Small Arms in Armed Assault

[Second 0]

Aks comes in from diffrent producers. Original Ak is unaccurate (Poor guality bullets are one main thing, but that can be corrected with increasing quality), but still it is considered accurate weapon to 300 meters (how much more can you hope with plain eye/iron sights?).And oh... by the way.. i'll tell you a secret... Main thing that affects to accuracy IS THE SHOOTER!

There are many-many diffrent Ak models made by others under licence, some of them are better (that depends of what you are looking from rifle - To me M16 is just long stick, i prefer shorter weapons... like FA-MAS, boy that felt good in my hands).

[stgn 39]

The US will use western guns so they should be accurate but not as reliable (the M16 is a bitch to maintain and is the worst rifle for modern technology), same for roller delayed german rifles. The G36 might be accurate and reliable in most cases, but IF there is a malfunction, you have one hard time to find the issue. In the Bundeswehr, we had some trouble with those rifles, but most were due to poor maintenance by recruits.

Hmm The M16 is the worst rifle for modern technology, what are you trying too say here, the M16 is the only rifle in mass production that is easily upgraded with rails so you can mout IR, laser, lights, fore grips and bipods not optimal by todays stardards where rails are integraded but the best just a couple of years ago. The flattop is still the best mounting option which is why new rifles have copied the M16 trying too catch up.

Quote[/b] ]

Aks comes in from diffrent producers. Original Ak is unaccurate (Poor guality bullets are one main thing, but that can be corrected with increasing quality), but still it is considered accurate weapon to 300 meters (how much more can you hope with plain eye/iron sights?).And oh... by the way.. i'll tell you a secret... Main thing that affects to accuracy IS THE SHOOTER!

There are many-many diffrent Ak models made by others under licence, some of them are better (that depends of what you are looking from rifle - To me M16 is just long stick, i prefer shorter weapons... like FA-MAS, boy that felt good in my hands).

hmm I have never tryed shooting the Ak but prity much every one says the sights are shit, its slow to get the sight picture and its sights might bounce off due too recoile meaning that you will be shooting in another direction than you are aiming.

The M16A2 was a Marine marksman rifle. And is to day called a mosked, why most are getting M4's. The FAMAS is a bullpub and naturaly short but that presents other problems.

[Second 0]

I'd say that sights are not a problem, only that are you used to use them (well if sights are that shit that they bounce, then i truly doupt they have shot with some very cheap copy, AK was designed by experienced soldier so i highly doupt that they has this kind of flaw). If you have done most shootings with diopetric sights (or how is it writen.. that hole on backsights type of thing), you are used to it. I prefer more AKs style of sights, as i've been shooting with those kind of sights all my life. Using Finnish RK-62 (which is kinda copy of AK, and used as marksman rifle too) was little challenging as it has that holesight thingie. I shoot faster with AKs sight type and i consider it more accurate

The point i'm trying to say that if you ask this from Russian (or someone else) soldier and give him shoot couple of times with M16. You'd still get reply that AK is better, as he has been trained/used to use them. FA-MAS has some lacks as has M16 or M4 or AK or G36 or FN-FAL or... depends of your view point what you look from your weapon. From way back Finland didn't consider 5.56 enough good bullet to our geological terrain as 7.62 was considered superiour (richoeting 5.56 just sucks) so M16-type was considered lousier than AK-type.

[ThePredator 0]

It is not my intention to start a flame war with my explanations. This said, I have to agree with "Second".

5,56x45 mm was a bad call. The exterior and terminal ballistics are poor. Shooting through underbrush will deflect the projectile (fact), hitting walls in specific angles will cause dangerous ricochets (fact) and the bullet fragments on impact with high velocity (fact) causing severe wounds not according with geneva convention (for this reason jacketed hollow point are not legal either).

The stopping power is another issue. In Somalia, the Rangers had tungsten carbide slugs punshing through cars and walls and therefore not stopping soft targets like 7,62x51 mm ammunition did.

On distance, the weaker round will be more affected by environmental conditions than its predecessor and granted, superior calibre.

I beg for proper implementation of these differences. The devs said environmental conditions affect energy transfer. Hopefully a 5,56 x 45 mm will perform different than a 7,62 x 51 or even 12,7 x 99 mm round when you hit a bush in the line of fire.