[Drjones]

It may be due solely to all the media coverage they're given, but RPGs seem to be a rather formidable weapon.

I know that our troops do employ some shoulder-fired rockets of sorts, but why don't we use more of them?
:confused:

[444]

We have better stuff than the RPGs being used against us.

Keep in mind one thing. When you hear these "news" stories about Iraq, they tell about American losses. They seldom seem to mention that we are killing them thousands to one. We are doing that with far superior weapons (that isn't the reason, they are simply the tools being used).

[DigMe]

You hear about the RPG's that hit but there are tons of misses with that weapon. During the whole "Blackhawk Down" incident in Mogadishu there were hundreds upon hundreds of RPGs fired that day that were completely useless and hit nothing. Apparently the Somalis had been stockpiling and saving their RPGs and chose that day to pull them all out and use them. They largely missed. However, out of those hundreds two happened to make crucial hits on helicopters. Can you imagine the nightmare if the bad guys had something more accurate?

brad cook

[Pendragon]

They suck.

They are not accurate and the shape charged warhead is designed to spew plasma through metal, not blow up like a pineapple.

They are designed for use against armor and we have way better stuff.

[Megaloman84]

we don't use RPGs because we have these..

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.jpg

And when more firepower is called for, we have bigger things like these, that also happen to be guided.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/javpic2.jpg

[longrifleman]

A minor point on Mogadisu. What goes up must come down. Some estimates of casualties claimed that the RPGs fired into the air killed as many Somalis as our aimed fire. Guess who got blamed for those deaths.

[JShirley]

DrJones,

The RPG (-7, I'm assuming you mean) is inaccurate and unreliable...unlike Comblock rifles and subguns. :)

John

[jimpeel]

RPGs simply go until they hit something -- anything. We use TOW missles that hit exactly what they are aimed at.

[Hoploholic]

Give me a Stinger any day.

[PvtPyle]

Saying the RPG is inaccurate is should be taken with a grain of salt in the context used here. You have a bunch of poorly trained (if they have any formal training at all) illiterate kids using them. I have shot the RPG-2 with fairly new warheads and they are not very accurate, even with pratice. The RPG-7 on the other hand can be a very accurate weapon when properly used. And it doesn't take much pratice. We have new ammo from Grenada and Bulgaria made in the late 90's and as new as 2001. The rounds are powerful for the size of the warhead and with a little bit of practice you can hit targets out past 200m fairly easily. We have Russian, Chinese, Egyptian, Polish, and German RPG-7's here and the Russian and EG tubes are more accurate and user friendly. They are longer and the difuser on the rear is bigger.

Yes we do have better weapons in our inventory. Much better in fact. But the new generation warheads provide a big bang for the buck and if you are going to outfit a rebel force and money is a big consideration, the RPG gives you the best value.

The stinger is a SAM, designed for shooting down aircraft. The RPG and other anti-armor weapons were designed for shooting ground targets, like armor and bunkers.

[Croyance]

In addition to what has been said above, why should we? Finding a valid target seems to be a bigger issue.

[c_yeager]

They are not accurate and the shape charged warhead is designed to spew plasma through metal, not blow up like a pineapple.

They have both Anti-Armour and Anti-Personell warheads for these. The anti personell version does indeed spread around some fun shrapnel.

I think it would be a neat weapon to have against barricaded infantry and light skinned vehicles. We DO have better anti-tank weapons. But we dont seem to have any really good multiperpose rockets for this task. With air-support and artillary we likely wouldnt need to fill that niche. But, if your without such support it would be nice to have something that goes boom instead of bang. I imagine it as a replacement for the bazooka that we don't issue anymore.

I don't know how innacurate they really are. I seem to remember Russian troops training to fire these things at several hundred yards with the expectation of hitting a tank at that range. That seems accurate enough for the platform.

[Hal]

I know that our troops do employ some shoulder-fired rockets of sorts, but why don't we use more of them?

$$$$

'bout a little over a year ago when the US first went into Iraq, CNN(?) showed a clip of our boys knocking out 2 Iraqi hostiles @ something like 500 yards. I don't remember the exact details (sorry). I do remember looking up the cost of the rocket and the launcher tube though. It was something like $100,000. for the tube and $80,000 for the rocket. The first one they tried was a dud, but the second one worked like a charm - it knocked out both Iraqis AND the 2 bulidings they were running back and forth between.

All I could think was "Man, they just spent $360,000. to kill 2 guys. I bet if they would have shown the guys what was about to happen to them, then offered them $25,000 ea and a 7-11 franchise in Atlantic City, to give up, we would have saved a pile of money".

Seriously though, I'm sure we use more "stuff" than they do, and far more than what makes it to the media.

[killermarmot]

What about the L.A.W I know it's intended to be anti tank hense "light antitank weapon" and it's single shot but it's only 5 pounds and packs a 66mm projectile could that be considered a psuedo RPG? or is the warhead completely diferent. Which brings me to is RPG actually a specific series of weapons or is it a category of weapons I.E. is RPG analagous to a Ford a ford F-150 or analagous to pickup truck. Hope I made me question clear

[TCD]

What about the L.A.W I know it's intended to be anti tank hense "light antitank weapon" and it's single shot but it's only 5 pounds and packs a 66mm projectile could that be considered a psuedo RPG? or is the warhead completely diferent. Which brings me to is RPG actually a specific series of weapons or is it a category of weapons I.E. is RPG analagous to a Ford a ford F-150 or analagous to pickup truck. Hope I made me question clear


Well, RPG is for Rocket Proppelled Gernade(ignore the bad spelling) so concivablly, many weapons systems would qualify, however, there are a specific line of "RPG - #" so, in my mind its both, but somebody might want to verify this(I could be totally wrong)

I believe we ditched the LAW due to the fact that we had better weapon systems availible.

[Double Naught Spy]

Okay, so while we do have better stuff than RPGs, you don't see us using them much against foot combatants. As noted by HAL, it is just way too much technology and expense, the proverbial cannon to swat a fly.

Probably a closer comparison is our grenade launcher.

[spartacus2002]

Having just seen The Alamo last night in the movie theaters, I bet Davy Crockett would have given his eyeteeth for some RPGs, no matter how crappy....

[MrMurphy]

We haven't used the LAW for over a decade at least. The AT-4 is the replacement (more bang, bigger, heavier, kills most of what you shoot at). The nearest RPG-like weapon we have is the Marine Corps's SMAUW (or SMAW?) Which if I remember right is shoulder launched medium assault weapon? Something like that. A bit bigger, fires a bigger warhead, and is built just for whacking bunkers, light armored vehicles, machine guns, etc (what the RPG is generally used for) weighs about 20lbs or so if i remember right (handled one at the El Toro airshow about eight years ago). It's a launcher with replaceable rockets (not a one-shot throwaway weapon like the AT-4).

[telewinz]

Too cheap and simple and it wasn't designed by an American or ally.

[Preacherman]

South Africa captured so many RPG-7's during the wars of the 1970's and 1980's that it became the standard-issue weapon in its class. They also developed some fairly nifty new projectiles for it, including an armor-piercing rocket that significantly improved on the Russian exemplar, a bunker-busting warhead, and an anti-personnel warhead with some thousands of ball-bearings in it.

A favorite anti-ambush tactic among some South African units became the use of up to a dozen RPG-7's fired simultaneously into the ambush position, spaced out like buttons, each one using an anti-personnel warhead. The impact of upwards of 50,000 high-speed ball-bearings tended to make that ambush an instant piece of history...

:what: :eek: :uhoh:

[seeker_two]

We have better stuff than the RPGs being used against us.

Keep in mind one thing. When you hear these "news" stories about Iraq, they tell about American losses. They seldom seem to mention that we are killing them thousands to one. We are doing that with far superior weapons (that isn't the reason, they are simply the tools being used).

444 got it in one. It's a lot easier to hump a lot of light grenades that can be fired from the M203 attached to your M4 than to lug around an RPG & a couple of spare warheads w/ your rifle. Plus, you can always call in for artillery & air strikes...:evil:

And I'm glad someone else is mentioning our kill ratios. The only news report I've heard (from Fox News, of course) has been that our guys have been engaging the enemy so successfully that the ratio of Muslim losses to coalition losses has been something like 10-20 to 1. :what:

Now that's good shooting, guys....:cool:

[bad_dad_brad]

Check it out. Javelin test firing. Awesome. Large file 5meg so dial-ups beware.

http://www.technicalpimps.com/movies/JavelinLiveFire.mpg

[killermarmot]

That is totaly awesome, I think I need 5 of em

[Citadel99]

The M203 is a simply better, more accurate weapon. I typical rifle squad has two. Just think, the ability to have an RPG attached to your rifle. Yep, I think we've thought this one through already.

If you ever have a chance to see a M203 live fire, it's pretty impressive. With a little practice it's very easy to lob those rounds wherever you want.

But my favorite is the Mark 19...not exactly man portable though.

Mark

[FRIENDLY]

I thought the most dangerous weapon in the US armoury was the radio. when you have the backup up to 30x 1000 bombs from a B52 and everything in between who needs a RPG

[telcom911]

the Marines always have available the Mk IVV, a 40mm full auto grenade launcher found on the top of Marine tracks and some hummers, fun- you better belive it. five minutes of concentrated fire with one of these and resistance is very, very hard to find. Did I mention FUN :D

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/marinefacts/mk19.gif Manufacturer: Saco Defense Industries
Length: 43.1 inches (109.47 centimeters)
Weight:
Gun: 72.5 pounds (32.92 kilograms)
Cradle (MK64 Mod 5): 21.0 pounds (9.53 kilograms)
Tripod: 44.0 pounds (19.98 kilograms)
Total: 137.5 pounds (62.43 kilograms)
Muzzle velocity: 790 feet (240.69 meters) per second
Bore diameter: 40mm
Maximum range: 2200 meters
Maximum effective range: 1600 meters
Rates of fire:
Cyclic: 325-375 rounds per minute
Rapid: 60 rounds per minute
Sustained: 40 rounds per minute
Unit Replacement Cost: $13,758

Features: The MK19 40mm machine gun, MOD 3 is an air-cooled, disintegrating metallic link-belt fed, blowback operated, fully automatic weapon and is crew transportable over short distances with limited amounts of ammunition. It can fire a variety of 40mm grenades. The M430 HEDP 40mm grenade will pierce armor up to 2 inches thick, and will produce fragments to kill personnel within 5 meters and wound personnel within 15 meters of the point of impact. Associated components are: MK64 Cradle Mount, MOD 5; M3 Tripod Mount; and the AN/TVS-5 Night Vision Sight. The MK19 also mounts in the up-gunned weapons station of the LVTP7A1 model of the AAV and vehicle ring mounts.

Background: The MK19 was originally developed to provide the U.S. Navy with an effective riverine patrol weapon in Vietnam. A Product Improvement Program was initiated in the late 1970s resulting in the MK19 Mod 3.

[Zach S]

It was something like $100,000. for the tube and $80,000 for the rocket. The first one they tried was a dud, but the second one worked like a charm - it knocked out both Iraqis AND the 2 bulidings they were running back and forth between.
Boy I'd be pissed if I paid 80 grand for a dud...

[Teufelhunden]

I thought the most dangerous weapon in the US armoury was the radio. when you have the backup up to 30x 1000 bombs from a B52 and everything in between who needs a RPG

From a Marine Corps Field Radio Operator, AMEN to that!

-Teuf

[Double Naught Spy]

The problem with radios is that they are not always attached to B52s.

Put another way, where are the B52s needed by our radio wielding troops in Iraq right now?

There were no B52s attached to radios in Somalia and even attached to choppers, the radios only provided a limited link to help as the choppers were quite limited in the tasks they could perform and often the folks on the ground were somewhat confused as to their own actual locations.

Called in air strikes when there is not an active cap are not effective against short duration, small number of attackers-type ambushes or situations where there are large numbers of non-combatants in the immediate vicinity. Immediate response is only going to come from resources available at that moment in the hands of those being ambushed.

[foghornl]

From Zach S post above:

Boy I'd be pissed if I paid 80 grand for a dud... Did we recover the "dud" and ask for a warranty replacement ? ? ? ? ?

/////Wise N. Hiemer mode off

[rich2u]

We also have the 40mm automatic grenade launcher. If I'm not mistaken its usually mounted on an armored vehicle or hummer. The thing can lob out dozens per minute"anyone know the exact rate of fire?" makes an rpg look like a joke. edited to say never mind I didn't read all the posts :banghead: They even have a nifty picture of the little darlin...

[Stickman]

Marines Use Low-Tech Skills to Kill 100 in Urban Battle

With no Marines killed (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/15/international/middleeast/15URBA.html?ex=1083069471&ei=1&en=8ec967a4743f67db)

Note some of the tactics used by the Marines. You can rest assured these guys are kicking ass and taking names, regardless of what the lib news says otherwise.

And my favorite quote: "Last night, they were all around us — in front of us, in back of us, everywhere," said Lt. Lewis Langella, who commands a squad of snipers and infantry on Falluja's outskirts. "They were throwing a whole lot of lead at us, and we were throwing a whole lot back."

Reminds of the one from WW2 where the Americans were surrounded and one of them said something to the effect of "Poor bastards, we've got them right where we want them."

[MRE]

Great article. I have a ton of respect for the soldiers fighting in Iraq.

[Daniel Watters]

Historical Note: Back in 1968, Redstone Arsenal was working on a reverse-engineered RPG-7 known as the XM194.

