Hummer70
Member
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3vWwz0ljvP5VjljX29UQnY1TzA
I was a Small Arms and Ammunition Test Director at Aberdeen in September 1982 when I got a call from Col Buck Weaver (US Army Retired) of the Army Material Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) which was about 100 yards up from our office "behind the fence".
Buck started off by telling me he had already talked with my Section Chief Bob Connolly who had cleared him to contact me directly. He went on and told me AMSAA had obtained a rifle and they wanted an accuracy analysis study conducted. He asked if I could come up to his office and he would give me more background as they wanted to meet me. I checked with Connolly and he confirmed the contact/approval.
I had seen their sign walking past their office numerous times but did not actually know what they did. I pulled this up on their website which seems to say it best, " The US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity, known as AMSAA, is an Army Materiel Command organization that conducts a variety of critical analyses to provide state-of-the-art analytical solutions to senior level Army and Department of Defense officials. AMSAA's responsive systems analysis supports the "Equipping" and "Sustaining" of weapons and materiel for our Soldiers in the field as well as our Future Army Force."
When I arrived he introduced me to a number of personnel and we went to his office. First he gave me a little background of what AMSAA did which was to evaluate a wide variety of material, concepts etc and told me they had just received a Russian AK-74 Rifle for analysis and evaluation. Unfortunately they they only had one that the Military Intelligence folks had recently obtained. He asked me if I would help them by conducting an Accuracy-Dispersion Validation on the weekends. I agreed and asked how they picked me.
The Aberdeen Proving Ground newspaper had just done a big front page spread on me for my being a member of the 1982 US Palma Team and I had just returned from Canada and Camp Perry National Smallbore Championships where I made the US Dewar Team the week prior to going to Canada with the Palma team. When I returned I got a call from the APG Newspaper and they wanted to do an article on me.
Buck told me the timing of that article was perfect and he called the Army Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM) and they directed him to the Material Test Directorate Small Arms and Ammunition Test Branch and ultimately to my Section Chief Bob Connolly. Bob was also a NRA Master Class shooter and he told them I was also the Test Director on the M16A1E1 Rifle Technical Feasibility Test which was developed at the behest of the US Marine Corps Firepower Division, Quantico which I had just that week finished the range portion of the Technical Feasibility Test. He also told him I served as the Accuracy -Dispersion "control shooter" for that project and I had just finished the firing phase for the Marine Corps test and had just started the report writing phase.
BACKGROUND: Aberdeen Proving Ground tests encompass a large variety of weapons and equipment testing. Our branch tested small arms which is defined as every caliber up to and including 40MM Air Defense guns based on Test Operation Procedures (TOPs) developed many years ago. All testing of similar weapons are tested following those procedures in the same manner so accurate system comparisons can be made even though conducted years apart.
Part of the TOP rifle protocol called for accuracy-dispersion firing of shoulder fired weapons were to be conducted only by personnel that held a National Rifle Association's Master Rifle Classification in Highpower Rifle or Smallbore Rifle" and I held both of those. In the Marine Corps test there were not enough Master Class NRA shooters on the Proving Ground and TECOM was notified and they notified Marine Corps. Thus the Corps would supply additional NRA Master Class shooters from the Marine Corps Rifle Team at Quantico, Virginia.
That introduced another problem as there was apparently a requirement that their people could not be on long Term TDY and their plan was to rotate shooters. The Aberdeen analytical section indicated they needed to have at least one shooter conduct all phases of the testing and such would give them a solid base line of data and they could work the numbers and give a good analysis. Thus I also became the "control shooter" and shot the initial dispersion groups for each rifle, all the long range work and the indoor 100 yard testing on each rifle. In excess of 244,000 rounds were expended.
At the end of one Marine shooter's TDY that shooter would leave and another replaced him and so on. The firing took months to accomplish as we had to test the rifles from 100 yards and 200-800 meters at the beginning and every 1200 rounds until 12,000 rounds were on each barrel.
Buck said when he read the article in the APG Newspaper he realized he had a extremely rare combination of things that would not only give him quality test data but after talking with Connolly he realized he had the opportunity to get data that would give a direct comparison to the M16A1E1 which had just been adopted as the M16A2. At the same time the M16A1 would be tested again with all shot by the same control shooter on the same range, with the same light conditions, same elevation, same targets, same weather conditions. On many tests over the years it is basically an "apples and oranges" comparison but this time it was going to be apples and apples all picked from the same tree by the same picker so to speak. He said it just didn't get any better. I agreed.
