|
Evgeniy Fedorovich Dragunov was born on February 20, 1920 in Izhevsk into a
long line of gunsmiths. His grandfather used to work in the
Izhevsk Arms Factory.
Following the family tradition, he graduated from the Izhevsk
Industrial School as a technician of “metal machining”. The young man was
offered a job in the same factory where his grandfather had worked in
Czarist times. His first project was to improve machining technique the
bayonet of the Mosin - Nagant rifle, model of 1891/30. In 1939 he was
recruited in to the Soviet Army where he served in a regimental gunsmith
workshop. With the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War broke out in 1941,
he was promoted to the rank of a senior armorer, which afforded him
priceless experience with both Russian and enemy automatic weapons. Dragunov
was an accomplished and enthusiastic target shooter and his shooting skills
proved very useful in the war as well as in his subsequent career of an arms
designer. He never missed an opportunity to take part in competitions and
tournaments and did it with fairly high scores.
|
Evgeniy Fedorovich Dragunov,
1920 - 1991.
|
|
After the war, Dragunov returned to Izhevsk
and joined the Arms
Designing Bureau to resume his work and education. He again turned his
attention to modernizing the Mosin - Nagant three-line (cal. 7.62 mm)
magazine-type, single shot rifle. The venerable rifle had been extensively
used as a sniper weapon during the past war. It was a fine weapon - accurate
and reliable, but what did not make shooters happy was its slow reloading.
The cartridges were placed into the undetachable magazine one by one.
Dragunov found an unusually simple but effective solution by designing a new
scope mount, which made reloading faster. The clearance between the scope,
held by the mount of a new construction, and the receiver of the rifle was
convenient enough to insert a cartridge clip.
The Mosin - Nagant rifle, it seems to me, became a Dragunov’s favorite.
At the end of the 1940-s and the beginning of the 1950-s, he made a number
of sporting versions of the rifle.
It will not be an exaggeration to say that Dragunov founded a new trend in
the Russian arms designing school. As a leading project engineer he
constructed 27 various firearms including MTs-50, íTsV-50,
Zenith,
Strela
(Arrow), Taiga, CM,
Biathlon-7-2,
Biathlon-7-3, Biathlon-7-4
rifles, winners of several Olympic Gold Medals.
In 1958 Dragunov accepted the challenge of designing a semiautomatic sniper
rifle.
The rifle envisioned in the MENS submitted by GRAU (Glavnoye Raketno -
Artilleriyskoye Upravleniye - the Chief Missile and Artillery Department of
the Soviet Ministry for Defense) was more than a simple sniper rifle. Along
with high accuracy and the substantial range of fire, the weapon had to be
lightweight, compact, and capable of semiautomatic fire.
The Russian tradition of training chasseurs - dedicated snipers dates back
to the 18th and 19th centuries: During the Crimean campaign against British
and French troops, Russia fielded small units of selected marksmen with
excellent shooting skills. Their first performance at the battle of
unexpectedly effective, with a great demoralizing effect upon the enemy, as
they targeted crucial enemy personnel at advanced ranges, while remaining
beyond counter fire. Special high-accuracy rifles did not exist at that
time, and the men had to use standard weapons. The development in 1891 of a
new 7.62 mm rifle by Sergey Mosin, a designer in the Tula Arsenal, was a
major step toward creating a more accurate weapon.
Such a dedicated sniper rifle, a version of the above rifle, was eventually
developed in Russia in 1930. Other attempts were also made to produce
dedicated sniper rifles by
Fedor Tokarev
(SVT-38 and SVT-40),
Sergey Simonov
(AVS-36, SKS-44).
Post-war attempts, such as variants of the SKS carbine,
were also unsuccessful, and the Army returned to the well-proven model of
1891/30.
It was clear from the beginning, Dragunov and his team were commissioned to
create a weapon as an individual means of advanced field fire support. He
realized, he would have to compromise between two major schools of thought:
In order to enhance accuracy of fire, he had to first minimize tolerances
between moving parts, while maintaining a relatively higher weight of the
weapon, and keep a longer barrel. On the other hand, these clearances had to
be sufficient to provide trouble-free operations under adverse conditions
(fluctuating temperature, high humidity, dust, etc.); and for the better
maneuverability of an operator, the rifle had to be lighter and compact.
It was also important to reduce pressure of gases in the chamber to optimize
automatic reloading (and accuracy of fire) - but for the sake of operational
reliability the pressure had to be high.
