Military Review

Youth of "Maxim"

87
A special place in the battle of the First World War belonged to the rifle arms - a machine gun that could develop a concentrated and accurate fire on a relatively narrow front in the shortest possible time, exerting a moral impact on the enemy and inflicting considerable losses on his personnel.


In 1914, the Russian infantry regiment had a machine-gun crew equipped with eight machine guns. This corresponded to the general European trend. The Russian machine gun of the Maxim system had a firing rate of about 600 rounds per minute and excellent penetrating ability.

Successful in attack

Even before the war, the statutory documents of the Russian imperial army practiced various types of machine-gun fire: for sighting and shooting, shooting with and without dispersal, at open and closed targets. Special attention was paid to the tactics of actions: from open and closed positions, by area and to defeat, at night, from various distances, with maneuvering. Of great importance was the massaging of machine-gun fire.

Youth of "Maxim"Competitions were held, the best shooters were rewarded and strongly encouraged. Machine-gun teams, especially those who retained the cadre, were the elite of the Russian infantry during the First World War.

In the offensive machine guns were used mainly in the middle and close ranges. Their task is to assist the attacking infantry and cavalry, especially in those moments when it is necessary to quickly and powerfully increase the fire impact. Machine guns that are in the combat order of the advancing troops concentrate their fire on the attacked site of the enemy’s position and, acting from short distances, sweep away both the defenders of the enemy’s position and suitable reserves, contributing to the rapid achievement of tactical success.

Special importance was given to machine guns while retaining the achieved lines and strongholds of the enemy - they served as the basis for the stability of units and divisions in repelling counterattacks and fixing on the captured positions. One of the participants in the war later recalled: “Potatoes well masked machine guns from the eyes of the enemy. One long throw from a beam ran out of a long blue chain of people and began to move in my direction. The distance finder relentlessly followed their movements and in a low voice, as if aware of the importance of his post, handed me sights. According to the charter, machine gun non-commissioned officers held their hands up, letting them know that the machine guns were ready. Following the first, the second chain of Austrians appeared from the beam. As far as I thought then, I commanded in a calm voice: “Fire!”. As if the machine guns were waiting for this, they simultaneously stumbled together, sending hundreds of bullets to the enemy who had not expected anything. The effect was amazing. The ricochets from the bullets lay in the location of the chain itself and a minute later both chains left numerous killed and wounded, pursued by continuous machine-gun fire, disappeared back into the beam from which they had recently appeared. ”

In the event of an unsuccessful attack, the machine guns covered the infantrymen’s retreat, preventing the enemy from going into a counterattack or pursuing.

Reliable in defense

For the units whose combat mission demanded special stability and were at such positions, from where it was possible to fire at the nearest approaches to support points and artificial obstacles with flank or crossfire, machine guns were irreplaceable. They could paralyze the actions of even a significantly superior opponent.

The machine guns remaining in reserve are a powerful fire and maneuvering means in the hands of the unit commander. Taking into account the special attention of enemy artillery to our nests, the creation of spare machine-gun positions and their dispersal was envisaged. The front-line commander recalled: “We did not have time to stop shooting, as several enemy shrapnels exploded over my machine guns. Apparently, their whereabouts were open, and in order to avoid unnecessary losses, I ordered to move a little to the right. ”

When the enemy's attack was repulsed, and the defenders were preparing to go on the counterattack, part of the machine guns accompanied the advancing units, shooting down the enemy who was delaying and not letting them gain a foothold. But the other part necessarily remained in position to cover and parry tactical surprises.

The most effective was the cross machine-gun fire. And the best results were achieved when shooting at a distance of a kilometer. Lt. Col. Yu. Buchinsky, a participant in the battles in East Prussia in 1914, wrote: “It was clear that German chains and columns were thinning and falling on the opening of our machine gun fire, and the German cavalry’s attack on the 6 Infantry Infantry Regiment wing".

The machine-gun fire of the Russian infantry was a powerful factor in the effective fight against the enemy and the cause of his high losses, even in tactically successful battles for him. This was largely determined by the quality of the combat training of Russian machine gunners.

For example, in a battle near the village of Piaseczno 27 August 1914, two machine guns of the 3 Siberian Rifle Regiment beat off nine enemy infantry attacks, inflicting heavy losses. And in the farm Zabrodye-Rymashevsky in August of the 1915-th also two machine guns not only covered the withdrawal of parts of the 20-nd Galician Infantry Regiment, but also distracted the enemy’s fire.

The archives retained the statement of the Galician battle participant: “When it was captured (235 heights), the machine gun platoon of the senior noncommissioned officer Yudin, who destroyed one enemy company with its fire from the reserve to the counterattack, was particularly distinguished (123 killed and wounded were counted) .

The combat regulations of machine-gun infantry teams noted: “Thanks to their mobility and power of fire, machine guns are a very valuable tool for changing the course of a firefight both at the front and especially on the flanks, which can be achieved with skillful use of decisive results. The moral impression from the action of machine-gun fire as a result of the mass losses inflicted by it in a short time is very strong and increases even more in cases of a sudden opening of fire. ”

Sometimes even a single machine gun could decide the fate of the battle of any level. A vivid illustration is the battle of the lifeguards of the Finnish regiment 20 July 1915, near the village of Kulik.

