Kalashnikov RIP

[Susexx]

http://cdn1.img22.ria.ru/images/94617/04/946170407.jpg
Legendary man.
Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov (Russian: Михаил Тимофеевич Калашников; 10 November 1919 - 23 December 2013)
http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/712677

[Ducimus]

You have to give the man a lot of credit. With the invention of his Avtomat Kalashnikova, he probably did more to defend his nation then any single man that ever lived.

[Aktungbby]

:Kaleun_Crying:'

[em2nought]

On the very day that mine arrives at the gun shop. :salute:

[Jimbuna]

You have to give the man a lot of credit. With the invention of his Avtomat Kalashnikova, he probably did more to defend his nation then any single man that ever lived.

True that.

[Oberon]

He will be remembered up there with names like Colt, Gatling and Maxim, truly a weapon that changed the world for better or worse. A true soldiers weapon though, and a credit to his design that it is in such widespread use to this day.

[mapuc]

RIP Sir

It's not so long ago I saw a documentary about the soldiers life in Vietnam

In this program a speaker said "Many American soldier change their M-16 to a Kalashnikov or toke it, when they ran into some dead Vietcong soldiers"(something like that)

It no doubt that this Kalashnikov is the best machine gun in the world(according to some of the expert on that program)

I my self have only heard positive words about this weapon

Markus

[Stealhead]

Arguably the best military small arm to come out of the 20th century.There is very strong evidence that Kalashnikovdid receive some help from Vasily Degtyaryov(in the few years before his death in 1949) mainly in fine tuning his prototype into a mass production ready weapon.Still though the AK47 was Kalashnikov's idea and design.

Some love to rag how the Russians borrow good concepts seen in other designs but nearly every firearm borrows ideas from previous designs.

Oh and the AK47 is not a copy of the STG.44 that has been "discussed" here more than once already so I think nothing more needs to be said there.

[August]

In this program a speaker said "Many American soldier change their M-16 to a Kalashnikov or toke it, when they ran into some dead Vietcong soldiers"(something like that)

Extremely bad idea according to my old Sarge. He would often say that using an AK on the battlefield is a darn good way to get yourself killed by friendly fire. It looks different, sounds different and even the tracers are a different color than the ones used by our forces.

[mapuc]

Extremely bad idea according to my old Sarge. He would often say that using an AK on the battlefield is a darn good way to get yourself killed by friendly fire. It looks different, sounds different and even the tracers are a different color than the ones used by our forces.

I must have heard wrong then. Hope it will be shown again in the near future-then I can listen extra to what he say.

I was so asure he said those things and he even said that Kalashnikov was a lot more popular than the M-16.

Markus

[Oberon]

Yeah, I don't think many used the AK47 for multiple reasons, primarily as August said, in a low visibility scenario, you shoot in the direction of the sound of enemy fire, which if you're firing an enemy weapon...

http://were.so/bad-time.png

You're gonna have a bad time.

Also, there was a campaign to sabotage Viet Cong equipment, including ammunition, along the Ho Chi Minh trail, so there was a small percentage, but still a chance, that the AK47 you picked up might choose to spontaneously combust in your hands whilst firing.

I would imagine that some did though, but I don't think it was on that large a scale.

[Diopos]

Extremely bad idea according to my old Sarge. He would often say that using an AK on the battlefield is a darn good way to get yourself killed by friendly fire. It looks different, sounds different and even the tracers are a different color than the ones used by our forces.

On the other hand, better to have a gun that fires than one that "jams" (for whatever reason)... :hmmm:

Rip Mikhail

.

[August]

I must have heard wrong then. Hope it will be shown again in the near future-then I can listen extra to what he say.

I was so asure he said those things and he even said that Kalashnikov was a lot more popular than the M-16.

Markus

Well please note that I didn't say that one weapon was better or worse than the other, just that shooting the enemies weapons is a good way get targeted by your own forces.

You interview a dozen people on any given subject and you'll find a dozen differing opinions on it. That doesn't mean that the one you see on a TV show represents the mainstream, nor does it indicate an overall trend in a war that lasted more than a decade.

On the other hand, better to have a gun that fires than one that "jams" (for whatever reason)... :hmmm:

When the M16 first came out in the early '60's it had a lot of fouling problems (primarily because the Army decided to use the wrong powder type in their ammo) and some soldiers at that time might have been tempted to use the AK, but such actions would and should be strongly discouraged for the reason I mentioned. After all if you see AK fire coming from a tree line in a battle would you assume it's friendly or enemy fire? If you see a shadowy silhouette step onto the trail in front of you holding an enemy weapon do you wait until he starts shooting at you to decide if he's the enemy? Sounds like a good way to get oneself killed if you ask me.

