Kalashnikov Dead

Kalashnikov Dead at age 94

http://news.yahoo.com/rifle-designer...iacontentstory


What do you say about someone like this?

What do you say about someone like this?

I say: Meh.

Not christmas yet? Design is stolen, the Kalashnikov is the Sturmgewehr 44 that was developed in Germany.

Fragony is ofc wrong again.

Brilliant guy, hero of his nation when it mattered..

RIP

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Fragony is ofc wrong again.

Brilliant guy, hero of his nation when it mattered..

RIP

Nope, I am not, google will solve things very fast.

Looks familiar? http://www.efour4ever.com/sturmgewhe...ncross_920.jpg

Originally Posted by Fisherking

What do you say about someone like this?

Someone like what?

He was a weapon designer, he didn't force anyone to use them.

He had a job and he did it very well.

"Blame the Nazi Germans for making me become a gun designer," said Kalashnikov. "I always wanted to construct agricultural machinery."

Although I don't care much for gun designers and would have preferred if his inventiveness was focused on agricultural machinery.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Nope, I am not, google will solve things very fast.

Looks familiar? http://www.efour4ever.com/sturmgewhe...ncross_920.jpg

You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you?

Kalashnikov's AK was not all that brilliant of a design. It has only become iconic due to its patron state. The Warsaw Pact should have adopted Jiří Čermák's vz.58, but the Soviet Union never would have accepted non-Russian derived weapon system at a level so central to its propaganda efforts.

It depends how you look at it. There were more precise rifles out there, with better range and a rate of fire but Kalash did what it supposed to do. Simplistic design, easy to maintain, easy to use, cheap, reliable, functions properly even in extreme weather conditions...

I'm not an expert on rifles by any means, vz.58 could be a better rifle than ak 74, Czechs had/have a quite good armaments industry...

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you?

Sure I don't. What does it matter that he admitted it himself.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Sure I don't. What does it matter that he admitted it himself.

Frags:

There is at least one source claiming that he denied such. This wiki suggests that the AK-47 inherited features from the M1 Garand and the Remington 8 (an antecedent of the BAR) as well as using a gas-operated system akin to that of the STG-44, but also akin to that of the SVT-38, a soviet automatic rifle that the Germans encountered (and snatched and used against the former owners). Implying that he "stole" the design is a little silly -- when enough features/ideas are taken from different places it's called research.

Now now, Seamus. It's rude to confuse Frags with this whole knowledge thingy.

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Frags:

There is at least one source claiming that he denied such. This wiki suggests that the AK-47 inherited features from the M1 Garand and the Remington 8 (an antecedent of the BAR) as well as using a gas-operated system akin to that of the STG-44, but also akin to that of the SVT-38, a soviet automatic rifle that the Germans encountered (and snatched and used against the former owners). Implying that he "stole" the design is a little silly -- when enough features/ideas are taken from different places it's called research.

The AK47 was build in cooperation with the Germans who made the Sturmgewehr 44. It isn't the revolutionary design people take it for. It's an evolutionary build based on the Sturmgewehr 44.

He admitted this, you know better than the man himself?

@Kadagar_AV, stop falling in love with me, I said no and I mean it. I am not into that.

Originally Posted by Fragony

The AK47 was build in cooperation with the Germans who made the Sturmgewehr 44. It isn't the revolutionary design people take it for. It's an evolutionary build based on the Sturmgewehr 44.

He admitted this, you know better than the man himself?

Just because rifles look alike externally doesn't mean that they use same mechanisms internally. The rifle PJ mentioned, vz.58 looks almost exactly the same as AK-47 but it's totally different inside.

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Just because rifles look alike externally doesn't mean that they use same mechanisms internally. The rifle PJ mentioned, vz.58 looks almost exactly the same as AK-47 but it's totally different inside.

Ffs he even admitted it. The AK47 was developed in cooperation with Meinfeld who developed the Stg44 and was flown into Russia after the war. Just like the USA did fly out german scientists on their parts. Germans may have their mistakes but they sure are excellent engineers.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Ffs he even admitted it. The AK47 was developed in cooperation with Meinfeld who developed the Stg44 and was flown into Russia after the war. Just like the USA did fly out german scientists on their parts. Germans may have their mistakes but they sure are excellent engineers.

