Czech: original and past long historical path. Part of 2

62
In general, the Germans turned out quite simple, convenient, cheap and technological. weapon. Suffice it to say that due to the use of stamping and welding, the cost price of the new machine compared to StG-44 decreased by Reichsmark 25 (now it cost 45 marks against previous 70 - the difference, as you see, is noticeable), but also from 14 to 7,4 hours , that is, the manufacturing time of one machine gun has almost halved. But the war ended before the Sturmgewehr 45 (M) received massive distribution and recognition. Known about him mostly experts. Moreover, even today, all sorts of conjectures continue to be written about him, or so to say - they write about the obvious, keeping silent about everything else. Therefore, today we will just tell about all this “rest”.


Automatic machine Sturmgewehr 45 (M).



Today, wherever you look at the Network, the following text takes place: “In the first samples, automation based on a gas engine and rigid barrel locking was used with a pair of rollers, similar to the MG 42 machine gun, but the scheme was too complicated.” And now we will re-read this passage again and ask ourselves the question: what kind of ignorant (can't you find another word!) Wrote all this? Well, what was the gas engine of the MG 42, when this machine gun works on the principle of recoil of the barrel during its short course? Now we read further: “Before the shot, the bolt under the pressure of the return spring is in the extreme forward position, displacing the rollers from its bolt into the grooves in the barrel coupling with its front bevelled part. At the moment of the shot, the combat larva begins to move back under the pressure of powder gases to the bottom of the liner. The rollers mounted in the larva are addicted to it, pressing into the bolt and causing its sloping front part to move backward relative to the combat larva. The main energy of the powder gases is spent on the acceleration of the most massive gate. By the time the pressure in the barrel drops to acceptable values, the rollers are completely “retracted” into the bolt, after which the entire bolt group moves back, removing the cartridge case and feeding the new cartridge into the chamber on the way back. ”. Surprisingly, everything that is written and marked here is written sufficiently correctly and ... wrong at the same time.


Czech poster with a picture of Sa vz. 58.


Device vz. 58. At the bottom left you can clearly see from what details the bolt group consists. On the right - the device of the vapor mechanism.

It would be more correct to write that in this sample of the automaton the shutter consists of two parts (or parts) - the upper and the lower, which, if desired, and by virtue of tradition, can be called a combat larva. The British call this part of the bolt head and, as it seems to me, this is more correct. Then we have the top and bottom of the gate and this bottom has a head. In the head two videos. Connected upper and lower parts of the shutter movably. But no "sloping front of the shutter" is not. There is a rod through which the drummer passes and which enters the larva (lower part), and this rod has its profile has side bevels, and when it slides into the larva, it actually presses on the rollers and pushes them into parties. But the rollers themselves are not removed in any valve. They are retracted inside the battle larvae, or in the lower part of the gate! The upper part of it is really massive, cylindrical in shape and connects to the recoil spring. At the bottom of the battle larvae are two protrusions that slide along the grooves of the receiver. Therefore, the shutter moves strictly horizontally. By the way, the slots for the rollers are also made in the receiver.


Soldiers of the Czech Army with machine guns vz. 58.


CZH 2003 Sport. Limited production in Canada. Version with barrel extended to 490 mm.


Right view. Maple Leaf is a sign of the production of this model in Canada.

Then everything seems to be clear. When a shot occurs, the powder gases press down on the bottom of the cartridge and, through it, onto the combat larva. To facilitate the operation of the mechanism in the place where the threaded part of the barrel begins, there are grooves (Revelli grooves) that divert some of the gases to the walls of the liner, which ensures its best extraction. And yes, when the gas pressure in the barrel drops to an acceptable value, both rollers sink into the larva and it, together with the bolt, retreats and then moves forward again by force due to the spring force.


Standard army model. Left view.


Standard army model. Right view.

However, it is not written anywhere, but why then you need such a massive, even in appearance, metal casing on the trunk. After all, it turns out that all automation is in the receiver! So why is Sturmgewehr 45 (M) also this “decoration”? And here's why: there is a gas exhaust mechanism! The hole in the barrel is closed by a spring-loaded rod. But the most interesting is that this rod with a bolt is not connected in any way, but serves only to relieve excess pressure and the barrel. Well, the gases come out of the three holes on the top of the lid. I wonder why nobody wrote about this interesting feature of this machine? They did not know what was hidden under this lid and how it works ?!


Here is the view of the slide group when retracted. The extractor and the drummer are clearly visible. Please note that the front of the receiver has no cover. It closes the shutter.


And this is an elongated barrel of the Canadian model.

Then everything that is written is quite acceptable: USM on it is really a kurkov type, which makes it possible to fire both single shots and bursts. The translator of firing modes (and it’s also the fuse) is on the left-hand receiver, like the shutter handle. The butt is wooden and is located on the same line with the barrel in a "linear pattern", which reduces the toss of the barrel, but forces the sights to be raised high above the barrel. By the way, it’s also bad that they on Sturmgewehr 45 (M) are too far forward and removed from the shooter’s eyes. It would be necessary to place them behind the cover of the receiver, but for some reason the Germans did not. It turned out that because of the long sector stores on 30 cartridges there was a problem with an increase in the shooter’s profile when laying down, and in order to solve it, I had to develop a special shortened 10 magazine for cartridges.


