Badger Arms
Member
I have never been a believer in the AK-47. It's no secret to those who have read my posts that I'm not a big fan of the M-16 either, but that's a whole different can of worms.
What got me started was watching that Discovery Channel "AK vs. M16" show that was talked about in an earlier thread. I was enthralled by watching high-speed video of the AK-47 firing. You could SEE everything shaking and rattling with the recoil. There were numerous harmonics, shakes, torques, rattles, jumps, clanks, etc. Each and every one of these little jolts jumps the rifle off of target and beats the crap out of different assemblies in the gun. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the AK will shoot itself apart. I'm saying that this is NOT the way to design a gun.
The reason? The AK-47 allows the recoil forces to be transferred in several stages and in different directions.
Watch this video first: http://www.bsg-dornier.de/schiessen/filme/hsp/kalashnikov.mpg
1) the recoil of the bullet firing is transferred in a direct line through the bore axis and above the shooters shoulder pushing back.
2) the counter-recoil of the propellant gas pushing the bolt carrier group back this motion being in a line slightly above bore line pushing forward
3) the bolt carrier smacks the rear trunion on the receiver (SOMETIMES!) again transferring its energy in the opposite direction of (2).
4) the bolt carrier jumps up striking the top of the rear sight housing twisting the muzzle up.
5) the action spring accelerates the bolt carrier forward.
6) the bolt carrier assembly smacks into the forward end of the receiver pushing the gun forward in the same axis as (2) again.
Now, things happen too. The rear sight jumps around, the magazine jumps back and forth, the weak hand slips back and forth, etc. That's just the action. These forces torque the barrel, gas block, front sight, and all of the loose rattling parts all over the place. There is NO WAY we can attain accuracy. I’m speaking of accuracy not only in terms of single shots but controllable, predictable bursts that one can effectively keep on target.
What are the solutions? There have been three approaches to minimizing adverse kinetics of full-auto weapons.
1) The M-16 addressed the off-bore-axis problems by utilizing an in-line stock and in-line recoiling. It also addressed the problem of the bolt carrier striking the rear of the receiver through an [eventually] successful buffer system in the stock.
2) Prior to this, the MP43 (Do I have the model right?) solved the problem through the Constant-recoil principle where the bolt carrier doesn't smack anything at the rear. This allowed for a constant force on the shooters shoulder instead of the herky-jerky movement of the subsequent AK-47.
3) Even earlier, many designs utilized the recoiling barrel to spread the forces out over a longer period of time. The M-2 50 caliber and Johnson automatic come to mind.
4) The Russians now have a gun that has a counter-weight system that is very complicated but seems to work.
Some ideas. Why not have the entire action connected loosely to the buttstock. Have two recoil springs. The primary one acting much like the AK-47 return spring except utilizing the constant-recoil principle. The second spring to allow the operating system of the gun to recoil free of the shooters shoulder. This second spring should be stronger and only needs to soften the peak recoil forces. It only needs to travel about an inch at most. Add to this an in-line recoil system and recoiling barrel to minimize disturbance.
The end result is a gun that will stay on target during full-automatic bursts. Rather than a gun that jumps and scatters bullets, we would have a rifle that acted like a laser-beam cutting whatever it was pointing at to shreds. Rather than pointing the burst, we can aim the burst and/or walk the fire onto the target without the gun working against us. What do you think?
What got me started was watching that Discovery Channel "AK vs. M16" show that was talked about in an earlier thread. I was enthralled by watching high-speed video of the AK-47 firing. You could SEE everything shaking and rattling with the recoil. There were numerous harmonics, shakes, torques, rattles, jumps, clanks, etc. Each and every one of these little jolts jumps the rifle off of target and beats the crap out of different assemblies in the gun. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the AK will shoot itself apart. I'm saying that this is NOT the way to design a gun.
The reason? The AK-47 allows the recoil forces to be transferred in several stages and in different directions.
Watch this video first: http://www.bsg-dornier.de/schiessen/filme/hsp/kalashnikov.mpg
1) the recoil of the bullet firing is transferred in a direct line through the bore axis and above the shooters shoulder pushing back.
2) the counter-recoil of the propellant gas pushing the bolt carrier group back this motion being in a line slightly above bore line pushing forward
3) the bolt carrier smacks the rear trunion on the receiver (SOMETIMES!) again transferring its energy in the opposite direction of (2).
4) the bolt carrier jumps up striking the top of the rear sight housing twisting the muzzle up.
5) the action spring accelerates the bolt carrier forward.
6) the bolt carrier assembly smacks into the forward end of the receiver pushing the gun forward in the same axis as (2) again.
Now, things happen too. The rear sight jumps around, the magazine jumps back and forth, the weak hand slips back and forth, etc. That's just the action. These forces torque the barrel, gas block, front sight, and all of the loose rattling parts all over the place. There is NO WAY we can attain accuracy. I’m speaking of accuracy not only in terms of single shots but controllable, predictable bursts that one can effectively keep on target.
What are the solutions? There have been three approaches to minimizing adverse kinetics of full-auto weapons.
1) The M-16 addressed the off-bore-axis problems by utilizing an in-line stock and in-line recoiling. It also addressed the problem of the bolt carrier striking the rear of the receiver through an [eventually] successful buffer system in the stock.
2) Prior to this, the MP43 (Do I have the model right?) solved the problem through the Constant-recoil principle where the bolt carrier doesn't smack anything at the rear. This allowed for a constant force on the shooters shoulder instead of the herky-jerky movement of the subsequent AK-47.
3) Even earlier, many designs utilized the recoiling barrel to spread the forces out over a longer period of time. The M-2 50 caliber and Johnson automatic come to mind.
4) The Russians now have a gun that has a counter-weight system that is very complicated but seems to work.
Some ideas. Why not have the entire action connected loosely to the buttstock. Have two recoil springs. The primary one acting much like the AK-47 return spring except utilizing the constant-recoil principle. The second spring to allow the operating system of the gun to recoil free of the shooters shoulder. This second spring should be stronger and only needs to soften the peak recoil forces. It only needs to travel about an inch at most. Add to this an in-line recoil system and recoiling barrel to minimize disturbance.
The end result is a gun that will stay on target during full-automatic bursts. Rather than a gun that jumps and scatters bullets, we would have a rifle that acted like a laser-beam cutting whatever it was pointing at to shreds. Rather than pointing the burst, we can aim the burst and/or walk the fire onto the target without the gun working against us. What do you think?