Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
GarryB wrote:
Most of the reports I have read about the new model sing its praise, but then that is because it is being used by people who had to put up with the old model which was not good.
It is certainly very heavy and there is nothing ambidextrous about it so when shooting round the left side of cover you would have to expose your whole head and chest, whereas with a newer rifle like the ADS you could swap shoulders and just expose half your head and a shoulder.
It is certainly a much more compact weapon than an M16... it is the size of an M4 with an M16s barrel, which in combat is significant, and its optical sight should allow better use at extended ranges like 300-400m.
There certainly better rifles out there but currently it is good enough IMHO... the UK military is constantly underfunded and I don't think splurging on a new rifle now will happen any time soon.
+66
lancelot
Mir
Shaun901901
Broski
lyle6
Atmosphere
Flyboy77
kvs
Nibiru
ult
The-thing-next-door
Cheetah
Luq man
KiloGolf
miketheterrible
MMBR
A1RMAN
OminousSpudd
SeigSoloyvov
selion1
Acheron
Cyrus the great
zepia
KoTeMoRe
r111
Project Canada
Arctic_Fox
BKP
Captain Nemo
PapaDragon
alexZam
GunshipDemocracy
higurashihougi
type055
Strizh
Kimppis
nemrod
Vann7
George1
Cyberspec
Mike E
par far
im42
akd
fragmachine
Morpheus Eberhardt
magnumcromagnon
Asf
TR1
sepheronx
Regular
gaurav
Gunfighter-AK
Werewolf
collegeboy16
Zivo
Shadåw
runaway
KomissarBojanchev
flamming_python
SWAT Pointman
Mr.Kalishnikov47
Luzhin36
TheArmenian
GarryB
Austin
70 posters
AK-12 Rifle Discussion
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
Perhaps the L85A2 does get an undeserved bad rep. I've read that UK SF generally much prefer the C7/C8 rifle to it.GarryB wrote:Now that is some serious fault.
Short of actually testing it in the field... how would you anticipate such a problem...
It is the old design secret... make 100 of them and give them to the people that have to use them and let them use them for a month and then listen to what they have to say... and keep doing that till the serious problems are dealt with.
Sure it is a serious fault, but a ballistic knife, who wouldn't want that.
A computer programmer wouldn't call that a problem... they would call it an added feature and charge extra...
Wouldn't any weapon be improved with the warning label... too dangerous to use!
It is not like you are going to stab yourself by launching your bayonet with a live round...
Never fired an SA80, but some suggest it's still a sub par rifle even with the L85A2 upgrade. I imagine it's surpassed by newer bullpups. I wonder what Britain will replace their L85A2's with? It certainly wouldn't be an indigenous design I imagine.
Most of the reports I have read about the new model sing its praise, but then that is because it is being used by people who had to put up with the old model which was not good.
It is certainly very heavy and there is nothing ambidextrous about it so when shooting round the left side of cover you would have to expose your whole head and chest, whereas with a newer rifle like the ADS you could swap shoulders and just expose half your head and a shoulder.
It is certainly a much more compact weapon than an M16... it is the size of an M4 with an M16s barrel, which in combat is significant, and its optical sight should allow better use at extended ranges like 300-400m.
There certainly better rifles out there but currently it is good enough IMHO... the UK military is constantly underfunded and I don't think splurging on a new rifle now will happen any time soon.
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Well the M16 had a pretty rough start too if you remember.
The main problem with the SA-80 is that it was basically done on the cheap in a hurry.
The design is not new or unique... take it apart and it is actually an AR-18 design converted into the bullpup configuration.
Of course if that were totally true it should have been a better rifle, they made it of fairly flimsy materials despite its excessive weight.
It was a very good rifle at the rifle range however... nice and accurate and reliable if kept out of the mud and the rain.
The main problem with the SA-80 is that it was basically done on the cheap in a hurry.
The design is not new or unique... take it apart and it is actually an AR-18 design converted into the bullpup configuration.
Of course if that were totally true it should have been a better rifle, they made it of fairly flimsy materials despite its excessive weight.
It was a very good rifle at the rifle range however... nice and accurate and reliable if kept out of the mud and the rain.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
Hmm, all this talk about bullpups got me thinking, is there a bullpup version of the newer AK models. The Israeli Tavor has the same internal design as the AK so it shouldn't be that hard for the Russians to make a bullpup version that is as reliable as the AK itself.. I mean the current design is great as it is but for special forces guys it would be better. Also AFAIK current and next gen assault rifles are mostly bullpups which would be great in relatively low intensity conflicts.
