Russian Assault Rifles/Carbines/Machine Guns Thread: #2

GarryB wrote:

Glad to see it is auto and full auto capable... wasn't the original version hand cocked manual?

I'm no gun guy but thats quite a fascinating concept.

At first I thought it was some memeworthy gloriously crazy Russian 'more dakka' thing with proper machinegun rounds.

But its basically a giant sub-machinegun with big, blunt, low-range bullets but enormous short-range stopping power, designed for urban anti-terrorist operations clearing out a small number of well armed & armored terrorists with reduced chance of 'collateral damage' to the neighbours.

Edit: Oh my! There's even a revolver with those rounds  

Yes, this is yet another new round... I believe it is a 12.7x39mm round intended for use within 100m with a heavy slug for serious knock down performance.

There is another heavier version with a 12.7x55mm round too but it is in a bigger heavier weapon that I thought was supposed to replace the 9x39mm AS and VSS in the suppressed role. It was the manually operated hand cocked version...

Maybe 12.7x55 is just too big and heavy, though it was intended for use out to about 600m where as this is specifically for shorter ranges.

Would make a powerful revolver cartridge and would be interesting against heavier game with a longer barrel.

I suspect in these guns it will be used from shorter barrel weapons to make the round subsonic for suppression.

BTW I love that revolver.

Like an earlier Soviet revolver the barrel is aligned with the bottom cylinder rather than the top so the recoil line is lower so it does not flip the gun up when fired.

I seem to remember that revolver being revealed before, and by the length of the cylinder it might use the 12.7x55mm round rather than this newer round.

Looks like the An-94 isn't as much of a unicorn as we originally thought:

Of course that is not totally compelling as they march past a guard armed with an SKS...

Certainly interesting... I would want to try it out on a range of different groups of forces... it is certainly not a weapon you would give to conscripts or rebels... it sounds pretty complicated, and the real question is... what does it offer that you cannot get from a different design gas system?

If the AK didn't have a big heavy bolt carrier slamming back and forth it would not need a balanced recoil mechanism.

Of course you could argue it is the weight ratio between the little bolt and the big heavy bolt carrier that gives it the ability to run dirty and abused...

wow that IS  revolutionary if 5,45 replacement is  true. But why focus on 7,62mm? not better to check 6x49mm?

Rostec may submit a new automated shooting complex in the near future

Industrial Director Sergey Abramov said that at present, their introduction is being implemented in anti-tank grenade launchers
MOSCOW, February 25. / TASS /. State Corporation Rostec may soon present a new automated small-caliber rifle complex. This was reported by TASS by the industrial director of the cluster of conventional weapons, ammunition and special chemistry of Rostec Sergey Abramov.

"I do not exclude that in the very near future we will offer a fully automated shooting complex, small-caliber, which ensures high effectiveness of destruction," said Abramov.

According to him, some samples of light weapons are already equipped with automated aiming systems. "Currently, there is an active introduction of such sighting systems and in anti-tank grenade launchers that provide the" shot-and-forget "principle, the industrial director of the cluster added.

The representative of Rostec said that the state corporation pays great attention to the development of intelligent systems. “Automated systems for identifying and hitting targets are actively developing not only for the Kalashnikov Concern (part of Rostec - TASS approx.),” Said Abramov.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6156431

Russian army may refuse 5.45 mm rounds cartridges

according to experts from the 3rd Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense, it is better to concentrate efforts on upgrading and improving the performance of 7.62 mm ammunition and ammunition.
Now the small arms system in the Russian army is based on automatic rifles, sniper rifles and machine guns of both calibers - 5.45 and 7.62 millimeters.

https://ria.ru/20190205/1550423092.html

GarryB wrote:Of course that is not totally compelling as they march past a guard armed with an SKS...

Certainly interesting... I would want to try it out on a range of different groups of forces... it is certainly not a weapon you would give to conscripts or rebels... it sounds pretty complicated, and the real question is... what does it offer that you cannot get from a different design gas system?

If the AK didn't have a big heavy bolt carrier slamming back and forth it would not need a balanced recoil mechanism.

Of course you could argue it is the weight ratio between the little bolt and the big heavy bolt carrier that gives it the ability to run dirty and abused...

The main advantage of the AN-94 is double to probability of hitting your target when you first pull the trigger by firing 2 rounds as the mechanism recoils backwards to absorb the recoil instead of it going into the operators shoulder and interfearing with his aim.

The An-94 part of the Abakan project which at the time was going to be the Soviet counterpart to the ACR program however only the Abakan project resulted in a weapon actually entering service, the AN-94.

In terms of performance it works as intended, when you pull the trigger 2 round come out and you have a higher chance to hit your target.

