Military Review

From the automatic bullet caliber 5,45 mm save ordinary bushes?

105
For a long time on the Internet there has been controversy regarding the 5,45 caliber mm automaton cartridge. In particular, many of his “whistleblowers” ​​believe that this munition is not only incapable of effectively defeating protected targets, but cannot even break through branches, and even ricochet off the grass.


It turns out that, for protection, it is enough to take, for example, a bath besom, brush aside a flying 5,45 caliber bullet, or hide in the bushes, and this will be quite enough to ensure its complete safety. The judgment looks, to put it mildly, strange, but nevertheless discussed seriously.

Is it really so, technical consultant of Kalashnikov Media, Vladimir Onoka, finds out. For the experiment, he uses an AK-74 caliber 5,45 mm and AK-104 caliber 7,62 mm. At a distance of 25 meters set targets, in front of which are bushes. The presenter will make 15 shots at the leaves and 15 - through the branches and find out how many bullets will hit the set targets.

How will the experiment end? Will the technical consultant succeed in dispelling the popular myth about this ammunition? Watch the video prepared by Kalashnikov Media.

Photos used:
https://ru.depositphotos.com
105 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. jonht
    jonht 29 December 2018 06: 20
    +3
    In general, it was already clear that 5,45 had a better chance of deploying a bullet, because it would go away from the direction vryatly, not so hard branches. Although there is a moment that in a bulletproof vest that arrives flat it will not penetrate, and there is a chance not to injure the enemy, and it is definitely higher than 7,62. But again, this is my opinion, probably if you hit a burst of 3-5 rounds, at least 60% will get it right.
    1. svp67
      svp67 29 December 2018 07: 10
      +13
      Quote: jonht
      In general, it was already clear

      Wait. Let's point by point.
      1. Is the myth confirmed? I believe that it is confirmed. And now this is not a myth, but a reality that is worth considering.
      2.
      Quote: jonht
      not so hard branches.

      Well, the question is different. And at what ranges? It's only 25 meters to the goal, which is somewhere in the meter from the broom. And if this distance is increased to 100 or 400 meters. It seems to me that there will be more and more of those who have gone to the rebound with every hundred and do not forget that in this case a single obstacle broke through, in the form of a bundle, and real bushes are somewhat different, there are many branches, of different thicknesses at different distances from each other, which again will increase the number of rebounds, and most importantly, it will begin not definitely how to change the trajectory.
      3. If a chance to take refuge and stay alive in the bushes? Yes there is and it is higher when using 5,45 mm cartridges by the enemy
      1. aws4
        aws4 30 December 2018 01: 16
        -2
        how you famously twisted everything ... the myth is not confirmed and this is a fact !!!! any bullet passing through the branches is rejected and the 545 bullet initially and intentionally made unstable is deviated more so that your arguments are not correct .. further search through the Internet there is a whole series about how and how different rifle bullets are rejected when passing or catching obstacles .. if if you were familiar with this topic, I think you haven’t written anything like that ... judging by the pluses under your lump, you can immediately see how many local people do not understand this topic
        1. svp67
          svp67 30 December 2018 10: 50
          +1
          Quote: aws4
          and the 545 bullet was originally and intentionally made unstable

          Already this shows HOW YOU ARE A SPECIALIST. The bullet is STABLE, otherwise you won’t be able to get anywhere intentionally. Another thing that is constructive, it is made in such a way that it would inflict maximum damage when it gets into living flesh, and this feature affects the ability of this bullet to go into a rebound when it gets into any obstacle
          1. aws4
            aws4 30 December 2018 18: 14
            -1
            no need to get out, you perfectly understood what I wrote about, only decided to show off .. and what you just wrote is just an attempt to get off the topic ... a cheap move and I did not expect this from you since I have known you for a long time because you often write comas here ..
            1. svp67
              svp67 30 December 2018 18: 29
              +1
              Quote: aws4
              no need to get out

              You give yourself wishful thinking. I'm not even going to get out of what. The bullet is stable, otherwise you simply WILL NOT GET WHERE.
              But now, however, structurally it is made so that its center of mass is displaced to the bottom, and this is typical for all high-speed projectiles, but this allows it to be easily removed from this stable state upon impact, because of which it begins to make rotational movements, causing terrible wounds. But even here there is a "but", there is 5,45 PRS - a cartridge with a bullet with a low ricocheting ability, it has a lead core, which negatively affects the penetrating qualities of the bullet and its stability at medium and long ranges, due to the heating of the lead, but reduces the tendency to ricochet at short firing ranges, just flattens the bullet.
              1. aws4
                aws4 31 December 2018 17: 27
                +2
                when I wrote that the bullet was initially made unstable, this is exactly what I had in mind and you perfectly understood it because you don’t understand this if you need to be strange to say the least .. accordingly, if the bullet is made like this (I write roughly on the folk) to lose stability when it enters the meat due to the displacement of the center of gravity, it will deviate more than a bullet as usual in any collision or contact with something in flight .. but you should not forget that absolutely any bullet is rejected in this situation, the only question is how much .. by the way the video confirmed this since 762 also unfolded what was visible on the holes on the target .. the fact that 762 deviates less than 545 is a fact and it doesn’t argue with that, but the fact that hiding behind a bush you will avoid injury is nonsense .. in this case the myth is not confirmed ..
                1. svp67
                  svp67 31 December 2018 17: 34
                  +2
                  Quote: aws4
                  accordingly, if the bullet is made like this (I write roughly according to the people) in order to lose stability when hit in meat

                  Not quite right, in fact it is a side effect. Typical of all high-speed munitions, in which the ratio of length to diameter is made higher, as in modern armor-piercing-ammunition
                  Quote: aws4
                  due to the displacement of the center of gravity

                  Again, this is not true, the center of gravity of such ammunition is already shifted to the bottom due to the shape, this does not prevent it from flying steadily, but it facilitates its removal from a stable state, in the event of a strong external impact, which is a collision with an obstacle
                  1. aws4
                    aws4 31 December 2018 18: 28
                    0
                    Tell me, did you come up with it now? this is not a side effect, and what is not the most real property of the 7H6 cartridge bullet originally laid down. again we return to who, when and where created this cartridge .. I hope you don’t write now as one Westerner here that 545 is a deliberate stub 556 made for the AK wooden system .. bother finding literature on who and when and what was the task when working on this cartridge and then draw conclusions based on this .. I won’t be prompting since you initially behaved not honestly and began to twist about instability))))))) on another resource I did not upload just text, namely photocopies what zn nd what I say and not making
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 31 December 2018 18: 37
                      +2
                      Quote: aws4
                      this is not a side effect, and what is not the most real property of the 7N6 cartridge bullet originally laid down

                      The debate goes already into the area of ​​what is primarily a chicken or an egg.
                      Quote: aws4
                      I hope you will not write now as one Westerner here that 545 is a deliberate stub 556 made under the wooden AK system ..

