AK-12 Rifle Discussion

They've done tests over the years and concluded that the 5.45x39 doesn't do any unusual damage to tissue compared to other rifle bullets. I suspect the Afgans didn't have proper medical treatment so the bullets were "poison" to them.

Tests done in the west show tissue damage comparable to the 5.56mm round without fragmentation. The 5.45mm round tends to tumble on impact which means large wound channel and also a tendency for the round to change path up to 90 degrees in soft tissue... which led to bullets exiting from places that were hard to find because they were not lined up with the entry wound.

Rumours of the poison bullet were perfectly justified despite poor medical support in afghanistan.

In fact the 5.45mm round was so successful with its hollow tip and rear heavy design the current NATO 5.56mm round has a steel tip and a lead rear to make the round rear heavy to achieve the same effect on target. The 5.45mm round retains it shape and is not a soft nose or open hollow tip round in the conventional sense. The purpose of the hollow tip is merely to move the centre of gravity back so that when it impacts something it will naturally tumble.

Would suggest you look up the work done by Dr. Flacker in that regard.

I believe corruption in the Russian military is one reason why a lot of arms ended in Chechen hands.

Most of the arms in Chechen hands was taken directly from Soviet weapon stores on Chechen territory. Corruption had little to do with most of the equipment they had... it would be like a US state wanting to withdraw from the US, depending on the state there will be lots of military bases and weapon storage facilities within that state they could take over and use. Nothing at all to do with corruption.

AFAIK the newer 5.45mm rounds are designed to be more stable to improve their penetration and slightly heavier to improve their effective range and accuracy.

One of the biggest problems with the small calibre ammo is that it is fairly easily deflected.

Original full rez. version: http://www.izhmash.ru/pix/news/ak-12_mil.jpg

The more I see it the more I like it.

This is a good start with the drum and under barrel grenade launcher, but I would add a day scope and a night scope in tandem and probably a rifle grenade to the muzzle just to make it look even cooler...

There is a bump on the buttstock that matches the circle thing in front of the oval dimple above the mag well, which makes me think that is not for the bolt release.

The button on the mag release is clearly visible but it gives no clue to how it functions as a bolt hold open device... manual or automatic... special mags or standard mags.

TheArmenian wrote:I came accross no such figures.
With a population less than half that of the gun-happy USA, the Russian civilian market is definitly smaller. However, gun ownership in Russia and the ex-Soviet countries is common.

With vast wild expenses, hunting and sports shooting is wildely practiced in Russia (even duiring Soviet times). Generally speaking, east of the Ural Mountain chain is rifle territory, while west of the Urals is mostly shotgun dominated.

Russian gun laws are not as relaxed as the USA but not as restrictive a s say Australia. Basically:

- Pistols and full automatic firearms are prohibited.
- You can have a maximum of 5 firearms (unless you are registered as a gun collector).
- One must have posessed a shotgun for 5 years before being allowed to own a rifle.

Almost no restrictions on action type, pistol grip, folding stock etc.
Traumatic pistols (e.g. a converted Makarov pistol that shoots rubber bullets)for self protection are allowed and popular.

Well thats a LOT better than bulgarian and EU gun laws, here to own a rifle or shotgun its mandatory you join a hunting club(should I even mention you have no right to own a high powered firearm unless youre a hunter, buying for collecting or sport shooting is virtually impossible)and that means you have to constantly devote your life to caring for the game not to mention you can only go hunting in preplanned groups, no individualism.

As for pistols theyre illegal to have unless you have a profession that demands them(policeman, bodygaurd, etc.)

I wonder if having the 3 round burst option in addition to fully automatic increases complexity? Perhaps they should have two versions of the AK-12, one with fully automatic and the other with the 3 or 2 round burst.

