Ammo calibres for Russian Army rifles

Werewolf wrote:

Mike E wrote:
DMR = any small caliber rifle that sits between an assault rifle and *actual* sniper rifle. - Can your clear up the rest of the first part? I'm sorry, but it didn't make any sense (to myself).

Again such classification does not exist in other countries except USA and forcing it upon NATO, but no one else classifies rifles in such catagories and that was the entire point of my first part that if you really go for such calibre then this already existed with 7.62x39mm for Assault Rifle/DMR/Sniper Rifle and LMG.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

Mike E wrote:
DMR = any small caliber rifle that sits between an assault rifle and *actual* sniper rifle. - Can your clear up the rest of the first part? I'm sorry, but it didn't make any sense (to myself).

Again such classification does not exist in other countries except USA and forcing it upon NATO, but no one else classifies rifles in such catagories and that was the entire point of my first part that if you really go for such calibre then this already existed with 7.62x39mm for Assault Rifle/DMR/Sniper Rifle and LMG.

The term "DMR" came about due to a lack of understanding about sniping, sniper tactics, and sniper rifles by the "creators" of this term.

To just touch upon the subject, I should say that sniping is more about sniper tactics than sniper rifles, and it is this fact that makes SVD a better sniper rifle than even the SVDK.

Mike E wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

Mike E wrote:
DMR = any small caliber rifle that sits between an assault rifle and *actual* sniper rifle. - Can your clear up the rest of the first part? I'm sorry, but it didn't make any sense (to myself).

Again such classification does not exist in other countries except USA and forcing it upon NATO, but no one else classifies rifles in such catagories and that was the entire point of my first part that if you really go for such calibre then this already existed with 7.62x39mm for Assault Rifle/DMR/Sniper Rifle and LMG.

The term "DMR" came about due to a lack of understanding about sniping, sniper tactics, and sniper rifles by the "creators" of this term.

To just touch upon the subject, I should say that sniping is more about sniper tactics than sniper rifles, and it is this fact that makes SVD a better sniper rifle than even the SVDK.

Agreed, but it is convenient to use. 

DMR =/= Sniper - DMR = longer range semi-auto assault rifle

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Mike E wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

Mike E wrote:
DMR = any small caliber rifle that sits between an assault rifle and *actual* sniper rifle. - Can your clear up the rest of the first part? I'm sorry, but it didn't make any sense (to myself).

Again such classification does not exist in other countries except USA and forcing it upon NATO, but no one else classifies rifles in such catagories and that was the entire point of my first part that if you really go for such calibre then this already existed with 7.62x39mm for Assault Rifle/DMR/Sniper Rifle and LMG.

The term "DMR" came about due to a lack of understanding about sniping, sniper tactics, and sniper rifles by the "creators" of this term.

To just touch upon the subject, I should say that sniping is more about sniper tactics than sniper rifles, and it is this fact that makes SVD a better sniper rifle than even the SVDK.

Agreed, but it is convenient to use. 

DMR =/= Sniper - DMR = longer range semi-auto assault rifle

Obviously my two-liner wasn't enough to clarify the point; so here's some clarification.

* An assault rifle has to have full-auto capability; this is extremely fundamental.

* SVD is a sniper rifle; actually it is the epitome of sniper rifle conception and design.

* ORSIS T-5000 is not a sniper rifle, according to the scientific discipline that covers this subject. T-5000 is a specialized rifle for some limited special tasks.

* PTRD, PTRS, and ... are not sniper rifles either.

* Russians don't use any form of "DMR".

* Going through a description of actual tactics used by snipers like Vasilij Zajtsev or Lyudmila Pavlichenko clarifies why snipers use SVDs, and not weapons like T-5000 and PTRS. The reason includes the massive agility and mobility that a sniper requires.

The classification, sure, but the idea (?), no... I'd almost be willing to say that the SVD is a large-caliber DMR kind of rifle. - It doesn't really sacrifice practicality for accuracy, much like a DMR. - I've been implying that the 7.62 isn't as good as the 6.5 at those roles... At short-range (assault rifles), the Grendel is more powerful, when it comes to machine-guns; it has less recoil making it more suitable for unmounted firing, and for large rifles; it is much more accurate at all ranges and carries more energy.