Handguard and receiver pad.


And so they are removed. Interestingly, the fastening pins are not completely removed, so they can not be lost!

Well, then German engineers who took part in the creation of StG45 (M), found a shelter in France and began working for the French arms company CEAM. From 1946 to 1949, Ludwig Forgrimler and his colleague Theodor Löffler created three versions of the new machine for the .30 Carbine, 7,92 × 33 mm and 7,65 × 35 mm cartridges. France eventually received the CEAM Modéle 1950, and Forgrimler already in Spain, working for CETME, designed the CETME Modelo A. rifle. In the future, it was the StG 45 that served as the basis for the HK G3 automatic rifle, which appeared in Germany in the 1959 year, and the submachine gun HK MP5, while in Switzerland a SIG SG 510 rifle was launched using a similar pattern.


Gas piston.


Gas piston extended out of gas tube.

And here's an interesting question: did the Czech designers become acquainted with this model of weapons or not? In any case, the system with the piston on the barrel was known to them, and they implemented it in their vz.52 rifle. How about a roller shutter retarder? In any case, one thing is certain: when in 1951, engineer Jiri Čermak from Brno began work on his submachine gun, he borrowed a lot of things from other models of small arms known at the time, but eventually he tried to go his own way. Of course, the Kalashnikov assault rifle was known to him. But ... his design of the Czech designer was not satisfied with something.


One of the features of vz. 58 is the presence of two springs - the return gate - it is at the top, and the combat - of the drummer, it is at the bottom.

He worked a lot, hard and consistently. First, he developed the ČZ 515 submachine gun for the Czechoslovak cartridge 7,62x45 mm vz. 52. He had a shortened barrel from a vz rifle. 52, who fired an open bolt (this was the requirement of the army, who feared the cartridges would self-ignite during intensive firing), and the trigger mechanism from the German MG 34 machine gun, which, depending on pressing the upper or lower part, included either a single gun or automatic fire.


Fully assembled automatic shutter.

During the tests of the machine, it was found that ČZ 515 does not meet the requirements for shooting accuracy imposed on weapons by the Czechoslovak army. It was considered that the reason is that the fire is fired from the open bolt. Then Chermak made an ČZ 522 submachine gun, in which there was the same trigger mechanism, but the firing was carried out from the closed gate, and the gas exhaust mechanism had a gas piston acting on the gate. In 1954, ČZ 522 and two other prototypes (from competing design teams) were tested both by the army of Czechoslovakia and in the Soviet army in the USSR. During this testing, Soviet specialists found that all three machines need to be improved, but ČZ 522 was considered the best among them.


View of the bottom gate. The drum head with longitudinal grooves and the swinging larva with protrusions are clearly visible.

The third option was also initially planned under its own, Czechoslovak patron, since earlier it had already been used in the Vz rifle. 52 and in a manual machine gun with the same designation. But in the USSR it was considered necessary to carry out standardization of small arms of its allies in the ATS, therefore the prototype of the Koště submachine gun (i.e., Czech in Broom) was made under the Soviet intermediate cartridge 7,62 × 39 mm М43 used in the SKS carbine and in the Kalashnikov machine gun . In 1958, he was given the designation Sa vz. 58 and adopted by the army of Czechoslovakia, after which over the next 25 years released in the amount of more than 920 thousands of copies. The machine gun was adopted by the armies of Czechoslovakia, Cuba, as well as several countries in Asia and Africa.


The lower part of the shutter with a swinging U-shaped rocking larva being put on it.

True, the initial sample of the machine weighed 3,2 kg, which was more than the weight set by the army and equal to 3 kg. Then, an aluminum alloy shop was developed for him, with which the necessary weight reduction was achieved. By the way, even the weight of the AKM was more than the initial weight of the Chermak machine. True, the designers had to tinker with the problem of self-ignition of cartridges in the chamber during intensive shooting, which usually occurred on the 180 shot. However, it was finally resolved.


Drummer extended from the bottom of the gate.

The machine gun was arranged in a rather original way and only externally resembled a Kalashnikov machine gun. Chermak didn’t begin to abandon the vapor-gas engine, but his gas piston is in no way connected with the gate. He has his own return spring and when fired, he strikes the bolt-frame with a strong blow, pushing it backwards. By the way, this phrase found on the Internet - “To provide the required push to the bolt group, the piston could move only a few centimeters” - does not correspond to reality, or rather, is not very accurate. The piston moves back only to 19 mm, while bleeding of the powder gases occurs after the passage of 16 mm.

