Silver Shogun Technical Question

[Webstral]

Development for Silver Shogun proceeds apace. I thought of a question I would run by folks here with more gun smithing knowledge than I have. Is it practical to rebore an AK-74 barrel (5.45mm) so that the barrel will fire 5.56N? I thought that one way the US could help pay for WW3 would be the sale of curios. By the end of December, 1996 there will be hundreds of thousands of AK-47 and AK-74 in NATO hands. It occurred to me that gathering these, shipping them back to the US, altering them so that they can’t fire on full auto, and selling them on the civilian market would be a good way to rake in some useful cash and get Americans excited. It then occurred to me that an American market with very limited access to 5.45B ammunition might be more inclined to purchase an AK-74 rebored and rechambered for 5.56N. The US government might sell them to enterprising individuals, who would then rebore the barrel, make the necessary alterations to the bolt, perhaps modify the magazine well so that the rifle would accept standard M-16 magazines, and eliminate the full auto feature.

A shop for doing this kind of work might very well appear in Las Vegas. Perhaps—perhaps—the market exists from 1995 onward. The PRC sells some of its captured Soviet equipment to the US, who then auctions off rifles for modification to appropriately licensed shops here in the US. That way when a flood of AK-74 falls into NATO hands in the last quarter of 1996, there is already a thriving industry for reboring and selling AK-74.

The question is whether reboring from 5.45B to 5.56N is practical. Any ideas?

[SionEwig]

Probably a lot more work than it's worth. Rebore the barrel, resize/replace the chamber, replace the bolt, and changes to the magazine (it's probably easier to make new magazines that will hold 5.56x45 than modify the magazine well and mechanism). In addition thaere would be possible problems with the 89 import ban and the 94 AWB.

[rcaf_777]

I am thinking this process would labour instense as you have modify the barrel and chamber or worst re-designed a new one mags would also have to modifed.

FN SCAR-H Mk 17 can take AK-47 ammo and mags if your looking for current weapons to compare too.

[unkated]

Wouldn't it make more sense to...

- sell the things in Europe, closer to any number of ready sources of 5.45x39 WP ammo (If not captured, then from most nations close at hand across Africa)?

- Just retool a factory in the US to manufacture 5.45x39mm WP? Not as labor intensive. I know there's a war on but manufacturing ammo is easer than manufacturing new weapons. The Germans did something similar in WW2 - making 76.2mm AT shells for a crap load of Russian AT guns captured in 1941 (re-tooling a factory was easier than manufacturing the same number of German 75mm AT guns, which used different ammo).

Put the factory in Seattle and you almost have a reason for the Russians to want to advance down the coast from Alaska - "400 more kilometers, comrades, and you will have more ammo than you can shoot off in your lifetime!"


Uncle Ted

[SionEwig]

If you decide to go with your idea, the weapons would certainly be sold through the DCM.

On the other hand, it might not be too much of a stretch for loads of the captured arms to be shipped back to the states in otherwise empty shipping space on freighters. At least before things start getting really hot.

[pmulcahy11b]

That's a really tight tolerance you'd have to have.

Actual dimensions of a 5.56x45mm round: 5.69x44.7mm

For 5.45mm: 5.61x39.65mm

You have a bit less than 0.08mm to work with...

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Webstral

... Is it practical to rebore an AK-74 barrel (5.45mm) so that the barrel will fire 5.56N?

Short answer: No, it'd be more practical to make brand new barrels bored for 5.56mm (and probably a whole lot safer, as Paul mentioned, if you rebore the 5.45mm barrel to 5.56mm, you'll be left with a much thinner barrel).

Originally Posted by Webstral

...perhaps modify the magazine well so that the rifle would accept standard M-16 magazines, and eliminate the full auto feature.

Magazine well change.
The AK series use a very different magazine release catch to the AR15 series and as such has a very short magazine well. The AK mag catch would have to be totally removed and the magazine well would have to be "rebuilt" so the AR15 style catch could be installed (primarily because the barrels on the two rifles sit at different heights to each other relative to their triggers and magazine wells). However, it can be done and some companies in the USA have produced AR15 mag wells for AK series rifles. The following link has some images of such a conversion done by a Florida-based company.
http://www.armyparatrooper.org/dropz...g-well-and-BHO

Removing full auto.
I think this would be the least "practical" change to make.
The AK series is designed with a very different methodology with regards to automatic weapons fire. The selector switch in the majority of rifles goes SAFE - SEMI - AUTO (or some variation of this theme) but the AK series goes SAFE - AUTO - SEMI. You'd probably have to fabricate new parts to allow the selector to move pass the AUTO position without engaging it. I would think it would be more practical to manufacture a brand new semi-auto only trigger group or totally rebuild the original - otherwise you'd have some enterprising individuals changing the modified original trigger group back to full auto capacity.

