Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Share
    avatar
    Arctic_Fox

    Posts : 148
    Points : 155
    Join date : 2015-05-02
    Age : 24
    Location : Brazil

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Arctic_Fox on Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:50 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:

    20000 rounds without failures? That's simply impossible (Barrel for SCAR-L is rated for 10000 before inspection). Build up per round is 0,09 gr. 20000 rounds means 2kg of build up inside rifle. It maybe wasn't lubricated but it was cleaned each 1200 rounds. SCAR-L however failed 99 times purely on mechanical purpose. 111 times ammunition was concerned.


    That was in the article written in magazine "Kalibar", few years back that one of the Scar rifles, fired 20.000 rounds without lubrication, with cleaning (every 500 rounds?), without mechanical failures, and X failures due to ammunition and new plastic magazine. It was stress test of a sort, they did similar with Saiga.

    The dust test as inducted by JSOC was done with 10 rifles, 60000 rounds (6000 rounds each), Inspection done prior fire one, then 50 cycles of 120 rounds, inspection each 5 cycles, cleaning & Lubricating each 10. FNUSA asked for the lubricating to be ad hoc, which happened only twice with half the rifles (which is good).

    The SCAr-L was the better rifle overall, but had some low-keys like indeed double feed with the plastic mags and other issues with the receiver.

    The 20 000 rounds is only possible in a lab and with high quality ammunition. This doesn't take out cleaning and "barrelling".

    Keep in mind, I'm a big fan of the SCAR, and it is very qualitative. It's just not all what FNH/USA made it out to be.

    Also we're not speaking accuracy here, we're only speaking click, boom, click, boom,
    if you may, can you compare AK74m with AR/SCAR platforms in terms of accuracy, is there really a huge difference?

    and do you think that AK12 will improve accuracy significantly?
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:12 am

    Arctic_Fox wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:

    20000 rounds without failures? That's simply impossible (Barrel for SCAR-L is rated for 10000 before inspection). Build up per round is 0,09 gr. 20000 rounds means 2kg of build up inside rifle. It maybe wasn't lubricated but it was cleaned each 1200 rounds. SCAR-L however failed 99 times purely on mechanical purpose. 111 times ammunition was concerned.


    That was in the article written in magazine "Kalibar", few years back that one of the Scar rifles, fired 20.000 rounds without lubrication, with cleaning (every 500 rounds?), without mechanical failures, and X failures due to ammunition and new plastic magazine. It was stress test of a sort, they did similar with Saiga.

    The dust test as inducted by JSOC was done with 10 rifles, 60000 rounds (6000 rounds each), Inspection done prior fire one, then 50 cycles of 120 rounds, inspection each 5 cycles, cleaning & Lubricating each 10. FNUSA asked for the lubricating to be ad hoc, which happened only twice with half the rifles (which is good).

    The SCAr-L was the better rifle overall, but had some low-keys like indeed double feed with the plastic mags and other issues with the receiver.

    The 20 000 rounds is only possible in a lab and with high quality ammunition. This doesn't take out cleaning and "barrelling".

    Keep in mind, I'm a big fan of the SCAR, and it is very qualitative. It's just not all what FNH/USA made it out to be.

    Also we're not speaking accuracy here, we're only speaking click, boom, click, boom,
    if you may, can you compare AK74m with AR/SCAR platforms in terms of accuracy, is there really a huge difference?

    and do you think that AK12 will improve accuracy significantly?

    Depends what you call huge. For 3/400m the only issue between the 74M and Scar are the Iron sights. Mauser sights are OK for combat, much more difficult for marksmanship. Then the barrels aren't at all comparable. The one on the 74M is lighter by almost half a kilogram when compared with the Mk16 and almost twice that HAMR. Then there are the tolerances within the system itself. There's none on the SCAR. When I say none, it's really none. So the system is very direct. You don't have the usual AK trigger creep, the long reset you find on the 74's. The ammunition helps the 74M hang in there a lot, it is very flat and very competitive but the quality of the barreling is very average, it is military spec, sure just not as good.

