u.s. troops like ak's?

[caz223]

I see nothing wrong with improvising, after all, their backsides are out there, not mine.
If they need a rifle, and there's one on the ground with 200 rounds of ammo, pick it up and use it...

 

[hillbilly]

I think the telling part of this article is right here:

"The soldiers based around Baqouba are from an armor battalion, which means they have tanks, Humvees and armored personnel carriers. But they are short on rifles. "

So yes, AKs are better rifles in combat......for troops who are not trained to shoot rifles for a living.

That's another reason why AKs are soooo popular. They are simple to use, especially by people who are not drilled and trained in the fundamentals of marksmanship.

I read another account of combat in Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance troops were intrigued by the American style of shooting. Native Northern Alliance troops always stood up (more manly that way) and fired the magazine dry from the hip. American soliders, Marines, SEALS, etc, shot from the prone when they could and fired aimed shots or short bursts at specific targets with much more lethal effects.

In the War in Afghanistan in the 1980s, it was common to hear reports of Russian conscript troops (afraid, don't want to be there, not honed to combat readiness) spraying away with AKs while mujhadeen fighters picked them off from 500 yards away with old bolt action Enfields.

I am not saying that US troops should be armed with bolt action Enfields.

I even like AKs and have owned them before.

I am just saying that AKs make more sense for folks who are not, by any stretch of the term, riflemen, or riflewomen, as the case may be.

And no, just because you might have "qualified" on the US Army course of fire one time in basic training years ago, you are not a rifleman, or riflewoman.

hillbilly

 

[Dr.Rob]

Ok in the last two paragraphs you just called the same group of fighters backwards spray and pray shooters AND lethal with a bolt action rifle. Which is it?

Those people grow up with a rifle in their hands. I'd say that goes a lot farther in making someone a rifleman than any training program you could dish up.

PS back in the days of Soviet involvement in Afghanistan theywere still using rifles they took off dead brits to get a rifle from a dead Russian.

 

[russlate]

The earlier imported Norinco Paratrooper SKS - D's, made to take the AK mags, were my favorite over M16 or the AK.

For me they felt and balanced wonderfully, shot groups half the size of the AK's, and seemed completely reliable ( I wasn't shooting in combat condits ). But most of all, they felt right. The AK's seemed clumsy and topheavy, the early SPI's too light, but the paratrooper SKS D felt the best. Just my opinion.

I think it was the Czech's that made a 7.62x45 AK round. Neck that to 25 caliber and put it into a lengthened SKS receiver taking 20 or 30 round magazines, and you'd have an ergonomically beautiful gun for fighting.

 

[Art Eatman]

Dr. Rob, are you referring to this: "Native Northern Alliance troops always stood up (more manly that way) and fired the magazine dry from the hip." ?

Heck, maybe they were "townies". Or, maybe after they got AKs instead of bolt actions, they fell in love with full-auto for full-auto's sake. Regardless, I've seen some footage from the early-on daze in this recent Afghani effort of ours where that exact behavior was caught on-camera. Maybe it's the Afghani Hippies: "Make noise, not war!"

, Art

 

[SodaPop]

Heck, maybe they were "townies".

Maybe since they don't have carnivals or circuses, so many of these people need to load a 30 rounder... as a joy ride?

They are poor ya' know............

 

[vitiaz]

"The guys at AK-47.net must be loving this."

 

[Destructo6]

I think it was the Czech's that made a 7.62x45 AK round.

That was actually for their Vz-52 rifle, which was later adapted to 7.62x39. Their AK-ish Vz-58 was in 7.62x39.

But you're right, it seems to be a good way to get a little more power without much more length.

 

[Sir Galahad]

So, Hillbilly, since U.S. Army basic training doesn't make a person a rifleman, what does? A weekend at Thunder Ranch? May I ask what your MOS was in the army, Hillbilly?

 

[DMK]

Rule One: Don't bring a pistol to a rifle fight.

Staff Sgt. Michael Perez, a tanker, said he would take anything over his standard issue 9mm pistol when he's out of his tank.

1) I could use this M9 to defend myself dismounted while I all along wishing that I had an M4.
or
2) I could pick up one of those rusty dusty AK thingamajigs and see how it works.

Yea, that's pretty much a no brainer.

This isn't a matter of the AK being better than any rifle or as a substitution for any amount of training. This is a matter of an AK and a 9mm pistol being better than no rifle and a 9mm pistol.

 

[Art Eatman]

Sir Galahad, consider this: I'd shot a Garand a lot before I went into the Army. I went through Basic on the Garand. A year later I went to NCO school and handled a Garand for the first time since Basic. I was amazed at how awkward I had become in handling it. (No range time; just "familiarization".) The other students were mostly from Infantry outfits; it was obvious they were indeed familiar.

Many Army units get little or no instruction or updating of shooting skills after Basic. Worse, support units get no further training in small unit tactics in the field.

Like a lot of stuff: Use it or lose it.

