15 ms·

The AK-47

143 points by boeingUH60 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
buscoquadnary 4y ago
One of the craziest stories I am familiar with when talking about an AK is from a 'Nam veteran who they stumbled upon a body that had been decaying in the jungle for two weeks or so, when they turned it over they found an AK underneath. They cleared the action, and the thing still worked flawlessly. There is something to be said about that level of engineering.
- JustSomeNobody 4y ago
  > There is something to be said about that level of engineering. Or simplicity. Keep it simple and make it work reliably.
- Ancapistani 4y ago
  I've seen videos from Afghanistan showing US troops finding AKs buried that date from the Soviet invasion in the late 1970s. They were covered in rust and looked terrible - but were 100% operational even in that condition. Run a rod through the barrel to make sure it's clear, insert a magazine, and it still runs. For what it's worth, the "AR family" of rifles (AR-15, M-16, M-4, etc.) actually surpass AKs in terms of field reliability and use in hostile conditions. They're built to tighter tolerances, but with the dust cover closed there isn't really any way for sand/mud/dirt to get into the action, so they continue to work. The AK takes the opposite approach - looser tolerances and plenty of room in the action to allow foreign debris to stay out of the way and let it continue to function. You can take the dust cover off an AK, turn it upside down, and smack it a few times to knock all the junk out of the action. AKs tend to work better with no/minimal maintenance, and are much easier to field strip and restore to operable condition. ARs require more maintenance but are easier to make (and keep) accurate, and require a bit more in terms of training and tooling to maintain under use. I've always found it interesting that AKs are relatively easy to manufacture in rough conditions, but that ARs are easier to manufacture in the US. I can build a working AR lower receiver in the US with tools I have laying around my home (drill press, rotary tool, etc). I can't do the same for an AK because I don't have a spot welder to attach the rails. The fact that what qualifies as "easy to make" is so different depending on the environment.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    >I can't do the same for an AK because I don't have a spot welder to attach the rails Harbor freight sells the simplest possible welders for like $150. Would that be sufficient?
    - brodouevencode 4y ago
      tbh I'd be scared of a Harbor Freight welder
      - snapetom 4y ago
        A friend of mine needed a chainsaw to chop up a tree branch in her yard. She told her dad she was going to Harbor Freight to get one and he emphatically said, "NO" and bought her a decent one.
        davidro80 4y ago
        bad416f1f5a2 4y ago
        Dad’s hate “Chinese crap tools?” Say it ain’t so! The average person that says “I need a chainsaw” will likely be well served by renting one from a home store, or buying a cheap one from Harbor Freight. They’ll probably use it a dozen times at most. Is your cheap chainsaw going to hold up as well as the Husqvarna my dad has been using since the late 80s? Absolutely not. Do you live on a 70 acre orchard? No, so a consumer grade tool will do.
        Spooky23 4y ago
        I bought a harbor freight drill press, and the metal pole that holds the drill up cracked the 3rd or 4th time I used it. Just buy the cheap chainsaw at Home Depot, it costs like $10 more.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jzellis 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Ancapistani 4y ago
  I think I detect a hint of sarcasm in this post :). If the history of the AK-47 isn't your thing, check out the two-round burst mechanism of the AN-94. There is a secondary "shelf" to hold a second round in the action, and steel cables that force that round into the chamber and fire it before the recoil impulse of the first round completes. At first, it struck me as a Rube Goldberg machine of ridiculous complexity that has no place is a firearm. After seeing one in person, though... it's genius. It's not right for every application, but as far as I know it's completely unique in the firearms world, enables a use case that no other rifle can meet, and is really an engineering marvel.
  - aerostable_slug 4y ago
    > enables a use case that no other rifle can meet The Heckler & Koch G11 fired a three round burst during a single recoil impulse. However, this required caseless ammunition, which effectively doomed the project (especially given its timing, right when the Soviet empire was collapsing). Other efforts to increase hit rates historically include duplex or salvo ammunition, where multiple bullets are loaded in a single cartridge.