The bolt group (this is the best way to call this set of parts) consists of a bolt carrier with a reloading handle (or the upper part of the bolt group), a lower part, a swinging U-shaped larvae and a hammer with longitudinal grooves. And just this swinging larva at the bottom of the gate plays the main role in the system of locking the trunk. When the piston hits the bolt carrier frame and throws it back, it moves to 22 mm (only the upper part moves back, and the lower one still locks the barrel bore!) And here the wedge-shaped surface of the slide frame presses on the larva, which causes it to drop out of engagement. with projections of the receiver. The lower part of the bolt group rises, moves along with the upper back, with the result that the cartridge case is thrown out and the drummer is cocked.


Butt model CZ858.

As for the firing mechanism, then yes, it is of the shock type. Drummer is located inside the bottom of the bolt group with the ejector, and behind it is a twisted combat spring, which is put on the rod in the rear wall of the receiver. The drummer has grooves so that it can move along the guides inside the above-mentioned part. Bottom is not he has a tooth that meshes with the sear when the weapon is placed on a combat platoon. There is no hammer on the drummer. He only hits it during each shot, and the striker is located in the lower part of the bolt carrier.

That is, in principle, the gas exhaust mechanism was and is not needed. It would be enough to have a short barrel stroke or roller retardation, like the Sturmgewehr 45 (M). But I needed a bayonet, so the barrel was fixed tightly.


Aim.

The sights of the submachine gun consist of a front sight and an adjustable rear sight, which makes it possible to hit targets at a distance from 100 to 800 m with a pitch of 100 m, both during daylight and at night.


Shop.

The machine gun was packaged with box-like sector shops on 30 cartridges from light plastic. After the last shot, the shutter remained open until a new magazine was inserted. Latch store located on the left at the base of the receiver. Ejector - at the base of the store receiver. You could use clips on 10 cartridges (similar to those used in the SCS). At the same time shops vz. 58 with shops of AK family machines are incompatible.


The neck of the store.

Butt, grip and handguard were first made from wood, and then from an unusual material - plastic mixed with wood chips! A bayonet could be attached to the machine gun, and on some specimens the bipod and the grenade launcher could also be attached. Weapons made in Czechoslovakia were traditionally distinguished by their high quality. All parts of the gate, the gas piston and the bore were chromed, and the outer surfaces of the metal parts were phosphated. In addition, to protect against corrosion, they were covered with a special varnish.


One of the upgrade options vz. 58.

Automatic vz. 58 was equipped with various accessories: so, it could be installed two-way translators of fire, the forearm could have a different configuration, on the barrel it was possible to put muzzle brakes and compensators. All this was installed on both military and civilian models of the machine: soldiers with various private military companies were usually equipped with such accessories. The machine also sells four spare magazines and a bag for them, a bayonet with a scabbard, a cleaning brush, a muzzle cap, a bottle of gun oil, a unified belt, a tool for adjusting the sight, a bipod, and a device for firing blank cartridges.

To be continued ...
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cat
    +3
    22 August 2018 07: 48
    Interesting however! We are waiting for what will happen next!
    Sincerely, Kitty!
  2. +3
    22 August 2018 07: 53
    Mom is one ...
    1. +5
      22 August 2018 08: 02
      hi ... One of the features of vz. 58 is the presence of two springs - a return bolt - it is at the top, and combat - of the striker, it is at the bottom.
      1. +2
        22 August 2018 16: 13
        “Full Metal Shell” (eng. Full Metal Jacket) - 1:44 - a Vietnamese partisan shoots the protagonist from vz. 58 and misses ...
    2. +5
      22 August 2018 09: 24
      "Mother is dear .... "
      I agree, but you could not be so concise, because such brief comments are far from clear to everyone.
      1. +1
        22 August 2018 14: 59
        You have already answered below. The analysis of mistakes is drawn to the article. Alas. Before retirement, I’m not as soon as I would like.
        1. +4
          22 August 2018 20: 58
          The "lashing pin" made my day laughing

          Information for the author of the article: a pin is a rod built up at one end, pins (pins) are used in the weapon — rods without points.
    3. +4
      22 August 2018 12: 56
      Quote: bunta
      Mom is one ...

      That's right!
      Regarding the work of automation - complete nonsense: "The rod is not connected with the bolt in any way, but only serves to relieve excess pressure and the barrel." Oh how! It turns out that the designers first created excess pressure in the barrel, and then courageously bleed it off ... The author did not see the classic piston on the "rod".
      Aim: "It is also bad that they on the Sturmgewehr 45 (M) are too shifted forward and far from the shooter's eyes. We should have placed them on the back of the receiver cover, but for some reason the Germans did not." Because the Germans, unlike the author, know that the human eye cannot equally sharply see the slot and the front sight if the slot is too close to the eye. It is impossible to take a straight fly.
      1. +2
        22 August 2018 16: 58
        "if the slit is too close to the eye." ////
        ---
        In very convenient diopter sights, the eye literally touches, rests against a tiny hole.
        Vision is focused and "enhanced". After the diopter sight, it was wild and inconvenient for me to switch to the open one.
        1. +3
          23 August 2018 10: 57
          Quote: voyaka uh
          In very convenient diopter sights, the eye literally touches, rests against a tiny hole.
          Vision is focused and "enhanced".

