Rpg-30

[Smaragdadler]

Wikipedia says:

The RPG-30 was unveiled in 2008 by the State Research and Production Enterprise, Bazalt as a modern anti-tank grenade launcher designed to address the threat of active protection systems on tanks. Active protection systems (APS) such as ARENA-E, Drozd and Trophy defeat anti-armour munitions by destroying them before they reach the target, the RPG-30 is a response to the introduction of these systems. The RPG-30 has cleared its testing program and is waiting to be included in the Russia state arms procurement program as of november 2008.

The RPG-30 shares a close resemblance with the RPG-27 in that it is a man-portable, disposable anti-tank rocket launcher with a single shot capacity. However unlike the RPG-27 there is a smaller diameter precursor round in addition to the main round. This precursor acts as a false target spoofing the APS into engaging it and allowing the main round (following the precursor after a slight delay) a clear path to the target while the APS is stuck in the 0.2-0.4 second delay it takes to start the next engagement. The PG-30 is the main round of the RPG-30. The round is a 105 mm tandem shaped charge with a weight of 10.3 kg and has a range of 200 meters and a stated penetration capability in excess of 600 mm RHA (after ERA), 1500 mm reinforced concrete, 2000 mm brick and 3700 mm of earth.

No much more info for now. Got pics from another board.

Have a look here:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=146447

[Sergei]

That would never work. A man that big couldn't get that close to an Abrams without detection, and even so he'd be wounded by the warhead exploding.

[Michael Withstand]

Sergei it was just an illustration.

Nice smart cheap solution to the expensive active protection system. The counter weapon now has a counter weapon.

So next we need counter counter-weapon weapon.

This gets confusing......

[costard]

meh - each missile weighs in at more than 10kg - sort of man portable. And a 600m range sucks - though you don't then have to spend money on superduper optics. Twice as much to go wrong and a ballistic trajectory to boot.

How cheap, exactly?

[Smaragdadler]

...The counter weapon now has a counter weapon.

So next we need counter counter-weapon weapon.

This gets confusing......

We need a counter against a "counter counter-weapon weapon".

That would be a "counter counter-counterweapon-weapon weapon" (CCCWWW) ...or better C3W3

weapon -> 'conventional' rpg

counter -> APS

counter-counterweapon-weapon -> RPG 30

But if we actually start to count with the tank, it would be even a C4W4.

counter counter-countercounterweaponweapon-weapon weapon

[Michael Withstand]

We need a counter against a "counter counter-weapon weapon".

That would be a "counter counter-counterweapon-weapon weapon" (CCCWWW) ...or better C3W3

weapon -> 'conventional' rpg

counter -> APS

counter-counterweapon-weapon -> RPG 30

But if we actually start to count with the tank, it would be even a C4W4.

counter counter-countercounterweaponweapon-weapon weapon

Now that is confusing . . .

If somebody brings a C4W4 in a presentation and started by saying,

"Good morning ladies and gentlemen. I present you the first true 'counter counter counter counter weapon weapon weapon weapon' ".

Everybody would be puzzled I bet. Can you imagine someone actually saying those words?

[Secondbrooks]

I'm wondering how much launcher wobbles when 30mm round goes off. Which would be it's actual accurate range if firing both tubes... 100-200 meters? If thinking that it has to hit profile of tank with 105mm grenade reliably.

[Smaragdadler]

Now that is confusing . . .

If somebody brings a C4W4 in a presentation and started by saying,

"Good morning ladies and gentlemen. I present you the first true 'counter counter counter counter weapon weapon weapon weapon' ".

Everybody would be puzzled I bet. Can you imagine someone actually saying those words?

...and after thinking again about it, it would still be wrong, because a tank in it's conception is basically a weapon to counter against infanterie...

That makes a C5W5.

Grognism strong!!11!

[Michael Withstand]

meh - each missile weighs in at more than 10kg - sort of man portable. And a 600m range sucks - though you don't then have to spend money on superduper optics. Twice as much to go wrong and a ballistic trajectory to boot.

How cheap, exactly?

The range is 200m not 600m. It's short because it's unguided. It's cheap because it's not sophisticated.

The 60cm penetration of RHA(mind you RHA not just ordinary homogeneous armor/steel) is actually amazing. This penetration capability is claimed to be after the first head destroy the ERA.

This is one dangerous weapon. Tanks equipped with active protection system should not get close to these weapon.

What would be extraordinary and highly dangerous is when the Russians produce a guided anti tank missile which is fail proof against active protection system.

And from what I know active protection system actually also works against another tank's armor piercing round. Amazing isn't it. But how effective I don't know. So there is a high probability that a new tank round may be produced to counter this active protection system.

The day we know there is such a round we know active protection system is effective and is here to stay.

[John Kettler]

Smaragdadler,

Outstanding find, and I never want to face one! Very clever technical solution!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Flanker15]

Does the 30mm rocket have a warhead? You could set it up so you could fire only one of the projectiles, then you'd have a single shot HE and T-HEAT launcher in one package.

[Michael Withstand]

I don't think the precursor head has any warhead. It just acts as a false target opening the way to the real RPG head.

The RPG warhead itself is of dual head. The first one is to destroy the ERA panels and the second one to do the actual job of defeating the tank's armor. If there were no ERA panels the first could give a little boost to the penetration capability I guess.

Whether this weapon can deliver what it claims is another thing to be proven in the field of future battle. Active protection system seems to have matured enough. I'm sure the developer of active protection system have already taken precaution against weapons like RPG-30. But who actually knows for sure?

[John Kettler]

Flanker15,

Given the Russian penchant for using what they already have, I'd say, yes. And the first place I'd look would be the AGS-17/30 for the warhead, albeit behind a streamlined nose cone.

http://www.warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=278&linkid=2087

http://www.warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=339&linkid=2462

That would be enough to trigger ERA in my view, possibly disrupting the target vehicle in the process. Some analyses of a future conventional WW III suggested that ERA detonation alone might cause a crew to bail, thinking a major hit had been sustained. Would be most interested to know what actually happened to the crews, in terms of reactions, when Blazer equipped IDF tanks and Kontakt equipped Russian tanks were hit in Lebanon and Grozhny.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Withstand]

If the precursor round has a warhead it would still be too small to do any real damage to a tank aside from detonating one or two ERA panels at most.

Plus the precursor won't in most probability be hitting the target tank at the exact point hence making a warhead equipped precursor round to be of dubious value.

Does anybody know whether the precursor round contains a warhead? But I guess it's a war weapon the more the bang the merrier it becomes.

[Michael Withstand]

Flanker15,

Would be most interested to know what actually happened to the crews, in terms of reactions, when Blazer equipped IDF tanks and Kontakt equipped Russian tanks were hit in Lebanon and Grozhny.

Regards,

John Kettler

Well actually the ERA would explode outwardly. They have been designed to direct their explosion outwardly.

But there are rumors that ERA could become a self defeating defensive measure when an AP round penetrates the ERA and tank armor causing additional burst of fire(explosion) to be added to the tank's interior. Ouch.

[dan/california]

I am agreeing with the aim issue, seems like at anything beyond truly pointblank range it would be that much harder to hold the weapon in line for the main round. .2 to .4 seconds is a significant amount of time for the muzzle to wander around.

[flamingknives]

Maybe 1st Gen ERA had a significant detonation, but I understand that modern ERA is no more significant in terms of explosion than an ATGM warhead. Likewise inadvertent effects - not going to happen. These arrays are not cobbled together and poorly understood, they are designed and tested.

[hcrof]

Surely, both rounds would leave the launcher at the same time but at different velocities. Later in flight, the smaller one would slow down to match speeds with the T-HEAT round meaning that it is always ahead the same distance.

Just a theory though - I don't know if the ballistics could be made to match up.

[YankeeDog]

Surely, both rounds would leave the launcher at the same time but at different velocities. Later in flight, the smaller one would slow down to match speeds with the T-HEAT round meaning that it is always ahead the same distance.

Just a theory though - I don't know if the ballistics could be made to match up.

By definition, if the rounds have different velocities, then they will follow a different ballistic trajectory. Over short distances, the difference might not be significant, but the more time the two rounds spend in the air, the greater the difference will be. There are ways of compensating somewhat by offsetting the barrels slightly, using different projectile shapes, adding a base bleed to one of the projectiles, etc., all of these solutions are imperfect and don't completely solve the problem. A range increases, there's just no way to avoid the Physics -- two projectiles of differing size and weight, launched at different velocities, are going to follow different paths.

There are other issues with this as well. For example, the slower round will have a longer time of flight, meaning that it will be deflected more by a crosswind.

Overall, I think it's an interesting idea in theory. I wonder how well it actually works in practice, though. Given the larger size, weight, and complexity of the system, one wonders if it's really so much better than just carrying two good-quality single projectile RPGs. After all, quantity has a quality all its own. . .

