Mega Rad Gun Thread

[Foley]

The optic part is cope, but the irons on the AK are better than aperture sights for close range like when you are fighting in a trench.

If you are that close, just shoot over the bore lol, you are not using those sights anyway. There is literally nothing redeeming about having open notch sights far away from the eye. It was a thing in the 19th century, and reason it stuck around for as long as it did was because militaries still wanted to train guys using the old techniques and be compatable with older firearms. Russians and other Eastern Bloc folks (who basically just copied the Russian firearms 1-1) were literally the only ones to use that type of sights after WW2. Everyone else realized that aperature is better. Even in Russia, the SVD initially had an aperture because it's better, then they told Dragunov "we don't want to train soldiers for two different iron sights, use the AK sight". And with the AK-12, even the Russians have finally adopted the aperature sight.

Like I said, there is not a single redeeming quality in the AK style open iron sights. They are fucking trash, and no doubt one of the reasons for the fuddlore of AKs being inaccurate. Because who the fuck can hit anything with those sights anyway?

 

[The Dude]

It has to be said though, that IIRC Danish military went back on doing basic training with irons, after they found out it produces better results with the recruits than going straight to red dots. Also, as the rifle is still just a PDW for most service members, it doesn't make sense to waste money on distributing optics for them. Therefore, everyone should know how to use and adjust iron sights.

But beyond that, there is no excuse in the year of 2025 for your infantryman not to be equipped with some sort of optic. The results in individual marksmanship are stark. IIRC, the Finnish Defence Forces have seen a drastic uptick in hit probability on lasertag wargames with units that use optics vs those that do not, and then you combine those with better range results too.

I agree that the proper usage of iron sights still needs to be part of a soldier's training. As good as optics are these days, and as tough as many of them can be, they can still break. Batteries can die. It is important to have and know how to use irons as a redundancy, if nothing else.

 

[Arminius]

>a 300lb Shaniqua lazily walks over to turn the electronic interference on and instantly jams every single chinesium drone in a 100 mile radius, dropping them like a sack of explosive bricks on top of baffled Russian mobiks

Both sides have fielded enough jamming tech that fiber optic FPV drones are turning battlefields into what resembles massive spiderwebs.
There is so much cope and seethe coming from this conflict claiming that their side is better and the other side are bumbling retards; that it's pretty hard to determine what the actual facts on the ground are.

 

[Foley]

The Ukrainians literally use Discord and VOIP phones for frontline comms.

IIRC, at least during the battle of Bakhmuth, Ukrainians said they were literally using WW1/WW2 era field telephones with hard wire for their defensive positions. It's not susceptible for electronic warfare, you have to literally cut into the line to listen in or to disturb it. We were still using the same tech (obviously with more modern phones lol) during my conscription in Finland in 2014. If you are defending a static objective, that is absolutely the best way of making connections. Pain in the ass to distribute all that wire, but well worth it in the end.

 

[Pretend To Imagine]

There is literally nothing redeeming about having open notch sights far away from the eye.

It’s literally the same sighting system that is on just about every handgun, and many other firearms. They are definitely better for up close and fast shooting and can definitely be shot accurately to further distances.

Past 25 - 50 yards the aperture sights are better, but none of this matters anyway since optics are a thing.

 

[AGPinochet]

AK-12 is a shitty rifle and they can't even field it in mas

AK-12 (201 is a shitty rifle, AK-12 (2023) is actually half decent
Don't believe me? Here's the testimony of a Ukrainian combatant, and he has a captured 2022 model before all the new upgrades.

>Can't field in En masse

Spoiler: All posted in the last 8 days

Video showcasing not only AK-12's but also VDV contract AK-12K's

30 post thread full of VDV AK-12K pics

https://nitter.net/rosenritter1958/status/1971621529327944144#m

They were issuing rusty AKMs to conscript-penal units in 2022

Are you referring to the 1 (one) video of reservists brushing 3 (three) Rusty AKM's? What's more likely, Russia didn't have sufficient rifles and had to resort to issuing rusty and corroded examples and only one video has ever surfaced, or those guys pissed off an officer and were punished with some nonsense "duty"

They can't do precision weapons

Lobaev Arms would disagree, Elite mil and CT units use western rifles because 1. They had them before the 2014 sanctions, 2. Lobaev was not always able to satisfy their demands 3. They liked the thought of having fancy western toys.