Art

 

[digex]

There is no tiny cotter pin to get lost during cleaning as with a certain other rifle I know of

[sarcasm]Why would you clean it? It's an AK, it'll work without being cleaned. [/sarcasm]
I seriously believe that this is perfectly acceptable. No one is saying that the AK is better the M16. All the article is saying is that these guys are doing their jobs; adapting and overcoming. If people have a problem with that, maybe they should try spending a few weeks (or days, or minutes) in that desert with a 9mm and I will ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE that they'll change their mind.
I'm actually pretty surprised that people here would disagree with our soldiers using these weapons. The AK is a battle-proven rifle that has been used forever and shown it's worth. It may not have the ability to attach 36 lbs worth of god-forsaken gadgets to it, but it'll push a bullet out of the pointy end fast enough to kill the other guy just as dead as the M16.
Perhaps you should disagree with the fact that our boys are over there fighting and dying and apparently don't have enough guns to keep everyone locked and loaded.
Anyway... Just my .02
YMMV

 

[clubsoda22]

of the people in the article, how many dropped an M4 and picked up an AK? It's not a matter of better (even though i must say i am an AK fan)

 

[Sir Galahad]

Art, I'm aware of that. I was support myself (Ordnance Corps--small arms repair.) But what I want to know is Hillbilly's military experience. If he has none, then who is he to know what is or is not sufficient military training? The military needs to make a pardigm shift in training, but they've known this since the Battle of the Bulge when support troops were caught completely unprepared. If the army would spend MORE time with skills that are USEFUL such as range time and LESS or, better yet, NO time doing stupid things like Class "A" uniform inspections, D&C, and crap like that, they'd have time for range time. Hell, get rid of class A uniforms altogether and spend the money on ammo. The time the army wastes on BS and frippery is pretty much murder of troops when that time could have been spent on the range.


In the case of these tankers, they probably asked for M4s and someone over at headquarters says, no, according to this, you have all the M4s you need. No, they need more. Why? This says you have all you're supposed to have. But there are men that only have pistols. Yes, they're supposed to. But they need rifles! Why? This says you have as many as you're supposed to. But they need more! Not unless a rifle gets broken or lost. Then it can be replaced. But they're not broken or lost! Right, then why do you need more? Because there are men with only pistols and they need rifle! Then they can use the ones you've already got! What about the men without rifles?!? That's why they have pistols. Who's on first, what's on second, and I don't know is on third----welcome to the U.S. Army. If it doesn't make sense-------you're in the army now! :banghead:

 

[c_yeager]

For a tanker or vehicle crew i would think that the shorter size and collapsability (is that a word?) of the AK would make it a good choice. An underfolder AK gets pretty tiny. Of course i think the whole POINT here is that an AK beats the pants off of a 9mm pistol. I dont think anyone is going to argue that point at all.

 

[jercamp45]

Any reliable rifle beats just a handgun!

I think this is more a story about the lack of intelligence found in modern logistics. Tankers are not riflemen, but when pressed into that service they need rifles, not pistols!! So, Improvise, Adapt, Overcome!! Available AK's get pressed into service and I applaud that decision over the pencil pushing REMF's idiocy. Though 30 round bursts are not a good way to train by any stretch of the imagination!
I spent four years as a Grunt packing the mighty mattel poodle shooter and was not terribly thrilled by it then. But it was short,light, handy, reliable(if kept clean, except in SAND!), and would hit a man in the chest at 500 meters with a supersonic bullet. And it was what I was given, no other option, period(though I did get to carry my HK91 a couple of times...mainly because the CO wanted to shoot it!) OK. Make use of what you have.
Yes, they improved it since then. Stabilized bullet, dotted sights, battery powered doodads that can be quite handy(surefires in afghan caves).
And they play with it still.....landwarrior, thermal imagery, computers, etc.
Warfare is often about simplicity though, and for close range, reliable combat...the AK is hard to beat. I have owned both...but if the Caca got deep tomorrow, my AK would be the one I grabbed first.
Why? I am not worried about sniping a bad guy at 500 meters. I want a reliable machine with credible thump for 250 yards or less. I want it to take abit of abuse, if necessary, I want it to be able to drop a deer if necessary. I want it to do a simple, yet complicated job...save my butt!!
Yes the silly sights can shift(that is why I like the Valmet/Galil style peep sight!), yes, it ain't real good at long distance. Yes the silly safety sucks the big green one!(Oy Vay, that 'Clack!"). But It WORKS anywhere, anytime, any clime or place!
Heck, for urban warfare, especially in the desert...if you offered me a M-4 with all the doodads or a cheap AK...I'd grab the AK! Same goes for a M9 Beretta and an old beat up 1911A1, though I would prefer one of my customized 1911's, I'd take the basic one over any nine millimeter....especially if ball was all you got for ammo.
Grunts like it simple!
Locate, Close With, Destroy!
Where's the Beer?
What? No Women? Are you sure?(uh, Sir!)
Semper Fi,
Jercamp45