Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: papertyger

Actually, I've heard Peter Kokalis state that the Dragunov was a mass-produced field-issued marksman rifle, not a true sniper rifle, so is it a surprise that it's not all that accurate or long-ranged? It's a sharpshooter's personal weapon intended to give a squad some punch a little distance beyond standard rifle range.


31 posted on 11/08/2005 5:10:07 PM PST by Jacob Kell (Regan 3:16: He whooped Communism's ass!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: Jacob Kell
Your input squares perfectly with my subsequent reading, with the exception I believe I've read single and paired sniper teams have been deployed armed with the Dragunov.

It may have been 'intended' as a squad based system, but its employment in that role deviates regularly. (probably because the first priority of *any* sniper is another sniper, and travelling around attached to a big, noisy, squad would radically decrease the sniper's chance of survival.)

I have to revise my accuracy quote, though. According to Maj. John Plaster, the conventional wisdom gives the Dragunov, on average, 2 MOA! That's not a 'sniper' rifle by our standards which demand 1 MOA at minimum, and tend more toward 1/2 MOA as the norm.

So unless 'Juba' is employing his rifle as a 'powered' bayonet, I think this claim of shooting between armored plates is either dumb luck, or el torro pooh-pooh.

32 posted on 11/10/2005 11:48:25 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson