Kalashnikov RIP
 

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

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.

:Kaleun_Crying:'

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

True that.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

Rip Mikhail

.

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.

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.

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

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.

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-in...heirs-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

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_1...099&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

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.

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.