The AK-47. How much does it owe to German Design? A LOT!

[Penguin]

Post #5 said it all.

Here is a comparison of the breech block, to show the difference of the "inner values" (The Sturmgewehr 44 is the one with the dark barrel):






And some scans from a German weapon mag from 1973. While the text is in German, the pics are quite clear:

[Spyguy101]

[QUOTE=Stealhead

I have never understood why where something is Russian designed and has concepts from other designs(something everyone does) people want to point out how much of a copy it is.But you dont see this so much if the design comes from some place other than Russia but is obviously a copy or uses design concepts from others. Did you know that the Panther was largely inspired by the T-34? In fact one German firms entry to the competition that the Panther won was a more or less exact copy of the T-34.Or that the Germans copied largely the SVT-40 ending in the G43? I am not Russian by the way but I am a fan of being fair and seeing things for what they are.
[/QUOTE]

Wasn't the T-34 an evolution of the BT series of tanks. Which was designed by an American named John Christie

[Stealhead]

That is true but the US government was not interested in the design.Also I am not sure if Christie designed the sloped armor on purpose or if the Soviets discovered it at any rate they chose to use the concept.

One piece of technology having features of another item does not really mean that it is a copy of the previous design.In the case of the T-34 it is based on the BT tanks but I dont know if the sloping in the BT designs was done with taking advantage of its armor effects the BT was designed for speed on any terrain and you could remove the wheels.I think the soviets discovered the benefits of sloping steel when they tested it out and found that it had deflection benefits.

The B-29 and Tu-4 Bull is a true example of 100% reverse engineering or copying which is very different from using another design as influence which is the case with many firearms.The AUG for example has a very similar bolt to the M-16 but is vastly different in other respects.

I think people get too tied up in the AK47s mythology and either think it is the best gun ever made or the biggest piece of **** ever designed both of which are false views.

What can be said about the AK is that is a fairly reliable and durable weapon with average accuracy but good enough for modern volume of fire type warfare it is not the most ergonomic design by any means and is crude by some standards but it was/is easily and cheaply mass producible which is its strongest asset.If my life depended on one I would feel very confident of course I'd feel the same way with an M-16/M-4,G-36,FN FAL as well.

P.S. another benefit of the AK it is very "idiot proof" one can be trained the basics on an AK in hours and the gun will 99% work no matter what the conditions or treatment of the weapon.An M-16 takes roughly 2 weeks to be trained on (enough to do SPOTRS and field strip it and properly care for it) and if the person fails to properly maintain it the M-16 will 45% not work on a good day the main reason for this is the very close tolerances of the M-16 and the very loose ones of the AK that makes the M-16 more accurate but if it gets fouled with dust(something that can not be avoided at times in an extended fire fight) it will jam soldiers since Vietnam have died because of this the issue is less common with the A2 up but they still occur too often compared to many other rifles.