In
|
SSV-58, prototype 08
|
|
our earlier research on the SVD development like in prevailing number of
other Soviet sources it was believed that the first prototype of the SVD
sniper rifle was produced in 1959. Later and more accurate investigation,
however, allowed us to discover the SVD (SSV - Snayperskaya Samozariadnaya
Vintovka - sniper auto-loading rifle) dated 1958 - the same year GRAU opened
the contest.
The first version of the Dragunov sniper rifle had a buttstock and a
handguard different from the later, model 1963, version. The number of
ventilation holes in a laminated plywood handguard is 3 in contrast to the 6
openings in the usual SVD rifle. The buttstock has no cheek. The geometry of
the gas chamber also differs from the SVD, model 1963. The rear sight of
SVD-1958 is of a peep-type, with a sliding tangent. The front sight is a
copy of the AK47 post-type sight, with protective ears. The muzzle is
without flash suppressor.
The gun showed fair accuracy but its reliability, and especially durability
of mechanisms, left much to be desired.
Although there is common perception in the West that under the Soviets all
defense production was so heavily monopolized that centralization left scant
place for competition, the evolution of SVD (Snayperskaya Vintovka
Dragunova) is an example to the contrary.
Mikhail Kalashnikov did his bid in creating various
sniper rifles. He
produced two models. Both had the construction typical of the
AKM assault rifle:
- the receiver of stamped and welded type;
- bolt carrier integrated with connecting rod and piston;
- rotary bolt with two locking lugs;
- gas chamber without gas regulator;
- sights derived from the AKM rifle, etc.
The rifles showed the results far from being the best. Kalashnikov realized
that his chances to win the contest were really slim. In addition, he was
totally involved in designing the novel
machine gun.
It was evident he would
not be able to “chase two hares at a time” as the Russian proverb says.
Kalashnikov abandons the contest to work harder on the RPK machine gun.
Parallel to Dragunov’s team, two more groups of designers, headed by
Alexander Konstantinov and Fedor Barinov, worked on a similar project. The
strongest team of these two was, probably, that of A. Konstantinov.
The competition became pretty tough as the stakes were high: The better of
the two firearms would be adopted for service. Another year and a half was
devoted to upgrading the first version of SVD. Dragunov, a kin sharp
shooter himself, knew subtleties of the sport. This helped him a lot in
designing an accurate weapon. One of such subtleties was the construction of
handguards. The
Kalashnikov’s rifles
had handguards rigidly fixed to the
|
SVD, set of delivery. The rifle features traditional laminated skeleton
buttstock and a new synthetic handguard.
|
|
barrel through a typically AK-type flange-ring. In firing, the force of
gripping was inevitably transmitted to the barrel, thus influencing
(decreasing) the accuracy. Dragunov’s design was smarter. His handguard
allowed a certain degree of freedom for the barrel. The main point onto
which the handguard rested, was the receiver.
Konstantinov also did his best and the cost effectiveness of his rifle was
even better than the Dragunov. In the end, however, the Army ruled in favor
of a superior accuracy potential, incredible durability and effectiveness of
fire - all qualities SVD possessed. Finally, in 1963 SVD won the contest and
became an issue weapon of the Soviet army sharpshooters.
Comparing the SVD with the M1891/30 the Dragunov has an effective rate of
fire of 20 to 30 rounds per minute, while the Mosin 1891/30 only 5 shots.
Accuracy - judged as 100% impacts in a 100mm circle - favors the SVD.
Shoot-off with highly skilled marksmen showed the following relative
accuracy, measured in millimeters:
Accuracy potential of SVD, model 1963, and
Mosin-Nagant model 1891/30, R.
| Type of weapon | Range in meters |
| | 100 | 200 | 300 | 400 | 500 | 600 |
Mosin-Nagant,
mod.1891/30
| 66.0 | 132.3 | 192.3 | 264.0 | 352.0 | 440.0 |
SVD,
mod. 1963
| 60.0 | 118.7 | 177.5 | 237.5 | 307.5 | 395.0 |
These data tell us that the R100 factor of
SVD at 600 meters is 395 mm, which in yards and inches 14.17 inches at 600
yards: the requirement for sniper rifles in the NATO is 15 inches at that
range.
A new
|
TSV-1 practicing sniper rifle, field stripped
|
|
weapon is usually designed to match a specific type of ammunition, but
with SVD it was the opposite: A special sniper cartridge with a steel core
was developed by a group of Russian engineers headed by Victor Sabelnikov;
using this ammunition, the SVD showed the accuracy far better than with
existing standard cartridges.