Buck stressed that he wanted me to test the AK-74 in the exact same way as I did the M16 variants and I assured him that could be done and that I would make sure I had the exact same gun crew supervisor and gun crew to change the targets, the same targets and their dispersions would be measured with the same calibrated/certified steel metric tape exactly as had been done in the previous months fired on the same target board which was still in place on the same range. It was 8X12 feet and completely covered in paper.
Buck wanted to conduct the testing on the weekend and I concurred since little or no testing on adjacent ranges were likely to interfere. He arranged for me to get the weapon and that came with a nice surprise. The intelligence boys had 55 gal drums of 5.45 genuine Russian arsenal produced ammo, all battlefield pick up just waiting for a rifle.
We went through the drums and noticed much of it was made at the same arsenal so we selected about 500 rounds with the same headstamp. Only a couple cartons were available in original packaging, there were loose rounds, rounds in stripper clips etc and I inspected each round to insure no handling damage had been sustained on the battlefield. Apparently is was all the same lot as it performed quite well with no stoppages.
MY INITIAL EVALUATION OF AK-74:
Sights: They were very crude and the previous owner(s) had not protected them and the finish was deteriorated to where they were bright and shiny. In shooting iron sights you want the flattest black surface you can get and even better no direct sun light on them. After blackening the sights I fabricated hoods from gun tape for the front and rear sight to give me the best sight picture I could get.
It did however have a scope mount but alas no scope came with the rifle. I would estimate a good scope on that system could really enhance hit probability at long range (upwards of 1000 Yards)
Muzzle Brake: The muzzle brake was very interesting in that it is not fitted to be tight and no way to tighten it. Apparently being loose was part of the design and not detrimental to accuracy.
Position Disclosure: We shot it at night to get familiarized with it and noted the flash signature was for lack of a better description unbelievable. Anyone firing that weapon at night is sure to bring grief on themselves in short order and by today's conditions could probably been seen by personnel in orbit at night.
Trigger Pull: The trigger pull was typical AK and not a marksman's trigger by any stretch of the imagination and took intense concentration to control it so that the movement could be stopped right before sear off to get the best sight alignment.
Magazines: Without a doubt the most durable magazine I have ever seen/used. One could probably use them as a weapon alone. The design and construction was superb. The only fault I would say was it is too long and doesn't allow for a low position in prone firing. I saw a demonstration on the military channel where it was being utilized as a monopod and rammed into the ground. It was clearly capable of taking such abuse. Also saw a former Russian operator utilizing one as a push up aid which was impressive.
Length of Pull: The butt stock was the right length for personnel wearing heavy clothing, body armor or with short necks.
Case Ejection: It is a reloader's nightmare. I estimate the brass ejection at perhaps 35 feet. It was hitting my spotting scope chipping paint from it and chipped my rear lens. It was ejecting cases out into the marsh area on the side of the range we were on. Anyone having a AK74 civilian version and located brass cases with boxer primers to feed it will find it will get quite costly in a hurry because "the hunt would be on" when they went to retrieve fired cases.
Barrel: We had no idea of the number of rounds on that barrel before I got it. A visual examination was the best I could do and the barrel appeared to be acceptable with no signs of mistreatment.
Accuracy-Dispersion: Semi auto firing was commenced after we spent considerable time tweaking the sights to get POA/POI (point of aim/point of impact) at 100 meters and I shot group after group till we were convinced it was zeroed for me.
As we moved to the next meter line I adjusted the rear sight to coincide with the range markings on the sight. Aberdeen Test Operating Procedures will identify not on group sizes but the relation of the various sight settings at various ranges to determine how close the sights were in relation to the point of aim/point of impact.
We were shooting at round bull targets and at the 700 and 800 meter range we shot the US 1000 yard 8/9/10/X target. From the dispersion I remember the group had shifted about a minute right at 800 meters but was a nice round group.
Bottom line is if you have opposition upwards of 800 meters from you and they possess a highly skilled shooter that has a good zero, no wind condition, good lighting and target acquisition and a rifle comparable to the one I fired exposing the upper half of your body will in all probability win you a trip home in a body bag or Purple Heart. I would estimate at 800 Meters utilizing a E silhouette target a good shooter and ideal conditions could expect a first round hit about 1/3rd of the time. If the shooter had optics and a good zero and good conditions I would estimate a first shot hit about 50% of the time.
Conclusion: There were things I was not impressed with however the dispersion at 800 meters with battlefield pick up ammo was equal to the M16A2 using FN SS109 ball ammo. The SS109 ammo loaded by FN is the most impressive ammo I have yet to fire in a 5.56 M16A2. The Marine Program Manager told me he had the same opinion of that ammo.
Wound lethality (M16 5.56 ammo) Per Col Martin Fackler MD Army Wound Ballistic Lab testing showed the 5.56 ball ammo has the highest lethality in the first 95 yards. I would not be surprised to learn the Russian ammo would exhibit similar wound capability as the M16 with M855 ammo.
I once saw a opinion that a heavy infantry overcoat was capable of giving protection from a 5.56 at 1000 yards. All I can say is we built our targets at Aberdeen with 3/8" plywood and never failed to achieve complete penetration at 800 meters. I looked all over that target (32 feet high and wide) and never saw a bullet sticking in the plywood. That range was 2500 yards long and there was lots of 5.56 MG firing from up range so the odds of a rounds getting into that target board were quite good.
The best part of this test was the relationship I established with Buck Weaver and his wife. I was invited to their home for Sunday Dinners and holidays as they adopted me and I learned a great deal more about other testing he had done and it was fascinating work.
We got into a conversation about hit probability with full auto from a magazine fed shoulder fired rifle (not a belt gun) and he told me, "If you ever see a study conducted that indicates full auto fire is more effective than semi auto fire, it was a rigged test." He said AMSAA had conducted many such tests thus he knew exactly what the hit probability was utilizing full auto fire.
Buck authored three studies of the AK74 in the next eight years. Only one is available on line and reflects the hit probability of the accuracy-dispersion validation I conducted for him.
www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a228398.pdf
Scroll down to page 8, see paragraph 2.1 and 2.3 for the data reference this project.
I was a Small Arms and Ammunition Test Director at Aberdeen in September 1982 when I got a call from Col Buck Weaver (US Army Retired) of the Army Material Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) which was about 100 yards up from our office "behind the fence".
Buck started off by telling me he had already talked with my Section Chief Bob Connolly who had cleared him to contact me directly. He went on and told me AMSAA had obtained a rifle and they wanted an accuracy analysis study conducted. He asked if I could come up to his office and he would give me more background as they wanted to meet me. I checked with Connolly and he confirmed the contact/approval.
I had seen their sign walking past their office numerous times but did not actually know what they did. I pulled this up on their website which seems to say it best, " The US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity, known as AMSAA, is an Army Materiel Command organization that conducts a variety of critical analyses to provide state-of-the-art analytical solutions to senior level Army and Department of Defense officials. AMSAA's responsive systems analysis supports the "Equipping" and "Sustaining" of weapons and materiel for our Soldiers in the field as well as our Future Army Force."
When I arrived he introduced me to a number of personnel and we went to his office. First he gave me a little background of what AMSAA did which was to evaluate a wide variety of material, concepts etc and told me they had just received a Russian AK-74 Rifle for analysis and evaluation. Unfortunately they they only had one that the Military Intelligence folks had recently obtained. He asked me if I would help them by conducting an Accuracy-Dispersion Validation on the weekends. I agreed and asked how they picked me.
The Aberdeen Proving Ground newspaper had just done a big front page spread on me for my being a member of the 1982 US Palma Team and I had just returned from Canada and Camp Perry National Smallbore Championships where I made the US Dewar Team the week prior to going to Canada with the Palma team. When I returned I got a call from the APG Newspaper and they wanted to do an article on me.
Buck told me the timing of that article was perfect and he called the Army Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM) and they directed him to the Material Test Directorate Small Arms and Ammunition Test Branch and ultimately to my Section Chief Bob Connolly. Bob was also a NRA Master Class shooter and he told them I was also the Test Director on the M16A1E1 Rifle Technical Feasibility Test which was developed at the behest of the US Marine Corps Firepower Division, Quantico which I had just that week finished the range portion of the Technical Feasibility Test. He also told him I served as the Accuracy -Dispersion "control shooter" for that project and I had just finished the firing phase for the Marine Corps test and had just started the report writing phase.
