Talk:RPG-29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.


[edit] Price Quote on RPG-29 launcher and round

Where does the pricing information come from?

I edited the part about how the container mates to the launcher, but did not edit, add or delete any part concerning the price. If the price quotes is correct it is one of the cheapest antiarmor weapons on the market. For example the USMC SMAW (based on the Israeli B-300) has an antiarmor round the HEAA which is quoted as costing $16,000 to $25,000 per round!!!! - Jack E. Hammond
I have a suspicion that the price quoted may be what the weapon actually fetches in a particular context, for example when being bought and sold on the black market in Iraq. The actual development/manufacturing cost is probably a lot higher, although no doubt still a lot less than the likes of the Javelin. :) Riddley 16:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Remember, this is a Russian weapon, not American... they like cheap and simple, and don't pay $1000 for toilet seats. I can easily believe the prices listed on the page. Mark Grant 16:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the price, since nobody has come up with a source for it - and it has been tagged for some time - see WP:VERIFY. Megapixie 22:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Sure. I checked the links listed on the page and didn't find any information there, so it's probably worth removing. Mark Grant 22:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Is the RPG 29 reloadable?

Yes, the rocket is breech loaded, i.e. slid into the launch tube from the rear. Riddley 02:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if the altered reload mechanism affected the reloading time compared to the old RPG-7? Has anybody information about the rate of fire a trained user can achive? 84.166.249.88 14:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unencyclopedic

"The warhead is extremely powerful, and in tests conducted against T-80 and T-90 tanks it penetrated the tanks over their frontal arcs.[1] If these reports are true about frontal penetration, the Russian HEAT weapons engineers have made an astonishing advance because a 105 mm warhead is considered inadequate. The French with their ERYX short-range anti-tank weapon stated that a HEAT warhead had to be at least 135 mm in diameter to defeat the newer Russian main battle tanks frontally."

This paragraph is not encyclopedia material.

In the first sentence is a sourced statement. That's perfectly fine.

The rest of the paragraph is unsourced editorial. After making a sourced statement, the next sentence begins with "If these reports are true...". If it's not true it shouldn't be in the article. Since it is sourced, why is that line there? Is there some reason to doubt whether or not the statement is true? Unencyclopedic.

The remainder of the paragraph is unsourced editorial. Unencyclopedic.

Without first sourcing and then rewriting it, it's just speculation and should be deleted.

Jdkkp (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


As to the "if these reports are true..." line. There seems to be a presumption in military arms circles that, in source country tests, performance will be overstated because the vast majority of customers won't bother to engage in intensive weapons system testing before purchase. Personally I wouldn't support removing that caveat even once a source for the subsequent line about ERYX is found (it sounds familiar but I just got off work and don't feel like finding one) unless you can either find confirmation from another (non-Russian) source as to RPG-29 warheard performance or find a source describing the test in detail complete with measurements. Zhivago533 (talk) 12:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)