Along with the common SVD, Dragunov designed a shorter version of his famous
weapon in caliber .22LR. TSV-1 (Trenirovochnaya Snayperskaya Vintovka) was
meant for training army sharpshooters. It had the usual SVD buttstock and a
handguard, a more laconic receiver, a ten-round detachable pistol-type
magazine and a shorter barrel. The weapon had excellent accuracy! At a
distance of 50 meters, skilled shooters in a prone position were able of
firing a group of ten shots all inside a circle of 12 mm. The rifle had a
unique firing mechanism, integrated with a free blowback bolt carrier,
firing pin, return spring and a top bolt cover.
When researching this feature I talked with those in the
IZHMASH Design
Bureau who had worked with Dragunov and intimately knew him and his family.
We were told repeatedly that the story would be incomplete without
mentioning Dragunov as a man. In their opinion, his personal qualities were
the foundation and extension of his technical talent.
|
SVD, new version: synthetic non-folding buttstock and handguard, with
experimental 10-rd magazine.
|
|
Although an ordnance expert of the highest acclaim, Dragunov, as a
personality, was described by his fellow designers as most unselfish and
unpretentious in private life, never caring for fame or glory. Once a local
news story noted “now quite a number of people are surprised why Dragunov
had so few decorations, just the two of them: the Lenin Prize and the Order
of “Token of Honor”. May be, it is because in Izhevsk, in Izhmash, there
works another brilliant arms designer -
Mikhail Kalashnikov”.
A man’s merit can not be taken only by awards; a more true measure is what
remains in people’s memory, after he is gone. Evgeniy Fedorovich was a man
with a strong sense of duty, totally committed to the cause and loyal to
friends. Like a guru, he lavishly shared knowledge with the younger
generation in his team. Many of them went on to become high-class
specialists, but they still speak of themselves as of Dragunov’s disciples.
Evgeniy Fedorovich died on 4 August, 1991.
I remember the day I walked into the design office, some time after his
funeral. There was a portrait on the wall above his old table. It was
somewhat unexpected, and moving. I stood there for a few moments, thinking,
when somebody behind me said, rather pathetically, “You know why we liked
him? Look, his working desk was never locked up, and he always had his
drawing board in one room with regular engineers. He was one of us. He
never considered himself a god on the Mount Olympus, which was such a
contrast to other big shots”.
The fact is the portrait is still hanging above that same old table. It is a
memorial place in the design bureau.
With the breakout of the war in Afghanistan the military raised an issue of
developing a folding version of
SVD rifle.
The reason was the numerous
reports from the troops that the rifle did not quite fit into a limited
space of an APC. The other problem was, a sniper could not, in case of
necessity, fire from the APC compartment for the same reason - the weapon
was too bulky.
Dragunov was cautious. He said that the folding stock would invariably
decrease the accuracy potential of the weapon. He suggested, as a
compromise, to shorten both the barrel and the flash suppressor. The overall
length of this version was by about 100 mm shorter than the original weapon.
In addition, the weapon was equipped with a bipod. One of the variants had a
full-auto possibility.
Various tests showed that the rifle was too light and its controllability in
the fully automatic mode was far from being perfect. As a result, the idea
of a fully automatic sniper rifle was abandoned.
Izhmash, however, commissioned a group of designers to develop a weapon
of a more compact envelope. Dragunov did not live to the moment when the new
rifle was created.
|
SVDS, with folding stock.
|
|
The experimental SVDS
(Snayperskaya Vintovka Dragunova, Skladnaya) rifle
with the folding stock had two types of synthetic constructions with a
cheek-piece. The two variants had different pistol grips made from the
glassfiber-reinforced polyamide. The rifles had a new detachable 10-round
magazine. The barrel’s length was similar to the original SVD, model 1963.
The final variant of the SVDS rifle was completed at Izhmash in 1994 by a
team of engineers headed by Azariy Nesterov. Nesterov, who has been in the
gun industry for almost 40 years, still works in
Izhmash as a senior arms engineer.
In fact, originally the SVDS rifle was made in two sub-variations: With the
barrel 620 mm long - for infantry, while the rifle with a 565-mm long barrel
- for paratroopers.
The army declined the longer version, and accepted the shorter one.
SVDS systems
As seen in the pictures, SVD and SVDS have considerable differences. The
latter were dictated by the new conditions in the recent theaters of warfare
in various parts of the world. Being a firearm designated to destroy single
targets, which may be collapsible, moving, open or screened, SVDS is better
adapted for airborne troops and troops carried by armored vehicles. Its
overall length of 875 mm (34.5 inches) with folded stock is roughly equal to
the size of a soldier’s seated body.
