Military Review

The main competitor of "Kalashnikov" M-16 and its modifications - this is a long time

80



The usual reproaches to the M-4 assault carabiner (replacing the M-16 in the US military and a modification of this rifle) of insecurity have recently been added to claims of insufficient ammunition power, especially when working on a protected target.

The sad experience of Afghanistan and Iraq, the ghost of "Warrior"

So, a couple of years ago, the US Department of Defense presented a report stating that it was no longer possible to postpone the replacement of an assault rifle with a more advanced model. The document indicated that, according to the experience of the hostilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, although the M-4 is superior to the main weapon the enemy - AK-47 in accuracy, inferior to it in a number of other equally important characteristics, such as reliability and unpretentiousness.

US Army personnel regularly report weapons breakdown during sandstorms and urban debris, in dusty conditions. It is reported that the assembly, disassembly and cleaning of the M-4 in the field, or rather, in the sandy desert, is fraught with a weapon failure. In addition, it is said about the insufficient penetration ability of the cartridge used in the carbine. There are reports of episodes when the bullets could not penetrate even the sides of the truck at a time when the lines from the AK carry the walls of brick and foam blocks and hit the fighters who hid behind them.

As a matter of fact, the report does not contain any information about the weapons of the AR-15 line, putting, among other things, its age to the weapon (note that the AK, which, according to the authors of the report, is even older). To be fair, one can add that the problems of M-4 in Afghanistan are still somewhat less than those of M-16А3 during the “Desert Storm”. The report, based on the Afghan experience, was added to the realization that the carbine ammunition - cartridge caliber 5,56 x 45 millimeters is not effective enough against modern body armor - and above all against the protection used in the Russian Ratnik outfit.

Unreliability - the main trouble of the "Black Rifle" and its offspring

Based on this, the Pentagon has once again announced a competition for the replacement of individual weapons of the AR family. Recall that the assault rifle M-4 is a descendant of the AR-15 rifle, created by the outstanding American gunsmith Eugene Stoner in the early sixties of the last century. The debut of M-16 (Army Index AR-15) was the war in Vietnam. Since then, on the basis of this rifle, a whole line of combat and sporting weapons has been created, produced not only in the USA, but also in many other countries.

Despite the popularity of weapons based on the AR-15, which is second only to the Kalashnikov system, almost immediately after the adoption of the “black rifle” (the so-called Vietnamese veterans M-16), it found a lot of shortcomings reliability. Since then, M-16 has experienced several upgrades that, while significantly improving the characteristics of these weapons, have not yet been able to solve all of its problems. The question of replacing M-16 (and its versions - M-16А1, М -16А2, М-16АЗ and М-4) has already been raised more than once. So, in the 1991 year, the program "Perspective combat rifle" was curtailed, which is preparing to change the line of the AR-15, and has not been able to offer the American military anything worthy of attention. This fruitless job cost American taxpayers 58 million dollars.

The failure of the program gave rise to talk about misuse of funds and corruption. In any case, the Pentagon and the Department of Defense tried to do everything so that the Perspective Combat Rifle was forgotten as soon as possible. The program “Targeted Individual Military Weapons” was launched, which, by the beginning of 2000-s, was to provide American soldiers with not just a rifle, but a whole rifle-and-grenade launcher complex, which was to combine an automatic rifle for a standard NATO cartridge 5,56х45 and self-loading 20-mm grenade launcher. In addition, the shots of the new weapon should have had an “intelligent” fuse, which would ensure that the projectile exploded in the air. To determine the distance of the explosion, the complex had to have a laser range finder and a computer that automatically programmed the fuse. The weapon was equipped with various sighting devices, including thermo-optical, and it had to weigh only five kilograms. Actually the main part of this complex was to be a grenade launcher, and an automatic rifle - to serve as a weapon of self-defense of the operator at close range.

After reviewing the technical specifications of this revolutionary program, the famous American weapon expert Peter Kokalis said in 1996 year: “We will have to manage with existing rifles chambered for 5,56х45 for a long time.” And as the water looked. The M-4 carbines, which became an obvious peak of the evolution of the AR-15 line, both in terms of reliability and ergonomics, nevertheless marked a technological dead end. According to experts, the possibilities for further modernization of this system are almost exhausted. While the claims remained. And in 2010, a new program was announced, and “already” after six years, its favorites were identified.

There is a good assault rifle, alas - not American

So, in the old 5,56x45 NATO caliber, two options were considered. The first of them is the assault rifle of the German company Heckler & Koch HK-416. In many ways, it resembles the AR-15 scheme familiar to the Americans, but the Germans changed its most vulnerable spot - the gas outlet system - using a gas piston with a short stroke.

The result is a weapon with an M-16 accuracy, but with much greater reliability. Its samples are used with might and main in the special forces of NATO, in particular, in the armed forces of Germany and France, and also as a weapon of limited standard in the units of the US Special Operations Forces Command, and since 2010 of the year - in the US Marine Corps, under the designation M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.

This weapon, successfully tested in combat, could be considered an ideal replacement for the M-4. It uses the same cartridge, the same shops. Its device is very similar to the usual "classics", which allows the use of many parts of the AR-15 group and does not require retraining of servicemen to work with new weapons.

But the rifle has one drawback, crossing out all its advantages - it is not American. Even released in the American factory, it still remains German. And it's not just a leaven, or rather, Coca-Cola patriotism. The fact is that the main US assault rifle will become a benchmark not only for NATO, but also for many other countries focused on the Western bloc. That is, the United States with its own hands will make the most powerful PR competing with them in the small arms market to the Germans. For this reason alone, the victory of this really good rifle (by the way, there is its version chambered for NATO 7,62x51 NK-417) in the American competition is unlikely. The other challenger (to which, by the way, the experts predicted victory, in the event that it was decided to stay with the former patron) was an American carbine Colt ACC-M. This is an improved version of a test rifle created back in 1990, which has no fundamental differences from M-4.

