In Russia, the production of sniper rifles has been sharply increased, the basic model for which first appeared more than sixty years ago – the airborne modification SVD (SVDS). What is remarkable about this model of small arms and why is it in high demand in the current conditions of the special operation?
In 2025, the Kalashnikov Concern increased the production of Dragunov sniper rifles with folding butts (SVDS) by 13 (!) times (compared to 2024) in accordance with the state order. This is very remarkable news, especially considering the age of the original model of this type of weapon. The SVDS is an amphibious upgrade of the Dragunov sniper rifle (SVD, adopted by the Soviet Army back in 1963).
You can often find criticism of this weapon system. The SVD is called outdated, criticized for poor ergonomics, low accuracy compared to precision rifles, and an archaic cartridge. All of this is largely true. In this case, why increase the production of an old rifle, and even in such significant volumes? Why not instead equip everyone with Vladislav Lobaev ZOV or K-15 Brat rifles from Orsis, which show excellent results?
But the fact is that these rifles are much more expensive. In addition, the available capacities do not allow the necessary number of these weapons to be delivered to the mountain in the foreseeable future. The introduction of new rifles will cause significant logistical problems – they use not the standard 7.62 x 54 cartridge, but the 308 Win (7.62 x 51 NATO), and even in brass rather than steel casings.
But the most important thing is that their use as a mass weapon of infantry snipers will not give any fantastic results. Such a weapon is intended for a high-class professional who has been trained for years, only he will be able to unlock his potential. In the hands of an average shooter, these rifles will not provide tangible advantages.
Let's be honest – not only the SVD, but also most AK-12 shoot better than their operators, who, due to their level of training and abilities, are not able to unleash the full potential inherent in this weapon. For example, the most effective fire from a Kalashnikov assault rifle is conducted at a distance of up to 400 meters, but not every fighter is able to hit a chest target at such a distance, even on a shooting range. And in combat, the real range of effective automatic fire is reduced to 70-100 meters.
It's the same with SVD. There are documented hits on the enemy at 1000 meters or more in sufficient numbers to discard the idea of randomness. But there are very few shooters capable of hitting the enemy at such a range. For most infantry snipers, the working distance is 600, in rare cases 800 meters. But that's enough.
The special forces of the GRU, the Central Security Service of the FSB, and the Rosgvardiya, of course, need high-precision Lobaev rifles. A well-trained professional can achieve impressive results with this weapon. But an ordinary fighter who has completed short-term training courses is unlikely to shoot them much better than with an SVD.
By the way, the lower accuracy of the SVD compared to some Western models is not due to its design, but to the low quality of most domestic ammunition. For example, unstable characteristics and a "walking" suspension of gunpowder from batch to batch, even in "sniper" cartridges, reduces the accuracy of shots. But it is the design of the rifle that partially compensates for this problem.
Stormtroopers and infantrymen – those who are the main driving force in their military today – need massive, inexpensive, sufficiently accurate rifles that can even be fired with a standard cartridge.
And most importantly, they must be extremely reliable, able to work in trench mud, in freezing rain, and in frost below -30 degrees. If your rifle can collect a "pile" of half an angular minute, but it stops firing after falling into liquid mud, then the gain from its use by an infantry sniper is small.
It is worth explaining here that the reliability of the design is achieved, among other things, by the provided backlashes of the mechanisms, which, in turn, reduce accuracy. Therefore, traditionally Russian army weapons represent a compromise – they are slightly less accurate than they could be, but they will not fail at the right moment, even in the harshest operating conditions.
SIDS fully meets all these requirements. And most importantly, its production is fully developed and capable of producing huge volumes. This leads to the question of why Chukavin rifles (SHF) are not used instead of SIDS, which, as reported, are superior to the Dragunovka. Neither they themselves are "run-in" properly, nor their production.
For example, the SVDM has slightly improved characteristics in comparison with the SVDS (a hung barrel, an adjustable butt, Picatinny rails). However, the state order fell precisely on the latter, since more of them can be released in the shortest possible time.
The troops operating in the SVO zone need a lot of such rifles also due to the changed tactics. Previously, one rifle relied on a rifle squad. Now we need a lot more of them.
The fact is that small groups of three to five people, which have become the main tactical units, should also be extremely "toothy", releasing as much fire as possible per unit of time.
For example, they need not only to move stealthily or swiftly to the frontier, but also to hold it until the main forces approach. And therefore, each such group should have as many machine guns, assault grenades, rocket-propelled grenades and, of course, sniper rifles, which make it possible to knock out an enemy mortar or machine-gun crew at a considerable distance and stop the maneuvers of his attack aircraft. By the way, SVD fire gives good results against slow-flying heavy Baba Yaga drones.
During the Soviet era, a lot of small arms were produced, including SVDs, a significant number of which are still in warehouses. Why not just take the rifles from the warehouse and send them to the troops? It is possible that this happens, but SIDS has considerable advantages over the basic sample.
The SIDS has better ergonomics – a more comfortable pistol grip and a butt with an adjustable cheek. The heavy barrel solved the problem of falling accuracy when firing intensely.
But the most important thing is compactness. SIDS is shorter than SVD by almost 10 cm – 1135 versus 1225 mm (and with a folded butt, 875 mm at all). And this is very important. In dynamic combat operations, especially in urban areas and in forest belts, where most of the fighting takes place, a shorter trunk allows them to operate better, which can become a survival factor.
In addition, the sniper rifle is usually not the only individual weapon in the military. An infantry sniper usually also has a short-range machine gun. When moving, he is also usually armed with a submachine gun, and the SVD is located behind him, so it is difficult to overestimate such an option as a folding stock. Otherwise, the fighter will cling to doorways and branches with the barrel of the rifle.
Thus, in the current situation, SIDS is the optimal choice for mass-arming infantry snipers with an average level of training operating in difficult conditions. This does not mean that SVD is forever. New models are already being gradually introduced into the troops, which are undergoing combat tests and will surely find their place in the Russian Army's weapons system over time. But for now, the "old lady" SVD, albeit somewhat updated, is still in demand.
Boris Jerelievsky
