Two New Russian Assault Rifles Vie To Unseat AK-47

Status
Not open for further replies.

shappy0869

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
113
Location
Deerfield Beach, FL
I don't know if this is old news or not, but I thought I would post it for those who might be interested.


Two New Russian Assault Rifles Vie To Unseat AK-47

Feb 7, 2007
By Maxim Pyadushkin/DTI

Although the legendary family of Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifles continues to enjoy brisk sales, Russian manufacturers are ready with a new generation of infantry weapons that offers better accuracy than the classic Kalashnikov design.

Unlike their Western counterparts, the two new Russian rifles don't rely on modern electronic devices to improve firing accuracy; their performance is improved through new internal mechanism designs. However, Russian defense budget constraints make it uncertain whether one or both of the new designs will ever enter production to provide a long-sought AK-47 replacement.

The Kalashnikov 7.62-mm. AK-47 (Avtomat Kalashnikova Model 1947) assault rifle, designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov in 1947, has served as the primary individual weapon for Soviet and then Russian infantrymen since 1949. More than 100 million AK-47s are estimated to be in circulation worldwide. Despite the rifle's reliability and simplicity in use and maintenance, the Soviet military actually was never happy with a key shortcoming: poor accuracy when shooting in unstable positions. This is a result of the AK's design--its heavy internal mechanical parts move rapidly during firing, producing heavy blowback that disrupts the shooter's aim. The military made its first serious attempt to find a better alternative in the 1970s, but ultimately again chose the classic Kalashnikov design adapted to fire smaller 5.45-mm. ammunition in the form of the AK-74.

The military viewed this as a temporary decision until a better solution could be found, but undertook no new initiative until the Abakan project to acquire a new individual infantry weapon in the early 1990s. The defense ministry selected an unusual design offered by Gennady Nikonov of Izhmash, which builds the AK-47 and is Russia's largest small-arms producer today. The new weapon entered service in 1994 as the AN (Avtomat Nikonova) -94 assault rifle. It featured a novel approach to increase firing accuracy--delayed blowback impulse--that allowed a soldier to shoot two rounds without experiencing recoil. To minimize recoil impulses, the receiver assembly of the rifle moves backward as firing starts but doesn't reach the far end of its path until after the second shot, when the shooter begins to feel the blowback. This principle allows a shooter to send the first two bullets practically to the same point at a firing rate of 1,800 rounds per minute. After the first two shots, the AN-94's firing rate decreases to 600 rounds per minute as its mechanism starts to function like a classic Kalashnikov system.

Initially, the Russian military planned to completely replace its Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifles with AN-94s. However, during field tests (as well as use in counter-terrorist operations in Chechnya), Nikonov's rifle proved to be complicated for Russian army conscripts to use and maintain. Izhmash's Alexander Baditza told Defense Technology International that plans now call for AN-94s to complement traditional AK-47/AK-74 rifles in the army by serving as a weapon for better-trained elite units and special task troops, and that his company is producing the Nikonov rifle in small batches. In addition, he says Izhmash has begun export deliveries of the AN-94, which are made through Rosoboronexport, the country's major arms-trading agency, but concedes that its export prospects are limited because the rifle is designed to fire only Russian 5.45-mm. ammunition.

Rosoboronexport's Alexander Uzhanov was more optimistic. He says the arms-trading agency already has a portfolio of AN-94 orders from former Warsaw Pact countries in Eastern Europe and sees growing interest in the rifle in North America and other markets.

In the meantime, Russian designers are working on two new infantry weapons that could finally provide an AK-47 replacement: Izhmash's AK-107 and the AEK-971 developed jointly by Kovrovsky Mekhanicheskiy Zavod (KMZ) and Degtyarev Plant in the town of Kovrov.

Details about Izhmash's new AK-107 assault rifle are closely guarded. A description of the new rifle was removed from the manufacturer's web site, and scant official information about its progress has been released. Baditza, citing security reasons, refuses to comment on the AK-107 program. However, he did confirm that the program is still underway.

