Mikhail Kalashnikov: Inventor of AK-47 Dies At 94

necro81 writes "Lt. Gen. Mikhail T. Kalashnikov, an arms designer for the Soviet Union, creator of the AK-47, passed away today at age 94. Kalashnikov was born a peasant and entered the Soviet Army as a conscript. However, the self-taught tinkerer had an aptitude that took him far. The AK-47, his best-known creation, was praised for its reliability and low cost; attributes that have made it the most successful firearm ever, seeing use in homeland defense, rebellion, terrorism, and untold massacres. The inventor was himself ambivalent about the uses his creation had seen, but was nevertheless proud of his contribution to his country, where he is praised as a hero."

Comments

Unlike the inventor

[Chas]

You can bury an AK-47 for a long period of time and it'll continue to remain operation after you dig it up.

On a less humorous note

[Chas]

Politics aside, Kalashnikov was something of a genius. Or at least a commonsense visionary.
He only had access to relatively crude manufacturing processes and a basic idea of what he wanted.
And he managed to turn out a product that is, by any stretch of the imagination, RIDICULOUSLY successful.
Things that'd be considered weaknesses or defects in other weapons systems are some of the very things that are considered strengths in the Kalashnikov rifles.

Re:On a less humorous note

[FuegoFuerte]

One good example is relatively sloppy tolerances - In most rifles, these are rather frowned upon, but it's also one of the reasons the AK can go through mud, snow, sand, etc. and keep firing. The loose tolerances keep it from running through hot, cold, lack of oil and cleaning, and other abuses long after most rifles (most certainly including the AR/M-16) have jammed up.

In a general-issue military weapon, reliability is far more important than accuracy, so this tradeoff works well for the AK. It's not something you'd want in a hunting or sniper rifle, but for the intended purpose it works great.

Re:On a less humorous note

[gman003]

Precisely! Kalashnikov realized (or at least correctly guessed) that accuracy is less important than reliability. US Army studies have shown that most engagements are within 50m, and that the primary determinant in victory is "number of bullets fired". This was part of their justification for moving from the M14 (essentially a magazine-fed M1 Garand with a useless full-auto hacked on) to the M16 - less power at range, less ability to kill in one shot, but capable of firing 30 rounds at automatic in a somewhat-controlled manner, rather than the "two round burst before it turns into an anti-aircraft gun" of the M14.

The AK47 did it earlier, and arguably better, because it made more tradeoffs. The M16 was a good weapon in the lab, but early models in particular failed in the field (even today jams are extremely common after decades of improvement). Too bad for them, almost zero battles have taken place in military laboratories.

The AK47 scored worse on any "benchmark" (for lack of a better term). Less accurate, slower firing, heavier, and so on. But because it's basically the most reliable (and cheap) assault rifle ever made, it's the weapon (or at least weapon design) of choice for almost everyone not wed to the NATO military-industrial complex. Even then, there's a reason there's AK-style weapons chambered in 5.56mm NATO. It's almost become the Linux of the assault-rifle world - you've got variants from the simple (the AK-74, the RPK, the Galil or the dozens of bullpup variants) to the crazy (the Saiga-12 shotgun, various Russian suppressed rifles, even a sniper rifle).

Was Mikhail Kalashnikov a genius? I don't think so, because nothing about it was itself revolutionary, but he was a damn good engineer because he knew what the users actually needed and gave it to them, rather than letting marketing decide on which features to produce.

Kalashnikov's Legacy

[Anonymous Coward]

"Blame the Nazi Germans for making me become a gun designer ... I always wanted to construct agriculture machinery."
--Mikhail Kalashnikov

If not for the Nazis, he might have invented an inexpensive, reliable machine that helps feed people around the world. Russia in particular seems to frequently have issues with wheat due to drought and/or wildfires, and this has an impact on global food prices. But coming from a rural area he might never have been exposed to the resources needed to achieve his inventions. He might not have been in a position where anyone with those resources would take him seriously. Sometimes bad things happen and deflect our lives in directions other than those we intended, but sometimes that results in putting us right where we need to be. His conscription exposed him to complex machines he might never have worked with otherwise. His war wounds landed him in the hospital where he overheard others talking about what was wrong with the existing Russian rifles. His hospital stay gave him time away from his job as a tank commander to work on his designs. His first attempts at small arms design were rejected, but they got him noticed, and got him transferred out of the tank division to work on rifle design.