Finnish battalions occupied the forest and the village — 2, 3 and 4 were in positions, and 1 was in the regimental reserve. When, after a powerful artillery preparation in 14 hours, the attack of the German infantry began, the Germans broke through the positions of the 4 battalion and, overcoming the Russian trenches, rushed forward. Combat staff captain A. F. Moller transmitted the heat of battle in this way: “Machine gun, machine gun! Where is the machine gun? - I shouted. “Shoot a machine gun!” I ran along the trench and ordered me to pull out a machine gun. The ensign Wielkopolski with machine-gunners of the 13 th company quickly raised the machine gun to the traverse of the trench, and he had already shot through the heads of the right-flank trench 13 in the trenches 15. “Where is the other machine gun?” I shouted, straining. It turned out that he was not acting because he was overwhelmed. But it was relieved from the heart, as the 15-th company taken by shelling along the trenches began to be cleared by Germans popping up and throwing whole groups back, and suddenly, with delays and interruptions, the second 13-company gun also started working on them. ”

The wounded, but not out of position, Moller personally supervised the actions of the machine-gunners: he ordered the only surviving machine gun to be pulled out and, setting it inside the trench, open fire on the Germans bypassing the battalion’s flank. One of the soldiers of the communications team rushed to transfer the order, but was immediately killed, and the next was wounded. Then the senior non-commissioned officer of the 13 Company of Soldiers alone (although the combat service of the Maxim assumed the presence of three people) pulled out a machine gun and opened the disastrous flank fire on the Germans. They could not stand it and lay down, and then rushed back in whole groups. Two or three minutes later, the hero got into the stomach with a glass of shrapnel, but lying on the ground, covered with blood all over, Soldatov tried to shoot a machine gun. “He had a gaping wound with torn clothes, mixed with intestines and blood and a piece of a still sticking large fragment of a grenade ... He was unbuttoned the gate, and he made some semi-convulsive gestures with his right hand, apparently wanting to cross himself. Because of the pain in my chest, I could not see that he was trying to say something, bend down and therefore sat down to him, tried to guess rather than hear, his words. Someone from bending over him helped his hand, and he reached out for the block with the crosses of St. George (he already had two and several St. George medals) and began to shoot it, which he immediately helped to do. Overcoming the pain and trying to smile, he handed them to me and, very tense, suddenly said clearly: “Your highness! Pass to parents. Tell me - honestly dying. " He said something else, already in a half-whisper, but neither I nor the ensign Wielkopolska could make out the words. Seeing the tears in the eyes of the brave old man of Wielkopolska and feeling that they are speaking out for me, I hurried to cross him, kiss his head and stand at the moment when his head was thrown back, supported carefully by his weeping friend, senior noncommissioned officer Andrei Salodovnikov. ”

The counterattack of the 4 fighters of the battalion decided the fate of the battle, but it was the fire of the senior non-commissioned officer Soldatov that was the key factor in repelling the onslaught of the enemy, already wedged in by the Finns.

Military examples of the successful use of Russian machine guns are not counted. But the most valuable recognition of their effectiveness comes from the enemy - mention of this is present in the writings of most eyewitnesses and participants in the war on the Russian front. For example: “In almost all the corps, the infantry was stopped by the Russian machine guns that resumed fire after the transfer of artillery fire. The units encountered everywhere with heavy machine-gun fire from convenient positions suffered heavy losses. ” This is said about the Gorlitsky breakthrough, during which the German troops, surpassing the Russians in heavy artillery in 40 times, practically equalized the Russian rifle positions with the ground.

The fact that some Russian officers were lovers of machine-gun fire is evidenced by the incident that took place with the commander of the 3 battalion of the 11 Turkestan rifle regiment, Lieutenant Colonel Gorny. He personally fired a machine gun, repelling a German attack near the village of Severinki on the River Narev. A good lieutenant colonel silenced several enemy machine guns. The Germans noticed a successful firing point, and when the officer, getting up from behind a machine gun, moved to prepare the battalion for the upcoming attack, a German soldier hiding in rye approached him and reported in Russian that he was being taken prisoner. When Gorn approached him, the "prisoner" rushed to the ground and fired from a rocket launcher into the air. At this point, a German machine gun was launched at the indicated point - and the lieutenant colonel was killed.

Machine guns that were in combat formations of the Russian troops were a powerful tactical factor, often (especially because of a lack of projectiles) to compensate for the weakness of field artillery guns.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/33326
87 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. parusnik
    parusnik 13 November 2016 08: 27
    +5
    Yes, "Maxim" has served ... And now he has not retired ... Both sides in Donbass use ...
    1. rjxtufh
      rjxtufh 13 November 2016 09: 05
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      Yes, "Maxim" has served ... And now he has not retired.

      In normal technically developed countries he left, and for a long time. Even before 2MB.
      1. svp67
        svp67 13 November 2016 09: 14
        +5
        Quote: rjxtufh
        In normal technically developed countries he left, and for a long time. Even before 2MB.

        You can find out what it is in what?
        1. rjxtufh
          rjxtufh 13 November 2016 09: 23
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          You can find out what it is in what?

          Which countries up to 2 MV were normally technically developed? Guess yourself.
          1. svp67
            svp67 13 November 2016 09: 45
            +10
            Quote: rjxtufh
            Which countries up to 2 MV were normally technically developed? Guess yourself.

            Well let's LET'S .... Germany? No, she used the copy of this machine gun under the brands MG 08, MG 08/15 and


            1. Amurets
              Amurets 13 November 2016 10: 30
              +8
              Quote: svp67
              Well let's LET'S .... Germany? No, she used her copies of this machine gun under the brands MG 08, MG 08/15 throughout the war

              Great Britain: Vickers machine guns. Inverted Maxim was used in the British army until the end of the 60s of the twentieth century.
              https://topwar.ru/100225-pulemet-vikkers-perevern
              utyy-maksim.html
              https://topwar.ru/13646-stankovyy-pulemet-vikkers
              .html
          2. adma
            adma 13 November 2016 10: 17
            +6
            And Britain used "Vickers" - the English version of the "Maxim" machine gun



            What did she use this machine gun until the early 1960s.
            1. svp67
              svp67 13 November 2016 10: 24
              +10
              And in the USA, its version a, la "Maxim" - Browning's M1917 machine gun ...