It should also be noted that those fouling problems were soon investigated and corrected. The M16 of 1965 was not the same weapon of 1970. There were many improvements to both weapon and ammo in the meantime.

[mapuc]

Here's more that I remember from that documentary

"In the heat of the battle soldies could take a dead vietcongs Kalashnikovs when their M-16 had some(He mentioned some failure to the M-16)"

I could of course have heard everything wrong.

Markus

[Stealhead]

Extremely bad idea according to my old Sarge. He would often say that using an AK on the battlefield is a darn good way to get yourself killed by friendly fire. It looks different, sounds different and even the tracers are a different color than the ones used by our forces.

I can confirm that especially for regular infantry not the best idea under normal circumstances.My understanding was in Vietnam the risk was that the distinctive sound that AK47 made was likely to attract friendly return fire.Now in a "rounds complete" situation sure you'd pick up an enemy weapon.So @mapuc under normal circumstances especially for regular infantry to as a regular practice to carry an AK in Vietnam bad idea.

Even elite units tended to prefer the M16/CAR15 to the AK/type56 which is mainly because units had better discipline and kept their weapons spotless eliminating most of the serious problems.

My father said the typical SOP for LRRP units was that if the troop preferred as a point man could they carry an AK a lot of guys just as soon carry a shotgun for that position.A much more popular chicom weapon was their version of the RPD they'd cut it down and use it as scatter gun it weighed a few pound less than a 60.

Another more important issue would be ammunition and spare parts harder to scrounge those up if the weapon is not in your inventory.

In Iraq I think it would be a different story for the aK was the primary rifle of the INA so friendly units usually with a few Americans attached where using AKs but different war and time all together.

[mapuc]

I have more trust in what you write than my memory

Edit

Searched the internet and found this article

http://www.haaretz.com/news/ak-47-inventor-u-s-troops-in-iraq-prefer-my-rifle-to-theirs-1.185455

Here's a phrase from the article

"In Vietnam, American soldiers threw away their M-16 rifles and used [Kalashnikov] AK-47s from dead Vietnamese soldiers, with bullets they captured. That was because the climate is different to America, where M-16s may work properly," he said."

so my memory was not that wrong.

Markus

[Oberon]

It should also be noted that those fouling problems were soon investigated and corrected. The M16 of 1965 was not the same weapon of 1970. There were many improvements to both weapon and ammo in the meantime.

I think, on the whole, until the fouling problems were fixed most soldiers preferred to use the M14 rather than to pick up an AK, but out in the field, in the heat of the moment, it's always possible, but like you said it wasn't likely to be a widespread thing and would have been very very much frowned upon.
Like the AK, the M16 was a good weapon for the jungle, close quarter combat, lighter than the 14 too, but there's something about the construction of the M14 that I prefer over the 16.
Of course, here's a R.Lee Ermey clip comparing them:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ee9_1351878099&comments=1


But this thread isn't about the 14 or 16, it's about the 47, and boy is that a weapon that will leave its mark on history. :03:

I have more trust in what you write than my memory

Edit

Searched the internet and found this article

http://www.haaretz.com/news/ak-47-inventor-u-s-troops-in-iraq-prefer-my-rifle-to-theirs-1.185455

Here's a phrase from the article

"In Vietnam, American soldiers threw away their M-16 rifles and used [Kalashnikov] AK-47s from dead Vietnamese soldiers, with bullets they captured. That was because the climate is different to America, where M-16s may work properly," he said."

so my memory was not that wrong.

Markus

Yeah, I came across that quote too, no doubt it did happen, probably during the M16s rough 'Mattel Toy' early years, but the risks of friendly fire would have limited its use.

There's a pretty good discussion on it here that I just found:
http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=94570

[mapuc]

I think, on the whole, until the fouling problems were fixed most soldiers preferred to use the M14 rather than to pick up an AK, but out in the field, in the heat of the moment, it's always possible, but like you said it wasn't likely to be a widespread thing and would have been very very much frowned upon.
Like the AK, the M16 was a good weapon for the jungle, close quarter combat, lighter than the 14 too, but there's something about the construction of the M14 that I prefer over the 16.
Of course, here's a R.Lee Ermey clip comparing them:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ee9_1351878099&comments=1


But this thread isn't about the 14 or 16, it's about the 47, and boy is that a weapon that will leave its mark on history. :03:



Yeah, I came across that quote too, no doubt it did happen, probably during the M16s rough 'Mattel Toy' early years, but the risks of friendly fire would have limited its use.

There's a pretty good discussion on it here that I just found:
http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=94570

Thanks for the links, was very interesting to read.