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
GarryB wrote:
It was a very good rifle at the rifle range however... nice and accurate and reliable if kept out of the mud and the rain.
Well...here is the problem like everyone who served in military knows that you can't do that all the time and often you will need to get through mud and of course rain to avoid a march in the open field.All equipment has the unbeaten requirement that is has to be reliable and durable when it can't fit this requirements than rough said its useless.
I wasn't in any real battles but just to remember how demoralizing it was in 4 days exercise when you had for the first time contact and your rifle jammed after the first bullet and you were without any real cover on a road, i don't want to imagine how it is in the real situation.
And i took more than 1 minute to fix the problem.
On our G36 the little pin that ejects the case when the bolt is rotating isn't the most reliable and it didn't eject the case but tried to ram the next round into the chamber and both stuck so hard that needed to smash it with my knife out of the bolt.
In real battle i would be dead, like 80% of our comerades.
Reliability is the first requirement and this will never change.
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Hmm, all this talk about bullpups got me thinking, is there a bullpup version of the newer AK models.
You might want to read a little about the ADS...
http://world.guns.ru/assault/rus/ads-dvuhsredny-e.html
Can be fired left or right handed without adjustment (there is a tube that ejects the shell cases forward so they don't hit you in the face whether you fire left or right handed).
It can also fire underwater with special ammo.
[quote]On our G36 the little pin that ejects the case when the bolt is rotating isn't the most reliable and it didn't eject the case but tried to ram the next round into the chamber and both stuck so hard that needed to smash it with my knife out of the bolt.[//quote]
How ironic... I remember all through the 1980s the SA80 was the best weapon in the world, but in the early 1990s it went to desert storm and the problems were revealed... by the mid 1990s the G36 was new and exciting and many considered it was the best rifle in the world and that the British should junk their SA80s and just buy G36s.
Of course no rifle is perfect, but reliability should be at the top of the list in my book... doesn't matter how cheap it was, or how accurate if it doesn't go bang when you need it to.
BTW thanks for sharing your experience.
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
GarryB wrote:
How ironic... I remember all through the 1980s the SA80 was the best weapon in the world, but in the early 1990s it went to desert storm and the problems were revealed... by the mid 1990s the G36 was new and exciting and many considered it was the best rifle in the world and that the British should junk their SA80s and just buy G36s.
Of course no rifle is perfect, but reliability should be at the top of the list in my book... doesn't matter how cheap it was, or how accurate if it doesn't go bang when you need it to.
BTW thanks for sharing your experience.
You are welcome
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
I found this image. I'm pretty sure that it's a 7.62x39mm variant AK-12. But, just in case, what are the odds of it being a 5.45x39mm variant? From what I understand, all Russian attempts to simulate the above drum in 5.45mm were unsuccessful.
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
A link to an interview with the designer of the AK-12. http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://ria.ru/interview/20121210/914134553.html%3Fria%3Dqpg4r6afj4n9etqo0p6qghaburjatc7p&usg=ALkJrhgdukZA7BhLdM082caT6wbEefdCTA
There really isn't any new information. If the translation is correct, the AK-12 for the state tests is going to be a complete new design apparently from the one we are seeing now. Also, the designer alludes to that the 5.56x45 AK-12 might use NATO STANAG magazines.
There really isn't any new information. If the translation is correct, the AK-12 for the state tests is going to be a complete new design apparently from the one we are seeing now. Also, the designer alludes to that the 5.56x45 AK-12 might use NATO STANAG magazines.
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
Alright. Anybody know of any good field photos, or otherwise, of the 7.62x39mm AK-12? I know there's a few coming out of GunCo, but not exactly what I'm looking for.
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
There aren't any such photos yet unfortunately. They have yet to publically show off the 7.62x39 prototype.Gunfighter-AK wrote:Alright. Anybody know of any good field photos, or otherwise, of the 7.62x39mm AK-12? I know there's a few coming out of GunCo, but not exactly what I'm looking for.
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
SWAT Pointman wrote:There aren't any such photos yet unfortunately. They have yet to publically show off the 7.62x39 prototype.Gunfighter-AK wrote:Alright. Anybody know of any good field photos, or otherwise, of the 7.62x39mm AK-12? I know there's a few coming out of GunCo, but not exactly what I'm looking for.
