AK-47 in Ambush role

[newlineofdefense]

The AK-47 is quite possibly the ultimate combat patrol (ambush) rifle. Due to the AK-47's renouned reputation for reliabilty and durability, the is rifle in the role of a near or far ambush is well-suited. The criteria for the perfect Ambush patrol rifle one that will fire when the trigger is pulled shot after shot after shot. There is no room at all for weapons jams during a combat patrol in general. The AK fits this criteria, of course the soldier taking time to clean and oil his weapon religiously. Its just that the AK is more resilient to jams from dirt, grime and any matter in its action. The rifle must also fire a cartridge that in my opinion should not be the ever so popular .223 (5.56mm NATO) or smaller. I think the Ak-47 hits the limit in needed power and penetration abilities with its 7.62x39mm ammo. I have raved on and on that the .243 would be an excellent replacement for the .223 in the ever so popular small-caliber assault rifle. I have full confidence in the accuracy and power abilities of the .243 when put into the ambush/combat patrol role. The rifle also does not need sniper-grade accuracy, although, as always, the more accuracy the better. The rifle should fire decent patterns with heavy volumes or suppressive and assaulting firepower. So, if you have a controllable rifle, one that you can fire accuratly and effectivly, your rifle fires with the utmost reliabilty, your rifle fires a moderate size cartridge, and you have been thouroughly trained by a true soldier in the tactics of ambush, then your intelligence, motivation,training, and AK-47 rifle will be a brutal combination.Always know that training,motivation,and an effective weapon are the keys to generating effective combat power.DPZ

[Bryant]

Have you ever seen a 7.62.39 gunshot wound, it is devestating. Leaves very little to attend to or reconstructure, takes large chunks and will eat bone as if it does not exist. Check out the July issue of Soldier of Fortune, it has pictures of a 7.62 wound through the shoulder( nothing left), .223 wound (through the leg) and a 9mm wound through the knee. To say the least out of the rifles I would rather sustain a shot by a .223, leaves much to work with and reconstructure. As far as 7.62, well entire sections are completely missing and limbs that are hit are either destroyed or non existant.

After the Russian got their ass kicked by Germans with a 7.92x33mm rifles. They made the 7.62x39mm rifles.
A .243 rifle would be too large G3/FNFAL size and uncontrolable in full auto. Even semi auto rapid firing would be hard to hit anything. Except the first round and multiable targets would be out of the question.

[Dodge]

Bryant
I have a friend that is a Paramedic for a major city. He told me about a gent that was hit with a Ruger Mini14 several times, one round went into his lower chest. He said it was a small entry wound, but his whole chest and mid section was beet red from severe internal bleeding, and of course he was probably dead before hitting the ground.

He was in the military for a few years and had heard how this round had a tendency to tumble when entering something denser than air, he said that was proof positive, as his insides where turned into scrambled eggs!
That round probably hit a rid and started on its meat grinding path.
I wouldn't want to be hit with either, or any gun for that matter, I would rather not be a test bed http://www.ak-47.net/akcgi/wink.gif

[akjunkie]

just my .02 cents. but for ambush scenarios. make sure there is a round already in the chamber and the safety is OFF, cuz the Ak's safety lever is known to make alot of noise:-) dont want to give away your position

[Sir Hacksalot]

I think on ar15.com couple of weeks ago, there was a very interesting post on the wound ballistics of the 5.56 MM. Very nasty stuff. When the bullet hits a target (provided it is going over 2700 fps), it tends to yaw, then break in two at the cannelure, which produces a massive wound cavity. This is probably why the russkies switched to the 5.45 x 39 with a long heavy bullet that will destabilize upon impact.

All of the talk about wound characteristics is interesting, but unless you hit a target center mass, or flip the switch on the CNS, you are still going to have problems, regardless of what you are shooting.

Sincerely,
Sir Hacksalot

[Edmund Rowe]

Bryant:

I saw the pic in SOF of the guy's shoulder chewed up but IIRC:
-the caption didn't say it was a 7.62x39 wound
-the muscle of the guy's shoulder looks fairly intact

Is it me or did I miss something? Or maybe I'm thinking of the wrong SOF article.

