Submachine gun: yesterday, today, tomorrow. CH 4. Second-generation submachine guns. MP-38 vs. PPD-38 / 40 and PPSH-41

259
Surprisingly, there was a time when the creators of the same submachine guns were proud, you know, what? Polishing their wooden parts and their high quality! And it should be really high enough for the mechanism to sit firmly in them, and the tree does not swell because of dampness, but ... weapon after all, there should have been such qualities as cheapness (not at the expense of reliability!) and high fighting qualities (not at the expense of manufacturability!), and not a beautiful finish and selected varnish. After all, a weapon in a combat situation does not serve for long. And what's the point of having one lacquered and nickel-plated submachine gun, if your opponent has them ... five, rusty, assembled from water pipes, but nevertheless shooting?


It is best to write about weapons, at least holding them in your hands. Although the author of this material could not be shot from the PCA, he managed to hold it in his hands. What exactly did this sample of the 1943 release of the year not like the most? Butt was short! The author's hands are too long ... And so ... everything else was good.



It would seem that the obvious things are written here, right? However, in the twentieth century, the realization that this was the case, and nothing else, reached the designers, production workers and the military (which is also very important!) Only by the 1938 year and came to the experience of two wars at once: “the wars of the Grand Chaco Between Bolivia and Paraguay (1932 — 1935) and the Spanish Civil War.


Mr-40 - rough and iron. It was necessary to hold it when firing for a textolite pad in front of the store receiver and nothing else. But only no one (even the Germans themselves, prone to pedantry and every kind of instructions) did not do that. Well, it was convenient to keep it for the store. Convenient, and that's it!

The latter, by the way, is not over yet, and a second-generation submachine gun developed by the Erma concern has already appeared in Germany. Also a descendant of MP-18, but very different from him. But not by design. Here everything was just very banal. He used the same cartridge from the "Parabellum" and the free shutter. But a completely different now was the manufacturing technology! In fact, the new PP, designated MP-38, became a kind of revolution in the mode of production. In the past, accurate and complex milling of parts remained, as well as lacquered wooden parts with high-quality coating, which gunsmiths were so proud of only recently. With the development of production technologies in the design of weapons, stamping and casting became widely used, and plastic replaced traditional wood. Coverage - the most primitive, and even then not always, but whenever possible. The MP-38 had no wooden butt at all. He was replaced by a folding metal, by the way applied for the first time, so that it would be convenient to use this submachine gun in a tight space, for example, inside an armored vehicle.

Submachine gun: yesterday, today, tomorrow. CH 4. Second-generation submachine guns. MP-38 vs. PPD-38 / 40 and PPSH-41

PPD-40 with a split box.

And it turned out that the receiver was now assembled from simple parts made by stamping, which could well be, if not done, then assembled in almost any workshop. The shutter required a minimum of machining. So the design as a result turned out to be coarse, but ... technological and cheap. The handle was placed on the left in a long slot, and it seemed that dirt could get in through this very slot. But ... it needed a lot to spoil the mechanism. And with a small amount of it he did an excellent job. However, such a construction did not preclude the disruption of the bolt from a combat platoon and a spontaneous shot when a submachine gun fell on something solid. Therefore, soon there was a model MP-38 / 40, which had a bolt-lock gate.


PPD-40 in the hands of a German soldier.

And in 1940, the Germans simplified the manufacturing process of the MP-38 even more and got the MP-40 model. Outwardly, it practically did not differ from the previous model, but it became even more technological. Then came the model MP-40 / 2, designed to use a dual store. But she was not very popular.


And this is a very interesting photo from the December issue of the Pravda newspaper. Senior Sergeant A. Gulenko is firing fire from PPD-34 / 38. That is, in the course went then everything that fired.

In conclusion, we note that the weight of the MP-40 was 4,7 kg, the length of the barrel was equal to 251 mm (and the overheated trunk could be changed!). The rate of fire was 500 rpm. This gave the trained soldier the opportunity to do even single shots, but the MP-40’s bullet speed was about the same as the French МAS 38 - 365 m / s. (By the way, you can read more about this weapon in VO in the material from July 21 of 2017 of the year).

As for the USSR - the main opponent of Nazi Germany in World War II, the Degtyarev PPD-38 submachine gun, although it was modernized according to the results of the “Winter War”, still remained the weapon of the first generation. Most of its parts had to be fabricated on machine tools, just like the German MP-35 and other types of similar weapons. That is, it was a good submachine gun that fired a powerful cartridge (bullet speed 488 m / s), rapid-fire (800 shots / min.), But not technological, like all the others. That is - "the son of his time." Moreover, the typical son!

Nevertheless, the production of PPD unfolded in the USSR extremely slowly. In 1934, at Kovrovsky Plant No. 2 (factory, not in the workshop!) Only 44 copies of PPD were made, in 1935 and even less - 23, in 1936 - 911, in 1937 - 1291, in 1938 m-1115, in 1939-m-1700, that is, just made them a little more than 5000.

And then a significant event happened for the Red Army: February 26 of the year 1939 7,62-mm self-loading rifle SVT-38 entered its armament. And then, in February 1939, the production of PPD was discontinued. And it is clear why: the price of SVT in mass production was 880 rubles, that is, it was less (!) Shorter and, in theory, simple in design of a Degtyarevsky submachine gun.


PPD-34 / 38

But spring, summer and autumn have passed. The war began with the Finns and the production of PPD had to be deployed again. Now, the price, and she for one PPD with a set of spare parts and accessories cost in 900 rubles in 1939 prices of the year, no one looked. Factories he was released, transferred to trehsenku. Urgently conducted a simplified design. Urgently, in one week, they developed a drum shop. And the original design, with a process in the upper part of the drum, like a short box store, so that you can have a new store adjacent to the old receiver. For the filing of 6 latest cartridges in this process served as a special flexible pusher. And although the design turned out to be not completely reliable (there were difficult problems with the supply of cartridges), it was better than nothing.


PPSH-41

In total, for the 1940 year in the USSR, 81 118 copies of PPD were released, which made the sample 1940 of the year the most popular and recognizable. The Germans also appreciated both of these samples and adopted them, since there was no shortage of trophies. PPD-34 / 38 received the designation Maschinenpistole 715 (r), and PPD-40 - Maschinenpistole 716 (r). We note a high, compared with the German MP-38, rate of fire - 800 spok. / Min. And also the initial speed of the "Mauser" bullet - 488 m / s. All this increased the flatness and accuracy of shooting, and the high rate of fire was beneficial because when firing at a target at a distance using the horizontal movement of the barrel, it was less likely to be in the fork of the trajectories.


PPSH-41 (the first material about PPSH on VO was also released on 22 June 2013). Before the trigger the translator of fire. Right "clasp" of the store. Pay attention to the sight. Usually they say and write that he was the simplest, loose-leaf, just two distances. However, in some factories at the PPSh, such frame sights were set.


Frame sight device on PPSH-41.


Reversible sight PPSH-41.

As for the famous "changer" PPD-40 - PPSh-41 submachine gun George Shpagin, this sample began to be created in the 1940 year. December 21 1940, he was adopted by the Red Army and until the end of the year 1941 produced in the amount of more than 90000 copies. In 1942 alone, the front received 1,5 a million of these submachine guns. The main advantage of it was high manufacturability. That is, it was “our response” to the MP-38. Moreover, its manufacturability was such that by the end of the Great Patriotic War, the PPSh was replicated in an amount of over five million copies, while the German MP-38 for all time produced only in the amount of about one million!


Year of manufacture 1943.

And now let's see what the same Christopher Shant writes about PPSH and what those who read his books read about him in the West. Quite emotionally, he writes that this is a "classic representative of the Soviet design genius." "All important parts are made perfectly." Absolutely admired his fiber damper shutter - it is necessary, it works even in the PPSH, which by 50 years! “Even a recruit who had never seen a single mechanism except a shovel could be trained in shooting from the PCA.” "When shooting, there is almost no return ... PCA is exceptionally reliable and durable." “PCA was the favorite weapon of the Germans, who appreciated his reliability and capacity of the store. Often they threw their MP-40 to take Soviet PCA. ” And the result - "PPSH-41 - one of the best samples ever invented small arms."


The original brake-compensator in the form of an oblique cut of the trunk - created a memorable and recognizable image of this weapon.

But this quote is just a real panegyric: “When the Red Army began to receive PPSh in sufficient quantities, they began to use it like no army in the world used: whole battalions and regiments armed with submachine guns. These units formed the vanguard of the shock units, which moved into battle on medium armor tanks T-34, from which they descended to the ground only for a foot attack, food or rest. Tens of thousands of Soviet soldiers with PPSh went through Western Russia and Europe, sweeping away everything in front of them. They were fearless troops, and their weapons - PPSh-41 - became a real combat symbol of the Red Army. " Even Bolotin didn’t write anything like that ...


Probably, in our instruction it was also written that we should not hold to the store. But for what then did this “automaton” have to keep in front?

To be continued ...
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

259 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    26 February 2019 05: 44
    Thank you, PP is the best weapon for total war.
    1. +2
      26 February 2019 06: 10
      Quote: polpot
      Thank you, PP is the best weapon for total war.

      Until the appearance of machine guns and assault rifles under an intermediate cartridge, and later with a small recoil momentum. Which had a greater effective range of fire than submachine guns. Soviet PPSh was also better because it had a greater effective range of fire than the enemy PP. In war, the one who first kills the enemy wins. Now they are also working on increasing the range of fire of automatic weapons. But these are already such ranges at which special sights are needed to simplify the hit. Therefore, everywhere, picatinny rails are placed on top, and they increase the accuracy of the weapon, they experiment with cartridges and bullets - so that they fly further and save energy longer.
      1. 0
        26 February 2019 11: 03
        Garbage, at a distance of under 100 meters, a bullet 7.62 loses all its advantage. More than 100 meters of steam9 the bullet is already in gain. The bullet is heavier and flies more stable - here is a debriefing of ammunition on the site. Yes, and eyewitnesses who fought with PPSh no "marvelous" range for They did not notice the shooting. It was possible to beat more accurately, this is yes only by switching the fire mode to single. then a good shooter won with the PPSh. there is no recoil, single good accuracy was
        1. +4
          26 February 2019 13: 52
          it is doubtful, to be honest.
          in systems with a free shutter, when shooting from the rear, he whispered single accuracy by definition, and the problem is not recoil - before the shot, the massive shutter moves forward, removes the cartridge from the magazine and drives it into the chamber and the massive shutter hits the chamber - and at that moment a shot occurs.
          not very contributes to accuracy.
          1. 0
            27 February 2019 11: 35
            Yes, I know all this. Old people when young people taught. They recommended that they beat them if possible. Good accuracy from the police. This is a veteran-machine gunner said. I personally read
        2. 0
          26 February 2019 23: 37
          please provide a link to the debriefing .. after explain what advantages the 762x25 has over 9 pairs at ranges up to 100 meters .. then the memories of specific veterans and where you can read their memories))) how did the experts get with their invented performance characteristics
          1. 0
            27 February 2019 11: 40
            This is what I’m going to sit down and from 4 thousand memories and interviews I’ll look for you the words of a veteran and I brought his interview here. The result is a fake vetran, an interview fake. On this site you will find the article about ammunition-discourses were already about the ammunition. desire, and on my own behalf, I will write again, where right now is TT cartridge and where is PAIR 9? The answer is clear — the first has died, and on the second, every self-respecting fireman and gunner makes pistols. This is because they don’t understand anything in the cartridges and LOKHI. And you are special, the gun factory is really cool for you!
          2. -2
            27 February 2019 11: 43
            Well, the sofa isn’t an experd site, I remember. Memoirs of veterans of the Great Patriotic War. You can’t get anywhere from 100 meters away, that's their words. Close fight is his element. Look there to read. There are a lot of interesting things, including about pp and ours and German. Very many speak of him as junk over
            1. +1
              28 February 2019 18: 23
              Ivan .. you don’t fuss and look to the root .. I’ll probably repeat it for the thousandth time .. 1 at what time when and why did the PPs be created then and now .. 2 my relative fought in reconnaissance, so according to him I tell you how there is .. 1 he considered the best pistol p38 and believed that the TT and didn’t roll around like a gun .. They didn’t like the PPSh and for obvious reasons preferred the German MP .. but at the same time when the PPS appeared everyone took it .. according to the assessment and it and his co-workers PPS exceeded MP significantly .. now draw conclusions .. the snag is probably for you like this lter under 9par much better than CT but the MP40 under the same 9par worse PPP sweat the same cartridge TT laughing And yes, the fact that with PPSh more than a hundred meters you will not get anywhere is an outright lie ...
    2. +2
      26 February 2019 06: 10
      Rifles and carbines were the most popular small arms of the Second World War ... in a total war, the cheapness of weapons is important ... PP will be more expensive.
      Fritz at the end of the Second World War even began to make concrete grenades for Volkssturm ... they survived what is called.
      1. +5
        26 February 2019 06: 30
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Rifles and carbines were the most popular small arms of the Second World War ... in a total war, the cheapness of weapons is important ... PP will be more expensive.

        Controversial statement. A good rifle can be even more expensive than an assault rifle. And submachine guns are generally simple to manufacture, if developed with emphasis on manufacturability. But there were also expensive ones in production, as mentioned in the PPD article.
        1. +8
          26 February 2019 06: 36
          What exactly did this model of 1943 release not like the most? Butt was short! The author has too long arms
          A bow with a quiver of arrows would be useful to the author ... Yes
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. +1
            26 February 2019 12: 31
            Quote: dds
            DEP Thompson (wartime), approximately 250 m.

            Quote: dds
            That was the first to kill the Americans. It is a fact.

            And due to what is this figure obtained? And it will turn out, as always, a comparison of warm with soft.
            1. +1
              26 February 2019 13: 09
              Quote: Spade
              Quote: dds
              DEP Thompson (wartime), approximately 250 m.

              Quote: dds
              That was the first to kill the Americans. It is a fact.

              And due to what is this figure obtained? And it will turn out, as always, a comparison of warm with soft.

              Delirium dds (# #) Today, 11:59 a.m. harmful even to read. Therefore, I do not answer him. Just a sick person most likely - lives in his own fantasy world. The Tomposon PP had the most limited effective fire range, the German PP 9mm Parabellum was superior to the Thomson PP in terms of performance characteristics, but inferior to the Soviet PP. Therefore, the Germans were so actively involved in the development of automatic weapons under the shortened Mauser cartridge of 7,92 × 57 mm - 7,92 × 33 mm, developed by the German company Polte in Magdeburg.
              1. +4
                26 February 2019 14: 03
                Sorry, but you have passed from the refutation of one myth to another.
                The Germans initially had 7,63 * 25 Mauser - the very one with which the TT cartridge was made.
                But they chose 9mm, quite rightly, by the way, the best balance between persistence and the stopping effect important for close combat at that time.
                And the post-war history of the PP only confirmed their choice.
                1. +1
                  26 February 2019 14: 18
                  Quote: Avior
                  Sorry, but you have passed from the refutation of one myth to another.
                  The Germans initially had 7,63 * 25 Mauser - the very one with which the TT cartridge was made.
                  But they chose 9mm, quite rightly, by the way, the best balance between persistence and the stopping effect important for close combat at that time.
                  And the post-war history of the PP only confirmed their choice.

                  I will answer you with words
                  Quote: Spade
                  And due to what is this figure obtained? And it will turn out, as always, a comparison of warm with soft.
                  above.

                  9 mm most popular combat pistol cartridge for today. Optimal or close to optimal in terms of performance characteristics specifically for the pistol (although there are adherents of other pistol calibres). But PP is still not a gun. The PP has a butt and a longer barrel, the weapon design of the PP is more rigid and stable, designed for a longer effective fire distance than pistol, automatic fire, and not self-loading, single like a pistol. The difference in nuances, so to speak. In WWII, PP won under the cartridge of 7,62 mm TT.
                  Modern submachine guns are designed for a variety of calibers. There is no standard recognized by the whole world for any tasks.
                  1. 0
                    26 February 2019 19: 53
                    "There is no internationally recognized standard for any task."
                    But what about 7,62 x 39? Not PP, of course, but for any tasks for sure laughing
                    1. -1
                      26 February 2019 20: 42
                      Quote: Doliva63
                      There is no internationally recognized standard for any task. "
                      But what about 7,62 x 39? Not PP, of course, but for any tasks for sure

                      The Soviet 7,62x39 mm is quite suitable for a machine gun, but inferior in range to effective rifle fire and is not suitable for a pistol. What does universal mean? It is simply better for the machine. 9x19 mm Parabellum is widely used as a pistol cartridge. But submachine guns are produced today not only in caliber 9 mm Parabellum. Although it is convenient to unify the cartridge for the pistol and submachine gun, and thereby simplify the logistics. But personal protective equipment is being improved, and the individual weapon of a soldier must cope with such protection. Therefore, experimenting with new cartridges with lower recoil, cartridge weight, better flatness and armor penetration. The war of calibers continues. As a result, everything will slide down to the .22-caliber, as the lightest and cheapest caliber due to less material consumption - it will become the most massive. And larger calibers will be more niche and specialized. Kalash, NATO automatic rifles have long been in the 22nd caliber. And larger calibers are specialized. For pistols and submachine guns, they are now experimenting with the 22nd caliber, but so far the 9mm is holding tight. I'm afraid to vang, but where weapons minds are directed noticeably.
                  2. -1
                    26 February 2019 21: 28
                    I will answer you with words

                    better if we stay on you.
                    In WWII, PP won under the cartridge of 7,62 mm TT.

                    The statement is frankly unfounded.
                    The Germans initially had 7,63 * 25 Mauser - the very one with which the TT cartridge was made.

                    you simply ignored it.
                    Modern submachine guns are designed for a variety of calibers. There is no standard recognized by the whole world for any tasks.

                    Yes. But the overwhelming majority of PPs are just chambered for 9 mm, and others are released only by virtue of circumstances or for which specific concept — in fact, the latter applies only to a few recent models.
                    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_пистолетов-пулемётов
                    1. +1
                      26 February 2019 21: 46
                      Quote: Avior
                      The statement is frankly unfounded.

                      For trolling, you can find simpler topics. Two indisputable facts in favor of the Soviet anti-German anti-German missiles: 1. It was the Soviet submachine gunners armed with the anti-German guards that forced the Germans to invent assault rifles under a more serious cartridge, and not vice versa. 2. Soviet machine gunners armed with PPSh defeated the Germans, and not vice versa. The gloomy German genius did not shine here, although it shone in many respects, and the Soviet no less gloomy genius in some places desperately tried to catch up with the Germans, as was the case with front-line aviation in the early years of the Second World War. But the Germans in small arms where a lot lagged behind the Soviet gunsmiths in those years. And Soviet self-loading rifles were the best, and submachine guns. The Germans constantly caught up and sought to overtake, until they drove themselves completely. But our German soldiers and officers admired pistols with German trophy - I know this firsthand, and not from the Internet. And when the PM was created in the USSR, German Walter was taken as a model, and it turned out even better than expected.
                      1. -1
                        26 February 2019 22: 51
                        1. These Soviet machine gunners armed with PPSh forced the Germans to invent assault rifles under a more serious cartridge, and not vice versa. 2. Soviet machine gunners armed with PPSh defeated the Germans, and not vice versa.

                        the arguments are frankly not serious, sorry.
                        Germans and PP created. in general, they started a lot of things during the war, which after the war received unambiguous distribution, such as guided bombs, missiles or an intermediate cartridge.
                        The Germans understood the limited capabilities of the PP in combined arms combat.
                        Therefore, they tried to create a weapon effective at all real combat distances.
                        2. Soviet machine gunners armed with PPSh defeated the Germans, and not vice versa.
                        this is generally some kind of kindergarten in this context.
                        Do you yourself understand this? And Th tanks released, if PPSh in your opinion decided everything ....
                        And when creating PM in the USSR, German Walter was taken as a sample

                        and when creating the PCA - patented in 1917 by Hugo Schmeiser (guess who he was by nationality?) PP MP-18 and its further modifications, reproduced with changes and additions throughout Europe in a wide variety of variations and models, including, by the way, Bergmann SIG 1920 under your favorite cartridge 7,63 × 25 mm Mauser - the very cartridge TT
                        hi
                      2. -3
                        26 February 2019 22: 57
                        Quote: Avior
                        the arguments are frankly not serious, sorry.

