AK-12 Rifle Discussion

Or was it a sign of respect... the Russian military is now worthy to be the bad guy in their pathetic violence fantasies again... I guess you must be doing something right....

Starting with Operation Flashpoint I loved the games where I fought Russians and Soviets because I enjoyed ditching the US equipment and picking up Soviet and Russian weapons.

The story lines were meaningless western propaganda dribble that I just ignored and I spent hours using the mission creator to fill islands with western forces with no fuel or ammo that I could walk through and massacre with the odd eastern ammo or weapon box here or there or empty vehicle full of fuel and ammo for me to "capture" and then use against the enemy... 

OK forget it... that was an M16 mag... it is just some boring NATO rifle...

I haven't played Arma II is it worth buying?

The main thing that annoyed me (there wasn't much BTW) was the attempts at balancing in OPFP... like the fact that the Soviet Units lost their SVD and RPK-74 soldiers for some reason and that all tanks only had three crew when in reality the western tanks needed a loader to operate properly.

I have read on a few forums that the AEK rifle has won against the AK12 family.

In those forums they state that the AK12 is just a warmed over AK-74M and that it is not worthy of Kalashnikov... that it is more like the work of an accessories company.

Perhaps they have not compared the M16A1 with the M16A2 and M16A3?

The AK-12 appears to me to be the peak of the AK with all the supposed and real problems fixed.

What more could the do?

AFAIK the whole idea was like the T-90AM or Su-35S programs... ie we are developing a new generation but for now we want you to take the current standard items and fix all the perceived and real problems and make the best that you can without radically changing it.  Then take a clean sheet of paper and develop a totally new system that is a generation ahead.

Hense the T-90AM and the Armata MBT, the Su-35S and the PAK FA. etc etc.

In this context the AK12 can truly be said to have taken all the perceived and real issues and fixed them without the enormous complication that would make it expensive to make and complicated to use.

Ambidextrous controls and cocking handle, adjustable stock (so you can wear heavy body armour and shorten the stock, or a light t shirt and lengthen the stock), the ability to use a range of optics easily and quickly, peep iron sights with a very long sight base, 3 round burst as well as full auto, large capacity mag... 60 rounds ready to fire instead of taping two 30 shot mags together all 60 rounds are ready to fire, better accuracy, ability to use NATO standard rifle grenades, bolt hold open device, and of course with the new models the ability to change calibres and of course a full family of weapons from SMG to sniper rifle/LMG.

What is not to love?

The job was to upgrade the AK with new technology to make it easier to use and more accurate and effective and I think... just looking at the features that they have done that without anything exotic or expensive that will make it more complicated or less reliable.

This is a whole family of weapons and from what I have seen it addresses all of the problems and adds features that weren't really problems anyway... but they have been fixed.

There are many "made-in-a-basement" kalashnikovs with foregrips and other tacticool features whitch actually aren't needed for a basic army assault rifle.

The vast majority of users will never need half the bits and pieces you can now add to these weapons but that is the point... they can if they want and don't have to if they don't want to.

With the new Ratnik supersoldier system they need firearms that allow the attachment of optics fairly easily and the top rail means standard optics can be used with iron sights and night vision equipment... all without effecting zero.

Being able to adapt the rifle to firing around corners from different shoulders means less exposure to enemy fire.

Plus improved accuracy means the ability to exploit optics to extend engagement ranges with accurate fire.

The next weapon family is supposed to have been developed from scratch and could be totally different. It could require new ammo... possibly even a new concept in ammo... that could be more efficient and powerful propellent, through to caseless ammo or gel based or fluid propellent or even EM weapons or possibly even a combination. This could make the next generation a generation above the current planned AK12 and also rather more expensive but also rather more capable.

It might be 10 years before the technology is ready for deployment so in the mean time a new family of weapons that are effective and reliable and use existing support equipment (optics, under barrel grenade launchers, bayonettes, etc etc) and ammo or perhaps slightly upgraded ammo makes sense.

Why make do with AK-74M with a few upgrades when you can adopt the rifle family you ordered that sorts out most of the originals problems... like a focus on accuracy.

The AEK balanced recoil system looks very interesting but is mostly useful for burst fire... if you want accuracy... just use single shot... the tightest groups you can get are in single shot literally if you only have to fire once.

The multicalibre feature is for special forces so that they can have short and long barrel weapons with the same interface, but different calibres and features.