              And in Britain a large-caliber 12,7 mm "Maxim" was produced and used for a long time

              So interesting
              Which countries up to 2 MV were normally technically developed?
              and abandoned Maxim and designs created on its basis in the First World War?
              1. Cat
                Cat 13 November 2016 12: 27
                +4
                UPDATE.
                Various models of maxims and its analogues were in service with the armies: Finland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Poland. Moreover, many went through several stages of modernization.
                Finnish machine gun Maxim on an anti-aircraft gun (with a metal tape, but without a wide mouth).
              2. rjxtufh
                rjxtufh 13 November 2016 13: 12
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                Germany? No, she used her copies of this machine gun under the brands MG 08, MG 08/15 throughout the war

                Quote: adma
                And Britain used "Vickers" - the English version of the "Maxim" machine gun

                Quote: svp67
                And in the USA, its version a, la "Maxim" - Browning's M1917 machine gun ...

                In Germany, water-cooled MGs were used but NOT MADE. At the same time, they tried to use them limitedly, not in the infantry.
                In the United States, such machine guns were produced mainly for "native armies". Those. for lend-lease supplies to allies.
                In Britain, they were released mainly for the same purpose, except for the period when Britain lost a lot of weapons in France. And then the main part of British consumption went to the air defense and the Navy.
                Quote: svp67
                And in Britain a large-caliber 12,7 mm "Maxim" was produced and used for a long time

                Navy machine guns MUST be water-cooled. It is also very good for air defense. In the infantry during WW2, such machine guns did not belong because of their unsatisfactory combat stability.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 13 November 2016 13: 50
                  +4
                  Quote: rjxtufh
                  In the United States, such machine guns were produced mainly for "native armies".

                  An excellent definition for the US Marine Corps, because it was with them that he stood in service ...
                  Quote: rjxtufh
                  In the infantry during WW2, such machine guns did not belong because of their unsatisfactory combat stability.

                  Sustainability, nothing to do with it, the factor of operational mobility should be taken into account more ... Well, what can you say before the war we also had 10000 DS-39 machine guns ...

                  1. rjxtufh
                    rjxtufh 13 November 2016 13: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    after all, it was with them that he stood in service ...

                    You have obvious problems with Russian. You cannot tell the difference between "released for your own consumption" and "used previously released". This is very difficult for you, apparently.
                    Quote: svp67
                    Sustainability, nothing to do with

                    Indeed, a small fragment was enough to turn a machine gun into a huge and very heavy self-loading rifle with the possibility of automatic fire.
                    And so, nothing to do with.
                    Quote: svp67
                    Well, what do you say before the war, there were also 10000 DS-39 machine guns ...

                    Yes, there were excellent machine guns. From others, good ones.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 16 November 2016 11: 46
                      +1
                      Quote: rjxtufh
                      You have obvious problems with Russian. You cannot tell the difference between "released for your own consumption" and "used previously released". This is very difficult for you, apparently.

                      Does it seem to be difficult for YOU, is it Natives or American soldiers, from the Second World War?



                      1. rjxtufh
                        rjxtufh 16 November 2016 16: 13
                        0
                        I still hope that someday it will come to you that no one throws out old weapons. And it serves until its failure.
                        But this does not mean that obsolete weapons are being manufactured all this time.
                        Well, there is no way this "super-complicated thought" will reach you.
                2. svp67
                  svp67 13 November 2016 14: 11
                  +4
                  Quote: rjxtufh
                  In Germany, MG water-cooled used, ....
                  In the US, such machine guns were produced ....
                  In Britain they were released .....

                  That is, if you recall what you said earlier:
                  In normal technically developed countries he left, and for a long time. Even before 2MB.
                  I don’t even know if there were SUCH countries in that war ...
                  1. rjxtufh
                    rjxtufh 13 November 2016 15: 56
                    0
                    It was necessary to highlight this:
                    Quote: rjxtufh
                    In Germany, water-cooled MGs were used but NOT MADE. At the same time, they tried to use them limitedly, not in the infantry.
                    In the United States, such machine guns were produced mainly for "native armies". Those. for lend-lease supplies to allies.
                    In Britain, they were released mainly for the same purpose, except for the period when Britain lost a lot of weapons in France. And then the main part of British consumption went to the air defense and the Navy.

                    Whole. And then try to understand what that means.
                    Quote: svp67
                    That is, if you recall what you said earlier

                    Are you really that ... misunderstood? Or are you trolling me?
                    For some reason, I'm starting to suspect that ...
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 16 November 2016 22: 05
                      +1
                      Quote: rjxtufh
                      Are you really that ... misunderstood? Or are you trolling me?
                      For some reason, I'm starting to suspect that ...

                      I showed you that you are EXPRESSLY expressing your thought, not only are you trying to blame others for your sins.
                      1. rjxtufh
                        rjxtufh 16 November 2016 22: 26
                        0
                        Quote: svp67
                        I showed you that you EXPRESSLY state your point

                        And I tell you that you cannot or do not want to understand what they write to you about.
                        I am sending you again to my words:
                        Quote: rjxtufh
                        In Germany, water-cooled MGs were used but NOT MADE. At the same time, they tried to use them limitedly, not in the infantry.
                        In the United States, such machine guns were produced mainly for "native armies". Those. for lend-lease supplies to allies.
                        In Britain, they were released mainly for the same purpose, except for the period when Britain lost a lot of weapons in France. And then the main part of British consumption went to the air defense and the Navy.