In a way I can understand it... a while back in one of the threads regarding small arms ammo they mention improved propellents that increased the muzzle velocity of existing round by 30% simply by more efficient use of pressure increases in the available length of barrel.

Adding 30% muzzle velocity to a 7.62x39mm round is enormous... 720m/s times 1.3 = equals about 930m/s, which is with standard 122 grain bullets... which is rather better than the new fangled grendel and other magic super western bullets achieve.

Of course being smaller calibre the western bullets... along with the 5.45mm bullets retain their velocity much more efficiently so at say 600m have better speed and kinetic performance than a shorter fatter round like most 7.62mm rounds... but most 7.62mm rounds still make a bigger hole.

As mentioned the auto aiming mechanisms... ie laser range finders are built in to most things these days and a simple ballistic computer makes hitting targets at extended ranges much much easier.

The original AK in 7.62x39mm was calibrated to 300m... that was the shooting battle setting so if you aimed centre of chest on a target it did not matter if the target appeared 5m in front of you, 150m in front of you, 250m in front of you, or 350m in front of you... aim centre chest and shoot and you should get a hit.

At 5m you will hit near centre chest because the bullet is just on its way up... at 150m you will hit the target in the face because the round is lofted up to fall back down to the zeroed range of 300m and at 250m you will hit the target in the throat or upper chest, while at 300m you get a centre chest hit and 350m you get a belly hit or a hit to the groin area.

Obviously you have to compensate for wind and the movement of the target but in terms of range trajectory you don't need to make any complex range estimates or calculations.

Anyone who claims... well what if the target is 500m away... yeah right... a human being 500m away is a tiny dot and you can move the muzzle of your rifle half a mm and miss completely at that range... you wont be shooting at that distance without optics and special ammo and a sniper rifle.

The new Ratnik system is adding night vision and presumably laser range finders and ballistic computers to standard rifle sights... the technology is becoming very affordable and being able to push a button and a glowing red aim point appearing in your sight... put that on the target and fire... the average grunt is going to become much more successful at hitting targets than ever before.

Particularly this bit:

According to him, some samples of light weapons are already equipped with automated aiming systems. "Currently, there is an active introduction of such sighting systems and in anti-tank grenade launchers that provide the" shot-and-forget "principle, the industrial director of the cluster added.

I think he is referring to RPG systems like the RPG-32 with ballistic compensators built in to the sights to generate calculated aim points for the range of the target and the type of ammo loaded to generate an accurate aim point to increase the chance of a hit.

I don't think in this case the fire and forget means guided ammo... just that you fire and then have no control of the shot to impact so it is literally fire and forget.

So why 7.62 and not smaller calibre?

Ironically... maybe they are only interested in shorter range effect for assault rifle calibres... if you restrict the range to 500m max and perhaps 600-700m for LMG models then using smaller calibres is less important perhaps than weight and effect on target.

I have seen the effect of very small very high velocity rounds on light and medium game... they will devastate a small animal but larger heavier animals the heavier bodies stop the little rounds and they become inhumane in terms of lack of penetration with heavier bone structures.

Heavier bullets tend to motor on through heavier game penetrating to internal organs and doing more damage.

Maybe they are going to go for a calibre reversal... 7.62mm with 100-120 grain bullets for assault rifles out to 500m tops and 6.5mm for machine guns and sniper rifles out to much greater ranges with a slim high velocity 100-120 grain bullet... 1,200-1,500m in range.

The smaller calibre is a much better aerodynamic shape with much lower drag so while the 7.62mm round might be doing 950m/s at the muzzle, at 500m it might be subsonic at maybe 250m/s or thereabouts because of its short un-aerodynamic shape.

The 6.5mm or perhaps 6mm round might leave the barrel at 1.2km/s with a 120 grain bullet but because of is narrow design and good aerodynamic shape it could still be supersonic beyond 1,200m so it gets to the target faster and with much more energy...

Both rounds are reasonably heavy and rather fast moving which is good for dealing with crosswinds...

The An-94 part of the Abakan project which at the time was going to be the Soviet counterpart to the ACR program however only the Abakan project resulted in a weapon actually entering service, the AN-94.

But it is relatively complex and cumbersome... I personally thought the Korobov TKB-059 three barrel assault rifle was vastly more interesting...

It looked cool from the side:



And from the front it must have looked intimidating with those three barrels:



And check out those iron sights... like something from Star Trek... why hasn't Hollywood done a movie with these weapons... Oh that is right... they are clearly Russian copies of American weapons...

Designed in 1962, this rifle that had a triple magazine with 20 rounds per barrel, holding 60 rounds in total.

