The war can not do without cars

39
The war can not do without carsThe start of car use in Russia dates back to 1900, and from 1910, the Russian-Baltic Carriage Works in Riga began producing cars, with the company receiving a number of parts and special sorts of steel from Germany. The performance of the plant was extremely insignificant - before 1914, they had produced up to 360 machines. Leitner's factories in Riga, Frese and Leisner and Puzyrev in St. Petersburg produced only test copies of the machines.

Imports of cars from abroad in the period from 1901 to 1914 year was about 21 thousand units. But of this total number of 21 360 machines more than 30% (over 7 thousand units) by the beginning of 1914 of the year were out of order, and on the eve of the war, there were thousands of cars in 13 - only about 5,2% (259 cars, 418 trucks and 34) special) belonged to the military department.



At the same time, motor transport on 40% was concentrated in large centers - in St. Petersburg and Moscow.

For comparison: on the 1913 year in England there were 90 thousand (including 8 thousand trucks), in France - 76 thousand, Germany - 57 thousand (including 7 thousand trucks) cars.

During the period from 1901 to 1914, about 9 thousand motorcycles were imported to Russia, and on the eve of the declaration of war, there were (minus worn out) a little more than 6 thousand units.

In general, German cars prevailed among imported cars - with the declaration of war these cars were cut off from the supply of spare parts. In addition, the car park in Russia was distinguished by a variety of types of makes and models of cars, which eliminated the possibility of organizing a case of serial repair of vehicles. The auto repair shops for 1913 in Russia totaled 35, plus 93 workshops in garages.

Thus, the country's general resources, both in terms of vehicles and repair facilities, which could be used by the military when declaring war, were insufficient.

CAR CARS

The military department still in 1910 requested the creation of special automobile companies and their introduction into the army. In the same year, with nine railway battalions in European Russia and the Caucasus, fifth companies were created to test vehicles, select models of vehicles most suitable for military service, and train lower technical personnel. The personnel of the company is an 4 officer and about 150 soldiers. In the established company were transferred available in the army cash cars. In addition, an automotive training company was formed, which was entrusted with the task of training non-commissioned officers and officers for automobile military units.

The overall leadership of the automobile business in the Russian army was concentrated in the military communications department of the General Directorate General Staff.

In 1911, the War Department acquired 14 trucks of the best foreign firms, testing them with a mileage of 1,5 thousand miles. In 1912, competitive runnings of passenger cars were organized along the route of a total length - along the highway about 2 thousand versts and along dirt roads around 900 versts - and trucks up to 2340 versts (along the highway).

In addition to creating automobile companies, measures were taken to supply cars and motorcycles to military headquarters up to and including individual brigades, as well as to supply fortresses to cars and trucks.

In 1913, technical issues regarding automotive parts were transferred to the Main Military Technical Directorate (GVTU).

The War Department decided to form individual autorotates for 29 and intended to implement this plan within three years - in 1914 – 1916. The staff of a peacetime company was: 8 officers, 4 official, 206 soldiers, and in wartime 11 officers, 4 official and 430 soldiers.

On mobilization from the population it was received: cars - 3562, trucks - 475 and motorcycles - 1632, and all cars - 5669. This figure was increased by requisitioning in border provinces and in Finland on the basis of the Statute on the Field Administration of Troops - but only slightly.

GROWING NEED

With the beginning of the war, the army's need for cars and motorcycles began to grow rapidly, it became clear that it was necessary to increase the number of automobile companies, sanitary detachments, automobile teams at the headquarters of the fronts and armies, motorcycle teams to carry out communications services at the headquarters of armies and cavalry divisions. In addition, cars and motorcycles were required to meet the special needs of artillery, aviation, aeronautical and other military units, as well as in the reserve to replenish the loss.

In May 1915 of the year, the General Staff made a calculation for which it was planned to have: 2 autotypes per army (15) and reserve each front, a motorcycle team per army, an automobile squadron for each corps (60) and one motorcycle for each cavalry division (45). To meet the needs of the army in cars and motorcycles in 1914 – 1915, orders were made in America and European countries for 12 thousand cars and 6,5 thousand motorcycles. The annual army demand was determined in the following figures: cars - 14 788, motorcycles - 10 303.