The Russians have always been trying to make a rifle with very accurate and controllable bursts of fire with their AN-94 and balanced recoil systems like the AK-107. The problem with most conventional assault rifles being used is that they have too much muzzle climb and recoil to be truly effective in fully automatic or burst fire. Another interesting thing is the progressive trigger system of the Steyr AUG. Pulling it half way produces semi auto fire where pulling it all the way gives you full auto. Perhaps a system like this using a three round or full auto could be used in the AK-12.

To achieve a 3 round burst it likely includes a shot counter, so that after the first three shots the hammer is held back till it is released.

On an AK the bolt carrier is a very large piece of steel that includes the pistol rod and bolt carrier.

When firing an AK that large lump of steel cycles back and forth and because of its mass it rocks the rifle back and forth as it moves.

This is largely what makes the AK move around more during firing than other weapons, but it is also the ratio of the large mass of the bolt carrier over the mass of the bolt that gives it its reliability, because no matter how dirty the weapon is the bolt carrier always has a lot of energy because of its mass.

With an AK cocked and loaded the hammer is held back by a hook called a sear. When you pull the trigger the sear is moved and the hammer is released and it goes up and hits the firing pin which hits the primer and fills the shell case of the loaded cartridge with flames, which ignites the main powder charge that blows the projectile down the barrel. That force directed down the barrel has an equal and opposite force that goes back toward the shooter but the bolt is locked in place and cannot move. When the bullet is approaching the muzzle of the barrel it passes a small hole in the top of the barrel that leads to the rifles gas system. The gas pushing the bullet is vented up through the gas hole and hits the face of the piston rod, which pushes it backwards. As it moves backwards a spiral rail turns the bolt and unlocks it so now the bolt carrier and the bolt start moving backwards dragging the empty shell our of the chamber (the bullet has left the muzzle and the pressure has dropped enough so the steel case of the cartridge is no longer pressed hard against the chamber walls. The empty cartrige case is flicked out and the bolt and bolt carrier rides over the magazine and cocks the hammer. Once it has gone as far back as it can the main spring pushes it forward again and is scoops up the next round from the top of the magzine (which is pushed up by the magazine spring). Now if the gun is set to single shot the auxiliary sear holds the hammer and the bolt and bolt carrier slam forward chambering the round and locking the bolt, ready for the shooter to release the trigger so the hammer will slip off the auxiliary sear and onto the main sear, so to fire the weapon again you have to pull the trigger again.
For full auto the auxiliary sear is blocked so the hammer goes up as the bolt closes and bang.

For three round burst you could simply use a ratchet mechanism that allows the weapon to fire three times before the auxiliary sear is released to stop the gun firing.

Shouldn't be that hard or that complicated.
The problem with having a rifle that allows a light pull to fire a single shot and a harder pull to fire bursts is that when surprised you might fire a burst.

I think the thumb selector is best as the shooter can decide with the flip of a thumb whether to fire a single shot, a three round burst or full auto.

I like the fact that he can put the weapon on safe and still take a round out of the chamber or put one in.

The safety and fire selector are separate on the AK-12 which could lead to additional complexity. I don't mind additional complexity on the AK-12 as long as it doesn't give it any chance to fail. I'm no firearms engineer, but I think even 1 little ratchet spring could cause problems. Even if the chance of it breaking is extremely remote, it still can break and possibly cause the weapon to fail.

Yes, the large reciprocating mass does allow the rifle to move around quite a bit. Another reason is the AK uses a lot more gas pressure than what's needed to cycle the rifle. A gas regulator would add complexity and perhaps the chance of it seizing,breaking, or being assembled incorrectly.

Yeah, a progressive trigger may not be such a good idea.

The AK-12 is going to undergo reliability tests in adverse conditions in November, so we'll see if it matches the reliability of the AK-74M.

The safety and fire selector are separate on the AK-12

No, they are not.

On the AK12 there is a thumb operated switch that can be set to one of four positions including safe, single shot, three round burst, and full auto.

It is duplicated on both sides of the receiver so you can use either thumb whether you fire left or right handed.

If the shot counter mechanism fails the operator can always move the selector to single shot or full auto... the weapon should still fire.