Hm. Interesting. That's a shame. But, thanks for the information. I guess I'll keep watch here just in case there's anything. Cheers.
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I found this image. I'm pretty sure that it's a 7.62x39mm variant AK-12. But, just in case, what are the odds of it being a 5.45x39mm variant? From what I understand, all Russian attempts to simulate the above drum in 5.45mm were unsuccessful.
There is no great problem in designing a drum magazine, in 5.45mm or 7.62 x 39mm... they have done so in the past.
The problems in actually putting them into service include they are expensive, they are heavy, and of course they are noisy... they rattle. Another problem is that they generally don't fit well in standard webbing. Further problems include more maintainence than standard mags and lower feed reliability make them fairly unpopular.
The drum I have seen for the AK12 in 5.45mm calibre is quite different to the one shown above, basically it looks like the above mag rotated 90 degrees so it is flat and parallel with the barrel and with a short stick mag sticking out the top of it like a 5 round mag. When the 5 round mag projection is loaded into the mag well the maing body of the drum mag is horizontal and is actually shorter than the standard 30 round mag, yet holds 90 rounds.
It looks like this:
It's quite an interesting looking AK variant. I doubt it's an AK-12. I'm betting it's a modified AK-109 perhaps, or a modified AK-104. It's interesting they are still tinkering with the 7.62x39.
I think it is an AK-103 modification because the gas system doesn't look long enough for a balanced gas system. The visible controls appear to be standard AK-100 controls on the receiver, while the gas system is changed with the front iron sight moved.
It's interesting they are still tinkering with the 7.62x39.
Compared to modern wonder cartridges that are supposed to be ideal it would only take a very moderate increase in muzzle velocity to make the 7.62 x 39mm quite comparable in performance to a 303. A higher velocity will flatten its trajectory and shorten the period the round was subject to wind conditions, while the larger calibre allows more mass and velocity retention at the expense of drag. Of course the 7.62 x 39mm is not intended as a long range round so that is less important to the Russians as it seems to be to the US who seem to want sniper rifle performance from their assault rifles.
Regarding field shots of a 7.62 x 39mm AK12... sorry... wish I did.
Just these shots so far:
I would guess the new design with the iron sights on top of the gas system might be for special forces use where over barrel suppressors would work better with that layout. Perhaps it is an indication that these are the modular weapons that allow swapping calibres and barrel lengths?
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
GarryB wrote:I found this image. I'm pretty sure that it's a 7.62x39mm variant AK-12. But, just in case, what are the odds of it being a 5.45x39mm variant? From what I understand, all Russian attempts to simulate the above drum in 5.45mm were unsuccessful.
There is no great problem in designing a drum magazine, in 5.45mm or 7.62 x 39mm... they have done so in the past.
The problems in actually putting them into service include they are expensive, they are heavy, and of course they are noisy... they rattle. Another problem is that they generally don't fit well in standard webbing. Further problems include more maintainence than standard mags and lower feed reliability make them fairly unpopular.
The drum I have seen for the AK12 in 5.45mm calibre is quite different to the one shown above, basically it looks like the above mag rotated 90 degrees so it is flat and parallel with the barrel and with a short stick mag sticking out the top of it like a 5 round mag. When the 5 round mag projection is loaded into the mag well the maing body of the drum mag is horizontal and is actually shorter than the standard 30 round mag, yet holds 90 rounds.
It looks like this:
So, then, it would be safe to say that the model I showed off is, in fact, a 7.62x39mm variant of the AK-12?
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The one from the video?
Hard to say as there are a variety of features between all the different rifles and the one in the video had some but lacked others.
The curve of the mag confirms 7.62 x 39mm, while the muzzle and front iron sight suggests one of the latest AK12s shown above, but from the rear looking down the receiver it has the old AK-103 receiver with the old selector and mechanism and looking at the gas system I suspect it does not use the AK-107/108/109 balanced system.
I rather suspect this is intended as a cheapish upgrade option.
For the improved accuracy they will need new barrels/gas systems and new top rails for scopes.
I just hope they take the time to thoroughly test them all and think about performance rather than cheapest and easiest.
I think the AK12 should reduce the weight of the recoiling bolt carrier to the point where a complex balanced recoil mechanism is no longer needed.