    - sbierwagen 4y ago
      You can see some soldiers using G11 salvo fire here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jaclaz 4y ago
As a side note, the Wikipedia page "Concept" on the AK-47, cites Mikhail Kalashnikov as saying two things that can be generalized to other fields: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Concept #1 "I was a soldier, and I created a machine gun for a soldier." #2 "A lot of Russian Army soldiers ask me how one can become a constructor, and how new weaponry is designed. These are very difficult questions. Each designer seems to have his own paths, his own successes and failures. But one thing is clear: before attempting to create something new, it is vital to have a good appreciation of everything that already exists in this field. I myself have had many experiences confirming this to be so." Particularly the latter could be a valid corollary to the Chesterton's Fence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...
- la64710 4y ago
  And the Lord blesseth the man for his wonderful work with 93 years of full life. /s
  - imafish 4y ago
    Seems he was also battling with guilt most of his life. One year before his death, Mikhail Kalashnikov wrote a letter to the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. Excerpts: “I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people’s lives, then can it be that I… a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?” “The longer I live, the more this question drills itself into my brain and the more I wonder why the Lord allowed man to have the devilish desires of envy, greed and aggression.”
- melony 4y ago
  He meant assault rifle not machine gun right?
  - kevingadd 4y ago
    Seems likely to be a translation error, or in reference to how he also worked on designing machine guns and light machine guns. The round the AK-47 uses is used by some machine guns, so that might be how it got mixed up.
Ancapistani 4y ago
If this article was interesting to you, I strongly recommend "The Gun", by C.J. Chivers. It's a history of the "AK family of rifles", and the AK-47 in particular. It starts well before that, with the impact of automatic weapons on warfare in general, but quickly comes back to the development of the AK. It covers a lot of interesting details around the social, political, and technical environment that led to the creation of the AK and its development since. From a US-centric political perspective, the author seems pretty obviously "anti-gun". That said, it's one of those rare books where the author's political perspective is pretty much irrelevant. It's extremely well-researched and well-written. It's honestly an enjoyable read if you're at all interested in history, politics, warfare, or industrial design.
- giantrobot 4y ago
  Seconded for the same reasons you state.
- wrp 4y ago
  Many years ago, I read a breakdown of the systems thinking behind the development of the AK-47. It showed how the design features of the gun related to the goal of optimizing number of enemy killed for expenditure of all forms of resources. Does this book cover that in detail or point to studies that do?
  - djsavvy 4y ago
    Where could I find this breakdown you mention?
    - wrp 4y ago
      It was so long ago, I don't even remember whether it was in a book or article. That's why I asked, hoping to find it again. I just remember being impressed with the complex considerations behind what initially appeared to be simplistic design choices.
      - ahazred8ta 4y ago
spurgu 4y ago
> “I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people’s lives, then can it be that I… a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?” Yes/no/whatever. Someone else would've created something similar eventually. Same with the Oppenheimer and the atomic bomb.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  What about racist bridges? If you invent low-height bridges to keep black people out of select neighborhoods (because they tend to take the bus, and busses can't cross the bridge / tunnel), would you just be "someone else would have created something similar eventually??". As an engineer, you are responsible for your inventions. That's always been true. Ideally, you create things for people who are trustworthy. If you don't care about ethics, then don't be surprised if those ethics come to bite you in the ass later. Is it "just a low height bridge", or is it a "racist bridge"? As an engineer, its your job to make the thing (or decide to not make the thing).
  - spurgu 4y ago