Another likely suggestion was the Barrett REC7 carbine with a short stroke gas piston. This weapon also uses a fairly powerful cartridge 6,8 × 43 mm Remington SPC. The main obstacle for him was that the introduction of a completely new cartridge as the main (unlimited standard) would force to change the entire weapons system of NATO. The same problem was present in another contest participant - Textron 6.5mm carbine, which uses specially designed bullets. Unlike conventional rifles, in which a bullet protrudes from the end of the sleeve, the innovative 6,5 mm cartridge is completely hidden in the sleeve and made using polymers.
Based on the fact that the mandatory requirement of the program was to use a more powerful patron than the 5,45 x 39 NATO (223 Rem), one could assume with a high degree of probability that the Robinson XCR-M karabiner would win under the 7,62 × 51 mm NATO (308 Win) cartridge, which has similar to AK gas exhaust device and has great reliability.

In favor of this model can be attributed to the fact that the cartridge used in it is much more powerful than NATO 5,56x45, unified for NATO machine guns and sniper rifles. This cartridge in 1954 was standardized as a single for the North Atlantic unit assault rifles. However, by the year 1961 Western gunsmiths came to the conclusion that this cartridge is not suitable for assault rifles. With the automatic shooting mode, he gave too much dissipation, and there was nothing to be done about it: neither the reduction in the initial speed of the bullet, nor the various schemes of the weapon and the muzzle devices helped.

As a result, the NATO rifle - M-14 and FN FAL and its versions - were converted into self-loading, depriving them of one of the main functions of the assault weapon - the automatic mode, which provides a high density of fire with sufficient accuracy.

That is, XCR-M assumed a return to the path that was once rejected by gunsmiths as erroneous. And so, suddenly, this fall, the US Department of Defense announced the early closure of the Interim Combat Service Rifle program. The reasons for which this decision was made, could not help but surprise. Speaking against the program, experts said that an increase in caliber would inevitably lead to an increase in the mass of weapons and ammunition, as well as a reduction in wearable ammunition. As if these things were not obvious from the beginning!
After all, at one time, the replacement of the M-14 caliber 7, 62х51 with the M-16 was due to the fact that the caliber of the new weapon allowed the soldier to increase the ammunition load by three times or reduce the weight of individual equipment by 40 in comparison with that of military personnel armed with M-14.

Replacing the M-4 does not seem to be a high priority.

Strictly speaking, the decision to stop the next program to replace the main assault rifle of the US Armed Forces is not surprising. After all, if we proceed from the tactics adhered to by the US ground forces and the marine corps, an assault rifle is not an essential tool for them. If we talk about special forces, they have the right to use weapons of "limited standard", which they do. That is, replacing the M-4, especially in light of the reduction in the US military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, does not seem to be a top priority.

However, each such program promises a lot of money, not only in the form of kickbacks to military officials who make decisions about adoption, but also to numerous lobbyists. And the latter - almost officially. Perhaps this is the fanatical love of US military officials for everything new.
Author:
Originator:
https://vpk-news.ru/articles/40321
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. unignm
    unignm 17 December 2017 19: 33 New
    +1
    I do not believe that you cannot make a normal machine.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 17 December 2017 23: 15 New
      0
      Quote: unignm
      cannot make a normal machine.

      They have already made ten normal machines. And the first is AR-10.
      Unfortunately, specifically infantry weapons - this is some kind of damned place for the Army. As it did not go from the 32nd year, it does not go, even though weeping.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 17 December 2017 23: 20 New
        +3
        And what was the bad Garand? And the M-14?
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 17 December 2017 23: 52 New
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          And what was the bad Garand?

          Cartridge .30-06. I just remembered the 32nd year, the ban of the cartridge .276
          Quote: voyaka uh
          And M-14

          Why is a self-loading rifle bad in the 64th year? I do not even know...
        2. Shironay
          Shironay 18 December 2017 00: 09 New
          +4
          So about the M-4 I can only say good things. Convenient, accurate and reliable weapons. Personally, I have never jammed
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 18 December 2017 00: 20 New
            +2
            Quote: Shiryonay
            So about the M-4 I can only say good things. Convenient, accurate and reliable weapon

            The thing is good, one trouble. While they brought it up - they brought it up for 20 years, until 1982 - questions arose for a breakthrough cartridge at the end of the 50s. M4 is generally the 94th year. The nose was pulled out - the tail got stuck.
        3. Gonchar
          Gonchar 18 December 2017 17: 18 New
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          M-14
          Seriously? Did you run with this?
        4. Kibb
          Kibb 19 December 2017 11: 23 New
          0
          Where did you see the M14? I wonder even when you saw the full-fledged M-16? Not banter, just asking about the years of service.
          1. Gonchar
            Gonchar 20 December 2017 16: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: Kibb
            Where did you see the M14?
            It’s a wonderful question, you have to answer for the bazaar. I have seen and tried a lot of weapons in the arsenal of the Tsakhal. FN (two modifications), M16 (all modifications) + M4, Galil (all modifications), M14 among colleagues (Snipers) was. For some time I made acquaintance with Kalash. And of course, it is gratifying when a gunsmith evaluates a weapon, but I look from the point of view of the infantry and its work. Work after a lot of effort, ease of use in the open field, in trenches, in the city, reaction to unexpected changes in the situation, firing, etc. My personal opinion, for the infantryman, in Israel in my time (for me, this is the area application - "working" and geographical have an effect) there was nothing better than the M4. Today is Tabor, but that's another song.
            1. Kibb
              Kibb 20 December 2017 19: 31 New
              0
              I don’t know, I only saw the M-14 at the 13th flotilla, and even that was like the M21 - although this is not essential.
  2. unignm
    unignm 17 December 2017 19: 35 New
    +4
    ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh got tallyrasts
  3. The comment was deleted.
    1. Popovich
      Popovich 17 December 2017 20: 10 New
      +6
      will you blindfold AR15?
      1. AshiSolo
        AshiSolo 17 December 2017 20: 52 New
        +8
        Che so immediately, with a trump card? Direct capitalist hatred in you, comrade! xD
      2. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 18 December 2017 06: 03 New
        0
        Quote: Popovich
        will you blindfold AR15?

