Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Was Kalahanikov a fraud! what do you think

  1. #11
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,804
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    All I know is the guns been around for 60 some years or so an IM the only one who ever managed to mount a scope on one that held zero . LMAO an now Veipr has stolen that idea . were is my 6000 rubles ????

  2. #12
    Gunco Addicted for life j427x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    9,349
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)

    Postak

    one thing most people don't consider -- if germany designed the AK-- why did they not field the excellent, reliable cheap and quick to make AK instead?

    how about the tank many think is the best all around tank of WW2 ??--that is a russian design the T-34! people are quick to discount russian hardware --but whos tanks came crashing through the gates of berlin in 1945?

    i don't think klash designed the modern AK all by himself though he did pen the idea. lots of people worked on it and it was re-designed several time to meet reliability standards and speed up production/cut costs. it was also changed from a 45mm length case to the short & very tapered 39mm SKS designed round. i also read some were that the russians even considered going to 6mm/6.5/6.8 bullets, but stuck to the .311s because all their machinery was set up to make the .30s and it would have required a re-tooling to go anything else.

    another thing most don't consider --war time shortages and deadlines-- they probably had millions of .311 barrel blanks and billions of .311 bullets warehoused--

    why was the M2 version of the M1 carbine late and missed D-day? the mags wern't ready and the machinery was slow to produce the full auto parts so the m2 was late to the party.

    the M1 garand & SKS used clips --because imagine what it would have took to make millions functioning box mags by d-day!

    i sure the designers all considered box mags at one time or another but decided to go with metal clips to cut production time.

    the technology to build an "assault weapon" had been around long before WW2 -- looking back it seems difficult to imagine that NONE of the major powers in WW2 had a true "assault weapon" before the war started. not much work even went into the sub-machine guns and they were used very hard, i suspect that it was the PPSH that got the soviets into the AK game as they wanted a sub gun that has a little more range but still cheap and quick to make.

    it is a big oversight by the USA, germany ,britan, japan and russia that no mid powered, box feed gas-operated weapon with semi and full automatic operation was developed prior to the war. it seems that an infantry mans weapon --just was not a priority like it should have been.

  3. #13
    Gunco Member Plan B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    231
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Money,the answer is always look for the money. It probably would have cost a couple of dollars more to make box magazine rifles and a bean counter said no. The M16 would have a better rifle from the start if McNamara's think tank would have listened to the Military.

  4. #14
    GuncoHolic Sprat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,907
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by j427x View Post
    one thing most people don't consider -- if germany designed the AK-- why did they not field the excellent, reliable cheap and quick to make AK instead?

    how about the tank many think is the best all around tank of WW2 ??--that is a russian design the T-34! people are quick to discount russian hardware --but whos tanks came crashing through the gates of berlin in 1945?

    i don't think klash designed the modern AK all by himself though he did pen the idea. lots of people worked on it and it was re-designed several time to meet reliability standards and speed up production/cut costs. it was also changed from a 45mm length case to the short & very tapered 39mm SKS designed round. i also read some were that the russians even considered going to 6mm/6.5/6.8 bullets, but stuck to the .311s because all their machinery was set up to make the .30s and it would have required a re-tooling to go anything else.

    another thing most don't consider --war time shortages and deadlines-- they probably had millions of .311 barrel blanks and billions of .311 bullets warehoused--

    why was the M2 version of the M1 carbine late and missed D-day? the mags wern't ready and the machinery was slow to produce the full auto parts so the m2 was late to the party.

    the M1 garand & SKS used clips --because imagine what it would have took to make millions functioning box mags by d-day!

    i sure the designers all considered box mags at one time or another but decided to go with metal clips to cut production time.

    the technology to build an "assault weapon" had been around long before WW2 -- looking back it seems difficult to imagine that NONE of the major powers in WW2 had a true "assault weapon" before the war started. not much work even went into the sub-machine guns and they were used very hard, i suspect that it was the PPSH that got the soviets into the AK game as they wanted a sub gun that has a little more range but still cheap and quick to make.

    it is a big oversight by the USA, germany ,britan, japan and russia that no mid powered, box feed gas-operated weapon with semi and full automatic operation was developed prior to the war. it seems that an infantry mans weapon --just was not a priority like it should have been.
    you did not read the article no one said germany invented the AK, the story is about German firearms designers kidnapped as war reparations who helped MK design the ak
    Sprat and sprat1 are one and the same.

  5. #15
    jrs
    jrs is offline
    B.U.F. (Bald, Ugly, Fat) jrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    PRK
    Posts
    1,492
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by j427x View Post
    it is a big oversight by the USA, germany ,britan, japan and russia that no mid powered, box feed gas-operated weapon with semi and full automatic operation was developed prior to the war. it seems that an infantry mans weapon --just was not a priority like it should have been.
    Forgetting the BAR and the Thompson? I seem to remember both were designed before WWII, were box fed and fully automatic.

    U.S. military doctrine at that time was aimed rifle fire. Not spray and pray.

    Or I may be wrong.
    jrs
    --
    "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.", Will Durant

    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.", Edmund Burke

  6. #16
    Gunco Regular SouthTexasGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    958
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Hah! I wouldn't put shit pst these 'gummit" guys.

    Remember operation "Papercip" when they bought in Nazi scientists, who should have been hung at Nuremburg into the US after falsifying documents?

    Remember 'Operation Blue sky and MKII Ultra?"

    They could not get LSD into a gaseous form because it decomposes" . But they did use that on some of their own.

    There is no limit to what these 'gummit" A-HOLES WILL STOOP TOO!

    Keep your powder dry boys!

  7. #17
    GuncoHolic Tommo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,127
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default

    +1 AK is dreived from the Garand. Read somewhere the AK was designed by a Russia who died and Kalasnikov finished it and got the credit.

  8. #18
    3/6 Infantry mtdew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Benton,AR
    Posts
    3,216
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default

    I refer you again to the book "The Gun" by C.J. Chivers. I beleive it is the most comprehensive historical book on the AK to date, as well as other guns such as the M16,(reading that section will piss you the hell off!) Gatling,Maxim,etc. Should be required reading for anyone studying modern military firearms. Not so heavy on tech details, but more of a history of specific designs and how they came about. I have to warn you, Chivers can seem a little anti-gun at times.
    "NA BEAN DON CHAT GUN LAMHAINN"
    Clan MacPherson
    "CREAG DHUBH"!

  9. #19
    Gunco Addicted for life j427x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    9,349
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)

    Default

    the tommy is a sub gun and the BAR is a light machine gun so they are not "assault weapons" generally speaking.

    -- the czar had a rifle that fit the "AW" mold in WW1 the fedorv in 6.5 jap--but it was difficult to machine and expensive to build. only a few of the czars units got um. the AW concept goes back to WW1 or before--


    Quote Originally Posted by jrs View Post
    Forgetting the BAR and the Thompson? I seem to remember both were designed before WWII, were box fed and fully automatic.

    U.S. military doctrine at that time was aimed rifle fire. Not spray and pray.

    Or I may be wrong.

  10. #20
    Always sore, always tired Bradrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Missouri/ Ark border
    Posts
    6,133
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)

    Default

    Nikkola Tesla invented alternating current & the light bulbs we still use today. But yet edison is still taught as the father of electricity & inventor of the light bulb. There were plenty of guys flying powered aircraft before the Wright brothers too. I don't believe much of anything taught in history classes or most history books anymore.
    It's ALL politics.
    No more in russia than here or anywhere else.
    " Save a tree...........Eat A Beaver!"

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •