RPGing from 10m

Killer-Ape · Post by **Killer-Ape** » 2008-01-17 19:28

One thing I don't understand is why they added the extra zoom on the RPG iron sight? Is it hardocoded or a balance implement? (Same as on the AT-4 iron sight)

Post by **Ninja2dan** » 2008-01-17 19:38

I haven't noticed too much of a zoom level on either. The magnification rate on the iron sights of the RPG, AT-4, or any equivalent should be about the same as any other weapon using iron sights. You can attach magnified optics to just about any rocket system, but those are not modelled in PR yet.

Can anyone else confirm those systems are using a higher magnification level compared to a rifleman's iron sights? I won't be starting up PR until later this evening.

General Dragosh · Post by **General Dragosh** » 2008-01-17 19:59

Too bad that we dont have a AT-4 with scope and an rpg-7 with scope, at least very limited...

Sabre_tooth_tigger · Post by **Sabre_tooth_tigger** » 2008-01-17 20:13

Ninja2dan wrote: Can anyone else confirm those systems are using a higher magnification level compared to a rifleman's iron sights? I won't be starting up PR until later this evening.

Seems similar to me

charliegrs · Post by **charliegrs** » 2008-01-17 21:29

General Dragosh wrote:Too bad that we dont have a AT-4 with scope and an rpg-7 with scope, at least very limited...

ive never heard of an AT-4 with a scope. it has an iron sight. and PR did have a rpg-7 with a scope in the previous versions it was taken from the special forces expansion pack. they replaced it with a new model without the scope because the insurgents have many more rpgs without scopes in real life. but in my personal opinion i think the mec should still have a scoped rpg because they can afford it.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2008-01-17 21:39

also , the pf89 should have more zoom since it has a scoped attached

USMC_Cook · Post by **USMC_Cook** » 2008-01-17 22:51

A friend of mine had an RPG fired at him from about 20ft away. There were some insurgents upstairs and he was downstairs. My buddy was firing at insurgents as they tried to come down the stairs, so the insurgents ran back up to the second story. Well, 30 seconds later, they poked an rpg around the corner of the stairs and fired it towards my buddy. The RPG exploded and knocked him down, but didn't injure him (other than some scrapes).

I wasn't actually there, so I don't know the exact details, but my buddy's not a liar, and half of his squad could verify the story. I know the RPG from 20ft away inside house sounds a little suspicious, but I believe it completely. My buddy did a lot of crazy stuff over there. There was an injured marine inside a room with 3 insurgents; He made a one-man entry into the room, killed all three insurgents and pulled the injured marine out (I honestly don't know if I could do the same, unless the injured Marine was one of my closest friends). He was definitely one of the bravest men I've ever known, so I'm sure he's not lying about the RPG incident. The three insurgents incident was just one of many things he did that you wouldn't expect to see happen outside of a cheesy action flick, so he had no need to make up the RPG story to sound like a war hero.

BTW, he eventually got shot in the arm trying to rescue some downed marines in a stairwell. Although he lived, they sent him home for the rest of the deployment.

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2008-01-17 22:57

Rocket Propelled GRENADE

Last time I checked grenades were used as anti-infantry weapons.

Post by **Ninja2dan** » 2008-01-17 23:16

charliegrs wrote:ive never heard of an AT-4 with a scope. it has an iron sight.

The term "optics" and "scope" have different meanings. I'm not talking about a 10x sniper scope, but the AN/PVS-4 that is attached to the M136 is magnified at 4x.

General Dragosh · Post by **General Dragosh** » 2008-01-17 23:20

Ninja2dan wrote:The term "optics" and "scope" have different meanings.

Ill keep that in mind...

Post by **Katarn** » 2008-01-17 23:29

Viper5 wrote:Rocket Propelled GRENADE

Last time I checked, Ručnoj Protivotankovyj Granatomjët does not spell Rocket Propelled Grenade.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2008-01-17 23:41

i was going to post the cap pikard pic abut the viers post , but i cant find it

.