                        Where did I write that the old weapons FROM OLD RESERVES were not used by the parties? On the contrary, it is clearly written what was used.
                        But FOR MYSELF it was no longer produced, because FOR MYSELF, a newer AIR cooling technique was produced. The Americans even bought a Lewis license for this.
                        The British were also an exception for a short period of time. And the bulk of the OLD equipment was made for deliveries to the Allied armies under Lend-Lease.
          3. moskowit
            moskowit 13 November 2016 12: 26
            +3
            I guess. Upper Volta and Ivory Coast! Guessed? And the rest, walked out ...
        2. avt
          avt 13 November 2016 10: 44
          +10
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: rjxtufh
          In normal technically developed countries he left, and for a long time. Even before 2MB.
          You can find out what it is in what?

          In which there were carabiner cartridges .... or there were no carabiner cartridges bully
          Quote: svp67
          Well let's LET'S .... Germany?

          Here is the rascal! He took it, and one can say in plain text - he craped into the alternative consciousness creating an alternative universe! laughing laughing It started so well
          Quote: rjxtufh
          Which countries up to 2 MV were normally technically developed? Guess yourself.

          such pearls wassat ,, olympa " laughing
          Quote: Amurets
          Great Britain: Vickers machine guns. Inverted Maxim was used in the British army until the end of the 60s of the twentieth century.

          Quote: adma
          And Britain used "Vickers" - the English version of the "Maxim" machine gun

          And then sadists with bags of salt pulled themselves up and strive to sprinkle to the fullest in a tender alternative and clean brain. bully
        3. Mushroom
          Mushroom 13 November 2016 17: 03
          +1
          left gone, fingering, and if used as a casemate tool ..
      2. Signore Tomato
        Signore Tomato 19 November 2016 09: 27
        +2
        Quote: rjxtufh
        In normal technically developed countries he left, and for a long time. Even before 2MB.


        Skaklam and their sympathizers VERY want to show the USSR and Russia a sort of third-rate backward agrarian country. This helps them to raise themselves in their own eyes to the level of, at least, the Ukrainian SSR. After all, now, they are at the level of Uganda.
  2. captain
    captain 13 November 2016 11: 12
    +3
    Thanks for the story, thanks for the story of the heroes. It’s bad that practically nothing has been written about the First World War.
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 13 November 2016 12: 09
      +3
      Quote: captain
      It’s bad that practically nothing has been written about the First World War.

      Yes, because we still divide Russia into white and red. Quiet Don, Transbaikal residents, describe the participation of WWII Cossacks, but otherwise, you are right. Almost nothing. The rest is research or journalism.
      Fedoseev "Machine guns of the Russian army in battle". V.G. Fedorov "In Search of Weapons". Fedoseev "Cannon fodder" of the First World War. Infantry in battle. Shunkov "The Russian Army in the First World War 1914-1918" That's probably all.
  3. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 13 November 2016 11: 59
    +3
    My mother had a natural "maxim" in the museum. As a schoolboy, when no one was there, he asked to spin around him. How heavy it is! I always remember this when I see newsreel footage of soldiers rolling him over the potholes of the battlefield ...
    1. Cat
      Cat 13 November 2016 12: 36
      +3
      They dragged the "Maxim" on them. They were scolded for the weight, but loved for the possibility of continuous fire.

      An negligent commander will allow you to roll a machine gun. Therefore, they wore, cursed but wore.
      1. rjxtufh
        rjxtufh 13 November 2016 19: 59
        0
        Quote: Kotischa
        They dragged the "Maxim" on them.

        Enchantingly in the photo, the fighter carries a shield. So you will not take it far.
    2. Dekabrist
      Dekabrist 13 November 2016 13: 00
      +2
      Yes, heavy. Our fighters were sent to the warehouses of Odessa VO to work, there, among other things, Maxim was in storage. And there were a lot of them.
  4. Dekabrist
    Dekabrist 13 November 2016 12: 32
    +8
    Well done rjxtufh! He lowered Germany and England below Honduras, not to mention all sorts of Belgium, Japan and other China. If we take the Maxim machine gun in service as a criterion of the country's backwardness, it turns out that at the beginning of World War II in Europe there were practically no industrially developed countries!
    Rjxtufh, you at least read Wikipedia or something. And then you will be expelled from the country of residence for slandering her history!
    1. avt
      avt 13 November 2016 13: 20
      +7
      Quote: Dekabrist
      Rjxtufh, you at least read Wikipedia or something.

      wassat Abalde! So they didn’t understand that he wrote Rjxtufhpedia! ?? laughing
  5. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 13 November 2016 12: 44
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    and abandoned Maxim and designs created on its basis in the First World War?

    Well, you can create a lot of things on the basis. The main drawback of Maxim is the mass and the complexity of manufacturing. If Maxim were satisfied with everyone, there would be no competitions for his replacement
    Quote: svp67
    Germany? No, she used her copies of this machine gun under the brands MG 08, MG 08/15 throughout the war

    The remnants, like the remnants of mg-34. So the Germans and the guns at first had all sorts, with a pine forest. Usually they use weapons until they are completely worn out
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 13 November 2016 13: 24
      +1
      Quote: Pilat2009
      The main drawback of Maxim is the mass and complexity of manufacturing. If Maxim were satisfied with everyone, there would not be competitions for his replacement

      Even modern weapons are not all and not always happy. Specifically, Maxim fit in perfectly where his reliability, reliability, water cooling were needed. Bunkers, Ships.
      Photo taken at Kaur. Similar were in the bunkers of the Annunciation ur. Unfortunately, I did not find the complete scheme of the machine gun cooling system in the bunker. Similar were the Si at the Finns on the Mannerheim Line
      1. Niccola Mack
        Niccola Mack 14 November 2016 13: 30
        +1
        This is just a machine from the "Mannerheim line":
    2. avt
      avt 13 November 2016 13: 25
      +3
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Residues, as well as residues mg-34.

      laughingNot "remnants", but quite a shortage of mass-produced weapons, which sharply faced the Wehrmacht during the Polish campaign, when the newly created units were armed with captured weapons. Well, finally, read the same Germans, the same Mueller Hildebrant, and not
      Quote: rjxtufh
      rjxtufh
      with his pearls from his alternative universe. bully
    3. rjxtufh
      rjxtufh 13 November 2016 14: 08
      0
      Quote: Pilat2009
      The remnants, like the remnants of mg-34. So the Germans and the guns at first had all sorts, with a pine forest. Usually they use weapons until they are completely worn out

      That's it. But different avt and others would never understand what the phrase "use previously released" means.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 13 November 2016 14: 57
        +3
        Quote: rjxtufh
        what does the phrase "use previously released" mean.