The rifle can be operated from the ground (surface) means of transportation,
using them as shelter against enemy’s small arms fire. The rifle can fire
both special sniper cartridges and regular rounds with steel core, cal. 7.62
x 54R. It also successfully employs tracer and armor-piercing-incendiary
types of ammunition.
Externally, the SVD and the SVDS rifles differ in the following:
- SVDS has a folding buttstock;
- a shorter barrel;
- a new conical muzzle brake with teardrop-shaped slots;
- a pistol grip under the receiver;
- handguards made of fiberglass-reinforced polyamide;
- the SVDS construction features no underbarrel bayonet lugs;
- the bayonet comes in accessory kit.
The buttstock, which folds to the right, is made of steel tubular segments
and assembled by welding. It is attached to the rear of receiver by means of
a hinge similar to that of AKS74. The buttstock lock knob was also borrowed
from the Kalashnikov construction.
The cheek plate has three functional
positions. “Marching order” - the plate is rolled up and locked in a
vertical position above the upper bar of buttstock. The other two positions
of the cheek in “Firing order” are as follows: (a) locked at the angle above
the upper bar of the stock when the operator uses an optic scope or a night
vision device; (b) unlocked and rolled down inside the buttstock frame when
firing with open sights.
The buttstock end is made from reinforced polyamide. The entire construction
of the buttstock is strong enough and can be used in a hand combat.
The barrel is 565 mm (22.3 inches) long, featuring four grooves with the
right-hand twist of one turn in 240 mm (9.4 inches) with the width of
grooves equal to 3.8 mm (1.5 lines) . The first designs of SVD had a twist
pitch of one turn in 320 mm (12.6 inches).
Later the pitch was reduced to 9.4 inches which
somehow deteriorated the accuracy of fire with regular cartridges and
reduced the muzzle velocity from 830 m/second (2,721 fps) to 810 m/second
(2,656 fps). It was done in order to improve trajectory of special types of
ammunition, specifically - tracer and armor-piercing-incendiary bullets
which required a greater speed of rotation rather than a higher linear
velocity. Outer diameter of the barrel in SVDS is larger than that of SVD by
1 mm, that is to say, the barrel walls in SVDS are by 0.5 mm thicker than
those of SVD. A heavier barrel is always welcome with sniper and target
rifles - the feature which improves accuracy potential. The bore and the
chamber are chromium plated.
|
SVDS, field stripped
|
|
The muzzle is equipped with a monoblock, consisting of the front sight base
integrated with the flash suppresser. The whole device is attached to the
barrel with two pins coming into notches on the upper portion of the barrel
end. One significant peculiarity of a new flash suppressor is its conical,
funnel-type geometry with four teardrop-shaped asymmetrically located slots.
The lower two slots are placed in such a manner that none of them comes into
a central position. The partition between these slots is wider than the one
between the upper slots. This is done for the purpose of preventing an
excessive upward climb at firing. The other reason is elimination of
vertical gas jets. The jets, diverted strictly downwards, would raise
unwanted dust in front of the shooter, disclosing his concealment. Despite
the fact that the new brake is by 65 mm (2.6 inches) shorter that the one of
the SVD rifle, it is in no way less effective in the sense of both
suppressing flash signature and decreasing the muzzle blast.
It might be of interest to know that during our recent mission to the North
Caucasus, we were told a story that the Cossacks of the Terek River
Territory during the war in Chechnya put out enemy’s night-vision scopes by
flashing powerful camera lights.
The pistol grip, located under the receiver and attached to it with a single
long screw, is also made from thermosetting reinforced polyamide. For
operator’s ergonomic convenience the trigger and its guard bracket are
shifted forward by about 10 mm.
The SVDS rifle has the usual sheet-metal selector on the right side of the
receiver. The upper position is “safe”. The lower position at all times
places the mechanism into semiautomatic mode. The levers of SVD and SVDS
slightly differ in shape: in the latter the side ear has been changed from
the lower position to the upper, which is supposed to make its manipulations
easier. A top cover locking lever, which is located in the rear of the
receiver of both rifles, is geometrically identical. In SVDS, however, the
locking angle is somewhat smaller.