    Improving the accuracy on an AK platform is really easy, but requires weight gain and price hiking. Just not worth it when you have systems that are as proven as the AK with the fraction of the price (Dragunov MA for instance). The AK-12 did improve accuracy and stability by as much as a 30% positive reduction of the gap shooting (peep sights dunno ) plus a very businesslike 1MOA at 100m multiple times with x4 Specter DR on top(best a military grade 74M can do is sub 2MOA).

    But that comes with a lot of friction inside the action, more buildup and less space to store it.
    avatar
    Arctic_Fox

    Posts : 148
    Points : 155
    Join date : 2015-05-02
    Age : 24
    Location : Brazil

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Arctic_Fox on Wed Feb 01, 2017 3:30 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Arctic_Fox wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:

    20000 rounds without failures? That's simply impossible (Barrel for SCAR-L is rated for 10000 before inspection). Build up per round is 0,09 gr. 20000 rounds means 2kg of build up inside rifle. It maybe wasn't lubricated but it was cleaned each 1200 rounds. SCAR-L however failed 99 times purely on mechanical purpose. 111 times ammunition was concerned.


    That was in the article written in magazine "Kalibar", few years back that one of the Scar rifles, fired 20.000 rounds without lubrication, with cleaning (every 500 rounds?), without mechanical failures, and X failures due to ammunition and new plastic magazine. It was stress test of a sort, they did similar with Saiga.

    The dust test as inducted by JSOC was done with 10 rifles, 60000 rounds (6000 rounds each), Inspection done prior fire one, then 50 cycles of 120 rounds, inspection each 5 cycles, cleaning & Lubricating each 10. FNUSA asked for the lubricating to be ad hoc, which happened only twice with half the rifles (which is good).

    The SCAr-L was the better rifle overall, but had some low-keys like indeed double feed with the plastic mags and other issues with the receiver.

    The 20 000 rounds is only possible in a lab and with high quality ammunition. This doesn't take out cleaning and "barrelling".

    Keep in mind, I'm a big fan of the SCAR, and it is very qualitative. It's just not all what FNH/USA made it out to be.

    Also we're not speaking accuracy here, we're only speaking click, boom, click, boom,
    if you may, can you compare AK74m with AR/SCAR platforms in terms of accuracy, is there really a huge difference?

    and do you think that AK12 will improve accuracy significantly?

    Depends what you call huge. For 3/400m the only issue between the 74M and Scar are the Iron sights. Mauser sights are OK for combat, much more difficult for marksmanship. Then the barrels aren't at all comparable. The one on the 74M is lighter by almost half a kilogram when compared with the Mk16 and almost twice that HAMR. Then there are the tolerances within the system itself. There's none on the SCAR. When I say none, it's really none. So the system is very direct. You don't have the usual AK trigger creep, the long reset you find on the 74's. The ammunition helps the 74M hang in there a lot, it is very flat and very competitive but the quality of the barreling is very average, it is military spec, sure just not as good.

    Improving the accuracy on an AK platform is really easy, but requires weight gain and price hiking. Just not worth it when you have systems that are as proven as the AK with the fraction of the price (Dragunov MA for instance). The AK-12 did improve accuracy and stability by as much as a 30% positive reduction of the gap shooting (peep sights  dunno ) plus a very businesslike 1MOA at 100m multiple times with x4 Specter DR on top(best a military grade 74M can do is sub 2MOA).

    But that comes with a lot of friction inside the action, more buildup and less space to store it.
    Thanks again for your explanation Very Happy
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 602
    Points : 606
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:29 pm

    Truth me told I never liked scars even when they made me field test those bloody things.

    Too prone to malfunctions. In the hot climate, it's why I hated using M4's and used AK's.

    It was far heavier than it needed to be in mu opinion. Low RoF.

    The Scar-L is more accurate than an AK-74M but the difference isn't huge.

    The effective range with these guns is virtually the same. Maybe a mere 50 apart at best.

    (depends on your version of AK) This is merely the sum of my experience with using both rifles in real combat.