        What for?
        1. Kibb
          Kibb 19 December 2017 20: 15 New
          0
          Well posed question. What for???
      3. Kibb
        Kibb 19 December 2017 19: 25 New
        0
        Well, firstly, it’s easier to disassemble than AK (although I personally prefer AK-like), and secondly: what to disassemble with blindfolds (a question for all pluses)?
        1. Gonchar
          Gonchar 20 December 2017 16: 37 New
          0
          Quote: Kibb
          what to disassemble blindfold
          And at night? (I didn’t plus. He himself came)
    2. Cxnumx
      Cxnumx 18 December 2017 04: 07 New
      0
      So, a couple of years ago, the US Department of Defense presented a report stating that it was no longer possible to postpone replacing an assault rifle with a more advanced prototype. The document indicated that according to the experience of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, although the M-4 surpasses the enemy’s main weapon, the AK-47 in accuracy, it is inferior to it in a number of other equally important characteristics, such as reliability and unpretentiousness.

      it’s strange that they don’t know. they probably want money ...
  4. Popovich
    Popovich 17 December 2017 20: 08 New
    +3
    M-4 and surpasses the AK-47 in accuracy, inferior to it in reliability and unpretentiousness - that’s all said!
    1. Pauladin
      Pauladin 17 December 2017 23: 47 New
      +3
      superior in accuracy only when shooting in long bursts. and inferior in reliability in in all modes
      1. MadCat
        MadCat 18 December 2017 01: 57 New
        +3
        Quote: Pauladin
        superior in accuracy only when shooting in long bursts. and inferior in reliability in all modes

        fairy tales are all this, the modern AR-15 is not at all what it was in Vietnam, reliable unpretentious with a modified design. M rifles have a million modifications since then. fellow
        1. LastPS
          LastPS 19 December 2017 12: 14 New
          +1
          Quote: MadCat
          fairy tales are all this, the modern AR-15 is not at all what it was in Vietnam, reliable unpretentious with a modified design.

          Yeah, not the ones in Vietnam, but they still have problems with reliability. It should be understood that army models, with the exception of weapons for special forces, cannot be expensive, but it’s very expensive to massively introduce improvements for such a huge army. Speaking of reliability, the ILC example is very indicative of which the author of the article mentioned. It is the marines that bring democracy to all corners of our ball - this is the vanguard, and since these comrades m4 is not to their liking, then it really is. At VO there is an excellent series of articles on comparing the AK and M16, where in detail, from a technical point of view, all the myths about the "black rifle" are considered, in short, this is a file in terms of ensuring the reliability of the system.
      2. cast iron
        cast iron 23 December 2017 01: 29 New
        0
        The accuracy of M2 is about 2,5MOA, the accuracy of AKM is about 4MOA. So the M4 is more accurate in all modes. Plus, she has a direct shot range of almost 2 times more. Persistence is significantly higher. The return is small. It’s easier to get out of it than from AKM.
    2. Grid
      Grid 18 December 2017 11: 14 New
      +3
      M-4 and surpasses AK-47 in accuracy

      What about the AK-74M?
  5. Victor_B
    Victor_B 17 December 2017 20: 16 New
    +1
    A new round of M-4 vs Kalashnikov Detected.
    Already a very expensive event is the replacement of the main small arms. Well, VERY expensive.
    For example, I don’t have a settled opinion about the need to replace the AK-74.
    Moreover, it seems that two new automatic machines will be immediately adopted.
    Where is the money zing?
    Our "spherical" liberals get an excellent opportunity to squeal: "This money should be given to (pioneers) pensioners, teachers and doctors."
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 18 December 2017 01: 17 New
      11
      Quote: Victor_B
      Already a very expensive event is the replacement of the main small arms. Well, VERY expensive.

      not so - it is enough to dispossess a dozen of the Ulyukaevs and other governors. You just can’t imagine how much they wrote .. stole.
      If the "modest" colonel had so much dumb stupidly in checkered bags, then imagine how many are in offshore with his superiors.
      Yes there is enough for a new lunar program, and not just for a new machine.

      People, we have already managed to forget this since the days of the Union, but ... We live in the largest and richest country in the world, in which there is EVERYTHING!
      The Union dragged a bunch of subsidized republics on itself, built communism all over the world, filled all Bantustans with free weapons for decades to come, and almost won the industrial race with the rest of the capitalist world. This is despite the fact that 60 years ago all that they could boast of was naked revolutionary enthusiasm.
      So there is money, you just need to return it (yes, yes, I’ve been stubborn for repressions and shots).
      1. psiho117
        psiho117 18 December 2017 01: 22 New
        +2
        But the Americans won’t do the machine - because if they didn’t do it before, when the infantry still solved something, then now they don’t need it anymore - we need bepilots, satellites and high-precision, used in the right place at the right time. And the patrol in the village will cope with M-koy if the Raptor is hovering over it, and in the 3-minute readiness the f-15 stands.
        1. Michael HORNET
          Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 24 New
          0
          None of the M27IAR parts is suitable for the M4, everything is completely there, this paragraph gives complete ignorance of the subject of discussion
          Only the store and the cartridge are common
          M27IAR conceptually is a shortened RPK for each fighter
          The reliability of the army M4 is not so small, it is full of users who never had delays when shooting. But there were enough those who caught the wedge ... And for them it ended sadly. Note that the M4, with its unhunged short thick barrel, and even with a sample for mounting the grenade launcher, does not exceed the accuracy of the accuracy of the AK-74M, the difference can be safely neglected. But there is a difference in reliability, although it is more obvious against the AK-103 with its 7,62
  6. DesToeR
    DesToeR 17 December 2017 20: 47 New
    +7
    Quote: Victor_B
    Already a very expensive event is the replacement of the main small arms. Well, VERY expensive.

