https://youtu.be/g-VS_ZwXxF0
In addition to its regular ASh-78 (fixed stock) and ASh-82 (under folder) Kalashnikovs, Albania also made a model specifically for launching rifle grenades and it has some odd features. The rear sight block was redesigned to have a hinge permanently attaching the top cover, and the rear sight was moved back onto that top cover. The top cover rear attachment was also strengthened. At the front, a gas cutoff was added as well as a grenade spigot. In another unusual twist, the barrel was lengthened to be as long as the spigot itself. I suppose this makes sense ballistically, but it is unusual to see.
Albanian ASh-78 video: https://youtu.be/doA3TmxUZ2Q
Many thanks to the Royal Armouries for allowing me to film and disassemble this very rare piece! The NFC collection there – perhaps the best military small arms collection in Western Europe – is available by appointment to researchers:
https://royalarmouries.org/research/national-firearms-centre/
You can browse the various Armouries collections online here:
https://royalarmouries.org/collection/
Question I’d like to have answered is whether or not this grenade-launching AK is built on a standard-thickness AK receiver platform, or a thicker RPK receiver, the way the Yugoslav M70 is?
If it isn’t built on a heavier receiver, then the question is, how many grenades is this rifle going to be able to fire before stress destroys the receiver?
My experience with looking over the various other grenade-launching AK variants is “Not for long…”, so how did the Albanians intend to overcome that problem?
It’s also damned odd that anyone issued rifle grenades alongside the RPG, when you get down to it. The Hungarians and Poles aside, I can’t think of anyone who felt like that was a necessity. Especially since the RPG rounds are about the same cost, in terms of manufacturing, and exponentially more effective.
The Swiss and French aside, the whole “rifle grenade as anti-tank weapon” always struck me as being delusional, borderline suicide weapons only marginally better than a Japanese lunge-mine. You’d be better off strapping on a suicide vest and hugging the tank… Especially if you encountered said tank in its natural environment of “other tanks and armored vehicles”.
Frankly, having played with tanks at extremely close quarters, that’s a mug’s game. There are reasons that the tankers refer to infantry as “crunchies”, and I do not like the idea of providing more evidence for that nickname…
>>It’s also damned odd that anyone issued rifle grenades alongside the RPG(…). Especially since the RPG rounds are about the same cost, in terms of manufacturing, and exponentially more effective.<<
…you try to apply criteria of rationality to a regime which 1) broke with Yugoslavia, 2) broke with Soviet Union, 3) broke with China, 4) built one bunker per three citizens, spending 2 x the Maginot line amount of money for them (bunkers, not citizens).
Do note the “anyone”, which includes Hungary and Poland…
It wasn’t just Albania that went in for this particular nuttiness.
If I were doing the cost/benefits analysis, I am pretty sure that the questionable benefit of giving random infantrymen the capacity to commit suicide with a rifle grenade would likely prove to be more expensive on the back end than the alternative of “give out more RPG systems and rounds”.
Especially for Poland and Hungary. I don’t have much insight into the production capacity for RPG systems in Albania, but… Man, rifle grenades for anti-tank work…?
That’s a bit of insanity that just leaves me cold, as a potential “crunchy”. It’s only marginally superior to trying to take out a tank maneuvering on your defensive position via a satchel charge or placing a mine under the tracks while it’s moving.
At least, that was my experience with rifle grenades. If you’re looking to “poit” an anti-personnel grenade out further than you can throw it, sure… You can do that without highlighting yourself as a target pretty effectively. Going after tanks…? Presumably moving in company with other tanks? Have you ever seen what a coax MG can do, or canister rounds?
I went to one Armor firepower demonstration, once upon a time, and became enlightened as to what “infantry in the open” looks like to a tanker: Targets.
I’d be willing to lay you long odds that “rifle grenade systems” have really low rates of success, and really impressively high casualty rates for people trying to use them. Success rate is probably well below the one-digit mark, and probably best expressed as a decimal fraction…
Maybe comparing the weight of normal albanian AK to this yields an answer, though I strongly susopect thiccness was the same, as they probably didnt have the intellect to go the thicc RPK route.
Hypothesis
The barrel was made ~6 inches longer to support the grenade spigot, increasing muzzle velocity ~100 fps. With a 200 yard zero, trajectory was ~30 inches high at 800 yards.
The SKS (20 in barrel) rear sight has about the right range profile but uses a 5 inch longer sight radius. An SKS rear sight mounted back on the dust cover was easier to implement than a new design in the original position.
That makes a lot of sense…
I wonder what the actual physics are of that rear sight; if it matches up with what you’re saying, we’d be able to say whether or not your hypothesis is correct.
Preview of the ytube video needs to be fixed in this article
Is the bolt carrier also machined differently, top being squared ?