What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Info wanted on PG-2 charge container

RE

Mannlicher said:
Thanks mate. I only used the "rocket" term as an expression for the overall item, instead of "projectile". I also have a the PG-7 round in my collection and i'm used to call both of 'em "rockets". So the PG-7 is a true rocket and the PG-2 is a recoilless projectile.
Every day brings a learning opportunity.
Click to expand...

Actually, depending on the various nebulous definitions of "rocket" floating around it could go either way. Better to argue that it is not a missile! That being said, long ago the Soviets / Russians officially designated both weapons as Shoulder Fired (Ruchnoy), Anti-Tank (Protivitankovaya), Rocket Launchers (Granatomet). The West just sort of took for granted that the phonetic "R.P.G." from the Soviet designation should mean Rocket Propelled Grenade. Since both are considered "Rocket Launchers" by "them" but not by everyone else, much confusion has reigned since then. However, the commonality - besides the descriptor - is that both a PG-2 round of munition and a PG-7 round of munition have to use a screw-on propelling charge to leave the launcher and the ejection gases are "immediately" vectored out of the rear of the launch tube. With that as the litmus test, both a PG-2 round and PG-7 round fit nicely into "recoilless projectile" explanation mentioned above.

The PG-7P ( ПГ-7П) series propelling charge for an "RPG-7" round and the DRP ( ДРП) series propelling charge for an "RPG-2" round both work the same way; they both "launch" their respective rounds from the launch tube.
However, that is where the similarities end. The DRP uses a loose black-powder (highly refined of course, but black powder nonetheless) as a propellant. The propellant is separated by five (or six) cardboard, Bakelite, rubber, ceramic or aluminum disks or spacers - not counting the threaded cap-well and base of course. (The Chinese made an enhanced DRP clone for their Type 56-II round that was approximately of an inch longer than a standard DRP charge - it had six spacers).

DRP-1.jpg


The PG-7P series uses an NBL-based propellant in strip form (heavily impregnated paper) laid along the long axis of an aluminum fin assembly which contains the four inertia-activated stabilizing fins and a slow rotation "fan" at the extreme rear of the assembly. The PG-2 stabilizing fins are organic to the round itself and not part of the propelling charge - unlike a PG-7 munition.

NBL info here: http://www.arsenal-bg.com/defense_police/powders_table.htm

NBL in strip form:
PG-7P-1.jpg

(Stabilizing fins and slow roll "fan". The paper sleeve covering the NBL strips burns away as the propellant burns (before the round leaves the launch tube)).

Most PG-7 rounds also have an organic "booster charge" (PG-7D) that further propels the round down range once the PG-7P series propelling charge is exhausted (approx 9-25 meters depending on the round). These gases are vented out of a series of six nozzles just below the rear fuze assembly base (behind the rear ogive).

vent1.jpg


While all PG-7 compatible munitions use a propelling charge, not all of them have the booster charge and vent nozzles. Any OG-7 series (or clone) Anti-Personnel round does not need to use this booster charge because there is no over-caliber warhead involved in the flight-path / trajectory equation (any OG-7 series or clone are 40mm in diameter; meaning most of the round fits in the tube.)

OG-7:
og-1.jpg


Hope this helped and did not further cloud this issue.

Semper Fidelis
Gunner
 
Last edited:
MCGunner, nicely explained.

Just one thing.
You wrote:
Rocket Launchers (Granatomet).

"Granatomet!" is in translation a grenade launcher.
 
EOD said:
MCGunner, nicely explained.

Just one thing.
You wrote:
Rocket Launchers (Granatomet).

"Granatomet!" is in translation a grenade launcher.
Click to expand...

EOD,

Thank you for the correction! I speak little Russian and must rely mostly on friends.

Semper Fidelis
Gunner
 
What is the purpose of the cardboard disks in the DRP propelling charge? Is it to slow down the combustion of the black powder? Does anyone have a photo available of the container the charges were issued in? BTW, I desperately need both a cardboard charge tube for an RPG-2 rocket, as well as the aluminum piece at the end of the rocket tail - I will pay top dollar for these two pieces. My e-mail address is: ww2kkrad@hotmail.com

Thanks
 
hkindiana said:
What is the purpose of the cardboard disks in the DRP propelling charge? Is it to slow down the combustion of the black powder? Does anyone have a photo available of the container the charges were issued in? BTW, I desperately need both a cardboard charge tube for an RPG-2 rocket, as well as the aluminum piece at the end of the rocket tail - I will pay top dollar for these two pieces. My e-mail address is: ww2kkrad@hotmail.com

Thanks
Click to expand...

HK,

I thought that very thing for years until relativity recently. Then a good friend of mine from Russia who used to work for BAZALT, told me it was nothing as complicated as that. The spacers were put in the DRP for lateral stability / strength between the "channels". In addition to cardboard spacers, some DRPs were made with folded Aluminum (like kitchen foil) disks as well, although these were nowhere near as prevalent. Here is picture of the tube the charge came in. (The example is from EODGuys' excellent post the first page of this thread.) The other pictures are two examples of the Chinese clone charges fielded for their Type 50, Type-50-1, Type 56 and Type-56-1 80mm HEAT rounds:

PG-2propellant.jpg

PG-2propellant9.jpg

PG-2propellant9a.jpg


Additionally - and only somewhat related - many early series PG-2 rounds were issued with additional cardboard spacers, but not for the DRP. These were issued for the DK-2 BD fuze. The user had to lightly dust the base of the fuze with chalk and then carefully insert the head of the fuze into the fuze well. He then had to insert at least one spacer into the fin assembly and assemble the round "hand tight".