The reason I ask is I've heard/read several accounts of 7.62x39 being a very "humane" bullet making very clean wounds in soft tissue. I'm sure it will break up bones but some good reading: http://www.fen.baynet.de/norbert.arnoldi/army/wound.html

The accounts I have heard about 7.62 combloc being very "clean":
-An SOF article back in the 80s about some guy training South American commandos. Seems there was a commie sleeper in the unit or something, he was shot with an AK. He commented on "it was just like my Viet Nam wound. Clean hole in and out" I'm not saying he was OK.
-The Martin Fackler paper linked above. He says something about having seen many wounded GIs in Da Nang hospital.
-A guy I know who ran a hospital in a Third World country saw many AK wounds which "If it didn't hit a bone, most of the time we just cleaned the wound, stitched it up, and injected the guy with antibiotics.
-Ragnar Benson, author of several books on paladinpress.com describes the FMJ 7.62x39 as something like "the most humane military round" or something like cause of mostly nonfatal wounds.

OK, having said all that, I do NOT want to be shot with one anywhere. I haven't been able to find good hard info on how 7.62x39 hollow point does, (I hear it's disappointing because of poor hollow point design).

Anyone know of any homo sapiens shot with 7.62x39 hollowpoint? I realize it's against Law of Land Combat nonsense.

Edmund

[Tomac]

Seems there's always a tradeoff when it comes to bullet design. Make a round frangible enough to cause massive wounding at nearly any velocity and the round may not penetrate light cover or clothing to reach the target. Make the bullet stout enough to reach the target and it may cause minimal damage upon penetration. Once the .223 FMJ loses enough velocity it won't fragment and after losing more velocity it won't even yaw upon impact. This is true for any FMJ round so I guess you pick the round & bullet design that best meets your particular needs. I chose 7.62x39 FMJ for its superior tactical penetration (when compared to .223) and ability to buck brush. Both are good rounds with strong points and weaknesses. Bottom line for me is I'd rather have a 7.62 clean hole through the target than no hole at all... Just my $.02 worth...
Tomac

[Sir Hacksalot]

You know, it seems to me that there is a simple solution to this matter.

If you want something that hits like the proverbial "Hammer of Thor", can punch through barricades, light armour, etc., then quit fooling with either the 7.62X39 or 5.56, and jump right on up to the full blown 7.62 NATO battle rifle, or even go with the time proven M1 Garand.

The assault rifle (AK, M16/AR) is a trade off. You give up long range (beyond 300 meters), you give up POWER, but you also give up weight, and gain the ability to carry LOTS of ammo, and have the ability to lay down a LOT of fire in a short amount of time.

If you try to use the weapon for something it is not designed for, you are in trouble.

Give me an AR or give me an AK, I really don't care, just so long as it goes "bang" when I pull the trigger if FINE with me.

Sir Hacksalot

[Edmund Rowe]

Sir Hacksalot took the words right outta my keyboard!!

7.62 NATO and .30-06 ball doesn't fragment like .223 but it tumbles slowly (that being relative) through soft tissue and causes some major tissue damage. I'm iffy on the exact details but somehow the full power military rifle cartridges make tissue go K-SPLATT due to something like very supersonic shock waves coming off the bullet or whatever. For some reason the full power stuff is over some velocity threshold for human tissue KSPLAT for this effect at least at relatively short ranges (100 yards? 200? 300? I dunno) Main point here the 7.62 NATO and .30-06 and the like cause major damage unlike 7.62x39 miltary ammo.

Some anecdotal info: H.W. McBride describes in his WW1 classic "A Rifleman Went to War" about soldiers at closer ranges being hit and the impact sound is like a loud POP making some think the dirty Huns are using explosive bullets. At longer ranges the bullet sorta just slips in with less of the dramatic effect heard by bystanders.

Of course there are trade-offs. All rifles in said Big Dawg rifle calibers are noticeably heavier, and have either smaller magazine capacity or have huge mongo ones. Shot to shot recovery is slower, too.

Like Sir Hacksalot says wisely, understand what your rifle(s) can/cannot do and that's the key.