On October 1, 1917 was sent to the army and ordered up to 30,5 thousand cars (of which 711 were in the military before the war and about 3,5 thousand entered by military-motor conscription) and 13 thousand motorcycles.

OWN PRODUCTION

The whole mass of cars in its composition was extremely motley. Accordingly, the military department in 1916 tried to organize the production of cars in Russia.

In February, GVTU 1916 signed five contracts for the manufacture of cars, the execution of which included the construction of the following plants:

- Joint-stock Moscow Society (AMO) in Moscow;

- Russian-Baltic - in Fili near Moscow;

- Lebedeva - in Yaroslavl;

- Russian Renault - in Rybinsk;

- Aksay - in Rostov-on-Don.

Contractors were obliged to build, equip and operate plants no later than 7 in October 1916 of the year, and the order assigned to them for 7,5 thousand cars to fulfill in October 7 of 1918 of the year.

In May, the GVTU 1916 signed a contract with the British engineering company Becos for the construction of a car factory near Mytishchi, designed for the annual production of 3 thousand cars.

Work on the construction of new plants was in full swing, but the Allies after the February Revolution inhibited the execution of Russian orders. As a result, work on the construction and equipment of automobile plants by October 1917, almost ceased.

Thus, the availability of road transport in Russia in 1914 in quantitative terms made it possible to meet the needs of the army for the first time after the declaration of war, but out of this amount, it was possible to take only 30% of the country’s available to the army at the time of mobilization of vehicles. At the same time, the vehicles taken from mobilization, which even needed minor repairs, could not be used for service for a long time due to the lack of funds for repairs.

The military department was not able to properly use the data of the organized mileage and the use of vehicles in the autorots and did not stop its choice on any particular type of car. The latter were purchased from almost all European factories. As a result, the military department was forced to take what was available on the market, bringing this even greater diversity to the fleet of military vehicles.

PROBLEMS WITH SPARE PARTS

During the war, spare parts for motor vehicles were ordered by the military department at the same time as cars. In the first period of the war, they were acquired in the amount of up to 35% of the cost of the cars themselves and were completely spent for two and a half years - thus, the annual consumption of spare parts amounted to 14% of the cost of cars.

The lack of production and mining in Russia of many materials needed for car repair (special grades of automobile steel, spring and spring steel, brass, tin, etc.) made it necessary to import them from abroad, which made supplying the army dependent on the allies' discretion - in particular, England, disposed of sea tonnage. The result was frequent interruptions in the supply of materials, causing an increased idle car repair (up to six months).

The front-line road network, which had an extremely limited number of highways, soon became unusable due to heavy traffic and the lack of proper repairs. Temporary roads - timbered, wooden, of poles, etc., built by road parts, were of little use for motor vehicles.

Low qualifications of the driver’s staff and poor road setting caused a large percentage (50 – 75%) of cars to lose, and repair shops created during the war could not cope with their task due to the lack of spare parts, materials and equipment.

The supply of military vehicles with maintenance materials depended on foreign countries only to the extent of rubber. About 50% of tires was imported, the rest was made domestically - but the raw material went again from abroad. Lubricants and combustible materials were almost 100% Russian production.

Finally, the autorot organization was very cumbersome, and this cumbersome increased as a result of the imposition by the autorotam of the tasks of supplying and repairing motor vehicles of military units and headquarters — this explained the low mobility of the autorot, which made their operational transfers extremely difficult.