For the average soldier I think the AK12 with the normal AK front iron sights and flash hider/muzzle brake should be ideal as long as its problems are dealt with.
For the special forces soldier I would think that a combination of the AK-107, but with the ergonomic controls of the AK12 and the new iron sights to allow over barrel suppressors to be fitted would be best... especially if it allowed the swapping out of barrels and calibres. Ideally what you would want is a domestic AK12 that takes all standard AK mags in 5.45 and 7.62 x 54 and 7.62 x 39mm (and indeed in 9 x 39mm) in the various calibres... so AK-74 mags in 5.45, AKM mags in 7.62 x 39mm, and the heavy AK12 to take Dragunov mags, while the AK12 in 223 should have the capacity to take standard 223 calibre AK mags, but also have an adapter that allows standard NATO M16 mags to be used. This would make them cheaper to use and more flexible.
A special forces soldier would appreciate the balanced recoil design of the AK-107, yet the ergonomics of the AK12 would appeal and the ability to change calibres and barrel lengths and add suppressors without adding too much length would also be appreciated.
The final weapon selected might be totally different of course with a combination of other features the Army has decided are important.
I rather suspect the rifles with the iron sights on the gas systems are the new civilian models for export, but I could be wrong.
Hope
can sneak one to me this Xmas... 
Hard to say as there are a variety of features between all the different rifles and the one in the video had some but lacked others.
The curve of the mag confirms 7.62 x 39mm, while the muzzle and front iron sight suggests one of the latest AK12s shown above, but from the rear looking down the receiver it has the old AK-103 receiver with the old selector and mechanism and looking at the gas system I suspect it does not use the AK-107/108/109 balanced system.
I rather suspect this is intended as a cheapish upgrade option.
For the improved accuracy they will need new barrels/gas systems and new top rails for scopes.
I just hope they take the time to thoroughly test them all and think about performance rather than cheapest and easiest.
I think the AK12 should reduce the weight of the recoiling bolt carrier to the point where a complex balanced recoil mechanism is no longer needed.
For the average soldier I think the AK12 with the normal AK front iron sights and flash hider/muzzle brake should be ideal as long as its problems are dealt with.
For the special forces soldier I would think that a combination of the AK-107, but with the ergonomic controls of the AK12 and the new iron sights to allow over barrel suppressors to be fitted would be best... especially if it allowed the swapping out of barrels and calibres. Ideally what you would want is a domestic AK12 that takes all standard AK mags in 5.45 and 7.62 x 54 and 7.62 x 39mm (and indeed in 9 x 39mm) in the various calibres... so AK-74 mags in 5.45, AKM mags in 7.62 x 39mm, and the heavy AK12 to take Dragunov mags, while the AK12 in 223 should have the capacity to take standard 223 calibre AK mags, but also have an adapter that allows standard NATO M16 mags to be used. This would make them cheaper to use and more flexible.
A special forces soldier would appreciate the balanced recoil design of the AK-107, yet the ergonomics of the AK12 would appeal and the ability to change calibres and barrel lengths and add suppressors without adding too much length would also be appreciated.
The final weapon selected might be totally different of course with a combination of other features the Army has decided are important.
I rather suspect the rifles with the iron sights on the gas systems are the new civilian models for export, but I could be wrong.
Hope
can sneak one to me this Xmas...
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
GarryB wrote:The one from the video?
Hard to say as there are a variety of features between all the different rifles and the one in the video had some but lacked others.
The curve of the mag confirms 7.62 x 39mm, while the muzzle and front iron sight suggests one of the latest AK12s shown above, but from the rear looking down the receiver it has the old AK-103 receiver with the old selector and mechanism and looking at the gas system I suspect it does not use the AK-107/108/109 balanced system.
I rather suspect this is intended as a cheapish upgrade option.
For the improved accuracy they will need new barrels/gas systems and new top rails for scopes.
I just hope they take the time to thoroughly test them all and think about performance rather than cheapest and easiest.
I think the AK12 should reduce the weight of the recoiling bolt carrier to the point where a complex balanced recoil mechanism is no longer needed.
For the average soldier I think the AK12 with the normal AK front iron sights and flash hider/muzzle brake should be ideal as long as its problems are dealt with.
