PHASR

[Mikey]

I'm not saying it's the best thing out there - FAL, IDI, and others still make superior assault rifles. All I'm saying is that it is a far more reliable weapon than the original Stoner Arms that was issued in 'Nam. And it still suits the original purpose for which it replaced the M14.

[DarkOmen]

If I had to choose only one gun out of all of the ones i own, or out of any for that matter, it would be my AK-47.

However, i would rather have an M4 than an SA80, AUG, FAMAS or G36...

[Sionnach Glic]

From what I remember, the incidents of US troops preferring AK-47s over their issued guns was with tank crewers. They'd pick up shortened versions of the AKs as they were better suited to the sort of close-range defence they'd need them for in a tank.

[DarkOmen]

It's not just Americans.... the AK-47 is simply a far more reliable firearm than anything else out there today. The US is "notorious" for it because of Vietnam. The M14's and M16s would jam in the swamp muck, and the M14's were way too big. The AK is a perfect size, has the increased power over the M16 to get through the foliage of the jungle, and would work, no matter what. A US soldier said his squad found a grave site that had been there for several years, underground. I'm not sure how they found the site, but there were several of the Vietnamese fighters buiried there, many with their AK's still in their hands. The US soldier took one of these weapons, covered with rust, filled with dirt and mud and sand. He put a magazine in, racked the gun, and it fired and cycled flawlessly. To a soldier, this kind of "indestructablility" is invaluable.

However, there was a downside to US soldiers taking AKs in 'nam.... the AK-47 has a very distinct report when fired, and US soldiers were trained to recognize this sound, and recognized it as the enemy. US soldiers using AK's were the cause of several friendly fire incidents.

i have a little firearm website i work on occasionally, and i have a bit about the ak if you want to look

http://www.guncentral.net/Rifles/ak47.html

[Blackstar the Chakat]

if ya combine the AK-47s with some sort of anti-friendly fire system it would make a near perfect weapon.

[Captain Seafort]

if ya combine the AK-47s with some sort of anti-friendly fire system it would make a near perfect weapon.

Such a system already exists - it's called target recognition. A concept that seems alien to the US military

[Mikey]

You just can't resist, can you, Seafort?

I'm dure you can provide clear evidence of no British troops having EVER been involved in a SINGLE friendly-fire incident, can't you?

[Captain Seafort]

Alright, apologies the unnecessary dig, and the exact circumstances of the blue-on-blues in Vietnam were the sort that would be likely to happen in a firefight. The topic is something of a bugbear of mine.

As for the question, I freely admit that the British military has been responsible for blue-on-blues - every military has. What annoys me about the US military is that not only do they seem to be responsible for far more, but in circumstances where such incidents simply should not happen. Seeing bloody great day-glow orange recognition markers and rationalising them as rocket launchers for example.

[Mikey]

Well, I'm not saying that US troops have always had the best justification...

But as far as the number of incidents, that can be easily attributable to the far larger number of troops that the US has fielded during modern campaigns, compared to our other so-called allies. I'd be interested to see if you have any info on the percentage of friendly-fire incidents per number of troops actually on the ground for a given nations force.

[Aaron]

It's not just Americans.... the AK-47 is simply a far more reliable firearm than anything else out there today. The US is "notorious" for it because of Vietnam. The M14's and M16s would jam in the swamp muck, and the M14's were way too big. The AK is a perfect size, has the increased power over the M16 to get through the foliage of the jungle, and would work, no matter what. A US soldier said his squad found a grave site that had been there for several years, underground. I'm not sure how they found the site, but there were several of the Vietnamese fighters buiried there, many with their AK's still in their hands. The US soldier took one of these weapons, covered with rust, filled with dirt and mud and sand. He put a magazine in, racked the gun, and it fired and cycled flawlessly. To a soldier, this kind of "indestructablility" is invaluable.

However, there was a downside to US soldiers taking AKs in 'nam.... the AK-47 has a very distinct report when fired, and US soldiers were trained to recognize this sound, and recognized it as the enemy. US soldiers using AK's were the cause of several friendly fire incidents.

i have a little firearm website i work on occasionally, and i have a bit about the ak if you want to look

http://www.guncentral.net/Rifles/ak47.html

The FN FAL is a pretty close second for reliability.

This thing though is a collosal waste of money to use to blind troops. Especially as it can be defeated by a pair of laser resistant glasses. Rather it would be better employed to blind vehicle optics (like tanks) considering their greater firepower. And whoever brought up the laser pointer is pretty spot on, the infantry in the CF often use laser pointers to screw with the sights on vehicles.

[Graham Kennedy]

AK 47 is indeed ultra reliable and has hitting power. But from what I've read it's accuracy absolutely sucks.

[Captain Seafort]

AK 47 is indeed ultra reliable and has hitting power. But from what I've read it's accuracy absolutely sucks.

Part of the problem is the Russian 7.62 round - it's only 39mm long compared with the 51mm of NATO 7.62, so the effective range is reduced to 400m compared with over 1000m for NATO weapons. There are also issues with the sights, which are fine for snap-shooting at short-medium range, but not for long range accuracy.

By and large, however, accuracy isn't of vital importance - the AK was designed as part of Soviet infantry doctrine, which relied on getting close to the objective in APCs, then debussing for the final assault. In such a situation accuracy is less important than volume of fire and reliability.

[MetalHead]

AK 47 is indeed ultra reliable and has hitting power. But from what I've read it's accuracy absolutely sucks.

Really? I heard that some AK's could almost be used as a para-sniper weapon in single-shot mode. Then again, thats just hearsay from a random person, not read anything official.

[Graham Kennedy]

Volume of fire is useless if the fire doesn't actually HIT anything!

[MetalHead]

Volume of fire is useless if the fire doesn't actually HIT anything!

hence the ultimate combat tactic - spray n' pray.