                      "Stub", of course not, but the fact that we repeated the actions of our "potential enemy" is beyond doubt.
                      Quote: aws4
                      take the trouble to find literature about who and when and what was the task for the study of this cartridge

                      Excellent, but on the basis of WHAT was the ToR made, is it not based on practical meetings with 5,56 rounds?

                      In general - Happy New Year, Happy New Happiness !!!!!.
                      1. aws4
                        aws4 31 December 2018 19: 17
                        +1
                        thank you and the Coming))))))))))))))
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 31 December 2018 19: 23
                        0
                        Quote: aws4
                        thank you and the Coming))))))))))))))

                        Well, thank God, at least something agreed drinks
      2. AndreyS
        AndreyS 7 January 2019 22: 54
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        There is only 25 meters to the goal, which is somewhere in the meter from the broom. And if this distance is increased to 100 or 400 meters.

        I personally shot 100 meters from a 5.45 mm AK-74M through branches at a target. There is no difference, about the same results as in the video. Here it will be worse with trees, 7.62 mm has better penetration. And the bulletproof vest is much worse.
        The plate is only 3 classes.
    2. figwam
      figwam 29 December 2018 12: 18
      +5
      I believe that even such an experiment confirmed that 5.45 bullets falling into the bushes will go far to the side.
    3. TTi
      TTi 30 December 2018 13: 20
      -3
      From the automatic bullet caliber 5,45 mm save ordinary bushes?

      Bosh what.
      1. igorka357
        igorka357 30 December 2018 14: 10
        +5
        And they still saved me and that bearded guy, most likely these same bushes, I didn’t pay attention to his weapons, and thank God, I wouldn’t write now! As soon as they saw each other, they started shooting almost from the hip, the distance was fifteen to twenty meters and a dense bush .. I don’t know how he used to shoot, but I was always excellent, and I had to fill him up from the first three, but it didn’t work! After apparently we both ran away, they thanked God, he’s his , and I’m mine, well, also bushes! And I swore in the green from 5.45 not to go to buildings e somewhere, yes, but not in a dense bush, the video only proved that if there were a couple more brooms at a distance of a meter from each other, hell would have hit the target ... and there are more than three bushes in the forest. The same 7.62 in order to leave the trajectory, you need to hook at least a small tree along the tangent, and 5.45 in the bushes will not fly in a straight line for a long time, of course, it depends on density and distance, but it’s better to be sure and not guess where you will meet that bearded guy ..
  2. riwas
    riwas 29 December 2018 07: 13
    0
    The United States is not in vain moving to the caliber of 6,8 mm. It is due to problems with penetration of 5,56 mm bullets. For example, a car windshield.
    1. TTi
      TTi 30 December 2018 13: 21
      -5
      Quote: riwas
      The United States is not in vain moving to the caliber of 6,8 mm.

      Only in your imagination.
      And the fact that they made their assault rifle not in the caliber of 7,62 mm (as in the USSR), but in the caliber of 6,8 mm, so do not confuse the assault weapon with the infantry (5,56 mm).
      1. riwas
        riwas 4 January 2019 05: 53
        0
        "The new weapon was originally intended for close combat units - infantry, reconnaissance and special forces. However, having been delighted with its fighting, US Department of Defense officials decided to equip all combat units with them in three to four years."
        https://rg.ru/2018/12/13/pentagon-nachal-ispytaniia-vintovki-kotoraia-legko-razryvaet-bronezhilet.html
  3. home64
    home64 29 December 2018 08: 42
    +8
    This is some kind of profanity and not an experiment ..... 25 m this melee distance the bullet gains maximum speed and strength and interference in the form of grass branches, etc. (you still have to manage to find the conditions for this application) will lead to minimal deviations ..... 25 a gun is more suitable. I think the experiment with 150-300 m will be more realistic.
    1. Dimonk
      Dimonk 29 December 2018 13: 26
      +5
      Agree hi He would still be right in the dense brooms to the targets set, and would be clever negative Even 10-15 meters between brooms and targets would show a completely different result stop Another self-promotion :(
      1. aws4
        aws4 30 December 2018 01: 21
        +3
        exactly!!!! if the broom were at a distance of 10-15 meters from the targets, the deviations were crazy in both 762x39 and 762x53
        1. svp67
          svp67 30 December 2018 10: 53
          -1
          Quote: aws4
          if the broom were at a distance of 10-15 meters from the targets, the deviations were crazy

          Well, for this it’s enough to look at the accuracy in the targets.
          This is 5, 45 ...


          Three generally went into "milk" and a lot of them flat ...
          And this is 7,62

    2. aws4
      aws4 30 December 2018 01: 18
      +2
      I think you really don’t understand how a bullet behaves in flight ..
    3. igorka357
      igorka357 30 December 2018 14: 25
      +4
      There were a bunch of such moments, the distance was just for an effective short-lived fire fight with a high hit rate of 25-50 meters, at the ranges that you indicated below, this will be a sluggish waste of ammunition in milk, depending on group shooting and the density of fire, of course! if you write that, then apparently you are not familiar with the PM, 25 meters for the PM is already a problem, and only a qualified shooter can hit the shooting range, ready to shoot, and 50 meters and hitting ... this is pure luck! And I wrote above about my personal experience of shooting in dense bushes, fear of course has large eyes, but the distance was no more than twenty meters, and from twenty meters I "killed" cans from under the "dry" from the first shot, but in the bushes something did not work out and from all store, when I realized that I missed the first two short ones, I stupidly lowered the whole store in that direction, just like he did in me ..
    4. Maki Avellevich
      Maki Avellevich 4 January 2019 15: 51
      0
      Quote: home64
      I think the experiment with 150-300 m will be more realistic.

      very little effective shooting at distances of more than 100 meters.
      at large distances it is so, to frighten the baking sheet, no more.
      the average infantryman is not a sniper in any way, and even under fire when the andrenaline shakes, you don’t aim much
  4. монастырь
    монастырь 29 December 2018 22: 52
    +4
    "myth" is not a myth at all, because no one is standing behind a bush within a meter, in principle, all of the above is true about the bullet leaving line 5 45 fast but weak and there is nothing to do with it in the forest!
  5. Catfish
    Catfish 30 December 2018 00: 12
    +2
    Quote: svp67

    Well, the question is different. And at what ranges? There is only 25 meters to the goal, which is somewhere in the meter from the broom. And if this distance is increased to 100 or 400 meters. It seems to me that there will be more and more of those who have gone to the rebound with every hundred


    Quite right! And the forest, and the urban conditions? What was the meaning of the transition to the "top five"? More ammunition? So there is more of it and goes into "milk". More precisely, a fight? So you need to teach a soldier as it should, then he will fall from the slingshot.


