# Rocket-Propelled Grenades: Facts Needed **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 23, 2001, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910 "2001-11-23T17:10:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tsunamisurfer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a698b9/32.png) [@tsunamisurfer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tsunamisurfer)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/1 "2001-11-23T17:10:10Z")
Everywhere one looks in the print/broadcast media, one sees that RPG’s have become the darlings of Third World armies, militias, radicals, and street thugs. Yesterday, I even saw a swaggering Northern Alliance soldier posing for Reuters with two RPG’s stuffed down into his pants. (ahem) What are the capabilities of RPGs? Can they punch through a Bradley fighting vehicle? Through a heavily armored car? How does an RPG’s explosive power compare to that of a standard U.S. hand grenade? Compared to a US grenade launcher? How do they differ from bazookas? What is their range? Are the projectiles guided in any way? Aimed through cross hairs? How accurate? ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/2 "2001-11-23T17:27:34Z")
> [@](#): > > The RPG-7 was issued by forces of the former USSR, the Chinese military and North Korea, and was used in many countries receiving weapons and training from the Warsaw Pact members. The RPG-7 proved to be a very simple and functional weapon, effective against fixed emplacements and playing an anti-vehicle/anti-armour role. Its effective range is thought to be approximately 500 metres when used against a fixed target, and about 300 metres when fired at a moving target. It can reportedly penetrate conventional armour plate from a distance of about 12 inches. The RPG-7 is being used extensively by terrorist organizations in the Middle East and Latin America and is thought to be in the inventory of many insurgent groups. The RPG-7 is available in illegal international arms markets, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. > **[Terrorism Prevention Branch](https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism/index.html)** > > Terrorism Prevention Branch ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/3 "2001-11-23T17:35:11Z")
I suppose there are a few things that might be called an RPG, but the (originally Soviet) **RPG-7** seems to be the generic RPG. From [Rocket Propelled Grenade](http://www.tamiltigers.net/rpg.html): > [@](#): > > Issued by former forces of the U.S.S.R., the Chinese Military, North Korea, and used by a large number of countries that have previously received weapons and training from the former Soviet/Communist Bloc, the RPG-7 proved to be a very simple and functional weapon that has an anti-vehicle/armor role as well as being effective against fixed emplacements. Its effective range is thought to be approx. 500 meters when used against a fixed target, and about 300 meters when fired at a moving target. It is reported that it can penetrate at about 12 mm of conventional armor plate. I found that same passage on several sites. On preview I see **Reeder** found the same. A page on the Chinese [Type 69 Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher](http://www.china-defense.com/infantry/type-69/type69rpg_1.html) gives some history of the development of this class of weapon. > [@](#): > > The Type 69 RPG can traces its linkage back to the WWII American Bazooka and German Panzerfaust anti-tank rocket launchers. The American Bazooka was the first effective portable infantry anti-tank system in WWII. The Bazooka system is basically a tube-launched short-range rocket with a HEAT warhead. The success of the Bazooka in combat had led to the Russian and German copying its design. The Russian copy is called the RPG-1 and it was based on Lend-Lease Bazookas. The German copy is named the Panzerschreck and it was based on captured Allies Bazookas. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/4 "2001-11-23T18:12:52Z")
From my expeience, it’s very similar to the American LAW - slightly more accurare, slightly better penetration, but much more cumbersome. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/5 "2001-11-23T18:36:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tsunamisurfer \* > \*\*Yesterday, I even saw a swaggering Northern Alliance soldier posing for Reuters with two RPG’s stuffed down into his pants. \*\* Well, someone’s going to say it, might as well be me. “Is that a rocket-propelled grenade in your pants, or are you happy-hey, that _is_ a rocket-propelled grenade!” 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Nukeman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ce7236/32.png) [@Nukeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nukeman)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/6 "2001-11-23T19:47:38Z")
From Reeder’s cite: “It can reportedly penetrate conventional armour plate from a distance of about 12 inches” pretty bloody useless then isn’t it? how the hell do you get that close? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![geepee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@geepee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geepee)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/7 "2001-11-23T22:18:36Z")