                        I answered your trolling. And now you can go to rest on other topics. There they will also explain to you in a popular way "how Schmeisser invented AK", "and PPSh", "and SVD", "and GSh-18" winked
                      3. -4
                        26 February 2019 23: 09
                        you answer your trolling, I’m just not doing it.
                        There they will also explain to you in a popular way "how Schmeisser invented the AK", "and PPSh", "and SVD", "and GSh-18"
                      4. +2
                        26 February 2019 23: 36
                        Quote: Avior
                        you answer your trolling, I’m not doing it

                        And how else is it popular to explain to a person that a successful weapon that suits the military does not change during the war? The Germans had nothing to do, that they were busy all their war with their little balls, if they were so good? The Germans had a lot of gaps in armaments besides the riflemen, and the mani quickly evaporated without any Sturmgevers. This voluminous article is needed to explain all the advantages of the same PCA against the MP-40, of which there were many in fact. The cartridge was better in ballistics, a larger store, fewer man-hours in the production of PPSh, this log could be used in hand-to-hand combat ... But the Germans, meanwhile, received cradles on all fronts and retreated. How else can I explain to you that it’s not a beautiful milled screw on a milled rifle receiver that wins the war, but the mind and talent of gunsmiths who create real, not imaginary, weapons of victory.
                      5. 0
                        26 February 2019 23: 41
                        abundant idle talk is not very interesting to me, I’ll tell you honestly.
                        I am interested in the arguments in fact, not a set of slogans
                        Have you read the discussion thread? there is data on ballistics with scans from the monograph.
                        and the fact that a 9 mm cartridge has much better terminal ballistics is generally an obvious fact.
                      6. +1
                        26 February 2019 23: 49
                        Quote: Avior
                        abundant idle talk is not very interesting to me, I’ll tell you honestly.
                        I am interested in the arguments in fact, not a set of slogans

                        So I wrote that you are a troll. If you see me idle talk. And I see that you are more on the cogs, not on weapons. There is an award weapon, an exhibition weapon - there is order with cogs. Weapon aesthetics are not alien to me either, and I understand that. And in the war functionality and competent calculation wins. When the arms factories in 3 shifts work and in addition to the submachine gun, the army still has a lot of requests that need to be quickly satisfied. The more competently designed weapon wins. And the PCA won precisely this.
                      7. -2
                        26 February 2019 23: 51
                        I haven't written a word about "cogs".
                        and the continuation of your idle talk is not interesting to me.
                        hi
                      8. 0
                        27 February 2019 01: 53
                        Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
                        When arms factories in 3 shifts work and in addition to the submachine gun, the army still has a lot of requests that need to be quickly satisfied. The more competently designed weapon wins. And the PCA won precisely this.
                        VN Novikov writes about production during the Second World War in his book "On the Eve and in the Days of Trials". The book is mainly devoted to the Izhevsk factories, but covers how weapons were produced at other factories. And he has interesting data on the production of PCA. And what changes were made to the Mosin rifle and brought the daily output of what seemed to be a technologically advanced sample to 12000 pieces per day. “But the rifle won't be the same.
                        Even General Dubovitsky could not have imagined that, despite the introduction of a large number of innovations, the rifle would not lose its qualities. Anyone who saw these wartime rifles, especially those who fought with them, remembers that they really weren’t sanded or lacquered like pre-war rifles, they no longer had carefully burned barrels, but they perfectly performed their main role - accurately and flawlessly smashed the enemy. In this rifle we did not spoil one iota.
                        The epic began, which went down in the history of the plant for a long time. Who worked then in Izhevsk, remembers this way to fulfill the task of T-bills.
                      9. +1
                        7 March 2019 18: 42
                        MP-38/40 was an excellent PP; just look at the PP designs developed after the war in other countries and at the PPP, which is considered the best WWII PP, according to many experts. PPP in many respects repeated MP-38/40 - all-metal, with a large shutter speed, with widespread use of stamping, wire stock and a box magazine, the manufacturability of PPPs is, of course, an order of magnitude higher. In fact, PPP is creatively rethought and improved for the better MP-38/40, and it was this PP and not PPSh-2 that was adopted as a result of the competition for a new PP in the 42nd year and if it weren’t for their undercover intrigues much more released. By the way, the PPSh store for 70 rounds did not represent anything good, and the Red Army was well aware of this, as a result, the PPSh also began to be equipped with box stores. The high rate of fire is a dubious advantage, in conjunction with a buggy store that is also not easy to charge - such a plus. The wooden butt is a plus for the infantry, but not for the tanker or scout, for example. MP-38/40 doesn’t dare to call the language a bad weapon and it is never such a thing, it is in many respects a revolutionary example made wisely to speak about the defectiveness of the German design genius, at least it’s stupid - this is an outright lie. MG-42, MP-38/40, Stg. 44 were revolutionary examples, and arguing with this would simply mean flouting common sense. And don’t even start talking about Victory - it has nothing to do with technology.
                      10. 0
                        27 February 2019 12: 11
                        Yes, the PCA did not have any advantages over the MP40. With the exception of a huge tambourine for 72 rounds. And manufacturability. But this does not apply to operational issues
                      11. -1
                        27 February 2019 12: 05
                        After reading. "Our soldiers with the PPSh defeated the Germans with a Schmeiser" I realized that the dude is really sick, then you could not argue with him
                      12. +2
                        27 February 2019 12: 56
                        Quote: Huumi
                        After reading. "Our soldiers with the PPSh defeated the Germans with a Schmeiser" I realized that the dude is really sick, then you could not argue with him

                        In fact, the patient is recognized as a person suffering from visual hallucinations if he consults a doctor with this problem. Where is the comparison of PPSh with Schmeisser, and with which Schmasser? Dude winked Here everyone compares PPSh with classmates: German and American submachine guns. If Schmeiser - Sturmgever 44 under a shortened German rifle cartridge Mauser, then he surpassed the PPSh in ballistics. But this is a different class of weapons. I am aware that you shit all the Soviet weapons of the Second World War in the topics. But, objectively, you just like to shit yours and admire a stranger. I met a similar reaction among foreigners: when they admired the Soviet weapons of the Great Patriotic War, but criticized their own, because, like, they lost, the weapon was not as perfect as the Russians had. Objectively, it is with respect to specifically submachine guns. The Germans had a store rifle cool, although the Soviet mosquito soldier did not fail. A self-loading rifle was interesting for the Americans, although not without controversial moments in the design, which were later abandoned in military weapons. But we're talking about submachine guns. With millions of series of submachine guns made in the country during the war, if you collect all the complaints about weapons, then a lot of things can be read. I saw a documentary shoot, where even the children did PCA and drum shops for him in the workshops. No bluing - everything went straight to the front. The Germans also refused during the war and burnishing, and simplified the design of weapons. American weapons during the war fell dramatically in quality. The British generally cooked their Stan from water pipes and he often shot like a water pipe. And on advertising photographs in modern or old magazines they can place some award samples with high-quality burnishing and surface treatment, which have never even been shot.
                      13. -1
                        27 February 2019 15: 13
                        Hey, are you talking about the victory of a soldier with PPS versus Germans with MP? I’m talking about a cartridge here generally and not about weapons. I sneezed better than anyone else, but since I’m a fond of history and I read in two languages. I don’t think myself and myself as Russian or German, especially since I myself German taught and nibbled. And if part of the veterans didn’t think so much what kind of weapon was still some rubbish and some good, then I’m drawing conclusions. If the veteran says that the German had the best finish, I would believe him. And for the cartridge, what I actually said, I already wrote .where right now is Mauser 7.62 and where is the pair9 That's the whole story
                      14. 0
                        27 February 2019 18: 01
                        I communicate with the living, and not through books. Soviet weapons are considered the best. They are mainly scoured by their merchants, who in this way vparivat their trash, not the first freshness by the way. Good modern weapons are not promoted like that. So the legend is that, allegedly, Kalashnikov did not invent a machine gun, but instead, like, Schmeisser secretly from Hespato, for the benefit of the USSR he created and waited for the arrival of Russian Ivan. I communicate with different people for a long time. There are more adequate ones than inadequate. Inadequacies in our country clog the Internet with constant nagging that it would be better to drink Bavarian rather than fight. Finishing - yes, it suffered from weapons when the fascist was persecuted. But they, too, when the tension began, not everything was good. I wrote above. PPSh-41 is like the T-34 - the iconic weapon of the Second World War and a very successful PP. In the Soviet troops they were able to use it very successfully. A high-speed bullet of 7,62 mm TT normally showed itself in PP. After the war, the USSR switched from submachine guns chambered for 7,62 mm TT to weapons of 7,62x39 mm caliber, and it turned out to be there. I am ashamed not to know this.
                      15. -1
                        27 February 2019 18: 23
                        Well, for starters, there’s no longer any living ones left. And different things, as one veteran said, wear and fight with him. Here he fought and said, the ppd is a gun-less dumb. The guns are better and that’s not camillefo. And those who are behind him he bears the very thing behind him. And the German, in his words, is a very good weapon. I didn’t speak at all about the intermediate cartridge and did not argue about this and you wrote a lecture to me in vain. I read this question and studied it. And no one argues that PPSh was bad and unsuitable, but they wedged all the weapons and had all the flaws. And PPSh had them immeasurably. From broken ext ators and broken fibers and discs are unreliable. But there was no problem charging the horns because of going out into one cartridge. To break the fingers. And you won’t pick up the tambourine. You need to pick them up 6 pieces so that they fit your barrel and then beauty. You can read all this from veterans in an interview where they ask questions about weapons. There are a lot of opinions. I don’t have to shame me either, because I’m 42 and I’ve read my grandfather’s grandfather to begin with all the memoirs on the shelf and then growing up. Yes, I’m traveling, I’m interested in the fighting history of the republic, so to speak. Yes, and I speak two languages. So shame I don’t need it, I take it one place
                      16. +2
                        27 February 2019 20: 08
                        And alive? There are enough educated people everywhere. And the theme of weapons, cars and women among men along with the theme of football in popularity wink The PPSh drum store was loved by the troops. But it is less reliable than a regular box. Loved for the capacity that you carry more cartridges in a drum store. During the war, the PPSh switched to box-type, but many liked the drum and fought with the drum until the end of the war. About breakdowns in the war of weapons - this is a separate topic of conversation. I had to repair and bring to mind after far from stressful operation, even Western models of modern weapons that were considered very reliable and of high quality. and far from hunting. Everything breaks, and even more so in the war. The Germans broke German weapons, they picked up our and admired, ours - domestic, took good German and also shot, and then praised. Americans in arms forums lower their weapons far and wide, because they exploit them in the army and want a reliable one like AK. And I know that there is no absolutely reliable weapon. Even the AK breaks. This is not scrap. I know three languages ​​together with my native Russian. In addition to all kinds of dialects, which I also understand, sometimes it’s better, sometimes worse, like Polish.
                      17. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 10
                        Well .. objective assessment, I agree.
                      18. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 24
                        If you need a reliable weapon, then nothing is better than a bolt rifle or carbine. I shot from various weapons and everything that dangles inside the weapon when firing tends to break, so fewer moving parts in the weapon are always good. Kalashnikov is better than Western models. But better without moving parts at all - like in a musket lol
                      19. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 29
                        For me, the duck ak47 will be the best. I still like the products of the Belgian FN of various modifications. For me, a good weapon
                      20. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 52
                        I like everything bolted and less self-loading. I like 5,45 mm from AK, because I like to shoot a lot and get carried away easily. And the 5,45 mm cartridge is lighter and you can take more with you. Biped and from 5,45 mm fall normally. 7,62 mm is appreciated by hunters, but a slightly different cartridge for a carbine. The 30-06 is the most versatile hunting caliber, from mouse to bear.
                      21. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 53
                        30-06 is it NATO? Wine?
                      22. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 58
                        It has long been no longer NATO, but a hunting one. In NATO, its "intermediate" "version is in service - 7.62x51 NATO (.308 Winchester). The 30-06 has a good volume and proportions of the case and the caliber itself is optimal. Therefore, it has a lot of bullets and equipment for any game. hands cleaned.
                      23. 0
                        27 February 2019 20: 59
                        Well then, he’s the most. I saw him at the hunter.
                      24. 0
                        27 February 2019 21: 02
                        Only he is Winchester, and Springfield. In addition to the Elephant and the Rhino, everything will do. But in Russia, elephants do not run around the streets, so everything will do.
                      25. 0
                        27 February 2019 21: 06
                        Isn’t it that 7.62 by 63 which shortened the sleeve after WWII? Type we also appeared intermediate. M14 full-time cartridge? Which was all one powerful
                      26. +1
                        28 February 2019 02: 55
                        In the USSR, after the war, an automatic weapon entered service with an intermediate cartridge 7,62x39 mm - the Kalashnikov assault rifle. The Americans could not find out the characteristics of the AK for a long time. But they were also going to fight in the future with the USSR. Therefore, they themselves tried to create an automatic weapon for the war "with the Russians." As an "intermediate", the Americans took the Winchester 308 caliber cartridge as a basis and created an automatic weapon based on it. It didn't work out well. That is, the M14 automatic rifle itself chambered for 7.62x51 NATO came out excellent, who owns its self-loading versions will confirm. But her automatic fire mode was not bad - the army was not satisfied. Because the American "intermediate" cartridge 7.62x51 mm proved to be too powerful for automatic fire. It was okay to shoot with automatic fire only from bipods (which the Americans did not immediately guess about). Well, the cartridges themselves for such an assault rifle were too heavy to shoot in a fully automatic mode - you can't take much. So they suffered, and experimented for a long time, during this time they managed to get live samples of AK and comprehensively study them, and as a result of a long search and torment, already closer to the mid-60s, they adopted the M16 rifle chambered for 5,56x45 NATO (hunting caliber based on .223 Remington). But the American rifle itself chambered for 7.62x51 NATO in the self-loading version is very good. It was also developed on the basis of the experience of the Second World War and the mistakes made in the M1 Garand self-loading rifle. Self-loading versions are still in demand in the United States. Now they sell it in the M1A version of various equipment modifications. Sold out on the civilian market old stocks from army storage warehouses and on the US civilian market, the self-loading version is known and in demand among the Americans - an accurate self-loading rifle.
                      27. 0
                        28 February 2019 18: 59
                        1 show me a down who considers himself a down? 2 you are the peak of the evolution of men !!!! you are 42 years old and you have a picture of the series on av - Chernobyl exclusion zone lol Ivan, you really can’t consider yourself a down well. Under no circumstances can you even think about it. lol
                      28. -1
                        26 February 2019 23: 46
                        [/ quote] I answered your trolling. And now you can go to rest on other topics. There they will also explain to you popularly "how Schmeisser invented AK", "and PPSh", "and SVD", "and GSh-18" [quote]

                        Very ugly of you. With you, after all, no one in a ravine had eaten a horse to poke, and even in such a shape. Moreover, 2 people are already trying to explain to you reasonably that you are a little wrong.
                      29. 0
                        27 February 2019 00: 42
                        Quote: Korax71
                        Very ugly of you. With you, after all, no one in a ravine had eaten a horse to poke, and even in such a shape. Moreover, 2 people are already trying to explain to you reasonably that you are a little wrong.

                        That you are one troll under two nicknames: Korax71 и Avior . I see what you are. Here I spread the troll.
                      30. 0
                        28 February 2019 14: 34
                        Yes, everything is clear here.
                        everything except Major Whirlwind is one person under different nicknames.
                        In how it surfaced!
                      31. 0
                        26 February 2019 22: 54
                        Regarding self-loading rifles, you got a little excited. I advise you to study the test report of the m1 grand at the NPSMW training ground. And about 9x19 and 7.62x25, then at a distance of 100m and above 9x19 did not lose anything in either speed or energy, but it clearly exceeds the cross-sectional area. The only thing 7.62x25 was better is that the decrease in the hit point (or the excess of the aiming point) at 9x19 by 300m will be 20cm below 1.7 compared to 1.5 at 7.62x25. The statement about shooting at 7.62x25 at long ranges is also doubtful. At 500 meters, 7.62x25 energy will have about 90-100J, with a bullet flying time of 2 sec. Exceeding the aiming point is 10 meters. Theoretically, you can shoot, in fact, no. This is all under ideal conditions without taking into account the drift coefficient.
                      32. -1
                        26 February 2019 23: 17
                        Quote: Korax71
                        M1 Grand

                        I don’t know such a rifle. I know the M1 Garand, but it’s definitely not German.
                        Quote: Korax71
                        At 500 meters, 7.62x25 energy will be about

                        At 500 meters from the PP do not shoot. If the Germans had a 500-meter submachine gun, then in the coffin they saw assault rifles, onto which only a bunch of Deutsch stamps were transferred.
                        Quote: Korax71
                        Regarding self-loading rifles you got a little excited

                        The self-loading German Gewehr 41 rifle was unsuccessful and the Germans at the front did not like it. Preferred Soviet trophy SVT-40. Under the influence of the SVT-40, German engineers developed the Gewehr 43 self-loading rifle in the 43rd year. So I didn't get excited. It's just that many believe in the legend that "an illiterate peasant Kalashnikov stole an AK-47 from Schmeisser," although in reality everything was the other way around, but for this you need to turn on at least your brain and work with the material laughing
                      33. 0
                        26 February 2019 23: 39
                        I don’t believe in stories about ak and storm trooper and who merged from whom. For your approval
                        [/ quote] And Soviet self-loading rifles were the best, and submachine guns.
                        I brought you the argument that this is not entirely true. According to the test results of M1 and SVT 40, the first was superior in almost all respects, with the exception of a slightly larger weight, though this also had its plus and had a positive effect on the balance of M1, and of course, loading in batches, not a clip, but there is more lack of production capacities for release.
                        Next, here it is
                        It was the Soviet submachine guns armed with PPSh that forced the Germans to invent assault rifles under a more serious cartridge, and not vice versa. [quote]
                        I wrote to you, I even brought the tsifiri that the PPSh had no advantage over the mp40 when firing over 100m, and, accordingly, the reasons for creating weapons under an intermediate cartridge are completely different.
                      34. +1
                        26 February 2019 23: 57
                        The 7,62 mm TT cartridge has better ballistics than the 9x19 mm Parabellum. Parabellum is optimal for a pistol, but in PP it is inferior in ballistics to 7,62 mm TT, which is redundant for a pistol in ballistics. Easier to hit, then hit the target. Also bursts from the huge drum store with a bunch of rounds. Already 5 times wrote.
                      35. 0
                        27 February 2019 00: 23
                        Quote: Korax71
                        the reasons for creating weapons under the intermediate cartridge are completely different.

                        And what were the reasons for creating a weapon for an intermediate cartridge? In addition to the fact that a cartridge was needed for automatic weapons with better ballistics than pistol ones, as close to a rifle as possible. Because it is impossible to create an automatic machine on a rifle cartridge - recoil will negate all the advantages of automatic fire with rifle cartridges. And in a simple way - only the first bullet from the queue will fly at the target, and all subsequent bullets into milk. Tell me, reveal the "military secret" ?! smile
                    2. 0
                      27 February 2019 00: 02
                      Sergey, you’re wrong here .. deceive us .. give an example of the massive use of post-war construction units in infantry formations .. we can only remember the Uzi and then again the auxiliary sooner ..
                      1. -1
                        28 February 2019 14: 59
                        What does it mean en masse? the main armament of the infantry PP was never, if you talk about it.
                        As for the widespread use after the war, namely in the army, and not in the police or in special forces, the Americans used M3, and Uzi, and Karl Gustav, the famous Beretta M12 and post-war versions of the M38, the equally well-known Heckler-Koch MP5, MPi 69 , Samopal 23 and its versions, Scorpio 61 and its versions up to modern ones are all weapons of wide army use, and some still are in service with the armies of many countries of the world.
                        There was no software only in the army of the USSR, perhaps ....
                        And even now, the RPs have lost relevance for the crews of armored vehicles, for example. hi
                2. 0
                  26 February 2019 23: 55
                  in my humble opinion of an amateur, you are both wrong a little bit (quite a bit) .. firstly the approach was different for us and the Germans .. secondly the Germans chose 9 pairs also because the cartridge was adopted as a pistol and subsequently it suited .. for us, the cartridge was already taken with the calculation for PP and better ballistics for this type of weapon ... but the fact that in the post-war history of the PP confirmed their choice was a fact, alas, not in infantry mass weapons but in auxiliary and police you know this and are deliberately lying ... software has become less e, lighter, shorter trunks ..
                  1. 0
                    27 February 2019 19: 23
                    Cartridge 7.62 started Toko because it was 7.63 mm. 9 mm barrels we did not make and there was no possibility to buy or remake production for 9 mm barrels at the end of 20, and no one would have sold us machines. We bought a license on what was closer in caliber and at the beginning of the 30s nobody seemed to even think about us. Here we had to start using a Mauser. The choice was from cartridges of other calibers and the ballistics were better and the sleeve was more suitable for designing. after all, neither 9 pair nor 9 Mauser nor 7.65 Mauser arranged for some reason. ak necessary measure standards patron.po at least he had shot her in full
                    1. +1
                      28 February 2019 14: 48
                      Quote: Huumi
                      Cartridge 7.62 began toko because it was 7.63 mm. 9 mm barrels we did not make and there was no opportunity to buy or remake production for 9 mm barrels at the end of 20, and no one would have sold us machines.

                      Are these assumptions or facts? If facts are needed, then a gun drill for deep drilling, reamer and a tool for cutting a profile inside the barrel, the sharpener-toolmaker makes in the workshop of any profile enterprise of any diameter, which he will order. With an accuracy of hundredths of a millimeter. The USSR, like any other developed country of that time, no matter what caliber to produce. I didn’t come to 7,62 mm, and they came from larger calibers. Just 7,62 mm turned out to be the optimal caliber in its characteristics for smokeless powder. Other calibers have been tested in Russia since tsarist times. It was the military who chose 7,62 mm (three lines of ten from 1 inch). And the economic benefits of a single caliber for a pistol, rifle and machine gun, of course, are. Therefore, they were chosen so that it was both good and economically not too wasteful for the treasury.
                    2. +1
                      28 February 2019 18: 41
                      I watch you all make up inventions laughing at the beginning of the 30's, nobody seemed to even think about PP at our place? laughing But what about the Tokarev PP created in the late 20s under the Nagan cartridge ??? please study again the question of why the choice fell on the Mauser’s cartridge .. not only the caliber, but also the fact that initially when adopting the TT cartridge in the USSR it was accepted in the future for the development of an army PP for it .. or we don’t Did you know that this cartridge is not perfect as a pistol cartridge and 20 years after the appearance of a magnificent 9mm cartridge pair adopted the worst TT cartridge?
                  2. -1
                    28 February 2019 15: 00
                    you are new to real facts, but allow yourself an abusive style
                    you know this and are deliberately lying.
                    negative
            2. The comment was deleted.
              1. 0
                26 February 2019 14: 57
                Quote: dds
                Perhaps that is why the Thompsons and Colts (weapons on the cartridge .45 ACP) were in service with the US Army until the onset of the Bronik era. Thompsons until the 70s, the Colts a little longer.

