Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Khand-e

The Small Arms Thread, Part 8: 2018; ICSR to be replaced by US Army with interim 15mm Revolver Cannon.

Recommended Posts

On 3/3/2019 at 5:03 AM, Sturgeon said:

 

Ah, the much vaunted 7N39. According to Western sources, this mighty mite bullet can penetrate all known body armors, and is truly fearsome to behold.

In reality, evidently it is a fairly pedestrian tungsten cored round, almost certainly behind the latest 5.56mm AP developments, and is rated to penetrate only GOST Class 4 (roughly equivalent to Level III) at 100m. Snore.

A person from Russia who allegedly works in a company where body armor is made, says that 7N39 can penetrate ESAPI(Level IV).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Suuuure it can.

He works with body armor and that's just a bit of information from someone in that industry, he didn't say from what distance though.Max Popenker holds that person to be well-versed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pascal said:

He works with body armor and that's just a bit of information from someone in that industry, he didn't say from what distance though.Max Popenker holds that person to be well-versed.

 

Well, for a start ESAPI and Level IV aren't the same thing, so he can't be that well-versed.

 

For another, "penetrate" is almost meaningless. I can penetrate ESAPI with a pressure washer if I hold it there long enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Well, for a start ESAPI and Level IV aren't the same thing, so he can't be that well-versed.

He did very well say that.That Level IV is ESAPI, i will stop then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pascal said:

He did very well say that.That Level IV is ESAPI, i will stop then.

 

Armor penetration is a delicate enough subject that without looking at actual test results (which I assume are classified), it's not really useful to say something that simple.

Not that it's absurd that 7N39 could penetrate ESAPI, but... The penetrator isn't that big, and it's not moving that fast. If it can penetrate ESAPI in one go, even at just 0 meters, then you wouldn't need the sort of rounds the US Army is looking at, to do so at longer ranges. And maybe you don't, but again without seeing actual test data that kind of speculation is a bit meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Vicious_CB said:

 

And people think Im joking when I say the best Cold War battle rifle was the SVD.

 

I feel like with a shorter, thicker barrel and a few light modifications it would have been an excellent general issue battle rifle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barrel change on the RPK 16 is a joke , useless in combat conditions In such configuration no one will be changing barrels in a fire fight. It not tool less change nor without use of heat resistant gloves.Also idiotic continued use of bipods mounted on ither barrel or removable forend .

 

This is how barrel change needs to work or you are better of with no barrel change at all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dpyf7TTi2s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mr.T said:

Barrel change on the RPK 16 is a joke , useless in combat conditions In such configuration no one will be changing barrels in a fire fight. It not tool less change nor without use of heat resistant gloves.Also idiotic continued use of bipods mounted on ither barrel or removable forend .

 

This is how barrel change needs to work or you are better of with no barrel change at all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dpyf7TTi2s

 

I think it's more a modular thing than a cooling thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mr.T said:

Barrel change on the RPK 16 is a joke , useless in combat conditions In such configuration no one will be changing barrels in a fire fight. It not tool less change nor without use of heat resistant gloves.Also idiotic continued use of bipods mounted on ither barrel or removable forend .

 

This is how barrel change needs to work or you are better of with no barrel change at all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dpyf7TTi2s

   Barrel change feature on RPK-16 is not for quick changing hot barrels. Main reason why SFs (probably FSB) are interested in RPK-16 (and probably payed for design works or were main aim for Kalashnikov Concern when designing this gun) is ability to prepare gun to very specific types of enviroments which would not change during operation. Fireifght with criminals blocked inside of house very rarely changed into chase in open spaces.

   So for operations inside of villages and towns (searches, arrests, liquidations) those spec ops need weapon for CQB and for use inside of MRAPs/armored cars. In operations when they search for gangs outside of populated areas it is usually mountains and forests with long ranges, so they need something for long range firefights. One type of operation is very unlikely to become other one, so mounting long or short barrel before operation is not going to really hinder specialists. but actually make things easier.

   Karden (MVD SF member, now Rosgvardia IIRC) wrote document to higher-ranking officials about conceptual look of "new generation" avtomat for units like his and ability to change elements like barrels before operations was one of key feature (and quick-change was not required for that type of modularity that he wanted). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   Lazarev's photos from Army 2019

   TsNIITochMash

RTS3D2v.jpg

 

Spoiler

W72GPQ1.jpg

 

Hg2rfVy.jpg

 

VzX9Zoh.jpg

 

   Kalashnikov concern

hFtlMSc.jpg

 

Spoiler

dyQBuNU.jpg

 

7oGmxv1.jpg

 

Wuc5D4s.jpg

 

SzcbfKm.jpg

 

CzyFnU3.jpg

 

wLMojrV.jpg

 

   Few more photos of AM-17 and ABM-17

xsVSh7v.jpg

 

Spoiler

ps8Sw9Y.jpg

 

q4xyjDY.jpg

 

   SVCh and updated SV-98 from another expo.

Spoiler

C2jLsGt.jpg

 

8yUDoUM.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2019 at 8:58 PM, LoooSeR said:

   Barrel change feature on RPK-16 is not for quick changing hot barrels. Main reason why SFs (probably FSB) are interested in RPK-16 (and probably payed for design works or were main aim for Kalashnikov Concern when designing this gun) is ability to prepare gun to very specific types of enviroments which would not change during operation. Fireifght with criminals blocked inside of house very rarely changed into chase in open spaces.

   So for operations inside of villages and towns (searches, arrests, liquidations) those spec ops need weapon for CQB and for use inside of MRAPs/armored cars. In operations when they search for gangs outside of populated areas it is usually mountains and forests with long ranges, so they need something for long range firefights. One type of operation is very unlikely to become other one, so mounting long or short barrel before operation is not going to really hinder specialists. but actually make things easier.

   Karden (MVD SF member, now Rosgvardia IIRC) wrote document to higher-ranking officials about conceptual look of "new generation" avtomat for units like his and ability to change elements like barrels before operations was one of key feature (and quick-change was not required for that type of modularity that he wanted). 

 

That makes a bit more sense altough you are better of with a specialist short barrel version for the folks that need them , barrel changes also change POI which was not a problem in the past with iron sights as each barrel also had a front sight that could be sighted for it. but with optics the barrel change became much more of an issue it needs to be much more repeatable and precise than  it ever was in the past.

 

Hope Kalashnikov manages to get  heads out of their asses and move towards making guns like  AM-17 and ABM-17 or at very least something with solid upper based on AK .    Optics in firearms are single most important jump in lethality and not having a simple optic ready guns in 21century is crazy (whole side mounted optics is a dated concept), also hope they stop using M4 type stocks on their platorms makes guns look cobled up with Aliexpress componets. Don't get me wrong Ak47 is an icon but optics ready it is not .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mr.T said:

 

That makes a bit more sense altough you are better of with a specialist short barrel version for the folks that need them , barrel changes also change POI which was not a problem in the past with iron sights as each barrel also had a front sight that could be sighted for it. but with optics the barrel change became much more of an issue it needs to be much more repeatable and precise than  it ever was in the past.

 

Hope Kalashnikov manages to get  heads out of their asses and move towards making guns like  AM-17 and ABM-17 or at very least something with solid upper based on AK .    Optics in firearms are single most important jump in lethality and not having a simple optic ready guns in 21century is crazy (whole side mounted optics is a dated concept), also hope they stop using M4 type stocks on their platorms makes guns look cobled up with Aliexpress componets. Don't get me wrong Ak47 is an icon but optics ready it is not .

 

Are you unaware of the AK-12?

 

...Exactly what do you think is wrong about folding+adjustable stocks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr.T said:

 

That makes a bit more sense altough you are better of with a specialist short barrel version for the folks that need them , barrel changes also change POI which was not a problem in the past with iron sights as each barrel also had a front sight that could be sighted for it. but with optics the barrel change became much more of an issue it needs to be much more repeatable and precise than  it ever was in the past.

 

Hope Kalashnikov manages to get  heads out of their asses and move towards making guns like  AM-17 and ABM-17 or at very least something with solid upper based on AK .    Optics in firearms are single most important jump in lethality and not having a simple optic ready guns in 21century is crazy (whole side mounted optics is a dated concept), also hope they stop using M4 type stocks on their platorms makes guns look cobled up with Aliexpress componets. Don't get me wrong Ak47 is an icon but optics ready it is not .

   Barrel change feature on RPK-16 is AFAIK and heard from videos was made in such way that there is no noticeable shift in POI.

 

AM, AMB small-sized assault rifles and SVCh DMR are still in development, after them it is very possible Kalashnikov will work on assault rifle using same principals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with folding stocks and adjustable stocks , AKs had great folders , but uncritical adoption of an M4 butstock is just lazy. There are much better solutions as we have seen on most modern rifles that are not Ar15 patern that is limited by the buffer tube arangment .  I used to own number of AKs and loved them but optics ready is now mondatory and aka just in not it in standard configuration.

 

Ak12 meloved out , likely due desire to keep cost low its barely improved over 100 series. 

Two features that make hairs stand flimsy sheet metal  topcover with rudimetary fix and  non structural forend configuration

ak12d1.jpg

ak12d2.jpg

 

Solid upper and forend and can be done to Aks

1027315486.jpg

 

Even to old jugo kalashnikovs 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By LostCosmonaut
      There are many who feel that the 5.56 NATO is a superlative rifle round. Much has been said about larger alternatives to 5.56, such as various 6.5mm and 6.8mm rounds among others. Less has been said about smaller rounds. Off the top of my head, I can recall that there was a German 4.6x36mm round, used in the HK36, and the British 4.85x49mm round. Neither of these rounds managed to gain widespread acceptance. My knowledge of the voodoo that is ballistics is somewhat limited, so I'm uncertain as to whether these failures were caused by flaws with the rounds themselves, or because they were below some lower limit of effective bullet size, beyond which performance decreases rapidly. Could we see a resurgence of these concepts in the future, or do they represent an evolutionary dead-end?
×
×
  • Create New...