    I have had M4's for example overheat on me.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:29 am

    Militarov wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I watched a video where Larry Vickers fires the AK-107 and I was really impressed with that incredible gun. How reliable would it be in relation to the AK-74? I would think that it's far more reliable than most Western assault rifles.

    Actually majority of NATO operated assault rifles these days are very reliable. Especially fairly recent developments from 90s and 00s.

    This is especially true of the Western armies that have finally seen the merits of piston driven rifles, but the AK variants are still the gold standard of reliability by a significant margin.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:18 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:

    There are three cycles to achieve.

    Failure between rounds.
    Failure between field maintenance.
    Failure between structural inspection/maintenance.

    In these most Western rifles score rather poorly in 2 and 3. They can score abysmally on 1.

    Kalashnikov systems score evenly in both, but that's a rather mediocre score anyway, although better.

    The difference though is that Western have an edge when it comes to accuracy in pure numbers. All the rest is down to so many factors.

    M4  FBR on test is over 1000 (1200 to be precise), on the field, its not even half that. Technical spec for Type 78 was 500 (wipe and clean) in the field that POS has seen more magazines than a pervert teenager, without a speck of lubricant. So you can't exactly tell which is going to be more reliable.

    What you can say about the 107 is this, will this rifle be easier to maintain than a direct action system or a simpler system? The answer is no. It will be more complex and possibly that might add to the Field maintenance and Structural maintenance.

    More boxes on a check list means more corners to cover.

    I expected the long-stroke piston and the larger clearances in the AK system to make up for the more complex mechanics but I guess the AK-107 is just too complex. I have never seen a rifle handle full automatic fire with such little recoil as the AK-107 has continuously demonstrated. It really does seem that the AK-400 is the future but I still don't really know what a reverse short-stroke piston is and just how it stacks up to a conventional short-stroke system in terms of reliability and whether or not it has the same problem with carrier tilt.  The AK-400 will not be as reliable as the AKM and AK-74 variants (nothing is) but a slight hit to reliability is worth it for a modern rifle. Based on how much the AK-400 shares with the Dragunov, you have referred to it as AD-400 for Avtomat Dragunov, so it could have the same layout as the new SK-16 with its modern flat-top rail and its modern magwell guide and the mag release, bolt-lock/release of the ACR. The SK-16 magwell guide seems nice and wide -- wide enough for a 60 round magazine.  





    The AD-400 for Avtomat Dragunov is definitely the future; it has a free float barrel and an adjustable gas block but it must also incorporate the ambidextrous controls seen in other modern rifles, like the ACR. A carbine variant with a length no longer than 840 mm and a lightweight alloyed magnesium full length rail like the one seen here on this M4, would be awesome.



    I really like the pistol grip of the AK-15 and think it should be incorporated into the AK-400.




    Do you think incorporating a bolt-lock/release would negatively impact on reliability in the AK-400?  

    There are new, light, strong and cost-effective materials that would allow such a rifle to weigh only 3 kg unloaded.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:25 pm



    I really do hope that Kalashnikov Concern eventually adopts the architecture of the SK-16 or MA Kalashnikov for the AK-400 for a much more stable and streamlined flattop rail while maintaining the same degree of clearances to preserve reliability. The AK-400 is not as ergonomic as its predecessor, the AK-12 but Kalashnikov Concern seems to be heading in the right direction in this regard. The AK-400 will (mostly) preserve the legendary reliability of its antecedents while gaining world class accuracy with its free floating barrel -- likely matching or surpassing any other modern assault rifle in the world in accuracy. If the AK-400 is as reliable as the Dragunov then it has the potential to be the best assault rifle in the world provided it has the same kind of ergonomics as rifles like the ACR.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:09 am

    So there's been talk about a secretive deep modernization of Pechneg 7.62, I wonder what it could mean. OK KoTeMoRe, have at it:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174253_sekretnyii_pulemet_rossii.html&edit-text=&act=url
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:05 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:So there's been talk about a secretive deep modernization of Pechneg 7.62, I wonder what it could mean. OK KoTeMoRe, have at it:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174253_sekretnyii_pulemet_rossii.html&edit-text=&act=url

    There's nothing secretive about the compromises made to obtain the PKP. And there was no such thing when it comes to the two different weapons shown in the picture.

