Russian army stops buying Kalashnikov rifles

[MothBalls]

End of an era? I didn't see if it said they quit making them, or if Russia just quit buying them.

(CNN) -- The Russian army has ceased ordering the famed Kalashnikov rifle for its arsenal and is waiting on a newer model its manufacturer is developing.

The inventor of the weapon, Mikhail Kalashnikov, 91, has reportedly been deliberately kept uninformed about the decision.

In 2009, Kalashnikov told a CNN crew on an excursion to the Izhmash arms assembly plant in the Russian city of Izhevsk that two main qualities describe his machine gun: simplicity and reliability.

"It is a thousand times harder to make simple things than complicated ones," he said.

You would think they would have a reliable replacement before they stopped buying them. In the article it said they are waiting on development for a replacement.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/29/world/...a-kalashnikov/

[CCIP]

There's been a lot of proposed replacements going back to the 1980s, some of them even perfectly working prototypes or limited service rifles (spetsnaz etc.) - just that one hasn't ever been adopted into service. Most of them are modernized derivatives of the AK anyway so I don't think there's much to worry about.

Personally I'm a fan of the Abakan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94 I hope something like that gets adopted.
The downside, though, is that it is a somewhat more complex and sensitive rifle than Kalashnikov, requiring better care and training. Still, for a proper and professional army service, that shouldn't be an issue.

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by MothBalls

You would think they would have a reliable replacement before they stopped buying them. In the article it said they are waiting on development for a replacement.

Hmm, should probably get a Saiga soon.

[TFatseas]

Personally I'm a fan of the Abakan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94 I hope something like that gets adopted.
The downside, though, is that it is a somewhat more complex and sensitive rifle than Kalashnikov, requiring better care and training. Still, for a proper and professional army service, that shouldn't be an issue

The AN-94 is as dead as a doorknob. No funding, Nikonov's dead and it's production lines are long gone. The fact that the design came about between the death of the USSR and the birth of of the new Russia pretty much made sure of it staying a niche design.

Hmm, should probably get a Saiga soon.

No worries, Izmash is stepping up it's export production to cover the gap left by the Russian military pulling out its contracts.

[Platapus]

Back in the dark ages when I was in EOD school in MD, we visited the Beretta factory. One of the managers there had a very large private collection of AK rifles and he put on a display for us.

Being a gun nut since birth, I was eating this up with a big spoon.

He had a lot of rifles!

He disassembled one of his AK-47s (I forget which mod). I happened to be right in front of the table, drooling. He then asked me to reassemble it.

I told him that I couldn't as this was the first time I had ever seen one first hand. He told me not to think about it but to just put it together.

He was right. With the exception of the forward wooden handgrip, which can be tricky, the AK-47 goes together exactly as you would imagine it.

Simple and reliable.

It took me a formal class and many attempts before I could do the same for my M-16. But I was able to put together the AK just by looking at it.

A very well designed weapon. Probably one of the better designs.

Not being able to assemble an M-16 in a given time is one reason many fail the Expert Infantry Test.


I passed first time.

[MH]

AK is good basic rifle but its unsuited for modern warfare.

[Gerald]

Heckler & Koch MP7 is good for personal protection,and reliable

[MH]

New standart rifle of IDF replacing m-16

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by MH

AK is good basic rifle but its unsuited for modern warfare.

That really depends on your definition of modern warfare! Most of the warfare taking place in the modern world isn't fought by first-rate armies against equal opponents, and in that messy world the AK still very much holds up as a good option. As the concept of 'ASSAULT rifle' goes, it's also more than adequate - it's not a fantastic rifle at any serious range, but it's still versatile and reliable enough to be no less deadly and arguably more deadly than more sophisticated weapons in more confined areas.

That said, it's obviously time for it to go. I wasn't suggesting that AN-94 replace it, but I would certainly like to see a weapon with a similar improvement in capability over the AK. And hopefully even accounting for the next 20 years of weapons development. I'm sure something like that has been on the drawing boards at least...

[TFatseas]

AK's are fun, no doubt about that.

I wouldn't be surprised if they start moving towards more "western" designs.

Russia is already fielding Accuracy Internationals in limited numbers.

[Gerald]

AK-47, will remain on the market, just like an old Volkswagen car, it's cult-tier status in the gun,

Originally Posted by MH

AK is good basic rifle but its unsuited for modern warfare.

It WILL kill you very quickly have no doubts!!
That's the bottom line in conflicts.
If it was not good in Modern Warfare?
Why are many of our Service Members being killed or wounded with it to this day?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by privateer

It WILL kill you very quickly have no doubts!!
That's the bottom line in conflicts.
If it was not good in Modern Warfare?
Why are many of our Service Members being killed or wounded with it to this day?

Good point...I was trained on the MP5 and many 'experts' claimed it was a poor weapon....not many survived its attack!!

Being on the run and in a hostile enviroment?
I'd take the AK over the M-16 every time!
I was well trained and used both at times.
To this day I can tell which weapon is fireing at me!
Being on the wrong end of an AK is something you do not forget.