“The Kalashnikov rifle is a symbol of the creative genius of our people”
- Thread starter yokel
- Start date
- Status
El Tejon
Member
Thanks, Misha.
Now, go make more, a lot more and bring them here.
Now, go make more, a lot more and bring them here.
kcmarine
Member
SHHHHH!!! Hell hear you (pun intended).
Joe Demko
Member
Grazdanin Mikhail Timofeyevich almost certainly did not have the AK-47 design spring full-blown from his forehead. It is a robust, reliable design that lends itself to mass production; definitely one of the most noteworthy guns of the 20th century. Mikhail Timofeyevich, unhappily, is also one of those not-too-uncommon people who works as part of a team but claims sole credit for success himself. Max is dead on target with his assessment of why this was allowed to happen.
My wife and in-laws are from the former CCCP and they are scornful and disbelieving about such stories. The Soviet government lied to the world and it lied to its citizens, it even lied to itself. For some, like Mikhail Timofeyevich or Vasily Zaitsev, it was of benefit to allow a myth to be built around them.
My wife and in-laws are from the former CCCP and they are scornful and disbelieving about such stories. The Soviet government lied to the world and it lied to its citizens, it even lied to itself. For some, like Mikhail Timofeyevich or Vasily Zaitsev, it was of benefit to allow a myth to be built around them.
I wouldn't call the AK-47/AKM "revolutionary". It's the same idea as the Stg44, the gas system from Simonov's SKS-45, and a bolt and trigger system duplicated from the M1 Garand.
It was if anything, a creative combination of existing mechanical technologies applied in response to a need. But it really isn't that fundamentally revolutionary.
It was if anything, a creative combination of existing mechanical technologies applied in response to a need. But it really isn't that fundamentally revolutionary.
Cosmoline
Member
It was carried by a lot revolutionaries, though.
Ditto on the SKS gas system.
Totally different creatures.
Not much common between the German Stg44 (tilting bolt) and the Soviet Avtomat Kalashnikov (rotating bolt), either - save for their stamped construction and intermediate-power cartridges.
Totally different creatures.
Not much common between the German Stg44 (tilting bolt) and the Soviet Avtomat Kalashnikov (rotating bolt), either - save for their stamped construction and intermediate-power cartridges.
One could argue the cartridge was devleoped from the STG-44, but that was already fully developed for the SKS... other than outward appearence those rifles don't have much in common with each other.
I have NEVER heard a direct quote from Kalashnikov saying his design had anything to do with the STG 44, but many denying it. (The first part of that article sounds like a mis-quote or its a COMPLETE reversal of everything else he's said otherwise.)
Russian designs of WW2 might not be 'innovative' but they damn sure work.
I have NEVER heard a direct quote from Kalashnikov saying his design had anything to do with the STG 44, but many denying it. (The first part of that article sounds like a mis-quote or its a COMPLETE reversal of everything else he's said otherwise.)
Russian designs of WW2 might not be 'innovative' but they damn sure work.
Davo
Member
In Tales of the Gun, they dedicated an entire episode to the AK47, and Kalishnakov specifically denies any resemblence to the Stg44 other then externally. Heres some cool clips I found.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCpgj6z6h7I&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQe864rGLyk&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rtHuXzL8FQ&mode=related&search=
And sadly how its more seen these days
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXtUV8sNzyY&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCpgj6z6h7I&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQe864rGLyk&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rtHuXzL8FQ&mode=related&search=
And sadly how its more seen these days
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXtUV8sNzyY&mode=related&search=
TimboKhan
Member
I think you overstate how testy a AR can be, although I would agree that an AK is the more rugged rifle between the two. I would point out that the AK was never used in a Stalingrad type seige either, at least as far as I am aware...
I would also point out that the level of cleanliness that the military requires is far and above the actual level of maintenance needed to keep an AR running. For example, I don't think I have used one pipe-cleaner yet, and my AR runs just fine. Basically, all I do is clean the bore, the bolt and thats about it. When I was in the USMC, just about every time I cleaned, I did indeed have to dig into the trigger and every other little part. It was a pain, but thats what was required.
no, because WW3 never happened. and the soviets never had to suffer another Stalingrad because besides the USA, no one was strong enough to do that to them ( save maybe china, but thats doubtful) . and the smaller satalite nations using AK's rarely held typical, standing army style fights. but look back at stalingrad. one guy was given the Mosin, one guy was given the ammo. there wasnt enough rifles, ammo , food or medicine for the soldiers and civilians. and if you limited with the amount of stuff you can bring in ( airlift, supply drop, or low % that can breakthe line and make it in) Beans, Bullets, and Rifles better be numbers 1,2,and 3 on that list. with solvent and cleaning patches probibly a low, 8-10
just an opinion.
- Status