This means 5.45mm rifle barrel length for outside, short barrel length for inside... perhaps with a suppressor fitted, plus 9 x 39mm for quiet operations.

The result is that instead of having to have 3 or more different weapons he can have one with different barrels.

If anything wears out from excessive use it will be barrels so it will be cheaper to buy new barrels than buy new rifles when worn out.

Also all accessories bought for one rifle instead of for three.

In the field it wont be as important, though in current units you have troops with 9 x 39mm AS rifles and ammo and the rest with 5.45mm ammo. Having a changible barrel means overheating LMG barrels can be replaced.

As I know the MoD wanted a balanced mechanics rifle, may be due to some kind of lobbism.

Balanced mechanism rifles were put forward the last two competitions... to replace the AKM (won by AK-74) and to replace the AK-74 (won by An-94) and the main reasons given for them being rejected was that their design was not well suited to mass production and that the entire armed forces would need to be retrained to use them.

If the payoff is improved groupings in full auto then I really don't see the advantage over the AK-107.... which could have all the AK12s ergonomic upgrades applied to it and get the best of both worlds.

Given they are going for modular vehicles it makes sense to me to issue modular weapons.

Still I see AK-12 as just an attempt to keep it's finger deep into the military budget without much of an afford (an old AK with some minor twiks and modern look).

These rifles were designed with the direct input of special forces soldiers, so I would expect a big step up in ease of use and accuracy... both of which should be relevant to the average grunt.

You can say the AK12 is just an AK with a few tweaks... but an AEK is a total unknown that shoots tighter groups in full auto... is it worth putting into production considering all the changes needed and all the retraining too?

I don't think so... they asked for all the problems to be fixed and a multi calibre family of weapons to be used as a stopgap for a totally new generation of weapons... if that is what it is then they should accept it into service... it is what they wanted.

I don't understand that do you mean. AK-12 can only be refited for left-handed people during it's disassemble. Not in combat for sure

I mean it is not a bullpup that empties shell cases into your face like an SA-80 firing left handed. When shooting around cover if you only ever use the same eye and the same shoulder to rest the rifle then around one side of cover you just expose your shoulder and one eye, but around the opposite corner you have to expose your entire chest and head if you can't swap shoulders/eyes.

AK-74M can be fitted with optics quite easely. It has soviet-standart V-shaped rail, not NATO-standard picatinny rail. It's cool to have picatinny rail for a commercial rifle, but I don't think russian soldiers should buy commercial optics in arms shops for their own money, as they sometimes do now because of IR sights insufficiency.

I am quite familiar with the Soviet side rail, but with the full length top rail you can have iron sights, with a low power red dot scope fitted to the rear and a night vision scope mounted in front for use at night. It means you can zero the red dot sight and use it through the night vision scope at night or inside, but during the day outside you can take off the front night sight and continue to use the red dot sight.

Part of the Ratnik kit will include a night vision monocle that can be used hand held, helmet mounted like a night vision goggle, or attached to a rifle like a rifle scope.

Why would a standart soldier need all this crap?

Most of the time he wouldn't. The AKS-74U is short and handy but lacks accuracy at range. The AK-74M is not the longest rifle in the world but paratroopers might prefer a shorter carbine like an AK-105. With replaceable barrels an armourer can have a range of weapons with the same base mechanism.

Switch barrel every time he enters a building? From where should he get those rare munitions like 9x39 mm?

Instead of having forces armed with AK-74s and AS rifles they can all have AK12s but the soldiers that would normally have AS rifles can use AK12s with shorter barrels and suppressors... and they could have ported barrels in 7.62 x 39mm calibre with 154 grain bullets that are standard issue but with the short barrels and porting they could be made subsonic. Not as effective as the 9 x 39mm but standard issue and much more widely available standard ammo.

Soldier shouldn't repair his rifle, he should have a reliable one. Assaul rifles could be repared in a mechanic shops, nobody will ever carry additional barrels for their AKs with them as it's an additional weight.

Not an aspect the soldier will care about, but quartermasters will appreciate it, as will the bean counters.

The Russian Army has PKP instead of RPK now. Why would it need another incarnation of RPK based on AK-12?

It might be worth another look with a 95 round drum feed... they might even design the LMG barrel to be similar to the PKP so it doesn't need replacement when it gets hot...