        Is this "Biogas" released from the anus? In fact, surplus weapons are handed over to warehouses and arsenals and are mobilization reserves for long-term storage, weapons withdrawn from the troops during the disbandment of military units or replacing weapons with more modern ones are also stored there.
        1. rjxtufh
          rjxtufh 13 November 2016 15: 18
          0
          Quote: Amurets
          Is that "Biogas" released from the anus?

          You know better.
          Quote: Amurets
          In fact, surpluses of the released weapons are handed over to warehouses and arsenals and are mobilization reserves of long-term storage; weapons that were withdrawn from the troops during the disbandment of military units or the replacement of weapons with more modern ones are also stored there.

          Well, then what?
          What does this previously released weapon that will be USED during the war have to do with weapons issued for arming its army during the war?
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 13 November 2016 15: 28
            +2
            Quote: rjxtufh
            this is a previously released weapon

            And what does this term mean?
            1. rjxtufh
              rjxtufh 13 November 2016 19: 57
              0
              Quote: Amurets
              And what does this term mean?

              Do you really don’t understand the Russian language? That means what is written.
              1. aiw
                aiw 13 November 2016 21: 53
                +6
                Oh, tell some more amazing stories about the weak TT cartridge, about the effective range of PPSh 30m (against 60m for the erma), about wound ballistics when you can kill the enemy only by hitting his central nervous system. About the weak cartridge 7.62x39, about the fact that the machine is bad and the assault rifle is good.

                Well, about the backwardness of the maxim, of course, yes, which, for example, WAS PRODUCED in "technically backward" Great Britain up to 1945 inclusive and was the BASIC heavy automatic weapon of the British in WW1 and WW2.
                1. rjxtufh
                  rjxtufh 13 November 2016 22: 21
                  0
                  Quote: aiw
                  Oh, tell some more amazing stories about the weak TT cartridge, about the effective range of PPSh 30m (against 60m for the erma), about wound ballistics when you can kill the enemy only by hitting his central nervous system. About the weak cartridge 7.62x39, about the fact that the machine is bad and the assault rifle is good.

                  But do not dance hopak? To dig a garden? To fix the car?
                  You order, do not be shy.
                  Quote: aiw
                  Well, about the backwardness of the maxim, of course, yes, which, for example, WAS PRODUCED in "technically backward" Great Britain up to 1945 inclusive and was the BASIC heavy automatic weapon of the British in WW1 and WW2.

                  I already wrote a detailed explanation on this topic on this thread. Including in Britain. Search.
                  1. aiw
                    aiw 13 November 2016 22: 33
                    +4
                    You wrote a detailed, internally contradictory nonsense, as well as usual.

                    Once again for dyslexics - vickers were PRODUCED in Britain until 1945.
                    1. rjxtufh
                      rjxtufh 15 November 2016 20: 21
                      0
                      Quote: aiw
                      You wrote a detailed, internally contradictory nonsense, as well as usual.

                      This is your understanding of the problem.
          2. Dekabrist
            Dekabrist 13 November 2016 15: 36
            +13
            Wagon and special - in everything ...
            Touching global topics easily
            Obviously enjoying himself
            He talks about everything!

            With a crooked grin on my lips
            With aplomb and categorically,
            He will say rude and cynical -
            About prose, music, poetry ...

            Covering my eyes from pleasure
            Condemn, not hiding stupidity.
            Impenetrable dullness
            Flaunting everyone.

            Doubt, modesty - deprived.
            And catchy labels
            A fool lives, not understanding ...
            Aplomb of the ignorant, so ridiculous ...
            1. pilot8878
              pilot8878 26 February 2017 15: 40
              0
              Decembrist, I applaud you.
      2. Chtononibrator
        Chtononibrator 13 November 2016 19: 42
        +2
        Quote: rjxtufh
        use previously released

        Browning 1917 was produced during the WWII and was a regular battalion of the Americans, the same is true about Vickers naglosaks.
    4. 97110
      97110 13 November 2016 15: 39
      +1
      Quote: Pilat2009
      So the Germans and guns at first had all sorts

      On VO I recently read that in the list of artillery weapons delivered either by "Reich" or by "Great Germany" in May 1945 there is a Putilov three-inch model. The same one, the "scythe of death". That is, at first there were all sorts, and then immediately - none?
  6. Dinko
    Dinko 13 November 2016 14: 39
    +1
    Well, what kind of Russian easel is he? Just one of our machines.
    1. Cat
      Cat 13 November 2016 17: 37
      +4
      From 1896 to 1943, over 300 technological changes were introduced to the Maxim machine gun. Even the very first version of Maxim adopted by the Republic of Ingushetia had serious differences from the base model.
      1. Dinko
        Dinko 15 November 2016 03: 33
        0
        Technological changes, dear friend, relate primarily to production technology and the device of the Maxim machine gun itself is the least. The device as it was and remains as a whole as it was when developed by Maxim.
  7. Lopatov
    Lopatov 13 November 2016 15: 30
    +2
    Here srach out of the blue. And nobody paid attention to the most interesting in the article ...