    Quote: DimonK
    He would have put the brooms directly to the targets straight and clever. Even 10-15 meters between the brooms and targets would have shown a completely different result. Another self-PR :(


    Yeah, and if you put the target in front of the brooms, the result will be just amazing! laughing
    1. aws4
      aws4 30 December 2018 01: 27
      +1
      Tomorrow we’ll give out muskets to everyone, or not, the Berdan’s 10-plus mm and let our soldiers learn to shoot .. but what a very accurate weapon and a broom it will pierce and a big birka will do .. 20 rounds to give out and then ask everyone who will be left alive, he didn’t hit 20 enemy soldiers .. you know, sometimes I get the feeling that all AK lovers in caliber 762 either didn’t use AK or at least have 545 operating experience ...
      1. Dimonk
        Dimonk 30 December 2018 01: 40
        0
        Yes, the point is not whether they used it or not. To put it right, how in one expression - "all professions are important, all professions are needed" good And I don’t think that 5,45 was created just like that or for cutting money like now stop Not those times were. The people here are talking about such an expert who negative negative negative negative only shows himself to be a very competent sweep of myths negative
      2. igorka357
        igorka357 30 December 2018 14: 35
        0
        And why are you getting nervous, you can’t go to the forest from 5.45, you can build up, you can in the field .. but I will repeat it again, I won’t get in! One of us, being a bunker, shot into the toilet, and there his assistant was sitting, the bullet hit the left the shoulder, as it’s not clear, didn’t touch a single bone, but it flew out from the guy’s right side! Inside, of course, there’s mincemeat, the opponent’s and unfortunately this guy’s zero chance of survival! So 5.45 is not bad and 7.62, but to each his own conditions are needed!
        1. TTi
          TTi 30 December 2018 14: 42
          0
          Quote: igorka357
          In our country, one summer flyer, as a nachkar, shot into the toilet, and there his assistant was sitting, a bullet hit his left shoulder, as it’s not clear that it didn’t hit a single bone, and flew from the guy right from the right side

          I heard such "terrible stories" in the army. I thought Runet had already outlived them all. An, no. Pop up sometimes.
          Quote: igorka357
          So 5.45 is not bad and 7.62, but each needs its own conditions!

