warfare.
Large scale air operations were carried out and planned strategically; air power was not a responsive tool yet.

Most tanks that the USSR lost @ Kursk where to Anti-Tank guns and tanks, not air power.

Do you think the soviets, with their lack would be in a disadvantage against NATO on a european battlefield?

The most significant effect of snipers is the effect on morale and occasionally being able to kill significant soldiers.

In many ways they are a lot like landmines.

On the european battlefield in urban combat snipers on both sides would be devastating... the Soviet snipers might not have the flash and fancy tools, but I suspect they would make up for it in numbers and certainly numbers get results.

It should be noted that when NATO complains about the 5.56mm and talks about the Afghans using Kalashnikovs at 900m they are actually talking about PKMs... a 20-30 round burst at a group of enemy troops can be as effective or even more so than a single well placed shot from 900m. They are also using SVDs.

Did soviet grunts have the authority to call in arty strikes?

HELL NO!

Every time the enemy fired a pistol through a window they would call in an air strike to deal with it...

Brigade commanders can call in artillery and would most likely call that in in preference to anything. They also have very heavy direct fire capacity with their BMP-1s and BMP-3s for taking on targets and of course their tanks have big guns too.

Now that their air support have night vision and precision guided weapons it would now make sense to call in a strike... generally they would have a forward air controller on the ground looking for and crucially identifying targets and perhaps marking them with a laser or passing back a coordinate.

I've read that one of the main disadvantages of the soviet airforce was its complete lack of coordination with the ground forces while western and german soldiers could call in CAS.

Was that Steven J Zaloga by any chance?

It seems the biggest problem with the Soviet Military was that it was not the US Military...

The German air force was largely subordinate to the German army. The Soviet Air Force was a separate entity from the Soviet Army. They had different missions.

For most of the start of WWII till about mid 1943 the Soviet Airforce was badly damaged and spent most of its time trying to slow the Germans down, by about mid 1943 it just started to gain the advantage in the air.

It should be remembered that the Soviet air force was not one force but at least 5. There was the air defence forces (PVO), the long range bomber force, transport, frontal aviation of course, and naval aviation. Frontal aviation included fighters and strike aircraft like the Il-2 that worked with the army to engage enemy air power and to engage ground targets.

This was one of the reason the soviets lost so much tanks at Kursk.

Actually they didn't lose any... they gained quite a few as it was the Germans who retreated that battle. On paper the Germans with their new super Panthers and Tigers should have cleaned up the Soviets, but they did not.

In afghanistan and chechnya could the soviet or russian army infantry and tankmen call for air support or was for the high command to decide where its necessary?

In no army could a lowly infantryman call in air support. The commander of the unit might, but unless it is coordinated with a forward air controller there is just as much chance of getting a blue on blue result as anything else.

http://www.itar-tass.com/c134/711548.html

MVD will buy new Orsis T-5000 rifles - if appropriate ammunition can be produced in Russia.

The quality ammo issue is something they have been working on for some time and certainly needs a solution.

Good to see the Russian rifle is competitive.

I've always wondered if the OSV-96 is more effective than the KSVK. Does the KSVKs bullpup layout give it any advantage?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:I've always wondered if the OSV-96 is more effective than the KSVK. Does the KSVKs bullpup layout give it any advantage?

For this calibre only 1 advantage could be dimentions. But anyways, they are both date back from long time and they are rather outdated today. I would say leave it to ORSIS to create new anti-material rifle. They did artwork with T-5000.