This is in reply to the thoughtful comments I read on Joe’s post regarding the AK, which became a discussion regarding the relative merits of the two types, AR v. AK. The general philosophy behind the two weapons is a reflection of the military tradition of the two countries. The AR is a precise weapon, regardless of the caliber. It is accurate out to 500-600 yards using the peep sight system adopted by the American military. Troops can be trained readily to become proficient out to that range, the entire Marine Corps is trained out to that distance. I agree w/Monk (someone note the date and time) the AK is not a weapon I generally appreciate. It reflects the Russian military philosophy that the tools of war, like the troops, are cheap, imprecise and expendable. The atrocious accuracy of the AK at 200yds is emblematic of everything that is wrong with the weapon.
The US and some other western countries became enamored of the 5.56×45 round because a soldier could carry more rounds than if they where equipped with the 7.62×51. The thinking was the stopping power of such a round on the plains of Germany to stop Ivan was sufficient; the 5.56×45 was, and still is, sufficient for warfare in open terrain. If someone gets hit by a 5.56 at 200+ yards, they are done for the day, if not for good. If you want to openly contest this, go find Monk in western Loudoun, and let him shoot you at 200+ yards (or even 100 yds), with a 5.56×45 using an AR15. If you are able to then run up and explode your IED strapped to your chest, more power to ya.
The trouble is that this round may not drop someone fast enough in an urban environment. In house to house, room to room fighting the high velocity 5.56×45 round is not knocking people down, as it is passing through cleanly, and not imparting its energy to its intended target. However, there are work-a-rounds, as the Wolverine put it, pull out a bazooka and the trouble in the other room WILL GO AWAY. As many AR type weapons are capable of carrying a 40mm grenade launcher slung underneath, that is almost as good as a bazooka. The real lesson here is that the AR is fine, the round it is pushing is far too specialized. The new 6.5×47 is a very good compromise.
I like to hit what I am aiming at. If you keep your AR clean it will work. Our troops kept their gas operated M1’s clean in WWII and Korea. The argument that taking care of a weapon is too much to expect is vacuous. The Russian’s made the AK popular because it was cheap. You get what you pay for. The loose manufacturing tolerances are a function of the abysmal state of Russian/Soviet manufacturing, not some stroke of design genius. The loose tolerances gave the AK its ability to be a maintenance free weapon. The price for this feature is accuracy. Accuracy kills. At 200+yds the AR is to the AK what a guided missile is to an iron bomb dropped at 30K ft.
The short comings of the 5.56 were magnified in Iraq, the fighting there has been almost exclusively urban in nature. In Afghanistan the 5.56×45 is in a mixed urban/rural environment and has performed well there. The urban environment is where the 7.62×39 shines, at close range it has far more stopping power than the 5.56×45. Again, the issue is not the rifle but the ammo. The AR10 fires the 7.62×51, a round with plenty of stopping power. As mentioned above the 6.5×47 Lapua is another option. Considering the nature of asymmetrical warfare the US may need to consider adopting a new round, or, returning to the 7.62×51.
Another area where the AK shines is in the use of it by untrained militias, guerrilla troops, or other irregulars. These troops fit the profile of typical troops in the Russian military doctrine. They can’t hit anything past 100 yards, regardless of weapon choice, so the AK is just fine. The AK requires no care, since untrained militia typically do not take good care of their weapons, the loose tolerances of the AK is a plus for these kinds of combatants. If all you want is something that will fire, with an effective range of less than 100yds, the AK is good enough. Since it is cheap, the AK is probably a better choice than the AR for those who can’t shoot.
UPDATE:
The issue of tumbling M16 bullets came up. Below is a link all may find useful:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs13.htm
and the following illustration is useful as well.