In the image of an AKM receiver below, the AB is Cyrillic for "av", shorthand for avtomaticheskaya (automatic). The second symbol is Cyrillic for "od", shorthand for odin (single). The image also shows the magazine release ahead of the triggerguard and illustrates the almost non-existent magazine well


For comparison purposes, this is the AR15/M16 setup. For those unfamiliar with the rifle, the black "paddle" lever directly above the trigger is the release catch for the bolt hold-open device while the black button diagonally above the trigger is the magazine release catch. The purpose of that other black lever should be kinda obvious - although in this case it's the ambidextrous version, normally it's only present on the lefthand side.

[bobcat]

its not too much of a stretch to repeal the NFA in the games timeline. particularly considering it almost got thrown out by SCOTUS shortly after it was enacted. all you'd need is a case like US v Miller with the right judges sitting on the bench. that would allow the transfer of automatic weapons without the $200 tax stamp.

[SionEwig]

Originally Posted by bobcat

its not too much of a stretch to repeal the NFA in the games timeline. particularly considering it almost got thrown out by SCOTUS shortly after it was enacted. all you'd need is a case like US v Miller with the right judges sitting on the bench. that would allow the transfer of automatic weapons without the $200 tax stamp.

The NFA isn't really the problem here. The $200 transfer tax is quite low in the mid to late 90s. Import, for transfer to individuals, would have to be allowed. Plus, while the Hughs amendment to the FOPA of 86 only concerns the domestically manufactured items, I'm sure it would be brought up in any court case as to intent.

[Webstral]

I greatly appreciate the feedback, gentlemen. I especially appreciate the subject matter expertise on gun smithing.

I don’t think I did a good job of explaining the mechanism and thought process I see behind bringing AK-74 (possibly among other rifles) to the US for resale on the civilian market. The two principal goals would be a modest revenue stream that could be used to support US allies (albeit very modestly) and building some domestic involvement in the war among people not involved in the arms industry. By the end of October, 1995 the PRC should find herself in possession of a significant stock of AK-74, among other weapons. By this point in the real world, the AK-101 had been introduced. I’m not yet prepared to comment on whether this system would have been introduced in the Twilight v1 chronology. However, I’m imagining that some enterprising individual suggests buying some of these rifles from the PRC and modifying them for sale on the US civilian market. I’m imagining, perhaps fancifully, that someone would have crunched the numbers on costs to figure out whether these reworked rifles could have turned a profit.

Congress could be convinced to allow the rifles into the country for sale on the civilian market as a special effort to support our Chinese comrades. China gets some money from selling the rifles to the US, which the PRC promptly spends on materiel from the US. The US government taxes the rifles at every step in their transition from China to the hands of eager buyers in the US. The tax revenues, though comparatively modest, can be earmarked for something or other that will get Congressmen who haven’t bought into the idea on board.

So what I’m gathering from the commentary above is that the reboring job would be difficult because the tolerances would be very tight. How difficult is difficult? On the other hand, what does it cost to make a new 5.56 barrel when you’re making 50,000? I honestly don’t know. One thing I’m not understanding is why increasing the diameter of the bore by 0.08mm makes the barrel much thinner such that thinness would be an issue.

I see from the link provided that the magazine compatibility issue can be overcome. This, and a new trigger group, would enable a rebuilt AK-74 to enter the civilian market. At what cost? Would it be cheaper to rebore or cheaper to replace the barrel? How much support would the civilian market show for AK-74 at various cost options? Would the civilian market accept a new barrel? Would they accept a rebored barrel? Would one see both options at different prices? I am assuming that a certain segment of the American populace would be eager consumers of rifles formerly owned by Soviet troops. I’m sure a range of opinion would exist regarding the virtues and evils of converting the rifles to fire 5.56N, as well as replacing other features like the hand guard, etc. My concern comes back to what the costs of the minimum rebuilding necessary for the rifles to fire 5.56N, use M16 magazines, and fire on semi only would be and whether the US market would be sufficiently robust at this level of expense to justify the investment on the part of the firms doing the work and resale. I don’t know the answer, but I’d like to. Having a shop doing this work someplace in Nevada would help equip the Shogun’s forces with rifles well suited for the environment.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In regard to a rebore of the barrel, it probably isn't a big problem in the short term for a semi-auto, casual-use rifle (e.g. a plinking gun) but for any rifle that was firing auto or rapid semi-auto or something you needed to rely on to put meat on the table, it's going to have a negative effect on accuracy and precision.
Keep in mind I'm not a gunsmith or armourer so this is from my own understanding of things (I know some of the guys here are gunsmiths/armourers so please step in and correct any dumb mistakes I make!)

Apologies in advance for telling everyone how to suck eggs but a little exposition is going to be helpful
Two simplified definitions for the non-gun people: -
Accuracy - the ability to hit the target where you want to hit it.
Precision - the ability to consistently hit the target with accuracy.

Because the barrel works as a heatsink, rapid firing can build up enough heat to cause the metal to soften and in extreme cases the rifling can be worn out much faster than normal and reduce the rifles accuracy over time. As I said, not a big problem if it's not firing full-auto or firing hundreds of rounds in rapid semi-auto in a short space of time.
The primary safety issue at this point would be that obviously, a thinner barrel will heat up faster than a thicker barrel and in the long term, this could wear the barrel to the point where weak spots develop. Should something like a blocked/clogged barrel or double-loading occur during firing, it might cause the barrel to split/burst at these weak spots with the potential to send metal fragments into the face and arms of the shooter.