          7,62x39 mm were scrapped back in the USSR. And they did the right thing. It has no advantages over 5,45 mm, except for those from the series "a bullet hit the left shoulder, but came out of the right side."
          1. igorka357
            igorka357 1 January 2019 07: 15
            +1
            You are lucky that you only heard, and I personally pulled this out of the toilet!
  6. Note 2
    Note 2 30 December 2018 04: 24
    0
    A bunch of statements to the grief of specialists on the topic of the instability of 5,45 caliber bullets, finally understand that the shifted center of gravity of bullets of this caliber is a myth that has long been debunked in the pages of the weapons press. The same Kalashnikov magazine wrote about this more than once. through fascines from vetok. Understand amateurs that bullets with a mixed center of gravity reduce the penetrating ability of automatic ammunition and not one slightest clever Ministry of Defense will not agree to such an "innovation".
  7. geniy
    geniy 30 December 2018 11: 24
    -2
    This idiot is an "experimenter" and many of his fans don't understand the simplest things! After all, the instability of the bullet's flight increases with increasing distance! That is, he set up an obstacle and a target at an extremely close distance - only 25 meters - but if, for example, at 250 meters? or 400 m? or 600 meters? that's when the bullets would ricochet off the branches much more. And what is this barrier - a bath broom !! At a broom, the thickness of the branches is 2-3 millimeters from the force, and in the forest or in the bush the branches are 10-15 millimeters thick! Yes, even simple - the most ordinary grass - of course, if you take only one blade of grass 2 mm thick, then any bullet will easily pierce a blade of grass. But the point is that in the thick grass, the bullet must knock down 50-100 blades of grass before it reaches the target - and this is already a serious obstacle - because the bullets will tumble in the thick grass!
    And also all viewers and readers did not notice that even at a very short distance of 25 meters and when shooting through a thin broom, 50% of 5,45 caliber bullets started tumbling and entered the target sideways! But this means that if the soldier who was shot was wearing at least a weak body armor, such bullets - hit sideways - could not penetrate even a thin body armor! And besides - if the bullet hits the target sideways - then even an armor-piercing bullet with a steel core will not be able to penetrate the armor - because the core can only fly straight and not sideways!
    Such experiments are only for fools!
  8. garri-lin
    garri-lin 30 December 2018 12: 19
    0
    No one thinks that there is another side to the coin. A bullet originally fired off to the side of the target can turn around due to a rebound and hit? Spherical shot of a horse in a vacum? If the target behind the bushes means not visible. If they shoot, then it manifests itself as something, for example, a sound. If they don’t see the target, but they know about where it is, they will shoot with a fan to increase the probability of defeat. And in this case, the rebound can both remove the bullet from the path of defeat, and vice versa, deploy the bullet towards the target.
    I agree with the armor penetration. When you arrive sideways, there will be no bulletproof vest penetration. But the blow will still be not weak.
    Well, as a sarcasm: all other bullets, especially Western manufacturers, maintain a straight flight even after breaking through 1 meter of concrete. That's how it is!
    1. geniy
      geniy 30 December 2018 12: 44
      0
      Bullshit.
      A bullet originally launched not towards the target can be deployed due to a rebound and hit?
      Are there really such stupid readers in the world who believe that due to the rebound you can purposefully hit the enemy. No, of course, that one in a billion ricocheted bullets has a chance to hit sideways, but this is a terribly small probability!
      I agree with the armor penetration. When you arrive sideways, there will be no bulletproof vest penetration. But the blow will still be not weak.
      It is possible that there are readers who do not make out the differences between "not a weak blow" и death blow. So I will explain, from a strong blow a person will be hurt, and he may even lie in the hospital, and a fatal blow - this is forever.
      Well, as a sarcasm: all other bullets, especially Western manufacturers, maintain a straight flight even after breaking 1 meter of concrete.
      This is of course sarcasm, because even a large-caliber 12,7 mm bullet pierced concrete and stuck into it by only 50 mm - they showed in Donetsk one bullet piercing the wall of a concrete house. And bullets of ordinary caliber from the same distance barely stick into concrete by 10-20 mm. Moreover, 5,45 bullets will be more prone to somersaults and generally will not be able to penetrate the slightest barrier to protect a soldier. But the author of the quote says: that if they say foreign military fools that adopted the 5,56 mm caliber, then ours must be the same. That is - if you fight in light conditions for the enemy - without bulletproof vests, then the 5,45 caliber is certainly good. but if you fight with bulletproof vests?
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 30 December 2018 13: 13
        0
        Well, let's start on the points.
        1. The probability is not one billionth, as you deigned to put it, but much more likely. And the target knows about it and is nervous and tries to hide.
        2. Don't run around in heavy armor. It's almost unrealistic. Don't have enough strength. But the average armor from all the energy of the hit will not save. And it will be like a horse kicked. While ochuhaeshsya may well add a butt. And it is not known what is better, move into the category of "observers from above" or become a participant in forced interrogation.
        3. Well, since you and Sarcasm are commenting. The walls are different, the concrete is different, the bricks are different. 12,7 completely breaks into a brick wall. 7,62 completely breaks through the wall from the expanded clay block. The question was not in penetration, but in the fact that any bullet from an external impact goes off the trajectory. That is 5,45 that is 5,56 that is 6,0 6,2 6,8 7,62.
        1. geniy
          geniy 30 December 2018 16: 31
          0
          In the absence of comments on the garri-lin post, I see that most readers distracted by reading his small counterarguments do not understand the essence of the dispute. Which consists in a simple thought: which caliber is better: 7,62 or 5,45, provided that it is fired in difficult conditions: through a bush or tall grass. Delusional counterarguments such as aimed firing with a rebound. I don’t remember exactly, but the aiming accuracy of the order of one angular minute is considered good. So - even if we take the accuracy of one tenth of a degree - that is, about 6 angular minutes, then readers should understand that a bullet rebound from an obstacle is in principle possible in any direction - that is, at an angle of 360 degrees, and taking into account one a tenth of a degree - that means the dispersion of bullets from the rebound can be 3600 directions - and this is only in the radial dimension! But deviations of bullets can also be from a different angle - that is, also in principle 3600. Therefore, we multiply 3600 x 3600 = and we get a wild number of bullet expansion after a rebound - about 10 million !!! What difference does it make - where can they fly - every clever person should understand - that aimed shooting in conditions of rebounding is in principle impossible! And the only condition is that the smaller the rebound, the more accurate the shooting. And if the caliber 7,62 provides a smaller rebound, then it means that the accuracy of shooting under difficult conditions is better.
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 30 December 2018 16: 39
            0
            My friend you are a terrible lol and a troll. About the fact that in zelenka is better than 7,62 everyone knows from the last century. Numerous discussions of Ikspertoff on this topic are nothing more than a discussion of the fidelity of axioms. (I hope they have not forgotten what it is) And please be kind enough to quote my phrase in which I proposed to shoot at the target through ricochets. It will be interesting to watch.
            And by the way, how does one choose to conduct targeted fire through dense bushes?
            1. geniy
              geniy 30 December 2018 16: 57
              0
              And please be kind enough to quote my phrase in which I proposed to shoot at the target through ricochets. It will be interesting to watch.
              And by the way, how does one choose to conduct targeted fire through dense bushes?
              you are trying to assess with me the probability of being shot when shooting through the bushes. But I then prove that the probability of hitting a caliber of 7,62 is simply higher than that of 5,45.
              So - for all readers: everyone needs to understand that in war there is a variety of combat situations - from the simplest conditions of shooting in an open field, to shooting through a single rare bush or tree branch through which a person is clearly visible, and the probability of grazing a branch is 50% , and the third option is to shoot through thick bushes at random, when targets are not visible at all.
              So, if you take the third variant of shooting at random through dense bushes - that is, you can get into a person, only the bullet will fly somersaulting. And since the bullet flying sideways experiences enormous aerodynamic drag, the range of its flight through the bushes is small, and the impact force is hundreds of times less. Therefore, a bullet flying flat will hit not like a horse with a hoof, but much weaker.
              About the fact that in zelenka is better than 7,62 everyone knows from the last century.
              And where, then, did all these "professionals" hide, who know that when shooting in green paint, the 7,62 caliber is better? Why do some idiots and laymen conduct experiments, who shoot through a broom from a distance of 25 meters? Where is at least one smart person who shoots through the bushes from a distance of, say, 200 meters at a target in a bulletproof vest?
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 30 December 2018 17: 35
                0
                Professionals do not prove anything to anyone and do not shoot stupid videos. Do their job and all. Just ordinary people need to understand a huge number of factors. And any bullets will ricochet. Any caliber.
                And 7,62 is not a panacea and 5,45, with due dexterity, you can use
                1. geniy
                  geniy 30 December 2018 17: 52
                  +1
                  ricocheting any bullets. Any caliber.
                  And 7,62 is not a panacea and 5,45, with due dexterity, you can use

                  Yes, then all ammunition ricochets, even shells from armor. But the degree of rebound is different for everyone - the heavier the ammunition, the more difficult it is to ricochet.
                  And of course, any caliber can be used for an unprotected target - even from a close range of five meters a naked person can be shot from an air rifle. I protest only against the fact that all these boobs - experimenters never shoot from great distances of 100-500 meters, and in addition on body armor, and not on thin plywood barriers.
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 40
                    0
                    Here the caliber is not so important. What matters is the actual weight of the bullet, the actual density and proportion is long by diameter. And they shoot at the brooms on YouTube and the first kpnale.
            2. TTi
              TTi 30 December 2018 17: 39
              -1
              Quote: garri-lin
              About the fact that in zelenka is better than 7,62 everyone knows from the last century.

              Well, who knows? "Experienced warriors" whose education God forbid, 10 classes and a horizons a little wider than zero?
              Yes, a much stronger return of 7,62 leads them to this idea. But they do not take into account that comparing 7,62 and 5,45 is the same as comparing a cannonball with a belt shell. Different generations of weapons. And different returns with different final efficiencies.
              Therefore, subjective sensations do not help here. And "experienced warriors" are simply mistaken.
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 21
                0
                And can you more in detail what are experienced warriors wrong?
                1. TTi
                  TTi 30 December 2018 18: 33
                  -1
                  Quote: garri-lin
                  And can you more in detail what are experienced warriors wrong?