For the special forces soldier I would think that a combination of the AK-107, but with the ergonomic controls of the AK12 and the new iron sights to allow over barrel suppressors to be fitted would be best... especially if it allowed the swapping out of barrels and calibres. Ideally what you would want is a domestic AK12 that takes all standard AK mags in 5.45 and 7.62 x 54 and 7.62 x 39mm (and indeed in 9 x 39mm) in the various calibres... so AK-74 mags in 5.45, AKM mags in 7.62 x 39mm, and the heavy AK12 to take Dragunov mags, while the AK12 in 223 should have the capacity to take standard 223 calibre AK mags, but also have an adapter that allows standard NATO M16 mags to be used. This would make them cheaper to use and more flexible.
A special forces soldier would appreciate the balanced recoil design of the AK-107, yet the ergonomics of the AK12 would appeal and the ability to change calibres and barrel lengths and add suppressors without adding too much length would also be appreciated.
The final weapon selected might be totally different of course with a combination of other features the Army has decided are important.
I rather suspect the rifles with the iron sights on the gas systems are the new civilian models for export, but I could be wrong.
Hope
No, no, my good friend. Not from the video. That one has to be a modified AK-104 of some sort. I was referring to this photo below. It's definitely an AK-12. But, there's a little issue with figuring out what caliber. From what I understand, there's absolutely no working 5.45x39mm drum that looks like the 7.62x39mm model like this. Thus, it would have to be a 7.62mm variant, correct?
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
I was thinking perhaps they could extend the handguards over the gas block and just have a detachable front sight. Perhaps with an improved 5.45x49 they could make the 7.62x39 redudent. It would be a bit of a headache to have the AK-107 and AK-12 marketed to the military. They only need one I think. It is confirmed that they will be working on a civilian version of the AK-107 along with the AK-12, not sure if they will try to push the AK-107 on the military market, not out of the possibily though.
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
No, no, my good friend. Not from the video. That one has to be a modified AK-104 of some sort.
In the stills from the video above I would suggest that the curve of the magazine means it must be a 7.62 x 39mm mag.
Regarding:
I was referring to this photo below. It's definitely an AK-12. But, there's a little issue with figuring out what caliber. From what I understand, there's absolutely no working 5.45x39mm drum that looks like the 7.62x39mm model like this. Thus, it would have to be a 7.62mm variant, correct?
Your quite right, that is an AK12, and I have not seen a drum magazine like that in 5.45mm calibre, which is not to say they don't exist, but I would expect the different shape shell case would lead to a different shaped drum, so I would agree this weapon is probably 7.62 x 39mm calibre.
I was thinking perhaps they could extend the handguards over the gas block and just have a detachable front sight.
Detachable would not be very soldier friendly... too easy to lose. Besides a fold down front iron sight at the end of the top mounted pic rail would be most convenient, but I personally think if they are going with a multi calibre system then having a separate iron sight on the barrel makes a lot of sense. Sure it means that if you carry 10 spare barrels you are carrying 10 front iron sights, but with the iron sights on the barrel means you can zero each barrel using its own front sight so you wouldn't need to rezero if you have to swap barrels during a mission.
In comparison the old model M60 machine gun had a fixed front iron sight so you either had to zero the each barrel and remember the rear sight settings before a mission and then try to reset the rear sight when you change between barrels, or just set an average zero and hope for the best.
Of course whether it is on the gas tube or near the muzzle, as long as it is part of the barrel that is swapped for different barrel lengths and calibres it should be fine.
Perhaps with an improved 5.45x49 they could make the 7.62x39 redudent.
Technically... as far as the Russian military is concerned, the 7.62 x 39mm is redundant but it still has its uses. To make it subsonic the 5.45mm round has an 80 grain projectile... so basically it is a .22lr with a double weight projectile (normally 40 grain). In comparison the 7.62 x 39mm has a 193 grain 311 calibre projectile travelling at a similar subsonic speed... which would be far more lethal.
The 5.45mm is designed to be lethally effective because of its velocity, but in certain conditions its light fast projectile can be deflected or simply not reach the target.
I rather suspect the best solution will be heavier bullets for the 5.45mm that retain high velocities due to more powerful propellant.
The new 6 x 49mm cartridge is really designed to replace the 7.62 x 54mm round and probably would not be suited to shorter barrel carbine weapons.
It would be a bit of a headache to have the AK-107 and AK-12 marketed to the military.