The second issue with the barrel heating up is that it can affect the barrel harmonics. Harmonics describes the vibration of the barrel during firing and is important for longarms as the effects are related to the square of the barrel length.
Way back, people used to call this "barrel whip" but that's misleading because the greatest vibrations don't occur up and down like the motion of a horse whip (although there are smaller vibrations that do), they move in a circular pattern. Obviously, this has a very strong negative effect on precision and a thinner barrel is not going to be as rigid and therefore as resistant to barrel vibration as a thicker barrel.
Manufacturers will typically find a specific barrel thickness that makes the best compromise between weight and cost without negatively affecting accuracy and precision.
You often see precision target competition rifles with heavy or "bull" barrels specifically because they are trying to minimize the affect of vibration on precision but you don't necessarily want a heavy barrel on a hunting or military rifle.

By reboring a 5.45mm barrel to 5.56mm, you will probably screw up the harmonics severely because 1. the barrel thickness was optimized for 5.45mm ammo and 2. the barrel is a little less useful as a heatsink which in turn, interferes with the harmonics. As far as I can find, a typical 5.45mm AK barrel has a diameter of about 0.57 inches (approx 1.447mm) while a typical 5.56mm AK barrel has a diameter of about 0.59 inches (approx 1.498mm) so you're already starting with a barrel thickness that is not optimized for 5.56mm and by boring that extra 0.08mm out of it, you're reducing it's diameter from 0.57 inches (1.447mm) to 0.53 inches (1.367mm) taking it even further from it's optimum thickness-to-ammunition calibre ratio.

[unkated]

Originally Posted by Webstral

I greatly appreciate the feedback, gentlemen. I especially appreciate the subject matter expertise on gun smithing.

I don’t think I did a good job of explaining the mechanism and thought process I see behind bringing AK-74 (possibly among other rifles) to the US for resale on the civilian market. The two principal goals would be a modest revenue stream that could be used to support US allies (albeit very modestly) and building some domestic involvement in the war among people not involved in the arms industry.

By selling them over-priced (multiply taxed as you said below) used weapons?

• People who don't generally buy weapons will be disinterested.
• People who are interested in weapons for use will not be interested in expensive worn weapons when better can be had (read as Galil) at the same or better price.
• There will be some who will buy them for the cachet of a weapon used in combat. But see below.

By the end of October, 1995 the PRC should find herself in possession of a significant stock of AK-74, among other weapons. By this point in the real world, the AK-101 had been introduced. I’m not yet prepared to comment on whether this system would have been introduced in the Twilight v1 chronology.

Real-world introduction of the QBZ-95, QBZ-95B & QBB-95B (Assault Rifle, carbine & LMG chinese weapons that fire the Chinese 5.8mm cartridge) were introduced in 1997. In the midst of war, wishing to ramp up production and to not complicate munitions needs at the front, I'd suggest that they would most likely stick to the Type 81 asslt rifle and LMG, that fire 7.62mm S.

So, AK-74s hold no immediate interest for the Chinese, unless they captured a lot of ammo also. Of course, the US could retool factories and sell 5.45mm WP to china (export! or at least pay down our trade deficit) and domestically. Better revenue stream.

However, I’m imagining that some enterprising individual suggests buying some of these rifles from the PRC and modifying them for sale on the US civilian market. I’m imagining, perhaps fancifully, that someone would have crunched the numbers on costs to figure out whether these reworked rifles could have turned a profit.

Congress could be convinced to allow the rifles into the country for sale on the civilian market as a special effort to support our Chinese comrades. China gets some money from selling the rifles to the US, which the PRC promptly spends on materiel from the US. The US government taxes the rifles at every step in their transition from China to the hands of eager buyers in the US. The tax revenues, though comparatively modest, can be earmarked for something or other that will get Congressmen who haven’t bought into the idea on board.

So what I’m gathering from the commentary above is that the reboring job would be difficult because the tolerances would be very tight.

Beyond the barrels, don't you also need to replace the receiver? NATO case is significantly (~5mm). The rounds are close to the same length (.4mm difference), but the shoulders on a NATO round are much taller than the WP round. Will it fit in an AK-74 receiver, or does that need to be replaced too?

So, now you're reboring or replacing the barrel, the receiver, the trigger and the magazine feed. How much of this is still an actual war weapon?

Why not just have a 5.45 WP factory in Nevada?

The equation changes yet again when the war spreads to Europe. Whereas I have postulated that the PRC might be willing to endure some logistical headaches in order to get as many Western countries invested in Chinese victory as possible, West Germany might not be as tolerant. They aren't going to reequip the Bundeswehr with weapons firing 5.45B. They might want to keep some AK-74 around to equip East German units that need spares, but the long term goal will be to standardize equipment to West German norms.

While true for the long run, during the war I wouldn't think the Heer would want to take East German units out of the line to re-equip; and also the E Germans already have ammo factories producing 5.45 ammo

Uncle Ted