It. Is. A. Different. Rifle! Simple as that.

Wherever you read about that, it was bollox.

Fragony's post here is the third link on Google when you search for "Meinfeld AK-47", so there goes my attempt to find anything about that...

What I can find are theories about Hugo Schmeisser having developed the rifle instead, the Moscow Times calls it a fringe theory however, while the only sources claiming that Kalashnikov admitted that Schmeisser did it are apparently blogs, like this one.

Of course both sides have an agenda, some people hate the soviets and do not want to attribute such a wonderful rifle to them or they just love the Nazis so much that they do not think Russians were capable of coming up with anything decent (which is wrong of course). On the other hand the Russians wouldn't just admit if a German engineer helped design their iconic rifle just as Americans like to forget that they needed German technologies to get to the moon and to break the sound barrier.

Quite frankly I don't think it's important, I find it far more debatable and worthy of debate whether the development of that rifle or any other weapon is a good thing that ensures peace or makes one indirectly responsible for all the deaths this weapon causes. To me this doesn't seem really clear cut. Unless one considers the unlikely option that all humans would stop developing weapons, someone will always make the tools to kill people anyway, so why wouldn't he try to give his people an edge? What seems far less moral is giving them to shady people for money but even that seems inevitable.

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

It. Is. A. Different. Rifle! Simple as that.

Wherever you read about that, it was bollox.

Just not exactly the same

Originally Posted by Husar

Fragony's post here is the third link on Google when you search for "Meinfeld AK-47", so there goes my attempt to find anything about that...

What I can find are theories about Hugo Schmeisser having developed the rifle instead, the Moscow Times calls it a fringe theory however, while the only sources claiming that Kalashnikov admitted that Schmeisser did it are apparently blogs, like this one.

Of course both sides have an agenda, some people hate the soviets and do not want to attribute such a wonderful rifle to them or they just love the Nazis so much that they do not think Russians were capable of coming up with anything decent (which is wrong of course). On the other hand the Russians wouldn't just admit if a German engineer helped design their iconic rifle just as Americans like to forget that they needed German technologies to get to the moon and to break the sound barrier.

Quite frankly I don't think it's important, I find it far more debatable and worthy of debate whether the development of that rifle or any other weapon is a good thing that ensures peace or makes one indirectly responsible for all the deaths this weapon causes. To me this doesn't seem really clear cut. Unless one considers the unlikely option that all humans would stop developing weapons, someone will always make the tools to kill people anyway, so why wouldn't he try to give his people an edge? What seems far less moral is giving them to shady people for money but even that seems inevitable.

I thought we stole most of our sound barrier stuff from the Brits, just like we adopted their implosion calculations for Fat Man. The rest of the Moon program, as you rightly note, was Werner and crowd -- who actually bothered to read Goddard, unlike most of the U.S. establishment prior to the V2.

Frags:

There are simply too many antecedent concepts from too many directions, ALL of which went into Kalash's development of the AK-47. Significant direct German involvement is unlikely because of timing (indirect plenty of course based on captures). While the weapon was adopted in 1947, that was following nearly 2.5 years of development, trials, and provings. German weapons design was certainly one influence, but by no means the only one.

RIP, I feel sad for him for having to sit back and watch his invention become hijacked by undesirable types... I suppose even turned against his own countrymen in Afghanistan and the like.

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I thought we stole most of our sound barrier stuff from the Brits, just like we adopted their implosion calculations for Fat Man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swept_wing#Development

I just remember reading in a book about how you (Anglos ) had problerms breaking the sound barrier because of structural problems at such high speeds. That was until one of the designers had a look at older German designs and found the solution in swept wing designs. Been a while since I read that and I do not have the book anymore but at least wiki seems to agree that German engineers figured that out relatively early before breaking the sound barrier was even a reachable goal.

Basically seems like we had a solution without really having the problem and you (the British/Anglos) then copied our solution when you actually had the problem.

Germany also designed the first stealth airplane in WW2 already, it took you years after the war to come up with such a design, although yours more sophisticated of course.