                Too lazy to read your entire sheet. But the .45 ACP cartridge for a submachine gun, even during the Second World War, was far from being the most optimal. The "pistol" cartridge 7,62 mm TT for the pistol was slightly redundant in terms of ballistic characteristics, and for the PP it turned out to be just right to surpass even the PP chambered for 9mm Parabellum, which, in turn, surpassed the American old Thomson in ballistics.
                Regarding wound ballistics, it is guaranteed to stop a person only getting into the brain or spinal cord. And the caliber here is not so important. There are many facts in history when bodies filled with 9 mm bullets managed to do business and successfully leave on their own two.
                Judging by the experience of the Second World War, the caliber of 7,62 mm was quite suitable for the military. After the war, the intermediate cartridge for AK and SKS also remained in the caliber of 7,62 mm, only having even better ballistics and effective range than the cartridge of 7,62 mm TT. And later the caliber was further reduced, bringing it to 5,45 mm (or 5,56 mm according to NATO standard) in order to reduce the weight of the cartridge.
                Somehow your theory does not coincide with practice. You can, of course, continue to bow before the American PP at the beginning of the 20th century, but in practice everything looks a little different. For police operations in the United States, they still use .45 ACP software; there is also a 9 mm Parabellum software. And for the army they create weapons capable of combating modern means of defense.
    3. +2
      26 February 2019 09: 23
      It was replaced by a folding metal, incidentally used for the first time, so that this submachine gun was convenient to use in a confined space, for example, inside an armored car.

      MP-38 was created for paratroopers, so the butt was made folding.
      1. +3
        26 February 2019 13: 35
        Quote: figvam
        MP-38 was created for paratroopers

        It's unlikely.
        There were features of parachutes that did not allow jumping with something larger than a pistol.

        ----
        I wonder why you minus? 8)))))
      2. +4
        26 February 2019 17: 17
        More likely for tankers. Skydivers in Germany jumped without long-barrel weapons. It was dumped in a separate container.
      3. 0
        26 February 2019 22: 03
        For military vehicles too. hi
  2. +4
    26 February 2019 06: 24
    Sudaev’s submachine gun is the best WWII submachine gun, it combines the best of German and our submachine guns, in particular, the iron butt and a lower rate of fire were taken from the MP-40, and the casing was taken from the PPSh.
    1. +2
      26 February 2019 08: 43
      Quote: riwas

      The submachine gun Sudaeva is the best WWII machine gun,

      Yes ... PPS (Sudaeva) defeated PPSh-2! Shpagin failed to "multiply his glory" at the expense of PPSh-2 ... recourse
      PPSH-2 ...
      1. +3
        26 February 2019 16: 06
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Yes ... PPS (Sudaeva) defeated PPSh-2! Shpagin failed to "multiply his glory" at the expense of the PPSh-2.

        Heh heh heh ... in the competition actually won the same PPSh-2. But then GAU in a difficult struggle defeated the NKV - and the PPP still went into the series.
      2. +1
        26 February 2019 17: 20
        Can anyone = anyone have a PPSh-2 scheme? I would like to see and compare the device!
    2. +3
      26 February 2019 20: 01
      Quote: riwas
      Sudaev’s submachine gun is the best WWII submachine gun, it combines the best of German and our submachine guns, in particular, the iron butt and a lower rate of fire were taken from the MP-40, and the casing was taken from the PPSh.

      Father in the Second World War fought with the PPD, PPSh, PPS. Estimated as follows: 1. PPS, 2. PPD, 3. PPSh. Mother was offended - in vain, did we collect PPSh in the winter practically on the street? laughing
  3. +2
    26 February 2019 06: 45
    Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
    Quote: The same LYOKHA
    Rifles and carbines were the most popular small arms of the Second World War ... in a total war, the cheapness of weapons is important ... PP will be more expensive.

    Controversial statement. A good rifle can be even more expensive than an assault rifle. And submachine guns are generally simple to manufacture, if developed with emphasis on manufacturability. But there were also expensive ones in production, as mentioned in the PPD article.

    you need to take into account the specifics, the rifle is not interchangeable at long distances, + "not into the white light as a pretty penny" cartridges landed, which is also important, it hits the target piece by piece, and effectively. even the planes were "brought down" from the "three-line". and in city conditions, of course, only a machine gun.
    1. +4
      26 February 2019 07: 51
      An attempt to arm aircraft, PPSh - PPSh system “Fire hedgehog” - https://topwar.ru/11501-sistema-ppsh-ognennyy-ezh.html
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. +2
          26 February 2019 12: 35
          Quote: dds
          The level of delirium in the USSR has always gone through the roof.

          Metal Storm was not created in the USSR
  4. +4
    26 February 2019 07: 28
    Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
    Soviet PPSh was also better because it had a greater effective range of fire than the enemy PP.

    Wait for the continuation - the author will quickly debunk this point of view and prove the opposite.
    1. +4
      26 February 2019 08: 46
      Quote: kvs207
      Soviet PPSh was the best also because

      ... that even the night sights put on him ...!
  5. +4
    26 February 2019 07: 45
    Regarding the wooden parts of PPSh, their GOSTs
    Blanks for submachine gun boxes PPSh GOST 2541-44 - https://yadi.sk/i/-NxAKPGTGEmUxA
    Lodge for the PCA. GOST 2539-44 - https://yadi.sk/i/CHkGkXwoQeEtiA
  6. +7
    26 February 2019 08: 34
    Well here again. A couple of facts from the category - a no brainer. A couple of long ago debunked myths. The complete absence of any analytics. And the whole article - oh what a wonderful, insightful, etc. I am. Well, in the comments, the first thing a pair of twinks got in with praise. Total? Typical caliber article ...
  7. 0
    26 February 2019 08: 46
    Quote: Alceers
    Well, in the comments, the first thing a couple of twinks climbed with praise.

    Where did you find the pair?
  8. +3
    26 February 2019 08: 48
    The PPSh was good in that it took a very short time to train soldiers to use them, and again it is important that it takes a long time to learn to shoot with a rifle, and not everyone can hit the target accurately, but with PPSh just shoot in bursts and maybe you will. During that war, it was considered that 1 thousand rounds were spent to kill 25 soldier. But the most technologically advanced and cheapest PPS, but it’s more convenient to shoot with PPSh.
  9. +3
    26 February 2019 09: 07
    Speaking about the shortcomings of the PCA, they do not forget to mention the "heavy, inconvenient" drum magazine ... and the fact that with the appearance of the "horn", the latter strongly pressed the "disc" ... This is so, but not quite so! One thing is a "horn" for a PPS (with a rate of fire of 600 w / m) and a "horn" with a PPSh-41 with a rate of fire, somewhere, 900-1000 w / m ... how long will it last? Yes, there was a "single" switch, but on the PPSh "with a disk" it was not used a lot, therefore there was no "corrosive" habit. PPSh with a "horn" were convenient in the rear, the second line of battle formations, guard duty ... But in the first line of battle formations, in any place where the probability of hostilities at any moment is very high with "disks" did not part!
  10. +2
    26 February 2019 09: 10
    He absolutely admired his fiber shock absorber of the shutter - this is necessary, it works even in PCA, which are 50 years old!

    in fact, it crashed very quickly in real conditions and the accuracy of the fire fell sharply.
    Actually, this is one of the reasons why both Sudaev and other designers of that time increased the shutter speed and got rid of shock absorbers.
    which led to the transfer of the pistol grip to the middle of the shutter stroke, which is why many PPs of that time had a pistol grip that was strangely shifted to the center.
    1. 0
      26 February 2019 09: 26
      Obviously Shant didn't know that.
      1. +1
        26 February 2019 13: 56
        Praising enemy weapons is a fairly common occurrence.
        And he wrote that the 50 native fiber absorber served for years?
    2. 0
      27 February 2019 15: 55
      Quote: Avior
      in fact, it crashed very quickly in real conditions and the accuracy of the fire fell sharply.

      Replacement was made from improvised means. If there was no rubber, shafts of boots, for example, were used.
  11. +4
    26 February 2019 09: 12
    Probably, in our instruction it was also written that we should not hold to the store. But for what then did this “automaton” have to keep in front?

    But to read the instruction is not fate? Just at PPSh deduction for store was allowed.
    1. 0
      26 February 2019 09: 27
      Yes, it was allowed. But in any case, the store is better not to stick.
      1. +6
        26 February 2019 17: 32
        Quote: kalibr
        Yes, it was allowed. But in any case, the store is better not to stick.

        This is your personal opinion, and the instruction offered two whole ways of holding the store.
  12. +3
    26 February 2019 09: 34
    And I liked the sight on the 500 m. I didn’t know such a sight on the PS. Of course, it was hardly possible to conduct targeted shooting at such a distance. But my first teacher of fire training at a military school managed to hit targets from TT on 200-250 meters. The holes in the targets were not sharp, the bullet was already losing stability. The PCA has a longer barrel, so you can shoot 500 m. So the Fritz could not feel calm and at 500 meters.
    1. +2
      26 February 2019 17: 30
      PPSh-41 has a barrel length of 270 mm. The range of a bullet is 800 m. So it could have pierced his head at 500 m. A bullet holes in wooden targets only from the bullets of the Nagan revolver - he has blunt bullets. And the boards are stitched, like blunt nails, without breaking them. All animated bullets come in smoothly, and when they exit, they spill wood chips.
      1. +1
        26 February 2019 19: 15
        I could not break through. At such a firing distance, an error in determining the range of 10% yielded a deviation in height of up to 2 m. So even 45asr flight range per kilometer. Shooting at such ranges of 7.62x25 is nothing more than a lottery.
    2. Alf
      0
      26 February 2019 22: 18
      Quote: glory1974
      The holes in the targets were not cool

      And what holes were obtained in the deutsche gold ...
  13. 0
    26 February 2019 09: 55
    For its reliability and good quality workmanship in some countries still stands in service.
  14. +5
    26 February 2019 09: 59
    Nk about "threw the MP and took the PPSh" It's like a bust. The fiber as a shock absorber broke quickly, they were pritenzii to this. As well as fitting the disks, here you run and the fallen one grabbed a couple more but did not use it, only when he sat down and on vacation he sawed, adjusted the disk to his copy, then it was possible to use it. The bulk of the claims to the manufacture of steel is poor anti-corrosion treatment. The rain passed and it is once-and covered with a raid, but then because of the haste and simplicity, if we say to make it okay and process it, it's generally candy. By the way, now I watched the interview of the Afghan commander, they took the PPSh as a trophy, I shot a grit, very pleasant and comfortable for shooting car is no kickback.
    1. +1
      26 February 2019 10: 52
      Currently, PPSh are sold in weapons stores, like hunting carbines, converted to single shooting.
      1. 0
        26 February 2019 10: 56
        and cartridge-s? 7.62on 25? what kind of carabiner will it be? toko hare and capercaillie
    2. 0
      26 February 2019 20: 30
      In the NVP lessons, in our school there was a machine gun PPSh 1942 of the year of release. There was a shock absorber textolite. For the first time in this article I read about fiber.
      1. 0
        26 February 2019 21: 56
        Christopher Shant has it written - "parchment leather", and this is fiber - "leather for suitcases."
        1. 0
          26 February 2019 22: 11
          Well, I personally saw the textolite. What Shant saw is unknown to me.
        2. -1
          26 February 2019 22: 55
          you're wrong
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Фибра_(материал)
          Fiber (from lat. Fibra - fiber) - a material made by impregnating several layers of base paper with a concentrated solution of zinc chloride (less often a solution of sulfuric acid and calcium rhodanide) and subsequent pressing. Fiber (marks FT, FE, FSV, FP, FPK, GKF, FKDG) is a pressed cardboard made from a mixture of cellulose and wood pulp, impregnated with zinc chloride or calcium chloride [1]. Available in black and unpainted sheets.

          hi
          1. 0
            27 February 2019 18: 27
            What you posted here from Wiki can, of course, be called fiber. Actually, this is getinaks - paper impregnated with phenol-formaldehyde resin. The thing is good, but it does not tolerate shock loads. And textolite is a cotton fabric impregnated with the same resin, in appearance it is very different from getinaks, and its impact strength is higher.
            1. 0
              28 February 2019 13: 39
              the answer is incorrect. have you ever seen fiber?
              Are you a techie actually?
              it is forgivable to the caliber, he is not a techie, but a techie is unforgivable.
              it is not impregnated with resin, like getinaks or textolite.
              which is what the quote says.
              impregnation of several layers of base paper with a concentrated solution of zinc chloride (less often a solution of sulfuric acid and calcium thiocyanate) and subsequent pressing.
              1. 0
                28 February 2019 16: 41
                Quote: Avior
                and about fiber- so is compressed paper impregnated with special chemistry and has never been leather or rubber.

                And I mean the same - see the answer. Why are the words in quotation marks given? "Parchment Leather"? The article should be more informative than one source, otherwise it is ... "bad work". But to read out the entire list ... And over there in the articles about the knights he began to give literature. Do you know what they write to me? "Why? Nobody will watch anyway!"
                1. 0
                  1 March 2019 08: 47
                  the author, whose authority you referred to, has no quotation marks.
                  he directly writes that there was rubber, which was replaced with leather.
                  Which clearly does not correspond to reality and contradicts the known information about the reliability of shock absorbers.
                  1. 0
                    1 March 2019 09: 02
                    Sergey, what's wrong with you? Are you trying to prove that? I, I took it in quotes. Not Shant. And he has parchment skin, and this is fiber. Well, how else to tell you? Translation such !!!!!!
                    1. -1
                      1 March 2019 09: 11
                      it’s not a matter of translation, the question is important.
                      The real shock absorber was made of fiber, and in practice it quickly crashed under military conditions, which significantly affected the accuracy of the fire, so many PPSh actually used in the troops had accuracy that was far from that given in the manuals and even when testing the samples.
                      And from your text and links to sources, we can conclude that the shock absorber was so reliable that it worked for 50 years.
                      In my opinion, this is an important issue in assessing PCA that cannot be avoided.
                      But I will not argue further, I accept "parchment leather for suitcases."
                      drinks
                      hi
              2. 0
                28 February 2019 20: 42
                I remember fiber suitcases in childhood. Have you seen getinax with textolite? And did the entrails of the PCA touch?
                1. 0
                  1 March 2019 08: 37
                  saw.
                  in PPSh costs fiber
                  and what they put in there 40-60 years after the war, who knows?
      2. 0
        27 February 2019 12: 14
        There was fiber. It was quickly breaking it.
  15. +2
    26 February 2019 10: 28
    As for the application, the question is complicated, I’ll say what my grandfather said, having passed more than one war. He came across a bomber in the fall of 41, the reconnaissance group received a new bomber weapon, went on a raid, returned and abandoned, they said return the carbines to us. It was simple, they faced the Germans with armed rifles and ate away, the Germans did not give them a distance of 150 m, if they could break away from them. PP is good only in close combat, and if the distance is, then a carbine.
    1. -2
      26 February 2019 10: 59
      Yes, I read a lot that they went back to the reviewer and handed over the PPSh back, in FIG. You need. The river won by force, jumped out of the water and shot an automatic rifle. Doesn’t shoot. And there are a lot of such cases. It’s more reliable. It’s necessary to train and a new weapon, although scouts are not just infantry-in-arms understood.
  16. The comment was deleted.
    1. +2
      26 February 2019 12: 52
      3. Trajectory persistence, these are the third-rate indicators for army and hunting small arms
      indicator directly on the effective firing range
      4. Accuracy depends on the shooting skills and accuracy of fire weapons, and not from the N / s bullet.
      in theory, all this is so .... but the lower the initial speed, the steeper the trajectory, the more edits you need to make. A simple shooter does not have a rangefinder in his pocket, accurate weather data and a ballistic calculator.
      The PP is usually limited to 100 m. What's next, nobody cares.
      "If you want to live, you will not be so rash" © such a borderline is fair now, when PPs occupied the niche of exclusively police-auxiliary weapons, but in World War II there were no mass submachine guns for an intermediate cartridge, and the main personal weapon was a bolt rifle, so PPs of those times It was necessary to solve tasks of combined arms assault weapons, and here the effective range of fire decides a lot, every additional 2 meters gives a huge tactical advantage.
      The effective destruction range (DEP) of the PPSh due to the sports cartridge unsuitable for the army was only about 35 m
      absolutely already gesture, maybe they’ve made a mistake?
      1. 0
        26 February 2019 23: 16
        Not quite true statement. The steepness of a bullet’s flight does not always depend on speed. There are a lot of facts influencing the weight of the projectile (bullet), brisk step, etc. Here it would be appropriate to compare the ratio of the ascending and descending trajectory. The effective shooting distance for each type of target is different, of course the trajectory flatness has an effect, but the speed and energy of the bullet at the target are of primary importance. 7.62x25 beat competitors up to 100m, but lost a lot in terminal ballistics, over 100m its performance was worse than that of 9x19. Accordingly, he had no tactical gain in effective fire range. hi
  17. +2
    26 February 2019 12: 01
    Quote: dds
    some kind of left german

    He is an Englishman...
  18. +2
    26 February 2019 12: 02
    Quote: dds
    The bullet was from the TT cartridge. Mauser bullet was caliber 7,63 mm.

    It is the same...
  19. +6
    26 February 2019 12: 05
    I will allow myself a few comments. To begin with, rusty weapons, even from water pipes, are unsuitable for use in hostilities. Therefore, in all the armies of the world at all times, including today, weapons are cleaned and lubricated.
    As for the understanding that mass armies would need a lot of weapons and the process should be simplified and made cheaper, came long before 1938, including the Germans, including the Erma company, which was puzzled by the problem in 1931, having created by 1936 year ЕМР-36.

    Here, the tree was gone, and a folding metal stock appeared, and the barrel cover was missing. Well, then the MP-38 and MP-40 already went. By the way, with the advent of the MP-38, "precise and complex milling of parts, as well as varnished wooden parts with a high-quality coating" did not remain in the past, as the receiver, the receiver neck and the return spring guide tubes were made using exclusively milling, and the linings the pistol grips of the first MP-38s were made of high-quality varnished wood. In short, the Germans decided that the submachine gun was complicated and expensive and took up further improvements that led to the MP-40.
    1. +6
      26 February 2019 12: 26
      MP-40 - rough and iron. It was necessary to hold him when firing for the textolite pad in front of the store receiver and nothing else.

      This is a photograph from Luftwaffe D (Luft) 5602. This is roughly the same as what we call the "Manual on Shooting", that is, an official document. Pay attention to the workmanship.
      5 different versions of this guide have been published. All focus in this manual is on teaching the "schütze" (arrow). In addition to more general paragraphs such as a description of the weapon, this manual also explains how to carry the weapon in various positions and, most importantly, how to learn how to fire. The manual was intended for the officers responsible for training.
      So the version about the "testolite patch" is another meme, born by Internet experts, like compensation with a bayonet for derivation and the like.
      1. +7
        26 February 2019 12: 30

        This is from the same Luftwaffe D (Luft) 5602.
    2. +8
      26 February 2019 12: 47
      And a little more about "manufacturability".

      The first MP-38s were equipped with such folding barrel plugs that prevented its pollution.
      1. +2
        26 February 2019 22: 21
        Thanks, Victor. For me, this detail is news. But a condom seems to be cheaper and ... for all occasions. wink
        1. +3
          26 February 2019 22: 31

          The Germans obviously also came to this conclusion, since this stub was issued for a very short time.
          1. +1
            26 February 2019 23: 07
            Well, tell me ... straight and no words! good
    3. +3
      26 February 2019 14: 43
      Quote: Decimam
      As for the understanding that mass armies would need a lot of weapons and the process should be simplified and made cheaper, came long before 1938, including the Germans, including the Erma company, which was puzzled by the problem in 1931, having created by 1936 year ЕМР-36.

      EMP-36 is far from the "pipe" EMP-44
      1. +2
        26 February 2019 14: 55
        This weapon was created as part of the Primitiv-Waffen-Program, which appeared under the influence of the British "Stan" and did not go beyond the experimental samples.
      2. +1
        26 February 2019 20: 14
        Quote: igordok
        Quote: Decimam
        As for the understanding that mass armies would need a lot of weapons and the process should be simplified and made cheaper, came long before 1938, including the Germans, including the Erma company, which was puzzled by the problem in 1931, having created by 1936 year ЕМР-36.

        EMP-36 is far from the "pipe" EMP-44

        I met the MG-42 with a triangle of thick wire instead of bipods - this is what reflected in childhood, then (at 68 or 69) we dug up a whole warehouse in Krampnitsa, and what other simplifications were, one can only guess.
    4. +2
      26 February 2019 14: 58
      model MP-38/40
      Such a model never existed. Another online sample. There were models MP-38 and MP-40.
    5. +1
      26 February 2019 22: 18
      Quite right about milling, straight from the tongue. There (MP-38) on the receiver there were still longitudinal grooves, either for relief, or for greater rigidity. By the way, the "bolt-blocker bolt" was quite enough on the MP-38, but on the MP-40 I never noticed it. We had a dozen of them in our department, three or four of both models. hi
  20. 0
    26 February 2019 13: 07
    1. It was recommended to hold MP-38/40 for the forend of textolite or for the neck of the store.
    2. The rate of fire at the MP-38/40 - 400 rds / min. PPD-34/38 has 800 rds / min. At ppd-40 - 1000 rds / min. PPSh-41 - 1000 rds / min
  21. +4
    26 February 2019 13: 09
    If you look closely at the MP-40, you can clearly see that the store’s receiver is made in the form of a handle, and you had to hold on to it, which, in principle, the Germans did. The most near-by ...
  22. 0
    26 February 2019 14: 14
    Dear author, why didn’t the domestic PPs turn into ersatz-assault rifles, because, in principle, they were close in the PPSh-2 and PP Kalashnikov variants, where due to shifting the breech bar and using a folding butt, it was possible to go beyond the PPSh envelope lengthen the barrel. Not 250 like the PPSh-41, but 400 like the AK-47, then the TT bullet would have hit much further than the PPSh-41 and PPS-43, approaching the distances of Sturmgever. It was also possible to make the TT cartridge more long-range, making it a bullet not pointed, but pointed. That would have been ready in time of war a cheap domestic analogue of Sturmgever.
    1. 0
      26 February 2019 16: 34
      I have never read that such a question was raised ...
      1. +3
        26 February 2019 18: 36
        rose, experiments were conducted for 41-42, there was a competition for a self-loading carbine under the TT cartridge, samples of Main, Simonov, Degtyarev, Korovin, Slostin were tested. The work was stopped at the end of the 42nd, having received the quite expected conclusion that the barrel extension to 400mm with the CT cartridge did not significantly raise the ballistics, therefore, these standard samples have no significant range advantages over standard PPs.
        1. 0
          26 February 2019 21: 52
          I do not doubt your awareness, but I would be grateful for the indication of the source. I have never come across this mention ...
          1. +2
            26 February 2019 22: 15
            magazine "kalashnikov" 3-2015, article by Ulanov "Carabiner Main or PDW in Soviet style"
            https://www.kalashnikov.ru/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Kalashnikov-2015_03.pdf
            article by R.N. Chumak "At the very beginning. History of domestic machines"
            https://www.kalashnikov.ru/v-samom-nachale-istoriya-otechestvennyh-avtomatov/
            Well, so to speak, for expanding the horizons regarding the history of weapons under the TT cartridge - light machine guns for it - https://www.kalashnikov.ru/medialibrary/2e5/ne-vpisavshisya.pdf
            https://www.kalashnikov.ru/pulemyotnaya-drama-krasnoj-armii/
            1. +1
              26 February 2019 22: 48
              Yes, catching up, touching directly on the topic of the PPSh and its military edition, I think this article will be of interest to you Ulanov "had to be cleaned with a file"
              https://www.kalashnikov.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/kalashnikov_2014_05_site.pdf
              1. +1
                27 February 2019 08: 13
                Thank you very much! I usually read this magazine, but this is something that has passed by. Thanks again!
            2. 0
              26 March 2019 16: 16
              Thanks for the links to very interesting articles!
    2. Alf
      +2
      26 February 2019 22: 26
      Quote: Hastatus
      It was also possible to make the TT cartridge more long-range, making it a bullet not pointed, but pointed.

