Jump to content

Talk:Assault rifle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pre-Sturmgevehr guns

[edit]
Cei-Rigotti from 1890s
Fedorov Avtomat
Ribeyrolles 1918 automatic carbine

Literally the Fedorov Avtomat. Also, the XIX century invention of Cei-Rigotti. Those were literally the XM7 rifle-tier "assaulties" in terms of 6.5mm caliber and 5 centimeters long rounds. I mean, the Russian gun, "the avtomat before there even were avtomats" wasn't any heaver than a "tactical"-decorated modern assault rifle: 11 lb loaded or under 9.7 lb unloaded. And the Italian curio was superleggera in that regard: it had the weight of 4.3 kg (9.5 lb). Профессор кислых щей (talk) 16:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be worthwhile to add a subsection to the history section to discuss these early "pre-assault" automatic rifles. VQuakr (talk) 20:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll make such a subsection one day. By the way, there was Ribeyrolles 1918 Automatic Carbine, with its 8x35 cartridge being really close to 7.92x33. 81.89.66.133 (talk) 10:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got you, made a section just in case StG is (still?) believed to be a "wunderwaffe". Профессор кислых щей (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A-a-a-and it's gone, because someone a really good reaction time. What I wanted is to create a section on rare prototypes, that weren't assault rifles yet were featuring traits of "engineering evolution", so to say. It's bold to say Ribeyrolles 1918 was "the first"; yet it was one of the first experiments. In fact, there should be a paragraph for at least one early caliber that is not rifle-ish yet is not a pistolet-ish either. Профессор кислых щей (talk) 11:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to note there WAS the research: one of the sources used says: This is true, but it is worth bearing in mind that, in terms of calibre and muzzle energy, they were in the same class as the present-day 6.8x43 Remington SPC and 6.5x38 Grendel, which are today regarded by many as ideal intermediate cartridges for assault rifles. In other words, the author puts Arisaka 6.5x50SR (not the WWII era 7.7mm namesake round) into the same "intermediate" class as 6.8x43 and Grendel. Профессор кислых щей (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think a gallery-like insert would be nice. Added it atop of the section to not ruin the markup.
DONE. Fyodorov's "Avtomat" now lives in "history" section as a "WWI design". Also. Thank you, Loafiewa and CactiStaccingCrane for hinting what's a quality sourced material and what's not. Профессор кислых щей (talk) 07:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, it makes perfect sense 81.89.66.133 (talk) 11:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2023

[edit]

AK partially developed by Hugo Schmeisser

The article claims that Hugo Schmeisser was on the development team of the AK-47, however the source of this given claim only claims "believed" and "likely"[1]. As the article of Hugo Schmeisser states, the entire design of the AK was made in Degtyaryov Plant before moving to Izhmash in 1948, when serial manufacture had begun for troop trials.

When looking inside of the AK rifle, it can be seen that these are nothing alike, bar the long stroke gas piston. The AK is a rotating bolt weapon with the recoil spring mounted around the recoil spring guide, whilst the StG 44 is a tilting bolt weapon and has its recoil spring in the buttstock, not unlike the buffer tube of an ArmaLite AR-10 or ArmaLite AR-15. If anything, the STG has more in common with the ArmaLite designs than the AK, particularly the disassembly and lower recievers of said weapons.

There was an AK that was very similar to the STG 44, that being the AK-46, discussed in the AK page. The AK-46 was a short stroke weapon and it did have an upper and a lower reciever. However this AK is mechanically speaking more akin to something like an ArmaLite AR-18, most notably the short stroke rotating bolt and the gas tube above the barrel. This weapon however didn't continue further than testing until being completely redesigned to the AK-47.

The only similarity that these weapons share is the long stroke gas piston and the general role of a selective fire rifle meant to be used until ~400 meters. If "influenced" means that one design was adopted before the other, surely the AR series are influenced by the AK, being a mass adopted assault rifle.

