AK-203 Scrap

[Angel of War]

I don't know much about rifles
There are many kinds of Ak, and the same 7.62×39 ammunition is used, the accuracy of AKM is much better than that of AK47,
Ak74 has better accuracy than M4
I think what he means is, the M43 is already a very backward bullet, there is no reason to adopt him

AKM still fares very poorly in this regard . Like i had quoted an article , you can read this

A 1979 report, titled “Shooting effects of automatic weapons” lays out the statistical methodology that was used to test weapons during the Soviet era. There also is a huge resource of firing tables from 1977, that compare accuracy of various infantry weapons. Both experienced and average soldiers were tested with various weapons, from various stances, including firing from moving vehicles, at night, at even returning fire against muzzle flashes at night. From those tests, a measure of average shots to hit or destroy a target was measured against a variety of targets, including helicopters, cars, and enemy personnel.From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy .
The Soviets also measured these figures for burst fire against the ak74. Here the softer recoiling characteristics of the AK-74 start to shine. Firing from a supported prone position, a single three shot burst from an AK-74 is all that is needed to hit a running target out to five hundred meters. With the AKM, this can only be done out to three hundred meters. In a bounding overwatch situation, firing short bursts after a quick halt with the average soldier, the AK-74 required two bursts or six rounds to hit a standing target at one hundred meters, and five bursts or fifteen rounds to hit that same target at two hundred meters. With the AKM, eleven rounds are required at one hundred meters, and thirty-three are required at two hundred meters. The difference is dramatic, with almost double the rounds required with the AKM when bursting.
So It isn't really false bro , it's true to a good extent .
Also , Perhaps one of the most interesting tests is the longer bursts. Soldiers were instructed to shoot at a squad target using long bursts from one hundred to three hundred meters out. The number of shots required to neutralize 50 percent and 80 percent of the squad was recorded, against standing targets, and head and chest targets. From the prone supported position, the best soldiers needed twenty-two shots in long bursts to neutralize half a squad, and fifty-two shots to neutralize 80 percent of the squad with the AKM at three hundred meters. The average soldiers needed fifty-one and 119 shots to accomplish the same tasks. With the AK-74, the numbers for the best soldiers dropped to seventeen and thirty-nine, and to thirty-eight and eighty-eight for the average soldier, a marked improvement in full auto control and accuracy.

The accuracy could have improved in AK203 . But the current generation of AKs in IA service aren't known to be very accurate

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

AKM still fares very poorly in this regard . Like i had quoted an article , you can read this

You have actually quoted the article very poorly, sorry to say.

For exampe, you write -
"From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy "

and ignore that the AK74 also loses 54%.


The report is about hitting targets, not delivering damage. Report is from era where armour was nonexistant. It is very likely that we will be up against semi armoured troops where 5.45 is worse than 762.

If you want pure accuracy, 5.45 is better than 7.62 due to flatter trajectory.

Here you are again fixating yourself on the efficacy of 7.62*39 in COIN ops and CQB battles . are bhai PBI engagements are not done in the same way !

Kindly read my post again which you are reffering to . I have clearly mentioned ' a couple hundered metres ' for an infantry assault on an enemy position not 200 metres as you claim . If you have doubts then you can just ask me instead of boldly justifying yourself

Just saying, "a couple hundred" literally means 200 .

And AKs are good from 300-400 for regular infantry, which is not COIN distances. And beyond that its unlikely people will be relying on rifles to fight, more likely DMR / CG / Mortars / Arty support.

 

[Angel of War]

AKM solves the muzzle jump problem of the AK47

Compared to AK 47 - Yes ( a 1940s weapon)
But that dosen't make it more accurate than what's there in the market today

 

[Angel of War]

You have actually quoted the article very poorly, sorry to say.

For exampe, you write -
"From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy "

and ignore that the AK74 also loses 54%.

You are contradicitng yourself here . A bullet losing 54% of it's energy is suppossed to perform better than a bullet which loses 60% of it's energy in the same distance . You should be thankful that I did not include this point . This further clarifies my point .

The report is about hitting targets, not delivering damage. Report is from era where armour was nonexistant. It is very likely that we will be up against semi armoured troops where 5.45 is worse than 762.

