The development of the Dragunov designated marksman’s rifle was spurred by the NATO adoption of the 7.62x51mm cartridge. The Red Army had standardized on a new suite of infantry weapons using the intermediate-sized 7.62x39mm round, and feared being out-ranged in open terrain by NATO units. The Soviet squad needed some way to reach out and engage a NATO machine gun or antitank weapon that might be beyond the range of their RPD light machine gun. And so in 1957, specifications were issued for a new 7.62x54Rmm precision rifle.
Three designers responded with proposals; Dragunov, Konstatinov, and Simonov. The Simonov was not really suitable (it was ascaled-up SKS in essence), and the Konstantinov was not as accurate as the Dragunov. And so, Evgeniy Dragunov’s rifle was adopted in 1963 as the SVD. Dragunov himself was a talented competitive marksman, and this experience undoubtedly contributed to the quality of hhis design. The SVD is a rotating bolt rifle with a lightweight short-stroke gas piston and a light-be-accurate barrel. It was issued to ever squad in mechanized infantry units, and was an important part of infantry armament, still in service today.
Video on detail differences between SVD, Tiger, and NDM-86:
Video interview with Max Popenker on Dragunov history:
And just what do you mean by “accuracy”? Ian raises a good point when talking about the required accuracy for the Dragunov.
These days accuracy seems to be mono-focused on what would be required for a gentile, polite marksmanship competition. But many of the firearms that Ian presents are for military use. I would think 5 inches at 100 yards would still be sufficiently deadly for the purpose required on a battlefield.
According to https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%94%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0 there was change made in 1975, pitch of rifling was changed. This was done in order to lessen spread of AP-I bullets, but did have side effect of increasing spread of normal and sniper bullets. Old-rifling SVD is considered fit for usage if hits at 100 m are inside circle with diameter of 8 cm, for new-rifling SVD it is 10 cm.
Seems a little too wide a spread. 5″ at 100 is 25″ at 500.
Would think a DMR would be at least 1.5″ or lower at 100.
But just an opinion
The Dragunov SVD is one of those weapons that people look at and critique based on their own ideas, not the ideas of the system that procured it.
Yes, the accuracy and the “stamina” of said accuracy is not what we’d think appropriate for the mission we think it has, but that’s not how they were thinking. It’s a product of the “quality triage” that the Soviet Union applied to a lot of things, like the wartime T-34/85 tanks: Just good enough to get into action, kill some of the enemy, and then be killed in turn. If a T-34/85 broke down just as it killed it’s requisite number of enemy tanks, well… That was a perfect solution, so far as the Soviets were concerned. Anything else? Well, if it didn’t achieve what they wanted in terms of effect, then they had a problem and needed to egg the quality pudding a bit more… If it was still running after taking out the desired number of enemy, then the “quality” dials back at the plant needed to be turned down, a bit.
That was the mentality, the mindset. You and I look at it, and the conceptions behind it all seem insane, but that’s what they wanted and got out of their system. “Just good enough” was what they wanted, and that way of thinking infused and suffused their entire military-industrial complex.
Frankly, I think the whole thing was of a piece with the rest of the Soviet “Planned from Above” mentality, in that they thought it was possible to achieve some sort of God-like certainty on these matters, and then base an economy/civilization on such arrogance. In the end…? Didn’t work out too well, and here we are.
Critiquing the Dragunov SVD on the basis of “insufficient accuracy” is a bit like critiquing your neighbor the yak or reindeer herder for the quality of his dairy output. He’s not trying for high-butterfat cow’s milk, he’s concerned with the yak or reindeer equivalent… You’re the one who has mistaken the situation, more than anything else.
Speaking about the SVD, one should take into account an important point.
At that time, the West already had mass-produced self-loading rifles that, when equipped with optics, could serve as a “sharpshooter’s” weapon. Recently, a colleague from Switzerland and I tested the G1 rifles (a variant of the FN Fal for Germany), G3, and the Swiss rifle 57 at a distance of 300 meters. Even without optics, these rifles are quite capable of hitting a target (half of the hull). At that time, the main weapon in the USSR was the AK/AKM, which had worse ballistics. The Soviet military saw that on the battlefield they needed to supplement their weapons system to enable soldiers to hit targets outside the effective fire range of the AK/AKM.
At the same time, the Soviet rifle was originally created as a weapon for the best shooters. In this role, it was clearly more reliable and effective than standard army rifles, on which an optical sight was installed.
What is interesting to add is that the USSR always wanted to make a self-loading sniper rifle. After the failure with the SVT, there was a series of competitions that went on continuously since 1944. The SVD was not the result of one competition, but of a very long process.
It’s just that these samples remained experimental and are not known to the general public.
In that vein, people read the actual Soviet manuals on zeroing the vintovka Mosina and are astonished that they weren’t going for the 4-m.o.a. “rifleman’s standard.”
As far as the T-34 analogy goes: the tread pins slip out toward the rear, toward the tank hull. This is so they can be easily replaced or tinkered/buggered with by the mechanics in the field. But they’ll fall out. Soviet design solution: Weld a metal plate onto the hull between the body and the tread. As the tread goes by, it drags the pin against the plate, which pushes it back into place.
Why paint the interior? Heck, during extreme duress, why bother to paint it at all?
I’m not sure if this is well and truly a very first “purpose built DMR?” I’ll see what the experts write…
Let’s see if I have this Cold-War to post-Cold War section/squad “loadout” right?
USA: Sgt. with M16A1, 7x M16A1s, 2x grenadiers with M203 grenade launchers.
MG+AT weapons: M60 GPMG + pistol, 2x M16A1s. M67 recoilless rifle + pistol, plus assistant with another pistol.
USSR: 10 per BTR/BMP 1 pistol, 4-5x Kalashnikovs, 1 RPG-7 or SVD rifle, 2x crew of PK GPMG or extra Kalashnikov and +1 RPK longer-barrel Kalashnikov.
Post-Cold War: DMRs in Nato squads. Carl Gustaf 8.4cm recoilless rifle aka. M3 MAAWS or similar AT rockets. M249 SAW or M27 IAR as belt-fed or magazine fed Nato RPK longer-barrel Kalashnikov, M249/ FN MAG as stand-in for PKM, etc.
Of course now there’ll be the 6.8x51mm CC aka .277 “Fury.” what with 80,000psi and 2-2.7m/ 6 to 9 feet less drop at 1,000 yards/ 914 meters, and negating body armor and all that…
interesting that the Chukavin is reported to be appearing in action.
Yet, in September 2024 https://en.topwar.ru/249870-koncern-kalashnikov-naraschivaet-proizvodstvo-snajperskih-vintovok-svd.html
Thanks Daweo,
I’ll probably get myself onto all sorts of watch lists and social credit scores now, for going further and having a good look through the kalashnikov groups English language website
“(…)proposals; Dragunov, Konstatinov, and Simonov(…)”
There was another one https://guns.fandom.com/wiki/Kalashnikov_sniper_rifle
“(…)Konstantinov was not as accurate as the Dragunov(…)”
http://war-russia.info/index.php/nomenklatura-vooruzhenij/457-sukhoputnye-vojska/strelkovoe-oruzhie/strelkovoe-oruzhie-2/vintovki-karabiny-3/2784-7-62-mm-opytnye-samozaryadnye-snajperskie-vintovki-1958-62g41gg furnish different explanation, both Konstantinov entry (final form, 3rd image from top) and Dragunov entry (1st image from top) were found accurate enough, but Dragunov entry was more reliable and has longer expected life.
There were also 2 design rejected early АО-24 (5th image from top) and ТКБ-579 (8th image from top).
M. T. Kalashnikov revoked his entry (СВК) to focus at RPK developed at same time.
At same time Konstantinov entry was heavier (according to https://military-exotic.blogspot.com/2023/12/1958.html it was around 5 with half kg) than Dragunov (as adopted 3,9 kg), which suggest superiority of 2nd designer, as he made much lighter design which was also more durable.
The 1960s field manual of the SVD lists a probable error of 54 mm at 300 m. This is equivalent to a standard deviation of 80 mm (or 0.27 mil).
Which lets us expect 90 % of the shots inside a 343 mm (13.5″) circle at 300 m (328 yd).
Note: the above figures were based on the ordinary 9.6 g L bullet.
According to Russian sources (Dvorjanninov), the 7N1 sniper ammunition from SVD could have only about 74 % of the above dispersion, 254 mm (10″).