The AK Files Forums

The AK Files Forums (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/index.php)
-   AK-47s (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   did the Kalashnikov truly transform warfare? (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327536)

Alonzo Harris 11-29-2017 10:54 AM

did the Kalashnikov truly transform warfare?
 
I think this is an interesting discussion, and I think the obvious answer is yes. Not because the AK is such a revoolutionary invention(it is, though), but because of one thing.....its simplicity. In CJ Chivers book "the Gun", he notes that the average viet cong fighter was 98 pounds and had never shot a rifle before........you have to ask yourself, could the NVA and vietcong have been able to last long enough for uncle sam to leave if they had PPSH's, Mosins and SKS's? Maybe, maybe not. Also, in the middle east, there is supposedly a saying that every childs first rifle should be an AK, and in pictures of child soldiers in africa, they all got AK's. Another thing, is the simplicity of the design makes manufacture a lot more easy. Poorer, less technologically advanced countries can equip a military a lot easier than they would otherwise. Think about it, Albania, Sudan, Bangladesh and venezuala make AK's.....and I doub any of those places have a whole lot of CNC technology.
I would like to hear ya'lls opinions on how the AK has affected warfare in general.

paratrooper101 11-29-2017 11:21 AM

Yes.

Tankboy 11-29-2017 11:26 AM

No.

Ammosexual 11-29-2017 11:27 AM

Read "The Gun" by C.J. Chivers

Did it change warfare, no not really. Did it change how easy certain peoples or nations could wage war, yes.

HK-91 11-29-2017 11:28 AM

No, gun powder did.

Worm 11-29-2017 11:37 AM

Yes

hansellhd 11-29-2017 12:24 PM

In a way it did. It brought a new level of firepower into the hands of 3rd world people who hand little to no training on weapons use or maintenance. In other words it made it easier for them to cause mayhem and destruction then would have nominally been possible.

As far as organized Armies are concerned I would say no, other similar Guns would have taken it's place.

Avtomatkalashnikov 11-29-2017 12:34 PM

does a bear shit in the woods? duh.

Tankboy 11-29-2017 12:36 PM

I mean stuff like predator drones, night vision, thermal, etc are “warfare changing” not aks lol. VC woulda been fine without them tbh.

MAKAK47 11-29-2017 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammosexual (Post 4346805)
Read "The Gun" by C.J. Chivers

Did it change warfare, no not really. Did it change how easy certain peoples or nations could wage war, yes.

This

The concept of “assault rifle” was already tested and adopted in WW2, but how much impact that concept has had in modern warfare is up to debate

The spread of the Kalashnikov world wide allowed the assault rifle concept to become universal and not limited to professional/large conscript militaries

etown_ak 11-29-2017 12:54 PM

It changed how 3rd world troglodytes wage their tribal conflicts and conduct glorious communist revolutions, yes. Then we had to play katchup.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alonzo Harris (Post 4346744)
I think this is an interesting discussion, and I think the obvious answer is yes. Not because the AK is such a revoolutionary invention(it is, though), but because of one thing.....its simplicity. In CJ Chivers book "the Gun", he notes that the average viet cong fighter was 98 pounds and had never shot a rifle before........you have to ask yourself, could the NVA and vietcong have been able to last long enough for uncle sam to leave if they had PPSH's, Mosins and SKS's? Maybe, maybe not. Also, in the middle east, there is supposedly a saying that every childs first rifle should be an AK, and in pictures of child soldiers in africa, they all got AK's. Another thing, is the simplicity of the design makes manufacture a lot more easy. Poorer, less technologically advanced countries can equip a military a lot easier than they would otherwise. Think about it, Albania, Sudan, Bangladesh and venezuala make AK's.....and I doub any of those places have a whole lot of CNC technology.
I would like to hear ya'lls opinions on how the AK has affected warfare in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammosexual (Post 4346805)
Read "The Gun" by C.J. Chivers

Did it change warfare, no not really. Did it change how easy certain peoples or nations could wage war, yes.

Reading is fundamental.

Ramey 11-29-2017 01:02 PM

I say no. It was developed to meet the needs of changing warfare.

LXD55 11-29-2017 01:12 PM

It just proves africa has better gun rights than we do...

As far as the question, no more than any other weapon ever invented.

Ammosexual 11-29-2017 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etown_ak (Post 4346933)
Reading is fundamental.

Wow, lol.


While I read his statement I completely overlooked that. I really need to slow down when reading stuff.

Flankenstein 11-29-2017 01:22 PM

Alonzo, is English your first language?

Soviets arming and tooling up these countries had more impact than the weapon choice. And small arms in the modern age aren't going to revolutionize warfare.

LXD55 11-29-2017 01:26 PM

Naw he is in Tecsis.

DP 11-29-2017 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tankboy (Post 4346908)
I mean stuff like predator drones, night vision, thermal, etc are “warfare changing” not aks lol. VC woulda been fine without them tbh.