    > As an engineer, you are responsible for your inventions. Disagree. Feel free to design whatever you want. The person actually building and putting it to use would be the one at fault.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      > Feel free to design whatever you want. Yes. And if you design a racist bridge designed to keep black people out of a neighborhood, you're either helping racists, or are racist yourself. Feel free to be whatever you want, but accept that if you make racist decisions it makes you a racist.
      - bobkazamakis 4y ago
        but you don't understand! I didn't create my face tracking software for surveillant capitalism!
upupandup 4y ago
The K-2 rifle used in ROK army is also seemingly inspired by AK-47 gas piston while taking design clues from American rifle. It's amazing how influential the AK was, Israelis, Belgium etc.
walrus01 4y ago
One of the interesting things is that the US has effectively re-invented the 7.62x39 round (at a much higher per round cost) with same weight bullet and nearly same length, which is the .300 Blackout supersonic. It's designed to work in a standard NATO 556 magazine, receiver and bolt carrier, the cartridge body is the same as a 556 NATO, it's necked to take a 7.62 bullet. https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/300-blackout-vs-7-62x39/ https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/300-blackout-vs-7-62x39/
- halffaday 4y ago
  Blackouts were an attempt to get enough thump in a room-clearing range where 5.56mm is a little lacking. Long-term, 6.8mm seems to be the direction small arms are going: https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/19/army-chooses-sig-sauer-to-build-its-next-generation-squad-weapon/ https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/19/army-cho...
  - walrus01 4y ago
    yes it was clearly designed for short range engagements - not exactly same application as 7.62x39 as a general purpose medium range infantry cartridge. the military/contractor folks I know wouldn't even think of using blackout at ranges where anything above 250 yards would be anticipated. the blackout is also unique in that the subsonic version of it was designed from the start to be NATO-rifle-platform compatibile with a suppressor. and due to even lower velocity, even shorter range (definitely 75 yard and less). also fairly unsure on its performance vs. modern plate based body armor vs greater velocity of regular 556 nato, 6.8 as you mention, etc.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    Those new 6.8mm rounds are crazy. For context, your typical rifle chamber pressure is ~60,000 psi (5.56mm, .338 lapua mag, etc) and these 6.8mm rounds go to ~80,000 psi. Punches above it's weight. Very interested in this space lately.
    - thedrbrian 4y ago
ARandomerDude 4y ago
> The strengths of the AK-47 are its ease of operation, endurance to mistreatment, and insignificant failure rate. It trades these features for weaknesses including less accuracy, less safety, and a smaller range than similar weapons. I'm not sure how it's unsafe, but regarding accuracy I'll point out that a modern AK with a decent barrel is much more accurate than most people think. I used to hunt with an AK and standard ball ammunition, and killed several deer at about 80 yards. It was more than adequate for the task, in fact I never had one run off. On paper, I'm usually at about a 2" group at 100 yards. Certainly there are more accurate rifles, and that group would open up substantially at 300 yards, but for my purposes it was a great rifle.
- jakearmitage 4y ago
  Lack of accuracy on AKs is fudd lore at this point. All my AKs are under 2 MOA, shooting old yugo M67. The SAM7 is just beyond anything else, losing only to the Vz58, which is a different thing altogether. I think it is a mixture of prejudice against "the enemy rifle", "usa made" and other xenophobic feelings, as well as ignorance towards the manual of arms, how to use the sights, etc.
  - spaceman_2020 4y ago
    Is accuracy even that big of a concern to most soldiers? If I'm attacking, sure. But if I'm in a defensive situation, I'd much rather prefer being able to fire anything than being able to fire accurately. Reliability trumps accuracy.
    - jakearmitage 4y ago
      You are thinking of accuracy in terms of precise shots in precise targets, but think of it from the perspective of being deterministic. If my rifle is accurate, and deterministic, then I know I can land shots effectively at 600 yards for example using simple calculations. Or 800. Being able to do that has enormous significance in the battlefield.
    - snapetom 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ur-whale 4y ago
Worth a watch for a laugh: AK-47 vs. M16 by R Lee Ermey https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32ced2 https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32ced2
ehnto 4y ago