Modern body armour will have no problem stopping 7.62*39mm rounds . @Kuldeepm952 has written a post on this thread regarding that. You can read it.
Just to make it clear , I am not scouting for 5.45 , that article was to point out the ineffectiveness of 7.62*39 in eliminating squad level targets with accuracy

If you want pure accuracy, 5.45 is better than 7.62 due to flatter trajectory.

Lot of other factors are involved to other than accuracy . You think I've been scouting for 7.62*51 for accuracy alone ? Then you haven't read my posts .

Just saying, "a couple hundred" literally means 200 .

A couple of hundered could mean anything . 200, 300 , 400. It isn't specifically meant to be 200 . That's what i wanted to say , if i wanted to say 200 then I could have just said so.

And AKs are good from 300-400 for regular infantry, which is not COIN distances.

Any proof to support your statement ? Going by pure ballistics ,I don't think so . ( I have shared the stats for ballistics earlier in some posts)

And beyond that its unlikely people will be relying on rifles to fight, more likely DMR / CG / Mortars / Arty support.

Very weird logic , we don't even need to replace insas by your logic considering that our army will solely rely on DMR / CG / Mortars / Arty support.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

You are contradicitng yourself here . A bullet losing 54% of it's energy is suppossed to perform better than a bullet which loses 60% of it's energy in the same distance . You should be thankful that I did not include this point . This further clarifies my point .

Modern body armour will have no problem stopping 7.62*39mm rounds . @Kuldeepm952 has written a post on this thread regarding that. You can read it.
Just to make it clear , I am not scouting for 5.45 , that article was to point out the ineffectiveness of 7.62 in eliminating squad level targets with accuracy


Lot of other factors are involved to other than accuracy . You think I've been scouting for 7.62*51 for accuracy alone ? Then you haven't read my posts .

A couple of hundered could mean anything . 200, 300 , 400. It isn't specifically meant to be 200 . That's what i wanted to say , if i wanted to say 200 then I could have just said so.

Any proof to support your statement ? Going by pure ballistics ,I don't think so . ( I have shared the stats for ballistics earlier in some posts)

Very weird logic , we don't even need to replace insas by your logic considering that our army will solely rely on DMR / CG / Mortars / Arty support.

1)No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading.

2)Modern HARD armour will stop it, yes. And it'll stop 5.56 as well. Against soft armour, 7.63 does more damage as it does not depend on speed alone for damage.

3)If you are supporting 7.62x51 as every troops, there are a multitude of disadvantages. 1) Recoil 2)Capacity ( About 60% capacity of AK, even if you have new polymer 7.62x51 mags vs old steel AK mags) 3)Weight of rifle itself.

7.62 Nato is fine for LMG which you put down on the ground and fire with bipod support, but apart from some specific cases its not as good.

4)A couple, literally means 2. A couple hundred means 200.

5)

AK without optics


AK with optics


6) I said we wont use beyond 400 meters, and we dont use insas at those distances either.

 

[Angel of War]

1)No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading.

2)Modern HARD armour will stop it, yes. And it'll stop 5.56 as well. Against soft armour, 7.63 does more damage as it does not depend on speed alone for damage.

3)If you are supporting 7.62x51 as every troops, there are a multitude of disadvantages. 1) Recoil 2)Capacity ( About 60% capacity of AK, even if you have new polymer 7.62x51 mags vs old steel AK mags) 3)Weight of rifle itself.

7.62 Nato is fine for LMG which you put down on the ground and fire with bipod support, but apart from some specific cases its not as good.

4)A couple, literally means 2. A couple hundred means 200.

5)

AK without optics


AK with optics

1)No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading.

It loses 6% of it's energy ? Did you even read the article ? It clearly says " 60%" not "6%" . Shall I share the link with you ?

2)Modern HARD armour will stop it, yes. And it'll stop 5.56 as well. Against soft armour, 7.63 does more damage as it does not depend on speed alone for damage.

5.56 was never even involved in the discussion . 7.62*39 will fail fail against any good leveL IV BPJ , our soldiers lives have been saved by such BPJs from the same 7.62*39 bullets , clearly shows how ineffective they are against modern body armour , nuff said

3)If you are supporting 7.62x51 as every troops, there are a multitude of disadvantages. 1) Recoil 2)Capacity ( About 60% capacity of AK, even if you have new polymer 7.62x51 mags vs old steel AK mags) 3)Weight of rifle itself.

That isn't true if you are living in 2022 .
1) recoil - https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...e-low-recoil-7-62-nato-round-with-m14.474244/

2) weight of the rifle - sig 716 weighs 4.2KG with mag and 3.8 without Mag .