GarryB wrote:

The safety and fire selector are separate on the AK-12

No, they are not.

On the AK12 there is a thumb operated switch that can be set to one of four positions including safe, single shot, three round burst, and full auto.

It is duplicated on both sides of the receiver so you can use either thumb whether you fire left or right handed.

If the shot counter mechanism fails the operator can always move the selector to single shot or full auto... the weapon should still fire.

I think you're right. I'm little bit confused about the selector switch and safety on the AK being combined. How does it work?

Technically they are the same except the old selector was a horizontal bar that also covered the slot in the receiver where the cocking handle moved back and forth through during firing. When set to safe the bar blocked entry for dirt and sand, but the new AK12 doesn't have an open slot in the side of the receiver.

The selector is moved to above the pistol grip and combines the safety with the fire selector.

This means that the cocking handle can be operated and rounds removed from the chamber even with the safety set on safe, which is an improvement.

If they can make the AK-12 fire 7,62x51 then can they make it 7,62x54? Would give some power advantage in expense of magazine capacity.

I hope some western militaries like, say Norway or Holland might buy a batch of 7,62x51mm AK-12s.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:If they can make the AK-12 fire 7,62x51 then can they make it 7,62x54? Would give some power advantage in expense of magazine capacity.

I hope some western militaries like, say Norway or Holland might buy a batch of 7,62x51mm AK-12s.

Norway already has HK417's. The Netherlands uses some HK417's also I believe. A 7.62x54R doesn't really have any advantage over a .308, a rimmed cartridge is arguably less suitable for an autoloader. I dont see why they couldn't make a 54R AK-12.

If they can make the AK-12 fire 7,62x51 then can they make it 7,62x54? Would give some power advantage in expense of magazine capacity.

It would give them a significant power and range increase at the expense of weight and capacity.

Compared with the AK12 in 5.45 x 39mm the 7.62 x 54Rmm will likely increase effective range from perhaps 300-400m out to 600-700m, though it would mean less ammo.

In mountains where you can often see further than you can shoot with an assault rifle calibre weapon, or in flat open terrain like desert or steppe then the larger rifle would be much more useful.

For most normal use however the 5.45mm is an effective round for ranges at which most normal combat occurs.

Norway already has HK417's. The Netherlands uses some HK417's also I believe. A 7.62x54R doesn't really have any advantage over a .308, a rimmed cartridge is arguably less suitable for an autoloader. I dont see why they couldn't make a 54R AK-12.

In terms of performance the 54R and 51 are pretty similar, the Russians already use 54R in MGs and sniper rifles so it is the natural choice, while the Dutch and Norway use NATO standard 51 so their natural choice would be that calibre.

I would think norway and Holland would never consider buying Russian rifles, but former eastern european states might consider it, like Slovakia or the Czech republic, or perhaps Hungary or Bulgaria might consider buying or perhaps even licence producing AK12s in 5.56mm NATO and 7.62 x 51mm NATO calibres.

They would appear to be getting an excellent rifle in useful calibres to them, with the AK12 in 7.62 x 51mm being used as a designated marksman rifle like the SVD, only rather cheaper.

They would also likely find the compatibility with 22mm standard NATO rifle grenades would be handy as well.

We already produce the best Ak-74s variants in the world(perhaps the only thing our military can be proud of these days) and besides our armed forces are getting smaller by the day and we woulddnt have enough money. Hungary seems more plausible.

GarryB wrote:Slovakia or the Czech republic, or perhaps Hungary or Bulgaria might consider buying .

Not a chance. Buying weapons is all about politics, it has nothing to do with performance.
In swedish military, the Kalashnikov has always been considered as the best assault rifle, and seen upon with awe and envy. But for political reasons we have bought from Germany and Netherlands, AK4(G3) and AK5(FN FNC).