    The biggest of them was the decision to have a fixed barrel, instead of a QCB (Quick change barrel) and have an airflow ventilation through a sleeve instead of relying on swapping barrels.

    The problem started when the PKP got out of the platoon Squad automatic weapon role (in lieu of RPK) and became, because of its qualities in this role, a GMPG and started getting mounted on everything. You can see that the first "modernization" is in fact a return to PKM standard with a CQB, an integral M1913 style rail and the possibility to use the PKM for close combat or sweeps by adding a vertical grip. The other huge factor is the muzzle device that should play a role in reducing the felt recoil (inverted deflector principle like the AKS74U).

    There are some cons IMO, the integral rail system has forced them to put the iron sights on the front of the top cover, which may be a problem for zero holding as it stands just atop of the feed tray and ammo band. The return to a QCB clearly shows this is a modernization of the PKM rather than the Pecheng.

    The second monster is just a Spetznaz toy, it features a dual controls and triggers, completely over the top. But hey, bullpup PKP....

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:58 pm


    I've been asking a flurry of questions and so I hope that I'm not annoying people here, but I have learned a lot from posters on this forum, so please bear with me. I have some more questions:

    The AK-12 was able to achieve 1 MOA - which is astonishing... and the AK-400 purpotedly surpasses this -- which would make it a sub MOA rifle. Is this possible in an assault rifle? Am I wrong to assume that the AK-400 should be more reliable than the genuine SIG 550 series in Swiss service?
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Wed Feb 08, 2017 2:00 am

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I've been asking a flurry of questions and so I hope that I'm not annoying people  here, but I have learned a lot from posters on this forum, so please bear with me. I have some more questions:

    The AK-12 was able to achieve 1 MOA - which is astonishing... and the AK-400 purpotedly surpasses this -- which would make it a sub MOA rifle. Is this possible in an assault rifle? Am I wrong to assume that the AK-400 should be more reliable than the genuine SIG 550 series in Swiss service?  

    It isn't astonishing at all. Firing a lower impulse round and with a flat trajectory helps immensely at 100m. The AK400 doesn't surpass it, it's about 2MOA/2.5MOA a tad better than the AK74M, but it's a compromise and a "modernization".

    The AK MA (Dragunov MA) is said to be a MOA gun at 100.

    With the right barrel the AK in 7.62 can become a MOA; 1.5MOA gun. The Galil achieves that with a twice the weight of the barrel vs AKM.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/19/galil-ace-review/

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:31 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I've been asking a flurry of questions and so I hope that I'm not annoying people  here, but I have learned a lot from posters on this forum, so please bear with me. I have some more questions:

    The AK-12 was able to achieve 1 MOA - which is astonishing... and the AK-400 purpotedly surpasses this -- which would make it a sub MOA rifle. Is this possible in an assault rifle? Am I wrong to assume that the AK-400 should be more reliable than the genuine SIG 550 series in Swiss service?  

    It isn't astonishing at all. Firing a lower impulse round and with a flat trajectory helps immensely at 100m. The AK400 doesn't surpass it, it's about 2MOA/2.5MOA a tad better than the AK74M, but it's a compromise and a "modernization".

    The AK MA (Dragunov MA) is said to be a MOA gun at 100.

    With the right barrel the AK in 7.62 can become a MOA; 1.5MOA gun. The Galil achieves that with a twice the weight of the barrel vs AKM.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/19/galil-ace-review/

    Thanks for these answers, mate.