    Have you considered this the most "expensive"? The cost of one AK-74M or M-4 assault rifle is by no means more than $ 1000. And they say that even $ 500 can easily be met. So if you need to buy say 5 million. pieces of new machines and at a price of $ 2000, the cost of re-equipping the entire army will cost $ 10 billion. One aircraft carrier without an air group is more expensive.
    1. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 19 December 2017 22: 06 New
      0
      This is true, and even five million, now it’s unnecessary, in fact, only those who should go into battle need a full-fledged automatic machine with quite a lot of gimmicks. For signalists, signalists, etc., something can be simpler. By the way, if I’m not mistaken then M4 just performs this function in the American army, this is a simplified, shortened version of M16, for those who have to go into battle, now they release M16-4.
    2. Tarikxnumx
      Tarikxnumx 19 December 2017 23: 02 New
      +1
      You do not consider the logistics of the process. Rearmament is not carried out on a battalion basis. If there is a rearmament, then it should happen at least corps, armies, brigades. And this must be done at once. And for this it is necessary to first bring in the required number of ammunition, zip, weapons to the warehouses, establish their preliminary logistics, and only then make the replacement. And this is without taking into account the retraining of soldiers for new weapons. That is why it is unrealistically expensive, much more expensive than a new aircraft carrier ...
  7. akm8226
    akm8226 17 December 2017 21: 15 New
    +5
    This reminds me of an old joke about God and a man.
    The man begged for a dialogue with God. He, having mercy, asks the peasant, they say, well, say, what do you need?
    Man, in joy and says:
    - Lord - make my dick get to the floor!
    Well, the Lord thought, and said:
    - Okay, be your way! - and here the man looks - and his legs are shortened, shortened ... Oppa! - And a member got to the floor!
    Man to the Lord:
    “God, how so, I didn’t mean it !?”
    The Lord answers:
    - And you need to correctly formulate the terms of reference!

    This whole story proves only that old truth that an incorrectly formulated technical assignment ALWAYS leads to failure.
  8. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 17 December 2017 22: 03 New
    +1
    It seems to me incorrect to compare the ammunition M-16 and AK-47 for penetration ...
  9. Krasnyiy komissar
    Krasnyiy komissar 17 December 2017 23: 03 New
    +1
    We should also consider replacing the AK-74, but only after developing a new munition. 5.45x39 mm was, of course, a significant step forward in the 70s, but it was time for him to rest. Already after 10-15 years, bulletproof vests will reach such a level that even the 7H24 cartridge will be too tough for them. The way out is the development of a new cartridge of 6-6.5 mm with a muzzle energy of more than 3000 J and a pulse at the level of the outdated 7.62x39 mm. Such an approach will significantly increase the bullet's penetration, accuracy with single shots (high flatness, good ammunition), but accuracy will drop in long bursts and weakened ammunition will decrease. Even in the USSR, similar studies were conducted, a new powerful cartridge was developed - 6x49 mm (5 gram bullet, speed 1100 m / s).
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 18 December 2017 01: 05 New
      0
      In the courtyard of the 21st century, new industrial technology. IMHO, you don’t have to invent new intermediate cartridges, but take the classic 7.62x54, maybe even strengthen it (so that even if the bulletproof vest doesn’t break through the enemy anyway), the resulting shortcomings, such as less ammunition and problems when firing bursts, should be solved by raising firing accuracy and recoil compensation (something like an individually customized muzzle brake).
      1. Krasnyiy komissar
        Krasnyiy komissar 18 December 2017 01: 44 New
        +5
        What is the 21st century? The gunshot reached its perfection half a century ago, all subsequent efforts in this area have yielded extremely meager results. You do not understand the very essence of the problem of individual automatic weapons. The 7.62x54P cartridge is good for machine guns and rifles, but its momentum is excessive to create a light and heaped machine gun, and the mass of the required ammunition is beyond the reach of the infantryman. The sniper does not need to carry 300 rounds of ammunition, but the infantryman does. This was one of the reasons for the creation of an intermediate cartridge of 7.62x39 mm, and then 5.45x39 mm in the 70s.
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 18 December 2017 12: 28 New
          0
          Perfection has been lost: the existing firearm can no longer be guaranteed to fulfill the task of incapacitating enemy soldiers. Bulletproof vests of high resistance, which you can wear all the infantry appeared only now. BC is heavy? So you can reduce the need for BC: put a 4x-10x sight, a collimator, a barrel with high precision processing, a ballistic computer. Make it so that where the task was solved by a short burst of 3 rounds, they would be solo. You can try to play with the sleeve, making it out of plastic and modifying the chamber.
          1. Michael HORNET
            Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 35 New
            0
            Armor plates cover far from the entire body of the soldier, in fact a minuscule. Moreover, only the special forces actually have the armor-piercing bullets, well, theoretically it’s theoretically possible to equip everyone, but can they wear not a protector, but a full-fledged bulletproof
            The middle ground for a cartridge is 6,5 Grendel. 5.45 is too weak, and 7,62 in all is inferior to 6,5 without giving anything in return
            The cartridge with a bullet speed of 1100 m / s will kill the barrel for a maximum of 1000 shots. You need a smooth trunk and it’s not a panacea
            Do not forget that if the cartridge is longer than the current one, in addition to new weapons, new magazines (!) For it and new cartridges you will have to change all magazine pouches) that is, replace all equipment.
    2. Droid
      Droid 18 December 2017 09: 13 New
      0
      Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
      Already after 10-15 years, bulletproof vests will reach such a level that even the 7H24 cartridge will be too tough for them.