It only weighed just over 3.5kgs and fired three shots per trigger pull...

And of course the much simpler cheaper option of duplex ammo where there are two projectiles in each round of ammo, with the front bullet going to the point of aim and the second normally slightly lighter bullet landing within a few cms at most ranges... without any complicated gun mechanism or design change...

Actually they have that smart visor system, and they were talking about projecting smart aiming systems into viewing systems... so maybe we have Half Lifes floating aiming cursor ready for real combat deployment... you just swing around your gun and put the aiming crosshair on the target and pull the trigger to shoot all different types of weapons... a sensor in the glove detects which weapon you are holding....

GarryB wrote:

The An-94 part of the Abakan project which at the time was going to be the Soviet counterpart to the ACR program however only the Abakan project resulted in a weapon actually entering service, the AN-94.

But it is relatively complex and cumbersome... I personally thought the Korobov TKB-059 three barrel assault rifle was vastly more interesting...

It looked cool from the side:



And from the front it must have looked intimidating with those three barrels:



And check out those iron sights... like something from Star Trek... why hasn't Hollywood done a movie with these weapons... Oh that is right... they are clearly Russian copies of American weapons...

Designed in 1962, this rifle that had a triple magazine with 20 rounds per barrel, holding 60 rounds in total.

It only weighed just over 3.5kgs and fired three shots per trigger pull...

And of course the much simpler cheaper option of duplex ammo where there are two projectiles in each round of ammo, with the front bullet going to the point of aim and the second normally slightly lighter bullet landing within a few cms at most ranges... without any complicated gun mechanism or design change...

I don't really get what you are saying the rifle you have posted pictures of is form the 1960s and you even said that.

All of the ACR rifles were miserable faliures and classic examples of a declining defence industry.

And Nikanov's system is totaly unique the only thing it shares with the american projects in the idea of shooting multiple rounds per trigger pull.

GarryB wrote:In a way I can understand it... a while back in one of the threads regarding small arms ammo they mention improved propellents that increased the muzzle velocity of existing round by 30% simply by more efficient use of pressure increases in the available length of barrel.

Adding 30% muzzle velocity to a 7.62x39mm round is enormous... 720m/s times 1.3 = equals about 930m/s, which is with standard 122 grain bullets... which is rather better than the new fangled grendel and other magic super western bullets achieve.

And recoil? Try to shoot M-14 full auto.

US are no idiots of course. Why Grendel? not only speed, but also barrel life, mass vs. no of rounds carried by a soldier, lethality to name a few.

BTW how many birds or rabbits did you see in full body armor of new generation?

GB wrote: Maybe they are going to go for a calibre reversal... 7.62mm with 100-120 grain bullets for assault rifles out to 500m tops and 6.5mm for machine guns and sniper rifles out to much greater ranges with a slim high velocity 100-120 grain bullet... 1,200-1,500m in range.

The smaller calibre is a much better aerodynamic shape with much lower drag so while the 7.62mm round might be doing 950m/s at the muzzle, at 500m it might be subsonic at maybe 250m/s or thereabouts because of its short un-aerodynamic shape.

The 6.5mm or perhaps 6mm round might leave the barrel at 1.2km/s with a 120 grain bullet but because of is narrow design and good aerodynamic shape it could still be supersonic beyond 1,200m so it gets to the target faster and with much more energy...

Both rounds are reasonably heavy and rather fast moving which is good for dealing with crosswinds...

IMHO smaller caliber with high Vo is more likely. Recoil, body amour penetration, flat trajectory, relatively small cartridge weight.


MA-17 infogrphics,
length 740mm
barrel =230mm
weight = 2,5kg
ammo = 30rounds (you cn see how many rounds is in the clip)

https://rg.ru/2019/02/26/koncern-kalashnikov-raskryl-harakteristiki-miniavtomata-am-17.html

I don't really get what you are saying the rifle you have posted pictures of is form the 1960s and you even said that.

You were talking about the Abakan like it was the only gun that can fire two rounds rapidly enough for the to end up close enough on the target to increase the chances of a hit and indeed increase the lethality of a burst... two holes in a body kill faster than one... if they are all the same size.

All of the ACR rifles were miserable faliures and classic examples of a declining defence industry.

And Nikanov's system is totaly unique the only thing it shares with the american projects in the idea of shooting multiple rounds per trigger pull.

The picture of the rifle I posted had nothing to do with the ACR... that was an American programme, and compared with the Abakan it is not any heavier... fires three rounds at one time, instead of just two, and a vastly simpler mechanism.

And recoil? Try to shoot M-14 full auto.