      Can you imagine what it means in war time to launch a new cartridge in a series? If they had, then they would not be asked such questions. An intermediate cartridge was invented in 1943, but until the end of the war they were not allowed to go into series. Replace BASIC ammunition during the war ...
      1. -1
        27 February 2019 00: 13
        Quote: Alf
        An intermediate cartridge was invented in 1943, but until the end of the war they were not allowed to go into series.

        You are absolutely right. In December 1943, the first batch of cartridges with a lead-core bullet (this cartridge was assigned the index 57-H-231) was tested at the test site. After some refinement, in March 1944 the production of a pilot batch of 7,62 mm rounds of arr. 1943 g. The original version of the cartridge had a sleeve 41 mm long and a bullet with a lead core without a rear cone and with a short warhead. In 1944, after receiving the first test results, work began on improving the cartridge in order to increase its accuracy and penetration.
        By mid-1947, all the shortcomings noted in the tests for the cartridge arr. 1943 with an ordinary bullet were eliminated, and the GAU decided to manufacture a series of cartridges and prototypes of weapons for military tests. Adopted in 1949. hi
      2. 0
        26 March 2019 16: 17
        And before it was impossible? At the end of the 30s, for example.
  23. +7
    26 February 2019 14: 52
    Especially for the author, not a frame but a sector sight! It was used at the beginning of production. Then he was replaced by a loose-leaf. Cheaper and more technological in the conditions of total war!
  24. +2
    26 February 2019 15: 01
    and a high rate of fire was advantageous in that when firing at a target at a distance using the horizontal movement of the barrel, it was less likely to be in the “fork” of the trajectories.
    I would like to see from the author a clear explanation of this revelation.
    1. -1
      26 February 2019 16: 31
      And do not hope, this explanation is not for weak minds. We need to think long and hard about it, looking at how the stars Sad-hell Zabih confront the planet Jupiter, and only then can the whole depth of this revelation be grasped. And if without laughter, then what to explain? And so everything is clear!
      1. +1
        26 February 2019 17: 20
        Well, if it's clear, give a definition to the term "fork in the trajectory".
        Is this the place where the bullet thinks where to fly?
        1. -1
          26 February 2019 17: 27
          Photo Churchill seen? Where does he make V fingers? This is the fork in the road!
          1. +2
            26 February 2019 17: 29
            Well, if Churchill himself ...
    2. 0
      27 February 2019 16: 52
      Quote: Decimam
      clear explanation of this revelation

      Yes, it seems clear. The line goes more often. Intervals between hits less. But this more likely applies to machine guns and relatively large distances.
      And I myself wonder why the Germans on the MG-34 stopped putting the pace slowers, and on the MG-42 they even bent 1200 rounds per minute. If you think about it, then at high-speed shooting from a stable position with low recoil, you should get better accuracy, because less time for exposure to weapons of external factors. And the PPSh, judging by the instruction and design (a 500-meter sector sight, a rifle butt, a capacious but inconvenient store), initially just meant shooting from the stop. In his instruction, and statistics on the defeat of various targets up to 500 meters spelled out very optimistic for such weapons. As for the other use, the scouts scolded him, the paratroopers scolded with tanks. Uncomfortable when shooting and carrying the handle, butt and store. Vulnerability and low reliability of the store, plus rumbling cartridges. High consumption of ammunition. Extremely inadequate handling safety - accidental shots when hitting hard surfaces when carrying (tank armor, for example). In general, it actually turns out some kind of ersatz of a light machine gun. With machine gun troubles, like a high rate of fire.
      1. +1
        27 February 2019 17: 04
        And how does "frequent line" relate to the concept of "fork in the path"?
        If by your "frequent line" we mean the rate of fire, that is, the technical rate of fire of automatic weapons, then how can this be connected with the concept of "fork" - the forked end of something?
        When you explain, refer to some sources.
        As for the machine gun, its task is to provide the necessary density of fire. And to make this fire effective at such a rate of fire, the machine gun is put on a machine tool or on a bipod.
        1. +1
          28 February 2019 12: 09
          Quote: Decimam
          And how does "frequent line" relate to the concept of "fork in the path"?

          The author wrote a "fork" of the trajectories. What is a fork? Forked end. When you drive with the barrel, the target is in a "fork". Those. the target is between two hits. In my opinion, in order not to understand what the author wanted to say, you have to be either a robot or a foreigner. Or just want to find fault with at least something.
          Quote: Decimam
          When you explain, refer to some sources.

          What's the point? People who understand the sources do not have such questions. Those who need clarity and order are not reading articles on VO, but instructions, some "sergeant's textbooks", etc.
          Quote: Decimam
          As for the machine gun, its task is to provide the necessary density of fire.

          Nevertheless, the rate of fire of different machine guns differs significantly.
          Quote: Decimam
          And to make this fire effective at such a rate of fire, the machine gun is put on a machine tool or on a bipod.

          PPSh and PPD have a low recoil and an aiming range of 2-3 times less. You can get by shooting from the stop. Plus a drum shop and a rifle box. It seems that in this way the pre-war project was forced through the generals and ministers so that a military order appeared, lines were established at the plants and production began. Under the pretext that the PPD, and then the PCA are capable in some cases play the role of a light machine gun.
          1. 0
            28 February 2019 12: 25
            Thanks for the fun. "Target between two hits" is a masterpiece. I realized that with regard to weapons you have a "forked end" level, so I no longer distract you. All the best.
  25. +3
    26 February 2019 15: 05
    German MP-38 for all time produced only in the amount of about one million!
    About 38 German MP-40s were produced. And another nine hundred sixty thousand author sucked from the finger (of the Internet).
    1. -1
      26 February 2019 16: 26
      These data are given in all books of K. Shant. What do I have - for every number and fact give a link to the book and page?
      1. +4
        26 February 2019 17: 18
        Why, Vyacheslav Olegovich. It's just that the numbers are checked against other sources. At least you can specify - "from different sources." Shant is not a Bundesarchiv.
  26. 0
    26 February 2019 15: 19
    Quote: Huumi
    Garbage, at a distance of under 100 meters, a bullet 7.62 loses all its advantage. More than 100 meters of steam9 the bullet is already in gain. The bullet is heavier and flies more stable - here is a debriefing of ammunition on the site. Yes, and eyewitnesses who fought with PPSh no "marvelous" range for They did not notice the shooting. It was possible to beat more accurately, this is yes only by switching the fire mode to single. then a good shooter won with the PPSh. there is no recoil, single good accuracy was


    But the veteran who stormed Koenigsberg said that they could shoot Germans from 500 meters ... So you fell a little into a puddle ...
    1. +7
      26 February 2019 19: 19
      Quote: Dzafdet
      But the veteran who stormed Koenigsberg said that they could shoot Germans from 500 meters ... So you fell a little into a puddle ...

      But the results of the post-war field tests speak somewhat more.

      Actually what do they usually stress when comparing MP40 and PPSh? The range of a direct shot - it usually looks like this - our soldiers could shoot at 300 meters and the Germans at 200, Wow, what an advantage!
      And if you drop the cheers-patriotic husk and look at it impartially?
      We open the 3-volume monograph by Dvoryaninov "Fighting cartridges of small arms" and look at the summary table of the cartridges used in the PP in WWII, the tables give data in relation to the PPSh and MP40

      And what do we see? DPV on the thoracic target in PPSh 219m in MP40 200m - what are the differences of 100 meters on the fix?
      the following - and what exactly do we have in addition to the direct-shot range? right, accuracy (dispersion). We all know from books that due to the greater weight and carabiner lodge, the PPSh was much more crowded - but in fact? We look at the report of 1945. for testing German pistol cartridges with surrogate and conventional bullets - on the one hand the brand new MP-40s on the other are the same PPSh - see table


      at 300 meters, the dispersion diameter for MP40 is 72 cm and for PPSh 100 cm
      Actually, it is easy to guess that the MP40 loses a little in terms of RPA in terms of RPA but it wins quite a bit in terms of accuracy, in principle, you can calculate the range of effective use, but there isn’t much point in it, and it’s clear that in both samples it will be about the same, 200 meters with a slight plus.
      Another plus that is usually mentioned is the breaking through of obstacles - if we consider obstacles of medium hardness - wood, earth - then the TT cartridge has an advantage at all ranges, but if we consider solid obstacles - brick, metal - then everything is not so simple, the fact is that since 1938 Pistol cartridges Pist.Patrone 08 mE with "surrogate" bullets begin to arrive in the Wehrmacht. with a steel core, by the end of the 42nd year, these cartridges make up the lion's share of the produced cartridges 08. And here everything is much more interesting, in May 1943 tests of the steel shell PZ-ZIF-20 were carried out, as a result of full-scale shooting, it turned out that the shell holds a bullet 08 from lead core from MP 38 from 20 meters, bullet "P" of the TT cartridge from PPD from 75 meters and bullet 08ME from the same MP38 only from 115 meters.
      1. +4
        26 February 2019 21: 49
        Such comments are welcome ...
      2. -1
        26 February 2019 23: 01
        your post should be inserted into the headings of all discussions on PP and sent out to those who argue about "the best PP of the Second World War".
        A lot of controversy would be dropped hi
      3. +1
        27 February 2019 00: 40
        Great post!

        The epigraph may be:
        "Walk less, read more" (C) Boutros Boutros Gali
      4. +1
        27 February 2019 12: 45
        1. Data in the table for a single lamp.
        2. Not the diameter, but the radius of R100.
        3. If you have R50 data and core bands (Sv, Sat), you should not pay attention to R100. For German surrogate cartridges, the numbers R50 and SVHSb fight poorly among themselves, some strange distribution.

        For firing a burst at a moving target moving across the firing line, flight time and rate of fire are important. It will be necessary to somehow calculate the probability of a hit ...
        1. 0
          27 February 2019 18: 00
          Quote: Droid
          Data in the table for a single fire.

          Shooting from a shooting bench in three bursts of twenty shots.
          Quote: Droid
          Not the diameter, but the radius of R100.

          Yes, I agree, blinked.
          Quote: Droid
          For German surrogate cartridges, the numbers R50 and SVHSb fight poorly among themselves, some strange distribution.

          Yes, I agree, it is quite possible that the method of shooting by 300 was different than by 100 and 200.
          1. 0
            27 February 2019 20: 17
            Quote: gross kaput
            Shooting from a shooting bench in three bursts of twenty shots.

            By line here is meant a series of 20 single shots. About shooting with bursts, at that time they wrote in groups, for example, 20 rounds in groups (i.e. bursts) of 3-4.
            The dispersion data clearly show that these were just single ones, because the accuracy, even for bursts of 3-4 shots, is prohibitively good. Actually, Dvoryaninov, in parentheses, says so - "judging by the results - single shots"
      5. 0
        27 February 2019 18: 11
        Quote: gross kaput
        at 300 meters, the dispersion diameter for MP40 is 72 cm and for PPSh 100 cm

        Is that all? Few. It is necessary to take PPSh NSD and compare with MP40 NSD. There should be tables of corrections and excesses. Derivation, correction for wind, for movement, for the height of the target relative to the shooter, for temperature (when shooting single at 300m, it is also needed). The smaller the corrections, the better the cartridge. If we take naked accuracy from the machine, then in this way Thompson and .45 can even get out of our lead. Here, somehow, the comrades in the comments tried to prove that this is generally the best WWII software, because he has the best accuracy.
        1. +2
          27 February 2019 20: 49
          Quote: brn521
          There should be tables of corrections and excesses.

          I will upset you, the Germans did not suffer such henna in relation to the PP, PP weapons of the "last 200 meters" in battle at such ranges are not up to derivation and exceeding, therefore only the most general data on ballistics are given in the German NSD

          .Yes and we began to include such tables in the NSD for software only after the war.
          Actually, to compare the PP by excesses-derivations-flight time is stupid and meaningless - because everything will be about the same there - for example
          Quote: Droid
          flight time
          bullets "P" from PPSh at 200 meters will be 0,55 sec and from MP-40 bullet "Me" 0,64 sec.
          It is not the plates that need to be evaluated, but the "iron", the dispersion of bullets in the queue (accuracy of auto fire), the number of cartridges in the magazine (time of continuous fire), the reliability of operation, the convenience and speed of aiming, the speed of changing the magazine, the mass of weapons and wearable ammunition, the filling time spare magazines, convenience and control when firing from unstable positions, etc. those parameters that play a decisive role in typical for PP application scenarios - combat at close distances from 200 to hand-to-hand combat. Actually, we realized this already by the 42nd year, when more and more often in the test program of domestic and captured weapons, in addition to tests for accuracy / reliability / penetration action, tests simulating real combat situations began to be included, and often, in these tests, seemingly clear in terms of performance characteristics things were turned upside down.
          As an example, experiments with AVT - a seemingly unnecessary and harmful automatic mode suddenly "played" in the scenario of repelling an attack, or a LAD machine gun chambered for a TT - like an idiotic concept - but with the same repulse of an attack, the LAD "fired" the PPSh at 10 times in the percentage of hits by 1,5 times, while the LAD had an advantage over the DP and in the mass of the loaded ammunition and, if possible, conduct a much longer continuous fire until the barrel overheats.
          1. 0
            28 February 2019 13: 32
            Quote: gross kaput
            It is not necessary to evaluate the tablets, but the "hardware"

            Evaluation always starts with an NSD.
            Quote: gross kaput
            therefore, in the German "NSD" only the most general data on ballistics are given

            The Americans, in my opinion, do not even have that. Bourgeois could afford to produce targeted weapons. But we are not. We have a new production line of PP meant that it will be released less than other, more important weapons, which are constantly lacking. Before the war, we expanded our reserves, created new warehouses, but could not fill them. Of course, that the PP for the Germans was only a target toy, while we tried to get the most out of it. Throughout the war, PPSh produced armor-piercing incendiary cartridges. By the middle of the war, tracers were also added. After the war, the relay was intercepted by other countries. For example, automatic 7,62x25 began to appear with a reinforced hitch. And PPSh normally consumed them.
            Quote: gross kaput
            Actually, we understood this by the 42nd year

            And they reflected the result in the instruction of 46 years. At the end of the war, the PPSh became the main infantry weapon and remained with it until the advent of the AKM. Not like at the beginning of the war, a company of reserve machine gunners and all. Yes, and she was armed with rifles, because did not deliver either PPSh or cartridges to it.
            Quote: gross kaput
            As an example, experiments with AVT - seemingly unnecessary and harmful auto mode suddenly "played" in the scenario of repelling an attack

            Yes, he "played" before. The only natural question arose was where to get the cartridges for all these scenarios. After all, it was not about a one-time action, but about regular use.
            Quote: gross kaput
            those parameters that play a decisive role in typical application scenarios for PP - close range combat from 200 to hand-to-hand combat.

            In the case of PPSh - 300 meters. Shooting with all pending amendments reflected in the NSD. Reduce to 200 meters - the same as leaving for AKM 350 m.
            Quote: gross kaput
            but with the same repulse of the attack, the LAD "fired" the PPSh in time by 10 times, the percentage of hits by 1,5 times

            But at the same time, he himself ceased to be a PP. He weighed without tape like a PCA with an equipped disk magazine. And the sizes are bigger. In the end, such weapons became all the more irrelevant. Why should 1-2 under-gunners with LAD in the company, if it is possible to arm the entire company with PPSh and get a much greater increase in efficiency? And armed.
            1. 0
              26 March 2019 17: 10
              automatic 7,62x25 with reinforced hitch

              And how much power, speed and range of the cartridge increased? A typical TT like 500 J and 500 m / s.
          2. +1
            1 March 2019 14: 32
            Actually, the hands reached the calculations.
            The initial data was taken for the PCA from the NSD.
            At 200 m:
            1. Flight time 0,54 s
            2. Demolition by a crosswind of 1,5 m / s (error) 0,225 m
            3. The tangent of the angle of incidence of the bullet = 0,0075, which for an error of 10% range gives 0,15 m vertical deviation.
            For the MP-40 at 200 m, the trajectory had to be counted on a calculator based on the initial 390 m / s and flight time 0,64 s.
            1. Flight time 0,64 s
            2. Demolition by a crosswind of 1,5 m / s (error) 0,186 m
            3. The tangent of the angle of incidence of the bullet = 0,0109, which for an error of 10% range gives 0,22 m vertical deviation.
            Dispersion for a queue of 5 shots is the same SEC = 0,66 m.
            Point error 1 thousandth (0,2 m)
            Rate of fire MP-40 400 v / m, PPSh 1000 v / m.

            Shooting on the chest, target number 6
            Chance to hit:
            PPSH - 0,4
            MP-40 - 0,385
            The difference is 1,04 times, i.e. within the margin of error.

            Shooting on the running, target No. 8a, moving across the firing line at a speed of V = 3 m / s
            Chance to hit:
            PPSH - 0,52
            MP-40 - 0,382
            The difference is 1,36 times.

            Shooting on the running, target No. 8a, moving across the firing line at a speed of V = 5 m / s
            Chance to hit:
            PPSH - 0,4
            MP-40 - 0,271
            The difference is 1,48 times.
            1. 0
              1 March 2019 21: 53
              Quote: Droid
              For MP-40 at 200 m, the trajectory had to be counted on a calculator

              You are the ball. what coefficient was laid for 9mm steam?
              And I forgot about the wind - at 200 a side wind of 4m / s 7,62 with a bullet P drift 55cm, 9X19 Me 48 cm
              1. +1
                2 March 2019 15: 57
                Quote: gross kaput
                You are the ball. what coefficient was laid for 9mm steam?

                G1 0,14, just for a flight time of 0,64 s.
                Quote: gross kaput
                And I forgot about the wind

                No, I didn’t forget. My wind drift is 1,5 m / s. The shooter determines the wind speed precisely with this median error, which means that the lateral correction error will be equal to a wind drift of 1,5 m / s. Actually, due to a more persistent trajectory, the vertical error (determining the range) of the PPSh is smaller, and the lateral error due to the greater wind drift is greater. It is for this reason that the probability of getting through the chest is almost equal to them.
                And when shooting at a target moving across the line of fire, the main contribution is made by the pace. Because if the core strip width is Sb = 0,66 m, then taking into account the target width, it needs to slip about 1 meter. Moving at a speed of 3 m / s, the target will slip through the Sat in 1/3 of a second, during which time 40 * 0,7/400/60 = 3 bullets from the MP-1,56 are expected to hit, and since the PPSh rate is 2,5 times higher, then this time it is expected to hit 3,9 bullets in Sat.
    2. +1
      26 February 2019 21: 31
      yeah. two hundred sight, and shot from 500.
      aimed at the casing?
      1. 0
        27 February 2019 18: 20
        Quote: Avior
        yeah. two hundred sight, and shot from 500.
        aimed at the casing?

        Normal PPSh has a sector sight at 500m. And PPD too. Shooting at group targets, at airplanes, at paratroopers, etc. Moreover, unlike light and heavy machine guns, this is an individual weapon, and a company of machine gunners is able to provide a monstrous density of fire. With the overrun of cartridges, of course, but at the end of the war it is uncritical. In addition, the story of the surrender of Singapore to the Japanese illustrates that overspending is perfectly acceptable if the enemy is eventually demoralized.
        1. 0
          27 February 2019 23: 28
          Quote: brn521
          Normal PPSh has a sector sight at 500m.