7.62 Nato is fine for LMG which you put down on the ground and fire with bipod support, but apart from some specific cases its not as good.

Like what ?

4)A couple, literally means 2. A couple hundred means 200.

Do I have to repeat what I said again ? A couple of hundered could mean anything be it 200,300,400 . If i wanted to say 200 , I could have just daid so .
BTW , Don't think that our troops will get AK with optics .

 

[Flying Dagger]

You have actually quoted the article very poorly, sorry to say.

For exampe, you write -
"From one hundred to four hundred meters, the AKM loses a good 60 percent of it's energy "

and ignore that the AK74 also loses 54%.


The report is about hitting targets, not delivering damage. Report is from era where armour was nonexistant. It is very likely that we will be up against semi armoured troops where 5.45 is worse than 762.

If you want pure accuracy, 5.45 is better than 7.62 due to flatter trajectory.


Just saying, "a couple hundred" literally means 200 .

And AKs are good from 300-400 for regular infantry, which is not COIN distances. And beyond that its unlikely people will be relying on rifles to fight, more likely DMR / CG / Mortars / Arty support.

@Angel of War Well it's not just me who has problem with understanding what you say and what you mean...

Couple hundred means 200 metre please share the guide to help me out if it means anything else.

Compared to AK 47 - Yes ( a 1940s weapon)
But that dosen't make it more accurate than what's there in the market today

Market have improved AKs like Galil Ace Ak 203 Ak -)12/15 and special op mod by Zenit co Fab etc.


the Sig 716 DI is facing issues as per some reports can you care to put your words about that.

and yes you can point out the ammo issue but then Aks are using the OFB ammo and working fine.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

It loses 6% of it's energy ? Did you even read the article ? It clearly says " 60%" not "6%" . Shall I share the link with you ?

5.56 was never even involved in the discussion . 7.62*39 will fail fail against any good leveL IV BPJ , our soldiers lives have been saved by such BPJs from the same 7.62*39 bullets , clearly shows how ineffective they are against modern body armour , nuff said

That isn't true if you are living in 2022 .
1) recoil - https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...e-low-recoil-7-62-nato-round-with-m14.474244/

2) weight of the rifle - sig 716 weighs 4.2KG with mag and 3.8 without Mag .


Like what ?

Do I have to repeat what I said again ? A couple of hundered could mean anything be it 200,300,400 . If i wanted to say 200 , I could have just daid so .
BTW , Don't think that our troops will get AK with optics .

1)

What I wrote:

"the AK74 also loses 54%" "No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading."


What you wrote:

It loses 6% of it's energy ? Did you even read the article ? It clearly says " 60%" not "6%" . Shall I share the link with you ?


2) If you are 7.62 NATO only, guy, the issues have been clearly highlighted by me. I was only showing why forces moved from 5.56 to 7.62.

3)

i)Thats with lower weight bullet, but same caliber - You will compromise on armour penetration (Which I suppose is one of your central arguments)

ii) Yeah, and sig has recoil issues. Light rifle with high power cartridge is always a bad idea.

4) Like Mountain warfare

5)No, like I said, "A couple" means exactly two. A couple hundred means 200. Couple is often misused as "some", but literally means two only. That aside, AK is effective well beyond 200, 300 mtrs.

And yeah, I dont think they will be issued with scopes - But they have the correct architecture for future use of optics, which will definitely happen.

 

[Angel of War]

@SwordOfDarkness @Flying Dagger @Super Flanker
I am gonna end this argument now . In the end , I'll just like to say that this is your chinese infantryman equipped with the latest generation body armour . Good luck killing him with your AKs

 

[NotASussyBoi]

to the bullet nerds here,would it be possible to create a new 7.62 round with some next gen features "borrowed" from the US

 

[Super Flanker]

Alright now, I think so that we should close this thread now. What do you all think?

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

@SwordOfDarkness @Flying Dagger @Super Flanker
I am gonna end this argument now . In the end , I'll just like to say that this is your chinese infantryman equipped with the latest generation body armour . Good luck killing him with you AKs
View attachment 155804

No, this is what they want you to think is their avg infantryman.

This is the actual avg infantryman. No armour. Sometimes soft armour.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

to the bullet nerds here,would it be possible to create a new 7.62 round with some next gen features "borrowed" from the US

Sure, why not. Polymer 7.62x39 wont be that hard, already exists in civillian market.