I really love engineering, and small simple machines, and it is such a shame that so many small simple machines are guns. I still enjoy learning about them and their history, I just wish there were an equivalent for something positive. There is a lot of depth and ingenuity in weapons engineering that is fascinating to read about.
- hoseja 4y ago
  Clockwork wristwatches? The movements are pretty ingenious, though sadly there's only a couple standard ones that get riffed on. I recently found the "Wristwatch revival" channel on YT where a hobbyist restores vintage watches while being very informative.
- spookthesunset 4y ago
  Guns, bombs and nukes are what keep the world as peaceful as possible. It is kind of a mutually assured destruction thing that keeps everybody safe. Better your “team” have them than some other “team”…
  - quickthrower2 4y ago
    It is MAD for powerful countries with those resources when they are up against similar powerful countries.
  - sph 4y ago
    There is no "mutually assured destruction" in sub-nuclear weapons. If you're in the Northern Emisphere you might be lucky and never be shot (this does not apply to North America), but if you're in a poorer country, you're not safe from being bombed or in the mid of a war. How did this MAD you're talking about help any Afghan children? It's called mutually assured destruction, not one-sided nor with exceptions.
  - dreen 4y ago
    Plus, if it wasn't for the nuke, the Soviets would've conquered Europe and possibly US too.
1_bad_plf 4y ago
Funny... The old infantryman wasn't expecting much out of the HN comments on a gun article and I'm now feeling that I'm the lightweight on the topic now... Lol
2143 4y ago
I have never touched a gun. And I don't intend to. (I'm from a country where people don't have access to guns. And most animals here are considered exotic and shooting them is illegal.) Nevertheless, I can appreciate a piece of good engineering, even if a little dark. I also like other well engineered simple long-lasting stuff. Things like the Toyota Land Cruiser, BMW B57 & B58 straight-6 engines, and ThinkPad laptops come to mind. People sometimes even say "ThinkPad is the AK-47 of laptops". What are some other well engineered long-lasting products? --- Update: explained why I haven't touched guns. Thanks for the downvotes ;)
- sufficer 4y ago
  What scares you from touching guns? Guns are fun, shooting is one of my favorite hobbies but I don't one a ton like a gun nut.
  - zach_garwood 4y ago
    I don't begrudge anyone being scared of guns. They can have carastrophic results even when handled properly. The snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes, but that doesn't mean that your average Joe should go around, blithely picking up every snake they see.
    - f1refly 4y ago
      A snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes because he'll typically mutilate the animal by breaking the fangs or cutting out the venom sacks before going anywhere near it. A snake charmer will be afraid of every other snake.
- dreen 4y ago
  I had an old Soviet-era made excavator digger standing on my property. It was standing out there long enough for trees to grow through the cabin and way above it. We cleared them and put a little grease here and there and it started like charm. Another random example seems to be a Remington beard trimmer I had which recently gave up after nearly 20 years of service. Edit: I guess we should make an honourable mention for the Opportunity Mars Rover.
bradwood 4y ago
"AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherf*cker in the room, accept no substitutes." -- Quentin Tarantino
Sin2x 4y ago
If you are interested in Russian guns, check out this marvel of overengineering, a dark twin of AK: https://armamentresearch.com/russian-an-94-self-loading-rifle/ https://armamentresearch.com/russian-an-94-self-loading-rifl...
hackeraccount 4y ago
Any article on the AK-47 that doesn't start by mentioning the 7.92×33mm Kurz is missing out. The realization at the heart of modern infantry rifles is that the conversation you're having is with people who aren't a 1000 meters away - they're 300 meters or less. Once it was clear what could be given up it was that much more clear what could be gotten.
jakearmitage 4y ago
If you are in the US and got curious by this thread, I highly recommend reading the following wiki and joining the hobby: https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/Soviet_Firearms/Kalashnikov https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/Soviet_Firearms/K... The experience of assembling/disassembling the rifle, taking it out to range and seeing the engineering feats first hand is just incredible. As an engineering nerd, there is something to this platform that is just amazing. Simple Made Easy comes to mind.

