AK-47 is the simplest automatic weapon that I've seen. When I was in high-school I could take it apart in 7-8 seconds. It's simplicity and reliability are remarkably astounding.

You took apart AK-47's in high school?

When Soviet Union still existed, we had weekly "civil defence" classes where we were taught a number of interesting things such as what to do in case of a nuclear attack, why we will win the war and what to do with the weapons (boys) or how to cater for the wounded (girls).

Disassembly/assembly of AK47 was one of routine exercises, we even had competitions on who could do it the fastest.

Those were mandatory classes, just like regular subjects (math, physics and etc) with the exams and grades counting towards your equivalent of GPA. Some schools had after hours clubs where those who were interested could learn more.

I liked those classes a lot, because we got to shoot some weapons (mostly air guns, but sometimes small caliber rifles) for free.

The teacher was a retired sergeant who taught us sharpshooting even though his eyesight was so poor that he had to wear two pairs of glasses, one on top of another. True story...

This is pretty interesting. Where was this?

The teacher was a retired sergeant who taught us sharpshooting even though his eyesight was so poor that he had to wear two pairs of glasses, one on top of another. True story...

Ha, sounds like my dad. He used to coach the local junior rifle team. Retired Marine and old enough his eyes got tired after taking one or two shots, but a very good coach.

  This is pretty interesting. Where was this?

Across the USSR. Lithuania was a part of it during my school years (except for the last couple of months, Lithuania proclaimed renewed independence in March 1990, I graduated in June) and we had this course too. We even had two-weeks of kind of military camp after the 10th grade.

Like TY said it was standard practice. It is 21 or 22 seconds total to take apart and build it back to get a "pass" grade.

Los Angeles public school ?

I think he meant Al Qaeda High School.

There are numerous simpler automatic weapons. British Stan, Soivet ППШ/ППС, Israel Uzi etc.

Simpler, yes, but of the ones you cite I think only the Uzi has comparable reliability. It has been said to me that an unlettered village blacksmith could manufacture most replacement parts for an AK, and it is certainly true that bits that would be carefully machined in any other gun (such as the receiver) were stamped metal on the AK. The gun is even fairly accurate per se, although the sights are primitive and probably the source of the "AKs are horribly inaccurate" meme.

A lot of that is exaggerated lore of course. Blacksmith would not be able to make any substantial replacement part for AK.. maybe fix a rivet or two, replace a spring, but that's about it.

Stamped receiver is not really an issue if you can attain stamping with required precision - which most manufacturers can't do economically, at least not when batches are in ballpark of mere tens of thousands. The earliest attempt at stamping it for original AK failed, so they had to do with milled part for a few years, until the engineers managed to set up reliable stamping. Anyway, the receiver is not that critical part in the weapon, compared to the quality of chamber, barrel and other gas-operated parts. The tolerances there are unattainable by an average machinist shop.

The bad rep for accuracy you mention is probably a mix of many factors. The vast majority of it's operators are incompetent shooters. The accuracy gets much worse as the weapon wears through: it might still function perfect after 50 years of use, but it is long past its prime and could have been never properly serviced. Add to that that majority of AKs out there are not really AKs but Chinese-produced Type-56, or Bulgarian, or Iranian etc. clones, and it's no wonder.

In the Pakistani northwest, there are towns which specialize in making knockoffs of guns. See, for example, Dera Adam Khel. There blacksmiths, using very primitive techniques, make duplicates of AK47s all the time. I think you underestimate the resourcefulness of a village blacksmith.

I've seen these, and bought some myself (replicas or mixmasters of old bolt or lever action guns, or flintlocks; they're in my colo cage now as decoration). They're amazing, although I wouldn't want to fire commercial/military ammunition out of one the first time.

http://www.snotr.com/video/2154 is fairly accurate. http://www.motherboard.tv/2010/2/1/a-stroll-through-pakistan...

There are plenty of AK-47s available now for ~$800 instead, but until around 2001, this was a popular way for some people to arm themselves.

It has zero accuracy - to reliably hit a target with an AK you have to be close enough to beat them with the stock.

It can just about fire a full mag before over heating.

To go from safe to automatic fire the safety lever makes a noise that alerts people in the next country

I'll stick with my SA80 thank you

AK-47 is not one weapon. There are many different types of construction and even more derivatives. Stamped (cheap) or milled (expensive, more accurate, does withstand abuse like sitting on the gun) parts, it does make a difference. Open sights and wood stock also indicate cheap construction. Quality of ammunition also plays a big part in accuracy, but I'm not going there.

Even the AK-47 derivatives have several generations. For example Finnish Rk 62 (current Finnish standard issue service rifle) was licensed to form a baseline for what was to become IMI Galil. http://www.dnmsport.com/GALIL/historygalil.htm

(Disassembly + assembly of Rk 62 takes about 40 seconds, it has five parts)

No modern army uses AK-47. So it shouldn't be compared to SA80.

The bottom line: AK-47 is simple and good enough to be effectively used by even the most inexperienced soldiers. It also requires the least amount of maintenance. Precision tools require more experience and always have drawbacks (like gain accuracy - lose the ability to shoot effectively through walls). Multi-purpose tools are compromises, of which AK-47 is the most battle proven.

It has better accuracy than M14, AK's contemporary foe. AK's reduced caliber revision, AK-74, has it on par with (similarly reduced caliber) M16.

"It has zero accuracy..."

Not so. Watch what happens at 1:09 of this video of the 2005 Tyler, Texas courthouse shootout. David Arroyo (the guy with the AK-47) cuts down running civilians, cops - in short, everyone he sees. He's using his AK-47 in semi-auto mode (one trigger pull = one shot) very effectively against moving human targets:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVGmSzV00-Y

One lesson from the video: stay behind cover while looking for a shooter.

I was with you until the last line... seriously?

You can field strip it in 15 seconds. If you look at the inside of them, there are a few moving parts, and they're all very rough. However, the gas-piston operation system is far superior to the American AR15/M16's system that blows burnt residue into the receiver - that makes it seize up when dirty.

Only if you don't clean your weapon every 4000 rounds :\

Yea, sounds like you've never used one in humidity (even after a few mags) - hell or even one not cleaned and left in storage for a while. I've had them jam on me more than I can remember. There's a reason all of them come with an "assist" that let's your force the bolt closed. If ammo quality (ball powder anyone?) is bad they'll jam on you constantly.

The AK doesn't need an assist, good ammo, or really even oil or cleaning. They're built so you can worry about staying alive - not cleaning...

I'll admit, I'd rather swim in the mud with an AK rather than an AR, but if your AR (assuming it was issued?) was finicky enough to jam in humidity or because it hadn't been cleaned after an outing, then you had a bad AR. The direct impingement system pros outweigh the cons for all but the serious mudbath situations where you also forget your cleaning kit