    Even before the war, the statutory documents of the Russian imperial army practiced various types of machine gun fire: for sighting and defeating, shooting with dispersion and without, open and closed goals. Particular attention was paid to action tactics: from open and closed positions, in areas and to defeat, at night, from various distances, with maneuvering. Of great importance was the massaging of machine gun fire.
    1. Cat
      Cat 13 November 2016 20: 39
      +2
      Oh well! Moreover, the sightings were carried out before the war ...... Russian-Japanese in 1902-1904. And the tasks for Maxim were "cut" as for artillery. Including shooting from closed positions!
      In principle, all the conclusions of the commission were confirmed in Manchuria.
      Again to shooting at distances of up to three kilometers, optical sights and scopes for shooting from closed positions returned in the 20s already in the Red Army, but not for long.
      And they always knew about massive fire, only 8, and later 16 barrels per regiment, few, very few. It was the lack of firearms that led to the fuss of the famous cart. Maneuver by fire compensated for his lack.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 13 November 2016 21: 58
        0
        Quote: Kotischa
        Again to shooting at distances of up to three kilometers, optical sights and scopes for shooting from closed positions returned in the 20s already in the Red Army, but not for long.

        But the British SAS in the north of Italy successfully used shooting from PDO when attacking German columns.
        We really tried to forget about it. For example, on a PC, the height of the bullet trajectory when firing at 1500 is already 22 meters
  8. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 13 November 2016 15: 47
    0
    Quote: avt
    Not "leftovers", but quite a shortage of mass-produced weapons

    The essence of this does not change. When something is missing, you’ll scoop out all the leftovers from the warehouses. When we didn’t have enough rifles, we’ve removed the tsar’s receiver boxes with slight excesses in tolerances, stored in the cellars from 16 years old. Maxim wasn’t riveted from a good life and from lack
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 13 November 2016 16: 16
      +3
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Not from a good life Maxim was riveted but from a lack

      Yes! Maxim had flaws, but his production had to be restored for the simple reason that the DS-39 machine gun had fatal flaws and had to restore Maxim's production. See the link to DS-39.
      http://www.sinopa.ee/sor/bo001/bo08pe/bo08pe03/pe
      08ds01.htm
      https://topwar.ru/14449-stankovyy-pulemet-ds-39.h
      tml
      1. Cat
        Cat 13 November 2016 17: 39
        0
        All right, the DS39 turned out to be raw and not ready for mass production, which Degtyarev himself admitted after the war.
        1. unknown
          unknown 14 November 2016 09: 25
          0
          I read that the shortcomings of the DS-39 were removable.
          But there was no time to eliminate them. Therefore, we returned to Maxim.
          1. rjxtufh
            rjxtufh 14 November 2016 17: 09
            0
            Quote: ignoto
            I read that the shortcomings of the DS-39 were removable.
            But there was no time to eliminate them. Therefore, we returned to Maxim.

            Well yes. And that's why they started from scratch to make the not-so-successful SG-43. And then they began to remake it in the SGM.
  9. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 13 November 2016 19: 51
    0
    Quote: Amurets
    Maxim had flaws, but had to restore its production for the simple reason that the DS-39 machine gun had irreparable flaws and had to restore the production of Maxim.

    I am in the know. Why the Red Army didn’t have a modern machine gunner at the beginning of the war is a different matter
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 14 November 2016 06: 06
      0
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Why the Red Army did not have a modern loom at the beginning of the war is another conversation

      Why? It all follows from the fact that Artkom wanted a family of weapons based on the DP-27, but alas, it did not work out, it happens. At the same time, Degtyarev machine guns with store food worked quite reliably. The DS-39 machine gun with tape power did not work. But there was one more machine gun and it also passed the test, but for some reason it was not allowed even for military tests. This is the machine gun TKB-67 Silina. here are links to Silin's work.
      http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/?option=com_content&view
      = article & id = 138 & Itemid = 453 & lang = en
      https://myslo.ru/club/blog/oruzheynaya-sloboda/fv
      zlWtI-3k6T1JZluPwKVw
      Well, here's a shot of a machine gun.
      1. rjxtufh
        rjxtufh 14 November 2016 17: 13
        0
        Quote: Amurets
        It all follows from the fact that Artkom wanted a family of weapons based on the DP-27, but alas, it did not work out, it happens.

        You cannot make a machine tool from DP. They shoot different cartridges. One "rifle", the second "machine gun". The difference is in the pool.
        Quote: Amurets
        Well, here's a shot of a machine gun.

        The radiator is the same as that of the DS. Kirdyk trunk in the trench mud will be.
        1. aiw
          aiw 14 November 2016 20: 04
          +1
          Suddenly, the DP could use the whole range of cartridges 7.62x54 R, as well as the mosquito.

          You are not tired of being the laughing stock of all Runet?
          1. rjxtufh
            rjxtufh 14 November 2016 22: 44
            0
            Quote: aiw
            You are not tired of being the laughing stock of all Runet?

            So you are a laughing stock. The most real.
            Clown Manege.
            You don’t even understand the phrase:
            Quote: rjxtufh
            They shoot different cartridges. One "rifle", the second "machine gun". The difference is in the pool.

            Those. You don’t know that easel and light machine guns fire with DIFFERENT ammo. Although I wrote about it, and even wrote what the difference is.
            Although, heavy machine guns can shoot and "rifle" cartridges.
            PPC. And THIS will still evaluate my knowledge. Would be silent better.
            1. aiw
              aiw 15 November 2016 00: 44
              +1
              But you then claimed that the RP CANNOT shoot ammunition from a machine tool! This is even more epic than your crazy texts about the weakness of the TT cartridge and the defeat of the central nervous system of the enemy.

              And it’s impossible to evaluate your knowledge because of the lack thereof. Regarding the production of vickers in Britain until 1945, you have nothing to say? The next drain is counted.
              1. rjxtufh
                rjxtufh 15 November 2016 00: 48
                0
                Quote: aiw
                But you then claimed that the RP CANNOT shoot ammunition from a machine tool!