          And how many were released? these "normal PCA"? Maybe it is worth considering what was actually produced in mass quantities and what really fought with?
          Normal PPSh should shoot a cartridge with a brass sleeve, a bullet weighing 5,45-5,7 g with a bimetallic shell and a weight of 0,48-0,52 g of gunpowder P45, with R50 not more than 5 cm per 25 meters.
          In fact, in the Great Patriotic War, cartridges were produced according to wartime standards with casings up to uncoated steel, with brass-plated or zinc-plated bullet casings, with gunpowders from P45 simplified fabrication to small-scale P220 and wartime viscose powder, with huge scatter and pressure and on the initial speed and accuracy of fire. PPSh were riveted by a dozen enterprises, with different quality, but almost all manufacturers did not reach the "normal PPSh" quality, which was also superimposed on the generic ailments of the PPSh - too short a bolt stroke, which entailed a high rate and low survivability of the reciprocating mainspring.
          Actually, if history had given the PCA at least a year of peacetime for working out mass production, identifying all childhood diseases and their treatment, then perhaps there would not have been a 42nd competition for a new PC. Well, in fact, the PPSh was scolded until the end of the 43rd year, constantly modifying the design precisely in terms of simplifying and reducing the cost and increasing reliability and survivability, one overhead rear sight was modernized three times, the bolt box was reinforced two times - the last most noticeable and radical enhancement, the so-called "ears "around the shop window - due to the deformation thereof, the consequence of which was not feeding and sticking, and the reason is banal - the fighters often used the PPSh with a disc as a stool, it was useless to fight this - they had to strengthen it.
          Why am I doing this? and besides that it is stupid to compare what "should have been" needs to be compared with what was, I therefore do not see the point in citing figures from the late post-war (64g) comparative tests of AK / AKM with PPSh / PPS - simply because PPSh were used in them post-war release, with cartridges of the same post-war release made according to normal CD.
          PS Somewhere materials on comparative tests of PPSh / PPS / MP40 from 1942 came across somewhere, I just can’t remember where request .
          1. 0
            28 February 2019 13: 45
            Quote: gross kaput
            And how many were released? these "normal PCA"?

            It's not about how many released them. The point is their quality. PPSh with a sectoral scope of the early releases were high enough to go through the whole war and take part in the assault on Koenigsberg, with 500m firing at group targets and equipment.
            Quote: gross kaput
            In fact, under the conditions of the Second World War, cartridges were issued according to the standards of wartime

            PPSh is not a sniper rifle. For him, the low quality of ammunition means only an increased consumption of ammunition. In addition, by the time of the Koenigsberg assault, our industry was on its feet evenly enough to produce cartridges in compliance with technical specifications and even return to original standards.
        2. 0
          28 February 2019 13: 40
          only the first.
          then they quickly realized the meaninglessness and made a cross over 100-200 m.
          and at first, even at the beloved Mauser, the commissars made a sight for almost a kilometer
          1. 0
            28 February 2019 16: 52
            Quote: Avior
            and at first, even at the beloved Mauser, the commissars made a sight for almost a kilometer

            It seems not, the full-fledged Mauser (we later ordered shortened versions from the Germans based on it) has the same 500m. But this is for large or group goals, like cavalrymen. At ordinary targets with an adjoining butt, they fired at 300m.
  27. 0
    26 February 2019 16: 36
    Quote: Decimam
    So the version about the "testolite patch" is another meme, born by Internet experts, like compensation with a bayonet for derivation and the like.

    It may well be ...
  28. -1
    26 February 2019 17: 25
    Quote: Decimam
    At least you can specify - "from different sources."

    What for?
  29. +1
    26 February 2019 17: 30
    Quote: Avior
    And he wrote that the 50 native fiber absorber served for years?

    Imagine on page 146. Small arms book. Omega, 2003
    1. 0
      26 February 2019 22: 09
      Chris Bishop Small Arms?
      Sorry, but this is a book for children.
      on page 146, he wrote that the shock absorber was rubber, and then, due to problems with the rubber, it was replaced with leather.
      that he was fiber, as you wrote, the author clearly did not know.
      A shock absorber is located behind the return spring to reduce vibration.
      when moving the shutter back. The shock absorber was made of rubber, the supply of which in wartime
      were limited. The solution was found: the shock absorber began to be made of
      parchment skin. Design
      worked. And so successful that even in the PCA of a 50-year-old
      "Age" she continues to act.

      but even he does not write that all these 50 years they shot him.

      in fact, everyone writes about this problem

      The fiber shock absorber, softening the shutter blow to the receiver in the rear position, had low survivability, which is why after the shock absorber is worn, the shutter broke the back of the box.

      https://www.armoury-online.ru/articles/smg/ru/ppsh-41/

      hi
      1. +1
        27 February 2019 08: 04
        Sergei! We have this book for children. "There" it is quite for adults. But when another is added to one, for example, of the same Bolotin, then another row ... when they are compared, the data in them are compared ... this is not for children, is it? Forgotten Weapons isn't for kids either, is it? So it should focus on the middle information level. And quotes in "quotes" just give to show exactly the opinion of the SOURCE. I, too, have not written anywhere that they have been shooting with fiber for 50 years. There are different terminology even in the designation of one subject. Example, fiber. So you just have to read carefully. And I cannot "chew" every term, concept, explain each example by referring to 2-3 sources, as well as referring to the archive every time. Reading such material will not be that uninteresting. Impossible!
        1. -1
          28 February 2019 15: 54
          I'm sorry, but your article, for example, is a level higher than the book you referred to.
          there are a lot of pictures, a minimum of text and almost no information. looking through it is interesting, but as a source of information ....
          and as for fiber, it is pressed paper impregnated with special chemistry and has never been leather or rubber. Suitcases were made from it then ....
          I still have this in my garage ...
  30. +1
    26 February 2019 19: 27
    But if there is a gun, then replacing the barrel by 25 cm and inserting the gun into the frame, we get ... semi-automatic software. In a few seconds. If the gun is fully automatic, then in real software.

    And it weighs less than 2 kg.

    1. -2
      26 February 2019 21: 36
      publicity stunt
      all the same, carry all spare parts with you.
      the same Shipka Arsenal or Scorpio
      1. 0
        27 February 2019 00: 28
        Well, they wear it like PP ...

        ... with one exception, when the PP is not needed, but the gun is needed.

        Two in one. Not for war. For short "planned" operations with more or less clear time boundaries. If the PP is not needed, you leave it at the base.
    2. +1
      26 February 2019 22: 32
      Hi, Lyudovedych! hi I then pulled a pile and imagined that if I stuck a trunk of 250 cm there, but put it on the bipod ... It will be ... It will be ... I don’t know what will happen ... It's just me, a joke. smile
      1. +1
        27 February 2019 00: 22
        IPSC has a division PCC (Pistol Caliber Carbine), with such a device (I had a silencer instead of a compensator) I took several medals last year. Thanks to the impulse silencer, which reduced the recoil to "light pushing of the kitten's paw on the shoulder", it saved time and made it possible to fire targets more accurately in less time.

        But if you shoot at a shooting range, then they can set targets at 100+ meters. Then the FAB front handle, which opens into the bipod with a button, is very handy. He fired at a distant target, with one movement put the bipod back into the handle and then fled. Very comfortably.
  31. +2
    26 February 2019 23: 03
    The front-line soldiers (more than one person) said that in the battle park, when the entire disc was released at once, the PPSh simply began to "spit" bullets in front of him. I believe that in addition to the complexity of the disk store, this reason was also taken into account when switching to a sector store.
    And with the disk, there were also such troubles as the freezing of grease in it, which made feeding cartridges impossible. They told such a case. Already after the war, around the fifties, guarding warehouses in the winter in the Siberian taiga:

    We sit at night in the guardhouse, suddenly we hear yelling in the street. They grabbed the trunks (PPSh) and exit. Young runs to us, threw a post, but there is no face on it. Petty Officer on him: Why are you stunned! And he answered: Bear, comrade bear. foreman! And he told him: You have a machine gun, for example! And young: I am a wheatgrass, but he does not shoot ... Petty Officer: Give it here! He took the PPSh, distorted, but how he would bite the butt plate on the log house! He all seventy rounds at a time and released into the night Siberian sky. Frrrrrr ... smile
    Such a story, as they say, for which he bought ... But the cartridges really froze. The Americans, and in hot climates shops pounded themselves on helmets.
    Thanks to the author. There is something to read, someone to listen to, and shake yourself. hi
    1. +1
      27 February 2019 00: 30
      The men probably immediately felt warm in their pants. About ten minutes.

      laughing

      Frrrrrr ...


      What did the witch say?
      1. +1
        27 February 2019 20: 41
        And hell knows, history is silent. This is most likely the case when both "bears are safe and hands are alive", only the watch's pants need to be washed. laughing
        1. +1
          27 February 2019 22: 55
          After the PCA, fucked up on a blockhouse, he himself shot off his entire disk - his pants were wet for everyone who was nearby and even ... for the witch!

          wassat
          1. +2
            27 February 2019 22: 59
            My friend, with all the pants, even the bear, I agree, besides the foremen. Such "chests" are simply indestructible and human emotions are not peculiar to them. Old school, even if not a front-line soldier, then more than five years in the SA - it's expensive. drinks
            1. 0
              27 February 2019 23: 04
              I wonder how such a front-line soldier (with PPSh about a log house) survived to Victory.

              This draws on the Darwin Prize and the wartime penal battalion.

              hi
              1. +1
                27 February 2019 23: 05
                And there were few of them, especially after liters of drunk? laughing
  32. +2
    26 February 2019 23: 13
    However, at some plants PPSh were equipped with such framework sights.

    Such sights are called sectorial. The framework looks different. Take a look:



    The original brake-compensator in the form of an oblique cut of the trunk - created a memorable and recognizable image of this weapon.

    Well, the cut is still fortunately not the trunk but the casing. The trunk there is quite ordinary :)

    And thanks for the article, I liked it anyway!
    1. +1
      27 February 2019 07: 53
      Thank you for noticing. "Well, the cut is, fortunately, not of the barrel but of the casing. The barrel there is quite an ordinary" Eye "is blurred" when you write a lot. You see one thing, you read another ...
  33. +1
    27 February 2019 03: 57
    Quote: Avior
    Sorry, but you have passed from the refutation of one myth to another.
    The Germans initially had 7,63 * 25 Mauser - the very one with which the TT cartridge was made.
    But they chose 9mm, quite rightly, by the way, the best balance between persistence and the stopping effect important for close combat at that time.
    And the post-war history of the PP only confirmed their choice.


    You mixed up warm with soft and dumped everything to a heap.
    - Initially, the Germans adopted 9 × 19 mm Steam as an army pistol cartridge. Together with the well-known pistol model, essno. It was long before the 1st MV, and then, in principle, no one thought about PP for the army.
    - When the Germans did seriously think about the PP, they naturally chose the proven army pistol cartridge for the PP. Actually, this was the original idea. The result was something that did not suit the military too much, but turned out to be quite suitable for the police.
    - But since the best, at the same time cheap and massive up to the 2nd MV, was never invented, during the next world meat grinder, it was necessary to use PP to solve the problem of high density of fire at relatively short distances. And the 7,62 × 25 mm TT was clearly the most successful for this. Simply because of the greater effective range of fire, "this is a medical fact." Inspired by this fact, the Germans even tried to copy the tactics of using the PP by the Red Army, but they did it worse than ours. Unlike the 9 × 19 mm Para, the 7,62 × 25 mm TT was put into service much later, with an eye on the PP, and this could not but affect the effectiveness of the Soviet PP. Despite the fact that as a cartridge for a pistol, he clearly lost 9 × 19 mm Para. But then it didn't really matter. 5 million PCA turned out to be significant.
    - And the post-war history of the PP showed that the military made a choice in favor of machine guns / assault rifles. PP, however, occupied their rightful main niche as a police weapon. The rest is already trifles.
    1. -1
      28 February 2019 13: 47
      The widespread opinion about the advantage of a CT cartridge with a pad of 9 mm for PP is not supported by real data.
      there are scans from the monograph on top.
      but in terms of terminal ballistics and stopping effects, a 9 mm cartridge is noticeably ahead of TT - this is a generally recognized fact.
      PP was used after the war for the same purposes as in the war - for the self-defense of crews, ambulances, and low-level officers and is still used, including in armies that actively fought, for example in Israel. This is in the USSR, the rule of the rule.
      The clear choice is 9 mm.
  34. 0
    27 February 2019 13: 39
    My favorite PPS (1944 was knocked out on mine). In the 1960s, his brother "hung" him from the train, where they were taken to Kuzbass for melting .. It was a song ... Then my uncle promised to bring me that same cowboy "Colt". But he himself created a coup d'état (brought Mohamed Ziad Bare to power and ... and there was a bummer with revolvers.
  35. 0
    27 February 2019 16: 17
    Given the low saturation of the PP at the Germans, nobody immediately threw away anything (mp40 per PPS), they picked up everything they could, plus the supply of contingent ammunition as an additional smut. Mp38 differed from Mp40 with a milled receiver, 40 went stamped multi-faceted.
  36. +1
    27 February 2019 21: 01
    [quote = gross kaput] [quote = Dzafdet] But the veteran who stormed Koenigsberg said that they could shoot Germans from 500 meters ... So you fell a little into a puddle ... [/ quote]
    But the results of the post-war field tests speak somewhat more.

    Actually what do they usually stress when comparing MP40 and PPSh? The range of a direct shot - it usually looks like this - our soldiers could shoot at 300 meters and the Germans at 200, Wow, what an advantage!
    And if you drop the cheers-patriotic husk and look at it impartially?
    We open the 3-volume monograph by Dvoryaninov "Fighting cartridges of small arms" and look at the summary table of the cartridges used in the PP in WWII, the tables give data in relation to the PPSh and MP40

    And what do we see? DPV on the thoracic target in PPSh 219m in MP40 200m - what are the differences of 100 meters on the fix?
    the following - and what exactly do we have in addition to the direct-shot range? right, accuracy (dispersion). We all know from books that due to the greater weight and carabiner lodge, the PPSh was much more crowded - but in fact? We look at the report of 1945. for testing German pistol cartridges


    We are reading the PCA manual published by the Ministry of Defense ... https: //war-time.ru/biblioteka/item/nastavlenie-po-strelkovomu-delu-k-ppsh-41-ot-1946-god page 44. The shooting tables and the shooting distance and are very surprised ..
    1. +4
      28 February 2019 19: 20
      And what did you mean by that? What did you see PPSh NSD? And do you even know what shooting tables are?
      But didn’t you be embarrassed that the sections concerning precisely certain shooting conditions were given up to 300 meters? And the table of excesses is given for PPSh with a sector sight? You were not confused in the table of excesses that with a sight of 200 meters (maximum value for PPSh with a cross over entirely) for 300 meters, the point of impact will be 127 cm below the aiming point? If you yourself don’t understand, then I’ll explain - when aiming in the chest, bullets will hit the lower leg, but in order to get into the chest it is necessary to carry TP 1 meter above the enemy’s head? You did not mind the steepness of the trajectory at ranges over 200? Aren't you embarrassed that trained shooters at such a range define it with a median error of 15%? And at the end you are not confused by simplifying the PPSh sight in 1942. were selected installations of 100 and 200 meters? Why not 150-300? or not 100-250?
      Now back to our sheep - why so much effort was directed precisely at increasing the range of the direct shot - which topic do not take (well, except for the pistol 9X18 and 5,45X18) everywhere one of the main strict requirements is the maximum DPV, this value is one of the fundamental for the effectiveness of weapons, it’s corny because at these ranges the shooter does not need to bother his head with rearrangements of the sight and spit on errors in determining the range - take aim at the center of the waist figure and you will hit your chest or stomach. From the same PPSh, in a firing range, when the range to the targets is precisely known, they don’t shoot at you and you are all dry and not tired of getting 300 meters tall, but in a real battle this becomes almost a little real task, that's why we cut it rear sight 100 and 200 based on real combat effectiveness.
      1. +1
        28 February 2019 19: 24
        Why don't you write about this in detail, Sergey? It would be great! And useful to many ...
  37. 0
    1 March 2019 10: 49
    Quote: gross kaput
    And what did you mean by that? What did you see PPSh NSD? And do you even know what shooting tables are?
    But didn’t you be embarrassed that the sections concerning precisely certain shooting conditions were given up to 300 meters? And the table of excesses is given for PPSh with a sector sight? You were not confused in the table of excesses that with a sight of 200 meters (maximum value for PPSh with a cross over entirely) for 300 meters, the point of impact will be 127 cm below the aiming point? If you yourself don’t understand, then I’ll explain - when aiming in the chest, bullets will hit the lower leg, but in order to get into the chest it is necessary to carry TP 1 meter above the enemy’s head? You did not mind the steepness of the trajectory at ranges over 200? Aren't you embarrassed that trained shooters at such a range define it with a median error of 15%? And at the end you are not confused by simplifying the PPSh sight in 1942. were selected installations of 100 and 200 meters? Why not 150-300? or not 100-250?
    Now back to our sheep - why so much effort was directed precisely at increasing the range of the direct shot - which topic do not take (well, except for the pistol 9X18 and 5,45X18) everywhere one of the main strict requirements is the maximum DPV, this value is one of the fundamental for the effectiveness of weapons, it’s corny because at these ranges the shooter does not need to bother his head with rearrangements of the sight and spit on errors in determining the range - take aim at the center of the waist figure and you will hit your chest or stomach. From the same PPSh, in a firing range, when the range to the targets is precisely known, they don’t shoot at you and you are all dry and not tired of getting 300 meters tall, but in a real battle this becomes almost a little real task, that's why we cut it rear sight 100 and 200 based on real combat effectiveness.



    No, it doesn’t bother me. The manual was written on the results of the combat use of PCA during the Second World War. And there is shooting at a distance of 500 meters. And 300 meters is shooting at a target with guaranteed destruction. There are shooting techniques there on the move, in different positions, in the forest, in the mountains, with a horse .. They created the PPSh as a replacement for a light machine gun. And its creation allowed to increase the mass of simultaneous salvo. And the production of PPSh in the amount of 6 million pieces speaks volumes. The infantry could create a wall of fire both in defense and in the offensive.
    With regards to the pillar: weapons have been simplified due to the conditions of the war. Or make a corner with recesses, or milling a shelf on the pillar. Big difference. And, given that the machines made bed workshops, there was no other way to wait.
    1. +1
      1 March 2019 21: 32
      Quote: Dzafdet
      there is shooting at a distance of 500 meters.

      Wow, hde? Maybe you shouldn't confuse round with soft and pay attention to the section "techniques and rules of shooting"? All tables in this section devoted to the choice of the aiming point and lead are given up to 300 meters. Actually, even the introductory part of this chapter says the same

      The tables of excesses and derivations are given in the appendix for general understanding and not for practical use, in fact, almost all the shooting tables in our NSD are given with a huge margin, far beyond the efficiency limits - for example, for the PKS tables are given up to 1500m, only get anywhere from such a distance from it is not possible, if only because at such a range the drift by moderate lateral wind is 18 meters and an error in determining the range of 25 meters leads to a guaranteed miss on the growth.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      The infantry could create a wall of fire both in defense and in the offensive.

      I’ll upset you - shooting at Call of duty and real combat have little in common, the wall of fire requires a huge b / p flow rate which is far from endless, I certainly understand that you didn’t even have PPSh in your hands, so take my word for it - its tambourine equipment it’s still a procedure, and in the conditions of battle it’s fundamentally impossible, therefore, if some especially gifted fighter tried to create a wall of fire at 500 meters, then by the time the enemy was approaching the distance of really effective fire from the PPSh, the fighter was left with an empty PP.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      And, given that the machines did bed workshops,

      Plant No. 367 of NK Armament (Zagorsk, now Sergiev Posad) was evacuated to Vyatskiye-Polyany where it is still located as "Hammer".
      plant N 828 NK mortar weapons / plant SAM "calculating and analytical machines" them. Kalmykova / "Schetmash" (Moscow)
      car factory them. Stalin NK Sredmash / ZiS (Moscow)
      plant N 182 NK Sudprom "Dagdizel"
      Plant N 43 of the Tax Code of the Aviation Industry (Plant N 43 at 2GU NKAP) (Moscow)
      Z-d N 622 NK Armaments (Izhevsk)
      z-d N 2 NK armament (z-d. named after Kirkiz, Kovrov machine-gun z-d) (Kovrov)
      Zd "Iskra" Mosgorsvet (Moscow)
      zd Dzerzhinsky Oil Company (Perm)
      Tbilisi Arsenal (Tbilisi)
      Railway Station N 113 Tankoproma (Gorky)
      Gorky Automobile Plant named after Molotov NK SredMasha (Gorky)
      Yaroslavl Automobile Plant NKSM
      Tbilisi Steam Train Car Repair Plant (Tbilisi)
      Tbilisi Tool Plant (Tbilisi)
      . Plant N 66 (Zlatoust city) evacuated Tula arms factory 66
      Would you deign to poke with your finger which of these industries that produced PPSh do you consider to be a bed factory? laughing
    2. +1
      1 March 2019 21: 39
      Quote: Dzafdet
      With regards to the pillar: weapons have been simplified due to the conditions of the war.

      Simplified - yes, well, so you did not answer the main question - why did you choose ranges of 100 and 200 and not, for example, 100-300 or 150-500?
      After the war, in many countries they continued to design and produce PPs, but in no other country in the world did they make PPs with sector or frame sights - either a cross over L-shaped rear sight, a drum with holes or a generally primitive non-adjustable diopter, although before the war most PPs had complex sights not inferior to rifle.
      Actually the answer is banal following the results of the war, the limit of the effectiveness of weapons under a pistol cartridge was determined, based on these ranges there was no point in complicating the design.
  38. 0
    1 March 2019 21: 48
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    there is shooting at a distance of 500 meters.

    Wow, hde? Maybe you shouldn't confuse round with soft and pay attention to the section "techniques and rules of shooting"? All tables in this section devoted to the choice of the aiming point and lead are given up to 300 meters. Actually, even the introductory part of this chapter says the same

    The tables of excesses and derivations are given in the appendix for general understanding and not for practical use, in fact, almost all the shooting tables in our NSD are given with a huge margin, far beyond the efficiency limits - for example, for the PKS tables are given up to 1500m, only get anywhere from such a distance from it is not possible, if only because at such a range the drift by moderate lateral wind is 18 meters and an error in determining the range of 25 meters leads to a guaranteed miss on the growth.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    The infantry could create a wall of fire both in defense and in the offensive.

