If All AK-47s Had Been . . .

[Tony Williams]

Of course those characteristics would be nice to have. But, at the price of developing and fielding two new (and completely different) machine guns, along with the attendant logistical and training issues? I can't say I'd rate that as a probable event, given the Soviets' post-WWII trend to simplify matters in regard to military small arms.

If they had a belt-fed 6.5, I doubt that the PK series would ever have been built. As the 6.5 MG would become standard for dismounted troops, leaving the 7.62x54R MGs for vehicle mounts and heavy fire support, it seems far more likely to me that they would have kept the SGM in service for a long time, just as they did with the DShK.

The Russians would've started out with a lightweight, belt-fed, 6.5mm RPD, which would later have been replaced by a magazine-fed, 6.5mm RPK. Would they then have turned around and developed another belt-fed 6.5mm LMG? IMO, there are too many variables to give an answer with any degree of certainty.

I'm not so sure that they would have replaced a 6.5mm belt-fed MG as rapidly as they did the RPD. The longer practical range of the 6.5mm would have encouraged tripod as well as bipod use, for more of a support fire role, which implies a higher volume of fire. Apart from the ballistics, it seems to me that the real problem for the RPD was that the high firepower potential of a belt-feed mechanism was severely limited by the fixed barrel, as already mentioned. The two elements really go together. If you have a fixed barrel, then you might as well use a magazine feed, which means you might as well use magazines compatible with the assault rifle, which means that you might as well adopt a heavy-barrel version of the rifle with bipod attached.

So I'll modify my previous statement, to say that if they had a belt-fed 6.5 with a quick-change barrel, they wouldn't need a portable MG in 7.62x54R.

If the RPD sees little use in Afghan combat, I'd say it's because of the small numbers in theatre, not due to poor long range ballistics.

There are only small numbers around because the concept of a belt-fed MG in a calibre with poor long-range ballistics was discarded. A lightweight belt-fed QCB MG in a long-range 6.5 would probably have been built in huge numbers.

Remember, the AK has even worse long range ability, but is by far the most numerous gun used by the insurgents.

But it's not the one which caused ISAF all of the problems and sent them rushing back to reissue 7.62mm MGs and rifles to the infantry squad. The AK is fine for the set-piece assaults on ISAF bases or for a close-range ambush. But once the Taliban cottoned on to the limited range of the 5.56mm, it was the PKM and SVD used at long range which harassed and pinned down the ISAF patrols.