 

[Foley]

As much as I shit on Russia in terms of their society, technology and especially military technology, their small arms is not something I can really take a big issue with, when it comes to the ability to procure and produce stuff, and build it with decent quality. The AK-12 program is fucking retarded, but they are at least trying to fix that. It's still not as retarded as the US NGSW program. But they can build rifles in good quality, and quantity. AFAIK the Saiga's made for the civilian market were still far and beyond the best quality AK's for the civilian market in Europe, until they got banned after Crimea.

Note, this is not a take about the AK platform itself, but just the Russian arms industry when it comes to their production.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

As much as I shit on Russia in terms of their society, technology and especially military technology, their small arms is not something I can really take a big issue with, when it comes to the ability to procure and produce stuff, and build it with decent quality. The AK-12 program is fucking retarded, but they are at least trying to fix that. It's still not as retarded as the US NGSW program. But they can build rifles in good quality, and quantity. AFAIK the Saiga's made for the civilian market were still far and beyond the best quality AK's for the civilian market in Europe, until they got banned after Crimea.

Note, this is not a take about the AK platform itself, but just the Russian arms industry when it comes to their production.

Thing is, the Russian small arms industry is stuck making assault rifles from the late 1940s.

There are inherent design features that make any AK, from a 1949 milled example to a 2025 production AK-12 inferior to other rifles.

Optics zeroing (impossible on the dust cover and the clean the rifle you must pop off the optics side rail.

The large open slot in the receiver when the rifle is off SAFE.

Large reciprocating charging handle that means you can't use it's space on the receiver.

The rock and lock magazine system where you literally can put it in backwards and have a deadlined gun for a bit.

The sometimes poor stock ergonomics

Inability to drop the bolt without racking the rifle

Safety is not ambidextrous and usually requires a hand to operate.

You can EASILY design a nice long stroke piston rifle that fixes ALL of these problems. Hell you could even keep your rock and lock magazines if you REALLY want to simplify the manual of arms transition.

 

[Foley]

Thing is, the Russian small arms industry is stuck making assault rifles from the late 1940s.

There are inherent design features that make any AK, from a 1949 milled example to a 2025 production AK-12 inferior to other rifles.

Optics zeroing (impossible on the dust cover and the clean the rifle you must pop off the optics side rail.

The large open slot in the receiver when the rifle is off SAFE.

Large reciprocating charging handle that means you can't use it's space on the receiver.

The rock and lock magazine system where you literally can put it in backwards and have a deadlined gun for a bit.

The sometimes poor stock ergonomics

Inability to drop the bolt without racking the rifle

Safety is not ambidextrous and usually requires a hand to operate.

You can EASILY design a nice long stroke piston rifle that fixes ALL of these problems. Hell you could even keep your rock and lock magazines if you REALLY want to simplify the manual of arms transition.

Like I said, the AK platform in general has been outdated for almost 70 years frankly, at least 50.

They will keep building AK platforms into perpetuity, because

- It's a Russian design therefore we must protect and use it!
- All the production tooling is there, making drastic changes isn't really worth it when you consider that the AK still does the job
- Backwards compatibility to the existing stuff

Especially the 2nd part makes it hard.

My comment was about their small arms industry in general. I don't think there is an issue with Russians cranking out AK's, when it comes to manufacturing quality. The design maybe shit, but they do know how to make it properly. The thing is, this same issue kinda extends to the rest of the Russian military industry, but they can't even get the production going. They can only supply Soviet era designs, and even making those from the ground up seems like an issue. How many from the ground up, new T-72B3s (or whatever their most modern version is) have they managed to build during the last 3 years? So much of the "new production" during this war is literally building stuff on old Soviet era hulls. Those will eventually run out, a lot of the depots are empty already.