          I had to shoot with a diopter sight from a sports rifle (Walter). Yes, it’s convenient on the target, but you won’t shoot offhand. I did not fight and was not in a combat situation, but I will assume that when using assault rifles and machine guns in battle, this is important. As a hunter, I think that a diopter sight is unacceptable, it will not allow you to accurately shoot offhand when there is no time to aim.
        2. +2
          23 August 2018 13: 14
          Quote: voyaka uh
          In very convenient diopter sights, the eye literally touches, rests against a tiny hole.

          I also wanted to write: not to be confused with diopter. But then he decided that the people on this site understand the difference ...
          In diopter, the sharpness (sharpness) of the edges of the diopter is not required, because you can easily find the center even in a blurry circle. And in sights with an aiming bar, the front sight is aligned with the maneuver of the aiming bar, so this mane should be clearly seen.
          The machine in this article is not a diopter, but an aiming bar. Therefore, it is moved away from the eyes of the shooter, like AK and all other weapons with an aiming bar.
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Vision is focused and "enhanced".

          For an amateur. For example, I’m very uncomfortable that the field of view is very narrow, you can’t see a damn thing around the target.
          1. 0
            1 September 2018 10: 11
            In general, according to the theory of accurate shooting, the farther away the rear sight from the front sight the more accurate the aiming and if you look at sports rifles with a diopter, this is clearly visible. And the AK rear sight was placed closer to the front sight for the reason that the receiver cover did not provide the necessary cruelty of the rear sight during shooting. However, if you look at the AK 12, you can see that the rear sight is on the back of the receiver cover, this also applies to rifles such as the HK 416.
            1. 0
              5 September 2018 11: 04
              [quote = Note2] according to the theory of accurate shooting the farther away from the front sight the more accurate the aiming [/ quote]
              All theories must be applied comprehensively, that is, all factors must be taken into account. The impossibility of focusing objects located at different distances from the eye has been known for a very long time.

              [quote = Note2] rifles with diopter [/ quote]
              Exactly - with a diopter. You do not read the comments to which you respond? It also indicates:
              "In diopters, the sharpness (clarity) of the edges of the diopter is not required, because you can easily find the center even near a blurred circle. And for scopes with an aiming bar, we align the front sight with the mane of the aiming bar, so this mane must be seen clearly.
              The assault rifle in this article does not have a diopter, but an aiming bar. Therefore, it is pushed away from the shooter's eyes, like the AK and all other weapons with an aiming bar. "

              [quote = Note2] the AK put the whole pillar closer to the front sight for the reason that the receiver cover did not provide the necessary cruelty [/ quote]
              Who told you that? Have you come up with?

              [quote = Note2] if you look at AK 12, you can see that the rear sight is on the back of the receiver cover [/ quote]
              And if you look carefully, we will see there a diopter instead of a mane.
  3. +1
    22 August 2018 07: 58
    Thank you, as always interesting and informative, I’ll degenerate my opinion AK better.
    1. +1
      22 August 2018 08: 54
      I agree with you about AK. Therefore, I would like the respected Author to mention the reliability parameters of the sample in question. Type in dust, bathe in a puddle, drive through it with a car and then shoot!
      1. RL
        +4
        22 August 2018 09: 28
        Such tests were carried out. The number of delays, failures and breakdowns was no more than that of the AK. In addition, the vz. 58 (in bursts, by an experienced fighter) is slightly better than that of AK. Therefore, the Czechoslovak army did not use AK. Currently, the Czech Army has adopted the CZ BREN 2, or as it is also called, the CZ 806 BREN of its own design. This device has already been bought by the French for their GIGN (Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale) in the CZ 807 configuration, and Hungary has bought a production license for itself, for the army and police.
        We look forward to the following articles about Czech weapons.
        1. Cat
          +7
          22 August 2018 09: 57
          Such tests were carried out. The number of delays, failures and breakdowns was no more than that of AK.

          Time! According to the test results in 1974, the Czechoslovak assault rifle was 74 times less reliable than the AKM and the new AK-60. Moreover, the accuracy of fire with single shots was worse than that of AKM! Because of what, repeatedly in the 70s and XNUMXs, modernization of machine tools was carried out, and for reliability the barrel was chrome plated. Some of the details of the trigger and the bolt group were made of metal of increased strength, etc.
          With automatic fire, the "Czech" was equal to the AKM, but inferior by an order of magnitude to the AK-74.
          Among other things, this explains the reason why the ATS countries preferred to produce their own Kalashnikov clones, rather than the "Czech". However, like the Yugoslavs and the Chinese.
          1. +2
            22 August 2018 10: 38
            Thanks to the forum users for the information, I am very grateful. Maybe the author will speak out on this issue?
            1. +5
              22 August 2018 12: 05
              Everything will be in the articles!
              Quote: RL
              This device has already been bought by the French for their GIGN (Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale) in the CZ 807 configuration

