Had the AK-47 not existed...
- Thread starter chemo
- Start date
Around 1946 trials were held to choose a new rifle for the Soviet army. The submission by Kalashnikov was one of several and the AK-47 won. If it hadn't then one of the other designs would have been used instead.
The others were rifles designed by A.A. Demetev of the Korov machine gun factory and F. Bulkin of Tula works.
If someone wants the actual answer to the question posed on this thread then they need to find out what those other designs were.
The others were rifles designed by A.A. Demetev of the Korov machine gun factory and F. Bulkin of Tula works.
If someone wants the actual answer to the question posed on this thread then they need to find out what those other designs were.
Lots of votes for both the StG44 and the FN-FAL.
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as51-e.htm
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as24f-e.htm
I respectfully disagree with this.
I think that both of these are too well made, and therefore expensive, to be given away to third world countries by the millions.
The AK series is often referred to as the Volkswagen of guns for good reason.
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as51-e.htm
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as24f-e.htm
I respectfully disagree with this.
I think that both of these are too well made, and therefore expensive, to be given away to third world countries by the millions.
The AK series is often referred to as the Volkswagen of guns for good reason.
So we're looking at something cheaply and inexpensively made in the millions by Soviet Bloc countries, later given away to terrorists?
I could see the Soviets either developing a select fire, detachable mag SKS, or perhaps taking the STG44 and simplifying/cheapening it, much like they did with the 1911 when developing the TT-33. I don't know that the PPSH's blowback mechanism would scale up to an intermediate rifle cartridge.
Whatever it was, it'd be chambered in 7.63X39mm; the Soviets had already developed the round in the mid-40's.
Western main battle rifles like FALs, G3's etc are too big/heavy/complex/expensive to arm armies of child terrorists with.
I could see the Soviets either developing a select fire, detachable mag SKS, or perhaps taking the STG44 and simplifying/cheapening it, much like they did with the 1911 when developing the TT-33. I don't know that the PPSH's blowback mechanism would scale up to an intermediate rifle cartridge.
Whatever it was, it'd be chambered in 7.63X39mm; the Soviets had already developed the round in the mid-40's.
Western main battle rifles like FALs, G3's etc are too big/heavy/complex/expensive to arm armies of child terrorists with.
no one had a no-gun option in mind? Like only few would have gun since their cost would be too high thus only highly ranked members of factions would have one and the rest would be using machettes and that kind of stuff
or maybe none of all this terrorism/genocides in africa/others would've hapened?
we're looking at a weapon which is by far worst than an A-bomb
or maybe none of all this terrorism/genocides in africa/others would've hapened?
we're looking at a weapon which is by far worst than an A-bomb
M-16... as it was #2 on this list. It would obviously be number 1 if there was no AK 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvrG4T2K4sE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvrG4T2K4sE
bladerogers
CGN Regular
- Location
- South Saskatchewan
Neil nailed it....and I wonder whom would've said in that thread "Probably the AK-47" as everyone else wondered what the hell that guy was smoking since the AK never even existed. So my choice would be a firearm that never existed, something still based on the STG design, might have came a year or two later...it would probably be called the AP-49, short for "Avtomat Petrovich model of 49"...could well have been an AS-48 on the way to though...who knows?!?
M-16... as it was #2 on this list. It would obviously be number 1 if there was no AK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvrG4T2K4sE
too many trouble with the m-16, reliability, complexity, costs
Fn-FAL
I agree - the Fn-FAL is the second bad ass gun in Africa and the Middle East at this time.
My vote goes to the FN-FAL.
It's bad-ass looks and side carry handle make it a fearsome-looking weapon... Just what you need if you wanna terrorize a bunch of european/american yuppies and soccer-moms.
I agree - the Fn-FAL is the second bad ass gun in Africa and the Middle East at this time.
Are you applying some heavy sarcasm here, or are you referring to it being statistically worse than an atomic bomb?
Answer to the original question:
SKS it's cheap, reliable, and can't hit #### at 100 yards unless you have worked them over or you have 10 of them shooting!
You are quite correct in stating that the AK has killed countless more people than the atomic bomb.
Of course, there is a learning curve involved with firearms, if you shoot someone who perhaps didn't deserve it, you can learn from it. There is no learning curve with an atomic bomb, you bomb a city or two, retaliation will lead to a nuclear war. You can't make any mistakes!
Of course, there is a learning curve involved with firearms, if you shoot someone who perhaps didn't deserve it, you can learn from it. There is no learning curve with an atomic bomb, you bomb a city or two, retaliation will lead to a nuclear war. You can't make any mistakes!