When I googled for "American soldies prefer AK47 in vietnam war

Many links about the iraqi war came up.

Markus

[Skybird]

AK-47 may be famous - but one wonders what there would be without the Sturmgewehr 44 that preceded it and other modern assault rifles. Another of those Third Reich gadgets that everybody later based on.

From a different perspective, not nuclear weapons, bombers or anything are the real weapons of mass destructions, but small callibre arms. Seen that way one maybe better takes note of the man's death - and leaves it to that. It's an absolutely murderous item we are talking of, and one with a probably unique historic killing record. Not exactly what I would want to celebrate.

[August]

There's a pretty good discussion on it here that I just found

Most of that discussion seems to be about SpecOps which is a totally different combat situation than what conventional forces would find themselves in.

As for comparing the two weapons a lot has to do with the time frame you're talking about. One can't just say "during Vietnam" because that encompasses over a decade, with many different unit types, tactics and situations.

Bottom line here is while the AK is a lot lower maintenance than the M16 variants the looser tolerances that make it so also makes it a lot less accurate. There's 100 meters difference in effective range between the two weapons. 300 feet is a long way to maneuver under enemy fire without being able to hit back.

Coupled with the problems obtaining ammo for it and the risk of mis-identification means that while regular Infantry might make use of an enemy weapon in a pinch, like you said it would be fairly rare occurrence.

[Stealhead]

I think, on the whole, until the fouling problems were fixed most soldiers preferred to use the M14 rather than to pick up an AK, but out in the field, in the heat of the moment, it's always possible, but like you said it wasn't likely to be a widespread thing and would have been very very much frowned upon.
Like the AK, the M16 was a good weapon for the jungle, close quarter combat, lighter than the 14 too, but there's something about the construction of the M14 that I prefer over the 16.
Of course, here's a R.Lee Ermey clip comparing them:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ee9_1351878099&comments=1



Meh R.Lee was not infantry though he was in aircraft maintenance so he did not have to hump an M14 through jungle,delta,highlands,....hell.Most true grunts from Vietnam whom I now where actually grunts pretty well liked the M16 sure it was not perfect but the M14 was a bit bulky and in most operational areas in Vietnam where much more claustrophobic where the long range advantage of an M14 would not have leneded itself well.Plus the weight factor in such a brutal climate as Vietnam this is a very important factor.Kind of like WWII in the Pacific many preferred the M1 carbine over other small arms for the same reasons.


Also people tend to ignore Aussie and New Zeland troops who had the choice between the M16 and the L1A1 and many preferred the M16.

Those quotes are most likely from the battle of Hamburger Hill in 1969 or the Battle of Hill 881 there was another hill battle in 1967 which I have read of but can't seem to recall the name of where the troops where ordered to pick up enemy weapons and complete the advance to take the hill or die where they stood.

[August]

AK-47 may be famous - but one wonders what there would be without the Sturmgewehr 44 that preceded it and other modern assault rifles. Another of those Third Reich gadgets that everybody later based on.

Probably right exactly were we are today anyways. After all it's been pretty conclusively proven that the AK was not based the 44 and neither was the M1 Carbine.

[Stealhead]

The other day Skybird was getting on to people for doing the very thing he just did in this thread not to call anyone out but it is what it is.

As if the STG44 was the first attempt at an "assault rifle" to use the term loosely.

[Skybird]

Whatever. The SG44 left quite a huge impression in Russian - and Western - minds, and Kalashnikov himself said in a rare interview about which I have read many years ago that the SG44 tremendously influenced his thinking - both in things he took over and things he made different. He said the Russians rated the concept of the SG44 and its military value in the war as very high. He said without the SG44 he would have done the AK quite differently - again both regarding design decisions "copying" the German SG'S characteristics and design decisions that were made to "replace" details in the German weapon. Also, the idea behind the SG44 - to combine carbine and machine pistol and make support by LMG and MMG less essential, was a kickstart to similiar brainstorming in East and West.

Technically, the SG44 and the AK47 are quite different, still, the SG44 has influenced the design of this and similar machine carbines (as would be the correct German term instead of assault rifle).

The SG44 gets used in third world conflicts until today. And German wikipedia says ammunition for it still gets manufactured, for example in Serbia.

[Red October1984]

RIP to a great man with a great idea turned into a great innovation. :salute:

[Ducimus]

Tales of the Gun - AK-47 (http://youtu.be/8jsMyg9NwBc) (45:57)

Mentions much of what some are discussing in this thread. I watched it earlier today, but didn't bother linking it.