 

[Angel of War]

1)

View attachment 155774

What I wrote:

"the AK74 also loses 54%" "No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading."


What you wrote:

It loses 6% of it's energy ? Did you even read the article ? It clearly says " 60%" not "6%" . Shall I share the link with you ?

What you actually wrote - "No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading."
You didn't mention AK 74 in your original post

2) If you are 7.62 NATO only, guy, issues have been clearly highlighted by me. I was only showing why forces moved from 5.56 to 7.62.

You highlighted the issues and I gave you the solution .
3)

i)Thats with lower weight bullet, but same caliber - You will compromise on armour penetration (Which I suppose is one of your central arguments)

ii) Yeah, and sig has recoil issues. Light rifle with high power cartridge is always a bad idea.

Don't you know why Sig is having recoil issues . They are using Hi power LMG rounds for a assault rifle .

5)No, like I said, "A couple" means exactly two. A couple hundred means 200. Couple is often misused as "some", but literally means two only. That aside, AK is effective well beyond 200, 300 mtrs.

I used " couple " to imply the former . You ain't convincing me bout your AKs being effective beyind 300

And yeah, I dont think they will be issued with scopes - But they have the correct architecture for future use of optics, which will definitely happen.

Let's see , only time will tell

 

[Angel of War]

No, this is what they want you to think is their avg infantryman.

This is the actual avg infantryman. No armour. Sometimes soft armour.

If you think PLA will jump into battle unprepared then you are being delusional . They have ordered 2 million units of body armour. Don't Keep underestimating your adversary .

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

What you actually wrote - "No, but saying "it loses 60% energy" without saying its just 6% worse is misleading."
You didn't mention AK 74 in your original post

You highlighted the issues and I gave you the solution .

Don't you know why Sig is having recoil issues . They are using Hi power LMG rounds for a assault rifle .

I used " couple " to imply the former . You ain't convincing me bout your AKs being effective beyind 300

The comparison in the report is between AKM and AK74, IDK what the confusion is. ANyway, hopefully you got the point about energy loss.

I also wrote about flaw in the solutions.

No, we use standard M80. Small deviations dont make crazy changes in recoil.

Well, I gave couple vids of AKs being very reasonably accurate beyond 300m, not much more I can do, having never shot one of them.

 

[Angel of War]

No, this is what they want you to think is their avg infantryman.

This is the actual avg infantryman. No armour. Sometimes soft armour.

don't live in your delusinal world buddy . These delusions costed us 62

PLA body armor tibet - Google Search

Thanks to India, PLA in Tibet is wearing body armor

Since the tension on the Sino-Indian border in April 2020, China's military equipment in Tibet and Xinjiang has been continuously upgraded. In a recent CCTV military report, a combined arms brigade commander named Zhao Xianfu appeared. Several years ago, he was still a regimental commander. Not...

www.china-arms.com

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

If you think PLA will jump into battle unprepared then you are being delusional . They have ordered 2 million units of body armour. Don't Keep underestimating your adversary .

Never said to underestimate, just pointing out that judging your enemy by propaganda videos and not ground realities is incorrect.

 

[Angel of War]

Never said to underestimate, just pointing out that judging your enemy by propaganda videos and not ground realities is incorrect.

They are getting the equipment and modernising rapidly , these ground realities you're talking about are in peace time . Don't expect to see them like this in war time .

Thanks to India, PLA in Tibet is wearing body armor

Since the tension on the Sino-Indian border in April 2020, China's military equipment in Tibet and Xinjiang has been continuously upgraded. In a recent CCTV military report, a combined arms brigade commander named Zhao Xianfu appeared. Several years ago, he was still a regimental commander. Not...

www.china-arms.com

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

don't live in your delusinal world buddy . These delusions costed us 62

PLA body armor tibet - Google Search

Thanks to India, PLA in Tibet is wearing body armor

Since the tension on the Sino-Indian border in April 2020, China's military equipment in Tibet and Xinjiang has been continuously upgraded. In a recent CCTV military report, a combined arms brigade commander named Zhao Xianfu appeared. Several years ago, he was still a regimental commander. Not...

www.china-arms.com

Lol. even in the propaganda photo, he is wearing a vest, but there is no plate

Like I said, officers do seem to have soft armour, but no need to gauge enemy by propaganda.