That is not legal in the country I live in, but there are videos of the brand new AK-308, which is a version of the AK-103 in 7.62x51mm calibre using new features developed for the AK-12 et al, which seems controllable at very short ranges... a 7.62x39mm round with a lighter bullet... like a 90 grain or 100 grain bullet travelling at a higher velocity should be relatively controllable with the right design.

US are no idiots of course. Why Grendel? not only speed, but also barrel life, mass vs. no of rounds carried by a soldier, lethality to name a few.

Of course they are idiots... they want an assault rifle superior in accuracy and range to an SVD or M14... they want head shots to 800m... they are ridiculous.

BTW how many birds or rabbits did you see in full body armor of new generation?

I am pretty sure the Russians could develop bicalibre armour penetrating rounds in 7.62x39mm like they have for their 9x21mm pistol rounds...

IMHO smaller caliber with high Vo is more likely. Recoil, body amour penetration, flat trajectory, relatively small cartridge weight.

That is what they have in the 5.45x39mm round and the article we are discussing suggests they want an alternative.

MA-17 infogrphics,
length 740mm
barrel =230mm
weight = 2,5kg
ammo = 30rounds (you cn see how many rounds is in the clip)

Yeah, nice, but what are you suggesting?

At the top of the page is a full auto 12.7x39mm calibre rifle intended for short range engagements with high lethality low ricochet bullets with high lethality...  I suspect both gun designs could be interchangable and could be made in either calibre so their existence proves nothing in terms of what the Russian Army wants.

I was responding to your post of the link:

https://ria.ru/20190205/1550423092.html

Where it states that some research group decided that increasing the penetration at medium to longer range of small arms ammo would be better focused on 7.62mm ammo than smaller calibre rounds... which is bugger all reason for anything really.

The article starts by saying 5.45mm weapons might be refused by the military and then it talks about medium to long range use of small arms ammo.

Well that sounds to me like they need to work on improving the performance of the 7.62x54mm ammo... perhaps even replacing it to get better performance.

The 6x49mm ammo was supposed to increase all round performance including penetration and accuracy and effect down range by using more aerodynamic bullets that retain velocity better and travel faster so they get to the target faster so there is less time for wind drift to occur and with a nice flat trajectory.

If penetration is the issue then a flechette round for the 5.45mm would be easy to develop...

I would suggest they just be much more realistic and realise the advantages of the smaller calibre bullets are best felt at medium to long range, while larger calibre bullets can still be effective at shorter ranges.

Note in the article in the comments section one person posted that they were in the military and both 7.62 and 5.45mm "slaughter".... which suggests he thinks they are good enough as they are... a lot of fuss about nothing.

America wants a magic bullet that will drop an enemy with a poor hit to an extremity... and they want precision accuracy to ridiculous ranges too... no wonder all their replacement programmes for the riflemans M16 have failed.

GarryB wrote:

And recoil? Try to shoot M-14 full auto.

That is not legal in the country I live in, but there are videos of the brand new AK-308, which is a version of the AK-103 in 7.62x51mm calibre using new features developed for the AK-12 et al, which seems controllable at very short ranges... a 7.62x39mm round with a lighter bullet... like a 90 grain or 100 grain bullet travelling at a higher velocity should be relatively controllable with the right design.

so you're not a remote village moonshiner who's got guns, cars and fiddles ? even if you can control it, what I dont believe, you still have 50% less ammo with you.

GB wrote:

US are no idiots of course. Why Grendel? not only speed, but also barrel life, mass vs. no of rounds carried by a soldier, lethality to name a few.

Of course they are idiots... they want an assault rifle superior in accuracy and range to an SVD or M14... they want head shots to 800m... they are ridiculous.

yet looks like they succeed with 6,8mm . Soviets played with 6x49 were also idiots?

GB wrote:

BTW how many birds or rabbits did you see in full body armor of new generation?

I am pretty sure the Russians could develop bicalibre armour penetrating rounds in 7.62x39mm like they have for their 9x21mm pistol rounds...

telescopic cartridge? like long round whit small caliber? sabot rounds?

GB wrote:
quote]IMHO smaller caliber with high Vo is more likely. Recoil, body amour penetration, flat trajectory, relatively small cartridge weight.

That is what they have in the 5.45x39mm round and the article we are discussing suggests they want an alternative.
[/quote]

no they dont. 5,45x39mm doesn't have enough body-armor penetration.

GB wrote:

MA-17 infogrphics,
length 740mm
barrel =230mm
weight = 2,5kg
ammo = 30rounds (you cn see how many rounds is in the clip)

Yeah, nice, but what are you suggesting?