After this, he had to remove the fin assembly and ensure that the cardboard spacer had a light ring of chalk from the base of the fuze. If it did not, he had to keep inserting spacers until the ring showed up. If more than four were required he was not supposed to fire that round. (He had to use at least one.) This procedure was to ensure the fuze was secure in the fuze well. Apparently there were issues with malfunctions with many early series rounds / fuzes.

Then, before he fired, he was instructed - at least until 1954 - to paint over "with black paint" the "DK-2" fuze designator stenciled on the rocket body and / or ogive.

Where are you located? There are still a few places that sell the threaded metal cap.

Best regards
Nick
 
Last edited:
Some excellent information and photos in this thread. Thanks to all! Let me extend this a bit with a question. I know there was an RPG-1, an RPG-2, an RPG-4, and an RPG-7. I also am aware of the numerous later post RPG-7 variations, but was there an RPG-3, RPG-5 and RPG-6? I have never been able to find any information on those numbers.
 
EODGUY said:
Some excellent information and photos in this thread. Thanks to all! Let me extend this a bit with a question. I know there was an RPG-1, an RPG-2, an RPG-4, and an RPG-7. I also am aware of the numerous later post RPG-7 variations, but was there an RPG-3, RPG-5 and RPG-6? I have never been able to find any information on those numbers.
Click to expand...

EOD Guy,

The answer to your question is yes and no. Yes, in the sense that the RPG-3 and RPG-5 existed as anti-tank grenade launchers, but only on paper or in the mock-up stage. The RPG-6 is still alive and well.

GSKB-47 (which would eventually morph into BAZALT) very briefly toyed with an "RPG-3". It was a short lived designation for a concept that died when the RPG-4 - then known as the RPS-400 - was still on the drawing board; the RPG-4 itself dying because of the RPG-7 (then known as the RPS-250). The "RPG-5" suffered the same fate as the RPG-3, being a concept weapon that never made it past the wooden mock up stage.

There has been an "RPG-6" since 1943, but only as the grenade. The "RPG" in this case standing for Ruchnaya Protivotankovaya Granata (Hand-Held Anti-Tank Grenade) - vice the "RPG" meaning Ruchnoy Protivitankovaya Granatomet normally associated with a Shoulder-Fired, Anti-Tank, Grenade Launcher. (Thanks to EOD for a quick Russian language lesson)

Sorry to have rambled. I hoped I answered your questions.

S/F
Nick
 
Last edited:
AK101 said:
Gunny "V"

When is that book coming out? :angel:
Click to expand...

Classic. As soon as the lawyers stop acting silly and I can find the time to route the three remaining chapters out for vetting. Life was certainly more fun when I was a Gunny...

S/F
Gunner
 
MC Gunner, I believe the terms "booster charge" and "propellant charge" are interchangeable for the rear attachment. The middle part of a 3-part PG-7 rocket is the "rocket motor". The OG-7 antipersonnel round seems to not include the motor with the nozzle block, just the body and the propellant/booster charge. The KO-7V Hollow Charge Fragmentation Round is the variation of the OG-7 rocket that has the motor included. Correct me if I am wrong?

OG 7.jpg (OG-7 Cutaway... it's all explosives and no engine or nozzle block)
ko-7v antiperonel rocket.jpg (KO-7V... has the explosive part and the engine)

---
This is a Rocket Propelled Grenade related post.
 
Bunker Dog, you are correct.

The KO-7V (I only knew it as KO-7 only so far) has the regular motor and fin section with a S-5KO warhead (from the 57mm aircraft rocket). This is a Bulgarian development - or rather a combination of already existing components than a development.
 
Bunker Dog,

OED is of course, spot-on. Sorry for the long delay, I have been busy.

The latest development of the KO-7V (Warhead + PG-7D Sustainment charge = KO-7, KO-7 + PG-7P (or similar) Propelling charge = KO-7V) is known as the KO-7VMZ:

http://www.vmz.bg/eng/new/malyutka.htm
 [FONT=&quot](Don't let the old web-page name confuse you, VMZ never renamed it after they took the AT-3 info off of it.)

I will dig up the specifics on the round later this weekend for you if you want.

Best regards
Gunner[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]


[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
botcheg said:
Hi all,
Here are some diagrams I have of PG-2s. One was labeled as Polish the other Chinese. Quite a bit of difference in lengths. Also a cutaway detail of the connector end of the tube from the manual in case you want to get crazy and do a cutaway version.
Regards,
Bill
Click to expand...

Any idea who wrote the notes on the threads for connecting the booster to the PG-2? I don't have a PG-2 but do have a subcaliber device for the RPG-7 that uses a PG-2 booster. Measuring my threads, they don't match up with the notes on the drawing

Any suggestions? Anyone have a PG-2 they can measure the thread diameter and depth on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top