But, despite all these problems, the First World War was an important milestone in the organization of the automobile troops of Russia.
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cat
    +8
    18 December 2016 06: 34
    Was it interesting to read that talking about bicycles was not enough by the beginning of the First World War? I will not say anything about weapons, the myth "about one rifle for three brothers" has its roots in those times.
    1. +5
      18 December 2016 06: 41
      The war can not do without cars
      to me, and without war, without it, no way ... what
    2. +3
      18 December 2016 09: 32
      Cat, I recommend reading Fedorov's book "In Search of Weapons". He told how the "rifle" hunger was formed
  2. +6
    18 December 2016 08: 46
    Here is another detail to consider the empire as a classic of technical backwardness .. you can fight without weapons))) but to win ... no. Rifle, shell hunger from the memoirs of the White Guards ... by the way, Russia’s biggest losses in World War I
    1. +3
      18 December 2016 10: 13
      because Western allies used Russia as a source of cannon fodder
      1. +2
        18 December 2016 12: 58
        And the king and his relatives agreed to this. Loans worked out.
        1. +1
          April 15 2017 17: 48
          Quote: murriou
          And the king and his relatives agreed to this. Loans worked out.


          And what did you want from the most miserable and worthless of the Romanovs ?! The actual defeat of Russia in war, revolution and civil war, if you look at the root of the problem, is his work. This is the trouble with the autocratic monarchies that sooner or later such a Nicholas’s comes to power and the consequences are sad.
      2. 0
        17 May 2017 15: 59
        But what, they had to tear themselves away, if only to help us? It never happens in life. Each country pursues its own benefits. The fact that the auto industry did not appear in Russia is certainly not the fault of the allies. Allies are also to blame for the fact that the engines had to be dragged from abroad? And the fact that there was little heavy artillery? The "Holy" Mikolka is to blame, not the evil Lloyd George.
    2. +2
      18 December 2016 11: 48
      Ahem, you look at least the loss of Germany in WWII. They are, as it were, the most gloomy of adequate forecasts for Russia. Or did you also add Civilian to the losses in WWI?
      1. +2
        18 December 2016 15: 46
        Germany has more casualties than Russia, and no wonder: the main fights were in the West; but much less loss by prisoners.
        K.O.
        1. +1
          18 December 2016 16: 43
          True, but these are already clarifications. And the words "the greatest losses for Russia" are not entirely correct, because they generalize what cannot be generalized - because the first impression from such a statement is that, in all respects, Russia has lost the most. “Lost most of all by prisoners” - this may be (I don’t remember this item of statistics for the rest of the powers). Killed - not us. And for me personally, this point in terms of losses is the most important, because only those killed are lost irrevocably for the state and relatives. Although everything seems to be not clean with our statistics - EMNIP, the article "killed" did not always take into account those who died from wounds. In short, this is a complex issue, and categorical statements personally hurt my eyes no less than "millions who were shot personally by Stalin."
          1. +2
            18 December 2016 17: 09
            In general, talking about losses WITHOUT indicating their categories is a sign of either deep ignorance or conscious speculation (counting on public ignorance, alas, not without reason).

            There are GENERAL losses, there are SANITARY, there are irrevocable, and within these categories there is also a significant division.

            Quote: arturpraetor
            “Lost most of all by prisoners” - this may be (I don’t remember this item of statistics for the rest of the powers).

            According to Krivosheev, rounding to millions and the first decimal place, Russia lost 3,3 mln prisoners, in the second place is Austria-Hungary with 2,2 mln. In addition, the loss of 1,87 million deserters is also Russia's world record.

            Due to this, the total losses of Russia in WWI are record by a wide margin among all the warring countries.

            Quote: arturpraetor
            for me personally, this point in losses is the most important, because only those killed are lost irretrievably for the state and relatives.

            We will not confuse military losses with demographic losses.
            From a military point of view, prisoners, internees and disabled people are irretrievably lost, because until the end of the war they are no longer fighters.
            From t.zr. demographics, this is not a loss.

            In addition, deaths in captivity also happen. In WWII, a huge number of Soviet prisoners were killed in German captivity, and there are speculations when these losses are plus military ones. From t.zr. demographics, it seems to be a difference, but to evaluate combat effectiveness - completely different things.

            Quote: arturpraetor
            the article “killed” did not always include those who died from wounds.

            Usually they go as a separate item, and are not always taken into account in the official data of the warring countries.