                  In that they consider weapons on a cartridge of 7,62x39 mm more effective than weapons on a cartridge of 5,45x39 mm. This is not true.
                  Besides, "experienced warriors" should be taken in quotation marks. Where do experienced warriors come from in Russia now? The last war ended more than 70 years ago.
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 36
                    0
                    Are you talking about absolutely all possible options for a clash? Or there are special cases when your statement is wrong?
                    1. TTi
                      TTi 30 December 2018 18: 38
                      -1
                      Quote: garri-lin
                      Are you talking about absolutely all possible options for a clash? Or there are special cases when your statement is wrong?

                      You first decide who you mean.
                      If ordinary army troops (infantry), this is one thing.
                      Army special forces for special operations, this is different.
                      Police special forces for special operations, this is the third.
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 58
                        0
                        The usual ordinary motorized rifle. Infantry. Little gear of war.
                      2. TTi
                        TTi 30 December 2018 19: 20
                        -4
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        The usual ordinary motorized rifle. Infantry. Little gear of war.

                        A motorized rifleman or infantryman? This is not the same thing.
                        Motorized riflemen are usually armed with assault weapons. It is lighter and less effective than an assault. But motorized rifles are a form of special forces. Therefore, infantry weapons do not need them.
                        And the armament of the infantry is a full-fledged infantry weapon.
                        In the SA, infantrymen were called motorized rifles. They were armed with assault, not infantry weapons. Those. were poorly armed.
                      3. Consultant
                        Consultant 30 December 2018 19: 23
                        0
                        Quote: tti
                        Motorized riflemen are usually armed with assault weapons. It is lighter and less effective than an assault.

                        The robot is broken, drag another ...

                        Quote: tti
                        ... armed assault weapons. It is lighter and less effective than assault
                      4. TTi
                        TTi 30 December 2018 19: 33
                        -1
                        Quote: tti
                        It is lighter and less effective than an assault.

                        It is lighter and less effective than infantry.
                      5. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 19: 48
                        0
                        Well, so be it. See an example of "infantry weapons" that have been in service with any army in the last decade.
                      6. TTi
                        TTi 30 December 2018 20: 08
                        -1
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        See an example of "infantry weapons" that have been in service with any army in the last decade.

                        Hamam today I do not serve.
                        And you yourself, as I see, are not in the know.
                        My condolences.
                      7. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 12: 44
                        0
                        What can you poorly file? Do you promise to pray on weekends? Say what you don’t know. You can blurt out the absurdity, but trying to confirm it is not enough. That is OK. The hosts will find out, they will send a new training manual.
                      8. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 19: 44
                        0
                        Well, everything is clear with you. Three fights in the "Call of the duty officer", a couple of training manuals and more on the Internet. Learn materiel, and then when yours come they will laugh.
                      9. TTi
                        TTi 30 December 2018 20: 07
                        -1
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        Teach materiel

                        Here I advise you very much to follow your own advice. You need.
                  2. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 47
                    0
                    The last war in which the warriors gain experience is by no means over. Take off the pink glasses. It will begin on a grand scale, thank God, it can’t. 20 years already.
                    1. TTi
                      TTi 30 December 2018 19: 16
                      -1
                      Quote: garri-lin
                      Take off the pink glasses. It will begin on a grand scale, thank God, it can’t. 20 years already.

                      This is your imagination. In fact, the last war ended in 1945. All other so-called Wars, these are army and police operations of varying degrees of concentration.
                      This applies to both the war in Korea and the war in Vietnam. Although they can be argued about.
                      But I don't even see any other contenders for the title "war".
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 19: 35
                        +2
                        Sorry. I thought war is when people shoot at each other with the intention of exterminating. Do you think that if there are less than tens of millions of victims, then this is not a war. You would have to build government centers with such views.
                      2. TTi
                        TTi 30 December 2018 20: 06
                        -1
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        I thought war is when people shoot at each other with the intention of exterminating.

                        No, it’s also possible to shoot in the gateways. But this is not a war.
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        Do you think that if there are less than tens of millions of victims, then this is not a war.

                        War is certain actions. This is front to front. And episodic skirmishes of armed groups in the jungle or dill thicket, this is not a war.
                      3. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 12: 40
                        +2
                        Original opinion. It is good that many disagree with him.
        2. geniy
          geniy 30 December 2018 16: 38
          0
          2. Don't run around in heavy armor. It's almost unrealistic. Don't have enough strength. But the average armor from all the energy of the hit will not save. And it will be like a horse kicked. While ochuhaeshsya may well add a butt. And it is not known what is better, move into the category of "observers from above" or become a participant in forced interrogation.

          In the absence of comments from other readers, it is clear that general stupidity prevails. Here I will divide this post about bulletproof vests into two parts. Firstly, I personally invent a lightweight but heavy-duty body armor of a special design, so that bullets with poor armor penetration will not penetrate it, and in any case it will provide much better protection even from bullets with a special piercing core.
          And most importantly - the longer the firing distance - the worse the stability of bullets, and the easier they get stuck in bulletproof vests. That is why all sorts of scoundrels check bulletproof vests only from a short distance of 10-25 meters, because bulletproof vests will probably not penetrate from large distances of 200-500 meters, especially with unstable bullets of 5,45-5,56 mm caliber. .
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 30 December 2018 16: 42
            0
            Aaapp you are inventing! I thought so. Here they invent in a parallel branch too. It’s so good that you took it. And then tired of the lid from the cast-iron stoves on the chest to tie, when you go out for a walk.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 30 December 2018 16: 48
              +1
              Quote: garri-lin
              Aaapp you are inventing!

              No, he's a spy from Hollywood. laughing
            2. geniy
              geniy 30 December 2018 17: 10
              0
              And then tired of the lid from the cast-iron stoves on the chest to tie, when you go out for a walk.

              Yes, so I want to make sure that the bronik protects from everything - from a rifle bullet, and from a knife or sharpening, and from a spear or ax. And the blow of the ax and sharpening really withstood.
              I came up with a design, but the manufacturing technology is still not come up with.
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 30 December 2018 17: 23
                +1
                I'll start from the end. It's one thing to come up with a bronik. Another thing is the price and manufacturability. A lightweight, comfortable wearing bulletproof vest by default will not hold a high energy bullet, and even more so with a special penetrating core. This is contrary to the law of conservation of energy. This bullet energy must either be extinguished or transferred to something. The only option is the counter application of energy to the pool at the time of contact, active armor, but it is expensive, difficult, dangerous. I say right away I gave this example only to show what is possible from the point of view of physics.
                1. geniy
                  geniy 30 December 2018 17: 46
                  0
                  A lightweight, comfortable wearing bulletproof vest by default will not hold a high energy bullet, and even more so with a special penetrating core. This is contrary to the law of conservation of energy. This bullet energy must either be extinguished or transferred to something.