    What did Kalashnikov Concern do to the AK-12 that made it more accurate than the AK-400? I was under the impression that a short-stroke piston would significantly reduce recoil and increase accuracy. The AK-400 also has a free float barrel and so this was yet another feature that I perceived to be a plus to accuracy,although it may produce carrier tilt. I understand that the AK-12 has a long-stroke piston with lightened internals but I really am surprised that it could be more accurate than the AK-400. The AK-400 should not be considered a modernization if it achieves less accuracy and inferior ergonomics to the AK-12. What is the difference between a conventional short-stroke piston and a reverse short-stroke piston.
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1714
    Points : 1871
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Feb 08, 2017 11:50 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:So there's been talk about a secretive deep modernization of Pechneg 7.62, I wonder what it could mean. OK KoTeMoRe, have at it:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174253_sekretnyii_pulemet_rossii.html&edit-text=&act=url

    There's nothing secretive about the compromises made to obtain the PKP. And there was no such thing when it comes to the two different weapons shown in the picture.

    The biggest of them was the decision to have a fixed barrel, instead of a QCB (Quick change barrel) and have an airflow ventilation through a sleeve instead of relying on swapping barrels.

    The problem started when the PKP got out of the platoon Squad automatic weapon role (in lieu of RPK) and became, because of its qualities in this role, a GMPG and started getting mounted on everything. You can see that the first "modernization" is in fact a return to PKM standard with a CQB, an integral M1913 style rail and the possibility to use the PKM for close combat or sweeps by adding a vertical grip. The other huge factor is the muzzle device that should play a role in reducing the felt recoil (inverted deflector principle like the AKS74U).

    There are some cons IMO, the integral rail system has forced them to put the iron sights on the front of the top cover, which may be a problem for zero holding as it stands just atop of the feed tray and ammo band. The return to a QCB clearly shows this is a modernization of the PKM rather than the Pecheng.

    The second monster is just a Spetznaz toy, it features a dual controls and triggers, completely over the top. But hey, bullpup PKP....

    How often are QCBs carried into battle.
    I don't recall a single instance where I saw them used in battle.
    avatar
    Arctic_Fox

    Posts : 148
    Points : 155
    Join date : 2015-05-02
    Age : 24
    Location : Brazil

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Arctic_Fox on Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:55 am

    Lots of toys  Very Happy


    MA:

    From: Otvaga2004
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Fri Feb 10, 2017 11:32 am

    Arctic_Fox wrote:Lots of toys  Very Happy


    MA:

    From: Otvaga2004

    What did we say? MA is going to take the cake. ZID is going to cry once again.
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Fri Feb 10, 2017 11:39 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:So there's been talk about a secretive deep modernization of Pechneg 7.62, I wonder what it could mean. OK KoTeMoRe, have at it:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174253_sekretnyii_pulemet_rossii.html&edit-text=&act=url

    There's nothing secretive about the compromises made to obtain the PKP. And there was no such thing when it comes to the two different weapons shown in the picture.

    The biggest of them was the decision to have a fixed barrel, instead of a QCB (Quick change barrel) and have an airflow ventilation through a sleeve instead of relying on swapping barrels.

    The problem started when the PKP got out of the platoon Squad automatic weapon role (in lieu of RPK) and became, because of its qualities in this role, a GMPG and started getting mounted on everything. You can see that the first "modernization" is in fact a return to PKM standard with a CQB, an integral M1913 style rail and the possibility to use the PKM for close combat or sweeps by adding a vertical grip. The other huge factor is the muzzle device that should play a role in reducing the felt recoil (inverted deflector principle like the AKS74U).

    There are some cons IMO, the integral rail system has forced them to put the iron sights on the front of the top cover, which may be a problem for zero holding as it stands just atop of the feed tray and ammo band. The return to a QCB clearly shows this is a modernization of the PKM rather than the Pecheng.

    The second monster is just a Spetznaz toy, it features a dual controls and triggers, completely over the top. But hey, bullpup PKP....

    How often are QCBs carried into battle.
    I don't recall a single instance where I saw them used in battle.

    As long as I remember I have seen two kits in Donbass in 2014 and a whole flurry of them in 2008. While in Donbass it might have been used for real, in Ossetia it was part of regulation so.