    I’ll upset you - shooting at Call of duty and real combat have little in common, the wall of fire requires a huge b / p flow rate which is far from endless, I certainly understand that you didn’t even have PPSh in your hands, so take my word for it - its tambourine equipment it’s still a procedure, and in the conditions of battle it’s fundamentally impossible, therefore, if some especially gifted fighter tried to create a wall of fire at 500 meters, then by the time the enemy was approaching the distance of really effective fire from the PPSh, the fighter was left with an empty PP.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    And, given that the machines did bed workshops,

    Plant No. 367 of NK Armament (Zagorsk, now Sergiev Posad) was evacuated to Vyatskiye-Polyany where it is still located as "Hammer".
    plant N 828 NK mortar weapons / plant SAM "calculating and analytical machines" them. Kalmykova / "Schetmash" (Moscow)
    car factory them. Stalin NK Sredmash / ZiS (Moscow)
    plant N 182 NK Sudprom "Dagdizel"
    Plant N 43 of the Tax Code of the Aviation Industry (Plant N 43 at 2GU NKAP) (Moscow)
    Z-d N 622 NK Armaments (Izhevsk)
    z-d N 2 NK armament (z-d. named after Kirkiz, Kovrov machine-gun z-d) (Kovrov)
    Zd "Iskra" Mosgorsvet (Moscow)
    zd Dzerzhinsky Oil Company (Perm)
    Tbilisi Arsenal (Tbilisi)
    Railway Station N 113 Tankoproma (Gorky)
    Gorky Automobile Plant named after Molotov NK SredMasha (Gorky)
    Yaroslavl Automobile Plant NKSM
    Tbilisi Steam Train Car Repair Plant (Tbilisi)
    Tbilisi Tool Plant (Tbilisi)
    . Plant N 66 (Zlatoust city) evacuated Tula arms factory 66
    Would you deign to poke with your finger which of these industries that produced PPSh do you consider to be a bed factory? laughing



    Further to read the manual was apparently too lazy. There is about shooting at 500 meters. The structure of the Red Army in 1943-1945, you do not know. Otherwise, they would have been aware of the creation of platoons and battalions of machine gunners, which the Germans never had before. Most of the enterprises you mentioned can be considered bed workshops after evacuation, I say this as a person who has worked for 18 years at a machine-building enterprise. We still have most of the factories near the bed workshops left. It’s normal to talk about shooting at 1,5 km from the teaching staff, especially considering that the Mosinki bullet retains its lethal force at a distance of 3 km, but getting into the target is a big problem. Shpagin made a mass machine gun that allowed him to surpass the Wehrmacht on the battlefield and defeat it. But PPSh, and not only I kept at school at the lessons of NVP, as did the tar, by the way. Voenruk did not fight with us, but joined the army in May 1945 ..
    1. 0
      2 March 2019 10: 41
      Quote: Dzafdet
      . There is about shooting at 500 meters.

      Once again I ask where there about shooting at 500 meters? We are not discussing a woman’s forum or discussing cowards with ruffles, so take the trouble either to give a page number or a page scan.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Otherwise, they would have been aware of the creation of platoons and battalions of machine gunners,

      I am aware, only unlike you, in the know when and why they were created, and in the know tactics of their use.
      What prevents you from reading the combat infantry charter of 42?
      "1. In an offensive against a defending enemy, a company was assigned to cover the battle formations from the front and from the flanks, and before the attack - to penetrate into the enemy's location in order to ensure the attack. enemy and ensure the success of the regiment's attack.
      2. When establishing an open flank or weakly defended areas of defense, a company, usually by platoon, seeped in and, with a sudden fire strike, ensured the success of the advance of the main forces from the front.
      3. The company, especially when attacking in conditions of fog and poor visibility, provided the flanks of the main forces from an ambush strike, etc.
      4. On the march, the company remained at the disposal of the regiment, but followed at the forefront or at the head detachment. With the onset of the oncoming battle, the machine gunners penetrated between the enemy columns and separated them and attacked from the flanks and rear, attacked the firing positions of artillery, convoys and vehicles.
      5. In defense, the company of machine gunners was the reserve of the regiment commander and was used to destroy the enemy that had broken through and to provide fire to the subunit junctions. The enemy who had broken through should have been enveloped from the rear and flanks by company platoons and delivered a surprise blow from three sides. "
      Battalions of machine gunners created since 44, only they were not independent combat units, but organizationally they were part of the tank brigades of tank and mechanized corps, the main task was to use as a tank landing in deep operations and to protect tanks from enemy infantry in special combat conditions (city , forest).
      Quote: Dzafdet
      which the Germans never had.

      But the Germans did not really need this, given the fact that the Germans from the 40th year worked intensively on assault rifles that were planned as a single type of weapon, and in the 44th year the Germans began to appear units entirely armed with MP43 / StG44.
      .
    2. 0
      2 March 2019 10: 53
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Most of the enterprises you mentioned can be considered bed workshops after evacuation.

      Again, write nonsense - will there be proofs?
      Quote: Dzafdet
      And talk about firing from the teaching staff at 1,5km

      What nafig PPP for 1,5 km? what kind of game? It was about PKS - if you certainly know what it is laughing
      Now, with regards to combat effectiveness, we open the first post-war KS-46 shooting course, the exercises in which are given just by the generalized experience of the Second World War and we are amazed at the exercises for PP



      We carefully look at the range of exercises - the longest 150 meters - a group of moving infantry, the same exercise only for a light machine gun is performed at 300 meters, now turn on the brain and think why?
  39. 0
    2 March 2019 04: 05
    The article is not accurate everything is superficial, wrote the delimiter of the figures from himself? Blah blah blah!!!
  40. 0
    2 March 2019 18: 39
    Once again I ask where there about shooting at 500 meters? We are not discussing a woman’s forum or discussing cowards with ruffles, so take the trouble either to give a page number or a page scan.



    Page 92 of the manual, Appendix 1 and 2. Do you find yourself? Or help?
    1. 0
      3 March 2019 14: 23
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Page 92 of the manual, Appendix 1 and 2. You will find it yourself

      Once again I ask WHERE IS THERE SPEAKING ABOUT SHOOTING FOR 500 METERS? poke a finger


      Do you understand the difference between shooting tables and reference ballistic characteristics of a cartridge?
      As for the shooting tables, they were never compiled at PPSh and PPS due to the stupidity of this lesson.
      This is how the main shooting table of that period (mid-40s) for the SVT-40 looks like

      it necessarily gave the characteristics of dispersion, flight time, angles, speed.
      this is what the ammunition consumption chart looked like for her.

      Once again, for those who believe in fairy tales - open any instruction on PPSh - at least NSD 51g at least KRS 42, open the first chapter, read the first paragraph

      Especially for you it is written - short to 200 long to 100, which is why exercises in the shooting course of the 46th year for the PPSh are given a maximum of 150 meters. The marking of a sector sight up to 500m only means that you can aim and shoot at this range at it wink but getting into something smaller than a tank will not work laughing
      Actually, if everything had been so rosy with the PPSh, there would have been no competition of the 43rd for a new intermediate cartridge, at the first meeting for the 43rd year, requirements for an intermediate cartridge were put forward: DPV 325 m, caliber 7,62, EFFECTIVE range of 400 meters, the lethal effect of a bullet on a person is not less than 1000 meters.
  41. 0
    2 March 2019 20: 17
    A film about PPSh, from the 4th minute about production and equipment needed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2sbtjK-Rn8
  42. +1
    3 March 2019 22: 35
    Vyacheslav Olegovich! I envy that you were able to shoot from such a rarity. I tried for many years but alas. And of course, thanks for the article.
    From SW. Alexey.
  43. 0
    4 March 2019 12: 27
    Especially for you it is written - short to 200 long to 100, which is why exercises in the shooting course of the 46th year for the PPSh are given a maximum of 150 meters. The marking of a sector sight up to 500m only means that you can aim at it and shoot at it wink, but getting into something smaller than a tank will no longer be laughing
    Actually, if everything had been so rosy with the PPSh, there would have been no competition of the 43rd for a new intermediate cartridge, at the first meeting for the 43rd year, requirements for an intermediate cartridge were put forward: DPV 325 m, caliber 7,62, EFFECTIVE range of 400 meters, the lethal effect of a bullet on a person is not less than 1000 meters.




    You are far from the first who is trying to argue over the range of fire from the PCA. I, at one time, shoveled a bunch of books on submachine guns and still found a book where it was written by the author: PPSh is the only PP that allows firing at a distance of 500 meters.

    Now regarding the intermediate cartridge: all over the world the AK is called "assault rifle" and it was made to replace the Mosin rifle. But only. And together with the PPSh they abandoned the line of PPs in the army, and this is a big mistake. There is no place for AK in a tank or in an airplane, and you can't fight a lot with a pistol. In Syria, the pilot fired a pistol and did not kill anyone, then he blew himself up, but he would have had Kashtan or PP-2000 and the result was different.
    By the way, together with the AAK, a beautiful Simonov carbine was developed and in vain they were abandoned in the army. By accuracy and ease of shooting, it exceeds the AK by an order of magnitude ...
    1. +1
      4 March 2019 19: 49
      Quote: Dzafdet
      You are far from the first to try to argue

      You can argue with someone who understands the subject under discussion and makes some serious arguments - there is not one other one on your part.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      and still found a book,

      Wow one piece book! probably some kind of Chris Bishop? Although even he did not write such nonsense.
      Why don't you, if only for the sake of diversity, read really serious books?
      Something like that?

      Quote: Dzafdet
      which allows you to fire at a distance of 500 meters.

      Shoot yes, hit no laughing
      in fact, serious books provide normal information from archives and not from the OBS agency, which concerns PCA - they also contain the results of 64g research.

      We look carefully at the bottom plate - the percentage of hits on various targets - and please note that it was not the soldiers-conscripts who shot, but the high-class test testers of the firing range, they fired at targets located at precisely known ranges, clearly visible and not moving, from the most stable lying position from the stop - for PPSh even at 350 m the percentage of hits on the growth target is 6,7% - i.e. to hit one target, you need to shoot a half-disk, while a lone at this distance failed to get even once. if you carefully comprehend the numbers, it becomes clear that for the test shooter the effective range of fire is 250 meters, then the seams are full, for a soldier, in a battle, the maximum effective range will be no more than 200, it was to such conclusions that they arrived at 42- m year, cutting the whole to 100-200 meters.
      1. +1
        4 March 2019 20: 44
        Quote: Dzafdet
        throughout the world AK is called "assault rifle" and it was made to replace the Mosin rifle.

        You write nonsense again - cartridge 43 was created immediately for a light machine gun (RPD), machine gun (AK) and self-loading carbine (SKS), and they had to be replaced in the army with DP27 / DPM, rifle arr. 91/30, SVT / AVT, PPSh / PPS, i.e. they were created for small arms of the department.
        Quote: Dzafdet
        There is no AK in the tank or in the plane, and you won’t get a lot of guns with a gun.

        Wow, today is just a revelation day, starting with T54 in all domestic tanks, styling is provided for the AKS / AKMS / AKS74 / AK74M, and the assault rifle is nominally included in the tank’s armament as an individual crew weapon, as well as the F1 grenades.
        The AKS74U assault rifle entered the combat aviation NAZ from the times of Afghanistan, the NAZ bag was placed in an ejection seat for aircraft pilots, it was attached to the pilot with a halyard and after separating the seat, the NAZ bag hung under the pilot on the halyard, from the experience of the first years it turned out that in a real situation this no one was able to use the machine gun, so in the mid-80s they refused to do this, preferring to arm the pilots of the aircraft with APS and use the normal NAZ-8. For helicopter pilots, the same AKS74U was placed in a special holster on the thigh. (Which were attached directly to the body like the BC to it) subsequently for helicopter pilots began the development of a special NAZ consisting of a vest and a full-sized AKS74.


        As a result, everything is quite natural - where it is possible to place a full-sized automatic machine - they began to place it, where the AKS74U does not climb in the same way, any normal PP will also not climb, well, among small APS PPs, in fact one of the most successful microzones is more effective poppy 10 \ 11, Polish PAK63.
        Quote: Dzafdet
        By the way, together with the AAK, a beautiful Simonov carbine was developed and in vain they were abandoned in the army.

        Not in vain, but quite naturally, the SCS turned out to be superfluous with the weapons system of the squad, having no advantages over the AK in effective fire range, the SKS had obviously worse parameters for combat rate of fire - why are there two samples of different design in the squad?
        Quote: Dzafdet
        In terms of accuracy and ease of shooting, it exceeds the AK by an order of magnitude ...

        Well, today is definitely a holiday of revelations laughing
        By accuracy of firing, AK and SKS are equal, and if SKS has a tired piece of wood then AK it will merge.
  44. 0
    5 March 2019 09: 29
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    You are far from the first to try to argue

    You can argue with someone who understands the subject under discussion and makes some serious arguments - there is not one other one on your part.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    and still found a book,

    Wow one piece book! probably some kind of Chris Bishop? Although even he did not write such nonsense.
    Why don't you, if only for the sake of diversity, read really serious books?
    Something like that?

    Quote: Dzafdet
    which allows you to fire at a distance of 500 meters.

    Shoot yes, hit no laughing
    in fact, serious books provide normal information from archives and not from the OBS agency, which concerns PCA - they also contain the results of 64g research.

    We look carefully at the bottom plate - the percentage of hits on various targets - and please note that it was not the soldiers-conscripts who shot, but the high-class test testers of the firing range, they fired at targets located at precisely known ranges, clearly visible and not moving, from the most stable lying position from the stop - for PPSh even at 350 m the percentage of hits on the growth target is 6,7% - i.e. to hit one target, you need to shoot a half-disk, while a lone at this distance failed to get even once. if you carefully comprehend the numbers, it becomes clear that for the test shooter the effective range of fire is 250 meters, then the seams are full, for a soldier, in a battle, the maximum effective range will be no more than 200, it was to such conclusions that they arrived at 42- m year, cutting the whole to 100-200 meters.



    You are an interesting conversationalist. Bringing the pages of the manual, you take from there only facts that are beneficial to you, although the figures about 500 meters and the lethal force at 800 meters are also given there. I rummaged around in the internet, found a forum where PPSh shooting is being discussed. So, at a range of 350 meters, the result is 50 by 50, and not like yours, 7 percent. Apparently the arrows from the book did not know how to bring weapons to normal combat. Shooting at
    500 meters at the forum was called quite possible as a harassing fire. At a distance of up to 250 meters, the target defeat is -67% .... Americans use PPSh in Iraq when cleaning buildings now, nowadays ...
    1. +1
      5 March 2019 19: 43
      Quote: Dzafdet
      , although there are also numbers about 500 meters, and lethal force at 800 meters.

      Once again - to the last - you do not need to confuse the marking of the sight and the table of excesses with the effective fire range - otherwise you will constantly write nonsense - at Mauser C96 the bar is marked up to 1000, at Browning HP up to 500, at artillery P08 up to 800, but this does not mean that from these pistols you can get somewhere at such a distance. I already sent you to the pages of the same manual regarding military use - up to 300 meters are specifically marked there, all tables regarding shooting conditions are given up to 300 meters.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      I rummaged around in the internet, found a forum where PPSh shooting is being discussed.

      Better dig and find a forum of real owners of PPSh (VPO135) the benefit of them is enough civilians, https://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/2/1227712.html
      Quote: Dzafdet
      So, at a range of 350 meters, the result is 50 by 50, and not like yours, 7 percent.

      Well, suggest that you smoke in the VPO135 owners branch to shoot the PPSh at 350 meters, as far as I know, there are no enthusiasts shooting at 300 among them, because people really shooting from it perfectly understand its capabilities.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Shooting at
      500 meters at the forum was called quite possible as a harassing fire.

      Dear harassing fire is conducted at least from group company weapons - i.e. easel machine guns and company mortars (now from AGSs).
      Further, something like that in the Russian / Soviet army, certain concepts are adopted that are embedded in the terms with regard to types of fire, then they are as follows
      "When firing at a single live target, the probability of destruction in the event of firing for destruction is at least 80-90%, when firing for suppression - 50% and harassing fire - 20%."
      Actually what harassing fire at 500 meters can be fired if the probability
      target defeat 0%.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      .Americans use PPSh in Iraq when cleaning buildings now, nowadays ...

      Now this is no longer funny - do not confuse pictures with captured PPSh using them in battles.
  45. 0
    5 March 2019 09: 37
    Well, today is definitely a holiday of revelations laughing
    By accuracy of firing, AK and SKS are equal, and if SKS has a tired piece of wood then AK it will merge.



    Today is exactly the day of revelation. Everyone who served and fired from the AKC says the same thing: it hits much more accurately and getting from it into the target is much easier than from AK. The AKC was in service with anti-aircraft gunners for a very long time for a reason.
    Now regarding the AK-74U: did you get out of the burning tank or armored personnel carrier? And from an airplane or a helicopter? And in terms of its qualities, like a weapon, it is far behind the usual Kalash. As always, we first make a good sample, and then we throw everything into a landfill. After dozens of years, we understand that we have made a mistake, and "we will not drink again, we will save money ..." ..
    1. +1
      5 March 2019 19: 31
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Everyone who served and fired from the AKC says the same thing: it hits much more accurately and getting from it into the target is much easier than from AK.

      Didn’t you beguile anything? AKS is a Kalashnikov assault rifle with a folding butt, and Simonov’s carbine is an SKS wink
      Those. you didn’t shoot from him, you didn’t serve with him, but do you have a categorical opinion? Charming
      I can absolutely tell you, as the owner of two SKSs, regularly shooting from them, and not 3-10 rounds of rounds like soldiers, but 200-300 at a time, say that this is not so - the SKS "out of the box" completely drains AKM (VPO136) in terms of accuracy, after bringing the iron in the bed to the divine form and the operation of the trigger, it catches up with the AKM and shoots exactly with such accuracy.

      Quote: Dzafdet
      The AKC was in service with anti-aircraft gunners for a very long time for a reason.

      Not really shoot down eroplans? laughing
      Dear, go to Ganz.ru in the "club of SCS fans" and ask who gross kaput is and then we will rub for SCS laughing
      https://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/2/1752044-0.html

      Quote: Dzafdet
      Now regarding the AK-74U: did you get out of a burning tank or an armored personnel carrier? And from an airplane or a helicopter?

      What do you mean by that? Is it not convenient to get out of a burning tank with a machine gun? So no one gets out with him, moreover no one mounts on his body, if possible, the machine gun is removed from the stack and thrown out through the hatch onto the armor, and the commander is already selected after it, if there is no time for this, the machine remains in the tank, mount on imagine that it’s automatic, that even an ultra-small PP, no tanker in his right mind will ever have - when there is an emergency leaving, there is a very high risk of catching and staying in the tank. In the Second World War, tankers mated bracelets on quilted jackets and overcoats, sewn in side pockets and hung a holster under outer clothing - it would not catch on leaving the tank just for the purpose. And by the way, the AKS74U was never the weapon of the crews of tanks and armored vehicles, they have full-size AKs with a folding butt.
      Regarding airplanes, I will once again repeat to you on the pilot's body the place for fastening that there is no full-size PP like MP5 or "knight", only a subcompact PP or a pistol can be placed on the cortex, and the APS is the best choice here, with a shoulder rest it allows confidently work at 100 meters, and because of the slower pace and a small recoil momentum of the cartridge, the dispersion in bursts is much better than that of the same micro-ultrasound.
      Helicopter pilots used the AKS74U because the helicopter pilots had the opportunity to mount them on the body (on the thigh) and the effectiveness of Ksenia is even higher than that of MP5 and similar tops of PP.
  46. 0
    6 March 2019 10: 12
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    Everyone who served and fired from the AKC says the same thing: it hits much more accurately and getting from it into the target is much easier than from AK.

    Didn’t you beguile anything? AKS is a Kalashnikov assault rifle with a folding butt, and Simonov’s carbine is an SKS wink
    Those. you didn’t shoot from him, you didn’t serve with him, but do you have a categorical opinion? Charming
    I can absolutely tell you, as the owner of two SKSs, regularly shooting from them, and not 3-10 rounds of rounds like soldiers, but 200-300 at a time, say that this is not so - the SKS "out of the box" completely drains AKM (VPO136) in terms of accuracy, after bringing the iron in the bed to the divine form and the operation of the trigger, it catches up with the AKM and shoots exactly with such accuracy.

    Quote: Dzafdet
    The AKC was in service with anti-aircraft gunners for a very long time for a reason.

    Not really shoot down eroplans? laughing
    Dear, go to Ganz.ru in the "club of SCS fans" and ask who gross kaput is and then we will rub for SCS laughing
    https://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/2/1752044-0.html

    Quote: Dzafdet
    Now regarding the AK-74U: did you get out of a burning tank or an armored personnel carrier? And from an airplane or a helicopter?

    What do you mean by that? Is it not convenient to get out of a burning tank with a machine gun? So no one gets out with him, moreover no one mounts on his body, if possible, the machine gun is removed from the stack and thrown out through the hatch onto the armor, and the commander is already selected after it, if there is no time for this, the machine remains in the tank, mount on imagine that it’s automatic, that even an ultra-small PP, no tanker in his right mind will ever have - when there is an emergency leaving, there is a very high risk of catching and staying in the tank. In the Second World War, tankers mated bracelets on quilted jackets and overcoats, sewn in side pockets and hung a holster under outer clothing - it would not catch on leaving the tank just for the purpose. And by the way, the AKS74U was never the weapon of the crews of tanks and armored vehicles, they have full-size AKs with a folding butt.
    Regarding airplanes, I will once again repeat to you on the pilot's body the place for fastening that there is no full-size PP like MP5 or "knight", only a subcompact PP or a pistol can be placed on the cortex, and the APS is the best choice here, with a shoulder rest it allows confidently work at 100 meters, and because of the slower pace and a small recoil momentum of the cartridge, the dispersion in bursts is much better than that of the same micro-ultrasound.
    Helicopter pilots used the AKS74U because the helicopter pilots had the opportunity to mount them on the body (on the thigh) and the effectiveness of Ksenia is even higher than that of MP5 and similar tops of PP.