Edmund

[buttrap]

I may be off base but I would go for somthing designed for the "ambush" role. Claymore mine for a start and a weapon that will put out rounds. M249 belt feed or a Stoner. The AK is a good gun but there are many first line weapons that are much more effective. M-60A2 is a thought but too slow of a fire rate. Just trying to stir the pot.

[USMCE4T]

There are some good points here. I agree with
sir hacksalot; if you really want to punch
holes through just about anything go to 7.62
or even 30.06 (Garand). However we cant down
play the penetration ability of either 5.56
or 7.62x39 FMJ rounds.

If we are talking ambush here, a suitable weapon firing either 5.56 or 7.62x39 will be just fine. At any typical ambush range, either caliber will give more than enough penetration on enemy personel and vehicles.
With either round you can easily take out
people inside an ordinary non-armored vehicle
at 200 meters. Certainly 7.62 NATO can do
a better penetration job and at longer distances. But your ambush is probably going to be pretty up close and personal, 50 to 100 meters, maybe (probably) less.

If you have to deal with Armored personel carriers, other armored vehicles and/or heavy baracades. You are going to need something in a .50cal BMG. Of course it never hurts to have some RPG's, LAAW or AT4 in these situations either.

If you have a small unit, say 5 guys, to outfit with (legally gotten) small arms;
Arm 2 men with an M14,FAL or M1 Garand, after that outfit everybody else with an AK or an AR15. If you can get a Barrett .50 cal for your team. In this case arm only one with a 7.62 battle rifle. A Barrett is heavy, but your team can operate it as a crew serve weapon and take turns carrying it. You will be a force to be reckoned with. You can kill the goons who think they are safe from you inside a SWAT APC.

[raven]

I've always thought of the AK as a weapon for guerrillas or drag-ass conscripts with bad supply lines, like those poor bastards in the Russian army today. Of course, you'll keep your weapon clean if you have the tools and solvents and oils....but it'll be just as reliable if you don't have that luxury. I've heard unbelievable stories about AKs working after being buried in mud, drug out of rivers, rusted so bad the cocking handle needed to be whacked free with a wrench..and the damn thing will still shoot.

I think the M-16A2 is a fine rifle for a modern, well-supplied army. It should be perfectly reliable as long as it is kept cleaned and well-maintained...and I've never been a soldier but I understand that in war it's 99% boredom and 1% sheer terror. There should be plenty of time to keep an M-16 clean for operations. I don't think it would be any worse of a weapon in an ambush than an AK (given, of course, its due maintanence).

[stinkin' Lincoln]

What happens when shooting through kevlar? any studies on this?

sl

------------------
if triangles had a god, it'd have three sides...

[CAV Trooper]

Having been on the recieving end (shot at a lot, hit once) of the 7.62x39 round out of AK's and SKS's, I have a bit of experience with the subject. The round that hit me was "through and through". No tumble, no expansion. I'm still walking around to talk about it. A 5.56 would have tumbled and we wouldn't be having this conversation. However, the bottom line is that geting shot with ANYTHING really F**ks up your whole day. If you have anything at all to say about it, don't go there.

[acex]

I have always trained to open fire with the most casualty producing weapon on the ambush. In my old company we would usually yell at the medic to throw his aid bag. just a joke no intentions to piss any medic off. Was real glad they were there when needed.

[Packrat]

The banning of steel-core rounds for the AK made it a much more deadly round. The steel-core rounds penetrate something like 8" before they become unstable enough to start tumbling. With the lead core, the bullet is shorter and more base-heavy, so starts tumbling within 2". The tumbling makes the large wound channel. The .223 not only tumbles (especially in the earlier, slower-twist barrels) but, at velocities above 2700 fps, when the bullet has tumbles about 90 degrees the base (below the channellure) fragments. These fragments, like shot, rip through the already-stretched tissue of the temporary cavity and make a lot of it permanent. This is the reason the ever-shorter barrels of the US Military weapons reduces their effectiveness. However, since they are primarily designed to keep Colt Industires alive, not some poor ragged-assed soldier, this isn't important.

