"Kalashnikov unveils SV-18 12.7mm light sniper rifle" Topic

"In its own permanent pavilion at the Patriot Park where Armya-2019 Forum takes place, Kalashnikov unveils its news light sniper rifle proposed in both the Russian and NATO heavy caliber, which means 12.7 x 108 mm or 12.7 x 99 mm…"

Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

I have very little knowledge of modern fire arms, but 2 questions come to mind:

1. Even allowing for the bullpup design, doesn't the barrel seem a little short?

2. Why are so many modern sniper rifles 12.7mm? I thought that was around the caliber of a WW2 AT rifle…

Simply curious if anyone has a comment.

Thanks for sharing Armand!

Being a former Infantryman for over a decade in my long past youth. I'll try to provide you with some answers …

1) No, the barrel is not too short, because of the bullpup design. Trying to make a weapon shorter/smaller is always somethings Small Arms designers hope to do. Making it easier for troops to move thru closed terrain, get in & out of vehicles, etc. Along with achieving all that, they don't want to reduce effectiveness. So like with AFV designs it is a "balancing act" Note : a .50 cal round is very large. Making a rifle that will fire it effectively is one of the designers'priorities.

As well as making it light enough for the Infantryman to carry a long distance for an extended period of time

Note: an M2 .50 cal HMG with barrel/receiver, tripod & T&E weights @ 128lbs. It normally would take 3 men to carry and only a short distance. Plus the troops that have to carry the ammo, which also is very heavy. E.g. We usually left our .50 cal MGs mounted on our vehicles. We only ever dismounted them and dug them in if we were going to set up a Deliberate Defense.

2.Obviously AFVs today are very much different from WWII's. The WWII AT Rifle was generally a situation of better than not having an AT weapon. For the infantry to carry in the early stages of WWII. Until about mid-War with weapons like the PIAT, Panzefaust, Bazooka, etc.

In early WWII the armor on many AFVs were thin enough for a big AT rd. to do some damage generally. But as the war progressed AFVs got bigger, armor got thicker, etc., etc.

In early WWII the Infantryman, even with an AT rifle in his Sqd. Would get better protection from AFVs with friendly towed AT guns and/or actual tank and/or assault gun support.

Also today with the tech we have in optics, ballistic, etc. a .50 cal Sniper rifle also called an Anti-Material Rifle.

As it can not only service personnel targets effectively at very long ranges. I.e. a .50 cal rd. will go further than a .30 cal rd., obviously.

But also a .50 cal round will take out light vehicles very effectively, again at a long range.

Hope that helps ?

Totally agree

As I recall the Barrett M82 would not be a lot longer than the new Kalashnikov – and as astutely noted by Legion 4, a larger round is a longer traveling round; plus more damage on the receiving end

Yes … A .50 cal rd. will do a lot of damage to a human body … Or a brick wall …

A votre service mon ami!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Working that bolt action on this thing would suck, though. You would have to be double-jointed or else break your cheek-to-stock weld after every shot, which means acquiring a whole new site picture every time. That would severely slow down time to fire subsequent rounds and result in less accurate shooting sharing the same target.

@Legion 4, many thanks for the explanation, it makes a lot of sense when you put it that way.

javelin98 – Agreed, that is always a problem with any bolt action. Regardless a good sniper goes by "One Shot … One Kill" … move on to the next target.

langobard – Glad to help … I.e. as I said I was an Infantry Officer '79-'90. And a student of history, weapons & tactics all my life.

I served in 1954 and 55 with 1st Lt at Army Language School who had been in infantry during the Korean War. He has an m2 heavy .50 calibe machine gun set up in a defensive position, an would on occasion take shots at Chinese 2,000 yards away.

I the current .50 caliber round anything like that size?

Well the M2 .50 cal has a max rg of, IIRC 6800m … So 2000m is certainly within that envelope.

AFAIK there is little difference between the M2 .50 cal in the 50s to today. Now IIRC, the newer M2s don't have to set Head Space & Timing. But while I serve in the Infantry, '79-'90, we still had to set that manually, with a special Head Space & Timing gage. Regardless I think the M2 .50 cal. round is basically the same as in the .50s.