[TFatseas]

Whatever. The SG44 left quite a huge impression in Russian - and Western - minds, and Kalashnikov himself said in a rare interview about which I have read many years ago that the SG44 tremendously influenced his thinking - both in things he took over and things he made different. He said the Russians rated the concept of the SG44 and its military value in the war as very high. He said without the SG44 he would have done the AK quite differently - again both regarding design decisions "copying" the German SG'S characteristics and design decisions that were made to "replace" details in the German weapon. Also, the idea behind the SG44 - to combine carbine and machine pistol and make support by LMG and MMG less essential, was a kickstart to similiar brainstorming in East and West.

Technically, the SG44 and the AK47 are quite different, still, the SG44 has influenced the design of this and similar machine carbines (as would be the correct German term instead of assault rifle).

The SG44 gets used in third world conflicts until today. And German wikipedia says ammunition for it still gets manufactured, for example in Serbia.

Meh, the tilting bolt design of the StG 44 is a world away from the AK-47.

The AK is closer to a SVT or a SKS, heck, even an M1 Garand internally than a StG. I don't doubt the StG 44 influenced the AK, but I believe more of it comes from the Soviet's own designs.

Anyhow, I need to do a mag dump for Mr. Kalashnikov.:03:

http://imageshack.us/a/img7/9121/qwedje213.jpg

[Ducimus]

Anyhow, I need to do a mag dump for Mr. Kalashnikov.:03:



Mag dump did you say?

In Memory Of Kalashnikov: 700 Round AK Burn (http://youtu.be/lND51FkLuFU)

Edit:
Although, I'd have been more impressed if he was using a class 3 AK.

[Red October1984]

Anyhow, I need to do a mag dump for Mr. Kalashnikov.:03:

Sounds like fun...

I really love shooting AK's. They're great rifles on and off the battlefield IMHO.

[Aktungbby]

He will be remembered up there with names like Colt, Gatling and Maxim,
Or down there:hmmm:

[Skybird]

Sounds like fun...

I really love shooting AK's. They're great rifles on and off the battlefield IMHO.

The Russian army had huge stockpiles of AK's that would have armed the reserves in case of a general mobilization. But in 2011 the weapons failed to pass Russian army's qualification tests, quoting its poor aim and the change in the kind of warfare to be expected. No longer is it about huge masses of enemies that are to be mowed down in epic land battles, but precision against small forces that move agile and quickly, and about individual targets. The weapon, says the Russian army, no longer meets the needs of the to-be-expected armed conflicts of the forseeable future. Who am I to challenge the Russians over their own assessment of their own national idol.

Kalashnikov himself had doubts about his life's work record when he became older. He was aware that his invention had become the killing tool of choice of terrorists, ruthless general in civil wars that sent child soldiers into battle, and today I read in Der Tagesspiegel that in a TV documentation from around the year 2000 he voiced worries about his fate in afterlife, fearing to suffer hellfire for what he had done. It seems he was a man of religious belief. And clearly he knew what the invention of the AK47 has meant and caused in the world.

Iconic the weapon is - but iconic for many sides and many users with questionable reputation. It seems as a man of higher age he did not get over his role in this "achievement".

[Ducimus]

Sounds like fun...

I really love shooting AK's. They're great rifles on and off the battlefield IMHO.

You know, as much as a gun nut people here probably think I am now, I have never held a kalashnikov of any sort in my hands. I don't even think i've asked to see them at gun shops. Hell, I had a gold membership to a local range where I had access to check out rental's for free anytime i wanted as part of that membership , class 3 full auto AK's, and never bothered to check one out. :roll: :oops:


Kalashnikov himself had doubts about his life's work record when he became older. He was aware that his invention had become the killing tool of choice of terrorists, ruthless general in civil wars that sent child soldiers into battle, and today I read in Der Tagesspiegel that in a TV documentation from around the year 2000 he voiced worries about his fate in afterlife, fearing to suffer hellfire for what he had done. It seems he was a man of religious belief. And clearly he knew what the invention of the AK47 has meant and caused in the world.

Iconic the weapon is - but iconic for many sides and many users with questionable reputation. It seems as a man of higher age he did not get over his role in this "achievement".

I think i caught similar impressions elsewhere. Maybe in the 45 minute documentary i linked earlier, maybe elsewhere, i dunno, i watch/listen to a lot of documentaries. But on this subject, a quote by a fellow named Jeff Cooper comes to mind:

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

[Aktungbby]

You know, as much as a gun nut people here probably think I am now, I have never held a kalashnikov of any sort in my hands. I don't even think i've asked to see them at gun shops. me neither:yeah:

[MH]

RIP AK
Great rifle in its time but out dated today and also a bit over glorified .:haha:

[Stealhead]

RIP AK
Great rifle in its time but out dated today and also a bit over glorified .:haha:


Not when you are on the receiving end and they will be around for some time after they are no longer effective for a modern military.In some parts of the world the jump was from muzzle loaders to the AK for these folks one design is suitable for a few generations.

All though bullet wounds are a less common form of causality for a counter insurgency force make no mistake that the AK47 is still doing what it was designed to do just fine.

Many other firearms receive their fair of veneration in most cases that veneration is earned that does not a firearm the ultimate weapon but tell me how many people ever heard of the Chachat?

One thing many over look the AK47 was that it had been in production since 1949 and did not see a major conflict until the early 60's in that roughly 14 years it had been improved several times and in fact the original design had already been replaced in Soviet service by the AKM.The Type 56 which is what the majority of AK type rifles used by the NVA and VC was the Chinese version of the AKM so it was of course a design based on 14 years of experience and bug correcting. The M16 on the other had was first designed in 1956/57 as the AR15 and first entered service as a military rifle in 1963.It had a very poorly performed testing process and the Army changed the powered type to one that greatly increased the amount of residue build up not to mention the fact that none of the parts where chromed.So no wonder the AK47 was better performer in the hands of conscript troops.

If anything the AK vs M16 argument simply proves the blind engineering over confidence that existed in the US at the time period (lets face it every nation has this pride to some extent).They thought that they could make a better weapon that had already been in development for over a decade in a matter of years.In the end at the peak of their respective designs both rifles are good kit so long as they are properly treated and used where their specific strengths are best.

So I can understand the veneration that the AK receives I also know that anyone who says that they never jam and never misfire is a liar or has not fired one more than just casually every firearm has malfuctions from time to time even the most cared for.Stovepipe for example a person who has never had that happen with a firearm is a hardcore layman the one who makes the malfunction free claim you can be rest assure does not know what a stovepipe is.

[MH]

Not when you are on the receiving end and they will be around for some time after they are no longer effective for a modern military.In some parts of the world the jump was from muzzle loaders to the AK for these folks one design is suitable for a few generations.



Have you ever been on receiving end of anything?
Sure you dont.
You dont want to be on the receiving end of a bow....not that i compare AK to bow as a pun.
Yes AK will stay for a long time , yet not with modern armed forces.

[Ducimus]

Not when you are on the receiving end and they will be around for some time after they are no longer effective for a modern military.


Oh yes. If wikipedia is accurate, the AK-47 alone, has had 75 million produced. Compare that to the Mosin-Nagant 37 million produced. The Mosin has been so plentiful in supply, as to be one of the cheapest bolt guns you can buy that fires a full sized cartridge. It's usually priced in todays market at about 160 to 200 dollars depending on condition. So comparatively, Kalashnikov's must be falling out of trees.

EDIT:
RIP AK
Great rifle in its time but out dated today and also a bit over glorified .:haha:

I must point out that the age of a firearm does not dictate obsolescence. For example some would say that 1911 handgun (you know, the handgun that has been around since before WW1) is obsolete, but how now the US marines are acutaly issuing them out again (http://youtu.be/IEIvu_aWccY) on a limited basis. Or the Browning M2 machine gun. Designed in 1933, and has never left service. Both of these examples predate any kalashnikov rifle.

So i would submit that while the AK may not be "all that and a bag of chips", and it may not be the best selective fire rifle in an intermediate cartridge, it does what it was designed to do well enough.

[MH]

I must point out that the age of a firearm does not dictate obsolescence. Its not about the age.
Its about its design which does not work and its not flexible enough to adapt it to the requirement of modern armed forced.

AK nowadays has no real advantage besides being reliable and cheap which is good thing but not enough anymore.

[Ducimus]

Its not about the age.
Its about its design which does not work and its not flexible enough to adapt it to the requirement of modern armed forced.

AK nowadays has no real advantage besides being reliable and cheap which is good thing but not enough anymore.

Do you have any supportive points for your assertion? Picitianny rails don't count. It's not hard to change furniture and put all the tacticool toys on just about anything.

If one was to a general look at the criteria for Assault rifles:
- selective fire
- intermediate cartridge
- engagement of targets at a maximum range of 200 to 300 yards.

While an AK may not be as accurate as other rifles, I do think it is accurate enough for the role intended, and will kill you just the same as anything in the M16 family of rifles. Although if your argument is beyond platform's and is more about the role of the intermediate cartridge itself, that is something entirely different.