                  That's it, that body armor can be both durable and light and cheap. Other designers for this stupidly take the most expensive high-strength Kevlar or aramid fiber. These boobs forgot that the energy that needs to be absorbed depends not only on the resistance force, but also on the magnitude of the braking path of the bullet. which can be increased due to the stretching length of the fiber. And the simplest and cheapest fiberglass stretches more than carbon fiber. And besides, my bulletproof vest is not just fabric - but high-strength elements are interlocked with each other, and when a bullet hits, they work together - that is, the bullet spends its energy at once on several elements, instead of just spreading the fibers in a normal fabric bulletproof vest to the sides. And another important factor - the principle of the operation of my body armor, I am based on the fact that making the bullet turn to its side is flat, so that no armor-piercing core just flew out of it. But the mass production technology of such small armored elements has not yet been invented ....
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 27
                    0
                    Do you want to make the bullet unfold sideways at the point of impact? Before or at the beginning of the deformation of the outer layer of the bulletproof vest? And then the bullet going sideways will stretch the bulletproof vest material thereby slowing down? What path should the bullet go to completely slow down? Or re-express what thickness should be a bulletproof vest?
                    1. geniy
                      geniy 30 December 2018 18: 39
                      0
                      Do you want to make the bullet unfold sideways at the point of impact?

                      Of course not. In order to make the bullet rotate at the point of impact, the bulletproof vest would require tremendous strength from high-strength steel armor. I look at things more realistically. A bullet is not able to break through a bulletproof vest even if it hits directly, but bumps into it. And the bulletproof vest is first deformed, the bullet passes a certain distance and at the same time it gradually turns to one side.
                      What path should the bullet go to completely slow down?
                      Well, I hope to slow the bullet to a length of about 40 mm.
                      Or re-express what thickness should be a bulletproof vest?

                      Yes, the bulletproof vest itself will be relatively not thick - about 10-15 mm, but you forget that under the bulletproof vest there may be an under-armor - just an ordinary quilted jacket, or foam padding, so that the total total thickness from the human body is about 40 mm. At the same time, I allow the bullet to be driven into the human body for another 20 mm (instead of 44 permissible), total 40 + 20 = 60. I wrote above that I hope to brake the bullet in 40 mm. and this is not a contradiction, because in any process there should be a margin: at least 40, at most 60 mm.
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 18: 53
                        0
                        That is 4 cm of armor plus substrate. Body. The middle of the shoulders. Mid thigh. This is easier to buy than to invent. With all the disadvantages in the form of weight and dimensions. In the green stuff in this far from being driven. Even in rare ideal weather conditions, when it is not cold and not hot, there is no rain or snow.
                      2. geniy
                        geniy 30 December 2018 19: 16
                        0
                        That is 4 cm of armor plus substrate.

                        are you distorting someone? What are another 4 centimeters of armor? firstly, the actual thickness of the body armor is only 10-15 mm. It’s just that he doesn’t lie close to the body, and under a bulletproof vest either puts on a quilted jacket, or foam-rubber substrates 25 mm thick - which actually weigh nothing. And the body armor itself will be made of fiber woven in a special way. So there will be large gaps between the strings. Total: fiber density is 3 times less than that of steel! Yes, and the fact that the gaps between the fibers will give a general decrease in the density and weight of my body armor compared to solid steel by about 4-6 times. In addition, I also want to make the body armor buoyant - that is, so as not to drown the arrow that has fallen into the water, but on the contrary - even help him swim a little.
                      3. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 December 2018 19: 31
                        0
                        Give an example of what you can make a substrate. Soft light material, does not absorb water. It removes heat well from the human body. Well softens shock. I can’t come up with it. It is impossible to circumvent the fundamental laws of physics. Bullet energy must be put somewhere.
                      4. geniy
                        geniy 30 December 2018 20: 13
                        0
                        Give an example of what you can make a substrate. Soft light material, does not absorb water. It removes heat well from the human body. Well softens shock. I can’t come up with

                        Yes, stop it! For example, the most common closed-cell foam is non-absorbent water. In principle, it works like a spring, partially softening the bullet’s blow and distributing it over a larger area.
                        But any foam rubber very poorly removes heat, so it is glued only in small areas - so that there are large air gaps between them that cool the skin of a person.
                        But do not think that foam protects against bullets. Foam is only a soft lining. And the bullet-proof vest absorbs the energy of the bullet - firstly: when the bullet strikes, the bullet-proof vest shifts backward in small sections, involving other sections in this movement - and not like a steel armor plate - only due to strength, therefore the weight of the bullet-proof vest sections is added to the weight in accordance with the law of momentum where m is the mass of the bullet. and M is the mass of the bullet with the weight of the bulletproof vest section - this results in an initial decrease in the speed of the bullet. That is, my body armor should work like a spring - absorbing the energy of a bullet and distributing its energy over an area of ​​about one square decimeter, unlike a steel armor plate, which does not move at all backward. And of course, high strength. body armor - so as to make the bullet tip over to one side. .
                      5. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 12: 52
                        0
                        Too lazy to go to the garage, there I was littered with several titanium plates, just on a square dimeter each. From bronik 80 years of the last century. And the same effect. At the moment the plastin hits, it goes back transferring energy to the substrate. It’s hard and uncomfortable, but it’s pretty good. On the green in this do not run.
                        By the way, to deploy a bullet sideways at a distance less than the length of the bullet is tantamount to its complete stop, with the complete transfer of energy.
                      6. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 13: 45
                        0
                        Too lazy to go to the garage, there I was littered with several titanium plates, just on a square dicimeter each. From bronik 80 years of the last century.
                        In fact, every person competent in military affairs should know that the most important parameter of any armor is its thickness, and it must be called first. Well, I think that you have about 6 mm, in extreme cases, up to 10 mm.
                        At the moment the plastin hits, it goes back transferring energy to the substrate.
                        But whether a piece of armor bounces back when a bullet hits - this still needs to be proved. Personally, I have doubts about this.
                        Of course, strong armor - whether it be steel or titanium, is quite heavy and you really can’t run a lot in such body armor. But I still hope to make body armor from a specially twisted fiber in a special way, so that the weight of the body armor is no more than 6 kg.
                      7. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 13: 47
                        0
                        By the way, to deploy a bullet sideways at a distance less than the length of the bullet is tantamount to its complete stop, with the complete transfer of energy.