    The army refused the APS. Uncomfortable to wear in a wooden holster. Only special forces in the version with PBS were suitable. Now there are modern software like Chestnut. It may well replace the APS. Read the memories of war veterans. What is there to throw the machine into the hatch. They immediately jumped out of the tank. Slightly delayed and burn immediately.
  47. 0
    6 March 2019 10: 14
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    , although there are also numbers about 500 meters, and lethal force at 800 meters.

    Once again - to the last - you do not need to confuse the marking of the sight and the table of excesses with the effective fire range - otherwise you will constantly write nonsense - at Mauser C96 the bar is marked up to 1000, at Browning HP up to 500, at artillery P08 up to 800, but this does not mean that from these pistols you can get somewhere at such a distance. I already sent you to the pages of the same manual regarding military use - up to 300 meters are specifically marked there, all tables regarding shooting conditions are given up to 300 meters.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    I rummaged around in the internet, found a forum where PPSh shooting is being discussed.

    Better dig and find a forum of real owners of PPSh (VPO135) the benefit of them is enough civilians, https://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/2/1227712.html
    Quote: Dzafdet
    So, at a range of 350 meters, the result is 50 by 50, and not like yours, 7 percent.

    Well, suggest that you smoke in the VPO135 owners branch to shoot the PPSh at 350 meters, as far as I know, there are no enthusiasts shooting at 300 among them, because people really shooting from it perfectly understand its capabilities.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    Shooting at
    500 meters at the forum was called quite possible as a harassing fire.

    Dear harassing fire is conducted at least from group company weapons - i.e. easel machine guns and company mortars (now from AGSs).
    Further, something like that in the Russian / Soviet army, certain concepts are adopted that are embedded in the terms with regard to types of fire, then they are as follows
    "When firing at a single live target, the probability of destruction in the event of firing for destruction is at least 80-90%, when firing for suppression - 50% and harassing fire - 20%."
    Actually what harassing fire at 500 meters can be fired if the probability
    target defeat 0%.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    .Americans use PPSh in Iraq when cleaning buildings now, nowadays ...

    Now this is no longer funny - do not confuse pictures with captured PPSh using them in battles.



    FIRST NOT PHOTOS, VIDEO. Like, incidentally, the use of AK by the Americans in Iraq. Chest with M-16, and the compartment is all with AK ..
    1. 0
      6 March 2019 10: 53
      Quote: Dzafdet
      FIRST NOT PHOTOS, VIDEO.

      Well, where is it this is your epic video? laughing

      Quote: Dzafdet
      Chest with M-16, and the compartment is all with AK ..

      Wow, you again hide the veils from previously unknown facts - keep it up. laughing
      It remains to tighten the equipment a little more and you can go to Ren-Tv to Dorenko - just between the reptilians and flat ground there will be a report on the mass rejection of the ILC from M4 in favor of AK.
      Now, seriously, you either tighten up your knowledge of the subject or start discussing topics that you don't understand a damn thing about. Here is a classic example of your "secession with AK in Iraq"
      Like both AK and M4 in the frame - pay attention to the chevrons of operators with AK - these are soldiers of the Iraqi army - yes, since 2003. The United States began to form the "New Iraqi Army" fighters of these formations (as well as in Afghanistan) use a uniform close to that of the US Armed Forces (to facilitate identification on the battlefield), similar protective equipment, but are usually armed with their more familiar AK / PK / SVD / RPG ...
      Quote: Dzafdet
      What is there to throw the machine into the hatch.

      Once again, the tank doesn’t just have laying for an assault rifle and hand grenades in a tank, the tank doesn’t always light up after a defeat, but an immobilized tank, especially when fighting in the city or in the depths of the enemy’s orders, it’s better to leave - for it will be guaranteed.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Now there are modern software like Chestnut.

      I just recommend that you look at the pictures of the pilots of the aircraft - at the compensation suit, at the belts, at the placement of the pilot in the cockpit of the attack aircraft, then it may come that even the chestnut cannot be attached to the pilot. I already told you about the emergency naz - we tried to place the AKS74U instead of the standard naz, during a database in Afghanistan, to analyze 4 real cases of ejection of the SU7B and MiG21 pilots over the enemy’s territory, literally on the heads of the souls - not one of the pilots I could use the machine from NAZ.
      Once again, wherever the AKS74U does not climb, any adequate PP will not go into it, where you can shove the AKS74U it is better to shove it than any PP - because it is in the quality of PDW that the Ksenia is much better corny because of its greater effective range and breakdown power. Ksenia’s overheating of the trunk begins at the fourth store at a fast pace; in NAZ, you usually can’t put more than three stores. Tales of poor accuracy will be left on the conscience of people who have never fired from the AKS-74U; up to 300 meters from Ksenia all exercises of the shooting course for full-size AKs are calmly performed.
  48. 0
    6 March 2019 13: 21
    Consider the aiming bar on the PPSh 1940 release ...

    It is complex in form ... Therefore, it was abandoned

    By video: Failure. I saw amer squad shooting from the roof of the house at the command of the chest of drawers. it
    there was a Negro with M-16, after his target designation, the entire compartment shot from AK.
    With regards to PP: Chestnut can be placed in the chest valve. And such options were worked out. But they did not accept him. Apparently in MO we have a lot of Kulikov ..
    1. +1
      7 March 2019 12: 43
      Quote: Dzafdet
      It is complex in form ... Therefore, it was abandoned

      I see you are a master to ignore not convenient questions that do not fit into your versions.
      I’ll ask for the third time, WHY WHEN CHOOSE A 100-200 MARK? A NOT 100-300 OR 150-500?

      With regard to marking the sight - marking the sight only means that you can shoot at this range and the bullet is guaranteed to fly, but does not mean that you can get at this range.
      The fashion in 00-30xx was to shove such sights to where they are not needed on the fix.
      Once again - here are three slats - the P08 artilleryman, C96 and the Browning High Power - how do you yourself think that the distance to which they have the slats marked can be reached from a pistol?



      These are pistols, with regards to PP, then the flight of imagination of designers in the 30s is admirable - the German MP28 and their British clone "Lanchester" had strips of up to 1000 meters and 1000 yards, respectively, on the MP34 and its Swiss (S1-100) and Japanese (Type 100) sturgeon clones were cut to 500 but in increments of every 50, the "gangster" Thompson M1928 had a rack mount sight up to 600 yards, the Suomi M1931 to 500 meters, etc. etc.
      The Germans were the first to realize the stupidity of this idea - already the MP36 (the forerunner of MP38 / 40) had a flip pillar of 100-200, and the others followed in their wake.
      Now the question of the complexity of the form - simplifying and cheapening the production of rifles 91/30 and SVT and carbines 38 as much as possible saved as much as possible, changed the accessories of the box, reconsidered machine operations, etc. but they didn’t abandon the regular sighting systems either without simplifying them - the question is why - because they directly related to combat effectiveness, replacing the PPSh sight with the combat effectiveness of this did not play any role since the markup was initially redundant, so this step was absolutely taken consciously and painlessly.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      I saw amer squad shooting from the roof of the house at the command of the chest of drawers.

      And I saw a Martian flying saucer - of course you don’t have a link, but the Negro before shooting, as is the case with respectable Negroes, introduced himself into the camera that he was the commander of the U.S. ILC unit, and now the soldier of the U.S. Army unit will demonstrate the shooting from AK laughing
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Apparently in MO we have a lot of Kulikov ..

      Thank God there are no rams in the MO yet to take the next unnecessary wunderwafle.
      PS The more I read your posts, the more I become convinced that you didn’t even serve as a cook in the army, hence such interesting thoughts. laughing
  49. 0
    7 March 2019 15: 45
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    It is complex in form ... Therefore, it was abandoned

    I see you are a master to ignore not convenient questions that do not fit into your versions.
    I’ll ask for the third time, WHY WHEN CHOOSE A 100-200 MARK? A NOT 100-300 OR 150-500?

    With regard to marking the sight - marking the sight only means that you can shoot at this range and the bullet is guaranteed to fly, but does not mean that you can get at this range.
    The fashion in 00-30xx was to shove such sights to where they are not needed on the fix.
    Once again - here are three slats - the P08 artilleryman, C96 and the Browning High Power - how do you yourself think that the distance to which they have the slats marked can be reached from a pistol?



    These are pistols, with regards to PP, then the flight of imagination of designers in the 30s is admirable - the German MP28 and their British clone "Lanchester" had strips of up to 1000 meters and 1000 yards, respectively, on the MP34 and its Swiss (S1-100) and Japanese (Type 100) sturgeon clones were cut to 500 but in increments of every 50, the "gangster" Thompson M1928 had a rack mount sight up to 600 yards, the Suomi M1931 to 500 meters, etc. etc.
    The Germans were the first to realize the stupidity of this idea - already the MP36 (the forerunner of MP38 / 40) had a flip pillar of 100-200, and the others followed in their wake.
    Now the question of the complexity of the form - simplifying and cheapening the production of rifles 91/30 and SVT and carbines 38 as much as possible saved as much as possible, changed the accessories of the box, reconsidered machine operations, etc. but they didn’t abandon the regular sighting systems either without simplifying them - the question is why - because they directly related to combat effectiveness, replacing the PPSh sight with the combat effectiveness of this did not play any role since the markup was initially redundant, so this step was absolutely taken consciously and painlessly.
    Quote: Dzafdet
    I saw amer squad shooting from the roof of the house at the command of the chest of drawers.

    And I saw a Martian flying saucer - of course you don’t have a link, but the Negro before shooting, as is the case with respectable Negroes, introduced himself into the camera that he was the commander of the U.S. ILC unit, and now the soldier of the U.S. Army unit will demonstrate the shooting from AK laughing
    Quote: Dzafdet
    Apparently in MO we have a lot of Kulikov ..

    Thank God there are no rams in the MO yet to take the next unnecessary wunderwafle.
    PS The more I read your posts, the more I become convinced that you didn’t even serve as a cook in the army, hence such interesting thoughts. laughing



    From a Mauser it’s quite possible to shoot at 150-200 meters. This pistol and cartridge for it (greetings from PPSh and TT) were specially designed for firing at such distances.
    The example of ABC-SVT is unsuccessful, since they were even more expensive than DP in production, not to mention PPSh and the mosquito.
    I dragged the AKM machine for a month and was enough for many years. I was sitting in the mock tank, though my head stuck outside the tower. I stood in the skeleton of the T-34. It was cramped for me alone, but I still do not understand how 5 people fit there. The topic of PP in our pen, but in vain. No wonder Heckler and Koch rivet PP, which are snapped up.
    I wanted to post a video of Badyuk in Syria, where he gives an assessment to AKSU, but I think you will find it yourself. on youtube, channel "Anna News" ...

    Unfortunately, I didn’t find the video with the black man ...
    1. +1
      7 March 2019 20: 12
      Quote: Dzafdet
      From a Mauser it’s quite possible to shoot at 150-200 meters

      AU! it's not about 150-200 but about 1000 meters on which its bar is marked.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      The ABC-CBT example is unsuccessful,

      Once again AU where it was about ABC? ABC was discontinued before the war, in 1939. During the war, Tokarev SVT and AVT rifles were produced - Tokarev's automatic rifle, the same as the SVT but with a fire translator and a reinforced box, since 1943. only ABT remained in production.
      I noticed that you too often confuse the names of weapons - there is only one conclusion - your knowledge, even from domestic standards, is in its infancy.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      since they were even more expensive in production than DP, not to mention PPSh and a mosin.

      Ay again - I refer you to the monograph by R.N. Chumak "Self-loading and automatic rifles Tokarev"
      For 1940-41, the cost of SVT was 713 rubles, DP 1150, PPD 850 and PPSh 500 rubles.
      Now, with regard to the price itself, there was such a wonderful resolution of the State Defense Committee No. 558СС of 22.08.41/626/20.09.41, which was called speaking - "On rifles" and its continuation, Resolution No. XNUMXСС of XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX. Actually, from these decisions, everything becomes clear - it's not about the price, but about TIME and the technological possibility of manufacturing a specific sample.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      I dragged the AKM machine for a month and was enough for many years.

      Military department? well, in principle, expected
      Quote: Dzafdet
      No wonder Heckler and Koch rivet PP, which are snapped up.

      Once again, MP5 / UMP are not captured by warriors, but by police and anti-terrorist units, in their conditions, really full-sized PPs are often better, but again we’re talking about full-sized PPs and not subcompacts, from what got into the army special forces The Bundeswehr is MP7 - but it’s not PP anymore, but the PDW concept for its 4,6 × 30 cartridge, like the Belgian P90 under 5,7X28, which is limitedly used by specialists from some countries, the attempt to launch the P90 under cartridge 9X19 ended in failure - there were no orders . In the 90s, we tried to make our PDW cartridge on the basis of the 25X30 MPC cartridge sleeve (PSM), extended to 5,45-18 mm - it did not take off for two reasons - it did not cause excitement among the military and the lack of suitable gunpowder in production.

      Quote: Dzafdet
      where he gives an assessment of AKSU,

      It is not necessary to confuse warm with soft - Badyuk gives an assessment of the use of AKS74U by infantry in battle, but we seem to be rubbing our "last chance" with our weapons. PDW concept - and here Ksenia is just much more effective than any PP, with a folded stock it is not larger and not heavier than PP, but in terms of effective fire range it surpasses any PP by 1,5-2 times.
      Ksenia has inherent flaws that did not allow her to become a standard weapon even in the airborne forces - small, compared with a full-size AK, effective range of fire (300-400m), fast overheating, very loud sound of a shot - which is especially bad when fighting in the city, inside the buildings.
      That is why in the army of the USSR / RF, the AKS74U became a standard weapon of calculations for RPGs, drivers, artillerymen, air defense personnel and crews of ground ICBMs - i.e. those categories that do not directly conduct military combat from small arms, but may well run into the RDG or another byak.
      Since 1970 the issue of adopting for these categories of PPs was being worked out, in fact, the modern "cedar" is growing from the Dragunov PP71, in fact they considered the effective range to be small and began the theme of "modern" ending with AKS74U.
      But for police operations, a full-size PP is really better, this is how the "Vityaz" appeared - the same AKS74U, but converted for a free breechblock and a 9X19 cartridge.
  50. 0
    7 March 2019 16: 05
    And here was a black man ...
    1. +1
      7 March 2019 20: 16
      Quote: Dzafdet
      And here was a black man ...

      Well, does he carry M4 for weight? and he took the stores to M4 instead of AK stores by mistake? laughing
      do not confuse pictures with trophy, with alien, non-standard weapons with the real use of it in battles, otherwise you can completely add stupidity - I offer you a new topic - the Russian army is massively switching to M4 and G36



      and what? Do you have any pictures? mean use in battle laughing
  51. 0
    7 March 2019 20: 58
    Quote: gross kaput
    Quote: Dzafdet
    And here was a black man ...

    Well, does he carry M4 for weight? and he took the stores to M4 instead of AK stores by mistake? laughing
    do not confuse pictures with trophy, with alien, non-standard weapons with the real use of it in battles, otherwise you can completely add stupidity - I offer you a new topic - the Russian army is massively switching to M4 and G36



    and what? Do you have any pictures? mean use in battle laughing



    They are making the transition, but in their own way: Kalashnikov began producing AKs chambered for the NATO cartridge.
    Never mind, they will soon attack and get everything from the warehouses: PPSh, PPS, and SVT.
    By the way, the glorious Red Army lost 1941 million SVT units in 1...
    1. 0
      7 March 2019 22: 42
      Quote: Dzafdet
      By the way, the glorious Red Army lost 1941 million SVT units in 1...

      Well, tell us how the Red Army managed to lose you in 1941. more SVTs than were produced in total, of all modifications, as of January 1, 1942? laughing
    2. +1
      7 March 2019 23: 01
      Quote: Dzafdet
      They are making the transition, but in their own way: Kalashnikov began producing AKs chambered for the NATO cartridge.

      Wow, and probably the 7,62X51 cartridge has been adopted by the Russian Army? And the machine gun for it was also adopted for service? This wunderwaffle was developed exclusively for export, by the way, if this has passed you by, AK20 and AK101 under 102X5,56 NATO have been produced for over 45 years, only both of them are produced exclusively for export.
      And the photos above are the spoils of war 8.8.8.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      and PPSh, and PPS, and SVT.
      Again, past the cash register - PPSh and PPS were withdrawn from service by Serdyukov and their stocks were disposed of, while PPSh were transferred to factories for conversion into civilian weapons MMG, SHP and pneuma. In fact, they were of no use at all as weapons in our time - it’s trivial due to the lack of cartridges for them, our last line for the production of TT cartridges was stopped in Yuryuzan back in 89, in the early 90s both this line and the entire 38- m plant as a whole, and those used items that remained in warehouses had long expired all warranty periods of storage.
      SVT/AVT were also withdrawn from service under Serdyukov and were disposed of in large quantities or sent for conversion; in fact, I am the owner of such a fenced AVT manufactured in 1944.
      Is there anything left in the warehouses from SVT/AVT h.z., but most likely no rather than yes.
      1. +1
        7 March 2019 23: 11
        Yes, I forgot to add, the AK 308 was developed under an Indian contract, the Indians had long wanted to accept something fresher than their insas - the same AK only with 7,62X51, as a result, we won the tender for a new Indian assault rifle, but the Indians changed their shoes in the air and chose not AK308 but AK103, a plant for their production was launched in India last year, the Indians plan to completely localize production by the end of next year. Although it is quite possible that the AK308 will be produced there and supplied to the Indian army.
  52. 0
    7 March 2019 21: 14
    Well, this is the same ABC-36 that allegedly did not exist..

    1. +1
      7 March 2019 22: 48
      Friend, who said that she wasn’t there? There is no need to attribute your fantasies to me, the point is that ABC36 after 1939. NOT PRODUCED. that is why they could not simplify it in 1941. And during the Second World War, SVT and AVT were simplified, and the only simplification of the sighting on them was made in August 1943 - an aiming bar with a one-sided clamp latch was introduced - which did not in any way affect the quality of aiming, but did affect the number of machine operations.
  53. 0
    8 March 2019 08: 59
    Quote: gross kaput
    Friend, who said that she wasn’t there? There is no need to attribute your fantasies to me, the point is that ABC36 after 1939. NOT PRODUCED. that is why they could not simplify it in 1941. And during the Second World War, SVT and AVT were simplified, and the only simplification of the sighting on them was made in August 1943 - an aiming bar with a one-sided clamp latch was introduced - which did not in any way affect the quality of aiming, but did affect the number of machine operations.


    And not only . They simplified the swivels, made the bayonet smaller, and messed up something with the ramrod. AVT is generally a horror flying on the wings of the night. All these convulsions were caused by the lack of a normal light machine gun.
    Here is a text about MTK. Although I do not completely agree with the author of the text, he is right in many respects...
    Trork. Feb 7, 2019 at 12:26
    Well, there are no words... the author is of course a great guy and knows how to write beautifully - but there are big problems with reliability!))))))
    Wow, as he beautifully said, “...It was really difficult for the Kalashnikov pistol to compete with the APS, perhaps this model did not even reach the stage of field testing. The reason was also that during the period of creation of the pistol, testing and adoption of the Stechkin automatic pistol, Mikhail Timofeevich was busy working on his main topic...” - well, how unlucky)))))) although, as himself the author lets slip that “Vilikav Timafeyich’s” classes “...on the main topic...” did not at all prevent him from trying, in addition to the pistol of his name, “... At different times the designer created both submachine guns and sniper rifles...” - never accepted for service, glory to God. By the way, no such “concentrations” were required from the MTK in 1950 - before the start of work on the machine gun named after oneself, there are still five to seven years, and the AK has already been adopted for service and no one expects anything significant from the “type of designer” - knowing him technical level... and also the “great” multi-machine operator from 1950 (meaningfully, right?) worked as a member of the Council of the Union of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR - there was such a poorhouse... wasn’t it really such a desire for publicity and fame that “prevented” our recognized “vilik”?))) )))
    The author is slightly wrong. MTK is a well-known poser, but NOT ONE sample of a weapon of his design has NEVER BEEN ACCEPTED FOR ARMAMENT)))))) the famous AK is a compilation from the works of Sudaev, Bulkin and others, assembled into one whole by Zaitsev at the tempo of a waltz “on the knee” fitting" Lyuty - from "Timafeich" there is only a name and a beautiful biography, and even that is murky to the point of being fabulous, and connections with party activists (here, most likely, are the origins of his "genius")... PC/PKM - again the work of the whole team based on the design of the machine gun NOT created by Vilikaim Mahal-Timafeich, especially since Vilikay himself was just as busy with “social activities” and could not take a leading part in the development for objective reasons)))))) ) all his personal handicrafts did not go beyond the category of amusing exotics of a low design level, regularly failing at all sorts of competitions - what a “genius”, damn it... this was exactly the fate of the described pistol - it was not for nothing that he was kicked out of the competition outright, oh for good reason !))))))

    but about “...It is no coincidence that in the mid-1970s the Modern competition was launched in the Soviet Union, the main task of which was the creation and adoption of not new automatic pistols, but small-sized machine guns...” the author knows extremely superficially!!! The “Modern” competition itself was organized precisely by chance - when a REAL designer, comrade Tkachev P.A. proposed a small-sized machine gun he created on his own initiative (it could be called a submachine gun, a unique example of its kind!) to arm all these “cooks, signalmen, tank crews and others...”, here http://maxpark.com/ community/404/content/1387562, quote “...The Tkachev AO-46 assault rifle, an experimental copy of which was released in 1969, is almost the only development that was created not by order of the USSR Government, Union ministries and departments, but by personal initiative of the designer - gunsmith, employee of the Central Research Institute of Precision Engineering Tkachev P.A...”!!! and “Viliky MTK”, as always, got into the work of good designers already “to catch up”, when, in FACT, the shortcomings in the CONCEPT of army armament identified by Tkachev, the competition announced in 1973 was already at the completion stage. Unfortunately, during the competition, the very idea of ​​P.A. They managed to kill Tkachev - the favorite of the competition, the Dragunov assault rifle, was already a small-sized assault rifle, much heavier than the Tkachev joint-stock company, much larger in size, and so on - in fact, being a full-fledged assault rifle of slightly smaller dimensions, but in no way “... The assault rifle was intended for use as a personal weapon for those units and units whose military personnel are not directly involved in fire contact with the enemy (artillerymen, missilemen, tank crews, support workers, etc.)...", (from here https://army-news.ru/2012 /02/avtomat-tkachyova-ao-46/) although the declared dimensions and performance characteristics of the weapon were literally “copied” by the organizers of the competition from JSC (by the way, ALL competition samples did NOT correspond to them to one degree or another!)!((( ((((but Dragunov’s MA was nevertheless a step forward compared to existing models (especially those named after AK), and in general was very “advanced" - suffice it to say that a normal “upper-lover” version was offered, with all the required pluses, more details here https://topwar.ru/20037-malogabaritnye-avtomaty-statya-i-ma-dragunova-ao-46-tkacheva-tkb-0116-stechkina.html, there are also other samples there, including including JSC... however, as it is beautifully said here https://armyman.info/avtomaty/27407-avtomat-tkacheva-ao-46.html “... The Tkachev AO-46 assault rifle was a constructive novelty for its time, which stood up with honor( !!!) all tests (!!!), including in extreme conditions (!!!). The reasons for the refusal to launch the product into series are unknown (!!!).

    because even “Modern” our “Vilikai Timafeich” managed to ruin!!! Well, I really wanted fame and honors, and bonuses, of course! and at the tempo of a waltz, again “on the knee” and by someone unknown (but, of course, under the already familiar “brand” of “brilliant gunsmith”), by bluntly cutting off the AKS-74, a freak was riveted together under the markings AKS-74U, also known as “Ksyukha” , it’s also a “spitter”, it’s also... incredibly being WORSE than ALL samples submitted to the competition, this freak is still ACCEPTED into service))))) not for long, however - after the start of use in real battles, everyone began to quickly push away from this miracle, whoever picked it up, and in the end it slid down the path of the “cop scarecrow”, where it took root - there’s simply nowhere to fall any lower)))))))) and in Syria, pilots even today are fighting back with APS, sometimes dying... Thank you , Great Timafeich!!! truly “... the spiral of history has made another circle...”(((((((

    the author again sang hosanna to “Vilikam Kanstrukhtyr.” I, as befits an unpleasant type with excessive causticity, cannot ignore outright nonsense, and considered it my duty to once again return the angel wings to the warehouse, and hand over the halo back to the manufacturer - because I DID NOT DESERVE IT!!! The price of the ambitions of this “genius” with the formation of “...I thought a lot...” turns out to be unarmed crews of military equipment! It's HIS FAULT!!! which cost not only money, but also blood... so there is no need to polish the bust - it won’t bleed...


    https://army-news.ru/2019/02/avtomaticheskij-pistolet-kalashnikova-1950-goda/
    1. 0
      8 March 2019 11: 20
      Quote: Dzafdet
      They simplified the swivels, made the bayonet smaller, and messed up something with the ramrod. .