Not really. Assuming the AK12 family is pretty complete and includes the small calibre assault rifle and larger calibre assault rifle calibres it could replace a wide range of currently in service weapons... from the Vityaz-SN SMG, AKS-74U assault rifle calibre SMG, AK-105 carbine, AK-74M rifle, RPK-74 LMG, and in a 7.62 x 54mm or 6 x 49mm heavy rifle it could replace the SVDS as a Designated Marksman rifle.
Not only that, but a 9 x 39mm model could replace the AS and VSS weapons used in recon units and a 12 gauge version could be used in urban combat for door breaching.
The AK-107 on the other hand with its balanced recoil mechanism could be used by special forces units in situations where they need lots of rounds on target rapidly and accurately.
Pretty much the AK-107 would be in 5.45mm calibre only, while the AK12 would be in 9 x 19mm for the SMG, 5.45mm for the SMG, Carbine, Rifle, and LMG, while for the SVDS replacement could be in 7.62 x 54mm and perhaps a LMG version of the heavy rifle version in the same calibre. The 12 gauge could be in 3 1/2 inch magnum or 12/89 calibre. The AS and VSS replacements would have integrated suppressors and would come in 9 x 39mm calibre with a 12.7 x 55mm calibre option in the heavy rifle.
To add to that I would have a few pistol types... PYa, Strihz, Gyurza, a few SMG types (as the AK12 model Vityaz-SN is large) say Kashtan, Klin/Kedr, and PP-2000, and a few sniper rifles like the SV-98, SV-99, SV-338, and a few 50 cal and 57 cal sniper rifles and that would be all they needed.
They only need one I think. It is confirmed that they will be working on a civilian version of the AK-107 along with the AK-12, not sure if they will try to push the AK-107 on the military market, not out of the possibily though.
Both would have merits for the military and the civilian market. I would suspect they will push both everywhere... when you don't know exactly what the customer wants then you are best to give them options rather than you picking one yourself and hoping you have guessed right.
The last competition they lost the Nikonov... this time I think they are going to cover all their bases... which means one will be accurate and easy to use, one will be a cheap upgrade of existing types that can be applied to rifles in service, and one will be a little radical and offer the best increase in performance at the likely expense of production costs and increased training.
There is no reason to believe one design will win all... the Russian government customers range from the military to the interior ministry, to the FSB and each will have different wants and needs. I suspect the military might go for a mix of upgrades and new weapons, while other groups might receive large numbers of excess stock from the military.
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
GarryB wrote:No, no, my good friend. Not from the video. That one has to be a modified AK-104 of some sort.
In the stills from the video above I would suggest that the curve of the magazine means it must be a 7.62 x 39mm mag.
Regarding:
I was referring to this photo below. It's definitely an AK-12. But, there's a little issue with figuring out what caliber. From what I understand, there's absolutely no working 5.45x39mm drum that looks like the 7.62x39mm model like this. Thus, it would have to be a 7.62mm variant, correct?
Your quite right, that is an AK12, and I have not seen a drum magazine like that in 5.45mm calibre, which is not to say they don't exist, but I would expect the different shape shell case would lead to a different shaped drum, so I would agree this weapon is probably 7.62 x 39mm calibre.
As. The video AK is that of a 7.62x39mm weapon. I say AK-104 because that is the carbine version of the AK-103 (both in 7.62mm), just with a modified front gas block and such.
I did figure that the AK-12 in the photo was a 7.62x39mm variant. I just wanted to make sure. Thanks.
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
But is it the carbine version or the rifle version with a gas system that makes it look like the carbine version?
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
GarryB wrote:But is it the carbine version or the rifle version with a gas system that makes it look like the carbine version?
It's an AK-104 Carbine variant for sure. From what I understand about all rifle / carbine differences when it comes to AKs, there are different barrel twist rate's between the two. Like with an AK-74. If you cut down an AK-74 to turn it into an AKS-74U, you screw up the ballistics because the barrel twist rate on the AK-74 rifle is higher than an AKS-74U. So, if you modified and shortened an AK-74 rifle and shoot it, you'll find your bullets coming out and "key-holing" the target. I.E., instead of there being a clean little hole, you'll see a side-slap where the round tumbled into the target (like what happened with the M-16s from 'Nam).