                        Yes, you are right about that. But firstly, I believe that all the boobs (who conduct the above-mentioned experiments) always shoot only from short distances. but at a distance of 500-800, the kinetic energy of the bullet decreases by at least 2 times! That is, if the kinetic energy at the muzzle of a 7,62 mm bullet is about 3 joules, then at 000 meters - about 500 joules. And the 1500 mm bullet has a muzzle energy of about 5,45 joules, and about 2 joules per 000 m But in any case - I believe that the designer is obliged to use several physical effects: first, the bullet should increase the mass of the material involved in the movement, and thereby reduce the overall speed.
                        Secondly, a bullet tipping over on its side increases the contact area four times, and therefore reduces the penetration force by 4 times. Thirdly, the strength of the bulletproof vest should not be organized like that of steel or other metal ones, when the metal only resists along the contour of the bullet - but due to the movement of the bulletproof vest elements, it is necessary to draw the neighboring bulletproof vest elements into this movement and thereby distribute it several times over the area - at least 4-5. At the same time, everyone needs to remember that already from the fact that the bullet turned on its side, the contact area increased 4 times. Total, we multiply the previous 4 times by the next 4 and we get that if the bulletproof vest is properly designed, the kinetic energy of the bullet can be distributed over an area about 16 times greater than that of a conventional metal or fabric bulletproof vest.
                      8. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 14: 20
                        0
                        Everything is much more complicated. You do not understand that the bulletproof vest penetration will begin before the bullet begins to unfold. A thin bulletproof vest will not work in any case. A massive wired but will be difficult and uncomfortable.
                      9. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 14: 52
                        0
                        Everything is much more complicated. You do not understand that the bulletproof vest penetration will begin before the bullet begins to unfold.

                        That’s the fact of the matter, I’ll try to create such armor so that the ammunition (bullet) would not be able to start punching right away, but at first it would get stuck in the bow, and began to move it back, experiencing great effort, due to which the bullet would begin to tip over on the side, and then - due to that the bullet will tip over on its side, it will repeatedly increase the area of ​​the barrier’s rupture (about 16 times), and in addition it will draw some mass of the barrier backward - that is, by the law of conservation of momentum it will reduce the bullet’s own energy.
                      10. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 14: 58
                        0
                        And perhaps you do not know that the strength of any materials increases many times with their transformation into thin fibers. So - when a bullet or projectile hits any metal armor (it doesn’t matter: steel, titanium or aluminum), cracks in the metal plate first run (at a speed of about 7 kilometers per second) - and these cracks weaken the metal.
                      11. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 10
                        0
                        So - there can be no cracks in heavy-duty fibers. However, stupid designers use only primitive ways to use heavy-duty fibers - in the form of fabrics. In this case, the bullet with its sharp nose simply pushes the fibers, I do not use the work of their XNUMX% break. And so the task is to make sure that the bullet rests on the obstacle, and they must either break all one hundred percent of the fibers, or force them to move back with themselves, for which they must divide their momentum of motion and kinetic energy by the weight of the obstacle involved.
                      12. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 14: 59
                        0
                        It will transfer all energy to the bulletproof vest, it will transfer to the body. The body will feel bad. So that this would not happen, the armor should be thick and therefore heavy and uncomfortable. All this is already there and not to slip past. Impossible lightweight comfortable armor capable of holding an armor-piercing bullet, and even more so a rifle.
                      13. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 14: 11
                        0
                        The thickness is 8-10 mm. I do not remember exactly. Ordinary bullets do not penetrate it only with shatterbores.
                      14. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 14: 17
                        0
                        The thickness is 8-10 mm.

                        That's it! the density of titanium is 4,5, and the density of steel is 7,9. That is, bringing the weight of your plate to the steel equivalent, it turns out that the equivalent strength of the steel plate would be 4-5 mm thick - and something very small - usually 6 mm. But the most curious thing is to know - does a metal plate bounce back when a bullet hits - or is this your mistake?
                      15. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 14: 25
                        0
                        Oh mlyayayach! But nothing that titanium is stronger than steel at times. A 6 mm titanium plate is equivalent to a strength of 20-25 mm steel (depending on the grade of steel and the methods of its processing) and at the same time weighs less. My friend would either be a victim of the exam, or he would not be handed over yet. Ambition and ingenuity are good. But the scientific base should be. Learn.
                      16. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 14: 41
                        0
                        Oh mlyayayach! But nothing that titanium is stronger than steel at times. 6 mm titanium plate equivalent to a strength of 20-25 mm steel
                        I think that you are very mistaken. True, I also have not been interested in comparing titanium and steel for a long time - about twenty years. But as far as I remember, titanium is certainly many times stronger than ordinary steel found in everyday life or technology. But there are especially strong (and very expensive! SECRET) steel grades that are rarely found, the public does not know about them. So - special grades of steel go to bulletproof vests. And they are not very different from the strength of titanium. I personally was very surprised when working in the KB on the secret topic that there are secret grades of steel.
                        So you better clarify the issue of bouncing metal plates from a bullet strike.
                      17. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 14: 54
                        0
                        And about secret alloys based on titanium with the addition of rare-earth alloying additives you haven’t heard in your design bureau? About directional crystallization of alloys with obtaining porous structures without loss of strength? That honestly fun talking with you.
                      18. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 05
                        0
                        And about secret alloys based on titanium with the addition of rare-earth alloying additives you have not heard in your design bureau? About directional crystallization of alloys with obtaining porous structures without loss of strength?
                        Honestly - I haven’t heard all this already - for decades, I have moved away from this topic and am only interested in heavy-duty fibers. But if this existed in reality, then it would certainly be applied in bulletproof vests - because by increasing the specific strength it is possible to reduce the thickness, and hence the weight of the bulletproof vests. But since there is no significant decrease in weight and an increase in the strength of body armor, it means that you are greatly mistaken regarding the use of heavy-duty titanium for body armor.
                      19. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 15: 12
                        +1
                        The problem is not strength. The problem is to extinguish bullet energy. For another 80 years there were purely fabric bags, thin and light, an armor-piercing bullet could not penetrate them. But due to her energy, she pulled them into the wound channel, penetrating tens of cm. Nobody made bulletproof vests from this material, they shot them on mannequins to gain experience and understand the process.
                      20. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 24
                        0
                        The problem is not strength. The problem is to extinguish bullet energy. For another 80 years there were purely fabric bags, thin and light, an armor-piercing bullet could not penetrate them. But due to her energy, she pulled them into the wound channel, penetrating tens of cm.

