Jackson_Slugger
$50 Site Donor 2022
The Mig-23 was a cheap, "serviceable" aircraft that served some well, but overall a very subpar fighter-bomber when used in sustained conflicts...
Worst Soviet Fighter
- Thread starter Jackson_Slugger
- Start date
Cheap knockoff of F111
We tend to be somewhat overly critical of Russian armament and aircraft. Using words like "cheap", and "subpar", etc. The AK-47 is constantly knocked and criticized in this manner. It's often called a, "cheap stamped metal bullet hose".
Russians do things differently. They tend to design around doing one specific thing. Then build that unit as cheaply and rugged as possible...... And build A LOT of them. They don't often embrace the term, "multi role".
This was particularly true with both the AK-47, as well as the Mosin Nagant service rifle. Both are simple, rugged, and cheap and easy to manufacture. And were built in massive quantities. Many in caves in the Afghanistan mountains.... Not in the latest temperature controlled factories. That are equipped with the best and most accurate CNC machinery available.
The AK-47 was / is the most produced service rifle in human history. Some estimate that over 100,000,000 (read 100 MILLION) were built. And they are rugged as hell. And they did well against the M-16 in both the jungles of Vietnam, and in the powdery sand deserts of Iraq.
As well as all but countless guerilla conflicts around the globe. And they're still banging out rounds somewhere as we speak..... And will be long after all of us have dissolved into dust.
Many Russian aircraft were designed in a similar manner. Not so much to be the, "latest and the greatest multi role design". But simply to accomplish the task at hand, as ruggedly and cheaply as possible.
The Mig 25 Foxbat was a good example. They made it out of Stainless Steel, instead of Titanium alloy. In order to withstand the heat of supersonic flight. This made it heavy as hell.
So they just put bigger engines in it. The range sucked, but it did what the designers wanted. It went fast as hell.... Until the engines were toast. But that wasn't an issue because they built plenty of them as well.
This thought process was carried out to the simplest detail. In their space program they didn't bother designing a pen that would write in zero G.... They simply used pencils.
Russians do things differently. They tend to design around doing one specific thing. Then build that unit as cheaply and rugged as possible...... And build A LOT of them. They don't often embrace the term, "multi role".
This was particularly true with both the AK-47, as well as the Mosin Nagant service rifle. Both are simple, rugged, and cheap and easy to manufacture. And were built in massive quantities. Many in caves in the Afghanistan mountains.... Not in the latest temperature controlled factories. That are equipped with the best and most accurate CNC machinery available.
The AK-47 was / is the most produced service rifle in human history. Some estimate that over 100,000,000 (read 100 MILLION) were built. And they are rugged as hell. And they did well against the M-16 in both the jungles of Vietnam, and in the powdery sand deserts of Iraq.
As well as all but countless guerilla conflicts around the globe. And they're still banging out rounds somewhere as we speak..... And will be long after all of us have dissolved into dust.
Many Russian aircraft were designed in a similar manner. Not so much to be the, "latest and the greatest multi role design". But simply to accomplish the task at hand, as ruggedly and cheaply as possible.
The Mig 25 Foxbat was a good example. They made it out of Stainless Steel, instead of Titanium alloy. In order to withstand the heat of supersonic flight. This made it heavy as hell.
So they just put bigger engines in it. The range sucked, but it did what the designers wanted. It went fast as hell.... Until the engines were toast. But that wasn't an issue because they built plenty of them as well.
This thought process was carried out to the simplest detail. In their space program they didn't bother designing a pen that would write in zero G.... They simply used pencils.
Poor handling, lousy radar discrimination, poor cockpit visibility, poor turn performance.
But it was built as an interceptor, or a ground attack variant, with a different weapon system.
Not a multi role fighter. Not intended to dogfight once the intercept happened.
As an interceptor? It was one of the fastest airplanes built. For the single mission - it had some advantages.
But it was built as an interceptor, or a ground attack variant, with a different weapon system.
Not a multi role fighter. Not intended to dogfight once the intercept happened.
As an interceptor? It was one of the fastest airplanes built. For the single mission - it had some advantages.
Worst Soviet Fighter
Some say this guy, Charlie Zelentoff. In the ring he was the master of the cheap shot. A real 'punch&run' type of boxer.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,066
Russian's aren't know for skilled labor or manufacturing at scale. They can stamp out a AK receiver that's serviceable but their milled product is rather robust. I was lucky enough to get a VEPR before the ban. Composite furniture, fit & finish solid, and it is even rather accurate. Much more so than my Bulgarian stamped. He ll of a design.
Just me but a fighter plane requires a bit more refinement
something Russian's are not the best at. AK's your talking massive scale whereas fighter planes not so much. They seem to have difficulty diverging from assembly line slap it together mentality to slower, higher QC levels of labor.
“ Quantity has a quality all its own.” - Josef Stalin
Russians have always gone for quantity.
Russians have always gone for quantity.
The original milled AK receivers tended to crack under full auto fire. They milled it because they didn't possess the welding technology at the time to weld in the trunnions.
Once they developed better welding skills, the stamped receivers were actually better. And much quicker to manufacture, than starting out with large block of steel. Then literally dozens of machining operations later, ending up with a finished AK receiver.
Many stamped receivers weren't much lighter either. Both of the receivers on my Yugo M-70 underfolder's are very heavy. Even heavier than my Arsenal SAM-7 Milled receiver.
And very long shelf life. Especially their ammunition. Most all of their 7.62 X 39 MM and 7.62 X 54 MM ammunition came in vacuum sealed and soldered steel tins. Packed in very sturdy wooden crates. (Most all of the Eastern Bloc ammunition was produced to these specifications).
I had read most all of this ammunition was packaged to last a century or longer. All were loaded with Mercury based primers, even well into the late 80's. While corrosive, Mercury based primers have a much longer shelf life. And are more impervious to moisture.
I still have a few cases of the stuff I bought years ago for cheap. Today if you can find it, the price has gone off the chart. It's good, dependable ammo.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,066
The original milled AK receivers tended to crack under full auto fire. They milled it because they didn't possess the welding technology at the time to weld in the trunnions.
Once they developed better welding skills, the stamped receivers were actually better. And much quicker to manufacture, than starting out with large block of steel. Then literally dozens of machining operations later, ending up with a finished AK receiver.
Many stamped receivers weren't much lighter either. Both of the receivers on my Yugo M-70 underfolder's are very heavy. Even heavier than my Arsenal SAM-7 Milled receiver.
Key word is "original." VERP's are legit. I wish I could get another but Obama stomped on that in 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea. They are refined!
I wish I had bought several of the Chinese milled Poly Tech models when they were available and cheap. Then Bush 41 / Clinton stopped them from being imported. Now they cost a fortune if you can find one that's NIB. They had beautiful blued and polished milled receivers.
I remember when the Poly Tech M-14 clones could be had for $550.00 a pop. They were forged steel receivers. And were very good quality. Same deal, they were banned from importation.
www.americanrifleman.org
I remember when the Poly Tech M-14 clones could be had for $550.00 a pop. They were forged steel receivers. And were very good quality. Same deal, they were banned from importation.
An Official Journal Of The NRA | This Old Gun: Poly Technologies M-14/S
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then a lot of firearm flattery has emanated from the People’s Republic of China. While developing some of its own unique firearm designs, the country is also known for making copies of everything from C96 Mauser “Broomhandle” pistols to Thompson...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,066
I wish I had bought several of the Chinese milled Poly Tech models when they were available and cheap. Then Bush 41 / Clinton stopped them from being imported. Now they cost a fortune if you can find one that's NIB. They had beautiful blued and polished milled receivers.
I remember when the Poly Tech M-14 clones could be had for $550.00 a pop. They were forged steel receivers. And were very good quality. Same deal, they were banned from importation.
An Official Journal Of The NRA | This Old Gun: Poly Technologies M-14/S
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then a lot of firearm flattery has emanated from the People’s Republic of China. While developing some of its own unique firearm designs, the country is also known for making copies of everything from C96 Mauser “Broomhandle” pistols to Thompson...
They are up their in $$ for sure. Solid guns.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
- Messages
- 167
The AKM is actually a very expensive gun to make. It was only cheap because slave labor and the economy of the Eastern bloc scale. American companies are just now producing AK variants at a reasonable cost.
The worst fighter was the Mig 19, which couldn't fire it's guns without stalling the engine haha.
The worst fighter was the Mig 19, which couldn't fire it's guns without stalling the engine haha.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
- Messages
- 167
Bulged trunnions, which are much larger than AKMs and borrowed from the RPK, along with the 1.5mm thick receiver are what make the Yugos so heavy.
Never heard that about the MiG. Departure prone, spun easily, but the engines were good.
Reportedly Russia now doesn't have enough AKs to issue one to every infantry soldier. That seems really hard to believe. If there's one thing Russia should never run out of, it would be AK47s and ammunition for them.
Much of the Soviet Union's weapons engineering and manufacturing talent was in east block countries, not Russia itself. They really miss that.
Much of the Soviet Union's weapons engineering and manufacturing talent was in east block countries, not Russia itself. They really miss that.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
- Messages
- 167
Interesting. You sure they weren't talking about the AK12? I would surmise that they either treated them as cheap weapons and junked a bunch of them or they sold them off to other countries in desperate attempts to make some money. I know they don't have AK12's for every soldier, but that is a much newer rifle with lower production numbers.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
- Messages
- 167
The Su-35 is kind of a masterpiece, so...So........98.9%+ of Russia's planes?
