Confession time - AK 47 vs. STG 44

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mizar

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
Messages
2,346
Location
Sofia, Bulgaria
Confessing your sins, or the holy sacrament of repentance, has an important role in the Orthodox Christianity... This is a picture of the brand new Mikhail Kalashnikov monument in Moscow, Russia. By the time I'm posting this the controversial plague is already removed. With an angle grinder, in a hurry. But it's still hilarious...

P.S. For those of you that didn't get it, it's an exploded view of Sturmgewehr 44 on the monument of the "father of the AK 47".

zx780_3046881.jpg
 
Cynically speaking, the sculptor got it absolutely right the first time around. There's no other notable gun designer who had only designed one gun, and considering that Hugo Schmeisser as well as over a dozen other bona fide experts were forced to "assist" Kalashnikov with the design, it's quite likely that there isn't even one. I'd wager a bet the Politbyroo had to come up with something - anything - because they simply couldn't give mr. Schmeisser a medal and name him a "Hero of Socialist Labor"... :D
 
Bah...they should have left it alone. I doubt Mikhail would have been offended. Besides, the only really revolutionary thing about the MP44 was the intermediate cartridge. Select fire, gas pistons, and stamped receivers had all been around before. You could even argue that the .30 carbine was the first intermediate round and I still say the M2 was the first assault rifle. Flame suit on....:neener:
 
Last edited:
Bah...they should have left it alone. I doubt Mikhail would have been offended. Besides, the only really revolutionary thing about the MP44 was the intermediate cartridge. Select fire, gas pistons, and stamped receivers had all been around before. You could even argue that the .30 carbine was the first intermediate round and I still say the M2 was the first assault rifle. Flame suit on....:neener:
The M2 Carbine was a later development of the M1 (1944-45). What the MP44 (and it's other earlier versions) offered was all the features you listed above in one package. Even at that, the gun was heavier than most battle rifles of the time and later improvements, such as those seen in the AM family and other weapons made the MP/STG idea more practical.
 
They probably looked in the file under "Design" and found the drawings....

It will not help the argument that the AK was not a modified design or heavily influenced from the sturmgewehr. I know there are significant differences....just think there's clearly a progression of design.

I'm no expert but will offer my opinion anyway! ;) I think that in addition to the captured German designers, there were laying on the design table a Siminov Rifle, A SVT, a STG, & M1 Garand.....
 
And there was the Sudaev AS 44, Bulkin AB 46, the AK 46 prototype (which is rather interesting BTW). Many people still think that Kalashnikov made the AK 47 from scratch and that there was nothing before it, but this is simply not true. And praising just one man, while completely ignoring all of the other designers that contributed to the development of the AK 47, is nothing more than a Soviet propaganda and pure insult to them. Not to mention that Schmeisser worked (captured) for seven long years in the same plant at Izhevsk where Mikhail designed his famous rifle... Some people even speculate that Schmeisser and his team actually built the AK 47, but without a solid proof this is just a theory, unsupported by the known facts. But Kalashnikov most definitely did not "invent" the AK at once, almost alone and by some sort of kommiepiphany - this is rather silly and immature thinking, which is sadly still shared by a large group of people.
 
Mizar wrote:
"The Internet misled him"

In other words he was too lazy (or too drunk) to pick up the phone and call the plant in Izhevsk, tell them what he was doing and ask them to send him a copy of an exploded picture of the rifle out of the museum next door to the plant.
 
Nighlord40K wrote:
You could even argue that the .30 carbine was the first intermediate round and I still say the M2 was the first assault rifle. Flame suit on...

No flame here.

I think it's a perfectly reasonable and cogent argument.

Where someone would probably take exception with it (and I know because I've had this argument hundreds of times) is that the M1 Carbine was intended to be used as a replacement for the pistol, sub-machine gun and standard rifle in the hands of service and support troops; it was intended to arm cooks, clerks, truck drivers, artillerymen, and the like and was never intended to replace the M1 Garand in the hands of the Infantryman. The German intermediate cartridge and the Russian cartridge from which it drew its inspiration was intended to be become the standard cartridge of the Infantry once sufficient numbers of weapons and ammunition could be produced and delivered to the field.
 
