Mikhail Kalashnikov: Inventor of AK-47 Dies At 94 283
necro81 writes "Lt. Gen. Mikhail T. Kalashnikov, an arms designer for the Soviet Union, creator of the AK-47, passed away today at age 94. Kalashnikov was born a peasant and entered the Soviet Army as a conscript. However, the self-taught tinkerer had an aptitude that took him far. The AK-47, his best-known creation, was praised for its reliability and low cost; attributes that have made it the most successful firearm ever, seeing use in homeland defense, rebellion, terrorism, and untold massacres. The inventor was himself ambivalent about the uses his creation had seen, but was nevertheless proud of his contribution to his country, where he is praised as a hero."
Re:On a less humorous note (Score:5, Informative)
Things that'd be considered weaknesses or defects in other weapons systems are some of the very things that are considered strengths in the Kalashnikov rifles.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
Cheap, stamped metal parts with loose tolerances that create inaccuracy at range, but allow for much rougher handling of the firearm as well as a higher tolerance for a lack of maintenance. Fill it with sand, water, or mud and it will still fire. To quote Lord of War (I love that opening sequence) "A weapon so simple a child could use it, and they often do". Essentially it is the perfect weapon for what it is: a firearm that untrained, uneducated civilians can pick up and fire (think of it in context of World War II, where Red Army training was not exactly the world's best).
Re:On a less humorous note (Score:4, Informative)
tolerances that create inaccuracy at range
Frankly, I was impressed with the AK's accuracy at ~50yds for such a short barrel (I was probably shooting a milled version). A 4" group at 100 yds is still plenty deadly [wikipedia.org]. AK-47's are capable of shooting 3-5 inch groups at 100 yards, whereas the stamped AKMs are capable of shooting 4-6 inch groups at 100 yards
Re:On a less humorous note (Score:5, Informative)
Loose tolerances of internal parts, usually only specified if manufacturing is really crappy. However Kalashnikov did this on purpose -- even though Russia had decent manufacturing capabilities -- knowing that this will lead to much greater reliability in the presence of dirt. American guns such as AR-15s are built to much more precise tolerances, and while they are more accurate than the AK, they are much less tolerant of sand/dirt/grime/powder residue. The AK's reliability is legendary.
You can usually get a 2 to 3 inch group at 150 meters with an AK and some training in its use. You'll get a 2 inch or less group with an M16/AR15 with the same amount of training. The big selling point of the AK is, only 8 moving parts. And yeah, the tolerances are sloppy as hell compared to the highly machined AR15, which has more moving parts. Less moving parts means less things can go wrong. Looser tolerances means it won't jam up when it gets dirty, and while regular cleaning is a Good Thing to keep it from wearing out, lack of cleaning WON'T stop it dead in its tracks like an AR15. They're ridiculously easy to make, easy to repair in the field, and they keep on shooting. Kalashnikov was a genius.
Re:On a less humorous note (Score:5, Informative)
Precisely! Kalashnikov realized (or at least correctly guessed) that accuracy is less important than reliability. US Army studies have shown that most engagements are within 50m, and that the primary determinant in victory is "number of bullets fired". This was part of their justification for moving from the M14 (essentially a magazine-fed M1 Garand with a useless full-auto hacked on) to the M16 - less power at range, less ability to kill in one shot, but capable of firing 30 rounds at automatic in a somewhat-controlled manner, rather than the "two round burst before it turns into an anti-aircraft gun" of the M14.
The AK47 did it earlier, and arguably better, because it made more tradeoffs. The M16 was a good weapon in the lab, but early models in particular failed in the field (even today jams are extremely common after decades of improvement). Too bad for them, almost zero battles have taken place in military laboratories.
The AK47 scored worse on any "benchmark" (for lack of a better term). Less accurate, slower firing, heavier, and so on. But because it's basically the most reliable (and cheap) assault rifle ever made, it's the weapon (or at least weapon design) of choice for almost everyone not wed to the NATO military-industrial complex. Even then, there's a reason there's AK-style weapons chambered in 5.56mm NATO. It's almost become the Linux of the assault-rifle world - you've got variants from the simple (the AK-74, the RPK, the Galil or the dozens of bullpup variants) to the crazy (the Saiga-12 shotgun, various Russian suppressed rifles, even a sniper rifle).
Was Mikhail Kalashnikov a genius? I don't think so, because nothing about it was itself revolutionary, but he was a damn good engineer because he knew what the users actually needed and gave it to them, rather than letting marketing decide on which features to produce.
Re:Unlike the inventor (Score:3, Informative)
Russia beat Vorhees by decades; Grigori Rasputin [wikipedia.org]
Re:You'd do the same (Score:4, Informative)
Kalashnikov started working on what would become AK in 1944, while in a hospital, where he got after being wounded on the front. The design was complete in 1947 (hence the common but incorrect AK-47 designation), production started in 1948, and it was officially adopted as the new army rifle in 1949.
And it was not like Nazis were the only enemy the Soviet Union had, especially five years after WW2.
Re:rant from a gun nut (Score:5, Informative)
Try as you might, your attempt to come across as a "gun person" fails miserably.