I missed that bit. Do You know why MoD wanted balanced automatics? Why did they test AN-94 then? It doesn't have it.

After rejecting it the last two competitions... why do they want a complex mechanism now?

There are still works with Pecheneg and we might see more changes with it. I think troops should need SAW, like this modification of Pecheneg. It wouldn't hurt if it would be chambered with 7,62x39 or 5,45 to make it light.

AFAIK they went back to the heavier calibre for the extra range and punch it gives over assault rifle calibres. If they adopt a new calibre like the 6.5 x 49mm they were working on to replace the 7.62 x 54mm round then it would be interesting to see a new PKP chambered in that calibre... particularly if they have a backpack ammo feed system...

AN-94 uses balanced automatics; it is the epitome of that concept; just look at its mechanism, the pulley and all.

I never liked the moving barrel part of it...

I said it about Ratnik modernisation program.

I have seen photos of Ratnik with the AN-94, AK-74M and AK-107. Perhaps they were referring to the latter?

That's because AK-12 don't have anything new besides that rail.

Supposed to have improved accuracy, bolt hold open feature, adjustable folding stock (length and cheek height (for scopes)), moved fire selector that now includes three round burst, peep iron sights, and larger capacity magazines. The charging handle is moved forward and can be adapted to left or right side to suit the operator.

Why would a common soldier do it?

The common soldier wouldn't. The quartermaster issuing weapons to troops on the other hand will just need one weapon mechanism and different barrel lengths for different roles... ie AKS-74U, AK-105, AK-74M, RPK-74, AS, and VSS can all be based on the barrel you supply with the weapon.

Imagine youself a motorised infantry battalion warrant officer - there did you get 9x39, as special purpose guns like Val or Vintores is only used but recce battalion in limited numbers so there are very little 9x39 even in a brigade-level armoury. And would you need your "motostrelki" to use such a special purpose ammunition?

As mentioned above you could easily use ported 7.62 x 39mm barrels with subsonic ammo... which would be rather more effective than subsonic 5.45mm ammo.

PKP has not a quick-changeable aka it can be changed without a sliedgehammer and blowtorch, but isn't intended during a firefight, lying in a pool of dirt.

I read somewhere it uses Stellite in the barrel so even if it gets red hot it doesn't become useless like a normal barrel would.

Heavier ammunition mass is compensated with an additional man in a squad, heavier recoil isn't that limiting as MG isn't intended to fire wide bursts without a bipod. And 7,62x54 has much more range and power. And Pecheneg is more squad level friendly due to it is supposed to be operated by a single man than, say, MG-3.
This is a bullpub PKP on the picture, isn't it?

The videos on youtube I have seen of PKP it appears to be very accurate.

The idea was to use two shot bursts instead of one round shots for more chance of hitting and damaging the target. But complexity of the design (all those steel cables and moving parts) makes AN-94 too costly and unreliable for nothing except of two-round bursts

There is a bit of a myth that the two shots are supposed to defeat body armour because the two shots in the same place in quick succession means the second round will hit the kevlar when it is stretched from the impact of the first round and the second round will rip through the extended fibres.

In actual fact the second round is supposed to land within a circle 30cm around the first round and is supposed to compensate for aiming errors and a moving target... so if the first round misses you have a second chance of a hit on a moving target or in the case of a stationary target two hits increase lethality... so it was a combination of increased lethality and increased hit probability.

Why are you just repeating your assertion? Do you have a reason for your assertion?

I think he is trying to say that the improvement in burst accuracy only applies to the first two rounds with the An-94. In longer bursts accuracy is similar to standard AK weapons.

I see cables and pulleys and a moving barrel and I think... unreliable. Obviously with no personal experience with this weapon my opinion holds very little weight, but I prefer the AK-107 method of recoil management.

Personally I think that for Ratnik they need a weapon that is reliable, not too expensive, able to fit multiple optic sights on at one time, made by a company that can mass produce them fast enough to get them into service.

I think the multicalibre aspect will appeal to Special Forces, or countries like India that use different calibres already, and I also think it would be good for civilians and police with cheap training using .22lr kits.

For standard soldier use a simpler cheaper easier to make version offering different barrel lengths for different roles would be the best option.

BTW the Vityaz-SN looks really cool... if they modified it with the four position selector on both sides and modified the charging handle AK12 style I could see it becoming as popular or more so than the MP5.