      You late. The armor-piercing rifle has not taken a ceramic armor plate for a long time.
      But this does not matter much, in an AK74 battle with an old 7N6, it is absolutely the same whether the enemy is wearing body armor or not. He will screw in both holes.
  10. Krasnyiy komissar
    Krasnyiy komissar 17 December 2017 23: 15 New
    +7
    The M-16 gas exhaust automation scheme is very poorly suited for army weapons, although it is ideal for shooting at a shooting range. Powder deposits, dust, muliah easily turn M-16 / M-4 into a useless piece of duralumin in plastic packaging. It is impossible to correct this drawback with design improvements, because the matter is not only in the scheme of removal of powder gases: extremely small gaps between the moving parts and the receiver, a small mass of the bolt and a weak return spring, a small taper of the sleeve .223.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 17 December 2017 23: 29 New
      +3
      We didn’t notice something like this: the dust didn’t interfere with the shooting, the soot was small (the gunpowder was clean).
      Well, they didn’t throw in the mud, of course. Misfires happened, but were eliminated by jerking the shutter. And because of the worn out necks of plastic shops.
      But the accuracy is excellent, without recoil, by single "twos", the cotton is quiet, the flame is not visible (for a long M-16). good
      1. Krasnyiy komissar
        Krasnyiy komissar 18 December 2017 00: 44 New
        +5
        In battle, it is very important to be confident in your weapons. AK is far from the standard of accuracy, but it shoots ALWAYS. In addition, the poor manufacturing quality of our cartridges affects poor accuracy. If the AK-74M is equipped with high-quality western cartridges, then it completely stretches in accuracy with the M-4 when shooting single. In the conditions of a great war of 100%, there will be a shortage of the right type of gunpowder, and then it is better not to recall the M-16 at all.
        1. Michael HORNET
          Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 38 New
          0
          The biggest joint of the M16 is its store ... and it is just chosen by the NATO standard)) The store is made essentially disposable with emphasis on the convenience of wearing by the user (here the achievements are significant). Domestic store under AK made on the basis of maximum strength and reliability, and the user will get used to it))
      2. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 18 December 2017 01: 56 New
        +4
        It is ridiculous to compare Russian and European realities with its frost, rain and mud, with Israeli conditions, where there is no dirt and frost. In Israel, the M4 will work fine. But somewhere in the swamps of Flanders or in the middle zone of Russia will constantly refuse.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 18 December 2017 16: 52 New
          0
          Here I will not argue, I remembered only my practical experience.
          Of course, the line M-16 - M-4 has already exhausted itself. No wonder the American Marines
          replace it with a German rifle, outwardly similar, but with a different mechanism.
          More resistant to water and dirt.
          1. Michael HORNET
            Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 40 New
            0
            The M27 IAR, which the ILC adopted along with SCAR, is by far the best image of small arms in the Western world. But both use a defective store))) such a damn thing
  11. cannabis
    cannabis 17 December 2017 23: 23 New
    +1
    All the countries that were defeated and the states that were destroyed by the Union of States of America were armed with AK-47 assault rifles and its modifications. This fact only confirms the superiority of Russian weapons over American ones. Because victories were achieved not in battles, but by the method of gangster bribery of the generals, general secretaries and wealthy of these countries. All who were not sold were destroyed, morally crushed armies were dissolved. The Anglo-Saxons have a centuries-old tradition of killing kings, kings, princesses, princes, national leaders and loyal generals. Anyone interested can trace this tradition from the time of William Shakespeare.
  12. Captain Nemo
    Captain Nemo 18 December 2017 00: 07 New
    +2
    I suspect we will also hear about the adoption of armaments in the RA under the good old caliber 7.62
    1. Krasnyiy komissar
      Krasnyiy komissar 18 December 2017 00: 58 New
      +2
      The old M43 cartridge is hopelessly outdated today. A low bullet speed clearly does not contribute to ease of aiming, and a high cartridge momentum reduces accuracy. After switching to a caliber of 5.45 mm, the AK was able to surpass even M-16 in burst accuracy, which already says a lot.
      The median deviation at a distance of 800 m (height and width):
      AKM - 64/90 cm
      AK-74 - 48/64 cm
      The area of ​​the dispersion circle of the AK-74 decreased 1.7 times, which is very good, not to mention the increase in wearable ammunition by 1.5 times.
      1. Michael HORNET
        Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 43 New
        0
        Shooting a burst in that direction is a waste of ammunition. Any caliber. Accurate single fire at a more clearly visible target (with optics) gives a more significant increase in efficiency. At the same time, it’s stupid to shoot from a machine with optics and possibly also a heat nozzle, wretched 5.45. And here 6,5 Grendel offers the most successful compromise in everything
    2. psiho117
      psiho117 18 December 2017 01: 02 New
      +1
      Already - AK-104 kag-bee has long been composed ...
  13. Operator
    Operator 18 December 2017 00: 51 New
    +1
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    Already after 10-15 years, bulletproof vests will reach such a level that even the 7N24 cartridge will be too tough for them.

    Already achieved: ESAPI and 6B45-1 hold armor-piercing bullets of ammunition of caliber 5,45 and 5,56 mm, respectively.
    1. Krasnyiy komissar
      Krasnyiy komissar 18 December 2017 01: 52 New
      0
      These bulletproof vests are available only in the armies of developed countries, while the rest wear less resistant bullets to bullets. It should be noted that the mass of such vests is quite high, and the area of ​​protection against armor-piercing bullets does not allow covering all vulnerable parts of the body. Every year, new types of armored ceramics and aramid fibers appear, which allows reducing the weight of the armor without affecting its level of protection, and the penetration ability of bullets remains limited by their energy (7N39 Igolnik is the limit for 5.45 mm).
      1. Operator
        Operator 18 December 2017 10: 04 New
        +1
        You correctly describe the trend towards a decrease in the specific mass of body armor that can withstand shelling with low-pulse armor-piercing bullets.