[Oberon]

Of all the weapons in the vast Soviet arsenal nothing was more profitable than Avtomat Kalashnikova model of 1947, more commonly known as the AK-47, or Kalashnikov. It's the world's most popular assault rifle, a weapon all fighters love. An elegantly simple nine pound amalgamation of forged steel and plywood, it doesn't break, jam, or overheat. It will shoot whether it's covered in mud or filled with sand. It's so easy even a child can use it, and they do. The Soviets put the gun on a coin, Mozambique put it on their flag. Since the end of the Cold War, the Kalashnikov has become the Russian people's greatest export. After that comes vodka, caviar, and suicidal novelists. One thing is for sure; no one was lining up to buy their cars.

:03:

[MH]

Do you have any supportive points for your assertion? Picitianny rails don't count. It's not hard to change furniture and put all the tacticool toys on just about anything.

True but maintaining them zeroed in in extreme conditions is a different story....
Try to use Ak,s side rail with an adapter to which you attach whatever you need in the field.
In particular when in need run or throw your self with the gun to the ground rocks or what ever...
Besides the issue that it gets stuck in your uniform or gear.
Actually this gun becomes very awkward with addons .
Ergonomy ,lightweight ease of use or acquiring target gives edge in combat...besides training and so on.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

RIP sir.Oh yes. If wikipedia is accurate, the AK-47 alone, has had 75 million produced. Compare that to the Mosin-Nagant 37 million produced. The Mosin has been so plentiful in supply, as to be one of the cheapest bolt guns you can buy that fires a full sized cartridge. It's usually priced in todays market at about 160 to 200 dollars depending on condition. So comparatively, Kalashnikov's must be falling out of trees.Just as curiosity. I visited Infantry Museum in Mikkeli around 2006-2007 and accordign to museum's knowledge last Mosin-Nagants were removed from reserve stockpiles in late 1990s. Also currently used sniper rifle - 7.62 TKIV 85 - is based on Mosin-Nagant. If I have understood correctly they use old receivers modified as necessary.

[Oberon]

True but maintaining them zeroed in in extreme conditions is a different story....
Try to use Ak,s side rail with an adapter to which you attach whatever you need in the field.
In particular when in need run or throw your self with the gun to the ground rocks or what ever...
Besides the issue that it gets stuck in your uniform or gear.
Actually this gun becomes very awkward with addons .
Ergonomy ,lightweight ease of use or acquiring target gives edge in combat...besides training and so on.

Aren't we missing the point a bit though? It's not the amount of extra bits that you can put on an AK that has made it one of the worlds biggest selling firearms, it's the fact that it's lightweight, easy to use, easy to maintain and in a close in fire fight will kill just as effectively as any other weapon out there. Most AKs aren't used out in long range fire-fights anyway, but close in town sieges and battles, and they're rarely used against well armed western forces but against other militias with AKs and FN FALs, and it does its job very well for that. I mean, an eight year old child is going to struggle to disassemble and re-assemble a M4 Carbine, but the AK with minimal parts, is...quite literally...childs play.
Then you've got repairs, with so many in action it's easy to get the parts, and if you can't then you could most likely get some stamped by a scrap merchant, although it wouldn't do much for the life-span of the weapon.

Basically, it's the same reason that you still find the Lee Enfield in use, it's simple, it's reliable, and it's good for the job that it's designed for, even after all these years. After all, the more complicated the drain, the easier it is to block it up. :03:

[Ducimus]

True but maintaining them zeroed in in extreme conditions is a different story....
Try to use Ak,s side rail with an adapter to which you attach whatever you need in the field.
In particular when in need run or throw your self with the gun to the ground rocks or what ever...
Besides the issue that it gets stuck in your uniform or gear.
Actually this gun becomes very awkward with addons .
Ergonomy ,lightweight ease of use or acquiring target gives edge in combat...besides training and so on.

I will have to concede on your points of addons of holding zero, portability with add-ons, and ergonomics. It sounds like you've tried this, so i'll just take your word for it. Personally, I subscribe to the idea of KISS and practicality. I've never delved much into addon's aside from a simple cowitnessed red dot sight, and a light; and even that much took some arm twisting. Maybe i'm getting old and senile at 40, but I just never got onto the gadget train.

[Stealhead]

Have you ever been on receiving end of anything?
Sure you dont.
You dont want to be on the receiving end of a bow....not that i compare AK to bow as a pun.
Yes AK will stay for a long time , yet not with modern armed forces.

A firearm not directly but I have been places where that particular firearm could have been used to sling lead at yours truly.My father and two brothers have been on the "snap" end of an AK and they lack your opinion.


Been on the receiving of fists and feet on more than a few occasions if you are trying to imply that I am untested.Been on the receiving side of some very poorly laid mortars a few times as well they only manged to hit dirt before they got wasted to decided to go back to Pakistan or decided that they pay was not sufficient enough.Never fired a weapon in anger they never had the balls to try and attack a large base on foot to make such action possible.