Have you been reading my replys? The Grendel isn't meant to completely replace the larger calibers, just supplement them... It carries energy better at range than the 7.62x54, thanks to the 6.5 mm bullet. It's a rather powerful round, more so than the AK round. - That plus great energy and velocity retention and it should be rather close to the 7.62x54 at long ranges. To be honest, when it comes to sniper rifles, the x54 isn't really that great anyway. For trying to stretch out, one would need a 338 etc. It is very close in power to the x54, so there's that...

Once again, I can't really see what you are getting at...

Hardly, true, but not so when considering when it is a smaller round with considerably less recoil... I never said it should replace those rounds. but it should replace the 5.x rounds without question. 6.x rounds have the best ballistic properties, that is something you should agree with...

Werewolf wrote:

The classification, sure, but the idea (?), no... I'd almost be willing to say that the SVD is a large-caliber DMR kind of rifle. - It doesn't really sacrifice practicality for accuracy, much like a DMR. - I've been implying that the 7.62 isn't as good as the 6.5 at those roles... At short-range (assault rifles), the Grendel is more powerful, when it comes to machine-guns; it has less recoil making it more suitable for unmounted firing, and for large rifles; it is much more accurate at all ranges and carries more energy.

That is wrong. 6.5x39mm you don't need to be an expert to understand that this is BS.
The 6.5x39mm does not carry more energy, or fly further and sustain high power over distance nor is it as accurate as 7.62x54mmR for Machinegun or Sniper Rifle purposes, the 7.62x54mmR from different versions has around 60-70% higher energy (joules) of almost up to 3.8k joules compared to 2.3k joules with Grendel.

Have you been reading my replys? The Grendel isn't meant to completely replace the larger calibers, just supplement them... It carries energy better at range than the 7.62x54, thanks to the 6.5 mm bullet. It's a rather powerful round, more so than the AK round. - That plus great energy and velocity retention and it should be rather close to the 7.62x54 at long ranges. To be honest, when it comes to sniper rifles, the x54 isn't really that great anyway. For trying to stretch out, one would need a 338 etc. It is very close in power to the x54, so there's that...

I've been reading your replies and again there is a very good reason why we are not unifying to one single round specifically for such vital parts of small arms like sniper rifles that need to be effective and using some small calbire that will be absolutley ineffecient as a sniper rifle calibre completley incapable to penetrate body armor or having even on blank flesh enough power on your emphasized ranges of 1000 yards, to be called an effective sniper rifle.

The 7.62x54mmR is the best 7.62mm round that is out there and it is great for its calibre it will carry far more joules than the little Grendl can achieve even at muzzle V0.
The Lapua .338 is far more powerful then 7.62x54mmR it has 6500 joules compared to 3800 joules for the best 7.62x54mmR round. The 9.3x64mm is comparable with .338 Lapua, it has roughly 6000 joules.

Once again, I can't really see what you are getting at...

Hardly, true, but not so when considering when it is a smaller round with considerably less recoil... I never said it should replace those rounds. but it should replace the 5.x rounds without question. 6.x rounds have the best ballistic properties, that is something you should agree with...

You want to say 6.5x39mm would be some great round to use on several weapon plattforms not only Assault Rifles but also Machineguns and Sniper rifles.

I say the 6.5x39mm would be great for Assault rifles but a downgrade for Machineguns and Sniper Rifles that is very easy what i am talking about.

Mike E wrote:
Werewolf, for crying out loud... The 6.x rounds have always carried energy better than other caliber-rounds. This is common knowledge, and proof is in the fact that most competition shooters shoot 6.x. The round itself should carry energy better because of this (aero-properties). The 7.62 will obviously fly further, but as I've said before, it won't replace that round... It will supplement it instead. I don't know how this is so hard for you to understand. From what I've seen, the energy difference is closer to 20-30%.