GB wrote:
The 6x49mm ammo was supposed to increase all round performance including penetration and accuracy and effect down range by using more aerodynamic bullets that retain velocity better and travel faster so they get to the target faster so there is less time for wind drift to occur and with a nice flat trajectory.

{}
I would suggest they just be much more realistic and realise the advantages of the smaller calibre bullets are best felt at medium to long range, while larger calibre bullets can still be effective at shorter ranges.

if you can carry more rounds then you can kill guy 3 instead of 1 heavier with the same effect in short range and still kill better on long one.

GB wrote: America wants a magic bullet that will drop an enemy with a poor hit to an extremity... and they want precision accuracy to ridiculous ranges too... no wonder all their replacement programmes for the riflemans M16 have failed.

isnt it that M4, M-16,M249 will llbe replaced by[ 6,8mm?

even if you can control it, what I dont believe, you still have 50% less ammo with you.

Another mistake... if you want control why are you firing full auto... the whole point of burst fire is to spread the hits around to increase hit probability... have you ever seen an Uzi fired?

Those things spray all over the place and the round they fire is not particularly heavy in terms of recoil.

The thing is that when you are using an Uzi you likely want a little spread of your shots because odds are the target you are shooting at is likely moving so you might not be aiming where you actually want the bullets to go anyway... a bit of spread around the point of aim is sometimes a good thing and when it isn't fire in single shot only mode then...

No point in carrying 50% extra ammo if it doesn't effect the target at more than 300m anyway... 50% more useless is still useless.

yet looks like they succeed with 6,8mm . Soviets played with 6x49 were also idiots?

You love to throw around insults don't you.

The 6.8mm round for the Americans is to replace their ineffectual 5.56mm rounds which can be spectacular and can also be very ordinary depending on the target and the range and the rifle you use to send the message.

The Soviets were experimenting with the 6x49mm to replace their 7.62x54mm rifle round... its narrow low drag shape makes no difference out to 300-400m range where they want to use assault rifle rounds... 5.45mm calibre ammo is fine for that distance, they wanted the 6x49mm ammo for 1,000m-1,300m or so where its low drag design means it retains velocity much better than any 7.62mm slug.

It gets to the target faster and is travelling faster when it gets there so has more energy a flatter trajectory, and less time for the target to move between the shot being taken and impact of the bullet on target... and it is smaller and lighter so you can carry more ammo and there is less recoil.

Thing is that they are looking at the .338 Lapua magnum rounds effective to 1.5km for their sniper rifles and have talked about a 9mm version with a better aerodynamic shape... perhaps their work with new propellents and their work with new high speed shapes has led them to realise they don't need narrow little high velocity bullets to improve performance... perhaps they have worked out a propellent that gets high velocities with heavier bullets so they can get low drag with larger projectiles... because larger projectiles retain energy better too and compound that advantage by simply making larger holes in targets.

I don't know anything about shooting at people and quite frankly am more than happy with this sort of situation, but when you are shooting animals the bigger the animal and the heavier its build... those light little fast bullets stop being so damned impressive and start being inhumane.

Heavier bullets are needed to penetrate through heavier flesh and bones to reach the vital organs and do some lethal damage otherwise you end up with a wounded animal that could suffer a long slow death.

Even hunting deer in New Zealand you don't use 223 or even 243 type calibres (243 is a 7.62x51mm NATO round necked down to a smaller lighter projectile at a higher velocity... perhaps a 100 or 120 grain projectile instead of a 150 grain at a higher velocity).

telescopic cartridge? like long round whit small caliber? sabot rounds?

Have a look here:

https://modernfirearms.net/en/cartridge/9x21-sp-10-sp-11-sp-12/

The pointed bullet has a hardened steel core for penetrating body armour, but is surrounded by polyethylene with the bullet jacket outside of that. The core is heavy and the polyethylene is light with the mild steel jacket outside of that so when it hits a flesh target it remains intact and acts like a standard ball projectile making a 9mm hole in the target. If it hits an armoured target with metal or ceramic plates the metal penetrator penetrates and the polyethylene and jacket peel away leaving the penetrator to penetrate alone.

There are versions for Police use that are more effective on soft targets that act like soft nose ammo but retain the penetrator so they have the best of both worlds... good penetration against body armour and good fragmentation against soft targets, but that would not be acceptable for military ammo so they just use the above for military use.

no they dont. 5,45x39mm doesn't have enough body-armor penetration.

Correction... 5.45 doesn't have enough body armour penetration at medium to long distances...

if you can carry more rounds then you can kill guy 3 instead of 1 heavier with the same effect in short range and still kill better on long one.