That's the gas block from an AK-104 7.62x39mm Carbine. Very similar design. I think what we're looking at is a Gen-II AK-104. You'll also notice in that one black-and-white photo that the regular AK leaf sight is missing (replaced with a full rail and that effed up holographic sight). They've already made a Generation-2 AK-104, where they just cut out the barrel length between the gas tube and the sight block, but they didn't make the gas tube / sight assembly one unified unit. The Gen-2 AK-103 is seen at the bottom of this photo.
We already know that there was a Generation 2 AK-102 that was put out for testing, so it's a high chance that all the rifle and carbine models are going through various "Westernizational" changes to get them properly tac-fitted for tactical use.
Final deduction? It's either a Generation-2 AK-104. OR, it's a Generation-3 AK-103. BUT, I don't think it's the latter because then wouldn't that AK-103 just really be the Gen-2 AK-104?
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
"Detachable would not be very soldier friendly... too easy to lose. Besides a fold down front iron sight at the end of the top mounted pic rail would be most convenient, but I personally think if they are going with a multi calibre system then having a separate iron sight on the barrel makes a lot of sense. Sure it means that if you carry 10 spare barrels you are carrying 10 front iron sights, but with the iron sights on the barrel means you can zero each barrel using its own front sight so you wouldn't need to rezero if you have to swap barrels during a mission.
In comparison the old model M60 machine gun had a fixed front iron sight so you either had to zero the each barrel and remember the rear sight settings before a mission and then try to reset the rear sight when you change between barrels, or just set an average zero and hope for the best.
Of course whether it is on the gas tube or near the muzzle, as long as it is part of the barrel that is swapped for different barrel lengths and calibres it should be fine."
As far as being soldier friendly, I'm pretty sure the rear sight is already detachable so having the front sight detachable shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps the biggest issue with the front sight on the handguards is field stripping. Taking gas tube off with front sight attached to the rail on top might cause it to loose zero. They can have the front sight attached to the barrel with the detachable barrel variant.
"Not really. Assuming the AK12 family is pretty complete and includes the small calibre assault rifle and larger calibre assault rifle calibres it could replace a wide range of currently in service weapons... from the Vityaz-SN SMG, AKS-74U assault rifle calibre SMG, AK-105 carbine, AK-74M rifle, RPK-74 LMG, and in a 7.62 x 54mm or 6 x 49mm heavy rifle it could replace the SVDS as a Designated Marksman rifle."
I do find it a bit interesting how the designer of the AK-12 bashed the balanced recoil mechanism saying it wouldn't be practical, and now here they are marketing the AK-107 again. One thing about the AK-107 is that it's a more proven design at the moment than the AK-12. If they figure out the AK-12 is able to do most of what the AK-107 is capable of, they probably won't continue to market the AK-107 to the military. You're right that it's good to have options whether they be redudent or not, as the customer is always right. I wonder why the AK-107 and its 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 variants never saw any success on the world market. Was it because of cost? Or was it because people did not trust it over the more traditional and proven AK-103?
In comparison the old model M60 machine gun had a fixed front iron sight so you either had to zero the each barrel and remember the rear sight settings before a mission and then try to reset the rear sight when you change between barrels, or just set an average zero and hope for the best.
Of course whether it is on the gas tube or near the muzzle, as long as it is part of the barrel that is swapped for different barrel lengths and calibres it should be fine."
As far as being soldier friendly, I'm pretty sure the rear sight is already detachable so having the front sight detachable shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps the biggest issue with the front sight on the handguards is field stripping. Taking gas tube off with front sight attached to the rail on top might cause it to loose zero. They can have the front sight attached to the barrel with the detachable barrel variant.
"Not really. Assuming the AK12 family is pretty complete and includes the small calibre assault rifle and larger calibre assault rifle calibres it could replace a wide range of currently in service weapons... from the Vityaz-SN SMG, AKS-74U assault rifle calibre SMG, AK-105 carbine, AK-74M rifle, RPK-74 LMG, and in a 7.62 x 54mm or 6 x 49mm heavy rifle it could replace the SVDS as a Designated Marksman rifle."
I do find it a bit interesting how the designer of the AK-12 bashed the balanced recoil mechanism saying it wouldn't be practical, and now here they are marketing the AK-107 again. One thing about the AK-107 is that it's a more proven design at the moment than the AK-12. If they figure out the AK-12 is able to do most of what the AK-107 is capable of, they probably won't continue to market the AK-107 to the military. You're right that it's good to have options whether they be redudent or not, as the customer is always right. I wonder why the AK-107 and its 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 variants never saw any success on the world market. Was it because of cost? Or was it because people did not trust it over the more traditional and proven AK-103?