              This device has already been bought by the French for their GIGN (Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale) in the CZ 807 configuration
              This will also be about!
          2. +2
            22 August 2018 10: 41
            In fairness, it should be noted that the AK was brought to acceptable characteristics throughout its long service. Well, you know AKM and so on.
          3. RL
            -1
            22 August 2018 11: 22
            And where does the AK-74? We talk about AK-47 and vz. 58
            But if you do not like the official conclusion of the USSR Ministry of Defense on comparative tests, then "Who's Time!"
            And the information about "According to the results of tests in 1974, the Czechoslovak machine gun was inferior in reliability to the AKM and the new AK-74 by one and a half times. Moreover, the accuracy of fire with single shots was worse than that of the AKM! Because of this, modernization was carried out repeatedly in the 60s and 70s. The barrel was chrome-plated for reliability. Some parts of the trigger and bolt group were made of high-strength metal and ... "Is this information from the open press, or from official sources?
            If from open - it is better not to refer to them.
            1. +1
              22 August 2018 16: 44
              Quote: RL
              ... we are talking about the AK-47 ...
              ... and about vz. 58 ... hi
          4. 0
            1 September 2018 10: 19
            The barrel is chrome plated in order to increase the resource of the latter and not for reliability. This Czech machine was tested more than once by the GRAU of the Soviet army and was inferior to our automatic machines in terms of reliability. This also applied to most NATO systems, for example, the Austrian AUG British SA 80 carbines from Belgium FN
  4. +8
    22 August 2018 10: 55
    Truly speak laughing Pride swept Jiri Chermak. Directly yellow-black-haired. His would- and oval-shaped cartridge would have been activated .. As a gunsmith, my practice is minimal - in the Criminal Procedure Code, when training on a turner, I made a couple of melkans, fortunately there were no interruptions with cartridges - they were not considered in the school rifle circle .. . lol BUT. Immediately to see - the bolt group, the mass is twice as large as that of AK. And according to the laws / laughing impulses and so on ../ springs are not springs - hever, maybe a native "Izhevtsa" will beat in his hands. soldier
    1. +4
      22 August 2018 15: 14
      And there is! With a smaller mass than Kalash - Kalashmatit mother do not cry. Although the scheme with a short stroke of the piston should in principle work more smoothly than when the piston on a long stroke with all its mass and speed pounds with all the dope along the back of the receiver. For a short-stroke circuit, the shutter rollback pulse is short in time. Poked the piston on the shutter and all. Then inertia works.
  5. +3
    22 August 2018 11: 03
    "The first samples used automation based on a gas engine and a rigid barrel locking with a pair of rollers, similar to that of the MG 42 machine gun ... "
    Now, re-read this passage and ask a question... what is incomprehensible here?
    After all, automation was actually used on the basis of a gas engine. As for the borrowings from the MG-42, it was not the principle of the automatic operation that was borrowed from it, but the method of locking the barrel, which is quite understandable from the "passage". May the author forgive me, but it would be worth apologizing for the ignoramus, for the wrong address.
    1. +2
      22 August 2018 16: 55
      You, it turns out, got ahead of me in your remark about "automation based on a gas engine ..." hi
      Quote: Curious
      As for borrowing from MG-42 ...
  6. +2
    22 August 2018 11: 45
    "It would be more correct to write "...'what ignoramus (you will not find any other word!) wrote all this? "
    Once again I apologize to the author, but the shutter operation description is a masterpiece (in a negative sense). Though write the article with analysis.
    1. +4
      22 August 2018 12: 10
      So write, who's in the way? Truth is known in comparison and reasoning.
      1. +5
        22 August 2018 14: 32
        Vyacheslav Olegovich! I’m kind of approaching your articles objectively, I never criticize indiscriminately. Give an example when my criticism of you was not objective, and the arguments were taken from the ceiling. Therefore, in this case, it’s not about whether I will write (remember about derivation and bayonet?), But that the presentation of the work of automation is absolutely illiterate, and even with a claim to revisionism.
        I will try briefly.