Werewolf wrote:

Mike E wrote:
Werewolf, for crying out loud... The 6.x rounds have always carried energy better than other caliber-rounds. This is common knowledge, and proof is in the fact that most competition shooters shoot 6.x. The round itself should carry energy better because of this (aero-properties). The 7.62 will obviously fly further, but as I've said before, it won't replace that round... It will supplement it instead. I don't know how this is so hard for you to understand. From what I've seen, the energy difference is closer to 20-30%.

What sportsmen shoot is completley irrelevant, war is not  a stupid shooting range where people start bitching around when the sun shines to bright or little bit of wind here and there, it absolutley does not matter.
Sports have nothing to do with war period.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:* In comparison to rounds used by Russians, its not a good military round at all; this was related to the main result of my analysis.

As it will be for any bullet, especially one that has as little powder as a small rifle cartridge.

The idea is that the Grendel is extremely *flexible*, and with modular rifle set ups, it could go from DMR to assault rifle to actual sniper rifle etc. It would also be a great round for "special forces" because of that.

GarryB, you of all people should know that armed forces are moving to modular, caliber-switching rifles increasingly more often.

Obviously! A piston round cannot reach those ranges, and won't be able to unless you stuff a friggin' pound of grain in the casing! They have terrible aerodynamic-properties, becuase they are built for close-quarters shooting!

Those who need it... Oh, I don't know, maybe a DMR or sniper?

You still don't understand? The idea is that it is an extremely flexible round, and even at shorter ranges it will be more accurate and powerful than a 5.56 or 7.62.

That is complete bull GarryB, and you should know it... All it takes is a few minutes of research, and one could find that 6.x rounds are the most accurate naturally, hence their wide-spread use in competition! This is what the pros use for reference;

What cost? All they have to do, is slowly move from their current calibers to the Grendel, it really doesn't get much easier or cheaper! Rifles can easily be chambered for the Grendel.

Don't forget that most DMR's are based off of assault rifles and their round, so a shared accurate round between an AR/AK/whatever and a DMR is a big advantage.

The 5.56 (223) has the same problem, except that it has a more aerodynamic bullet.

DMR = any small caliber rifle that sits between an assault rifle and *actual* sniper rifle. - Can your clear up the rest of the first part? I'm sorry, but it didn't make any sense (to myself).

Plus the Grendel is more powerful. - 300 meters is great, the ability to hit a thousand is even better...

he Grendel could easily replace the 7.62/5.56 and 7.62x54/308 in one cartridge. It combines the power of the AK round, the velocity of 5.56, the long-distance range of the 7.62, and accuracy of any 6.5 round (almost*).

hen this already existed with 7.62x39mm for Assault Rifle/DMR/Sniper Rifle and LMG.

Going with 6.5mm over 5.56 on Assault Rifles is a good idea, going with 6.5mm over 7.62x51mm for Sniper Rifles is a stupid idea.

To be honest, when it comes to sniper rifles, the x54 isn't really that great anyway.

For trying to stretch out, one would need a 338 etc.

* Also agreed, but I meant that it doesn't really sacrifice much for accuracy like a traditional sniper rifle. - As in, it is a flexible semi-auto design, much like a medium-range rifle (I'll call it that for your sake).

* They are technically anti-material rifles.

The Grendel (or similar) should replace current assault rifle rounds.

It has everything to do with a bullets performance, which is what we've been talking about this whole time.

Compared to the 5.45, the Grendel has way more power, is more accurate, and doesn't add much recoil...

Roughly translation from Vietnamese Wikipedia wrote:
Predeccessor of 7.62mm M-43 bullet part 1: shortcomings of traditional rifles and submachine guns

The traditional battle rifles like Russian 7.62x54 mmR or German 7.92x57 mm Mauser were not very suitable for combat at that time. The problem is that the guns used that ammo had a damn high recoil, which negatively affect the accuracy, and not suitable for people who are not strong enough to hold the gun. 7.62mm traditional rifles had an excellent range and penetration power, however the range of 1,500-2,000 metres was abundant since a human can only aim at maximum 700 metre without telescope. And with the slow rate of fire and limited ammo capacity, both bolt-action or semi-automatic rifle cannot generate enough "assault" capability for the soldiers to attack into heavily fortifield and complex trenches armed with machine guns.