                It cannot be "machine-gunned" from the machine tool. Only "rifle" ones.
                Quote: aiw
                This is even more epic than your crazy texts about the weakness of the TT cartridge and the defeat of the central nervous system of the enemy.

                More epic. Learn the materiel.
                Quote: aiw
                And it’s impossible to evaluate your knowledge because of the lack thereof.

                Follow yourself, wise guy.
                1. aiw
                  aiw 15 November 2016 09: 03
                  +1
                  And what will happen to the DP if you try to fire a machine-gun round from it?

                  The phrase "teach materiel" in your mouth means "I can not justify my delusional fantasies in any way" - so this is understandable to everyone.
                  1. rjxtufh
                    rjxtufh 15 November 2016 20: 22
                    0
                    Quote: aiw
                    And what will happen to the DP if you try to fire a machine-gun round from it?

                    Inet to help. The poor have no servants. And the boors, too. That’s why they are beggars.
                    1. aiw
                      aiw 15 November 2016 23: 20
                      +1
                      The Internet says that DP quite worked on cartridges with a heavy bullet including.

                      And you publicly got into trouble again, first made a deliberately wrong idiotic statement, and then fled into the bushes.
                      1. rjxtufh
                        rjxtufh 16 November 2016 00: 01
                        0
                        Quote: aiw
                        The Internet says that DP quite worked on cartridges with a heavy bullet including.

                        This does not tell you the Internet, this is an idiot. Even the Internet really can not turn.
                        Quote: aiw
                        And you publicly got into trouble again, first made a deliberately wrong idiotic statement, and then fled into the bushes.

                        No no. You will not receive pictures and links from me. And you don't need to embarrass me with your "tricks".
        2. Amurets
          Amurets 15 November 2016 00: 50
          +1
          Quote: rjxtufh
          You cannot make a machine tool from DP. They shoot different cartridges. One "rifle", the second "machine gun". The difference is in the pool.

          I heard a ringing but did not understand where he was. And he is in an empty cast-iron head. Special "machine-gun cartridges were produced only for ShKAS and UltraShKAS machine guns. Moreover, it was possible to replace the use of ShKAS cartridges in any other weapon using 7,62x54R cartridges, the reverse replacement was undesirable, since the ShKAS machine gun could misfire. There was no separation of machine gun and rifle cartridges for bullets, there were cartridges with "light" and "heavy" bullets that can be used in any type of weapon, except for the case given above.
          http://www.kalashnikov.ru/medialibrary/300/32_37.
          pdf
          http://www.sinopa.ee/kalashnikov/k2001/k0101/k010
          132 / k010132.htm
          https://topwar.ru/2525-aviacionnye-vysokotempnye.
          html
          Teach materiel.
          1. aiw
            aiw 15 November 2016 09: 08
            +2
            Most likely not a misfire, but bulging in the cycle is overdone - due to the high rate of fire in the ShKAS, the cartridge was removed from the belt with very high acceleration.

            I directly regret that I used to add rjxtufh to ignore - I still need to look for such a clown, I haven’t neighed it for a long time. Particularly delivers pathos with which he carries his nonsense.
          2. rjxtufh
            rjxtufh 16 November 2016 15: 52
            0
            Quote: Amurets
            I heard a ring and did not understand where he was. And he is in an empty cast-iron head.

            Yours?
            Quote: Amurets
            Special "machine gun cartridges were produced only for ShKAS and UltraShKAS machine guns."

            "Special cartridges" were produced for them. And "pellet ammunition" was produced for heavy machine guns.
            Quote: Amurets
            There was no separation of machine gun and rifle cartridges by bullets, there were cartridges with "light" and "heavy" bullets that can be used in any type of weapon

            For easel machine guns, yes.
            And for light machine guns, there was the concept of "regular cartridge" and "non-standard cartridge". And for rifles, too. Here you have to somehow realize this fact.
            Quote: Amurets
            Teach materiel.

            You? No, I won’t teach you materiel.
            Quote: aiw
            I directly regret adding rjxtufh to ignore before

            But I’m such a clown, as you added to ignore. You and a couple more like you. I’m just tired of you. You are self-forming, please contact.
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 16 November 2016 23: 15
              +1
              Quote: rjxtufh
              Quote: Amurets
              I heard a ring and did not understand where he was. And he is in an empty cast-iron head.

              Yours?
              Quote: Amurets
              Special "machine gun cartridges were produced only for ShKAS and UltraShKAS machine guns."

              "Special cartridges" were produced for them. And "pellet ammunition" was produced for heavy machine guns.
              Quote: Amurets
              There was no separation of machine gun and rifle cartridges by bullets, there were cartridges with "light" and "heavy" bullets that can be used in any type of weapon

              For easel machine guns, yes.
              And for light machine guns, there was the concept of "regular cartridge" and "non-standard cartridge". And for rifles, too. Here you have to somehow realize this fact.
              Quote: Amurets
              Teach materiel.

              You? No, I won’t teach you materiel.
              Quote: aiw
              I directly regret adding rjxtufh to ignore before

              But I’m such a clown, as you added to ignore. You and a couple more like you. I’m just tired of you. You are self-forming, please contact.