Actually, you are partialy right - it's not a STG 44, but it's not an AK 46 either. Well, I must admit that I was too "Misled by the Internet"...

I took a closer look ONE more time... Sorry, Lysanderxiii, but you are wrong entirely - this is an exploded diagram of STG 44. See the attached pic:

P.S. Why did you deleted your post? I did not deleted mine... ;)

865322.jpg
 
Last edited:
And again (for the last tyme I hope...) - this is, finaly, a diagram of MKB 42(H) - the prototype of the Sturmgewehr. So, it's almost a STG 44...
 
Confessing your sins, or the holy sacrament of repentance, has an important role in the Orthodox Christianity... This is a picture of the brand new Mikhail Kalashnikov monument in Moscow, Russia. By the time I'm posting this the controversial plague is already removed. With an angle grinder, in a hurry. But it's still hilarious...

P.S. For those of you that didn't get it, it's an exploded view of Sturmgewehr 44 on the monument of the "father of the AK 47".

View attachment 763684

that's new guns? They look like quite older guns.
I know that Orthodox Christianity shares beliefs in which they share a lot with other Christian churches.
I heard that the Mikhail Kalashnikov monument features the wrong rifle. not the AK-47.
I think if people really can't tell the difference, they are doing a really lousy job.
 
Bah...they should have left it alone. I doubt Mikhail would have been offended. Besides, the only really revolutionary thing about the MP44 was the intermediate cartridge.

Based on interviews with Kalashnikov that I heard/read, I disagree - I think he would have taken strong exception to the STG-44 on his monument. He denied taking any design cues from the STG-44.

... Of course, Russians are famously insecure about their history and heroes...
 
I have a book called, "The Rifle" which discusses the money and politics behind the AK.
Are you thinking of C.J. Chivers' The Gun?

If so, that's a great book. And just about the only thing it doesn't really tell you about the AK-47 is who really designed it, whether any other gun was a direct model for it, and what M. Kalashnikov's real extent of contribution was.

Chivers makes a point of noting the Soviet practice of moving whatever mountains (and destroying whatever information) which might be necessary to make history be what they thought it should have been.
 
Well, I don't know how much creativity and precise design you could wring from
a Soviet army hospital bed in 1944, but for the most part, Russia's M.O.D. has
always been shrouded in secrecy, and their weapons design has been a part of
that. How convenient for them to have let slip the particulars of this important
design so easily. You would think, if you didn't know any better, the M.O.D.
wanted to promote Kalashnikov as the weapons designer, for propaganda,
or other covert state purposes.
 
Are you thinking of C.J. Chivers' The Gun?

If so, that's a great book. And just about the only thing it doesn't really tell you about the AK-47 is who really designed it, whether any other gun was a direct model for it, and what M. Kalashnikov's real extent of contribution was.

Chivers makes a point of noting the Soviet practice of moving whatever mountains (and destroying whatever information) which might be necessary to make history be what they thought it should have been.

Yep. Definitely a good book.

The impression I got from that book was that the Soviets took gun designers and engineers from all over the country (where Kalashnikov was one), and just locked them in the Tula plant until they had a new assault rifle. I don't think it's any one guy's idea. Personally, I think they just bounced ideas off each other and knocked off a bunch of other guns until they had something working. Then the state gave Kalashnikov credit for propaganda purposes.

The AK is kind of weird in that it has so many design elements that are clearly stolen entirely from elsewhere. The trigger is directly from the Garand, the safety was stolen off the Remington model 8, the return spring is identical to the SVT, etc. Plenty of guns copy things, but I can't think of any other that borrows from so many different designs. It's like reading an essay that was plagarized from 5 different sources.
 
Then the state gave Kalashnikov credit for propaganda purposes.
Right. And if I recall correctly, even erased more than a little of his personal biography to make him out to be the perfect inspirational Hero of the Soviet Union. Can't recall the details at the moment, but the impression was that Kalashnikov was cast in the role of a useful character for his nation and he played that character well all of his adult life.
 
MTK never claimed to be the sole designer. He was the project manager. In the Soviet system, that's the guy who got all the credit... and the guy who faced "dimunition of circumstances" or the gulag if the project failed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top