As such, why does the article say that the AK had been partially developed by Hugo Schmeisser?

https://web.archive.org/web/20210117103742/https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-most-influential-gun-designers-20th-century-173382 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Schmeisser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47 BleachedDog (talk) 11:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. BilCat (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What consensus? We're having a discussion over a case of WP:DUBIOUS: a claim Hugo personally made some edits to AK-47's design. 109.252.65.192 (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since you are a retired user, you probably won't mind if this question will be reactivated. Basically, there is an article with WP:RANDY levels of reasoning, hence the likely word of excuse and such. 2A00:1FA0:20F:F43A:0:5F:2C9:6C01 (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
kalashnikov.ru has an article on how unrelated the guns are. Comment: Russian "Slyshaly zvon..." phrase is an idiom similar in "Randy in the bush". 2A00:1FA0:20F:F43A:0:5F:2C9:6C01 (talk) 21:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it's from a blog anyone can happily delete it for irrelevance

[edit]

I would request to see the line 

Hugo Schmeisser, the designer of the Sturmgewehr, was captured after World War II, and helped develop the AK-47 assault rifle,

deleted from the section on AK-47.

Reason: https://web.archive.org/web/20210117103742/https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-most-influential-gun-designers-20th-century-173382 link uses words "blog" and "buzz".

  1. The "blog/buzz" part it's a blogpost. Blogposts are not a relevant source of information per se.
  2. "Buzz" refers to the idea of "buzzfeed"; which implies the blogpost was made for the sake of catchyness, rather than seriousness.

81.89.66.133 (talk) 06:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some background of the site, I see no reason to remove this [1] --Denniss (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Denniss The background implies the original blogpost was deleted for a reason other than the site being taken down or deleted after losing hosting priveleges. ALSO: please reconsider the direct line has no words like "likely" and instead, creates a post hoc sum ergo hoc fallacy. Dixi 81.89.66.133 (talk) 17:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blog posts are not inherently unreliable sources -- those with editorial control and standards, like the National Interest, are acceptable sources. Your assumption that "Buzz" refers to the idea of "buzzfeed" is nonsense speculation. Regardless, the BBC agrees with the National Interest's take ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Swatjester 45 minute response SWAT over National Interests and assault rifles! Now that's some quality WP:) material, thanks! 81.89.66.133 (talk) 10:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Point taken. 81.89.66.133 (talk) 10:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC newsletter is nice and all, but there is no paper trail to be followed here. As argued above, the STG and AK are mechanically two very different firearms, and the timelines do not match. The AK was mostly finalized in Kovrov as stated in Hugo Schmeissers page.
I do not trust this article beyond the observation of the wrong weapon being sculpted as it furthermore claims that the STG-44 was the first of its kind. There were even earlier German intermediate rifles produced and fielded such as the MKb-42, and about 30 years before that there already were attempts at a lower power LMG or automatic rifle, chief among them being the Ribeyrolles 1918, Cei-Rigotti and the Federov. BleachedDog (talk) 12:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"AK-47" section is rather loose

[edit]

I think, the style of "AK-47" section is lacking in style.

First and foremost, the illustration involves AN-94 and Groza bull-pup.

  • Replaced with a photo from a museum, full of different AKs.

The which would quickly replace the SKS and Mosin in Soviet service. - problematic; the SKS still would have been some limited, auxillary use after the AK was introduced.

The The AK-47 was finalized, adopted and entered widespread service in the Soviet army in the early 1950s line is also erroneous, since the adoption took place in 1949.

The line about Hugo Schmeisser "helping to develop" the gun comes from a source, that uses the word "likely". A synonym for the word, "believeably", goes to the "words to watch" list from MOS:EDITORIALIZING, the idea of likelihood should have been addressed ever since the reference was added. Профессор кислых щей (talk) 15:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One more: the drawing of 6 different guns (from Deviantart) is not good either: there are pictures, photos of AK as well as AKM already; while AK-74 has own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Профессор кислых щей (talk • contribs) 05:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2024

[edit]

“Assault” rifle is a bs liberal term like assault golf club, assault cat 🐈, etc. 2600:6C5E:32F0:A8A0:C1CE:C4B7:A8B9:F4CD (talk) 05:27, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done. You seem confused with assault weapon; assault rifle is military terminology. Please get the basic facts straight before wading into contentious topics, and make a policy-based argument next time, k? ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 05:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Assault_rifle&oldid=1264971285"