The 5.45-mm. AK-107, as well as its AK-108 version adapted to fire 5.56-mm. NATO ammunition, features a mechanism that uses so-called balanced automatics, as does the AEK-971. Alexey Isakov, head of KMZ's Special Design Bureau, explains that, during automatic fire, a rifle of the classic AK-47 design has four impulses that shake the weapon and disrupt its aim: the recoil from the bullet; the forward impulse from the gas piston as it moves backward; blowback generated when the receiver assembly reaches the far end of its path, and the momentum of the receiver moving forward. Balanced automatics minimizes the impulses from the rifle's internal moving parts by using two gas pistons that move in opposite directions during firing. As a result, a shooter feels only the recoil generated by the bullet as it moves along the barrel.

Isakov says KMZ developed the first AEK-971 prototype in the early 1970s as a replacement for the 7.62-mm. AK-47. The company's designers initially wanted to modernize the AK-47's design. But they soon realized that they couldn't double the assault rifle's accuracy as desired by the military while staying within that classic design scheme. So they implemented the balanced automatics principle in the new rifle. Unfortunately for KMZ, the Soviet military conservatively chose the Kalashnikov 5.45-mm. AK-74, which offered decreased blowback due to its smaller caliber and, as a result, slightly better accuracy.

Yet the AEK-971 program resumed in the 1990s with the backing of then-Defense Minister Igor Rodionov. At comparative test firings sponsored by Rodionov, the AEK-971 faced both the AK-74 and the AN-94. Each rifle fired a standard 30-round magazine in automatic mode from a standing position into a 1 X 1-meter target at a distance of 100 meters. According to Isakov, the AK-74 hit the target only once and the AN-94 twice, while the AEK-971 scored 18 hits.

Since the restart of the AEK-971 program, KMZ has refined the rifle's parameters, decreasing its length and weight. The initial version of the weapon is designed to fire 5.45-mm. ammunition, but KMZ also developed modified versions for 7.62-mm. and 5.56-mm. NATO ammunition. The three versions share 80% design commonality. Compared with the AK-74, Isakov says, the AEK-971 has a more sophisticated design with more internal details but nevertheless is just as easy to maintain and can tolerate harsh operating conditions. The designers even made its partial disassembly routine, identical to that of the AK-47.

However, the AEK-971 has yet to be adopted by the Russian armed forces, a step that would facilitate both domestic procurement and export sales of the rifle. KMZ conducted preliminary tests of all three versions in 2006, Isakov says, and expects to start government acceptance tests in the near future. Various Russian military services already have purchased the AEK-971 in small numbers for evaluation.

But KMZ apparently sees a limited market for its new rifle. Early last year, the company decided to focus on producing equipment for the atomic energy industry, and subsequently began transferring its defense programs to the neighboring Degtyarev Plant, which already manufactures heavy-machine guns and anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles. During the Soviet era, both companies made up a single defense facility in Kovrov but, after they were split up, cooperated closely on several defense programs.

It's still not clear whether the Degtyarev Plant will continue the AEK-971 program. This weapon and its competitor--Izhmash's AK-107--currently both have an uncertain future. The manufacturers have to risk investing to complete their designs while having no orders until the rifles pass acceptance tests by the Russian military. Potential export sales also await a military decision, because Russian law prohibits the manufacturers from selling their defense products to foreign customers independently, and Rosoboronexport won't add the rifles to its sales catalog until they are accepted by the military.

The Russian army does not appear to be in a hurry to choose a replacement for its AK-74 assault rifles, despite the need for it demonstrated in counter-terrorist operations in the North Caucasus. Unlike in the previous decade, the Russian military budget has begun to grow at a rapid pace during the past five years. Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov keeps repeating that the nation's armed forces need to be reequipped with modern weapons to deal with today's security challenges. However, infantry weapons are evidently not near the top of his priorities list.
 
Cool. Can't wait for the civilian version over here. Given that the Izhmash plant is producing the Saiga, I wouldn't be surprised to see the AK-107 and AK-108 imported as well.
 
Basically, that's very old and obsolete news.

AK-107/108 is all but dead, according to sources at manufacturer; it is no longer listed on their official website and no longer shown on exhibitions

AEK-971 future is also quite dim, as the maker switched to civilian-only production, and all military production is to be moved to another plant.

and, as the last paragraph of article said, current tob-buy list or Russian army includes larger stuff such as AA/ant-ballistic missile systems, tanks, combat aircrafts etc.

With recent (and quite stupid IMO) decisions of install parts of US missile defence systems closer to Russian borders, our countries can start a new arms race, and this will bring no good for all participating counties.
 
Just my humble opinion, this is great for stabilizing automatic fire, but it adds little or no advantage for those of us in the civilian market.