So what you are really saying is that they need to convert to .22lr ammo because for the weight of 5.45mm ammo they currently carry they could carry 20,000 rounds of .22lr ammo so in a burst fire weapon... with very low recoil I might add, they could shoot around heavy body armour and make the target bleed to death with a small fraction of the tens of thousands of extra shots they will be carrying...

isnt it that M4, M-16,M249 will llbe replaced by[ 6,8mm?

Not really because the 6.8mm round they are working on has its dimensions limited so it will fit a standard 5.56x45mm magazine well as fitted to the M-16, M-4, and M249... so even if they change to that calibre it just means new bolts and new barrels and likely new belts but same weapons...

GarryB wrote:
No point in carrying 50% extra ammo if it doesn't effect the target at more than 300m anyway... 50% more useless is still useless.

wrong, useless is not when somebody  thinks it is but when objectively doesn't meet meet some criteria. if 6,8mm and 7,62mmcan kill with same range you need, regardless or defined amour protection level then then you choose 50% more ammo per soldier.  

GB wrote:  

yet looks like they succeed with 6,8mm . Soviets played with 6x49 were also idiots?

The 6.8mm round for the Americans is to replace their ineffectual 5.56mm rounds which can be spectacular and can also be very ordinary depending on the target and the range and the rifle you use to send the message.
+++
The Soviets were experimenting with the 6x49mm to replace their 7.62x54mm rifle round... its narrow low drag shape makes no difference out to 300-400m range where they want to use assault rifle rounds... 5.45mm calibre ammo is fine for that distance, they wanted the 6x49mm ammo for 1,000m-1,300m or so where its low drag design means it retains velocity much better than any 7.62mm slug.

no, it was to be universal round for  MGs and ARs alike.  They  also were plying with Dragunov version for this  round.  Now in service  there are:

5,45x39mm, 7,62x39mm,  7,62x54mm - those all could be replaced by only one round. Not only better characteristics but also puts much less strain on logistics.


BTW I also fail to see difference between  "OK    5,45mm"  and "ineffectual 5,56" Mind to elaborate?

GB wrote:I don't know anything about shooting at people and quite frankly am more than happy with this sort of situation, but when you are shooting animals the bigger the animal and the heavier its build... those light little fast bullets stop being so damned impressive and start being inhumane.
+++
So what you are really saying is that they need to convert to .22lr ammo because for the weight of 5.45mm ammo they currently carry they could carry 20,000 rounds of .22lr ammo so in a burst fire weapon... with very low recoil I might add, they could shoot around heavy body armour and make the target bleed to death with a small fraction of the tens of thousands of extra shots they will be carrying...

Perhaps that's  the source of your misunderstanding .No animals wear body amour. Neither are shooting back to you. So you take your time and if ammo is out just go to car and take more.  Army's round  doesnt need to be humanitarian but effective.

Tell my why for Soviet army in Afghanistan 5,45mm was just fine and now 6-7mm  isnt because is too small and inhumane ?

GB wrote:

no they dont. 5,45x39mm doesn't have enough body-armor penetration.

Correction... 5.45 doesn't have enough body armour penetration at medium to long distances...

And that' s precisely why Tshintomash scientists proposed to replace it.

GB wrote:

isnt it that M4, M-16,M249 will llbe replaced by[ 6,8mm?

Not really because the 6.8mm round they are working on has its dimensions limited so it will fit a standard 5.56x45mm magazine well as fitted to the M-16, M-4, and M249... so even if they change to that calibre it just means new bolts and new barrels and likely new belts but same weapons...

[/quote]

No, Sir

NGSC ...=/= M249
NGSAR..=/= M4/M16

+ marksman rifle for new round. BTW exactly what Soviets with 6x49mm were doing.

wrong, useless is not when somebody  thinks it is but when objectively doesn't meet meet some criteria. if 6,8mm and 7,62mmcan kill with same range you need, regardless or defined amour protection level then then you choose 50% more ammo per soldier.

But that is the problem... you don't know if it is just as effective until you take it into combat... the 5.56mm was supposed to be so much better than 7.62x51 they removed 7.62x51mm weapons from entire units... entire units had M16 or M4 carbines and M249 LMGs all in 5.56mm, yet in Afghanistan they realised they couldn't reliably kill people at much more than 200m because most soldiers had M4s or M249s with short barrels and most of the time from a short barrel the 5.56mm is just very ordinary on target...

In Afghanistan they introduced semi auto only 7.62x51mm rifles... like the Soviets used SVDs in the 1980s in Afghanistan...

no, it was to be universal round for  MGs and ARs alike.  They  also were plying with Dragunov version for this  round.

What are you talking about?

If you are talking about the Russian 6x49mm round then no, it was never intended to replace the 5.45mm rounds for close range use.... meaning battle ranges of 300m or less.