Like the pistol grip, the handguards of SVDS are made from black reinforced
polyamide. Their construction has been modified by adding pronounced
horizontal ribs to provide enhanced gripping surface. On the inside surface
of the guards there are additional rigidity ribs to increase shock
resistance. Like SVD, the new rifle has twelve ventilation openings in the
handguards (6 on each side) eliminating a possibility of burning operator’s
hands in intensive firing.
|
SVDS, close-up view of buttstock hinge, top cover retaining lever,
fire mode selector, pistol grip and standard detachable magazine.
|
|
Although 70% of SVD and SVDS parts and components are interchangeable, a
deeper insight may offer more differences.
The SVDS top cover has been given an extra strength by stamping it from
steel sheet 1 mm thick. The one in SVD has a thickness of 0.7 mm.
The gas regulator of a new rifle is basically the same, with a few moderate
alterations, which do not reduce operational merits of the older version.
The piston has no obturation grooves. Outer diameter of the gas piston,
internal diameter of the gas tube are 10.5 mm and 14 mm respectively, while
in SVD these sizes are 9.5 mm and 13 mm.
Steel bodied sheet metal magazines with prominent reinforcing ribs for both
SVD and SVDS rifles hold 10 rounds. No tools are required to load these
staggered-column, detachable box-type magazines. The magazines have a
hold-open device and thus after the last round has been fired, the bolt
group is retained in its rear position.
Both SVD and SVDS can be used with the standard PSO-1 (Pritsel Snaipersky,
Optichesky) - the sniper optic sight. The use of this 4x scope permits to
destroy surface targets at a distance of up to 1,300 meters (appr. 1,422
yards). The image of an object (target) in the scope is reversed from the
left to the right and from the top to the bottom. To bring it to the
operator’s eye in its natural form, the reversing system is available. To
improve contrast of an image in bad weather conditions, there is a light
filter colored light-orange.
To enhance aiming in twilight, there is a possibility of illuminating the
view-finder scale.
SPECIFICATIONS
| | SVD | SVDS |
|---|
| Caliber: | 7.62x54R |
| Ammunition: |
Rimmed, steel case; 7H2M bullet with steel core of 9.8 g;
powder charge of 3.1 g. (*) |
| Probable killing range: | 3,800 m (4,158 yards) |
Sighting range:
with open sights
with optic scope
with night vision device |
1,200 m (1,313 yards)
1,300 m (1,422 yards)
300 m (328 yards) |
| Operations: |
Gas-operated with regulator, locked-breech with a
rotary bolt, fire from the closed-bolt position. |
| Feed: | Black, steel sheet stamped, 10-round, detachable,
box-type magazine. |
| Weight with PSï-1 scope, with empty magazine: |
4.3 kg (9.4 lb.) | 4.68 kg (10.2 lb.) |
Length, overall:
with extended stock:
with folded stock: |
1,220 mm (49.8 inches) (**) |
1,135 mm (44.7 inches)
875 mm (34.5 inches) |
| Barrel: |
Four-groove with right-hand twist of one turn in 240 mm (9.4 inches). |
| Barrel lengths: | 620 mm (24.4 inches) | 565 mm (22.3 inches) |
| Sights: | Round-post-type front sight with protective
hood, adjustable for both elevation and windage zero.
Sliding tangent-type rear sight with an open U-shaped
notch adjustable for elevation only, in 100-meter increments
to the range of 1,200 m (1,313 yards). |
| Finish: | Black phosphate, with lacquer coating. |
| Furniture: | Laminated frame-type buttstock
and handguards. (***) | Black fiberglass-reinforced
polyamide handguards, pistol grip, buttstock-end. |
| Accessories: | Sling, carrying pouch, bayonet,
cleaning kit, optical sights and night vision devices. |
| Status: | Currently in production. | Proceeding to series production. |
Note:
(*) tracer and armor-piercing-incendiary types of ammunition are also used.
(**) rifle without bayonet.
(***) later modifications of SVD feature non-folding synthetic buttstock.
|
At this time SVD is available in several variations:
(a) with laminated wooden non-folding buttstock and plastic handguard;
(b) with synthetic non-folding buttstock and synthetic handguard.
Very possibly, both SVD and SVDS may soon be available in calibers .308
WIN., 9.3 mm and .338 Lapua MAG.
Stay with us and we’ll keep you posted !
PHOTOS.
1. Evgeniy Fedorovich Dragunov, 1920 - 1991.
2. SVD, set of delivery. The rifle features traditional laminated skeleton buttstock and a new synthetic handguard.
3. SVD, new version: synthetic non-folding buttstock and handguard, with experimental 10-rd magazine.
4. SVDS, with folding stock.
5. SVDS, close-up view of buttstock hinge, top cover retaining lever, fire mode selector, pistol grip and standard detachable magazine.
TOP
|