        The reserve of boron carbide plates (by eliminating the use of a binder during sintering) is a twofold increase in bullet resistance, which will allow providing the same weight with 100% body protection.
  14. Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 18 December 2017 02: 05 New
    +5
    Russia does not need to spend money on the development of a new machine. Small arms have come to their limit of perfection, and until a revolutionary new way of feeding is invented, for example, electropulse guns, or sleeveless cartridges, this trampling on the spot. As an example, you can recall the Dark Bess, who was in the arsenal of the British army for almost a century and a half - for the muzzle-loading smooth-bore gun, it was the limit of perfection. And only with the advent of unitary cartridges did it become possible to make fundamentally different weapons at a qualitatively different level of development.
    Moreover, as the experience of the Second World War showed, and subsequent wars, loss of personnel and the destruction of enemy defenses are mainly caused by artillery and aircraft, the role of small arms INDIVIDUAL weapons is minimized. The battalion has machine guns, mortars, self-propelled guns, grenade launchers, and the role of the machine gun is minimized. Not without reason in the Second World War there was no difference with what an ordinary infantryman was armed: a store rifle, a self-loading rifle, or a PP. Everything was decided by machine guns, artillery, aviation and armored vehicles.
  15. Operator
    Operator 18 December 2017 02: 06 New
    0
    The article lagged behind in life - in the field of small arms in the USA, the Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW) program is already operating:

    System Weight: The NGSAR combat configured weapon including sling, bipod and sound suppressor will weigh no more than 12 pounds [5,45 kg] (T) 8 pounds [3,63 kg] (O). This does not include ammunition or magazine.
    The NGSAR will achieve overmatch by killing stationary, and suppressing moving, threats out to 600 meters (T), and suppressing all threats to a range of 1200 meters (O).
    Rate of Fire: NGSAR shall be capable of a rate of fire of 60 rounds per minute for 16 minutes and 40 seconds without a barrel change or risk of cook-off. Cyclic 200 rounds without cook off (T). NGSAR will be capable of 108 rounds per minute sustained for 9 minutes and 16 seconds without barrel change or risk of cook off. Cyclic 300 rounds without cook off (O).
    NGSAR will have the capability to fire in automatic and semi-automatic modes (T). NGSAR will be capable of firing two rounds with one trigger pull with both rounds impacting the target within 1 inch at 100 meters in automatic or semi-automatic modes (O).
    1. Timeout
      Timeout 19 December 2017 10: 32 New
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW) is already operational in the US

      The operator, as always, runs ahead of the horse ... Official sources poorly read?
      They write something like this:
      The Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle (NGSAR) is a single incremental program to meet future force warfighting needs. It is the planned replacement for the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) in Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) and select support units during the next decade. It will combine the firepower and range of a machine gun with the precision and ergonomics of a carbine, yielding capability improvements in accuracy, range, and lethality.

      THAT is about replacing the M249. Proof link: https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=a38c54658f9479a
      b8befa19dd314d4ef
      1. Operator
        Operator 19 December 2017 15: 39 New
        0
        In the title of the Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle program, do you translate the word "rifle" or figure it out for yourself? laughing

        The fact that this very rifle is intended to be replaced in the infantry compartment with the FN Minimi light machine gun (aka M249) is beyond doubt.
        1. Timeout
          Timeout 20 December 2017 01: 58 New
          0
          Quote: Operator
          Do you translate the word "rifle" or figure it out for yourself?

          However .... your erudition knows no bounds. BAR is also rifle, but still a machine gun. It's funny to learn about the essence by reading only the headlines.
          Quote: Operator
          That this very rifle is intended

          Do you have cognitive dissonance or just perception difficulties? Probably replacing the MInimi and the assault rifles is the same for you as the ESAPI you consider the standard.]
          1. Operator
            Operator 20 December 2017 04: 34 New
            0
            Believe or believe: the light machine gun of the 249 M1984 should now be titled rifle in the image and likeness of the 1918 BAR laughing

            Otherwise, the Americans decided what they thought: to replace a light machine gun with an automatic rifle in the infantry squad, published a whole program in purely American language, but a connoisseur of their language Timeout revealed the intention of the adversary to disguise the change of one machine gun to another (disguised as an automatic rifle) laughing
            1. Timeout
              Timeout 20 December 2017 07: 11 New
              +1
              Quote: Operator
              henceforth, rifle should be titled in the image of the 1918 BAR

              What a "smart Operator", it turns like a louse under a fingernail ... There is a specific document, with specific descriptions of what is changing, and he is trying to blur his joint.
              Quote: Operator
              The fact that this very rifle is intended to be replaced in the infantry compartment with the FN Minimi light machine gun (aka M249) is beyond doubt.
              You can see your memory as a navaga, 3 seconds. Sometimes it’s worth answering for words.
              1. Operator
                Operator 20 December 2017 12: 05 New
                0
                What is your native language - Yiddish?
                1. Michael HORNET
                  Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 53 New
                  0
                  This program really is a replacement for the M249, but in fact the PKK in the American version), that is, to replace a full-fledged machine gun with a tape - a rifle with a weighted barrel, they want to abandon the tape, blasphemy)) go to the concept of the PKK, it draws to heresy)
  16. Nic
    Nic 18 December 2017 05: 41 New
    0
    It is strange that the author did not mention 6.5 Creedmoor, because, unlike the mentioned cartridges, kridmorchik is already quite widely used on the civilian, sports and hunting weapons market in the USA, including the AR-15 platform, and is often mentioned in America as part of this discussion. . Given the growing and well-deserved popularity of this cartridge, its full American character and sufficient versatility, he is one of the most likely candidates for the next cycle of attempts to transfer small arms back from the category of fly swatter to the class of killers. After all, the matter is not only in bulletproof vests - this is not just a technical, but primarily an ideological problem - what do we expect from a war and a soldier on the battlefield.
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 18 December 2017 13: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: Nic
      It’s strange that the author did not mention 6.5 Creedmoor,

      Creedmoor is a rifle-class cartridge; it cannot be a substitute for an intermediate cartridge. But 6,8 REM - maybe. - he fits into a standard store; with him, after minimal alterations, the automation of any AR can work. And at the same time, he has an amazing ability at the level of 7,62x39.