------------------
Packrat

[PRE BAN]

Hey newline,
That all sounds cool but where did you learn about the ambush. Did your instructor tell you about changing magazines and keeping the enemy supressed before the moving team assaults through the enemy element while the other covers? All the time keeping your weapon pointed at the enemy and your eyes on the target. Not to mention that you will be in the prone position.Or maybe you have one of those T.V. guns that never needs mag changing.
You are correct about training though. Just be carefull what school you go to.
PRE BAN
P.S. I bet you are a Straight-Leg MP
I read your profile. now I know why you said all that stuff. JK email me if you want, I never went to Italy.

[This message has been edited by PRE BAN (edited 01-14-2000).]

[grobinson8]

Originally posted by Bryant:
Have you ever seen a 7.62.39 gunshot wound, it is devestating. Leaves very little to attend to or reconstructure, takes large chunks and will eat bone as if it does not exist. Check out the July issue of Soldier of Fortune, it has pictures of a 7.62 wound through the shoulder( nothing left), .223 wound (through the leg) and a 9mm wound through the knee. To say the least out of the rifles I would rather sustain a shot by a .223, leaves much to work with and reconstructure. As far as 7.62, well entire sections are completely missing and limbs that are hit are either destroyed or non existant.

Would you know where I could get a picture of this online I could use this in my paper.
Thanks,
Glenn

------------------
"When in doubt shoot first ask questions later"

[dr jarhead]

Its all about energy. A round that overpenetrates does not leave all of its energy inside the body. Of course, you need a round that will penetrate other objects before or after hitting a body as well in some circumstances.
FMJ ammo is a result of an agreement between nations in the early 1900's to decrease the lethality of small arms ammo. It was reasoned that simply removing a soldier from the field of battle was enough. Some might even argue that it uses up other available resources and personnel. This is the reason that FMJ ammo is illegal for hunting.

[wkinma]

How did J.A. get to post if he is unregistered???

[timg953x]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by wkinma:
How did J.A. get to post if he is unregistered???</font>
Just a note on the AK safety/selector "klack". If you wrap some parachute cord around the selector you can eliminate it. I have a friend that carried an AK with CCN in '68 he told me about the para cord thing. I used it on mine and it works.

[eodinert]

If you pull the selector away from the reciever when you move it, it will also prevent the noise. The index notch keeps the lever from moving accidently; If you bump or snag the lever you might go back to safe.

[Dangus]

If anyone saw the footage that Israeli TV ran of the Palestinians executing a supected collaborator, you'd learn about about AK ballistic.

It's not a pleasant thing to watch at all, but when you need to know about wound ballistics, very few sources are that pleasant. They shot him maybe 5 times in the torso, failing to kill him. The bullets shook his body but didn't visibly blast away any flesh, just went right through(this was at 2 feet though), and then he wasn't dead from that, so he shot him in the chest again and the recoil put one in the guy's face. The face wound ripped tissue and probably broke his jaw, though it once again seemed a pretty clean wound.

I felt sorry for the guy, but this proves quite clearly that the 7.62x39 has limitations. I greatly suspect 5.56 wouldn't have proved a whole lot more effective at that range.

Statistically speaking, what I've read(no I don't remember the source so it could be wrong), most poeple shot with 5.56 OR 7.62x39 survived the wound. The rates of survival of 5.56 are slightly lower, but there's probably a good reason for that. Rich countries, or poor ones supplied by rich countries, use 5.56, poor countries use 7.62x39. If person from county A shoots person from country B, and country B is poor, chances are their medical care will not be as good as what person from country A will get.

That said, rarely do you just have enemies standing around out in the open waiting to be shot, I'd rather have the AK-47 in battle than the M-16A2, simply because I refuse to stand around and shoot at guys only to have lumber, bricks, etc get in my way. I wanna put a bullet at the enemy when I need to, and have a good chance of hitting him, light cover or not.

------------------
Compromising the right position only makes you more wrong. Finding the right position means compromising the wrong.

[RussianShort]

The FMJ rounds make straight holes in the flesh and throungh the body, While the Hollow points tend to mushroom causing more tissue damage and killing faster, The reason the Army uses the FMJ is to take more men out of battle, Like if one guy is hit he is wounded and it takes 1-2 people out because they are carrying the wounded. Which the FMJ is more avective on taking men out of battle and the .233 does have the tendacy to tumble inside the body. The 7.62 to me is a more avvective round.