            But, for example, Japan honestly published such data in the REV.
            According to Russian data, there are about three times less deaths from wounds on the Russian side than in Japan, with about twice as many injuries.
            The ratio varies about 7 times.
            That is, either Russian field medicine is 7 times more effective than Japanese (why not?), Or Japanese loss statistics are 7 times more honest lol

            In addition, the Russian army in the REV and WWII had a record number of missing persons.

            In the conditions of the REV, when the deserters had nowhere to go, and the partisans did not exist, this category definitely means unaccounted for the killed. There were about 2-3% in each battle, according to which such a category is generally given. and comparable to the number of deaths recorded.

            This conclusion is confirmed by the ratio of the number of wounded and killed.
            For the period of REV / PMV it is usually in the range of 3,7 - 4,1.
            According to Russian official data, this ratio turns out to be up to 6,0 - 7,0!

            But if we take into account the “missing” as the unaccounted for killed, everything immediately falls into place, the attitude of the wounded and the killed turns out to be normal.

            In some battles (Tyurenchen, Nanshan) on the Russian side there is a clear and large underestimation of the wounded, associated with the specifics of these battles:
            in the battle on the river. Yalu, aka Tyurenchensky, had a panic retreat, and not to account for the wounded;
            under Jinzhou, aka Chinchow and Nanshansky, there was one regiment on the front line - but behind the rear rear there was a division from which there was constant reinforcement and into which the wounded were sent from the front line, thus not taking them into account in the outcome of the battle.

            In general, as usual, the essence is hidden in the details that you need to know.
            1. 0
              18 December 2016 17: 14
              Still missing.
              In conditions of WWI, deserters can also make up this figure.

              Of the number of "missing and prisoners" recognized by the Russian side as a result of the battles (it is often indicated that way), approximately 2/3 are taken into account by the Germans (Germans and Austrians) as prisoners of war, i.e. 1/3 are unaccounted for killed and deserters.
  3. +2
    18 December 2016 10: 19
    A number of factors led to the "motor" leapfrog: 1 and the main domestic auto industry was just being created, and some "patriots" considered the car an unnecessary luxury, etc. 2. the lack of will of Emperor Nicholas led to the fact that each gang defended its interests.
    Perhaps this is an inappropriate comparison, but in 1941 a similar situation developed: a shortage of cars (some believed that the "red cavalry" would do everything), a shortage of rifles, but Stalin had corrected the situation by 1943.
    Now Russia is in a similar situation since 1914: under the Soviet Union there was a developed car industry, but now look what kind of cars there are! A neighbor bought himself a hemerroy: "Renault", it was taken out of production and he suffered, suffered and bought a "Chinese" component for the sea, and his friend tried a bunch of cars and took a VW
    1. +1
      18 December 2016 10: 36
      Quote: Monarchist
      rifle deficiency

      Is it possible in more detail?
      1. +3
        18 December 2016 12: 27
        Really. All this nonsense about backwardness in the production of weapons in the Empire has already bitten ...
        Read serious studies. Now almost everything can be found ... Yes, there were miscalculations with the mobilities of weapons and clothing allowances, but this is due to omissions in forecasts of the duration of hostilities. In 1916, the industry already provided the army with everything necessary.
        Here are just two examples. How did the Red Army fight for so many years in the Civil War? And one more fact. Information about him can be found in the artillery encyclopedias. When I read about it, I was quite surprised. The last shots to the "three-inch" (76mm). were shot at the end of the 50s ... And this after the Great Patriotic War, which consumed all the resources ...
        1. +3
          18 December 2016 13: 19
          Quote: moskowit
          In 1916, industry already provided the army with everything necessary.

          Sure sure. So far, more than 30% of the ammunition came with foreign supplies, and there was a deep lull on the front, there were reports of victory over the projectile-bullet hunger. It was a deal, yes. laughing
          And by the end of the Brusilovsky breakthrough, an acute shortage of ammunition reappeared, which was one of the reasons for stopping the offensive.

          In addition, in the same 1916, there were up to 12% of the army's needs for heavy machine guns, with more than half of the "Russian" machine guns from foreign supplies.