      This is like Grendel, made on the basis of 7,62x39, and with minimal alterations, interchangeable with it - and 6,8 REM is made on the basis of 5,56. So it is unlikely that someone will abandon the current doctrine of weapons, and will switch from intermediate to rifle caliber. And it’s more profitable not to throw old rifles into the landfill if they can be reassigned to the new caliber with minimal effort.
      1. Nic
        Nic 21 December 2017 03: 06 New
        0
        I am not a great connoisseur of small arms, but I watch American YouTube and sometimes read American articles on the hunting topic. I have never come across a distinction between intermediate and rifle cartridges in American colloquial. But the fact that Creedmore was created in many respects as an alternative to the 308 and is actively used in semi-automatic rifles based on AR is a fact.
        As for the discussions on the topic of slaughter and the need for military small things. The military themselves can use anything, including depending on the vision of the war. Yes, the TT pistol breaks through the tree where the 357 caliber (without a shell of course) gets stuck, but the 357th deer fells. And although deer are shot not only by fives, but even by the 22nd, everyone perfectly understands that a really killer caliber of at least a deer, even a person, starts with the six. So the question is what modern wars are being waged for - In order to cripple people (and in fact according to all known statistics, most shots are banal fireworks) or to kill them, and technical problems are in the background here. It would be necessary and the six made an automatic machine.
        1. Michael HORNET
          Michael HORNET 21 December 2017 21: 59 New
          +1
          Kridmore and analogues - this is all the same rifle cartridge. Which will entail replacing the store, SACKS / unloading, plus significantly increased returns, very slightly different from 308, just with better ballistics.
          6,5 grendel as well as 6,8 rem are intermediate - with all the consequences
          6,5 Grendel looks the most optimal for the Kalashnikov system (only the store needs to be replaced), and 6,8 Rem for “them”, and the store does not need to be changed, just upgrade a bit - although this is the replacement) But 6,5 Grendel surpasses 6,8 rem
  17. Vadim851
    Vadim851 18 December 2017 07: 48 New
    0
    The cartridge is weak and this is a fact, the means of armor protection are not the same. It is quite realistic to create standards for a machine with good accuracy under 7,62 X 51. FN FAL is a confirmation of this. Yes, the wearable BC will be less, but the rate of fire will also be at a higher accuracy. Similarly, on the basis of 7,62 X 54, you can also create an automatic rifle, if you already choose between 7,62 X 39, then 54 looks much better.
    1. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 18 December 2017 08: 34 New
      +1
      the Americans have already passed this path with their M14, do not repeat the mistakes of others. As for the Russian cartridge 7,62 * 54, this cartridge is absolutely not suitable for an individual automatic weapon due to the presence of a flange. It is good for tape machine guns, but not for automatic rifles with box-type stores.
    2. Droid
      Droid 18 December 2017 09: 19 New
      +1
      Quote: Vadim851
      The cartridge is weak and this is a fact, the means of armor protection are not the same

      The cartridge is not weak and he does not care about the protective equipment. Especially if the current opponents have practically none.
      Quote: Vadim851
      It is quite realistic to create standards for a machine with good accuracy under 7,62 X 51.

      Absolutely unrealistic.
      Quote: Vadim851
      FN FAL confirmation of this.

      That's it.
  18. DesToeR
    DesToeR 18 December 2017 11: 55 New
    +2
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    the Americans have already passed this path with their M14, do not repeat the mistakes of others.

    Aliens? Long before the American M-14 in the USSR, it was created, put into service and released in the amount of about 60 thousand tons. ABC-36 automatic rifle chambered for 7,62x54R. With a box magazine for 15 rounds. Everything in the USSR has long been tested in real military conflicts (at least in three). The USA in its entire history has created one single type of small arms that really made a revolution - the M-16 chambered for 5,56x45. Everything else: single machine guns, automatic / self-loading rifles, submachine guns, pistols - the Americans created LATER Europeans. And today, the United States is far from a spearhead in the development of promising army small arms systems. Only bravado and a game with calibers.
    1. Krasnyiy komissar
      Krasnyiy komissar 19 December 2017 01: 35 New
      +1
      And what is the result of the development of ABC-36? The rifle was capricious, and the accuracy of fire bursts extremely low, which was the reason for its replacement with a more reliable SVT-40. The three-line cartridge is not suitable for an individual infantryman’s weapon, which was proved even before the war. As for the development of the Americans, they also had a similar product - the Browning rifle M1918 BAR, but after WWII they repeated the same mistake with the choice of cartridge, creating the M-14.
  19. CTABEP
    CTABEP 18 December 2017 13: 50 New
    0
    A strange article. The 5,56x45 bullet fragmented in the body and inflicting perhaps the most serious wounds on them has insufficient power, and the story about:
    In addition, it is said about the insufficient penetration ability of the cartridge used in the carbine. Reports are given of episodes when bullets could not even penetrate the sides of a truck at a time when the lines of AK carried brick walls and foam blocks and hit the soldiers who were hiding behind them.

    It reminds drop dead stories that the AK-74 supposedly doesn’t break a wooden box (well, except that the truck was lined with armor, but the authors of the report did not notice this).
    All the advantages and disadvantages of the M-16 and its modifications seem to have been painted a thousand times a long time ago, and these "news" seem to be sucked in order to convince someone in Congress that we need to allocate the dough for a new rifle and, most importantly, expensive - cartridge. I get the impression :).
  20. groks
    groks 18 December 2017 16: 13 New
    +1
    Well, all this is chewed many times. What was remembered. A book by a German journalist about Vietnam was published in a Roman newspaper. Art and documentary. "Death and rain" is called. It seemed to be quoted there as a real phrase from the instructions on the M-16. "Field disassembly is strictly prohibited! Assembly in reverse order."
    Now the US military is trying not to get into the jungle and sandstorms. They generally try not to fight themselves. Therefore, any weapon suits them.
  21. DesToeR
    DesToeR 19 December 2017 08: 56 New
    +1
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    And what is the result of the development of ABC-36? The rifle was capricious, and the accuracy of fire bursts extremely low, which was the reason for its replacement with a more reliable SVT-40.