GarryB- Posts : 40487
Points : 40987
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I am not referring to the position of the iron sight, I am referring to the barrel length... I just don't think the barrel in the video is a shortened carbine version of the rifle, which would make it an AK-103 with the iron sight moved.
BTW the twist rate in a barrel is only related to length in terms of muzzle velocity and is more to do with the bullet fired. Long narrow bullets need to be spun very fast to stabilise them in flight... in fact APFSDS rounds for tanks need to be spun so fast they don't bother with rifling and use fins to stabilise them. Shorter fatter rounds need a lower rate of spin to stabilise them.
The AKS-74Us barrel is simply too short for accuracy in that calibre... just like a 2 inch revolvers barrel is too short to get any decent accuracy over extended ranges.
The spin rate of the bullet is a ratio of the twist rate of the barrel and the velocity of the bullet... the rate of twist in a barrel is fixed, but the velocity is not... less velocity from shorter barrels. The easiest way to fix the problems of the AKS-74U is to develop special shorter lighter projectiles to shoot through it.
Well actually the best thing to do is nothing because at 50-100m the AKS-74U is fine... if you want assault rifle performance then get an assault rifle.
Final deduction? It's either a Generation-2 AK-104. OR, it's a Generation-3 AK-103. BUT, I don't think it's the latter because then wouldn't that AK-103 just really be the Gen-2 AK-104?
It should therefore be a generation 3 AK-103... both have their iron sights moved to the top of the gas system, but the real difference is that the shorter carbine model AK-104 only has the muzzle brake and no actual barrel extending beyond the gas system, while the AK-103 does have quite a bit of barrel extending beyond the gas system... as shown in your photo with the suppressor fitted it is to reduce the length of the weapon with suppressors fitted because the muzzle is half way down the suppressor instead of the suppressor starting at the muzzle.
As far as being soldier friendly, I'm pretty sure the rear sight is already detachable so having the front sight detachable shouldn't be a problem.
They probably both are detachable, but normally would not be removed so that iron sights can be used through 1x magnification night vision sights or other optics without zeroing.
Taking gas tube off with front sight attached to the rail on top might cause it to loose zero.
The latch side mounted optics previously used on Russian weapons didn't lose its zero when taken off and put back on. As long as there is no play in its seating it should be fine.
I do find it a bit interesting how the designer of the AK-12 bashed the balanced recoil mechanism saying it wouldn't be practical, and now here they are marketing the AK-107 again.
Balanced recoil mechanisms are not new and have failed every time in the past to get into service. They appear to be more complex than the average AK mechanism and also more expensive to make, and in the past those issues have counted against them.
Of course the AN-94 won the last competition and it was worse.
I wonder why the AK-107 and its 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 variants never saw any success on the world market. Was it because of cost? Or was it because people did not trust it over the more traditional and proven AK-103?
The countries buying the weapons were not looking for extreme accuracy first, they were interested in reliability and simple training and ease of "local" production and support.
The AK-107 was different and was not in service in Russia... a gamble.
SWAT Pointman- Posts : 153
Points : 161
Join date : 2012-08-10
I have an ultimak gas tube mount for my AK and they don't really recommend that you remove it for cleaning. I think for the non detachable barrel variants of the AK-12, it is best to have the gas block combined with the FSB. Theoretically speaking, the less things touching barrel prior to firing results in greater mechanical accuracy. The balanced recoil systems failed mostly from an economic and manufacturing standpoint mostly, rather than a technical one I believe. I can't really find much data on whether the AK-107 was just as reliable as the AK-74 or not.
Gunfighter-AK- Posts : 22
Points : 22
Join date : 2012-12-10
SWAT Pointman wrote:I have an ultimak gas tube mount for my AK and they don't really recommend that you remove it for cleaning. I think for the non detachable barrel variants of the AK-12, it is best to have the gas block combined with the FSB. Theoretically speaking, the less things touching barrel prior to firing results in greater mechanical accuracy. The balanced recoil systems failed mostly from an economic and manufacturing standpoint mostly, rather than a technical one I believe. I can't really find much data on whether the AK-107 was just as reliable as the AK-74 or not.
We might know soon enough. Izhmash is making a "civvie" AK-107 now. We'll see it some time in 2013, I would imagine.