          The vast majority of aircraft engines, except several. dozens of copies (!) of Russian copies from foreign samples - from there.

          Almost all light machine guns are also foreign supplies. In Russia there were several of them. dozens of copies of Fedorov automatic machines and several. dozens of copies of Madsen, plus many PLANS for the construction of factories for the production of machine guns, and large volumes of orders for these still non-existent factories laughing
          About cars here a little has been said, I can add.

          "Everything you need", yeah laughing
        2. +3
          18 December 2016 14: 05
          Quote: moskowit
          What did the Red Army fight for so many years in the Civil War?

          Armament, including at the same time.

          For * some individuals * it’s a big, big secret that the scale of the database during the Civil War was many times smaller than in WWI.

          in the WWII, there were about 3 million soldiers at the front; in 1918-1919, the strength of the participants in the war reached barely several. hundreds of thousands, only tens of thousands participated in many battles, the so-called the divisions were less than a full regiment in the states of WWI.
          Only by the beginning of 1920. the strength of the Red Army began to grow rapidly.

          And the production of ammunition and light weapons continued. In 1918-1920. at Soviet enterprises, 22 thousand machine guns were "made and repaired" (the source indicated without breakdown by category, unfortunately) - comparable to ALL their production in Ingushetia.

          Therefore, fairy tales about huge-huge stocks of weapons and ammunition created under the tsar-priest, on which the USSR fought right up to the end of the Second World War - they are tales.

          Quote: moskowit
          The last shots to the "three-inch" (76mm). were shot in the late 50s

          And when were the ZIS-3s removed from service? winked
          Incidentally, in some countries they lasted until the 21st century in service. And their ammunition is unified with a three-inch, if someone does not know.

          And more information for the writers: the shelf life of artillery ammunition is LIMITED.
          Therefore, ammunition from the times of WWII to WWII had little chance of surviving, and to keep them in storage until the 50s, if it really was, is criminal.
          In the USSR, the production of ammunition and small arms was much more powerful than in the Russian Empire.
    2. +4
      18 December 2016 14: 04
      What is the shortage of rifles in the 41 year? fairy tales about one rifle for three again?
      where does the car of a neighbor and his friend? Army Renault, Chinese or Volkswagen nafig unnecessary like my Subaru
      1. +4
        18 December 2016 14: 16
        Quote: faiver
        where does the car of a neighbor and his friend? Army Renault, Chinese or Volkswagen nafig unnecessary like my Subaru

        You ply say these cars to hell with the army are not needed.
        But earlier off-road vehicles were put in the military registration and enlistment offices on mobilization accounting.
        Personally set Niva !, when selling, removed from the register.
        1. +2
          18 December 2016 15: 51
          My father had a Ural motorcycle in the same register.
        2. +2
          18 December 2016 15: 57
          quite right, just a friend mixed everything in a bunch ...
  4. +2
    18 December 2016 13: 11
    For comparison: on the 1913 year in England there were 90 thousand (including 8 thousand trucks), in France - 76 thousand, Germany - 57 thousand (including 7 thousand trucks) cars.

    Well, the production figures are appropriate. And if you include the United States in the comparison, then one Henry Ford produced hundreds of thousands a year, more than the whole of Europe combined, not to mention the "advanced" Russia.

    The plant's productivity was extremely insignificant - until 1914, it produced up to 360 cars.

    Let's clarify. The indicated number of vehicles is privately sold. In addition, a significant part of Russo-Balt's production went to the state. order. In total, up to 490 cars were released there over the entire 7-year history of the plant, and another 300 cars were "released" in the form of illiquid sets of spare parts: even their cost price was much higher than the market price of higher quality foreign analogues, the plant did not want to sell below the cost price, there were no volunteers, even at the cost price.
    Although this figure is much higher than that mentioned in the article, it is still tears.

    Note. that Russo-Balt, with its artisanal organization and scanty output, was at the same time the largest (!) and most advanced (!) automobile production in Russia.
    He even mastered the own production of most units.