Thats probably a typo or a mistake [http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/crewwpns\_frame.htm](http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/crewwpns_frame.htm) says 920 metres effective range being 500 metres ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2001, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/8 "2001-11-24T02:48:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tsunamisurfer \* > \*\* > > What are the capabilities of RPGs? Can they punch through a Bradley fighting vehicle? Through a heavily armored car? How does an RPG’s explosive power compare to that of a standard U.S. hand grenade? Compared to a US grenade launcher? How do they differ from bazookas? > > \*\* As mentioned earlier, they are the spiritual descendants of bazookas. **Ringo** ’s reference says they can penetrate 12mm (a half inch, in American units) of solid armor plate. A Bradley has laminate armor up to 2 inches. The RPG can probably make a hell of a mess of a conventional armored car (specually if it hits the _windows_ – and it’s not just the penetration, it’s also flipping it over from the blast, and causing inside parts to fly off at speed from the transfer of energy) The RPG has a shaped-charge warhead – it explodes so that metal jacketing is propelled in one single direction as a concentrated jet of molten metal, to breach a solid barrier. The standard hand grenade and the shell from the U.S. M-203 are fragmentation grenades, designed so that the metal cladding is spread in all directions a goodly distance, as shrapnel to maim flesh. So they’re not really comparable. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2001, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/9 "2001-11-24T03:09:44Z")
BTW, a shaped-charge projectile doesn’t actually have to punch a hole through the vehicle to do damage inside. The charge can detonate on the outside, and the shock wave will travel to the inside and cause the metal to fracture sending shrapnel through the vehicle even though no hole is created. ---
**Author:** ![Phoenix\_Dragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/65b543/32.png) [@Phoenix\_Dragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phoenix_Dragon)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2001, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/10 "2001-11-24T06:59:06Z")
The power of an RPG really depends on its version 🙂 The one always seen in the news is an RPG-7, with the large warhead protruding from the front. In general, an RPG is pretty much death to any APC/IFV (Assuming a good body-hit; A lucky vehicle might manage to survive one hit more or less intact, sometimes. Even a front hit isn’t very safe). They’re fairly effective against equivelent-era tanks on rear or side hits. Even the old RPG-7 would be deadly to an Abrams if it were to hit the rear, and it would only be safe from a side shot if it were one of the heavier-armored versions against an older warhead. Front, though, you might scratch the sights, but that’s about it. The main benefit of the RPG versus the equivilent-era US AT weapon (RPG-7 vs LAW, RPG-26 vs M136 AT4) is that the RPGs are reloadable, while the US versions are disposable one-shot weapons. The one-shot versions are lighter, though, so you can have more of your troops carrying them 🙂 RPGs are probably about the explosive strength of a regular grenade, but lack the fragmentation effects, so it’s not that hot against personel (Except against bunkers). Definatly not strong enough to flip a vehicle, nor to cause serious damage from a non-penetrating hit except to the lightest-armored vehicles. ---
**Author:** ![royjwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ce73a5/32.png) [@royjwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/royjwood)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2001, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/11 "2001-11-25T20:55:01Z")
Actually, the RPG-18 is an almost exact copy of our LAW. Even though I could not read the Russian instructions, it worked just like ours, so there was no problem. Many of the RPG’s in use today are more likely to be the RPG-9. No real difference in appearance or effectiveness, however than the RPG-7. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2001, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rocket-propelled-grenades-facts-needed/94910/12 "2001-11-25T21:15:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tsunamisurfer \* > \*\*Everywhere one looks in the print/broadcast media, one sees that RPG’s have become the darlings of Third World armies, militias, radicals, and street thugs. Yesterday, I even saw a swaggering Northern Alliance soldier posing for Reuters with two RPG’s stuffed down into his pants. (ahem) > > What are the capabilities of RPGs? \*\* There are lots of different types, so you’d have to be more specific. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > Can they punch through a Bradley fighting vehicle? \*\* Yes, most of them could. Bradleys are a pretty shitty fighting vehicle. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Through a heavily armored car? \*\* Yes. > [@](#): > > \*\* > How does an RPG’s explosive power compare to that of a standard U.S. hand grenade? Compared to a US grenade launcher? \*\* This isn’t a valid comparison, because they’re different types of explosives. Hand grenades simply blow up and spread shrapnel. Shaped charges (rpgs) are designed to concentrate an explosion into a focused jet of plasma to penetrate armor. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > How do they differ from bazookas? \*\* Same concept in design. They’re typically 1 shot and disposable, whereas bazookas were reloadable weapons. They’re cheaper, throwaway weapons. Modern RPGs can trace their lineage to the german panzerfaust - and, for that matter, the first 2 RPG models (RPG-1 and RPG-2) were a copy of the panzerfaust 100, and panzerfaust 150 respectively. > [@](#): > > \*\* > What is their range? \*\* Varies a lot per model. I wouldn’t personally give them, in general, anything more than 200m, though some may be effective beyond that. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Are the projectiles guided in any way? Aimed through cross hairs? How accurate? \*\* I can’t think of an RPG that’s guided. If it were guided, it would probably be an ATGM. Generally the word “rocket” will tip you off that it’s unguided. They don’t use a ‘crosshair’ system, typically - but there will be a piece of sheet metal with large rectangular chunks cut out with markings for range and speed. You’d match a specific hole area with your target. Accuracy depends on the model and the shooter. I don’t really know offhand how to rate the accuracy.