143 points by boeingUH60 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

One of the craziest stories I am familiar with when talking about an AK is from a 'Nam veteran who they stumbled upon a body that had been decaying in the jungle for two weeks or so, when they turned it over they found an AK underneath. They cleared the action, and the thing still worked flawlessly. There is something to be said about that level of engineering.

JustSomeNobody 4y ago
> There is something to be said about that level of engineering. Or simplicity. Keep it simple and make it work reliably.
Ancapistani 4y ago
I've seen videos from Afghanistan showing US troops finding AKs buried that date from the Soviet invasion in the late 1970s. They were covered in rust and looked terrible - but were 100% operational even in that condition. Run a rod through the barrel to make sure it's clear, insert a magazine, and it still runs. For what it's worth, the "AR family" of rifles (AR-15, M-16, M-4, etc.) actually surpass AKs in terms of field reliability and use in hostile conditions. They're built to tighter tolerances, but with the dust cover closed there isn't really any way for sand/mud/dirt to get into the action, so they continue to work. The AK takes the opposite approach - looser tolerances and plenty of room in the action to allow foreign debris to stay out of the way and let it continue to function. You can take the dust cover off an AK, turn it upside down, and smack it a few times to knock all the junk out of the action. AKs tend to work better with no/minimal maintenance, and are much easier to field strip and restore to operable condition. ARs require more maintenance but are easier to make (and keep) accurate, and require a bit more in terms of training and tooling to maintain under use. I've always found it interesting that AKs are relatively easy to manufacture in rough conditions, but that ARs are easier to manufacture in the US. I can build a working AR lower receiver in the US with tools I have laying around my home (drill press, rotary tool, etc). I can't do the same for an AK because I don't have a spot welder to attach the rails. The fact that what qualifies as "easy to make" is so different depending on the environment.
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  >I can't do the same for an AK because I don't have a spot welder to attach the rails Harbor freight sells the simplest possible welders for like $150. Would that be sufficient?
  - brodouevencode 4y ago
    tbh I'd be scared of a Harbor Freight welder
    - snapetom 4y ago
      A friend of mine needed a chainsaw to chop up a tree branch in her yard. She told her dad she was going to Harbor Freight to get one and he emphatically said, "NO" and bought her a decent one.
      - davidro80 4y ago
      - bad416f1f5a2 4y ago
        Dad’s hate “Chinese crap tools?” Say it ain’t so! The average person that says “I need a chainsaw” will likely be well served by renting one from a home store, or buying a cheap one from Harbor Freight. They’ll probably use it a dozen times at most. Is your cheap chainsaw going to hold up as well as the Husqvarna my dad has been using since the late 80s? Absolutely not. Do you live on a 70 acre orchard? No, so a consumer grade tool will do.
        Spooky23 4y ago
        I bought a harbor freight drill press, and the metal pole that holds the drill up cracked the 3rd or 4th time I used it. Just buy the cheap chainsaw at Home Depot, it costs like $10 more.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

jzellis 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Ancapistani 4y ago
I think I detect a hint of sarcasm in this post :). If the history of the AK-47 isn't your thing, check out the two-round burst mechanism of the AN-94. There is a secondary "shelf" to hold a second round in the action, and steel cables that force that round into the chamber and fire it before the recoil impulse of the first round completes. At first, it struck me as a Rube Goldberg machine of ridiculous complexity that has no place is a firearm. After seeing one in person, though... it's genius. It's not right for every application, but as far as I know it's completely unique in the firearms world, enables a use case that no other rifle can meet, and is really an engineering marvel.
- aerostable_slug 4y ago
  > enables a use case that no other rifle can meet The Heckler & Koch G11 fired a three round burst during a single recoil impulse. However, this required caseless ammunition, which effectively doomed the project (especially given its timing, right when the Soviet empire was collapsing). Other efforts to increase hit rates historically include duplex or salvo ammunition, where multiple bullets are loaded in a single cartridge.
  - sbierwagen 4y ago
    You can see some soldiers using G11 salvo fire here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