For my benefit, I would love to see an improvement that provides a longer sight radius or perhaps a selector switch that can be operated easily without having to remove one's right hand from the pistol grip.

I absolutely love my Saiga AK, but do wish for these two improvements.
 
Even if it's old news, it was still a very interesting article. I hadn't heard about those design technologies to reduce the vibrations and recoil.

I don't know if it was a translation thing or what, but they seemed to be referring to the bolt/carrier assembly as the the receiver. It had me confused for a bit.


Just my humble opinion, this is great for stabilizing automatic fire, but it adds little or no advantage for those of us in the civilian market.
I don't know. Having no gas piston banging around is one argument for the increased accuracy of gas impingement or roller lock systems. If you can cancel out the harmonics in other ways, it has some potential even in semi-autos.
 
Is there any outstanding difference between 5.56 NATO and 5.45x39?

It occurs to me that 5.45 magazines would probably be deeper, since the round is squtter, but other than that I know little about comparisons between the two rounds.
 
The only thing I can think of off of the top of my head is that the older rifles could be adapted to the newer round because the round is the same length as the 7.62 x 39. That's just a guess.

Plus, I don't think the Ruskies are that anxious to use and buy the same ammo that their former arch enemy uses. May be just a matter of pride. Again, a guess. Don't know about ballistics of the 5.39.
 
If they can import it, Americans will buy it. I would buy an AN-94 or three, even in semi-auto :).

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
Max Rocks. :D

to the rifles... seems a whole lotta monkey motion for a combat rifle.
It would be interesting to play with 'em to see how (if) they worked though. :)

I don't know. Having no gas piston banging around is one argument for the increased accuracy of gas impingement or roller lock systems. If you can cancel out the harmonics in other ways, it has some potential even in semi-autos.
Could be.. on the other hand, having yet more pieces moving around and resetting in possibly slightly different places with each shot.. you could just as easily be adding more variables to the accuracy equation. I imagine manufacturing precision would make a heck of a lot more difference than these bits, but offhand I'm inclined to guess they'd hurt intrinsic accuracy more than help.
practical accuracy, especially for bursts, would be a whole other thing.


Finally..

With recent (and quite stupid IMO) decisions of install parts of US missile defence systems closer to Russian borders, our countries can start a new arms race, and this will bring no good for all participating counties.

I daresay those are aimed for incoming from a wee bit south of you guys Max. :)
 
Who cares what it looks like? Effectiveness and reliability is all that counts. You think the enemy is going to give you a fashion critque on the battlefield?

It's pretty hard to beat the AK-47/74 design.

What would be interesting would be to lower the piston in relationship to the bolt. Have them much closer to one another - also tighten up (I know, not the greatest for reliability) the carrier to receiver rail engagement. This will eliminate a lot of that vertical vibration. I guess what the Russians would like would be something like the Sig 550 series....

If you've ever seen an AK design fire in slow motion - you'll know what I mean. Military Channel had a show once that spend 20 minutes of the hour long program comparing the M16 to the AK-47. It showed both firing in slow motion. The in-line design of the M16 decreases the vibration and movement of the rifle dramatically. The AK looks like it's made of rubber when it shoots.

There's just too much mass in the carrier/piston and too much clearance in the AK design. This will cause all kinds of gyrations. Of course, that great mass and long stroke allows the carrier to really slam home rounds. Which is why feeding isn't a problem.

The one time I saw an AK jam a round (hollowpoint that hit chamber face) it set back the bullet really deep. That's hard to do as there's a lot of tension (not to mention a crimp) on the case neck. The AK has an awful lot of chambering force. Add that to the cone-shaped ammunition and you have more reliability.


The Russians went for all out durability and reliability. We went for something with ergonomics and accuracy (rifleman philosophy) ...now the Russians are starting to think about accuracy. This is because the days of massive superpowers smashing into one another in huge land-wars are over (like WW2). The future of warfare will be much like how the war on terror is or the war in Chechnya. This type of war doesn't require that you have a rifle that doesn't require maintenance for weeks while you march to the front in bad weather. This type of war suits special forces and operators a lot better. Or suits the well-trained professional military more (since conscription is out of style)...

These types of fighters prefer a rifle platform that is more ergonomic, easy to modify or accessorize and that is accurate. They can shoot, so they want to HIT. They aren't uneducated, barefoot mountain people. These are people who will clean the rifle and care for it.