Bro how else can the VCs do rice paddy bayonet charges.:laugh_sma

Extra Medium 11-29-2017 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottyhipockets (Post 4346922)
Did ethylene glycol and bb guns transform the way we wage war with domestic dogs and retard owners? A little bit.

WTF?

tweathe850 11-29-2017 06:57 PM

is a bear Catholic?

1biggun 11-29-2017 07:44 PM

Had it not been the AK some other semi auto would have been avaliable in its place.

Nothing makes the AK any easier to shoot than say a SKS .

The fact multiple countries cranked the out in the hundreds of millions and provided them is what matters.

Weaponmark 11-29-2017 08:05 PM

It has certainly changed warfare, and it doesn't matter if "something else" "would have" come along. We are the most powerful country in the world, and if we didn't come along, someone else would been the most powerful, but the world would be unrecognizable to us if that were the case.

We can talk "what if" all day.

The fact is, it's the most produced firearm in the history of the planet and has been the most effective small arm for freedom fighters for almost 70 years now. It has without a doubt, changed the face of the planet, for better or worse.

def90 11-29-2017 08:17 PM

If it wasn't the AK 47 it would have been something else. People would have found a tool for killing and some regime somewhere around the would would have been just as happy to provide it for them.

Bubbajj 11-29-2017 08:46 PM

See my sig line below.

bj660raptor 11-29-2017 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HK-91 (Post 4346807)
No, gun powder did.

yup the cartridge did

Tankboy 11-29-2017 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DP (Post 4347059)
Bro how else can the VCs do rice paddy bayonet charges.:laugh_sma

With the SKS!

rurallife 11-29-2017 09:47 PM

The AK47? Yes. It is an assault rifle. Fully automatic, low maintenance weapon.

A squad of M4's is deadly, but the weapon needs a fully equipped Armory man to keep everyone's rifle in top operating condition. An AK? Any Somali kid can field strip and clean.

Brian in MN 11-29-2017 10:34 PM

Chivers was not making the case that the design of the AK changed the world. It was the Russian/Communist willingness to spread tens of millions of assault rifles throughout the 2nd and 3rd worlds that changed history. If the Russians had decided to dump millions of AR-70s into Africa, Asia and the Middle East the result would have been much the same. No longer could a colonial power mow down rows of locals who were armed with pointy sticks and a few old Enfields. Suddenly the locals had enough firepower to make life expensive for the old order.

As it happened, the AK was ideally suited to the role of destabilizing colonial power.

Sabre5G 11-29-2017 10:37 PM

The M-16 used to have a 20 round mag til the ak.
And no other rifle is more reliable.
It also standardized the intermediate caliber

Scott7891 11-30-2017 03:06 AM

Russians started AK proliferation but the Chinese dominated it.

You are more likely to run into a Chinese AK than a Russian one today, outside the U.S. notwithstanding.

DP 11-30-2017 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott7891 (Post 4347928)
Russians started AK proliferation but the Chinese dominated it.

You are more likely to run into a Chinese AK than a Russian one today, outside the U.S. notwithstanding.

Agreed

dontsh00tmesanta 11-30-2017 05:02 AM

No, gunpowder did. In the absence of the ak other rifles would have replaced it. I see tons of m16s in cartel hands.

AKBLUE 11-30-2017 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flankenstein (Post 4346963)
Soviets arming and tooling up these countries had more impact than the weapon choice. And small arms in the modern age aren't going to revolutionize warfare.

+1., yep

Did the Soviet Union, Chinese, Romanian and Yugoslavian proliferation of firearms and manufacturing machinery to many countries at cheap prices for political, alliance and monetary reasons change warfare?

Yes., but not the weaponry type as much as the proliferation of an automatic firearm vs the bolt guns and mixed pattern firearms that were available prior to the large numbers of AK pattern firearms made available.

A significant amount of machinery, skills and factory facilities are required to produce and assemble an AK pattern firearm in any quantity.

Bangladesh, Albania etc., African nations etc., were not really players in the small arms race etc. But they became large users and it ratcheted up the damage and scope of the wars/conflicts.

auskip07 11-30-2017 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dontsh00tmesanta (Post 4347955)
I see tons of m16s in cartel hands.

Thanks Obama

AKBLUE 11-30-2017 12:10 PM

Arms trades are the same as drug trades., there is always the underground, smuggling and illegal dealing. Following that path is like a snake in tall grass.

The USA sent more than a few Chinese AK's to Afghanistan in the 1980's and forward.

69Rebel 11-30-2017 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HK-91 (Post 4346807)
No, gun powder did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bj660raptor (Post 4347453)
yup the cartridge did

Quote:

Originally Posted by dontsh00tmesanta (Post 4347955)
No, gunpowder did. In the absence of the ak other rifles would have replaced it. I see tons of m16s in cartel hands.

Smokeless powder and self contained cartridges specifically.
Semi/full auto are basically impossible with black powder.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2018 The AK FIles