[goon]

At the very least, I think that we should use some of them.
I think that they should be used to supplement what we are using if it makes sense to the guys on the ground.
I personally feel that we should be using captured weapons and captured tanks to shoot captured ammuntion at the bad guys.
With some of the stockpiles that they are capturing it doesn't make sense to just destroy it.
It should be put to good use against the bad guys.

[TCD]

At the very least, I think that we should use some of them.

well, there was an incident last year where some troops were killed when an RPG malfucntioned on a training range and killed them. Why use inferior products?

[Spark]

Closest analog we use is the Gus, aka the Carl Gustav, aka M3, aka MAAWS.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m3-maws.htm

In service with the Rangers and some other "special" units but not GP for everyone else. Pretty cool

[killermarmot]

has anyone seen, have video or pictures of that H&K grenade launcher machine gun thingy it's called the GMG or just grenade machine gun, I'll bet that thing is fun 330 rounds per min of 40mm X 53 grenades according to H&K's website our military uses em, someone's gotta have some video of it.

http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military-le/special%20applications/gmg.html

[killermarmot]

ok im a total idiot there's a link to the video of it firing right at the bottom of the link i posted :banghead: :rolleyes:

[Citadel99]

Once again, there is no reason for us to use RPGs. Even in combat suport units there are plenty of M203s to take care of business. RPGs are for the most part unstable, inaccurate, and bulky. M203s are none of the above.

Also, nobody, outside of SF, has the proper training on RPGs. What's the backblast area? What do you do with a misfire? Accident waiting to happen.

Mark

[fix]

RPGs are for the most part unstable, inaccurate, and bulky.

Having had the misfortune to have 3 RPGs fired at me in rapid succession at relatively close range, I can attest to their inaccuracy, thank God.

Another problem is the fact that they announce their impending arrival with a certain amount of gusto. Grenades launched from an M203 or an M79...or even a Mk19 are quite stealthy in comparison.

[moa]

Is the M79 still used? That is what we had in the Army in the sixties. I have heard stories of very good accuracy with the M79.

[444]

" there was an incident last year where some troops were killed when an RPG malfucntioned on a training range and killed them. "

There were a couple people killed at Ft. Bliss in the early 80s firing an RPG 7. I am sure there have been others.

I can't see any reason to use inferior weapons when we have state of the art equipment to use instead. Equipment that our men our trained on and proficient with.

[MrMurphy]

Although the 203 rules for general issue, the 79 still floats around in small numbers. There's a cover pic on the current issue of SOF of a grenadier in Afghanistan with a 40mm ammo vest and an M79.

[CZ100B]

The term 'RPG' is actually a generic word. It means any Rocket Propelled Grenade. The first RPGs were the WW2 era Bazooka, Panzerfaust, and Panzerschreck.

The RPG-7 is a fairly old design, with a lot of drawbacks, that make it less than suitable for a top-line military.

The US army uses a variety of single-shot weapons instead of a permanent launch tube with individual rockets, so they do have RPGs, just not RPG-7s.

If the US army feels that it wants an RPG-7 style weapon, there is a modern and very affective alternative already available. The German PanzerFaust 3 is a kickass RPG, with 2 different kinds of rocket available, an anti-tank rocket, and an anti-bunker rocket. It also has negated the back-blast problem by using a clever disintegrating counter-weight system.
Link to a info page (http://www.defence-net.de/info/index.php?explosives)

Jeremy

*edit, the auto-translate function didn't work. Oh well, I changed the link to the original page (in German)*

[AlexI]

For those curious about what "RPG" actually means in Russian.
The "Rocket Propelled Grenade" matches the acronim "RPG", but this is purely coincidental.
In Russian, it stands for "Ruchnoi Protivotankovyj Granatomet", which literally translates to "handheld anti-tank grenade launcher".

BTW, I think RPGs are in a different class of weapon then M204 and Mk19, so comparisons between them are not exactly valid. The Soviet/Russian army had weapons almost exactly like M204 (forgot what it was called, also used 40mm grenade) and Mk19 (AGS-17, if I am not mistaken, used smaller 30mm grenades) and they issued RPGs right alongside them.

Alex.

[MrMurphy]

Yeah the RPG is for antivehicle use and hard points (bunkers etc) whereas the grenade launcher is for machine gun positions, groups of bad guys at a distance, making nice holes in houses, etc. The RPG gets thrown around in large quantities overseas because there's lots of them, they make a nice big hole in whatever they hit and with one shot you have a decent chance of taking out a vehicle, helicopter or building.