jaclaz 4y ago

As a side note, the Wikipedia page "Concept" on the AK-47, cites Mikhail Kalashnikov as saying two things that can be generalized to other fields: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47#Concept #1 "I was a soldier, and I created a machine gun for a soldier." #2 "A lot of Russian Army soldiers ask me how one can become a constructor, and how new weaponry is designed. These are very difficult questions. Each designer seems to have his own paths, his own successes and failures. But one thing is clear: before attempting to create something new, it is vital to have a good appreciation of everything that already exists in this field. I myself have had many experiences confirming this to be so." Particularly the latter could be a valid corollary to the Chesterton's Fence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton's_...

la64710 4y ago
And the Lord blesseth the man for his wonderful work with 93 years of full life. /s
- imafish 4y ago
  Seems he was also battling with guilt most of his life. One year before his death, Mikhail Kalashnikov wrote a letter to the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. Excerpts: “I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people’s lives, then can it be that I… a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?” “The longer I live, the more this question drills itself into my brain and the more I wonder why the Lord allowed man to have the devilish desires of envy, greed and aggression.”
melony 4y ago
He meant assault rifle not machine gun right?
- kevingadd 4y ago
  Seems likely to be a translation error, or in reference to how he also worked on designing machine guns and light machine guns. The round the AK-47 uses is used by some machine guns, so that might be how it got mixed up.

Ancapistani 4y ago

If this article was interesting to you, I strongly recommend "The Gun", by C.J. Chivers. It's a history of the "AK family of rifles", and the AK-47 in particular. It starts well before that, with the impact of automatic weapons on warfare in general, but quickly comes back to the development of the AK. It covers a lot of interesting details around the social, political, and technical environment that led to the creation of the AK and its development since. From a US-centric political perspective, the author seems pretty obviously "anti-gun". That said, it's one of those rare books where the author's political perspective is pretty much irrelevant. It's extremely well-researched and well-written. It's honestly an enjoyable read if you're at all interested in history, politics, warfare, or industrial design.

giantrobot 4y ago
Seconded for the same reasons you state.
wrp 4y ago
Many years ago, I read a breakdown of the systems thinking behind the development of the AK-47. It showed how the design features of the gun related to the goal of optimizing number of enemy killed for expenditure of all forms of resources. Does this book cover that in detail or point to studies that do?
- djsavvy 4y ago
  Where could I find this breakdown you mention?
  - wrp 4y ago
    It was so long ago, I don't even remember whether it was in a book or article. That's why I asked, hoping to find it again. I just remember being impressed with the complex considerations behind what initially appeared to be simplistic design choices.
    - ahazred8ta 4y ago

spurgu 4y ago

> “I keep having the same unsolved question: if my rifle claimed people’s lives, then can it be that I… a Christian and an Orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?” Yes/no/whatever. Someone else would've created something similar eventually. Same with the Oppenheimer and the atomic bomb.

dragontamer 4y ago
What about racist bridges? If you invent low-height bridges to keep black people out of select neighborhoods (because they tend to take the bus, and busses can't cross the bridge / tunnel), would you just be "someone else would have created something similar eventually??". As an engineer, you are responsible for your inventions. That's always been true. Ideally, you create things for people who are trustworthy. If you don't care about ethics, then don't be surprised if those ethics come to bite you in the ass later. Is it "just a low height bridge", or is it a "racist bridge"? As an engineer, its your job to make the thing (or decide to not make the thing).
- spurgu 4y ago
  > As an engineer, you are responsible for your inventions. Disagree. Feel free to design whatever you want. The person actually building and putting it to use would be the one at fault.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > Feel free to design whatever you want. Yes. And if you design a racist bridge designed to keep black people out of a neighborhood, you're either helping racists, or are racist yourself. Feel free to be whatever you want, but accept that if you make racist decisions it makes you a racist.
    - bobkazamakis 4y ago
      but you don't understand! I didn't create my face tracking software for surveillant capitalism!

upupandup 4y ago

The K-2 rifle used in ROK army is also seemingly inspired by AK-47 gas piston while taking design clues from American rifle. It's amazing how influential the AK was, Israelis, Belgium etc.

walrus01 4y ago

One of the interesting things is that the US has effectively re-invented the 7.62x39 round (at a much higher per round cost) with same weight bullet and nearly same length, which is the .300 Blackout supersonic. It's designed to work in a standard NATO 556 magazine, receiver and bolt carrier, the cartridge body is the same as a 556 NATO, it's necked to take a 7.62 bullet. https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/300-blackout-vs-7-62x39/ https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/300-blackout-vs-7-62x39/

halffaday 4y ago
Blackouts were an attempt to get enough thump in a room-clearing range where 5.56mm is a little lacking. Long-term, 6.8mm seems to be the direction small arms are going: https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/19/army-chooses-sig-sauer-to-build-its-next-generation-squad-weapon/ https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/19/army-cho...
- walrus01 4y ago
  yes it was clearly designed for short range engagements - not exactly same application as 7.62x39 as a general purpose medium range infantry cartridge. the military/contractor folks I know wouldn't even think of using blackout at ranges where anything above 250 yards would be anticipated. the blackout is also unique in that the subsonic version of it was designed from the start to be NATO-rifle-platform compatibile with a suppressor. and due to even lower velocity, even shorter range (definitely 75 yard and less). also fairly unsure on its performance vs. modern plate based body armor vs greater velocity of regular 556 nato, 6.8 as you mention, etc.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  Those new 6.8mm rounds are crazy. For context, your typical rifle chamber pressure is ~60,000 psi (5.56mm, .338 lapua mag, etc) and these 6.8mm rounds go to ~80,000 psi. Punches above it's weight. Very interested in this space lately.
  - thedrbrian 4y ago

ARandomerDude 4y ago

> The strengths of the AK-47 are its ease of operation, endurance to mistreatment, and insignificant failure rate. It trades these features for weaknesses including less accuracy, less safety, and a smaller range than similar weapons. I'm not sure how it's unsafe, but regarding accuracy I'll point out that a modern AK with a decent barrel is much more accurate than most people think. I used to hunt with an AK and standard ball ammunition, and killed several deer at about 80 yards. It was more than adequate for the task, in fact I never had one run off. On paper, I'm usually at about a 2" group at 100 yards. Certainly there are more accurate rifles, and that group would open up substantially at 300 yards, but for my purposes it was a great rifle.

jakearmitage 4y ago
Lack of accuracy on AKs is fudd lore at this point. All my AKs are under 2 MOA, shooting old yugo M67. The SAM7 is just beyond anything else, losing only to the Vz58, which is a different thing altogether. I think it is a mixture of prejudice against "the enemy rifle", "usa made" and other xenophobic feelings, as well as ignorance towards the manual of arms, how to use the sights, etc.
- spaceman_2020 4y ago
  Is accuracy even that big of a concern to most soldiers? If I'm attacking, sure. But if I'm in a defensive situation, I'd much rather prefer being able to fire anything than being able to fire accurately. Reliability trumps accuracy.
  - jakearmitage 4y ago
    You are thinking of accuracy in terms of precise shots in precise targets, but think of it from the perspective of being deterministic. If my rifle is accurate, and deterministic, then I know I can land shots effectively at 600 yards for example using simple calculations. Or 800. Being able to do that has enormous significance in the battlefield.
  - snapetom 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ur-whale 4y ago

Worth a watch for a laugh: AK-47 vs. M16 by R Lee Ermey https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32ced2 https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32ced2

ehnto 4y ago

I really love engineering, and small simple machines, and it is such a shame that so many small simple machines are guns. I still enjoy learning about them and their history, I just wish there were an equivalent for something positive. There is a lot of depth and ingenuity in weapons engineering that is fascinating to read about.

hoseja 4y ago
Clockwork wristwatches? The movements are pretty ingenious, though sadly there's only a couple standard ones that get riffed on. I recently found the "Wristwatch revival" channel on YT where a hobbyist restores vintage watches while being very informative.
spookthesunset 4y ago
Guns, bombs and nukes are what keep the world as peaceful as possible. It is kind of a mutually assured destruction thing that keeps everybody safe. Better your “team” have them than some other “team”…
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  It is MAD for powerful countries with those resources when they are up against similar powerful countries.
- sph 4y ago
  There is no "mutually assured destruction" in sub-nuclear weapons. If you're in the Northern Emisphere you might be lucky and never be shot (this does not apply to North America), but if you're in a poorer country, you're not safe from being bombed or in the mid of a war. How did this MAD you're talking about help any Afghan children? It's called mutually assured destruction, not one-sided nor with exceptions.
- dreen 4y ago
  Plus, if it wasn't for the nuke, the Soviets would've conquered Europe and possibly US too.

1_bad_plf 4y ago

Funny... The old infantryman wasn't expecting much out of the HN comments on a gun article and I'm now feeling that I'm the lightweight on the topic now... Lol

2143 4y ago

I have never touched a gun. And I don't intend to. (I'm from a country where people don't have access to guns. And most animals here are considered exotic and shooting them is illegal.) Nevertheless, I can appreciate a piece of good engineering, even if a little dark. I also like other well engineered simple long-lasting stuff. Things like the Toyota Land Cruiser, BMW B57 & B58 straight-6 engines, and ThinkPad laptops come to mind. People sometimes even say "ThinkPad is the AK-47 of laptops". What are some other well engineered long-lasting products? --- Update: explained why I haven't touched guns. Thanks for the downvotes ;)

sufficer 4y ago
What scares you from touching guns? Guns are fun, shooting is one of my favorite hobbies but I don't one a ton like a gun nut.
- zach_garwood 4y ago
  I don't begrudge anyone being scared of guns. They can have carastrophic results even when handled properly. The snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes, but that doesn't mean that your average Joe should go around, blithely picking up every snake they see.
  - f1refly 4y ago
    A snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes because he'll typically mutilate the animal by breaking the fangs or cutting out the venom sacks before going anywhere near it. A snake charmer will be afraid of every other snake.
dreen 4y ago
I had an old Soviet-era made excavator digger standing on my property. It was standing out there long enough for trees to grow through the cabin and way above it. We cleared them and put a little grease here and there and it started like charm. Another random example seems to be a Remington beard trimmer I had which recently gave up after nearly 20 years of service. Edit: I guess we should make an honourable mention for the Opportunity Mars Rover.

bradwood 4y ago

"AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherf*cker in the room, accept no substitutes." -- Quentin Tarantino

Sin2x 4y ago

If you are interested in Russian guns, check out this marvel of overengineering, a dark twin of AK: https://armamentresearch.com/russian-an-94-self-loading-rifle/ https://armamentresearch.com/russian-an-94-self-loading-rifl...

hackeraccount 4y ago

Any article on the AK-47 that doesn't start by mentioning the 7.92×33mm Kurz is missing out. The realization at the heart of modern infantry rifles is that the conversation you're having is with people who aren't a 1000 meters away - they're 300 meters or less. Once it was clear what could be given up it was that much more clear what could be gotten.

jakearmitage 4y ago

If you are in the US and got curious by this thread, I highly recommend reading the following wiki and joining the hobby: https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/Soviet_Firearms/Kalashnikov https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/Soviet_Firearms/K... The experience of assembling/disassembling the rifle, taking it out to range and seeing the engineering feats first hand is just incredible. As an engineering nerd, there is something to this platform that is just amazing. Simple Made Easy comes to mind.