        In the figure - the scheme of operation of a half-free shutter with roller deceleration or the Forgrimler scheme.
        The shot occurs when the bolt is in the extreme forward position - when the cartridge is sent and securely locked in the chamber (the so-called "front sear" type of fire). Slowing down the opening of the shutter is carried out using a pair of rollers located between the combat cylinder of the shutter and the body of the shutter (Fig. A). At the moment of firing, the bolt body under the pressure of the return spring is in the extreme forward position and, with its front beveled part, displaces the rollers from the bolt outward - into the grooves in the barrel coupling. Under the pressure of propellant gases at the bottom of the sleeve, the combat larva begins to move backward (B). At the same time, due to the configuration of the grooves in the barrel sleeve, the rollers seem to be pressed into the bolt, acting on the beveled front part of the bolt body - and thereby forcing it to move backward relative to the combat larva. The main energy of the powder gases is spent on accelerating the massive body of the bolt. Due to the large mass of the bolt body and the corresponding configuration of the parts at the initial moment of the shot, the combat larva moves rather slowly, and the rollers are completely retracted into the bolt only until the moment when the pressure in the barrel drops to safe values. After this moment, the entire bolt group (the larva and the bolt body) moves back as a single unit, removing the spent cartridge case (C) and feeding a new cartridge into the barrel on the way back.
        On what a combat grub is, I urge you to look at special literature.
        Regarding the sources - my comment is based on the book of Mikhailov L. E.
        "Designs of small arms automatic weapons." The book is intended for engineering and technical workers in industry, research institutes, design bureaus, that is, for professionals.
        Given that I write on the go from the tablet, I can’t add more yet.
        1. 0
          22 August 2018 16: 34
          Quote: Curious
          ... The figure is a diagram of the operation of a half-free shutter with roller deceleration .. hi
  7. +4
    22 August 2018 14: 45
    I remember as a child in the 1960s we had a toilet seat at home made of such a chip-epoxy "wood" as on this machine.

    hi
  8. +2
    22 August 2018 14: 55
    The machine was equipped with box-shaped sector magazines for 30 rounds of light plastic.


    I have not met a single "Czech" with a plastic store. All dump trucks came with aluminum magazines, and plastic magazines are a remake for upgrading the "car".
  9. +6
    22 August 2018 15: 03
    This samopal has a characteristic feature - when shooting it opens just a giant window into the mechanism and, God forbid, fingers, beard or dirt accidentally get in there ...

    It’s really dumb to shoot when near the nose ... such ...

    In Estonia, these self-propelled guns were sold with a trimmed fire at a price of 326 euros apiece. They were not very popular (but they were finally sold out after ten years of lying on the shelves), in contrast to the stripped-down AKM for 700-800 euros.
  10. +2
    22 August 2018 16: 49
    ... the following text takes place: "The first samples used automation based on a gas engine and tightly locking the barrel with a pair of rollers, similar to that of the MG 42 machine gun, but the circuit was too complicated." And now we’ll re-read this passage and ask ourselves the question: what ignoramus (you won’t find another word!) Wrote all this? Well, what kind of gas engine did the MG 42 have when this machine gun works on the principle of recoil of the barrel during its short course?
    Well, the author brought in ... prosecutors! And why not think a little before the prosecution? It seems to be like this: 1. “The first samples used automation based on a gas engine ... 2. The scheme of rigid locking of the barrel with a pair of rollers, similar to that (well, the expression, y-mine! ...) of the MG-42 machine gun ....
    1. +3
      22 August 2018 17: 41
      The main mistake of the author is that he did not understand that Sturmgewehr has 45 (M) and Sa vz. 58 completely different principles of automation.
      At Sturmgewehr 45 (M) - recoil half-free shutter with roller braking.
      At Sa vz. 58 - a system with a gas engine and locking the barrel with a swinging larva.
      Accordingly, the description of one and the other sample does not fit well in any way.
      If we talk about the role model vz. 58, then this is Fedorov’s automaton.
      1. +1
        23 August 2018 02: 50
        Quote: Curious
        at Sturmgewehr 45 (M) and Sa vz. 58 completely different principles of automation.

        Honestly, I read the article of the Author when it was already night in my region ... and therefore, there was no time to delve into the "principles of automation" ... But I saw a stylistic mistake in the phrase ... The Author, no.
  11. +3
    22 August 2018 17: 57
    It would be interesting to read about the combat use of this unit. It seems that the Eritrean partisans ran with them
    1. +3
      22 August 2018 18: 05
      In addition to the Czech Republic and Slovakia, another 17 countries, including Eritrea and Ethiopia.
  12. +5
    22 August 2018 18: 05
    Thanks to Vyacheslav Olegich for the presentation of the material. I will not discuss technical errors in the article - people who are smarter than me have already pointed this out, and I'm not a technocrat at all, but a humanist and intellectual. request
    From SW. hi
    It was this absence of the front part of the receiver cover that always bothered me in this sample: if the Kalash's left side and top are completely closed, and then many figures criticize it for opening a hefty window on the right side when firing - they say, dust, slurry, sand and earth, concrete and brick chips, lifted by the wind, close bursts and bullets and crave to get inside the receiver, here we see just a huge, opening during the operation of the automation, space for sowing the internal mechanisms and the feed path ammunition. sad
  13. +1
    22 August 2018 18: 56
    Quote: Curious
    The main mistake of the author is that he did not understand that Sturmgewehr has 45 (M) and Sa vz. 58 completely different principles of automation.
    At Sturmgewehr 45 (M) - recoil half-free shutter with roller braking.
    At Sa vz. 58 - a system with a gas engine and locking the barrel with a swinging larva.
    Accordingly, the description of one and the other sample does not fit well in any way.