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I thought we stole most of our sound barrier stuff from the Brits, just like we adopted their implosion calculations for Fat Man. The rest of the Moon program, as you rightly note, was Werner and crowd -- who actually bothered to read Goddard, unlike most of the U.S. establishment prior to the V2.

Frags:

There are simply too many antecedent concepts from too many directions, ALL of which went into Kalash's development of the AK-47. Significant direct German involvement is unlikely because of timing (indirect plenty of course based on captures). While the weapon was adopted in 1947, that was following nearly 2.5 years of development, trials, and provings. German weapons design was certainly one influence, but by no means the only one.

Not the only one, but the the model is based on the original design. After WW2 Russia imported German weapon experts, so did you. That shouldn't be new to anyone, I thought it was common knowledge.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not the only one, but the the model is based on the original design. After WW2 Russia imported German weapon experts, so did you. That shouldn't be new to anyone, I thought it was common knowledge.

You seem to know everything about it, so why don't you start with explaining who Meinfeld is? Google obviously cites you as the only source on his work on the StG-44.

The success of the Kalashnikov is due to its resilience and it simplicity. I learn to dismantle one just in looking at the mechanism. It s simple. If you try to do this with a FAMAS, you will go for big trouble (especially with the extractor system). The M.14 was inferior and the M.16 (and later) too sophisticated. At the time of the AK47 (47 being the year or production) look at what the others had to offer. About the Stgwhr 44, if it was so good, why no country used it?
Kalashnikov is the equivalent of Henry, inventor of the Winchester. He created a weapon that will be the symbol of the fight for freedom and independence for some and horrible dictatorships for others.

Originally Posted by Brenus

About the Stgwhr 44, if it was so good, why no country used it?

Err, silly question. Some are still in use today in third world countries, but not many were produced in the first place.
Not one piece of German WW2 equipment was produced after the war but quite a bit was used, Panzer IV and V were used in some countries and their 75mm guns continued to be useful for a while. The "problem" was that Germany was neither supposed nor allowed to build weapons anymore. That doesn't mean the AK-47 was bad, but there were definitely political reasons why the StG-44 wasn't used by any army after the war, there were probably not nearly enough to equip an entire army and have replacement parts left anyway.

Originally Posted by Husar

You seem to know everything about it, so why don't you start with explaining who Meinfeld is? Google obviously cites you as the only source on his work on the StG-44.

Frags is just giving too much weight to dubious blogs. Even a layman could see the differences if both rifles were disassembled in front of him.

Seamus is right, AK-47 was influenced by various previous designs, but it isn't a copy of any single one.

RIP

a“Err, silly question”: Nope. The French did use the Panther after WW2, And Japanese planes as well, at the start of the Indochina Wars, but not the Stg44. The AK was simpler and that is it. It was better suit for fighting that the Stg44. Could be a problem of munitions. 7.92 mm was not the usual one.

Originally Posted by Brenus

a“Err, silly question”: Nope. The French did use the Panther after WW2, And Japanese planes as well, at the start of the Indochina Wars, but not the Stg44. The AK was simpler and that is it. It was better suit for fighting that the Stg44. Could be a problem of munitions. 7.92 mm was not the usual one.

Well, you didn't use the AK, but you did actually use the StG-44 according to wikipedia.

There is however still the problem that it was not in production anymore, Iran also still uses F-14s but they are becoming fewer and fewer because they have to cannibalize them to get spare parts. In most cases armies also do not want to give rifles to half of their infantry and completely different rifles to the other half of their infantry. With fewer than 500,000 StG-44 produced and probably even fewer available after the war, no serious nation could have equipped its entire army with StG-44s and thought that this was a somewhat future-proof equipment. I wouldn't even say the AK-47 is worse, it has quite a few advantages, but to cite the number of users as proof given that one rifle was basically limited in the numbers available is quite odd. It's a bit like saying the VW Golf must perform better than a McLaren F1 because it has more users.

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

was influenced by various previous designs

Every single invention in the history of mankind is.

We're standing on the shoulder of giants, ya know.

Also this: