Kalashnikov dead

rowa

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25497013

feargale

R.I.P.

EWQuinn

RIP to the Russian tank sergeant and patriot who did his best to help his comrades and his nation.

Grizzly 45

The Grim Reaper has been busy again this year.
Ironic that Mr Klashnikov's invention has proably killed more people than the two atomic bombs ever used in warfare,and has proably been more of a game changer in world politics in the last century than all the high tech equipment of the West/East armies put together.
Good thing,bad thing?? That will be debated long now by the moralists and philosophers.
The gun is now as iconic as the Coca Cola bottle and will be influencing us and global politics well into the next century,when we have all passed onto the happy hunting grounds. A Hell of a legacy to leave depending on your opinion.

Mycroft H

We really shouldn't forget the contributions of Hugo Schmeisser too.

EWQuinn

The Soviets exported cheap weapons worldwide for decades to further their global interests. RPG-7s, T-34s, T-55s and MIGs fall into the same category. They would have done that with or without Kalashnikov.

deeksofdoom

Its a romantic idea to build a rifle to defend your homeland but its one that's ultimately backfired because every rebel group that ever was is using them against you.

A sad legacy to leave, but you can't blame the man. Designed by a genious to be operated by a fool.

EWQuinn

deeksofdoom wrote: »

Its a romantic idea to build a rifle to defend your homeland but its one that's ultimately backfired because every rebel group that ever was is using them against you.

A sad legacy to leave, but you can't blame the man. Designed by a genious to be operated by a fool.

Very true, lessons that continue unlearned.

Grizzly 45

Mycroft H wrote: »

We really shouldn't forget the contributions of Hugo Schmeisser too.

Schmeisser doesnt even come close to the amount of guns produced by Klashnikov,if you are alluding to the German machine pistol the MP40...called a "Schmeisser"... Hugo Schmeisser had nothing at all to do with that design.
His name got hung onto it by pouplar nomaculture for whatever reason.

Ironically Klashnikov stole the folding buttstock design off it for the AKM version of the AK.

Grizzly 45

EWQuinn wrote: »

The Soviets exported cheap weapons worldwide for decades to further their global interests. RPG-7s, T-34s, T-55s and MIGs fall into the same category. They would have done that with or without Kalashnikov.

But which one was the war winner on the ground?? It was and still is the AK,and it is still the measuring stick against which all other assault rifles are measured.
You dont need any of the other stuff mentioned on the ground to fight the low intensity global conflicts post 1945.You needed boots on the ground with a idiot proof rifle and lots of ammo to start and that was what made the AK so effective.

rowa

EWQuinn wrote: »

The Soviets exported cheap weapons worldwide for decades to further their global interests. RPG-7s, T-34s, T-55s and MIGs fall into the same category. They would have done that with or without Kalashnikov.

And the Americans didn't ? Oliver North ring any bells ? The cia or some other american agency bought up massive amounts of old lee enfield rifles which somehow found their way to afganistan. Todays friend tomorrows sworn enemy.
As for Kalashnikov, it must have been something which weighed on his mind, the fact that every child soldier in africa had one of his rifles and the mayhem that accompanied that. He also never made a penny from his design, apart from a wage for being employed by the soviet union.

Mycroft H

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Schmeisser doesnt even come close to the amount of guns produced by Klashnikov,if you are alluding to the German machine pistol the MP40...called a "Schmeisser"... Hugo Schmeisser had nothing at all to do with that design.
His name got hung onto it by pouplar nomaculture for whatever reason.

Ironically Klashnikov stole the folding buttstock design off it for the AKM version of the AK.

No, I'm not talking about the MP40, I'm referring to the STG44. And we owe to what the modern sub-machine gun is to Schmeisser anyway, but I digress.


Schmeisser was interned by the Russians after the War and was put to work. The stamped production of the receiver and the magazine are heavily influenced by previous design namely the STG44, allowing for quick production. As was the intermediate 7.62mm round influenced by the Kurtz round developed for the STG. The AK was was a reverse engineered project of several other weapons (STG/M1 Carbine etc) all of which the Soviets had access to during the war. Refined into the ubiquitous AK we see today.

It's very wrong the AK was solely the idea of Mr Klashnikov. Course it wasn't.

EWQuinn

rowa wrote: »

And the Americans didn't ? Oliver North ring any bells ? The cia or some other american agency bought up massive amounts of old lee enfield rifles which somehow found their way to afganistan. Todays friend tomorrows sworn enemy.
As for Kalashnikov, it must have been something which weighed on his mind, the fact that every child soldier in africa had one of his rifles and the mayhem that accompanied that. He also never made a penny from his design, apart from a wage for being employed by the soviet union.