    Sovsem is stupid, however, on his head, very dumb ...
    1. +2
      22 August 2018 19: 12
      I kind of wrote nothing like this anywhere in the comments. My comments related exclusively to the technical side of the article. Well then take offense.
      1. +2
        22 August 2018 20: 16
        Yes, I’m not offended! It’s impossible to joke ...
  14. +3
    22 August 2018 21: 12
    Vz58 is a vivid example of the wretchedness of the Czech weapons "school": what is only one bolt carrier open from all sides, and striving to tighten the fingers and uniform of the shooter under the blow.

    Plus, the desire to show off is not the case with the use of a gas piston with a short stroke compared to a gas piston combined with a slide frame: the first solution was used in the SCS for the possibility of loading using clips, the second is an automatic classic since AK-47 - a combined unit has a larger mass and, therefore, has a smaller recoil distance with equal powder gas pressure and spring return elasticity (for the Vz58 Golem, the receiver far runs back behind the control handle and from Kalashnikov standard).

    As for reliability - the Vz58 mechanism includes three parts more (separate gas piston, piston return spring, shutter larva) than the AK-47 mechanism.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. +2
        23 August 2018 01: 30
        A gas engine with a short piston stroke is not at all necessary for the weapon's less "headiness".

        First of all, the degree of "chipping" depends on the area of ​​the bore in the bore for the removal of powder gases into the gas engine, in second place - on the distance of the bore from the muzzle, in third place - on the distance of the bolt group rollback to the impact on the butt plate of the receiver, on fourth place - from the force of elasticity of the return spring, and only in fifth place - from the mass of parts of the bolt group.

        In other words, you can choose the first four parameters in such a way that the mass of the bolt group with the gas piston attached to it will not in any way affect the degree of "headiness".
      2. +1
        23 August 2018 01: 39
        I had a chance to shoot from it and disassemble it. Most of all I did not like when the last cartridge is fired and the bolt remains open. In this case, a stronger sound of a shot occurs (so that everyone in the circle knows that the cartridges have run out). Moreover, this clap to the arrow in the face, not a big flash and smoke. When disassembling and assembling, many small parts are not usual. But the Czech machine gun was still pre-war development, it was supplied to the German army in WWII, I really liked it. I saw him even in the museum of the Soviet Army before service, and he remained in service with the Czechoslovak army almost unchanged. He fired from the Warsaw Pact standard cartridge already converted to the "Mosin" cartridge. Handsome as a mosink, conveniently merges with the body, heavy, the rate of fire is higher than the PC and almost does not sway when firing. There are a lot of details when disassembling.
  15. 0
    23 August 2018 13: 43
    Colleagues! Who knows what the scale of the sight is below 1 in vz. 58? In the photo "Sight" this division is closed with a clamp. If the sight is P (permanent), then on which figure - chest (0,5m) or head (0,3m)?
    1. +3
      24 August 2018 00: 14

      But on what figure - I will not say. In the manual for English-speaking countries, it is generally written that "U" is for shooting at moving targets up to 300 m.
      1. 0
        24 August 2018 15: 22
        Thank you very much for the answer, colleague!
        Quote: Curious
        But on what figure - I will not say.

        Indeed, it is difficult to understand without the main table or the table of excesses, and all Westerners do not make such tables.
        NATO members do not have a culture of raw data for accurate shooting, and at the same time they also teach us to shoot! I mean all sorts of federations of "practical shooting at the range of a slingshot."
        1. +1
          24 August 2018 18: 01
          "NATO troops do not have a baseline culture for accurate shooting ... "
          Did you learn this on the Internet from sofa gunfighters, or do you have your own experience?
          I will tell you, you are very mistaken. Figure for an example.

          And the fact that I did not find the table does not say that it does not exist. After all, I have a manual for weapons that were supplied to the civilian market. Do you know a lot of civilian samples that are accompanied by ballistic tables?
          1. 0
            25 August 2018 16: 57
            Quote: Curious
            You’ve gotten it on the Internet from sofa gunfighters,

            No, in the manuals for military weapons. There they give the same thing. So let's see:
            Quote: Curious
            Figure for an example.

            And what is indicated there, in this plate of yours? Let's see: drop in inches, drop in centimeters, drop in milliradians ... Nothing confuses? This is the same indicator in different units of measurement. There are many columns in the table, but they are all about the same thing - "bullet drop".
            And now the question for filling: what does this indicator give - "bullet drop"? How can it be used for shooting? Only specifically, please.
            1. 0
              25 August 2018 19: 23
              Hello.
              "How can it be applied when shooting?"
              Yes, as usual. I do not know how professionally trained you are in terms of shooting and ballistics, but the question surprised me.
              The Americans and the British in ballistic tables very often use not vertical corrections, but bullet reduction at certain distances. Not a "fall" but a "decline".
              And in different units - this is for convenience, so as not to translate.
              If there were only, say, centimeters, then it would be necessary to convert to minutes to convert to minutes using the formula, then introduce an amendment. Everything was already counted right there, no need to count in miles. That is, this is a regular table. Really for the first time you see?
              1. 0
                26 August 2018 09: 18
                Quote: Curious
                "How can it be applied when shooting?"
                Yes, as usual. I do not know how professionally trained you are in terms of shooting and ballistics, but the question surprised me.