The submachine gun and machine pistol have great "assault" capability and great capacity of ammo, but they use pistol bullet with short range, low accuracy, and weak penetration power. Even the PPSh with 7.62x25 mmTT did not satisfy the need of power for Russia.

Predeccessor of 7.62mm M-43 bullet part 2: The Fedorov Avtomat

Fedorov Avtomat was one of the first full automatic rifles, and it is one of the model which laid the foundation of modern 7.62mm M-43 and the idea of assault rifle. The Fedorov used a new kind of ammo: 6,5x50 mmSR, which provide lower recoil but still maintain good practical range and penetration power. The lower recoil enabled the soldier to fire and a much higher rate, and the good range and power was much better than the submachine guns. In short, this can be seen as the first assault rifle: good power, good range, and good fire rate.

Reports from the battlefield testified the effectiveness of the gun and the idea of Fedorov. Unluckily, the old Russian Empire and newly formed USSR did not have enough financial and technological level to massively and rapidly replace all the old guns with Fedorov Avtomat and the 6.5mm bullet. The development of Fedorov Avtomat was tragically stopped and in 2 decades later, Russia continued to use the Mosin-Nagant with traditional 7.62x54 mmR.

Huy Phúc commented that the reason why Fedorov Avtomat failed was not because it was no good. The Fedorov gun was very good. But it was too novel. The 6.5mm caliber of Fedorov was too novel and conservativeness of people has killed it.

That was the same reason why TKB-408 and TKB-022 were defeated by AK-47 and AKM. The TKBs had many good advantages, but the bullpup idea was damn novel at that time. (GarryB once said that the Soviet weapon designers used to be quite conservative, is this relevant in this case ?)

Development of the 7.62x39mm ammo, 1942-1961

Nonetheless, the existence of 6.5mm Fedorov Avtomat inserted the very first idea of "assault rifle" into Russian weapon designer. From the experience of Fedorov Avtomat and other battlefield experience, Russia began to know what they need in an assault rifle and its ammo: good accuracy in the visible range of a normal human, low recoil and good fire-rate, has multiple firing mode, can have large amount of ammo, low cost, and can be used even in terrible conditions.

In 1943, the USSR created the 7.62x41mm M43, a mitigation between 6.5mm Fedorov and the traditional 7.62x54mmR. The power and range of M-43 is lower than traditional 7.62, but many times better than pistols and submachine guns. The bullet is designed to mitigate the shortcomings of rifle bullets (unneccessary long range, high recoil, low fire-rate, low ammo capacity) and submachine gun (low accuracy, low power, short range). The USSR expected the bullet will be the standard for all firearms of the soldiers.

Simonov CKC was one of the first one used 7.62x41mm, which produced good results, and it gradually replaced the old rifles after 1945. Later the TKBs and AKs also used the new kind of ammo. In 1949, the M-43 ammo was modified to be the current 7,62x39mm which had better quality.

The USSR began to applied many kinds of weapon combination using both the old and new ammo. First was CKC-RP46-PPSh, but was quickly abandoned due to the overcomplexity in kinds of ammo. It was replaced by CKC-RPD, all used the same M-43, and in 1949 was the AK-RPD. But both AK and RPD do not have long-range capability of CKC, therefore in 1961, Kalashinkov intoduced RPK which replaced the RPD. This became a perfect weapon combination in the Red Army.

7.62x39 mm M43 was gradually replaced by the 5,45x39mm M74 of the AK-74. The M74 is smaller therefore it has lower gunpowder, and weaker penetration power. But small bullets means the soldier can carry more. Both M43 and M74 have its own pros and cons, and therefore no one can replaced each other. Russia uses both kinds of ammo, and the M43 is still used in many countries.

Roughly translation from Vietnamese Wikipedia wrote:
Trajectory

Initial trajetory

Assault rifles mean the soldier can open fire when he is still moving. Therefore, the maximum kinetic energy of the ammo was restricted at 2000 J to provide low recoil.

The other problem is the weight, shape, rotating rate and muzzle velocity. Any mistakes can create a failure, just as the German 7,62x33 mm Pistolepatrone 43.