Izmash is in a very tough for place getting customers. Part of it is due to circumstance, and part of it is their own doing perhaps. Having to compete in a capitalist economy and the fall of the USSR made things very difficult for them. Another reason they are not doing so well is that the USSR gave AK rifles,license and machinery, so freely to other countries. This created less demand for their AK-100's series when customers could buy cheaper (cheaper in cost,not necessarily in quality) from other countries like Bulgaria and China. Another reason is Izmash has been very slow to upgrade the AK. The type of upgrades they are doing to the AK now should have been done 10 years ago.

The Czechs already have their own very well respected weapons industry. I don't they would be caught dead ever buying Russian weapons. The Bulgarians also have their own industry. I don't think the Hungarians would ever buy Russians weapon either.

I was thinking, couldn't they make an AK-12 sniper variant in 5.45x39? The 5.45x39 can go up to a 80 gr bullet, which is something the 5.56x45 can't do, unless you like feeding one round in the chamber at a time.

Not a chance. Buying weapons is all about politics, it has nothing to do with performance.

Politics is a very influential factor in weapons, but the current economic situation can lead to interesting results.

20 years ago if you had said Greece would buy weapons from Russia most people would have laughed in your face.

Licence production of a very capable rifle is an option, I mean lets face it... if you are going to buy a foreign rifle, then why not do a real test and find the best.

The Russians went through the same process a while back where suddenly the Soviet Union no longer existed. If you are going to buy night vision equipment from what is now a foreign country why not open it up to any foreign country and greatly expand your options to the latest and best systems. The result was that France won and Russian forces are getting modern capable thermal sights produced in Russia.

There is little reason for the reverse to not be true... the NATO standard has always been fairly loose... the SA-80 and the FA MAS and the M4 have little in common except calibre of the ammo it fires and there are even variations there.

In swedish military, the Kalashnikov has always been considered as the best assault rifle, and seen upon with awe and envy. But for political reasons we have bought from Germany and Netherlands, AK4(G3) and AK5(FN FNC).

Looking at the video showing the AK12 cooled to minus 51 degrees C and still firing suggests to me that an AK12 in 5.56mm and in 7.62 x 51mm would be ideal for Sweden and several other NATO countries. Licence production means spending money on local infrastructure with potential for further upgrades and changes to suit your needs... perhaps a heavier barrel, or perhaps longer or shorter barrel options etc etc.

The Czechs already have their own very well respected weapons industry. I don't they would be caught dead ever buying Russian weapons. The Bulgarians also have their own industry. I don't think the Hungarians would ever buy Russians weapon either.

And ego stopped the Germans from directly copying the T-34 so the result was about 6,000 Panthers produced during WWII compared with ten times that number of T-34s built.

The Russians used to be as closed minded as the Europeans and would not consider foreign weapons, but their situation forced them to reconsider. There is probably no similar reason for NATO counties to consider large scale purchases of Russian weapons or licence production of Russian weapons, except reciprocal purchases like the French buying Russian laser guided artillery rounds and Greece buying air defence vehicles.

Of course I am suggesting what they should be doing... not what they will likely do.

BTW Izhmash was mismanaged, and is economically in a fairly good position now, and its future is likely pretty secure. Now that they are in the WTO Russian companies can challenge US laws regarding Russian weapon imports to the US as illegal under WTO rules.

BTW2 most of the illegal copies of the AK design were just that... illegal. Izhmash has spent a bit of time chasing up the main offenders, but it is an ongoing process.

I was thinking, couldn't they make an AK-12 sniper variant in 5.45x39? The 5.45x39 can go up to a 80 gr bullet, which is something the 5.56x45 can't do, unless you like feeding one round in the chamber at a time.

The current 5.45mm round with an 80 grain bullet is a subsonic round. The main advantage of the 5.45mm round over the 5.56mm is that because it uses steel cores the bullets tend to be larger, which in a smaller calibre result in longer bullets with a better aerodynamic shape. With more powerful powders it is possible that new rounds could be produced with 80 grain bullets with much higher velocities. I remember an American M16 upper in 5.45mm calibre that was promoted as a countersniper option because of the effectiveness at longer ranges and with reduced recoil over standard 5.56mm rounds.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:We already produce the best Ak-74s variants in the world(perhaps the only thing our military can be proud of these days) and besides our armed forces are getting smaller by the day and we woulddnt have enough money. Hungary seems more plausible.

