Talk:Rk 62

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

This article is within the scope of the Firearms WikiProject, a project devoted to the improvement of firearms coverage on Wikipedia with an emphasis on civilian firearms. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

What is source of this "RK 2000" claim and whats it's relation to the Rk 62? I don't believe that Sako would any more start manufacturing assault rifles after discontinued Rk 95 and it's last finnish (sort of) weapon manufacturer. It's almost sure that future weapon of FDF will be import of some foreign assault rifle.--81.197.218.62 01:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Rk 2000 was as of 2002 the project name for an update of domestic assault rifles (would apply mostly to Rk 95). You are correct in that Rk 95 is most probably the last version to be manufactured, as Rk 2000 was about adding upgrade kits or various accessories such as picatinny rails etc (and these would most probably due to budget cuts etc only see international service or be used by special jaegers in small numbers). With the possible advent of increased Finnish participation in international peacekeeping/enforcing missions would increase the need to modernize equipment further (as uniforms etc do now). Any info on Rk 2000 or what variants/customs it may lead to would as of yet border on original research and should not be included here, but to go as far as to say that there will not be any future versions (however unlikely) would be misleading. A sentence such as last major version or last manufactured version would probably do though. Scoo 10:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that explained it. Couple pics of Rk 95 with different sights:

• http://tietokannat.mil.fi/kalustoesittely/media/1112074324_Taistelijanvaat_2PIENI.JPG
• http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/FDF/aad?full=1
• http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/FDF/aac?full=1

--81.197.218.62 15:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last Revert

Please check see the way the infobox works before changing things, like "part_length" to "barrel length": the infobox is designed to take the field named "part_length" and display it is "barrel length" if this is marked as a "ranged weapon". Also please do not confuse calibre with cartridge.

Also the standard name seems to be "Rk" and not "RK".

Deon Steyn 06:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

As for the name, "7.62 RK 62" is the official (alphabet soupish) designation of the weapon by the Finnish military. The Finnish naming convention is calibre {in millimetre}, type, year adopted. Thus the MP5 in Finnish service is called 9.00 KP {KonePistooli, machine pistol} 2002, while a 122mm howitzer is called 122 H 63A. Can't really say, but I'd use Rk over RK. Scoo 12:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I see the designation on the Finish military site ("7.62 RK 62") so I guess it might be more accurate, but we have a slight problem now in that it seems to be more commonly known as just the "Rk 62" and that is also the article/page name so it looks a bit strange? Perhaps the intro can rather read:

"The Rk 62 (also 7.62 RK62 etc. )?

(also, don't forget to indent ":" and sign "~~~~" you comments), thanks...

Deon Steyn 13:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, fellow historian, I do believe I signed ;) My above comment was not meant as criticism of your edits, rather I wanted to shed some light one the official naming convention. Your proposal for the intro is sound, it is a bit cluttered as of now. Scoo 13:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I must have been confused with another discussion page where someone didn't sign their comment :)

Yes, the current intro section is a bit cluttered. You think my idea is a good one? Cool, I will change it and then we can see what it looks like, feel free to revert or modify again. --Deon Steyn 07:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The proper term for the rifle is 7.62 Rk 62, as noted here. The Finnish Army is somewhat inconsistent in its approach to names when it comes to compound words. Rynnäkkökivääri is Rk, but Aliupseerikoulu is AuK. Go figure. The rifle can be called Rynnäkkökivääri m/62 or Rk m/62 too, if that isn't confusing enough. Then again, the m/xx denomination is usually seen with clothing and other such kit. What I don't know what the upgraded 1995 models should be called in English.Ruo-kone 21:01, 8 October 2006 (UTC)