RHYS4190 · Post by **RHYS4190** » 2008-01-17 23:56

battlepepsi wrote:my mom was a contracter in iraq and her convoy was amushed the insurgent who was sapost to fire the rocket blew him selfup with it. idiot

How did he do that was he a retarted or some thing. did he stick his head infront of it and pull the trigger?.

unrealalex · Post by **unrealalex** » 2008-01-17 23:59

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:Last time I checked, Ručnoj Protivotankovyj Granatomjët does not spell Rocket Propelled Grenade.

The russian spelling means "Hand based Anti tank grenade propeller or launcher"
Rocket propelled grenade is the english variant I believe

Post by **Katarn** » 2008-01-18 04:26

Handheld AntiTank Grenade launcher, true. But pretty much any explosive can be considered a grenade, and not in the terms that Viper5 was using.

BabaGurGur · Post by **BabaGurGur** » 2008-01-18 19:19

battlepepsi wrote:my mom was a contracter in iraq

You mean a Mercenary... wow.

Your lucky im already warned with 5 points or i'd..

nvm

Post by **Dunehunter** » 2008-01-18 19:49

BaBaGurGur, I am very tempted to warn you again, but I won't.

Also, get your facts straight. The vast majority of contractors in Iraq are not there to fight or protect people.

BloodBane611 · Post by **BloodBane611** » 2008-01-19 05:42

Handheld AntiTank Grenade launcher, true. But pretty much any explosive can be considered a grenade, and not in the terms that Viper5 was using.

Not all grenades are even fielded to kill infantry. Plenty of anti-tank grenades (hand propelled) were developed between the first and second world wars, and I'm sure they saw some use afterwards. But with the advent of the bazooka and panzerschrek the model was of course updated, and out of that the RPG-3 and then RPG-4 and RPG-7 were developed, with the RPG-7 significantly outperforming the earlier versions.

Currently there are two production warheads for the RPG-7 designed for anti-infantry use:
# TBG-7V thermobaric warhead for anti-personnel and urban warfare (105mm) (Rare, given the expense needed to produce these rounds. I have never heard of one being used in combat, but possibly happened in Chechnya.)
# OG-7V fragmentation warhead for anti-personnel warfare (within caliber due to limitations of international treaties) (As mentioned above, pretty rare, as the RPG-7 is a light anti-tank weapon, and your trusty AK should be used for killing those dirty yanks.)

Post by **Ninja2dan** » 2008-01-19 08:30

I might not be an uber-leet 5-year veteran of PR, but I had hoped that my previous statements would have been clear enough for everyone who reads English to understand. I have stated my personal experience with this weapon system, as well as my knowledge of weaponry in general.

So I am wondering why people are still questioning the fact if the RPG series has been used for anti-personnel purposes, or what the capabilities during such use are. This thread started out asking if it's possible for the RPG warheads to function at less than 10m, and this question has been answered. But now it has drawn out to people argueing the use of the weapon against troops.

To make it simpler for everyone not happy with all of the previous posts:

1) The RPG-7 rocket has a minimum arming distance of 5m, so engaging targets at 10m is possible but will likely cause death or serious injury to the operator.

2) The RPG-7 uses both HEAT and AP rockets. The HEAT round can be effective against personnel, but not as effective as the AP warheads. AP warheads are not common issue, and are unlikely to be found in possession of insurgent groups.

3) In a combat situation ANY rocket, missile, grenade, etc CAN be used against personnel. This is not saying it is within treaty guidelines, nor is it saying that is their intended use. This means it CAN be done. If you had a choice, I'm sure you'd thump that TOW missile at a single troop if it meant not taking a bullet in the head from said troop.

Any more questions?

TravisRomano · Post by **TravisRomano** » 2008-01-19 14:37

I'm sorry i made the tread to just see if they could but a 10m arming timer on it never thought it go off-topic so badly

also

"BabaGurGur" i have yet to read a post that you posted in what did not offend you.