Well size isn`t everything these days, the Russian Armed Forces might shrink in sheer size but they will be more or lesss much more modern in terms of equipment such as the Armata Ak-12, Kugnets all those new corvettes frigattes and soon to be destroyers? as well as having more professional soldiers every year i belive, Russia can be proud that their military has been dragged out of the 90s as well as their economy.


And not enough money?, well im not entierly sure.


http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20121017/176690593.html


Im not sure if this is legitimate or not, pardon me for going slightly-off topic. :>

Increasing funding for the military is relevant to the thread... these new rifles will not be free, and of course their design that allows the attachment of optics means further costs too in terms of those optics.

More compact and better equipped forces make sense.

An east european purchase of AK12s would be a political thing most likely but I suspect if they have a small arms industry they would be locally produced rather than bought.

AK-12 Now On Trial at TsNIITochMash

New automatic AK-12 produced by "Izhmash" on Friday, November 2, was sent to the pre-test to the Central Scientific Research Institute of Precision Engineering (TSNIITOCHMASH). This RIA Novosti reported the press service of the company.

It was reported earlier that the test machine will start in November 2012, but the exact date is not called. In the tests, automatic check for frost and heat resistance, effectiveness in conditions of high humidity and dust, and after falling from a height of five feet.

(Google Translate)

Read the rest here:http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Flenta.ru%2Fnews%2F2012%2F11%2F02%2Fak12%2F

An English version of the article I posted earlier today.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20121102/177146369.html

The AK above is just a cosmetic change that would be the cheapest option.

The buttstock removed and replaced, the top cover and front hand grips removed and replaced... and that is pretty much all it is.

Cheap and easy but basically the same rifle that is able to have gadgets fitted easily plus a length adjustable stock.

In the AK12 range however you get the benefit of real changes with the addition of a three round burst capability the more important improvements include ambidextrous selector/safety, the ability to cycle the weapon with the safety on so you don't have to take off the safety to remove or insert a round into/from the chamber. The ability to swap the side for the cocking handle means no more reach overs to prepare the weapon. Improved accuracy with newer rifling design, fully closed receiver so less dirt gets into the mechanism, fully "railed", bolt hold open feature, ability to use standard NATO rifle grenades from the muzzle... all in a rifle not radically different from the original.

Here is a pick of the "russian calibre" AK family, with (from top to bottom) The AK12 rifle (AK-74M), Ak-12 Carbine (AK-105), AK12 short barrel (AKS-74U), AK12 rifle with under barrel grenade launcher (AK-74M w/GP30) and RPK12 LMG (RPK-74).

The AK-12 in theory would be a superior rifle if it keeps the same reliability. The Russian military doesn't seem to feel that it's worth the cost though, and they would just keep the old rifle and update it. I'm not sure which is the right move. It's always possible they might change their mind and adopt the AK-12, nothing is written in stone. As for the picture above, those variants are just photoshops of what proposed models they will make. I don't think being able to chamber a round with the safety on is that big of a deal, it's an improvement, but nothing special. I don't think an interchangable cocking handle is a necessary feature. When the soldier is in combat, the round is already chambered, and he'll use the bolt catch (assuming the AK-12 has a bolt catch) when he wants to reload. Malfunctions should be rare. While it might be rare, a bolt hold open does allow the chance of things getting in the chamber in extreme conditions. This is the reason why some rifles don't have a BHO. Instead of having an external bolt catch, they should just have where once a magazine is locked, the bolt should automatically go forward. To my knowledge, no military launches rifle grenades from the muzzle anymore. The Russians themselves stopped this practice, and so did the Americans. They use grenade launchers now.