    Moody? It was here that she was considered moody, and in the "civilized" West, her reliability would be standard. I did not write about weapons, but about their use as part of units - i.e. Army experience operating automatic rifles in the Red Army, long before the appearance of the M-14 in the United States.
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    The three-line cartridge is not suitable for an individual infantryman’s weapon, which was proved even before the war.

    By whom and what has been proven? In the USSR they were looking for a self-loading system based on standard 7,62x54R rifle cartridges, they were searched from the 20s until the beginning of WWII.
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    As for the development of the Americans, they also had a similar product - the Browning rifle M1918 BAR

    This rifle could not give the United States experience in operating the AB in units, as weighed like a light machine gun. If you compare the BAR, then with the DP-27 or BREN. But these are no longer individual, but group types of weapons.
    1. Krasnyiy komissar
      Krasnyiy komissar 19 December 2017 11: 30 New
      +1
      1. Even the SVT-40 is not particularly reliable in operation (a lot of videos on the network when even one store cannot shoot “lights” from storage without delays), although it still surpasses ABC in reliability. If Simonov’s rifle were so good, then they would have been produced not by 60 thousand pieces, but by millions.
      2. You confuse a self-loading rifle and an assault rifle. A self-loading rifle fires only single, so the use of powerful high-pulse cartridges in it is even welcome. An automatic rifle can fire in a burst, but the effectiveness of such a fire is extremely small due to the large dispersion of bullets.
      An assault rifle (automatic) is designed to conduct effective fire in bursts, which imposes significant restrictions on the momentum of the used ammunition. The advantage of light automatic weapons in battle was clearly demonstrated by the experience of the war with the Finns, when the Red Army had almost no PP, and the Finns had Suomi.
      3. The Browning rifle is very far from machine guns, because It has a very small store, a non-replaceable barrel and a low rate of fire bursts.
  22. DesToeR
    DesToeR 19 December 2017 14: 50 New
    +1
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    Even SVT-40 is not particularly reliable in operation

    Great reliability. The M-16 will have more problems - it’s also in service in a heap of countries of the world. Operational and economic characteristics are weak for SVT-40.
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    You confuse a self-loading rifle and an assault rifle.

    I have not confused anything for a long time.
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    An automatic rifle can fire in a burst, but the effectiveness of such a fire is extremely small due to the large dispersion of bullets.

    Which cartridge? From what distance? With an emphasis or in an unstable position? How much does the AB itself weigh? And is automatic fire the main thing for AV?
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    The advantage of light automatic weapons in battle was clearly demonstrated by the experience of the war with the Finns, when the Red Army had almost no PP, and the Finns had Suomi.

    The Red Army DP-27 and RPD arr. 34 had more than the Finns of all “Suomi” and “Lahti” combined. It wasn’t about automatic weapons. And if you add machine guns on armored vehicles ...
    Quote: Krasnyiy komissar
    The Browning rifle is very far from machine guns, because It has a very small store, a non-replaceable barrel and a low rate of fire bursts.

    The Browning rifle is very close to light machine guns, for which a magazine size of 20 rounds and a non-removable barrel are quite normal. But the weight of 8kg is no longer suitable for individual small arms.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 19 December 2017 23: 14 New
      +1
      Quote: DesToeR
      But the weight of 8kg is no longer suitable for individual small arms.

      On this cartridge it is difficult to make something easier for automatic fire. Therefore, the BAR was more likely the forerunner of sprinklers, like minimi, than assault rifles, as is rightly noted here.
  23. k_ply
    k_ply 21 December 2017 22: 03 New
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Here I will not argue, I remembered only my practical experience.
    Of course, the line M-16 - M-4 has already exhausted itself. No wonder the American Marines
    replace it with a German rifle, outwardly similar, but with a different mechanism.
    More resistant to water and dirt.

    Where from though ?! In the Marine Corps, two-thirds of the M27 machine guns are replaced with M249, and just replaced the M16A4 with M4 carbines ("... sewed on soap"), following a bad army example.
    And the M4 and M16A2 / A4 self-loading-fixed-sequential line has exhausted itself, while the automatic Canadian licensed versions are still in demand (for example, except for Canada in the Netherlands, Denmark and the British SAS), including the LSW version (in Denmark and the Dutch Marines).
    LSW (light support weapon) is a class of weapons to which in the West M27 IAR, Beretta AS-70/90, Enfield L86, H&K MG36, Ultimax-100 and our PKK, incl.
  24. SPLV
    SPLV 27 December 2017 09: 37 New
    +2
    . Than 5,45 x 39 NATO (223 Rem)

    The fundamental nature of this article is visible in the citation. Well, the author prepared very meticulously. Check the texts. Another stuffing for sracha, not an article.
    Discussions about new cartridges excites the blood. But in the news on VO, it recently flashed that the Kalashnikov concern began to sell enriched PMs. How can you not recall Starinov. If we consider the issue from a pessimistic point of view, then with massive hostilities, things can even reach a guerrilla war. And there will be no more weapons. Or someone needs to be explained that for such a case there is nothing better than a simple and familiar weapon. AK, mosinki, SCS are sold to the whole world, Makarov is single. And as the saying goes, it’s hard in a village without a gun. Yes, normal people would do better shooting ranges, it is not necessary in every village, it is possible in the regional centers. In my childhood, there were three shooting ranges nearby (15 minutes on foot) for small things, he himself shot for two years. There is nothing more. Boys and girls from childhood could join the weapon, and now only sit on the couch and theorize left. All this reminds reasoning about delicacies when there is nothing to eat at home. Sad to me guys, sad. I'm sad.