It seems the Russians want that, but they're still dependant on some poorly trained people as the article states. They either need to get these people trained, or they need to stick with the simple AK. I don't think you can have poorly trained people use a rifle like an M16 for example. It will be a disaster if the fighter's knowledge is basically stick the magazine in, charge it and fire and nothing more.

The answer is simple. Keep building the AK-74 for the masses of poorly trained soldiers...heck they have tons of machinery and expertise in that. Then design and build a rifle that fires the same cartridge, but is more ergonmic, more accurate and suits the professional operator who knows how to shoot and who will maintain their weapon well.
 
Don't tread on me:

Lighten up... if you've ever read any of my posts in Rifle Country and/or noticed that I have the Saiga Forum as a link in my signature, you'd see I am a HUGE fan of the AK platform.

I was making a joke.


John
 
Wikipedia article mentions the AN-94 has better armor-piercing capability with the burst mode. I would assume this only works at very short range?
It also says production cost is 4-5 times, compared to the current issue AK-74.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94

The fast burst mode concept is similar to the HK G-11 caseless rifle btw, except the G-11 fires 3 rounds instead of 2.
 
You know

The Russians went for all out durability and reliability
I think you'll find that the M16 is actually a more durable rifle. AKs don't hold up as long as most people would think. Why do you think the AK would be more durable?

The AN94 is a very interesting rifle.

If I remember correctly it

Has two rates of fire. The initial couple shots are fired at a higher rate, and it then switches to a slower rate for a continued burst.

The cartridges are fed by a cable operated mechanism, so that the bolt doesn't have to travel the full length of the cartridge.
 
Who cares what it looks like? Effectiveness and reliability is all that counts.
Obviously those of us who commented on it are the ones who care. That's why we commented about it. Aesthetics DO count, when it comes to what I spend my money on. For the Russian service rifle, obviously aesthetics take a back seat, but that doesn't make them completely irrelevant to the discussion.
 
Quote:
The Russians went for all out durability and reliability. We went for something with ergonomics and accuracy.

I think you'll find that the M16 is actually a more durable rifle. AKs don't hold up as long as most people would think. Why do you think the AK would be more durable?

Russians tested AK, I saw on TV - they put AK in camera and go to -45degree in Celsius for 24 hours and than took it away and 5 round fire in less than 1 minute out of camera. They put AK in camera with sand and heavy wind conditions. After 24 hours - they shake it and again 5 rounds fire.
They drop AK in total marshy mud - took it back and fire.

So, I am not sure that "the M16 is actually a more durable rifle" is true.

Keep building the AK-74 for the masses of poorly trained soldiers...
Are you really believe in what you've wrote :eek: 20 years ago these "poorly trained soldiers fought in Afganistan. And if muslim guerilla troops didn't have support from "some country" - they will finished that war much faster than right now in Iraq (and Russians - not support iraqies). So, your statement - is not legitimate. :neener:
 
Are you really believe in what you've wrote 20 years ago these "poorly trained soldiers fought in Afganistan.

The statement is legitimate, as it is based on the reality of the Soviet forces. The Soviet military was a conscript army with minimal training. Noncoms were career and were better trained, as were the officer corps.

The AK was designed for the lowest common denominator in the military could use it in standard Soviet doctrine (massed automatic fire). That's not a knock against it, but just reality that, if I recall his interviews correctly, Kalashnikov himself agreed with. The AK wasn't designed to be idiot proof, but it was designed to be capable of mass production and use by those with minimal skill.

As for the AK vs the AR reliability, both have a lot of myths surrounding them. The AK isn't as perfect as people believe, and the AR isn't as bad as people allege. The Israelis put both through the wringer and designed the Galil as neither the AK nor the AR worked fantastically well in desert conditions.
 
Well

So, I am not sure that "the M16 is actually a more durable rifle" is true.
You're confusing durable, with reliable in adverse conditions. I am talking about being able to fire tens of thousands of rounds without major component failures. AKs will go thousands of rounds no problem, it's just that the M16/AR will last longer. I can't think of a longer lasting center fire automatic rifle. I think the pin holes on the recevier will eventually get peened out of round, and even at that we're talking about 10s of thousands of rounds. Bolts fail, but those are very easy to replace.

No more about AR v. AK. That isn't what this thread was originally addressing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top