The 6x49mm needed a very long barrel to achieve its performance and they only ever made a machine gun and a sniper rifle testing model in that calibre... there was never an intention to use it in assault rifles.

If you are talking about the 6.8mm... yeah, whatever... don't really care...

5,45x39mm, 7,62x39mm,  7,62x54mm - those all could be replaced by only one round. Not only better characteristics but also puts much less strain on logistics.

Suggests to me you are talking about the Russians and the 6x49mm, which means you are wrong... it was never intended to replace assault rifle calibres...

BTW I also fail to see difference between  "OK    5,45mm"  and "ineffectual 5,56" Mind to elaborate?

Seems to me that the US has very high expectations of their small arms ammo, while the Russians seem to have a more realistic appreciation...

For lethal effect the 5.56mm needs to be moving above a minimum speed to fragment inside the target... as most American soldiers are armed with short barrel M4 rifles that almost never happens.

Perhaps that's  the source of your misunderstanding .No animals wear body amour. Neither are shooting back to you. So you take your time and if ammo is out just go to car and take more.  Army's round  doesnt need to be humanitarian but effective.

Even the most effective body armour consists of a plate the size of a dinner plate over the persons chest so headshots, gutshots, hip or pelvis shots and shots to the arms and legs are perfectly effective enough... especially multiple hits.

I appreciate animals are not people, replace humaine with lethality...

Tell my why for Soviet army in Afghanistan 5,45mm was just fine and now 6-7mm  isnt because is too small and inhumane ?

Perhaps you might like to go back and reread what I wrote because you clearly are not understanding what I said.

The 5.45mm was just fine because it was also used with 7.62x54mm SVD rifles and 7.62x54mm PKM machineguns, so the muj couldn't sit 500m away and take potshots with 303s or other PKMs and not worry about any return fire being effective like they could against American units armed with M4 carbines and M249 LMGs both in 5.56mm calibre.

5.45mm is fine for short range where assault rifles are intended and designed to be used.

For medium to longer range where most units use rifles like SVD or LMGs and MMGs like RPK-74 and PKM the calibre they currently use is the 7.62x54mm which is a powerful and effective but also rather old cartridge... it is so old it is one of the few things in Russian service that in 1991 was Russian designed...

I fully support them adopting a 6x49mm round for all the reasons I have mentioned... the better aerodynamic shape means it retains velocity better so it gets to the target at long range faster and with a lot more energy than a slower larger calibre round.

The 6x49mm round is not inhumaine because it isn't a light little 50 grain bullet that at long range has slowed down to ineffectual speed... it uses a 120 grain bullet that is a similar weight to most centre fire 30 calibre rifle rounds which are often 150-180 grain but would be moving much slower at longer range because of their worse aerodynamic shape.

And that' s precisely why Tshintomash scientists proposed to replace it.

If the target is at medium to long range they probably wont fucking hit it with an assault rifle anyway.... let the guy in the unit with the SVD shoot the target or the guy with the PKP.

No, Sir

NGSC ...=/= M249
NGSAR..=/= M4/M16

+ marksman rifle for new round. BTW exactly what Soviets with 6x49mm were doing.

   Back to top

In english?

And the Soviets were developing the 6x51mm to replace the 7.62 x 54mm round, it is optimised to extend its effective range beyond 1,000m to about 1,500m in a medium machine gun or sniper rifle.

They later optimised the design down to 6x49mm while retaining performance but it needed a very long barrel to achieve the high muzzle velocity it needed to retain energy to that distance and would not be practical in an assault rifle length weapon... unless they replaced their AK-74Ms with RPK-74s... which I doubt.

There are examples of 6x49mm calibre MGs and 6x49mm calibre SVD variants, but no AKs or assault rifles in that calibre that I know of.

And in the article you originally posted criticised the 5.45mm for lack of medium and long range penetration but the article suggested going to 7.62mm weapons... not 6mm ones.

In Kalashnikov AK-203 production plant opened in India

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3555367.html


7.5 Lacs Ak-203 to me made in this new production plant in India

Can some one tell me what is good about AK-203 ? How is it better than Indian INSAS Rifle ?

Thanks

INSAS was prone to jams and or poor quality parts causing failures (jams). Accuracy was decent in single shot but full auto was iffy. Other than that, it's a rifle like all others. AK's are usually well built, cheaper and not prone to jamming. Single shot accuracy had improved due to mostly ammunition. AK-200 series have much better full auto recoil control due to design.

A friend of mine who seems to have expertise in small arms told me this

The 7.62x39 drops 5 to 8 inches by the time it travels to about 200 yards so that's not the one to carry if one wants to hit accurate at that range


How true is that statement , So 7.62x39 is not an accurate weapon ?