AR15s make wonderful hunting weapons. Many companies make AR15s with specific features chosen for hunting. Here are a couple:
http://rockriverarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_id=552 [rockriverarms.com]
http://www.dpmsinc.com/KINGS-DEAERT-SHADOW_ep_146-1.html [dpmsinc.com]
Typically they include a flattop upper receiver, a low profile gas block, skeletonized stocks, and a free-float hand guard.
The standard .223 round is more than sufficient for North American animals up to moose-size when using the proper loading: a 75grain BTHP. And many ammunition manufacturers offer .223 loadings specifically for hunting with an AR15. This is one of many fine examples:
http://www.hornady.com/store/223-Rem-75-gr-BTHP-Match/ [hornady.com]
Additionally, anyone with more than a passing knowledge of guns and AR15s would know that the platform does not only come in .223. In the last 5 years there has been a surge in popularity of upper receivers chambered in calibers such as 6.5 Grendal, 6.8 SPC and 300 Blackout. Additionally, the venerable .308 has been an option for AR-style guns for almost 50 years. While not being a necessity for using an AR15 to hunt with, these other optional calibers provide longer range hunting options.
But if you still believe that it's impossible to hunt with an AR15, please, whatever you do, don't tell the hundreds of people who posted pictures of their hunting ARs along with trophies in these two threads:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_10_23/605991_Show_us_your_AR15__and_other__deer_kills___and_60___retitled.html&page=1 [ar15.com]
http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=10&f=3&t=618206 [ar15.com]
They would be devastated to find out that what they were doing was impossible.
As far as target shooting goes, the annual National Matches, held at Camp Perry, Ohio every summer since 1907, and widely seen as the Olympics of the shooting sports world, uses.... you guessed it: AR15s. And it's not hard to understand why: they're light weight, ergonomic, light recoiling, and cheap to train with (compared to other competition rifles).
And your claim that an AR15 is worse at self defense than all other things you think it's bad at.... get real! Nearly every SWAT team in the US, and NATO-allied special forces group in the world has moved to the AR platform, and those guys have the money and latitude to choose anything they want. After a brief love affair with various pistol-caliber carbines and bullpups in the late 90's and early 00's, they have almost all gone to the AR15.
There are plenty of semi automatic rifles that are much better suited for civilians - and even military use too but they're too expensive for outfitting an army.
The US Army could replace all of its rifles for the cost of about a dozen F-35s. Cost is not an issue that would hold the army back if there were a better rifle available.
The only reason they are so expensive now is because of the demand from stupid people who think Obama is going to ban them.
AR15s are cheaper today than they have ever been. There are over 100 companies in the US producing them, and a nice mid-grade AR can be had for under $600 today.
The next time you want to appear to be an expert on guns, and then denounce the most popular, most capable, most flexible gun ever made, for reasons that don't stand up to even casual examination, stick to the comment sections at Moth
Re: On a less humorous note (Score:5, Informative)
StG-44 was the first rifle produced en masse, but it was certainly not the first assault rifle produced or even used in battle. Avtomat Fedorova [wikipedia.org] is generally considered the first such thing - it was a fully automatic rifle, with detachable magazines, that used an intermediate round (6.5 Arisaka - which is only about 25% more powerful than 7.62x39).
Also, if you read about the history of AK, it was never designed to "copy what StG did". In fact, the Soviets didn't truly understood the benefit of having a single universal infantry rifle even after the end of WW2, which is why they had two separate competitions, one for carbine (which SKS had won), and one for a "submachine gun" (which AK had won). That is also why the Russian word for assault rifle is "avtomat" - before AK, it was actually a word for submachine guns, e.g. PPSh was an avtomat; and so the competition in question was for a "new avtomat" - and so the winning Kalashnikov's design became "avtomat Kalashnikova".
The only new thing there was that both carbine and SMG were supposed to be using the same round, the newly designed intermediate M43 (which, by the way, was designed before Soviets even saw StG 44), but that was largely for the sake of simplifying logistics. It took them almost another decade, both SKS and AK in service, to finally realize that AK can actually fill both niches just fine - which is what the "assault rifle" concept is really all about.
Re:You'd do the same (Score:4, Informative)
Even so, the design with all the key features of the final AK was already available by the end of 1946 - that's less than two years after the war was over. And, of course, the very experience of that war did not suddenly evaporate as soon as the victory flag was hoisted above Reichstag. For four years, Soviet military industry was focusing on mass production of outdated but cheap infantry weapons to provide supply - Mosins, PPSh/PPS etc. They knew full well that they needed to upgrade if the arsenal was to have any relevance in any future war. And in the final year of the war and in early postwar years, another large conflict was considered quite likely by the Soviets - the prevailing fear being that US would decide to "keep pushing" in Europe, in hopes of steamrolling over the battle-weary Red Army.
Re:Unlike the inventor (Score:5, Informative)
Absolutely true. Here's an AK that was buried for 18 years and was dug up:
You can't kill an AK-47: Works after 18 years of being buried in ground [youtube.com]
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
AK-46 was significantly different from AK-47, and - bluntly speaking - utter crap.
AK-47 was a fine weapon but the machining process was rather expensive, complex and slow, making it unsuitable for mass production and deployment in army.
AKM - an AK-47 variant that used stamped sheet metal instead of machined parts, became the instant hit, possessing all the advantages of the original, slightly lower mass, and being very cheap and simple to manufacture in bulk.