The 7,62x39 mm has its best capability if the kinetic energy is a bit higher than 2000J for the barrel length of 400-600mm. The highest pressure in such barrel length should be 355,00 MPa. Therefor the USSR created a new kind of two-part gunpowder for the M43: the fast-firing part of powder quickly increase the pressure inside the barrel, and the slow-firing part maintain the velocity of 700m/s at 400mm and 755m/s at 600mm. The pressure then decreases, but very slow as the gunpowder has not been used up yet. The pressure slowly decreases an after a time, it becomes too weak and the bullet continues to fly merely on inertia.

The very slow decrease of pressure is very important for gas-operated gun like AK. First, it is neccessary to know that if the pistol of the  reloading device is too heavy, the revert air pressure is not enough to fully push it back and the reload device cannot function. If the piston is too light, it will be pushed back very fast and cause the drainage of the air, which negatively affect the force upon the bullet.

The very slow decrease of pressure of M43 is good for AK. Even when the bullet has escaped the gun, the air pressure inside the gun is still very high and still decreases very slowly. This fact maintaing a good push into the reloading machine, its piston go back and bounce back foward very fast. For the long-stroke piston system like in AKs, the pistol is pushed back right at the time when the bullet just has escaped the gun, therefore it maintains the high pushing force upon the bullet and make good use of the remaining pressure which is still high and decreases very slowly. To maintain the force and pressure, the suitable barrel length for it should be 400-600mm (AK-47/AKM: 415 mm, RPK: 590 mm, SKS: 521 mm.

Ngoài ra, nòng thiết kế cho thuật phóng áp suất thấp mỏng hơn, nhẹ hơn, bền hơn nòng dành cho thuật phóng áp suất cao chuyên dùng cho súng ngắn và súng ngắn liên thanh nòng ngắn.

The rifles inside AK-47 and others do not generate a very strong rotation, because the AK-47 is designed to have the range of 300-400 m, and the RPK is 600 m. Rotaiting rate of the bullet is 1:9,45 with the average pitch is 240 mm, this is good for the barrel, and makes sure the bullet is not broken apart if the target is too tough.

Intermediate trajectory

There is two issues of the M43's Intermediate trajectory: accurate range and killing range, both create effective range. According to the Soviet doctrine, accurate range of assault guns is 300m, of non-scattered-shot-machine-gun is 600m (súng máy chụm loạt, that means the shot and bullets is not scattered very much, do not know how to say it in English), and killing range should be 600m. The killing range of M43 is more than enough (1000m) therefore the remaining problem is accuracy. Bullet which is faster and better rotation will have better trajectory and can scatter the air resistance.

M43 used the effect "prop onto the sharp point" (chống trên mũi nhọn) of Russian and German ammo. The warhead has soft copper cover and hard iron core, gravity center is at the posterior part, this generated an aerodynamic pointed anterior part. When the warhead is flying, the soft and lightweight anterior push the aerodynamic centre foward. This "chống trên mũi nhọn" bullet require low-medium rotation rate. If the rotation rate is too high, the effect vanishes and the axis of warhead is fixed, cause more scattering (which scattering ? I do not know.). Therefore the AK-47 barrel cannot have too many rifles, but it cannot have too few either because too few rifles will stripped off the warhead cover. Therefore the AK-47 barrel has 4 rifles positioned in a skewed triangle.

The anterior point of M43 is a bit blunted, therefore the air hit against it and rebounce will not reach the posterior part of the warhead. In other words, the posterior part of the warhead cannot have contact with air, i.e. it always stays in a vacuum space. In other words, most parts of the warhead do not make contact with the air, and only the anterior point prop against the air in front of it. This significantly reduces the air resistance. The mid-low rotating rate makes the bullet become a gyroscope in the middle air, it does not have a fixed axis but the axis constantly moves around a center area, which reduces scattering.

M43 has low muzzle velocity therefore the heigh of trajectory is high, people also have more difficulties in managing the range, and less effectiveness in hiting moving target. These shortcomings are fixed in the 5,45x39 mm M74 which has high muzzle velocity.