    But the issue with the PKP is this, the moment you need sustained fire, you are going to think CQB, it's not if you're going to use it but when.
    This doesn't mean the PKP was a mistake, only that some things need to be retained at GPMG level, while the PKP is great, scratch that, outstanding RPK replacement when all things are considered. We know they've been tested in Yemen, we've seen it both.

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Militarov on Fri Feb 10, 2017 5:36 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    TheArmenian wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:So there's been talk about a secretive deep modernization of Pechneg 7.62, I wonder what it could mean. OK KoTeMoRe, have at it:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174253_sekretnyii_pulemet_rossii.html&edit-text=&act=url

    There's nothing secretive about the compromises made to obtain the PKP. And there was no such thing when it comes to the two different weapons shown in the picture.

    The biggest of them was the decision to have a fixed barrel, instead of a QCB (Quick change barrel) and have an airflow ventilation through a sleeve instead of relying on swapping barrels.

    The problem started when the PKP got out of the platoon Squad automatic weapon role (in lieu of RPK) and became, because of its qualities in this role, a GMPG and started getting mounted on everything. You can see that the first "modernization" is in fact a return to PKM standard with a CQB, an integral M1913 style rail and the possibility to use the PKM for close combat or sweeps by adding a vertical grip. The other huge factor is the muzzle device that should play a role in reducing the felt recoil (inverted deflector principle like the AKS74U).

    There are some cons IMO, the integral rail system has forced them to put the iron sights on the front of the top cover, which may be a problem for zero holding as it stands just atop of the feed tray and ammo band. The return to a QCB clearly shows this is a modernization of the PKM rather than the Pecheng.

    The second monster is just a Spetznaz toy, it features a dual controls and triggers, completely over the top. But hey, bullpup PKP....

    How often are QCBs carried into battle.
    I don't recall a single instance where I saw them used in battle.

    As long as I remember I have seen two kits in Donbass in 2014 and a whole flurry of them in 2008. While in Donbass it might have been used for real, in Ossetia it was part of regulation so.

    But the issue with the PKP is this, the moment you need sustained fire, you are going to think CQB, it's not if you're going to use it but when.
    This doesn't mean the PKP was a mistake, only that some things need to be retained at GPMG level, while the PKP is great, scratch that, outstanding RPK replacement when all things are considered. We know they've been tested in Yemen, we've seen it both.


    Our M-84s are coming from the factory in crates without replacement bores. However... on the frontline in the 90s you could see them appearing now and then in some weird ass bags in pairs because it was simply needed as sustained fire was regular appearance. And during my NCO school we had spares on shooting range for M-84s.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 18, 2017 3:40 pm

    Question:

    If Russia had replaced the 7.62x54 with the 6x49mm, what measures could have made it possible to mitigate the barrel wear from such an incredibly high velocity round?


    Last edited by Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Militarov on Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:07 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    Question:

    If Russia had replaced the 7.62x54 with the 6x49mm, what measures could have it made it possible to mitigate the barrel wear from such an incredibly high velocity round?  

    Chrome-lining basically, nothing else on large scale would be suitable from the financial aspect.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:03 pm


    Thanks, Militarov

    The 6x49mm has a velocity of 3,700ft/s out of a 24 inch barrel and so a chrome lined barrel could mitigate barrel wear to a certain extent. I read that the 6x49mm wored out barrels after just 5, 000 rounds - a third of the lifespan of a 7.62 barrel.

    Reducing the velocity to 3, 200 ft/s could also help - with just a slight loss in performance. You could probably achieve 3, 200 ft/s out of a 14 inch barrel with that round. The 6x49mm is only 1 gram heavier than the 5.56 and delivered 3200J of energy and so it's really unfortunate that it was never adopted.
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3911
    Points : 3938
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:45 pm

    Structure. Treatment. Self-treatment.

    Structure: Thicker barrels for integrity.
    Treatment: Chroming would be of another world.
    Self-treatment: Special polymers to ease scraping and outright self maintenance on the field.

    From a cost perspective. 1/2 are a given, 3 very unlikely given the sheer volume.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:02 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:Structure. Treatment. Self-treatment.

    Structure: Thicker barrels for integrity.
    Treatment: Chroming would be of another world.
    Self-treatment: Special polymers to ease scraping and outright self maintenance on the field.

    From a cost perspective. 1/2 are a given, 3 very unlikely given the sheer volume.

    Thanks for this informative response, KoTeMoRe.

    A heavier barrel would definitely go a long way to strengthening the barrel and dissipating the heat, but what kind of weight would be incurred if a 16.3 inch barrel was made heavier? The AK-400 currently weighs 3 kg flat... so
    how much heavier would it become with a heavier barrel?

    As you have pointed out, increasing the quality of the chrome lining and structural enhancements of the barrel are the only financially tenable measures that can be undertaken. I maintain that the 6x49mm would still be incredibly effective even if the propellent was reduced -with the attendant decrease in velocity from 3, 700 ft/s to a more reasonable 3, 200 ft/s. Could this kind of velocity be achieved with more advanced propellents and an increase in barrel pressure in a 14 inch barrel?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:48 am

    I would suggest not reducing the muzzle velocity... the point of the round is that higher velocity.

    To reduce barrel wear driving rings on the rounds made of the new plastic driving bands they developed for cannon shells and bullets should eliminate barrel wear with no loss of performance...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Cyrus the great on Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:45 pm

    GarryB wrote:I would suggest not reducing the muzzle velocity... the point of the round is that higher velocity.

    To reduce barrel wear driving rings on the rounds made of the new plastic driving bands they developed for cannon shells and bullets should eliminate barrel wear with no loss of performance...

    I really do appreciate this response, Garry.

    If these plastic driving bands prove durable and cost effective, then they should also be employed in current rounds like the 5.45. The 6x49 seems like an ideal round due to its competitive lightweight design, superb accuracy and its incredible power.

    The round is only 1 gram heavier than the 5.56 while producing almost 2x the energy and is undoubtedly more accurate, especially at longer ranges. The 6.5 rounds that have garnered so much attention in recent years are still too heavy but the 6x49 strikes the perfect balance. It could pass through barriers with ease. The air pocket feature of the 5.45 could be incorporated into a future updated version of the 6x49mm.

    Unfortunately, the 6x49mm is a victim of the Soviet fall and may never be adopted due to costs.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 23, 2017 8:54 am

    If these plastic driving bands prove durable and cost effective, then they should also be employed in current rounds like the 5.45.

    The issue would conditions.... will it still be effective as a driving band at sub zero temperatures.

    Of course if they do work and reduce barrel wear then the use in current calibres would be interesting. Boosting the muzzle velocity of existing rounds by 20-30% would be interesting with the new bands and new powder... of course iron sights would need to be recalibrated...

    Unfortunately, the 6x49mm is a victim of the Soviet fall and may never be adopted due to costs.

    Since the end of the cold war they have introduced half a dozen new calibres in small arms... both in small scale specialised rounds but also in large numbers too.

    The 9x19mm for pistols... the 9 x 21mm that will hopefully replace it (ie Viper pistol (SR-1) and SR-2 SMG both use the 9 x 21mm).

    The 12.7 x 55mm specialist round to suppliment the 9 x 39mm quiet round... their 9mm version of the Lapua magnum in their 9.3x69mm round for long range use.

    They are developing new families of small arms... now is the time to introduce a new calibre... especially if it can replace older obsolete calibres like 7.62 x 54Rmm.

    The huge irony is that before WWI Federov was experimenting with a 6.5mm round for his avtomat... in the end they used a similar calibre in the form of the Japanese 6.5x50.5R rimmed round... whose kinetic performance is very similar to the modern 7.62 x 39mm AK calibre... 120 odd grain bullet at about 650m/s... compared with the AK round with a 122 grain bullet at 710m/s. The smaller calibre round would retain energy over greater ranges so at 300m they would be very similar.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Assault Rifles & Machine Guns: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:55 pm