
Why did the AK-47 become so popular? - rajbala
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-4
======
malkia
During my mandatory army service (Bulgaria) I was given AK-47. I had to be
responsible for the gun for the whole 1997, but shot only few times, since the
country was going through hard period, and we were not allowed much ammo. Also
had to make sure that I shoot on manual, or was it semi-automatic. From what I
remember I had to get used to my weapon, as each one was uniquely biased, so
you had to understand yourself how it shoots. Had to clean it every day at
2:00pm, and had to cover disassembling and assembling it for some relatively
short time (actual times escape me, but was somewhere in the dozen of seconds
to a minute).

Losing the gun was punishable by 7 years military prison (or at least that's
what they've told us). Also while guarding and if someone was approaching you
should first fire an alert bullet (if that's the right name) up in the air,
and then shoot at place (if the object keeps moving).

I did not even cared about it. Later I was supposed to be with RPG-9, but
since the major and the captain of the brigade discovered my typing and
computer skills I was put in an "ad-hoc" position - sleeping in the same room
with all drivers, cooks, etc, while just doing computer stuff and delivering
the mail from the city (along with starting the wood stove, and some
cleaning).

~~~
JackpotDen
>alert bullet

Warning shot.

~~~
malkia
Thanks for the correction!

------
jandrewrogers
The article does a somewhat poor job of explaining the success of the AK47 in
the context of the time it proliferated. Because the discussion of such things
tends to be dominated by fanbois of one military rifle or another, the good
and bad of the weapons tends to be overstated.

One of the biggest advantages of the AK47 is that it could be manufactured en
masse with relatively simple manufacturing equipment that was widely available
and inexpensive in the middle of the 20th century. Consequently, it could be
produced even in marginally developed countries as a matter of both technical
ability and economics. Contrary to popular rumor, a number of countries
produced AK47s with relatively tight tolerances so lack of precision machining
was not intrinsic to its success.

By contrast, and many people forget this, when the AR15 family of rifles was
first produced, only a handful of industrialized countries had the ability to
fabricate the precision aluminum parts used in the rifle en masse. When the
design was exported, the US often exported precision aluminum foundry and
machining technology at the same time. That limited adoption as a practical
matter.

All that said, the reputation of both the AK47 and AR15 suffer from relatively
isolated instances of defective implementation. A well-made AK47 has perfectly
serviceable accuracy, comparable to many European assault rifles. However, its
operational ergonomics are atrocious. By the same token, the AR15 functions
far better in filthy environments than popular mythology suggests; most
infamous incidents of documented systemic failure were ultimately traced back
to out-of-spec components. An AR15 will not take quite as much abuse as an
AK47, but it makes up for it by being one of the most highly optimized assault
rifles in the hands of a skilled operator due to the unusual operating design.

In short, both the AK47 and AR15 offered compelling economics because they
were designed for and used by disjoint markets with very different priorities.

~~~
troels
_However, its operational ergonomics are atrocious_

I had to read that twice and I'm still not sure. You mean economics, right?

~~~
jandrewrogers
Nope, I meant ergonomics.

All of the operational mechanics (safety, trigger, magazines, bolt, etc) are
very poorly designed for efficient user operation. A number of AK47 clones
produced by countries attempt to at least partial rectify that situation.
Also, the AK47 has terrible rapid fire characteristics; even a well-trained
operator will have a hard time putting bullets on target.

By comparison, the M16 has a well-deserved reputation for being one of the
most effective rapid-fire actions ever designed, and with excellent user
ergonomics. Even in "spray and pray" mode, an M16 will put a lot more lead on
or near the target than an AK47.

~~~
troels
Thanks for clarifying.

------
jere
>The gun is nothing special. Its controls are unsophisticated; it is not even
particularly accurate. But this simplicity is a reason for its success.
Compared with other assault rifles, the AK-47 has generous clearance between
its moving parts. That is bad for accuracy, but it means that the mechanism is
unlikely to jam, no matter how clogged it gets with Sudanese sand or
Nicaraguan mud. Designed to be operated by Soviet soldiers wearing thick
winter gloves, it is simple enough for untrained recruits (including children)
to use.

 _Worse is better._

>Correctness The design must be correct in all observable aspects. _It is
slightly better to be simple than correct._

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better)

~~~
nhebb
I'll see your Wikipedia link and raise you one:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_dimensions_of_quality](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_dimensions_of_quality)

When you're getting shot at and your life depends on being able to shoot back,
reliability trumps all other metrics.

~~~
brazzy
I submit that availability trumps even that. In many cases, you would not
_have_ a gun if it wasn't as simple and cheap to make as the AK-47.

------
rdtsc
> The gun is nothing special. Its controls are unsophisticated;

That is main feature though. Nothing special _is_ what is special.

When you write code, try to remember the AK-47. Keep it simple, loose
components, try to make it fault tolerant if you can. Make it not just easy to
use, but also easy to disassemble, inspect and rebuild (design grey boxes not
just black boxes).

Is there an AK-47 design pattern, or are they called "stories" these day,
anyway I feel like there should be one.

Well, and then of course convince a mega-corporation to buy 100m units of it
;-)

~~~
bad_user
"Easy to use" is most often the opposite of "simple, loose components".

Building stuff out of simple components, means to break the problem space into
multiple smaller parts. By definition, you'll have more components to deal
with. It will also take more time to build something usable. Simplicity is
actually hard.

In the case of the AK-47, this is an actual example of simplifying the problem
and getting the priorities straight. Such works are so rare because people
don't think too much before starting to work on stuff.

------
ivanhoe
When experts say that AK47 is not "particularly accurate", it's a bit
misleading, because in a battle you don't shoot for bullseye, usually any shot
within the inner 30cm (12inches) circle on the target is considered as a hit.
Ak47 is certainly not the most accurate weapon, but in a real life situation
and within its fire range of about 350 - 400 meters it's accurate enough. In
my experience with the Yugoslav version m70 it's really hard to miss anything
under 200m and when shooting further than that (because it doesn't have optics
in the standard setup) your eyes are a bigger problem than the gun itself.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Most people who say that the AK-47 is "not accurate" are just parroting
conventional wisdom and have never actually shot one. Poorly made AK-47s might
not be accurate, but anything that is poorly made might not be accurate,
regardless of the design. Well made AK's are plenty accurate out to hundreds
of meters and could easily be used as sniper rifles with a scope. And by "well
made" I don't mean a small batch made by a boutique manufacturer, there are
millions of rifles made by various companies/countries that are fairly high
quality. One of the problems of talking about the "AK-47" in general is that
it's actually a family of rifles produced by a huge variety of folks. For
example, the actual "AK-47" is fairly rare, most rifles of the type are the
AKM model, or some regional variant of the AKM. Meanwhile, you have countries
ranging from Bulgaria to Ethiopia to Vietnam all manufacturing their own
models, with a very high degree of variation in quality.

------
mirkules
This post stopped well short of describing the advantages and disadvantages of
both AK-47s and M-16s in favor of emphasizing how bad weapons are. The
Wikipedia entry is much more informative:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16)

------
thatthatis
I think this was well explained in the intro to Lord of War. An amazing movie
that asks interesting questions about success as a motivator.

~~~
alexeisadeski3
Amazing movie? I'll call it pretty solid. Interesting questions? No...

~~~
thatthatis
Well, it appears we have different opinions. I think that's probably on net an
ok thing.

------
drac
everyone with any interest in the AK-47 should read
[http://cjchivers.com/aboutthegun](http://cjchivers.com/aboutthegun) (The Gun,
by CJ Chivers). Although it spends a lot of time examining historical contexts
for machine guns, and assault rifles in general - the AK-47 stuff is great.

The comparison with the M-16 in particular is pretty brutal.

------
dmix
Fluff piece, unfortunately.

------
chewxy
Not to forget, it is pretty easy to copy the AK47 design. The Register once
called it The Open Source gun that took the world by storm[0] - it's actually
a much better article than the Economist's

[0][http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/03/ak_47_60_years/](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/03/ak_47_60_years/)

------
Spooky23
Tl;dr

It's a "good enough" gun that the Soviets and licensees made over 100m of.
Guns, parts and ammo are available anywhere.

~~~
cgore
In my mind that is the only reason, because the USSR made a whole lot of them,
and then shipped them out to every third-world country.

It is for a similar reason AR-15s are so popular here in the USA, because the
US Military mostly uses M16s ,which are almost the same, and therefore they
are the "cool, I'm almost-for-really a soldier now" gun.

~~~
teuobk
The popularity of the AR-15 is related to the popularity of the M16, but the
"pretend you're a soldier" aspect isn't the main reason. A more complete
explanation includes:

\- Lots of manufacturers

\- Reliable action (depending on manufacturer)

\- 5.56mm NATO and/or .223 Remington ammo is (or, before late 2012, was)
relatively cheap

\- Light recoil

\- Tons of accessories available

\- Relatively accurate

\- Fun to shoot

And also, among gun guys, there's at least a little bit of the feeling that by
owning one, you're giving the middle finger to people who want to ban them.

~~~
commandar
The AR pattern of rifles has also evolved into something highly modular in the
past 20 years. The same lower receiver can be swapped into an upper receiver
set up for anything from long distance precision target shooting to close-
quarters room clearing.

Saying someone owns an AR is sort of like (loosely) saying they own a PC -
that could mean anything from an Intel NUC to a Xeon workstation in a huge
case. There's a common architecture, but it's the flexibility of the
architecture that makes it popular.

------
zw123456
A perfect example of the K.I.S.S. Principle.

------
cranklin
Okay, I get that the AK is the most popular military rifle in the world, but
there are many superior rifles that are just as reliable. I happen to own an
AK and \- the gun looks/feels flimsy, \- muzzle flip results in a nasty cheek
slap, \- the receiver looks like folded sheet metal, \- safety is hard to
engage/disengage and leaves a nasty scratch on the receiver, \- the magazine
doesn't fit right in (must insert the lip first at an awkward angle), \- field
stripping is easy but reassembly is a pain in the a$$.

The M1A... now that's a solid reliable/accurate rifle.

~~~
dingaling
The safety was one of the few obviously 'wrong' aspects of the AK design; not
only is it on the wrong side of the receiver for right-handed operators,
requiring them to reach-over to engage, but it also makes a distinctive CLACK
noise that resulted in many of its users being detected and killed. Rhodesian
forces developed 'cover shooting' as a technique for responding to this noise,
controlled firing into any clumps of vegetation capable of hiding the shooter.

Pedantry on the title: the AK-47 was never popular, it was heavy and
expensive. It was issued only to selected Soviet troops whilst the remainder
used the semi-automatic SKS rifle. It was the AKM of the 1950s that became a
runaway success.

~~~
varjag
Also ironically, it was AKM that moved from milled receiver to stamped, making
it both lighter and less expensive, but giving garage experts a reason to
complain about.

------
RachelF
So simple even a chimp can operate?

[http://youtu.be/GhxqIITtTtU](http://youtu.be/GhxqIITtTtU)

------
avis
Unlike the ar* and generally americans weapons, it can shoot in 'sandy'
situations.

------
rectangletangle
Simple, and easy to use UI; Robust and reliable; Extensible design; Massively
scalable

------
dschiptsov
Because it is simple and good-enough.)