                And I was surprised by your answer. I asked specifically, but "as usual" is about nothing.
                So I need to determine by the figure of what height the constant sight U is calculated. The indicated range is U = 300m. Please show me how to use "bullet drop" to solve my question?
                And then I will show you how easy it is to do from the table of instruction (manual) for all Kalashnikovs.
                1. 0
                  26 August 2018 10: 18
                  Specifically - theirs "decrease" - this is the same as in our tables "excess". Take the table and use it "as usual".
                  1. 0
                    26 August 2018 10: 52
                    Quote: Curious
                    their "decrease" is the same as in our tables "excess"

                    You are wrong. "Overshoot" shows the actual trajectory of the bullet - equally slowed up on the ascending branch of the trajectory and then uniformly accelerated downward on the descending branch. A "descent" is a trajectory with one descending branch, if the trunk is directed exactly to the target, that is, only uniformly accelerated downward. Therefore, even if the "decrease" is divided by 2, then the excess for the real trajectory will not be obtained.
                    For example, we analyze your table:
                    1) You can also understand why you can apply a reduction at a distance of 200m - you can still take 9cm above the center of the target. But why are reductions indicated in this table at ranges from 300m and beyond ?! Indeed, even for a distance of 300m, it is impossible to exceed 38cm in practice - the aiming point is even higher than the chest figure (38cm> 50cm / 2), and the front sight covers the entire target and therefore it is impossible to calculate the correction (which is done in the target's "figures").
                    2) It is significant that the table is not made entirely for "barrel to target", but for "zero range" (zeroing range) 100m, in our opinion for sight 1 (100m). That is, a step has already been taken towards our method of supplying ballistic data, but, as usual, the unnecessary "reduction" is still assigned to the entire firing range.
                    Hence the question: for "zero range" 200m, 300m, etc. do separate tables exist?
                    1. 0
                      26 August 2018 13: 37
                      "Hence the question: for" zero range "200m, 300m, etc. are there separate tables of the same kind?"
                      You bore me. Do not be offended, but I do not like discussions of this kind, when it seems to a person that he knows everything, on the one hand, but he always requires him to explain something. It only says that ambition exceeds knowledge. . Really, only God knows everything.
                      Yes for "for" zero range "200m, 300m" separate tables exist. This is a common truth. These truths are not many, they are well known.
                      The ballistic table, ideally, is compiled for the barrel-cartridge system, since a bullet from the same cartridge, but from barrels of different lengths and with different pitch rifling, has different ballistics.
                      Different tables are compiled in accordance with the shooting of weapons at different distances. We changed the distance of the gun’s shooting to zero - you need to change the whole table.
                      Therefore, for the "zero range" 200 m we have such a picture.

                      Moreover, for cold and hot trunks there are also tables of their own.
                      1. 0
                        26 August 2018 13: 50
                        And this is for you to think about a table from the book "Reference and Design Data of Small Arms", 1935 edition.
                      2. 0
                        28 August 2018 13: 42
                        Quote: Curious
                        Yes, there are separate tables for "for" zero range "200m, 300m". This is a common truth.

                        So:
                        1) You did not answer the question why the table "zero range 100m" contains data for 300m and further. How can this data be used?
                        Just no quirks like: "find the answer yourself, otherwise I'll say that you don't understand anything." These quirks do not work here. Undertook to defend NATO's way of filing ballistic data - if you please present arguments.
                        2) On the one hand - our ONE table of excesses, where the data about ALL divisions of the sight was placed because only the necessary data is indicated - 50m further than the range of the sight. And on the other hand - a pile of NATO tables and a half of completely useless data.
                        3) And most importantly - you hushed up the question: how to determine the height of the U sight from the NATO tables?
  16. 0
    28 August 2018 13: 51
    Svateev,
    You know, I’m not a public doctor, and I don’t have to treat everyone. Therefore, deal with your troubles yourself. Good luck in the fight against NATO.
    1. 0
      28 August 2018 13: 58
      Quote: Curious
      I’m not a public doctor, and I don’t have to treat everyone.

      I can not evaluate you as a doctor, because I myself am not a doctor. But as a shooter, you really are not at all. But as a boor - you are quite qualified.
      1. 0
        28 August 2018 14: 12
        You do not distinguish rudeness and honesty. With seeming similarities, these are two different things.
    2. 0
      28 August 2018 14: 01
      Quote: Curious
      Good luck in the fight against NATO.

      Thank. We can do it without you.