                        What are you saying! There are thousands of photos online of pierced fabric vests punctured by pointed rifle bullets - bullets simply push the threads of fabrics apart. Or they are relatively easy to pierce with a knife or sharpening. Here, to exclude this, metal (titanium or steel) plates are used.
                        But a few years ago, I made several test items - the area is just a matchbox. And he tried with all his might to cut them with an ax - it didn’t work. He sharpened the file with an awl - and hit from the full swing - but did not break. Then he hit this sharpening with a hammer - but he still didn’t break through the elements. And moreover, these were only the first not very successful experiments, now I hope to do better.
                      21. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 15: 39
                        +1
                        Such a desire and a person with the right education. Tissue do not work against pointed bullets, their profile is bullets with a high stopping effect, tobish blunt. Under this they are sharpened. Therefore, weaving is appropriate there.
                        Dense multidirectional weaving and special impregnation allows you to withstand hit and sharp-nosed bullet but energy has nowhere to go, the bullet drags the fabric along. This is unacceptable. The bulletproof vest should extinguish the energy of the bullet without transferring it to the body.
                      22. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 42
                        0
                        The bulletproof vest should extinguish the energy of the bullet without transferring it to the body.
                        Yes, this is precisely the task that needs to be completed. But I think I'm on the right track. But I still can’t come up with mass production technology.
                      23. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 15: 44
                        0
                        What is so special about your elements? At least call the material if not a secret. In general terms.
                      24. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 51
                        0
                        Yes, I can not speak in detail. Because if everything succeeds, it can become a military and commercial secret .. And the material is widely known - an ordinary fiberglass cord. I already said that in addition to cheapness, it has a virtue - the elongation is greater than that of ultra-strong carbon fiber, so the absorption of kinetic energy will be approximately equal. it's all in the form of elements - to make the bullet spend all kinetic energy.
                        Yes, in addition, I hope with large thickness to make tanks of fiberglass - to withstand the blows of all cumulative and sub-caliber shells. I really hope that the cumulative jet will be dispersed.
                      25. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 15: 56
                        0
                        Well, I get it. Just say forget about compactness.
                      26. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 31 December 2018 15: 57
                        0
                        And Happy New Year to you.
                      27. geniy
                        geniy 31 December 2018 15: 59
                        0
                        Just say forget about compactness

                        Yes, I sadly think that it will not be possible to create a hidden wearing body armor ...
                        In any case, in turn, I congratulate you on N. G.!
  9. SASHA OLD
    SASHA OLD 2 January 2019 04: 25
    0
    therefore, when I was accepted into the reconnaissance group, I immediately received an AKMS, before that I went with an AK-74M, so I served with an AKMS for 7 years, and fired through the bushes at targets more than once, showing the results "in fact" to those who had just come to the unit, the service took place in a mountainous wooded area (Dagestan river) and 7.62 was relevant
    1. Disant
      Disant 3 January 2019 16: 50
      0
      cartridge weight 7.62 - 17g, 5.45 - 11g.
      at least 500 rounds with you - this is a balance of 6g * 500 = 3kg is the minimum, plus a dozen stores - this is still a difference in a pound.
      That is, an assault rifle with 5.45 will take an additional two cans of stew with one and a half cups of water and three packs of cartridges.
      Yes, and the range of the direct shot was compared at 5.45 and 7.62? There’s a difference of 100 meters, or so, and you’re not only shooting at a neighboring corner.
      And the accuracy of fire bursts 5.45 and 7.62?
      And I don’t think that in the woods people and nonhumans scratch their body armor, but there is also a 5.45 armor-piercing cartridge with the same mass of a regular 5.45 cartridge.
      Of course, if you talk like Boris Razva from the movie: "heaviness is good, heaviness is reliable. Even if it doesn't work, you can always hit you in the head" - then yes, the advantage of AKM is undeniable
  10. AB
    AB 4 January 2019 14: 42
    0
    Well, I heard the tale of a ricochet back in late 1976, when my unit was transferred to AK74. There were a lot of stories about the cartridge 5.45. And that he works on the principle of doom-doom, and that a bullet with a displaced center of gravity hitting his leg goes over his shoulder, and fairy tales about grass and branches, and what they said about shooting in a frozen winter forest is just fantastic. You shoot, and the bullet from the tree bounces into a rebound! All this was before the first shooting at the firing range, and then in the field. Then they even hunted goats and wild boars from 74. It’s for nothing that no one counted the cartridges with us. They took as much as needed, and sleeves at the landfill with shovels for dumping into the baskets were poured without an account.
    1. geniy
      geniy 7 January 2019 19: 07
      0
      Well, I heard a tale of a rebound

      Well, if rebounding is a fairy tale, then take it and visually prove it to everyone! Is that why all readers should believe your allegations? What are you rubbing us here about the mountains of cartridges that were shot at the firing range? Yes, we do not know at what distance. Maybe like this topic starter who shot from 25 meters? Here you show us photos of the 5,45 mm bullets that hit the target from a distance of 300-500 meters, and let at least a simple body armor be worn on this target, not 6th grade, but at least 2-3th grade! And now let's see how such bullets stick into this target sideways. And you all understand that the bullet stuck sideways - the armor-piercing core does not fly out of it! That is, armor penetration in somersault bullets is completely absent. You are all used to checking armor penetration from 20 meters. but they would try from 300-500 meters!
  11. Forever so
    Forever so 7 January 2019 14: 05
    +1
    In general, ammunition is divided into two types, Penetrating and stopping. It is no secret that after the wound 7.62, the fighter continues the battle, but 5.45 according to the developers and as the shooting shows, it works as a stop, a long and thin bullet can easily turn sideways, causing injuries causing painful shock and often death. Therefore, it is not surprising that the broom can change the flight path 5.45. As always a compromise.
  12. DimanC
    DimanC 19 January 2019 11: 12
    0
    All these are cheap show-offs. And why? Because the brooms were dried !!! It was necessary first to take a steam bath in the bathhouse, and then shoot. laughing
  13. cat Rusich
    cat Rusich 24 January 2019 00: 51
    0
    What are we arguing about? Bullets turn sideways - a modern fighter, even the rebel is hung with equipment from head to toe. Will the unloading turn around sideways? They say a 5,45 bullet when hit in the body kills tearing the gut - where do the wounded come from? 5,45x39 is easier - you will carry more (510 rounds - 17 magazines) of a simple infantryman's BC - 120 rounds - 4 magazines. The quality of body armor is growing. They go to the wolves with buckshot (12 gauge) - why don’t they take a small fraction (16 gauge), will you take away more small cartridges, and if you count the pellets?