------------------
7.62x39mmMini

[srv656sxx]

Jeez! this topic is over a year old!

[GrinningGun]

Hehe just reading these old topics and thought I'd post to revive it FTHOI.

IMO getting shot hurts! I've seen people missing large parts of meat and limbs from AK's but the .223 is a deadly round. Since you can get shot in the knee and it could possibly come out your butt!:eek:
Take your pick massive external bleeding or massive internal bleeding?

[eodinert]

Come on, kids. I like AKs as well as any rational person, but the system, like any, has it's limitations. One of the more obvious limits is the round. Read Dr. Fackler's work on ballistics. When you get done with that, you might give this a try:

I have some steel armor plates that I use for targets. They are about a half inch thick.

At close range, both 5.56 and 7.62x51 will crater the metal. The back side of the metal will be slightly bulged behind the craters. The craters are nearly identical in shape and depth, with the 7.62 crater being proportionately larger in diameter.

When I fire 7.62x39 at the same plate, I just have to repaint the plate. No damage whatsoever is done, no crater, no bulge, nuttin'. Good as new after a shot of paint.

Distance was about 20 ft, weapons used were an FAL, M4gery and an SA85m. All ammo was ball. The 5.56 was old school 55 grain, by the way.

Kid yourself all you want, but 7.62x39 does not have as much horsepower as 5.56 or 7.62 NATO.

AK's are great guns, but you should appreciate them for what they are, not what you want them to be.

[Hawk]

Could you take and post pics of that test. I find it hard to believe. I've never done that test (0.5" steel plate @ 20 ft), but would be quite interested in those results. I figured .308 would punch right thru the plate at 20 ft and would never have thought .223 would dent it.

I have seen 1" steel rebar hit by .308 (by accident so might not have been a direct hit) @ 100 yds and it blew a 0.5" chunk off and snapped the bar in half.

[RJ Shooter]

This has got to be the oldest thread I have seen since I have been here!!!

[Airrick]

Kid yourself all you want, but 7.62x39 does not have as much horsepower as 5.56 or 7.62 NATO.

I must disagree. In my oponion:
The 7.62 NATO hands down has the most horsepower of the three rounds. But the 5.56 NATO does not have as much horsepower as 7.62x39. That is assuming horsepower is measured in muzzle energy. The 5.56 NATO has about 1200 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle. The 7.62NATO has about twice that. (2300-2400 ft lbs) The 7.63x39 has between 1500 an 1600 foot pounds. Thats why I choose the 7.62x 39. Also it retains the energy down range a lot more efficiently than 5.56.

[clem]

Hey Airrick, do you have any idea about the energy of the 7.62x39 out to 100 yards? clem:killmail:

[Airrick]

At 100 yards 7.62x39 has 1180 foot pounds of energy.

[gibsonite]

An old debate that goes waaay back.

I didn't get the horsepower comment either. Unless we're talking velocity. And velocity alone doesn't mean much.

5.56 can enjoy an accuracy advantage, and does enjoy a recoil and weight savings advantage. Those are pretty much undisputed. Is 7.62x39 faster? No. Is it as light as 5.56? No. Is it as easily controlled in sustained fire? Not likely. But....

For an ambush? Its ability to slice through brush from a hidden position is a clear advantage 7.62x39 has over the 5.56. I like 5.56 as much as anyone, but it will not cut the bush like a 7.62x39. At least not in a straight line. Another point is the shock factor. Most Kalashnikovs have a very loud and nasty bark when they're firing. That sudden very loud noise coming from nowhere can definitely be used to an ambush advantage.

The other big issue is which does more damage. No clear answer there. 5.56 with the right twist in the barrel can do really bad things if it hits a soft target. That against 7.62x39 FMJ probably will do more damage. But against a SP round? Nah. If that SP hits a soft target, its gonna make a mess. If they're in a vehicle or behind a wall, then the FMJ will probably do a better job of getting to them.

As for the hitting power, neither will seriously compete with the 7.62 NATO.

Really, if one cartridge had the hands down advantage, only one of them would be used. But for ambush I'll take the 7.62x39.