Who said the Americans didn't? I won't get into America vs Russia today. The Russians were crawling all over the StG 44 and wanted something similar in concept and would have gotten one. My point is if not Kalashnikov somebody else.

rowa

EWQuinn wrote: »

Who said the Americans didn't? I won't get into America vs Russia today. The Russians were crawling all over the StG 44 and wanted something similar in concept and would have gotten one. My point is if not Kalashnikov somebody else.

Of course the russians were not bothered about things like intellectual property rights or patents or any of that nonsense, they something they liked , they took it. They made a ural motorcycle which was a blatent rip off of the bmw the germans used during the war.

The Aussie

Only on Boards could a memorial thread turn into a battle wits :rolleyes:

Anyway...

He was no Johannes Gutenberg but still managed to shape the modern world in a unique way........ RIP.

rowa

I don't think kalashnikov was in the same league as j.m browning, but gaston glock certainly had the same ideas as kalashnikov, keep it simple, cheap, easy to use and brutally reliable.

Chesapeake

If Mr. Kalashnikov had been "non sovjet" we'd be using a lot more "kalashnikov's" than "brownings" now I'd wager...................HHmmmm SVD for foxes could work!!!! if I was.........

"brutally reliable".........keeps you alive longer ask any contractor. an ak or any clone please "M4's for show Ak's for go" and the ammo is easier to find.

Plus it makes a great noise on full auto, feed me more but I doubt that that was designed in..........or maybe he did have a sense of ryhtem and humour.

End of, he disigned a beaut of an implement, what others do or did with it is immaterial, except to fools, idiots & servers.
Those who think once your invention leave you, you can magically will its intentions for good or evil! HHmm.................Mr. Kalashnikov never killed a soul outside tank warfare
Althought his invention, he provided the means and ability for others to kill many. Hello Einstein................Hello dolly.

IMO, It's still the best full auto rifle I've had the privilege to use, globally bar none.

Grizzly 45

Apart from "AK rasp",badly placed rear sights and easily damaged mag lips and a mag you have to rock and roll into position rather than just dump and slap.Its the gun I'd want to have if I was going off to explore a strange new world.Lets face it who could take that design and turn out the worlds toughest box fed multi purpose shotgun as well from it.

pedroeibar1

The Aussie wrote: »

Only on Boards could a memorial thread turn into a battle wits :rolleyes:

Yep. And as yet not one poster has mentioned the book "The Gun" by Chivers which dispels much of the mythology & codology about the man and the gun. Much of the detailed design work was not by Kalashnikov, and most of his writing was heavily edited spin and propaganda, which probably is why he contradicts himself in several editions. That book is a worthwhile read, it covers early MGs and is very interesting on the Colt M16 and use of it and AK's in VietNam.

deeksofdoom

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Yep. And as yet not one poster has mentioned the book "The Gun" by Chivers which dispels much of the mythology & codology about the man and the gun. Much of the detailed de

Probably because not one poster has read it, the ignorance of it tut, tut.

recipio

Is there something about the round being top heavy and liable to spin in flight ? I seem to remember that is the reason put forward for its inaccuracy.

EWQuinn

Not sure about the AK-47 7.62x39 original round, I have never heard about any instability with it. However the AK-74 5.45x39 round has an air space under the jacket in the nose that induces it to tumble when it penetrates a target, adding to lethality. As I can attest the 5.45x39 in a well built AK-74 platform is capable of excellent accuracy.

deeksofdoom

I'ld say depending on the quality of the ammunition they are liable to go anywhere.

pedroeibar1

The biggest initial problems were to refine some of the moving parts, which were mass-produced, stamped out of steel rather than individually finished. It is an assault weapon, not a sniper rifle, so firepower is more important at close quarters rather than long distance accuracy.

One reason the AK took off was that the Soviets developed a short cartridge, the M1943, a .30 with an overall length of 56mms, almost an inch shorter than the .30-06 Springfield used in American rifles. The design ‘grew’ out of idea from the German 7.92 Kurz and the American .30 carbine; it is quite possible that Soviet spies/agents had advance designs of the German M35 sturmgewehr cartridge which is very similar. The M1943 had a muzzle velocity of about 2kfps, whereas the Americans were into high velocity – theirs had a MV of about 3kfps. To the Soviet designers the speeds were academic, results were more important – tests had shown that at 600 metres their round could penetrate 3 inches of wood. That was enough to kill, and at a range most infantry could not hit a mark with their high velocity cartridges. It would not have been much fun facing the firepower of an AK with a bolt action!