              You ignore the whole site. Such a joy for Runet will be
              1. rjxtufh
                rjxtufh 16 November 2016 23: 31
                0
                Quote: Amurets
                Such a joy for Runet will be

                Do not you speak for the whole runet. You can’t pull on him.
                Yes, and with qualifications and arguments you have a little bad.
                You need to read more and write less. I see, huh? We strain our eyes more, and we strain our fingers less. This is a 100% algorithm for your success.
  10. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 13 November 2016 20: 19
    +1
    Quote: 97110
    either "Reich", or "Great Germany" in May 1945 there is a Putilovka three-inch model

    Well, Maxim also walked in the Donbass. Maxima walks in the course. Everything that can shoot if there is ammunition is used.
    1. Dekabrist
      Dekabrist 13 November 2016 20: 36
      +1
      As of 2011 year, approximately 35 000 Maxim machine guns were stored in the APU warehouses
  11. aiw
    aiw 16 November 2016 10: 54
    +2
    Quote: rjxtufh
    Quote: aiw
    The Internet says that DP quite worked on cartridges with a heavy bullet including.

    This does not tell you the Internet, this is an idiot. Even the Internet really can not turn.



    This is told to me by the Manual on Small Arms (NSD-38) light machine gun DP. - Moscow: State Military Publishing House of the NPO USSR, 1939, p. 62.

    http://guns.allzip.org/topic/18/208578.html

    Quote: rjxtufh
    Quote: aiw
    And you publicly got into trouble again, first made a deliberately wrong idiotic statement, and then fled into the bushes.

    No no. You will not receive pictures and links from me. And you don't need to embarrass me with your "tricks".


    Of course I won’t get it, because you simply don’t have them. You have never been able to justify any of your delusional statements with any links.
    1. timeout
      timeout 16 November 2016 13: 17
      +2
      Quote: aiw
      This is told to me by the Manual on Small Arms (NSD-38) light machine gun DP. - Moscow: State Military Publishing House of the NPO USSR, 1939, p. 62.

      Bravo colleague! And I’ll also share a link to the document! And then the friend will spin again: http://rgho.st/84x4tNrvC, will be stored for 90 days.
      Quote: aiw
      Of course I won’t get it, because you simply don’t have them. You have never been able to justify any of your delusional statements with any links.

      Don’t be offended by the holy fool, he doesn’t have data where to store, there’s not even sawdust ...
      1. aiw
        aiw 16 November 2016 15: 00
        +3
        Yes, I even feel embarrassed - it is a sin to mock the wretched ... but I can’t resist, the stoker is painfully clogged with grass. And the PPSh fired at him at 30m, and you can only kill the enemy by hitting the central nervous system, and 7.62x39 is a weak cartridge ... and here about maxim and DP are amazing stories.
        1. timeout
          timeout 16 November 2016 15: 25
          +2
          Quote: aiw
          painfully clogged grass at this stoker

          Yes, along the way, there is not only grass there ... He also has a German 37 mm. "mallet" ... infantry ... (you have to come up with that) T-34 beat lengthwise on the flight!
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Bloodsucker
              Bloodsucker 16 November 2016 16: 27
              +2
              Quote: rjxtufh
              With the wretched and shkolota illiterate

              Are you talking about yourself?
              The clowning continues - vintage cartridges, strategic tanks ... now old Maxim has also come under the distribution ...
              "During the use of the Maxim machine gun, it became clear that in most cases the fire was fired at a distance of 800 to 1000 m, and at this range there is no big difference in the trajectory of a light bullet model 1908 and a heavy bullet model 1930"
              http://wartools.ru/pulemet/pulemet-maksim

    2. rjxtufh
      rjxtufh 16 November 2016 15: 44
      0
      Quote: aiw
      http://guns.allzip.org/topic/18/208578.html

      Those. you cannot understand what is written there.
      But this is not for me, this is for doctors.
      Threat. It’s been so long to look for a guide so that you don’t understand what is written there. PPC.
      1. aiw
        aiw 16 November 2016 16: 09
        +2
        Quote: rjxtufh
        You cannot make a machine tool out of a DP. They shoot different rounds.


        Quote from the manual:

        "CARTRIDGES FOR MANUAL GUN

        ...

        b) 7.62 mm cartridge with a sample bullet 1930g (heavy)
        ...
        "

        This is truly PPC, and no doctors will help you anymore. Extremely rare individuals of your level of tenacity ...
        1. rjxtufh
          rjxtufh 16 November 2016 16: 18
          0
          Quote: aiw
          b) 7.62 mm cartridge with a sample bullet 1930g (heavy)

          No, you just ... like a cork.
          So he did not understand where and what to read.
          Then read from cover to cover. Maybe you can understand when and in what cases a heavy bullet cartridge was used. It says there, by the way. And how it was possible to shoot from a "machine gun" with such a cartridge.
          "I look in a book, I see a fig" - this is about you.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. aiw
            aiw 17 November 2016 19: 47
            +1
            It says Russian in white that it is possible to shoot such cartridges. You stated that it is NOT possible to shoot such ammunition from a DP.

            No, are you really so enchanting, or are you pretending to be good?
            1. rjxtufh
              rjxtufh 17 November 2016 19: 57
              0
              Quote: aiw
              It says Russian in white that it is possible to shoot such cartridges. You stated that it is NOT possible to shoot such ammunition from a DP.

              It remains only to find out WHAT becomes manual A machine gun when firing machine gun (with a heavy bullet) cartridges. And does he still remain a machine gun?
              It would also be nice to find out how the machine gun differs from a self-loading rifle. Even heavy, multi-charged and on the bipod.
              By the way, it says that you can shoot such cartridges ONLY if there are no full-time ones. A shoot is necessary. Those. ONLY in force majeure circumstances.
              Quote: aiw
              No, are you really so enchanting, or are you pretending to be good?

              No, you are so enchanting. Because you need to drop something into your head. You cannot guess at once about everything. And even more so, you don’t know.
              1. aiw
                aiw 17 November 2016 20: 48
                +1
                Oh-wei ... well, give a link to the DP man page, which says that shooting with bullets with a heavy bullet is possible ONLY single.

                At the same time, tell how you can shoot single-handedly from a DP, you are our Internet multipat.

                Of course, you will not give links, because you are a nonsense and do not answer for your words.