Cheers,

YD

[Secondbrooks]

Yankee Dog: Fair points, but it seems that launcher isn't designed in the first place to reach long distances, but more to those practical and accurate 100-200 meters distances.

I can't see problem's with size, sure one could haul light launcher aside with heavier one. But then again they don't penetrate active defences and reactive elements as neatly/effectively as this is said to do.

It's main idea is that two rockets/grenades fired from seperate RPG's probably wouldn't hit same location even closely or in such short time as this does (0.2-0.4 seconds as it says).

Sure it can be that it doesnt' work in reality (like many inventions doesn't). But i think theory of it is good and definedly worth to pay attention to it.

[SgtMuhammed]

Funny how great everything looks in the advertisements. Hopefully we'll never see if it actually works or not.

[YankeeDog]

It's main idea is that two rockets/grenades fired from seperate RPG's probably wouldn't hit same location even closely or in such short time as this does (0.2-0.4 seconds as it says).

Wasn't thinking so much about trying to hit the same spot with two seperately fired RPGs; rather that two shots = double the chance of one of them getting lucky and slipping through the active defense, hitting something important etc. AIUI, current active defense systems are far from perfect, and many also have limited charges and/or a refractory period after an intercept. So one way to defeat an active defense system is just launch as much crap as possible at the tank, as quickly as possible.

As for the weight and bulk thing, I dunno. Certainly looks a lot more bulky than the RPG-7. Probably similar to the RPG-29, tho. Then again, the latter has a much longer range. Weight and bulk is a much bigger deal if you have to sneak within 200m of the tank to have a decent shot at a hit.

My SWAG, the RPG-30 system would probably be most useful with highly trained troops in dense (e.g. urban) environments. If there's a delay between the launches, the operator needs to have a very steady hand and mental discipline to keep the thing still. Not the kind of thing your typical militia irregular is likely to be very good at.

Seems to me, the skill for using a weapon like this would be very similar to firing a flintlock. Most beginning blackpowder shooters flinch on the flash of the primer ignition, and throw off their aim before the main charge ignites and sends the ball out of the barrel. Takes a fair amount of practice to supress this reflex response and hit what you're aiming at.

Cheers,

YD

[Michael Withstand]

Wasn't thinking so much about trying to hit the same spot with two seperately fired RPGs; rather that two shots = double the chance of one of them getting lucky and slipping through the active defense, hitting something important etc. AIUI, current active defense systems are far from perfect, and many also have limited charges and/or a refractory period after an intercept. So one way to defeat an active defense system is just launch as much crap as possible at the tank, as quickly as possible.

Yes of course I know RPG-30 tries to overwhelm the system by introducing the false target. The question is whether the precursor is equipped with warhead(explosive).

Imo it's better to launch a more advanced precursor with shrapnel like warhead or many small metal objects(or any other radar detectable object) bursting into the system envelope (before coming into range of the system envelope) with a high speed to act as multiple precursors. Similar to the concept of chaffs.

But how sensitive is the active protection system is as good as anyone's guess. The less sensitive the bigger the single precursor that is needed.

[Secondbrooks]

Yes. You can always argue about it's being poorly made and stuff, but still main principle stands: It's idea to deliver decoy and after that with actual real-deal penetrate active defences using same route as decoy (no destruction charge there anymore), under very short time (even if other destructioncharge could cover it's neibours area system's shouldn't be able to respond). so it basically uses two tricks to do the stuff, countering that isnt' as easy as using just one trick.

Shoulderfired AT-weapons usually are not accurate to over 300 meter distances even at stationary tank-sized target. Wind, ballistics, distance estimation errors starts to affect heavily. True that it's good to have option to fire even to 600 meters. Maybe this has designed so that you can take 30mm rocket out of use and fire it with more accuracy to longer distances, we don't know.

Besides it takes less training to be able to use weapon like this than try to work in pairs when even trying to fire both shots inside one second, preferably to same general location of tank.

I get many plus sides of that kind weapon (if it can defeat active protection system somewhat reliably it's worth to try). It can be also that it turns out to be complete failure.

[twogunz]

Designed to defeat anti missile systems like trophy. It launches a precusror round or a small diameter round (non explosive) to spoof the tanks radar and have it engage the precursor round. The lager 1055 mm charge rocket come blasting in a few seconds late teh delay is .02 to .04 sseconds. Good job suckering teh trophy system. This will be cured throu8gh software adjustment. Since no Anti tank round is smaller than 30mm, software could be programmed to ignore small diameter weapons, thus defeating the rpg30 at its own game. Russkies got tricky, solution coulde even simpler. All that R&D money wasted. Think about it