[MH]

A firearm not directly but I have been places where that particular firearm could have been used to sling lead at yours truly.My father and two brothers have been on the "snap" end of an AK and they lack your opinion.
.
My point is that you don't want to be on receiving end of anything at all.
Not AK , m16 or crossbow for that matter.
Yet you want all the advantage you may have .
While AK is great basic rifle there are some others which are simply better in balancing different advantages and shortcomings.
M16 for example is one of them , wether by chance or foresight i don't know:hmmm:

[Madox58]

I've been on the wrong end of the AK-47 and AK-74.
One of my newest employees caught an AK-47 round in the back in Afghanistan. That put him through 2 years of hell and another year getting off the drugs!

It may be a sub-par weapon when compared to what all is out there.
But it will, and still does, kill very well.
Even the wounds are no small matter.
:nope:

[Stealhead]

I read in a book in one section they speak with this Kurd from Northern Iraq he was a body guard for some official that AQII wanted dead so they put a hit on him.They did not manage to kill the target but the bodyguard took 7 rounds from an AK-47.He survived but just barely and much of that was due to the fact that this guy was one tough cookie in very good shape which allowed him a better chance at surviving such a serious injury.Still though he has permanent injuries.

The book was Gun written by a former Marine infantryman about the AK47 though it is an honest book and does a very good job at being unbiased.Interesting read I learned a good bit about the early M16 that I only knew minor details about.

Another interesting bit which made the author want to write the book was when he was on another assignment in Afghanistan.While he was there he was taking a look at AK47s that some friendly Afghans had they where Frankensteins made of various parts but several had receivers produced in 1954.Now flip side of that coin some of the guerrillas in Laos fighting the communist government they carry 40+ year old M16s left over for Vietnam most not in the ideal condition but they still go bang most of the time same would apply to a ruddy AK not ideal but it works.

[August]

the bodyguard took 7 rounds from an AK-47.He survived but just barely and much of that was due to the fact that...

I'd say it mainly depends on where the rounds impact. For example you could empty an entire 30rd mag into someones hand and they would likely surivive (although they probably won't ever play the violin again).

[Stealhead]

Yeah I just checked the book which is entitled The Gun the Kurds name is Karzan Mahmoud and the doctors where able to determine that he was hit 23 times lucky as many where not "bad" hits but it certainly shattered him.

One solid hit from any round to the body or limbs is nothing to shake a stick at.

[Skybird]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25709371

[Dread Knot]

So, Kalashnikov felt some twinge of remorse toward the end.

I wonder if the faceless politicians and bureaucrats who licensed and sold the AK-47 in the millions abroad without his consent feel any?

[soopaman2]

They will be using his guns 200 years from now.

I have some range time with an AK. It is a simple weapon, very easy to use, you can ride them hard and put them away wet. It will still fire.

Parts for it are dime a dozen, and parts made in different countries will fit in them, making them a great doomsday weapon. The caliber of bullet is also superior to what Americans use in M16s.

Not as accurate, and it feels "loose" in your hands. Alot of muzzle jump, so your just spraying bullets when you rapid fire.You know your firing a cheap gun. But still I am a big fan of the Kalash.:up:

[Ducimus]

Since this thread's bumped up, I may as well post this:

Tribute to Mikhail Kalashnikov and the AK-47 (http://youtu.be/IndgJBheS5s)

[Stealhead]

Nice video neat that he showed a Tavor I see why he calls it Hebrew Hammer I hear that they are pretty accurate good ergonomics as well.

[Oberon]

Understandable he felt remorse, I imagine many weapons designers did, look at Nobel, and Oppenheimer.

[Aktungbby]

Not to mention the world famous Winchester Mystery House in present day San José CA, built by Winchester's widow, Sara, into a bizarre 160 room mansion to appease the spirits of the dead victims of the Winchester Rifle. It's something off a first rate tourist trap but extremely interesting nonetheless. She feared the vengeful spirits of the dead Indians and built the false roomed and dead-end hallways abode to confuse the angry ghosts over many spiritually consumed years until her death. If memory serves however, at the Little Big Horn, Winchesters and Henry's were in the hands of the Sioux and Cheyenne warriors, not the troopers.:hmmm:

[August]

I just read a very interesting article that provides yet one more reason not to use an enemy weapon in combat.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=61f_1303788297

Secrets of the Vietnam War: Project "Eldest Son" - Top Secret U.S. S.O.G. Operation to Plant Sabotaged Ammunition in Enemy Hands

During the Vietnam War, the Studies And Observations Group (SOG) created an ingenious top-secret program called Project Eldest Son to wreak general mayhem and cause the Viet Cong and NVA to doubt the safety of their guns and ammunition.