 

[ellroy]

Lobaev Arms would disagree, Elite mil and CT units use western rifles because 1. They had them before the 2014 sanctions, 2. Lobaev was not always able to satisfy their demands 3. They liked the thought of having fancy western toys.

The rifles identified were not rifles authorized for export to Russia. Quoting Accuracy International in the news report:

That model of rifle, the AX338, only came into circulation in 2010 but in a previous interview with the Sunday Express newspaper, Accuracy International said it hadn't sold any rifles to Russia since 2000, and an EU arms embargo has been in place since 2014.

The Russians have been smuggling these weapons for almost three decades now just like they have been smuggling western optics.

For reason 2, you're only confirming what I wrote, their industry can't meet their demand. Though I doubt Lobaev is as precise at its western counterparts. The Russians have never had precision machining like the west has. It's been an issue in their aerospace too and they got away with in Cold War with some of their fighters but times have changed.

>Can't field in En masse

Cool pictures, can you actual confirm every active combat unit is using it? I just watched a youtube video of Azov fighting against AK-74s, they are using the arms they have available and haven't met their modernization goals.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

How many from the ground up, new T-72B3s (or whatever their most modern version is) have they managed to build during the last 3 years? So much of the "new production" during this war is literally building stuff on old Soviet era hulls. Those will eventually run out, a lot of the depots are empty already

Hundreds actually, of the T-90M

That road it's literally just a much better turret on a T-72B mod. 1989 hull, which they haven't changed since 1990 or so.

The issue is that Russia just didn't have the money or the inclination to introduce dozens of new vehicles/ large weapons systems to replace the 1980s Soviet stuff they were mostly using until VERY recently.

Now they've burned through a solid 80% of their pre war vehicle fleet so they have a literal once in a generation opportunity to o make stuff that isn't shit (lol good luck Russian MiC)

 

[AGPinochet]

The rifles identified were not rifles authorized for export to Russia. Quoting Accuracy International in the news report:


The Russians have been smuggling these weapons for almost three decades now just like they have been smuggling western optics.

For reason 2, you're only confirming what I wrote, their industry can't meet their demand. Though I doubt Lobaev is as precise at its western counterparts. The Russians have never had precision machining like the west has. It's been an issue in their aerospace too and they got away with in Cold War with some of their fighters but times have changed.


Cool pictures, can you actual confirm every active combat unit is using it? I just watched a youtube video of Azov fighting against AK-74s, they are using the arms they have available and haven't met their modernization goals.

can you actual confirm every active combat unit is using it

Is every active combat unit in the Army equipped with the M7 and M250 yet? The Russians adopted the 2023 model AK-12, after having to retool from the 2022 model and after upgrading from the 2018 model.

We've had a head start during peacetime and Sig still isn't caught up on orders.

 

[Foley]

Is every active combat unit in the Army equipped with the M7 and M250 yet? The Russians adopted the 2023 model AK-12, after having to retool from the 2022 model and after upgrading from the 2018 model.

We've had a head start during peacetime and Sig still isn't caught up on orders.

It should go the other way around no? Russia should be cranking out more of the stuff during war and in a partial war time economy, compared to SIG.

Also, are we really holding SIG USA and the US M7 program as a standard here? Everyone reading this thread knows how retarded, fucked, and corrupted that program is.

 

[AGPinochet]

should go the other way around no? Russia should be cranking out more of the stuff during war and in a partial war time economy, compared to SIG.

I would assume modern war economies would focus more on big ticket, high impact items, I don't remember the exact ownership stays but KC partially or wholly owns Zala Aerospace which among many other things makes Lancets, plus the Russians may or may not have reached their maximum capacity for rifle production or they could have simply quite reasonably decided that small arms have competitively little impact and it doesn't really matter if they slow roll the 2023 model production, they still have warehouses full of 2022's, 2018's 74M-RMO's and 74M's.

 

[Boney]

People fundamentally misunderstand small arms in warfare it seems.

