Quote:
Originally Posted by Tegyrius
Oh, I agree. I've seen a number of articles and books cite the Finnish rifles as the ultimate evolution of the AK. But in terms of a stat block, none of those refinements affect the basic ballistics, speed, and handling. Ergonomics tend not to be reflected in Reflex equipment modeling (bullpup layout being an exception because it is such a fundamental shift in balance and overall length).
|
Yes, that is quite right. A number of foreigners I know, who have had the chance to try the Finnish rifles have been astonished because as far as I've understood, even though AK is a very good weapon, it did have a lousy reputation in the west during the cold war - at least among those who have not actually encountered it in person. There was a test batch of M/82 assault rifles that were built bullpup, but they were not very efficient and never got in to full fledged production. They had been planned for the paratroopers, but caused a number of facial and dental injuries upon test jumps and the sights were lousy. To avoid having the sights very high above the actual weapon, the sights were on the left side of the rifle, which made it practically impossible for a left-handed user to fire and very difficult to adjust.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tegyrius
I like consistent systems. How much of the full designation is used in normal conversation? Is "m/95" typical, with just the year of adoption being stated?
|
When talking about assault rifles, if you ask a Finnish soldier, they call it RK, which is short for rynnäkkökivääri. If they want to distinguish different models of the RK, they'll say RK62 or RK95 - there is the RK76, but it's practically just a bit differently manufactured M/62, so people use the 62.
In general, all the gear in Finnish Defence Forces has the year of adoption planted in the name for logistics. For an example, I have both M/95 and M/05 field uniforms in my closet. The M stands for malli (= model). If everyone knows what piece of equipment you are talking about, then you can just drop the prefix and use the year.
Of course, some of the equipment isn't listed like that - for an example the old radio transreciever, designated in Finland as LV217 (it's actually the U.S. AN/PRC-77 built by Nokia in Finland under a license) is Lähetinvastaanotin (=transreciever) model 217 (and don't ask me where the 217 came from). It's lovingly called 'venttiseiska' (= Blackjack Seven) by it's (overburdened) users, in which I actually counted myself when I was in conscript service. There was already a model of it by then, the 217M, modernized by Nokia - the 217M is also being phased out already in favour of digital radios. Also, mounting a 6/30W booster on it turns it in to a brigade-level radio, LV317 or 317M.