    Other "Russian car factories" made only a body, into which foreign units were inserted, or even engaged in screwdriver assembly of ready-made kits, such as AMO - which was supplied to "advanced" Russia by Fiat kits from "backward" Italy. laughing
    1. +2
      18 December 2016 13: 47
      Quote: murriou
      Other "Russian car factories" made only a body, into which foreign units were inserted, or even engaged in screwdriver assembly of ready-made kits, such as AMO - which was supplied to "advanced" Russia by Fiat kits from "backward" Italy.

      Well, here I am arguing with you, I won’t particularly, because the complete sets of cars were busy in Russia, I don’t know other facts than Fiat-AMO. It was not profitable. In Russia, the production of components was not deployed, and according to customs regulations, the import of vehicle components and components was much more expensive than the import of chassis and full cars. So inserting imported units into Russian bodies was very expensive, but putting a Russian body on a ready-made chassis is much cheaper. This is taken by L.M. Shugurov. Cars of Russia and the USSR. By the way, the Austin chassis for armored cars did the same.
      1. +2
        18 December 2016 15: 58
        Well, now it’s not profitable. Even one of the most successful entrepreneurs failed. crying
      2. 0
        18 December 2016 16: 05
        Quote: Amurets
        according to customs regulations, the import of vehicle components and components was much more expensive than the import of a chassis and complete vehicles.

        Thanks for the information, I believe.
        But, since the car was then a very expensive toy, the broth from its assembly could with a margin pay back customs duties.

        In addition, during the WWII, some car repair and assembly enterprises were forced to fulfill military orders, in which case they had good tax and customs benefits.

        Quote: Amurets
        the Austin chassis for armored vehicles did likewise.

        A significant part of the Austin armored cars entered Russia in finished form, but the military considered their original armor too thin and replaced it with a thicker (and heavier) Putilov armor at the expense of mobility and maneuverability, which were already small.

        By the way, crystal bakers are usually proud that Russia had the first armored vehicles in the world and the first armored forces in the world.
        Some * particularly outstanding * copies even call them the world's first armored forces. laughing

        In reality, experiments on the creation of armored vehicles were started at the end of the 19th century. all over the world, and the first "Russian" armored car, declared the first in the world, is as it were, serial! lol - was made in France by Sharron. laughing

        In general, with all the bakery myths about the same picture: how you stick into reality - all myth creation falls apart right away.
  5. +3
    18 December 2016 14: 09
    I would add that the Russian Automobile Society (RAO) (1904), which in 1906 received the status of "imperial" (IRAO), played a huge role in the development of motorism (a term adopted in RI) in RI and in Europe. It is fundamentally important that the RAO (IRAO) was headed by a military man - an adjutant wing, Colonel Svechin, who graduated from the School of Law. The officers of the Russian army and many members of the imperial family took an active part in the activities of the IRAO, in motor rallies, in the formation of competition regulations, in the improvement of automotive technology, in testing, laid a serious foundation for Soviet automotive science. Separately, mention should be made of one of the German dukes and Russian princes of Oldenburg, to whom Russia owes for the creation of a resort and recreational zone on the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus (in Sochi and Abkhazia). He was involved in the organization of hospitals for the wounded, their evacuation, including using cars.
    The chief driver of the emperor, Adolf Kegress, by the way, at that time an officer in the Russian army, invented the original semi-tracked chassis.
    By the way, one of the first RAO organizations was the Riga Automobile Society. In Riga there is also a Russian-Baltic plant, which also produced cars. However, there was no mass production of cars in RI. Mass motorization in Russia began only in the early 1930s on the basis of obsolete technologies purchased in the United States.
    1. +3
      18 December 2016 16: 06
      Quote: iouris
      Mass motorization in Russia began only at the beginning of the 1930's on the basis of obsolete technologies purchased in the United States.

      And during the war years created the Victory. And created.
      1. +1
        18 December 2016 16: 42
        And much more was created along the way. Including such that in the world had no analogues.
    2. +4
      18 December 2016 16: 41
      Quote: iouris
      The chief driver of the emperor, Adolf Kegress, by the way, at that time an officer in the Russian army, invented the original semi-tracked chassis.

      Kegress, by the way, retained French citizenship in the Russian service.
      Whether he accepted Russian, I’m not sure whether to check laziness, but I doubt it.

      The ideas of Kegress were realized in the Republic of Ingushetia only in single experimental constructions, despite the lively, as it were, support of the members of the imperial family and personally of His Imperial Nothingness.

      And only after emigrating to his native France did his ideas find a worthy application: Citroen-Kegresse cars, as well as imitations of them, were produced in large series in the thirties and were in service with many countries of the world, as army all-terrain vehicles and art. tractors.

      Quote: iouris
      Mass motorization in Russia began only at the beginning of the 1930's on the basis of obsolete technologies purchased in the United States.

      Eka you wrapped laughing Here is not a word without spitting in the direction of the USSR and a bow in the direction of tsarist Russia! lol

      Motorization in the USSR was carried out even before the establishment of the mass production of its own cars. Car rallies with a propaganda (sometimes also sporting) purpose, voluntary societies like the same DoSAAF, etc. - this is already the 20s. The immortal work of Ilf and Petrov tells about a little later times (this novel was completed in 1931, and began to think about it already in 1928, shortly after the release of "12 chairs"), but rather well conveys the situation itself. In their articles and feuilletons, disputes about the directions of motorization are also reflected.

      The first production Soviet car was released in 1924, contrary to your words, and based on outdated Italian lol technologies, and not American - the basis was taken (with revision and adaptation to our conditions) "Fiat" in 1915, which in tsarist Russia on the same AMO were assembled from ready-made kits, i.e. it was still progress in comparison with the pre-revolutionary state. Including the scale of production.

      In 1930, yes, Ford and Auto-Car technologies were purchased.
      They were NOT outdated at that time.
      "Ford-A" was created in 1927 and by Ford himself until 1931. was issued.
      Ford-AA was produced by Ford from 1929 to 1932, although GAZ-AA was considered its licensed copy. but in addition to converting to the metric system, it was modified towards strengthening the structure, increasing the carrying capacity and cross-country ability.
      Autocar Dispatch SA - 1929 model, was supplied to Latin America until the end of the 30s. Also greatly modified and improved in our conditions.

      So what about outdated technologies - "Congratulations, citizen, sovramshi" (C)
    3. 0
      18 December 2016 23: 43
      Quote: iouris
      By the way, one of the first RAO organizations was the Riga Automobile Society. In Riga there is also a Russian-Baltic plant, which also produced cars.

      Well, here I will make a correction, as well as the factory of bicycles and cars "Russia" A. Leitner.
  6. 0
    18 December 2016 16: 44
    Old photo - Motorcyclists, Handsome!
    1. +1
      18 December 2016 17: 00
      Quote: Bayonet
      Old photo - Motorcyclists, Handsome!

      Yeah...


      And then the KGB put on these jackets ...
      1. 0
        18 December 2016 17: 19
        There were also "scooters", i.e. cyclists.
        And the photo is staged. It can be seen that the motorcycle is standing, the engine is muffled, and the driver is staring into the lens, he does not care about the "enemy" at which the passenger is allegedly aiming laughing
        1. 0
          18 December 2016 23: 26
          Clearly staged.
        2. 0
          19 December 2016 05: 37
          Quote: murriou
          And the photo is staged.

          It's okay, the main thing is the spirit of the time smile And now they like to pose and take crazy nuts lovers for example! laughing
          1. 0
            19 December 2016 08: 28
            Including, they like to pose in reenactment suits. Among which there are reconstructions of the WWII period. laughing
      2. 0
        21 July 2017 10: 18
        Looks like not Grandfather Surgeon
  7. Cat
    0
    22 December 2016 21: 19
    Quote: Monarchist
    Cat, I recommend reading Fedorov's book "In Search of Weapons". He told how the "rifle" hunger was formed

    Vyacheslav had the opportunity to read. First, in an abridged version in the magazine "Arms", in 2002 I specially bought the book.