The "prop onto the sharp point" effect enables the bullet to bend and reduce air resistance, reduce scattering. When the bullet reach 700m, scattering suddenly rise due to the reduced velocity with reduce the effect. Accuracy of M43 is best in 300-600m range, suits the theory of the Soviet doctrine.

Final trajectory

For target with tough surface, 7.62x39 mm M43 used the technology of AP ammo with high density core. The warhead has a soft cover but a very tough core, either steel or volfram aka tungsten. The gravity center is in the posterior part. Therefore, without the aerodynamic anterior, after escaping the barrel, the heavier posterior will go to the front.

The blunted anterior not only cause "prop onto the sharp point" effect, but also increase the stickyness of the bullet when it hits the target. The blunted anterior point helps increase the surface contact. The soft anterior then deforms, and this further increase the stickiness. Meanwhile, the hard core behind continues to move foward since the soft cover cannot stop it. The core possesses most of the warhead's weight, therefore it is very heavy and has large kinetic energy, which generates great penetration power. The very high density core prevents it from deforming and therefore, maintains the penetrating capability.

Mike E wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:* In comparison to rounds used by Russians, its not a good military round at all; this was related to the main result of my analysis.

What do you base that off of?

Mike E wrote:Compared to the 5.45, the Grendel has way more power...

Mike E wrote:..., is more accurate ...

Mike E wrote:..., and doesn't add much recoil ...

Mike E wrote:This argument is getting tiring, clearly I'm the outlier here.

The Fedorov used a new kind of ammo: 6,5x50 mmSR, which provide lower recoil but still maintain good practical range and penetration power.

Reports from the battlefield testified the effectiveness of the gun and the idea of Fedorov. Unluckily, the old Russian Empire and newly formed USSR did not have enough financial and technological level to massively and rapidly replace all the old guns with Fedorov Avtomat and the 6.5mm bullet.

The 6.5mm caliber of Fedorov was too novel and conservativeness of people has killed it.

(GarryB once said that the Soviet weapon designers used to be quite conservative, is this relevant in this case ?)

Simonov CKC was one of the first one

used 7.62x41mm, which produced good results, and it gradually replaced the old rifles after 1945.

Later the TKBs and AKs also used the new kind of ammo. In 1949, the M-43 ammo was modified to be the current 7,62x39mm which had better quality.

Russia uses both kinds of ammo, and the M43 is still used in many countries.

(which scattering ? I do not know.).

GarryB wrote:The Russians have standardised on the 5.45... they will likely remove all 7.62 x 39mm from service when they adopt a new weapon. In the situations where they currently use 7.62 x 39mm I suspect they might replace it with 9 x 39mm.

higurashihougi wrote:

GarryB wrote:The Russians have standardised on the 5.45... they will likely remove all 7.62 x 39mm from service when they adopt a new weapon. In the situations where they currently use 7.62 x 39mm I suspect they might replace it with 9 x 39mm.

@Garry, Werewolf: May I ask who is the "genius" who want to use a 6.5mm intermediate cartridge for sniper rifle and machine gun ???

Werewolf wrote:Or Russia could just use its 9.3x64mm like for SVD-K and modify it for a longer slimmer but still heavy bullet that would improve long range capability and it would sustain over long ranges enough energy to be equal or more similiar in power of .338 Lapua rounds, than in its current power. No need to buy foreign rounds when it already has the basis for such rounds, not like .338 Lapua rounds to be old they are also just a rather "recent" invented round.

Mike E wrote: - Maybe this thread should be called "different ammunition" or something like that. This thread has become somewhat off-topic from the title, and the current topics are worth continuing sooo....

Mike E wrote:The SVD-K didn't really have a far range of fire, but an updated round + design might help that out.

higurashihougi wrote:

Mike E wrote: - Maybe this thread should be called "different ammunition" or something like that. This thread has become somewhat off-topic from the title, and the current topics are worth continuing sooo....

I agree. The topic should be change so that we can discuss a wider variation of ammo.

Mike E wrote:The SVD-K didn't really have a far range of fire, but an updated round + design might help that out.

What about the SV-98 ?