The grunt is eternal. The rifle is for the forseeable future, any and every armies primary weapon.

The drones, artillery, tanks, fighter jets, electronic countermeasures, cyber... everything is made to hinder or facilitate the man with the rifle. He is the foundational element in the military infastructure which all else depends on and protects.

Because as dramatic and oldfashioned as it sounds, the individual soldier is going to be the most adaptive, judgemental, and effective tool for carrying out orders that fall outside of a commanders sight at any level.

This is also the secret sauce behind western military tradition and the rest of the world, harkonning back to the Roman Legionaire, there is a critical moment which one persons discretion on how to handle a particular situation results in success or failure and these moments add up accross the entire battle space to determime victory or defeat.

So yes, an individual riflemans equipment and capability are as prevelent as ever, regardless of what the statistics driving casualty numbers are. More capable soldiers have more options in dictating the tactical and therefore strategic landscape of the war. Talking about little downgrades or upgrades here and there about infantry equipment is as, if not more so, important as incremental advancements in drone tech.

Yes, drones hit the scene by kicking the door down, but we are still in the formativr years of rock paper scissors for that technology. It has made its major debut, but so did the machine gun, gunpowder, aircraft, artillery... Keep your eye on the grunts. Their kit is where the interesting things are being decided.

 

[S.C.U.D.]

Drones are great and all but ultimately you need men on the ground to take and hold a position. You can bomb somebody all day and all night but the territory isn't actually yours until you send some guys there to properly take it.

 

[VF-1J Armored Valkyrie]

Drones are great and all but ultimately you need men on the ground to take and hold a position. You can bomb somebody all day and all night but the territory isn't actually yours until you send some guys there to properly take it.

This is why the XM-30, AMPV, ACV, and ARV programs all escaped the chopping block that shit like the Booker was beheaded on. After all that has happened, infantry are still the movers and shakers on the battlefield and still need good vehicles to maneuver in and fight from.

 

[Dean Pentel]

You can EASILY design a nice long stroke piston rifle that fixes ALL of these problems. Hell you could even keep your rock and lock magazines if you REALLY want to simplify the manual of arms transition.

PWS already did it and if one wants to stick with 7.62X39 and those magazines, CMMG has their Dissent. In other words, it can definitely be done though I have no clue how feasible either of the above would be for widespread infantry application.

We've had a head start during peacetime and Sig still isn't caught up on orders.

I hear it's also quite helpful if the rifles they produce work reliably and as advertised.

Drones are great and all but ultimately you need men on the ground to take and hold a position. You can bomb somebody all day and all night but the territory isn't actually yours until you send some guys there to properly take it.

And not only do they need to take it, they need to keep it, guard it, report on it, maintain it and extend their infrastructure to it as needed. That means men with infantry weapons and kit. And most importantly, sweltering port-a-potties to jerk off in.

I mean, uh, so I've heard.

Thread tax: awhile back one of you mentioned using Eotechs for a red dot because the dot was so crisp, even with astigmatism. It's not that I didn't believe you, I simply had never owned an Eotech previously. One of my friends wanted to sell their EXPS3 and gave me a great price on it. 1) That thing is a chonker compared to the Aimpoints I'm used to and, 2) I now see exactly what you meant. I'm probably going to run the Eotech on my .300 BLK shorty. Believe it or not, I thought it was a good fit on my Ruger Gunsite Scout. That too was a surpise.

 

[Pretend To Imagine]

awhile back one of you mentioned using Eotechs for a red dot because the dot was so crisp, even with astigmatism.

Probably me. I have six of the dot only eotechs. I don’t use anything else.

 

[AncientPhosphur]

The grunt is eternal. The rifle is for the forseeable future, any and every armies primary weapon.

No matter the issue it’ll be the infantryman having to take and hold a point. Drones can’t do it. Tanks can’t. Airplanes can’t. No matter the tech some poor bastard has to climb out of his trench and march there to push the line up and dig in. And he’s going to defend himself with a cool rifle we all will want to own or talk about while doing it