Do we have some reviews done on AK-203 using Russian Ammo by Professional where I can read ?

It is basically an evolution of the AK-103, which itself was an upgrade of the AK to the AK-74M standard... the so called AK-100 series.

That AK-203 is a further upgrade of the AK-103 with features and ideas from the AK-12/AK-200 rifles, but in the old 7.62x39mm calibre of the AK original.

Should be easier to use, more accurate but still reliable, easier to add sights and equipment to.

They are building a new factory to make these guns so the production quality should be very good and in the future it should be able to make other new weapon types including the RPK-16 with a removable barrel as a support weapon, or even the AK-107 with the balanced recoil mechanism perhaps for special forces use.

Have seen a 5 minute video of an Indian soldier shooting from a bunker like position with an INSAS and he has more than a dozen jams or misfires in that time... he seemed to try to fire in bursts because it was a little more reliable than with single shots...

A friend of mine who seems to have expertise in small arms told me this

The 7.62x39 drops 5 to 8 inches by the time it travels to about 200 yards so that's not the one to carry if one wants to hit accurate at that range

But all bullets drop over distance... gravity is the same for everything... it all drops at 9.8m/s/s... a 7.62x51mm round drops about 32 feet from the boreline at 1,000m but does that make it inaccurate, or does that just mean you need to know the distance to the target before you shoot?

The AK had a combat setting of 300m so you zero the rifle and then set the iron sights to 300m and aim for the centre of the targets chest.

The trajectory of the 7.62x39mm round means at no point between 300m and the muzzle of the rifle does the bullets trajectory go higher than the top of a persons head and out to about 400m if you fire without adjusting your aim you will hit the target somewhere between the centre of the face to the groin... so all you have to worry about is crosswind and of course moving targets

Crosswinds and moving targets means you are probably not going to hit the target at more than 300m anyway... and if the ammo you are using is 5.56mm what is the point of hitting the target beyond 400m... it will be a through wound with no tumbling... you might as well have hit them with a .22lr.

A pocket laser range finder and the 7.62 x 39mm is as accurate as any other round... in fact it is less effected by crosswinds than lighter smaller calibre bullets...

But if the round is the problem... there is always:



Full auto and semi auto... and 7.62x51mm.

Good Debate by Indian Army personal on why they opted for AK-203 , GarryB do watch

https://modernfirearms.net/en/assault-rifles/ak-200-2/

About AK-202 form source ;-) BTW AK-202 is chambered for NATO's 5,56x45mm

Austin wrote:A friend of mine who seems to have expertise in small arms told me this

The 7.62x39 drops 5 to 8 inches by the time it travels to about 200 yards so that's not the one to carry if one wants to hit accurate at that range

did he men drop or accuracy?  Drop is fairly easy to calculate:

vo=715/ms lets say it wont change in 180m . Not true it drops  like 1/3

t= s/v ~0,25s

drop d=0.5*g*sqr(t) ~  0.3m = 30cm =12in


so min drop is 12in. This can be addressed by barrel elevation, but accuracy  is different issue here.

Austin wrote: How true is that statement , So 7.62x39 is not an accurate weapon ?

depending to what do you compare with?

looks like Russians improved 5,45mm ammo as cost effective solutio but this column below (1/3/2019) seem to outdtedinfo. Look t tble below:

7H39 was created in 2013.

5.45 mm caliber cartridges got more powerful

Created a more powerful ammunition caliber 5.45 millimeter. Also appeared his version with increased accuracy, reports TASS with reference to the general designer of equipment TSNIITOCHMASH Oleg Nekrasov.

- Within the framework of the OCD "Warrior", two munitions were created: 7Н39 and 7Н40. One with increased accuracy of fire, the second increased armor-piercing effect, said Nekrasov.

He clarified that the first of them punches an armor plate of the 2P brand at 50-70 meters, and the second one increased the accuracy by more than one and a half times.

In his opinion, the new cartridges are significantly superior to those already in service. Nekrasov also admitted that earlier Russia lagged behind NATO ammunition in the caliber of 5.45 mm in accuracy by single fire. In addition, customers wanted to increase the range of armor penetration

https://rg.ru/2019/03/01/patrony-kalibra-545-mm-sdelali-moshchnee.html



7H39 - 5mm armor plate form 550m ?
http://www.dogswar.ru/boepripasy/41-patrony/7711-prom

Looks like AK-103 7.62x39 is quite accurate up to 300 m , Read the review

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/08/05/practical-accuracy-of-the-ak-in-7-62-and-5-56-by-9-hole-reviews/