I saw a bumper sticker on the freeway the other day that read: "Remember who you wanted to be." Kalashnikov was haunted by the fact that his design had become a symbol of war and terrorism, but the real tragedy of Kalashnikov's life is that AFAIK he never used his success in his unintended profession to go back and do what he really wanted.

Re:PRAISE?!?

[Nerdfest]

It was designed to kill soldiers of a technologically superior and well trained army who were invading the designer's country. Personally, I think he should get at least a little slack because of that.

Re:rant from a gun nut

[Anonymous Coward]

The only TRUE reason for a civilian to own those things is because you want to own them for the sake of owning them.

I am not a fan of guns at all, but I am a believer in the constitution. I would suggest that the only constitutionally protected reason for a civilian to own a gun should be to be capable of mounting a militia that could defend against a corrupt government. That would clearly include guns like an AK.

The right to bear arms in my opinion has nothing to do with hunting and target shooting...

Re:An Eternity of Torment, I ope

[icebike]

I am either religious not terribly spiritual, but one can only hope that a man whose invention was responsible for the deaths of so many millions does not go into a peaceful afterlife.

Hold on here. He was a patriot for his country. He developed an arm that could be produced in mass quantities because that is what his government needed at that time. He didn't set out to arm terrorists, just to make an arm for the foot soldier in the USSR, to be used in horrible field conditions by mostly uneducated soldiers.

That his country decided to cover the earth with the weapon and license it's manufacture world wide was none of his doing. You might as well blame the Wright Brothers for the fire bombing of Berlin.

As he said himself:

"I'm proud of my invention, but I'm sad that it is used by terrorists."

"I would prefer to have invented a machine that people could use and that would help farmers with their work – for example a lawnmower."

Re:rant from a gun nut

[felrom]

Try as you might, your attempt to come across as a "gun person" fails miserably.

AR15s make wonderful hunting weapons. Many companies make AR15s with specific features chosen for hunting. Here are a couple:
http://rockriverarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_id=552
http://www.dpmsinc.com/KINGS-DEAERT-SHADOW_ep_146-1.html
Typically they include a flattop upper receiver, a low profile gas block, skeletonized stocks, and a free-float hand guard.

The standard .223 round is more than sufficient for North American animals up to moose-size when using the proper loading: a 75grain BTHP. And many ammunition manufacturers offer .223 loadings specifically for hunting with an AR15. This is one of many fine examples:
http://www.hornady.com/store/223-Rem-75-gr-BTHP-Match/

Additionally, anyone with more than a passing knowledge of guns and AR15s would know that the platform does not only come in .223. In the last 5 years there has been a surge in popularity of upper receivers chambered in calibers such as 6.5 Grendal, 6.8 SPC and 300 Blackout. Additionally, the venerable .308 has been an option for AR-style guns for almost 50 years. While not being a necessity for using an AR15 to hunt with, these other optional calibers provide longer range hunting options.

But if you still believe that it's impossible to hunt with an AR15, please, whatever you do, don't tell the hundreds of people who posted pictures of their hunting ARs along with trophies in these two threads:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_10_23/605991_Show_us_your_AR15__and_other__deer_kills___and_60___retitled.html&page=1
http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=10&f=3&t=618206
They would be devastated to find out that what they were doing was impossible.

As far as target shooting goes, the annual National Matches, held at Camp Perry, Ohio every summer since 1907, and widely seen as the Olympics of the shooting sports world, uses.... you guessed it: AR15s. And it's not hard to understand why: they're light weight, ergonomic, light recoiling, and cheap to train with (compared to other competition rifles).

And your claim that an AR15 is worse at self defense than all other things you think it's bad at.... get real! Nearly every SWAT team in the US, and NATO-allied special forces group in the world has moved to the AR platform, and those guys have the money and latitude to choose anything they want. After a brief love affair with various pistol-caliber carbines and bullpups in the late 90's and early 00's, they have almost all gone to the AR15.

There are plenty of semi automatic rifles that are much better suited for civilians - and even military use too but they're too expensive for outfitting an army.

The US Army could replace all of its rifles for the cost of about a dozen F-35s. Cost is not an issue that would hold the army back if there were a better rifle available.

The only reason they are so expensive now is because of the demand from stupid people who think Obama is going to ban them.

AR15s are cheaper today than they have ever been. There are over 100 companies in the US producing them, and a nice mid-grade AR can be had for under $600 today.

The next time you want to appear to be an expert on guns, and then denounce the most popular, most capable, most flexible gun ever made, for reasons that don't stand up to even casual examination, stick to the comment sections at Moth