Amid a firefight near the Cambodian border on June 6, 1968, a North Vietnamese Army soldier spotted an American G.I. raising his rifle, and the NVA infantryman pulled his trigger, anticipating a muzzle blast. He got a blast, alright, but not quite what he'd expected.
United States 1st Infantry Division troops later found the enemy soldier, sprawled beside his Chinese Type 56 AK, quite dead - but not from small-arms fire. Peculiarly, they could see, his rifle had exploded, its shattered receiver killing him instantly. It seemed a great mystery that his AK had blown up since nothing was blocking the bore. Bad metallurgy, the G.I.s concluded, or possibly defective ammo. It was neither.

In reality, this actual incident was the calculated handiwork of one the Vietnam War's most secret and least understood covert operations: Project Eldest Son. So secret was this sabotage effort that few G.I.s in Southeast Asia ever heard of it or the organization behind it, the innocuously named Studies and Observations Group. As the Vietnam War's top-secret special ops task force, SOG's operators - Army Special Forces, Air Force Air Commandos and Navy SEALs - worked directly for the Joint Chiefs, executing highly classified, deniable missions in the enemy's backyard of Laos, Cambodia and North Vietnam.

[Stealhead]

They also did 82mm mortar shells which I think was a wiser choice as the likelihood of a mortar being put into action by a friendly is lower than a common small arm which is much more likely to be used in a dire situation.

I read in a book by an SOG SFC that his team once found a crater along the Laotian border the crater was a former mortar crew that had dropped an Eldest Son shell down the tube.Of course SOG did a lot more recons and POW grabs than plant Eldest Son "surprises". Of course the goal was to plant just enough because too many exploding guns and tubes and they are gonna figure that something is up.The goal was to cause the typical NVA/VC to doubt his supply which I am fairly sure Project Eldest Son failed in that respect.That or NVA NCOs where very good at inspiring their troops.

Of course another little known Vietnam fact is that a South Korean company secretly made 7.62x39mm ammo which sheds light as to just how common use of the AK-47 was at least with SF.

[August]

Of course SOG did a lot more recons and POW grabs than plant Eldest Son "surprises"

The way I read it Eldest Son was more like something that can be done to enemy ammunition caches that are discovered while on other missions and which cannot be secured or destroyed.

...which sheds light as to just how common use of the AK-47 was at least with SF.Well a 12 man SF team operating far behind enemy lines, relying upon remaining undetected for their survival is vastly different than an Infantryman using a discarded enemy weapon in a conventional military action.

I can easily see an SF team choosing to use AK's over M-16's (they can use any weapon they want, unlike the average grunt) if for no other reason than M-16 gunfire where they are going is like holding up a big neon sign saying "we're right here, come kill us!". AK gunfire would introduce a degree of uncertainty as to who is doing the shooting but even still they'd rather not have to use their weapons at all.

An Infantry company on the other hand has 150-200 troops spread out over a much larger area and is fighting a completely different type of war. There's a lot more noise and confusion and what they call the "fog of war". In that situation I think there's a lot bigger chance of receiving friendly fire if one uses an enemy weapon.

[Oberon]

Mentioned Eldest Son on the first page... :03:

[August]

Nobody reads your posts Oberon! :)

[Oberon]

Nobody reads your posts Oberon! :)

:haha:

http://makeameme.org/media/created/im-so-ronery.jpg

[TarJak]

Nobody reads your posts Oberon! :)Who is Oberon?

[Jimbuna]

Who is Oberon?

I've a picture you could look at but then I'd have to brig myself :)

[TarJak]

I've a picture you could look at but then I'd have to brig myself :)

:dead:

[August]

I've a picture you could look at but then I'd have to brig myself :)

Look at it often do you? :hmmm::)

[TarJak]

Look at it often do you? :hmmm::)

Shhh you'l interrupt his fapping.

[Stealhead]

The way I read it Eldest Son was more like something that can be done to enemy ammunition caches that are discovered while on other missions and which cannot be secured or destroyed.

Well a 12 man SF team operating far behind enemy lines, relying upon remaining undetected for their survival is vastly different than an Infantryman using a discarded enemy weapon in a conventional military action.



Of course SOG and LRRP teams fairly regularly worked with Cambodian and Chinese(ROC) mercenaries who also had the choice of more exotic than average weapon selection so I recon that a good amount of those South Korean made rounds where being used by those guys.Heck some of the non SOG SF camps "Mike Forces" where pretty large 100~200 men so you figure half of them might use an AK.

Of course the Cadillac of SF weapons was the Swedish K.I heard they became a bit of a status symbol for regular officers and many SF units would trade them off.