BACKGROUND: Aberdeen Proving Ground tests encompass a large variety of weapons and equipment testing. Our branch tested small arms which is defined as every caliber up to and including 40MM Air Defense guns based on Test Operation Procedures (TOPs) developed many years ago. All testing of similar weapons are tested following those procedures in the same manner so accurate system comparisons can be made even though conducted years apart.
Part of the TOP rifle protocol called for accuracy-dispersion firing of shoulder fired weapons were to be conducted only by personnel that held a National Rifle Association's Master Rifle Classification in Highpower Rifle or Smallbore Rifle" and I held both of those. In the Marine Corps test there were not enough Master Class NRA shooters on the Proving Ground and TECOM was notified and they notified Marine Corps. Thus the Corps would supply additional NRA Master Class shooters from the Marine Corps Rifle Team at Quantico, Virginia.
That introduced another problem as there was apparently a requirement that their people could not be on long Term TDY and their plan was to rotate shooters. The Aberdeen analytical section indicated they needed to have at least one shooter conduct all phases of the testing and such would give them a solid base line of data and they could work the numbers and give a good analysis. Thus I also became the "control shooter" and shot the initial dispersion groups for each rifle, all the long range work and the indoor 100 yard testing on each rifle. In excess of 244,000 rounds were expended.
At the end of one Marine shooter's TDY that shooter would leave and another replaced him and so on. The firing took months to accomplish as we had to test the rifles from 100 yards and 200-800 meters at the beginning and every 1200 rounds until 12,000 rounds were on each barrel.
Buck said when he read the article in the APG Newspaper he realized he had a extremely rare combination of things that would not only give him quality test data but after talking with Connolly he realized he had the opportunity to get data that would give a direct comparison to the M16A1E1 which had just been adopted as the M16A2. At the same time the M16A1 would be tested again with all shot by the same control shooter on the same range, with the same light conditions, same elevation, same targets, same weather conditions. On many tests over the years it is basically an "apples and oranges" comparison but this time it was going to be apples and apples all picked from the same tree by the same picker so to speak. He said it just didn't get any better. I agreed.
Buck stressed that he wanted me to test the AK-74 in the exact same way as I did the M16 variants and I assured him that could be done and that I would make sure I had the exact same gun crew supervisor and gun crew to change the targets, the same targets and their dispersions would be measured with the same calibrated/certified steel metric tape exactly as had been done in the previous months fired on the same target board which was still in place on the same range. It was 8X12 feet and completely covered in paper.
Buck wanted to conduct the testing on the weekend and I concurred since little or no testing on adjacent ranges were likely to interfere. He arranged for me to get the weapon and that came with a nice surprise. The intelligence boys had 55 gal drums of 5.45 genuine Russian arsenal produced ammo, all battlefield pick up just waiting for a rifle.
We went through the drums and noticed much of it was made at the same arsenal so we selected about 500 rounds with the same headstamp. Only a couple cartons were available in original packaging, there were loose rounds, rounds in stripper clips etc and I inspected each round to insure no handling damage had been sustained on the battlefield. Apparently is was all the same lot as it performed quite well with no stoppages.
MY INITIAL EVALUATION OF AK-74:
Sights: They were very crude and the previous owner(s) had not protected them and the finish was deteriorated to where they were bright and shiny. In shooting iron sights you want the flattest black surface you can get and even better no direct sun light on them. After blackening the sights I fabricated hoods from gun tape for the front and rear sight to give me the best sight picture I could get.
It did however have a scope mount but alas no scope came with the rifle. I would estimate a good scope on that system could really enhance hit probability at long range (upwards of 1000 Yards)
Muzzle Brake: The muzzle brake was very interesting in that it is not fitted to be tight and no way to tighten it. Apparently being loose was part of the design and not detrimental to accuracy.
Position Disclosure: We shot it at night to get familiarized with it and noted the flash signature was for lack of a better description unbelievable. Anyone firing that weapon at night is sure to bring grief on themselves in short order and by today's conditions could probably been seen by personnel in orbit at night.
Trigger Pull: The trigger pull was typical AK and not a marksman's trigger by any stretch of the imagination and took intense concentration to control it so that the movement could be stopped right before sear off to get the best sight alignment.
Magazines: Without a doubt the most durable magazine I have ever seen/used. One could probably use them as a weapon alone. The design and construction was superb. The only fault I would say was it is too long and doesn't allow for a low position in prone firing. I saw a demonstration on the military channel where it was being utilized as a monopod and rammed into the ground. It was clearly capable of taking such abuse. Also saw a former Russian operator utilizing one as a push up aid which was impressive.
Length of Pull: The butt stock was the right length for personnel wearing heavy clothing, body armor or with short necks.
Case Ejection: It is a reloader's nightmare. I estimate the brass ejection at perhaps 35 feet. It was hitting my spotting scope chipping paint from it and chipped my rear lens. It was ejecting cases out into the marsh area on the side of the range we were on. Anyone having a AK74 civilian version and located brass cases with boxer primers to feed it will find it will get quite costly in a hurry because "the hunt would be on" when they went to retrieve fired cases.
Barrel: We had no idea of the number of rounds on that barrel before I got it. A visual examination was the best I could do and the barrel appeared to be acceptable with no signs of mistreatment.
Accuracy-Dispersion: Semi auto firing was commenced after we spent considerable time tweaking the sights to get POA/POI (point of aim/point of impact) at 100 meters and I shot group after group till we were convinced it was zeroed for me.
As we moved to the next meter line I adjusted the rear sight to coincide with the range markings on the sight. Aberdeen Test Operating Procedures will identify not on group sizes but the relation of the various sight settings at various ranges to determine how close the sights were in relation to the point of aim/point of impact.
We were shooting at round bull targets and at the 700 and 800 meter range we shot the US 1000 yard 8/9/10/X target. From the dispersion I remember the group had shifted about a minute right at 800 meters but was a nice round group.
Bottom line is if you have opposition upwards of 800 meters from you and they possess a highly skilled shooter that has a good zero, no wind condition, good lighting and target acquisition and a rifle comparable to the one I fired exposing the upper half of your body will in all probability win you a trip home in a body bag or Purple Heart. I would estimate at 800 Meters utilizing a E silhouette target a good shooter and ideal conditions could expect a first round hit about 1/3rd of the time. If the shooter had optics and a good zero and good conditions I would estimate a first shot hit about 50% of the time.
Conclusion: There were things I was not impressed with however the dispersion at 800 meters with battlefield pick up ammo was equal to the M16A2 using FN SS109 ball ammo. The SS109 ammo loaded by FN is the most impressive ammo I have yet to fire in a 5.56 M16A2. The Marine Program Manager told me he had the same opinion of that ammo.
Wound lethality (M16 5.56 ammo) Per Col Martin Fackler MD Army Wound Ballistic Lab testing showed the 5.56 ball ammo has the highest lethality in the first 95 yards. I would not be surprised to learn the Russian ammo would exhibit similar wound capability as the M16 with M855 ammo.
I once saw a opinion that a heavy infantry overcoat was capable of giving protection from a 5.56 at 1000 yards. All I can say is we built our targets at Aberdeen with 3/8" plywood and never failed to achieve complete penetration at 800 meters. I looked all over that target (32 feet high and wide) and never saw a bullet sticking in the plywood. That range was 2500 yards long and there was lots of 5.56 MG firing from up range so the odds of a rounds getting into that target board were quite good.
The best part of this test was the relationship I established with Buck Weaver and his wife. I was invited to their home for Sunday Dinners and holidays as they adopted me and I learned a great deal more about other testing he had done and it was fascinating work.
We got into a conversation about hit probability with full auto from a magazine fed shoulder fired rifle (not a belt gun) and he told me, "If you ever see a study conducted that indicates full auto fire is more effective than semi auto fire, it was a rigged test." He said AMSAA had conducted many such tests thus he knew exactly what the hit probability was utilizing full auto fire.
Buck authored three studies of the AK74 in the next eight years. Only one is available on line and reflects the hit probability of the accuracy-dispersion validation I conducted for him.
www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a228398.pdf
Scroll down to page 8, see paragraph 2.1 and 2.3 for the data reference this project.
Last edited:
