Military Review

Russian Minister of Defense causes a storm with his proposal to replace the famous AK-47 (Fox News, USA)

16
Russian Minister of Defense causes a storm with his proposal to replace the famous AK-47 (Fox News, USA)
Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov caused a flurry of debate in Russia, saying that the pride and joy of the Russian military, the Kalashnikov assault rifle and the SVD sniper rifle were “outdated”, and that he plans to buy foreign small arms weapon.

Such a statement was made behind closed doors during a meeting with deputies of the lower house of the Russian parliament on the eve of the New Year, as reported by the Russian media. Serdyukov introduced them to the plan for the purchase of foreign weapons as part of a large-scale military reform, which also provides for the acquisition of French Mistral class helicopter carriers for the Russian naval fleet.

Such statements forced the Russian military leadership to defend their weapon, which is for them a reliable "workhorse."

The Kalashnikov assault rifle, especially the AK-47, is a Russian invention, causing pride. Designed and built in Russia during the Second World War, the AK-47 is considered the first real assault rifle. He is known worldwide for its reliability in all conditions, reliable shooting, ease of use, low cost and high lethal force. Military science teaches that the AK-47 can be put in the dirt, pull it out a year later and start shooting.

For this reason, it has become the favorite weapon of terrorists and rebel organizations around the world. The Russian military began to use the AK-47 more than sixty years ago, and since then little has changed in this weapon.

Criticism of the Minister of Defense sounded from all sides. The Russian information site Pravda.ru quotes the famous weapons designer Dmitry Shiryaev, who stated:

“Foreigners themselves admit that our small arms are one of the best in the world. Show me a foreign rifle products that could compete with ours in all characteristics, including the level of reliability. The main problem is that now there is no one to work in the arms industry because of low wages, and foreign purchases can ruin it all ”.

Former Russian special forces fighter Sergei Glusky said on the Pravda website that Serdyukov’s statements are untrue.

“The current Minister of Defense is not a military man - that’s the problem. Where can he understand the merits and demerits of a particular type of weapon? It is impossible for people who are not knowledgeable in such matters to make such important decisions. ”

Glusky, who once commanded the anti-terrorism unit, cited the fact that this is a favorite weapon of terrorists as an argument in defense of the machine gun.

“Terrorists from the Caucasus have always used Kalash and SVD,” he said. “With the financing from abroad that they had, they could easily get both American and French weapons.” And if the means of communication they often were of foreign manufacture, then they most often, if not always, used Russian weapons. ”

Fox News military analyst, Major General (Ret.) Bob Scales, is not surprised that Russians are looking for better weapons, but suggests that they should not expect American samples to be purchased in the near future.

"The AK-47 is outdated because it is not an exact weapon," said Scales. “I suspect that the Russians are looking for something more sophisticated and of higher quality, something more universal and precise - and they are ready to sacrifice the AK-47, which was created in 1947,”

According to Scales, the sighting range in 400 meters is not enough in the context of modern warfare. The gold standard of Western weapons is the American M-4 rifle, whose target range is 600 meters and more.

But Scales notes that the Russians will look for something else, say, the German G-4 or French and British 1 mm guns, which are not inferior to the M-5,56. Israeli Galil Russian machines are also unlikely to buy, although they say that they combine qualities such as the Western accuracy and reliability of the AK-47.

The main problem is, says Scales, that a weapon is not just a technique, it is a manifestation of military culture.

“American philosophy has always been that each rifle is a high-precision tool that combines the latest technology. But in Russia it is just the opposite. It should be a popular weapon. It should be such a weapon that any schoolchild, any peasant can disassemble, assemble and learn to shoot him for 10-15 minutes. Such is the installation of the Russian military. ”

And since today in the world 110 of millions of Kalashnikov assault rifles are manufactured, in the near future they are unlikely to disappear.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/21...test=latestnews"rel =" nofollow ">http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/21...test=latestnews
16 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. VOVA
    VOVA 25 January 2011 14: 18
    0
    it’s necessary to drive such a minister of defense! how did the former furniture maker become defense minister? their weapons enterprises have a bunch of samples and are bent because of the lack of large orders, and he decided to buy foreign ones! with such successes in Russia soon just do nothing to produce will not be out of defense And a foreign Gamna will buy! MAYBE HE WANTS TO PROTECT THIS MONEY ASKED AT TRANSACTION! FUCK TO US MISTRALS WHEN THEIR OWN MAY BUILD SUCH AS MUCHES WOULD LESS PAY AND EVERYTHING WILL BE!
  2. Alexander
    Alexander 25 January 2011 15: 01
    0
    Apparently, the defense of the Russian Federation is already of little interest to anyone. A simple example is our Russian soldier in uniform from Yudashkin and with the vaunted M16 or in a sheepskin coat with AK boots. Some of them are able to fight in the cold, while remaining snow-fighting in the snow. Honestly answer this to yourself question.
  3. pavlo
    pavlo 25 January 2011 17: 50
    0
    This goat is as alien as almost everything in the Kremlin!
  4. SOLDIERru
    SOLDIERru 25 January 2011 18: 12
    0
    Gentlemen, well, why confuse God's gift with fried eggs. They will not purchase small arms for combined arms units. This is just unreal. It was probably only about the purchase of high-tech weapons (drones, reconnaissance systems, invisibility systems, well, etc.). And then, only in quantities necessary for local conflicts. With our former brothers in the USSR.
    And if he talks about small arms, then:
    1) The AK-47 was adopted in 1948, replaced by AKM in 1959, and currently the most common personal small arms are the AK-74, and to a lesser extent the AK-74M, AKM. So, it’s ridiculous to protect weapons removed from armament.
    2) With all the strengths, and so far sufficient solvency, small arms of the platoon level (AK, RPK, SVD) no longer fully meet modern requirements.
    a) AK (all modifications) in terms of indicators such as fire accuracy, mass-dimensional data, usability and efficiency (to a lesser extent AK-74M), and striking ability (except AKM), do not show outstanding results.
    In my opinion, translating the AK-74M to a caliber of 5.56mm can give an acceptable result.
    After all, AK-101 has long been exported under the 5.56 NATO cartridge.
    b) With a weak cartridge and the inability to conduct continuous firing. The PKK is not at all capable of providing effective fire support to a platoon. In service, definitely must be adopted, a heavier machine gun. With a more powerful cartridge. Even to the detriment of the unification of ammunition. Yes, even the same PC, unlike the PKK, is a perfectly acceptable weapon.
    c) SVD, for all its legendary character (I myself love it, I don’t know why, but I love it), is a weapon of the combined arms battle of the 70s. Definitely, there are samples, in particular, developed in our country with higher characteristics.
  5. VOVA
    VOVA 25 January 2011 20: 05
    0
    it can and is advisable to change, but for Russian models such ones are developed and are available in the design bureaus! Firstly, the reliability in our team is higher and the support of our developers will help replenish capital for further development!
  6. Kostya
    Kostya 25 January 2011 20: 45
    0
    "M-4 ... with an aiming range of 600 meters or more" - nonsense of a general who has gone out of his mind.
    At a distance of 400m, the AK front sight is THREE times wider than the target No. 8 "tall figure (width 50cm)", at 600m the AK front sight is wider almost SIX TIMES. That is, it is impossible to shoot without optics at such ranges, the PURPOSE IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE, and the Americans put optics or calimators. Put optics on the AK and shoot. Further, according to the instructions, the SIGHTING RANGE of the AK-74 is 1000m, according to the instructions, the sighting range of the Mosin rifle is 2000m, according to the same instructions, effective fire is from the AK-74, from Mosin to 400m. Because over 400m the target is barely visible to the unarmed. Sighting range and effective fire TWO BIG DIFFERENCES
  7. XIII
    XIII 25 January 2011 20: 47
    0
    "In my opinion, an acceptable result can be obtained by transferring the AK-74M to 5.56mm caliber"

    SOLDIERru, but in my opinion - this is complete nonsense. Give me at least a couple of SIGNIFICANT advantages of 5,56 (M193 and M855) over 5,45 (7N6) for small arms of this "class" in terms of combat effectiveness.
  8. Makarov
    Makarov 25 January 2011 20: 51
    0
    there are no prophets, some merchants, concerned about personal gain, whatever their own military industry is, there are no kickbacks to you, and Western owners will be unhappy. So, for what you brothers do not take ....
  9. balder
    balder 25 January 2011 22: 45
    0
    The fact remains. The military of the USSR were dissatisfied with the outdated AK, therefore the Abakan competition was announced, in which more than 10 submachine guns took part. Among them are the Nikonov assault rifle and the Kovrov AEK 971 with a compensated recoil impulse (i.e. practically without recoil, displacing the barrel from the line of fire after the 1st shot) and the same resource as the AK.
    So many AKs have been produced that you can probably arm the entire population of the country if the adversary attacks. Nobody is going to throw them away. He is good for this - a moron can be taught to disassemble and clean in an hour. Or not clean it, and it will still shoot. And the accuracy of firing in bursts is not at all, and it is not needed if the militias go into battle, who still shoot not "at the enemy", but "towards the enemy." Or terrorists with the same skills. That is why Soviet generals wanted to equip the "elite" with more accurate and equally reliable weapons. But in the 90s, everyone did not care. And the Kalashnikov lobby did everything to push competitors away from the government order.

    It seems that AEK971 was purchased by special forces. Find reviews on its combat use, so that the conversation was substantive, information from one hand. And then it seems that this idea of ​​replacing AK is not 1 years, but 30 days.
  10. Alexander
    Alexander 26 January 2011 08: 07
    0
    Question is our Country or colony?
  11. SOLDIERru
    SOLDIERru 27 January 2011 10: 20
    0
    Answer for xiii.
    Perhaps I did not correctly formulate my thought. I do not urge you to switch to the 5.56x45 NATO cartridge (109 SS1980). Although this decision has a positive side. If our troops defeat the NATO forces, we will be able to take advantage of captured weapons. (Humor).
    And if in essence. The 5.56mm NATO cartridge, compared to our 5.45x39 cartridge, has a heavier bullet, and a stronger charge, as well as an initial initial speed of 950 m / s (the M193 has 990 m / s but not about it) versus 900 m / s. The result is better ballistics, penetration, stability.
    But again, I do not urge to accept the 5.56x45 NATO cartridge. My opinion is to develop (or purchase a license) a new cartridge. And on its basis, the development (or purchase of a license) of a new small arms.
    Thanks for the discussion.
  12. Xiii
    Xiii 30 January 2011 15: 27
    0
    SOLDIERru, good day!
    The most frequent maximum range of firing in real combat conditions (taking into account the experience of Iraq, Chechnya, etc.) is about 300 m (maximum 400 m). At such a distance, 5,45 has advantages over 5,56 (SS109) in penetration and provides 100% damage to the growth figure at 330 m and 50% at 550 m.
    A 5,56 bullet (SS109), when hit as a target, is fragmented (forming numerous fragments in the wound channel) and due to this it loses more kinetic energy, creating more severe wounds compared to a 5,45 bullet (it is destroyed to a much lesser extent, deforming more ). BUT, when working on a conditionally protected target (natural and artificial obstacles in front of the target), the destruction of a bullet 5,56 (SS109) is "on hand" for the "target".
    A larger powder charge of 5,56 leads to an increased load on the weapon mechanisms, all other things being equal (if we do not take into account the design features of the AK-74m and M4 of various modifications, as the most used recently), increased pressure in the bore and leads to more rapid overheating and "spitting". And the deformation of the bullet itself is affected by an attempt to increase the speed by increasing the powder charge, which can lead, on the contrary, to a deterioration in accuracy.
    Although the powder in the 5,45mm cartridge is high-energy, with an almost perfect burning rate. It is better than American gunpowder - WC 844 from Olin: in the M193 cartridge, Russian gunpowder of the same weight provided an initial speed of 1040 m / s instead of 995 m / s with a lower pressure of 2,5% "
    5,56 (test) has a slightly longer range of a direct shot, but for "working" distances (up to 300-400 m.) - this is not important.
    The first samples 5,56 (M193) and 5,45 (7H6) had an increased tendency to ricochet, but 5,45 to a much lesser extent.
    Since 1986 7N6 cartridges began to be produced with a core made of heat-hardened tool steel and received the 7N10 index (not to mention the later modifications and BB), which pierce a steel plate at a distance of 100 m. When shooting (including at an angle of about 16-20 degrees), there is practically no rebound. You can not say about 30 (SS40).
    At distances over 300-400 m, it is generally necessary to work not with the AK-74 and M4, but with a "heavier" ammunition and a corresponding barrel.

    And already a completely different question 5,45x39 or 7,62x39 ... this is a real reason for discussion, since, depending on the conditions of use, these ammunition have both "+" and "-".

    And it is not Kalashs that need to be replaced (at the moment they meet the requirements), but worn-out production equipment for the manufacture of ammunition for small arms of the army, because the quality of manufacture is frankly "lame".
  13. ceramics
    ceramics 17 February 2011 12: 21
    0
    And the reviews are literate. One trouble - the furniture maker will not read them. Once, the loot believes.
  14. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 22 May 2011 00: 29
    +1
    Appeal to the gentlemen, who believe that 5,56 is better than 5,45.
    1) 5,56 M193 / 855 inflicts severe wounds only at distances up to 100 meters when firing from 508 mm barrel, when firing from 370-400 mm barrels, the striking ability drops to a critical level, this is not observed in a domestic cartridge with a 7N6 bullet, a bullet continues to act effectively in the flesh over the entire effective fire distance, suppose that at a distance of 300 meters the wound cavity is 7.62 times larger than the wound cavity 43M2.5!
    2) The advantage in external ballistics is unambiguously 5,45 for a very long bullet, has an excellent shape, ballistic coefficient not lower than 0,314.
    3) Due to the smaller energy of the bullet and the small powder charge, the weapon is more controlled during automatic shooting, the barrel is much less overheated.
    To gentlemen who like to compare power, I’ll say 5,45 is inferior in power to 5,56 by 11 percent.
    Now, according to the prospects, I think it is advisable to keep 3 options of a cartridge with a Tracer, Armor-piercing on the army supply (You can use the design developments of the SP-6 bullets - a bare core made of tool steel), a Bullet with a steel hardened core (with design features of the 7N6 bullet).
    External ballistics can be improved by changing the nose of the bullet (make it sharper), and increasing the mass of the powder charge by 5-7 percent, and the bullet to 3.7 for the Tracer and conventional bullet and to 3.8 for the armor-piercing bullet.
  15. werr
    werr 14 July 2011 19: 39
    0
    how did the furniture maker become a minister ??!? Volodya helped, he said that the army needed people who knew a lot about finances ... and he needed it as MINIMUM to x ... y !!
  16. Leisure
    Leisure 17 February 2012 11: 00
    0
    “The AK-47 is out of date because it's not an exact weapon,” Skales said. His compatriots who could not get out of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan could argue with him ...