      Swing swivels you say? smile the list of changes just to simplify mechanical operations on the receiver takes up a page - read Chumak’s monograph again. There, a complete list of wartime changes and figures for reducing the cost of time and materials are given.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      AVT is generally a horror flying on the wings of the night. All these convulsions were caused by the lack of a normal light machine gun.

      Oh how! but the men don’t even know! ABC36 also had an automatic mode because of this? And the Tokarev ACT carbines, which were produced in small series before the war, were also invented due to the lack of handbrake? The USM SVT initially included the possibility of auto-fire; Tokarev rifles themselves participated in all competitions for AUTOMATIC rifles in the 30s, but in 1938. the requirement for automatic fire was dropped from the competition tasks, so the SVT38 became only self-loading, although in the USM the changes affected only the fuse-translator. Actually, this feature made it possible to quite simply convert the SVT into an AVT in 1942 - by 1942, such a rework was caused by a lack of handbrake, but the preservation of the AVT in production for 43-44 is no longer there, there were already enough handbrake, but according to research results it turned out that the AVT is preferable SVT at short combat ranges - although the ammunition consumption is higher, the percentage of targets hit per minute is much higher.
      Quote: Dzafdet
      the author knows extremely superficially!!! The “Modern” competition itself was organized precisely by chance - when a REAL designer, comrade Tkachev P.A. proposed a small-sized machine gun he created on his own initiative

      My friend, weapons are not fashionable rags, especially the weapons theme in the USSR, a designer can’t just decide, out of nothing better to do, whether I should get an automatic? take it and mold it in an “initiative” manner, and then show it to the military so that they groan wow, what a thing! It won’t work out like that for us, because questions will immediately arise for the designer - are you guys making something that is not approved at the workplace?
      First, the customer formulates the task and sets TTT (tactical and technical requirements), then the contractor opens R&D (scientific research work) during which experiments are carried out and the question of the possibility and ways of solving the problem is decided, if this is decided, then the customer issues TTR (tactical and technical requirements) tasks) and R&D opens - development work during which a sample weapon appears.
      As for the Tkachevsky AO-46, it appeared as a result of an addition to the research project NV10-106-65 “the search for new principles and schemes for creating advanced small arms (cartridges and weapons)”; Tkachev was the leading engineer of this research project. And there was no trace of initiative here, the impetus for working out the short one was the captured Colt XM177 and data on the “short program” of the US Army.
      Actually, the AO46 was created precisely as a demonstrator to determine the very possibility of creating a small-sized assault rifle chambered for the 5,6 13MZhV cartridge with sufficient efficiency.
      and from this research work the design and development work "Modern" and technical specifications for it have already grown.
      I tell you again, stop reading all this nonsense on the Internet, read better normal books - yes, they are expensive, but they are written by professionals with the maximum use of archival materials.
      1. +1
        8 March 2019 11: 42
        Regarding the garbage opus about the AKS74U that you cited as an “argument” laughing
        For aircraft pilots, it makes absolutely no difference which of the small-sized assault rifles would be adopted for service, since they were all made from the same technical specifications and all had approximately equal performance characteristics in weight and dimensions - folded length 440-450 mm weight 2,8-3 kg t. e. any of these devices would have to be shoved into the NAZ, throwing out everything inside. And in combat conditions, everything would have developed according to the same scenario as in Afghanistan - the pilot landing on the heads of the dushmans would not have been able to drag the NAZ container to him by the halyard, open it, take out and load the machine gun. In the case when the pilot had a head start on time, it was much wiser not to wait with a machine gun in the hands of the spirits, but to try to merge quietly. It was for these reasons, confirmed in practice, that the machine gun was very quickly removed from the combat NAZ and the really necessary things were returned there.
        As for the unarmed crews of military equipment - aftor two - crews of military equipment conducting direct ground combat: tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, engineer clearing vehicles, etc. armed with full-size machine guns.
        Ksyukha is good exactly in her place - i.e. as PDW, and main mud throwers AKS74U
        firstly, they have never fired from it, and secondly, they do not understand its tactical niche, trying to pull an owl onto a globe - i.e. consider it as the main weapon of the infantryman.
        1. 0
          8 March 2019 15: 39
          I’ll add for the “experts” the wretchedness of the AKS74U
          Typically, such “specialists” have two points of view - the first is that the very idea of ​​​​a shortened assault rifle is flawed and the AKS74U is an under-automatic machine that is not capable of adequately shooting.
          And the second AKS74U sucks, but if Konstantinov, Stechkin or Dragunov had won, that would have been great!
          Actually, I’ll answer both at once, the AKS74U had maximum unification with the standard AK74, while the specially created short ones did not have significant advantages over it either in efficiency or in weight-dimensions, but had nothing in common with the standard assault rifle, and the Stechkin assault rifle also required its own shops.
          As for whether it is necessary or not, there are similar shortcuts in all armies of the world, and they are all created on the basis of standard samples, and everywhere they are exclusively “niche” specialized samples and in this they are not at all different from the AKS74U, but only in the Russian Federation are Internet specialists They are strenuously trying to get Ksyukha to be used for infantry use, and only in Russia, when this does not work out, the same would-be theorists foam at the mouth and prove the “wretchedness” of the AKS74U.



          1. 0
            8 March 2019 15: 41
            a little more




            and my favorite version is the short FAL for 7,62X51 NATO
            1. 0
              8 March 2019 15: 45
              It’s strange that none of our miracle theorists thought of comparing the AKS74U with a cropped sbr-fal

  54. 0
    8 March 2019 17: 58
    Quote: gross kaput
    It’s strange that none of our miracle theorists thought of comparing the AKS74U with a cropped sbr-fal




    Are you talking to an owl on the globe?
    1. +1
      8 March 2019 19: 40
      And what is this photo for? Was it a discovery for you that the AKS74U was tested in the Airborne Forces? or was it a discovery for you that the landing party abandoned it as the main model? Or maybe it was a discovery for you that the “modern” theme did not provide for a small-sized machine gun as a replacement for a full-size one?
      For the life of me I don’t understand what you are trying to prove.
      Unlike you, I have shot quite a lot with both the AK74M and the AKS74U, and I have a very good idea of ​​both its advantages and disadvantages. If you have a choice of using a weapon in battle, even for combat inside buildings, then the AK74M is still the same, although the AKS74U is more turning and convenient , but if you have to choose what to carry on your person just in case, then a knot is definitely better than a pistol or PP.
  55. 0
    8 March 2019 18: 04
    The machine gun for tank crews was AKS74, one per crew, assigned to the gunner-operator. Then they introduced AKS 74U for supply for all crew members, except for platoon and company commanders who had AKS74. At the same time, pistols remained with all crew members. That is, in a tank company, the crews were armed with 33 PM, 4 AKS74 and 26 AKS 74U. However, the trick is that in the T-64/72/80 tanks, stowage was provided for only one AKS74 assault rifle. The rest were shoved where they didn’t end up

    http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=332&p=17
    1. 0
      8 March 2019 19: 33
      And what does this change? I repeat once again - the standard armament of the tank is ONE AKS/AKMS/AKS74/AK74M assault rifle, so why additional AKS74Us began to be assigned to crew members is probably more good than bad? Or do you think it’s better that they only have PM? or better yet, SHN laughing
      You can take a closer look at the staff of tank companies/battalions here.
      https://yv-gontar.io.ua/s204359/shtaty_tankovyh_motostrelkovyh_polkov_otdelnyh_batalonov_i_parashyutno-desantnyh_polkov
  56. 0
    9 March 2019 14: 55
    Quote: gross kaput
    And what does this change? I repeat once again - the standard armament of the tank is ONE AKS/AKMS/AKS74/AK74M assault rifle, so why additional AKS74Us began to be assigned to crew members is probably more good than bad? Or do you think it’s better that they only have PM? or better yet, SHN laughing
    You can take a closer look at the staff of tank companies/battalions here.
    https://yv-gontar.io.ua/s204359/shtaty_tankovyh_motostrelkovyh_polkov_otdelnyh_batalonov_i_parashyutno-desantnyh_polkov


    They need to be armed with this:

    The first combat use of the AEK-919K pistol was noted in the spring of 1995 by one of the special forces of the FSB of the Russian Federation (which received a batch of 100 submachine guns) during the restoration of constitutional order in Chechnya. In 2002, the crews of Ka-919 “Black Shark” helicopters operating in the combat zone in Chechnya and Dagestan were armed with AEK-50K pistols[7].

    In 2003, AEK-919K pistols were officially adopted by the Federal Bailiff Service[8]. As of October 2006, AEK-919K pistols were used by individual units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation[9], FSO, FSB and FSIN[10].

    1. 0
      9 March 2019 21: 14
      Quote: Dzafdet
      They need to be armed with this:

      For what? What kind of perverted logic is it to arm an obviously worse model when there is an existing opportunity to give a better one? Subcompact SMGs are only good for concealed carry and for working inside buildings; in fact, their effectiveness is a maximum of 100 meters, and any armored vehicle, even a light one, is already a serious obstacle for them. I haven’t shot from a chestnut tree, but I have shot from our other compact, the “cedar”, - the poor and extremely short shoulder rest and the aiming line are too short, as a result, at 50 meters standing hand-held at the chest target No. 4, such a picture emerges that, so as not to get upset , I no longer want to shoot at 100.
      1. qw3
        +1
        9 March 2019 21: 54
        Quote: gross kaput
        in fact, their effectiveness is a maximum of 100 meters, and any armored vehicle, even a light one, is already a serious obstacle for them. I didn’t shoot from a chestnut tree, but from our other compact, the “cedar”

        A real SMG is a full-fledged weapon for combat at a range of up to 100 m.
        Weapons on the 9x18 mm PM cartridge are not military in any form, just like the PM cartridge. Therefore, Kedr is PP. But not an army man, but a policeman. The police are not tasked with destroying their opponents. The task is to detain the opponent.
        I think they will make an army PP in Russia. Later. On a 9x19 mm NATO or 9x21 mm cartridge. Then it will be possible to talk about army PP. In the meantime, it's early.
        1. 0
          9 March 2019 22: 26
          Quote: qw3
          On the 9x19 mm NATO cartridge

          That is, you haven’t heard about PP-19-01 “Vityaz”, PP-2000 or SR-2 “Veresk”? It's funny.
          What is hidden behind your term army PP - would you be so kind as to decipher it?
          And most importantly, what do you think is its advantage over a compact machine gun?
          1. qw3
            -1
            9 March 2019 23: 48
            Quote: gross kaput
            That is, you haven’t heard about PP-19-01 “Vityaz”, PP-2000 or SR-2 “Veresk”? It's funny.

            Russian weapons are usually designed for the Russian version of the 9x19 mm +R cartridge. And I wrote specifically about the 9x19 mm NATO cartridge. He's slightly different.
            Quote: gross kaput
            PP - would you be so kind as to decipher it?

            A submachine gun, of course.
            Quote: gross kaput
            And most importantly, what do you think is its advantage over a compact machine gun?

            At least in the fact that the PP is precisely an automatic machine.
            Same AKSU, this is not a machine gun. This is an automatic carbine. He cannot create dense fire.
            The AK-74 is also an assault rifle.
            Quote: gross kaput
            What do you think of the army pistol cartridge?

            An army pistol cartridge is a cartridge whose bullet, at a distance of up to 50 m, when fired from a barrel usually 120-125 mm long and with a high-quality hit, strikes the victim’s central nervous system, guaranteed to turn him into a corpse.
            Barrel length numbers may vary slightly. It can also slightly “walk” in a larger direction. But that's the general meaning.
            Quote: gross kaput
            Have you seen the results of a PM bullet hitting a human carcass?

            It does not matter. Emotions are one thing. The end result is different.
            1. +1
              10 March 2019 01: 30
              What a mess you have in your head,
              Quote: qw3
              a high-quality hit affects the victim’s central nervous system

              My friend, the human central nervous system consists of the spinal cord, medulla oblongata, midbrain, diencephalon and cerebellum; if even a small bullet hits any of these sections, “CNS damage” occurs. wink traumatic shock is not directly related to the central nervous system.
              Quote: qw3
              whose bullet at a distance of up to 50 m when fired from a barrel is usually 120-125 mm long

              In 1970, at the Rzhev test site, tests were carried out on the PM cartridge in comparison with the standard pistol cartridge of the most likely enemy, that is, with the .45 ACP. results for shooting at gelatin blocks - the dimensions of the temporary pulsating cavity at standard speeds are approximately equal - for 45 cubes for PM 134 cubes. In addition, the PM was used to shoot at canned corpses at a distance of 130 meters - “50mm bullets gave through wounds when shot both in the upper and lower extremities and when hitting the head, chest and stomach of canned corpses. In this case, comminuted fractures of long tubular bones occurred.” .
              Quote: qw3
              Russian weapons are usually designed for the Russian version of the 9x19 mm +R cartridge. And I wrote specifically about the 9x19 mm NATO cartridge. He's slightly different.

              Hmm, do you actually understand what “NATO cartridge” means? STANAG 4090 says nothing?
              wink And in fact, it’s not entirely clear what the “NATO cartridge” has to do with this: all domestic weapons under the 9X19 freely fire any cartridge corresponding to STANAG 4090, but on the contrary - pushing 7n30 or 7n31 into a foreign country is not a very good solution - it will shoot for a while, but the kirdyk will come much faster, I’ll tell you a terrible secret, the “NATO cartridge” in terms of maximum pressure is on the border between 9mm and 9mm+P, and domestic ones are already closer to +P+.
              Quote: qw3
              It does not matter. Emotions are one thing. End result, other

              This is of great importance, because it is the “holes” in a real carcass that determine the final effectiveness, and if all your knowledge is taken from Tyrnet, then I have seen the results of use, including 9X18, more than once, therefore, unlike I’m judging you not only by the articles, but also by my own experience.
              Py.Sy. and yet “the topic of boobs has not been covered” so how do you think the army PP differs from the “non-army”?
              1. qw3
                +2
                10 March 2019 02: 11
                Quote: gross kaput
                The human central nervous system consists of

                I already understand that you don’t know how a small arms bullet “works” on a target.
                Quote: gross kaput
                traumatic shock is not directly related to the central nervous system.

                Through the peripheral n/system, connected.
                Quote: gross kaput
                In addition, the PMA was used to shoot at canned corpses

                I could be wrong, but what does this have to do with the main topic? Do corpses have a central nervous system?
                What was there and where the corpses gave, is of no interest to anyone.
                Quote: gross kaput
                all domestic weapons under 9X19 freely fire any cartridge corresponding to STANAG 4090, but on the contrary - shoving 7n30 or 7n31 into a foreign country is not a very good solution - it will shoot for a while, but the kirdyk will come much faster,

                And you don't know this topic. Everything is exactly the opposite.
                And the pressure in the bore of the NATO cartridge is higher. And the recoil impulse is greater.
                Quote: gross kaput
                and domestic ones are already closer to +P+.

                They made me laugh. From this it follows that you do not know what the Russian 9x19 mm cartridge is.
                The Russian 9x19 mm cartridge, in terms of performance characteristics, very roughly speaking, is between the wartime 9x19 mm cartridge and the modern 9x19 mm +R. It is noticeably closer to the latter and is essentially its variety, subspecies.
                Those. the shift is not in the direction of 9x19 mm +P+, but in the opposite direction.
                You judge by DE, and this is wrong. Unprofessional, it will be more accurate.
                Quote: gross kaput
                because it is the “holes” in a real carcass that determine the final effectiveness

                Holes don't define anything. Determines the amount of energy transferred to the body. And the time of this transfer. This is all.
                When a strictly defined energy is transferred over a strictly defined time (if the threshold of this energy is exceeded), the central nervous system is damaged and the fins stick together automatically.
                If there is a lack of this energy, options are possible.
                With a long transfer time of even a sufficient amount of energy (and even in excess), options are also possible.
                In fact, everything is very simple.
                Quote: gross kaput
                then I have seen the results of use, including 9X18, more than once

                This is not interesting to anyone.
                Quote: gross kaput
                I judge not only from articles but also from my own experience.

                So judge. Since you don’t know how to do it.
                Quote: gross kaput
                Py.Sy. and yet “the topic of boobs has not been covered” so how do you think the army PP differs from the “non-army”?

                Many of them. And above all, a patron.
                1. +1
                  10 March 2019 12: 10
                  Quote: qw3
                  And the pressure in the bore of the NATO cartridge is higher. And the recoil impulse is greater.

                  laughing
                  9mm Luger +P rated 36,000 to 38,500 PSI (not sure if SAAMI rates +P).
                  9mm Luger +P+ rated 42,000 PSI (not sure if SAAMI rates +P+).

                  NATO 9x19mm Parabellum rated 36,500 PSI.

                  domestic army 9Х19 - 2800kg/cm2 - or 39 PSI

                  US standard 9mm NATO M822 ball - 7,4g bullet, speed on a 120mm barrel at 15 feet from the muzzle 385 m/s
                  now a domestic manufacturer - a cartridge with a bullet with a lead core "PS" (7N35) bullet weight 7,4 g speed 440 m/s/
                  Quote: qw3
                  When a strictly defined energy is transferred over a strictly defined time (if the threshold of this energy is exceeded), the central nervous system is damaged and the fins stick together automatically.

                  Did you come up with it yourself or did someone suggest it? Does your energy exist separately and is it energy that kills? It's funny, but we haven't invented blasters yet laughing
                  The lethal (stopping effect) of a bullet depends primarily on the volume of damaged tissue and the depth of penetration, i.e. on the length and profile of the wound channel, if we consider military pistol cartridges, then everything will depend only on the diameter of the bullet and the depth of its penetration - they cannot actually create a serious runway because the speed is too low, they fragment and open up for army taboos - as a result There are only two values ​​by which one can judge - the diameter of the wound canal and the depth of penetration, but it lies within certain limits limited by the thickness of a typical carcass - i.e. if we take two identical bullets, one with a wound channel length of 50 cm and the second 1 m, then there will be no difference in lethality between them.
                  Actually, stop with online training and read serious works, including those on wound ballistics.
                  Let's return to our sheep - a 5,45 bullet in terms of lethality, at the effective fire range of PP under 9X19, covers it like a god on a turtle, as it enters the carcass in two strokes, creating a huge runway while starting to turn sideways after 10cm of the wound channel.
                  Quote: qw3
                  Many of them. And above all, a patron.

                  Actually, it’s quite expected - they blurted out something stupid and now you don’t know how to get out of it laughing
                  1. qw3
                    0
                    10 March 2019 13: 04
                    So many different numbers. Now I can imagine what a mess you have in your head. And why can't you understand the topic?
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    US standard

                    Quote: gross kaput
                    now a domestic manufacturer

                    You don’t adjust the numbers to fit your statements. And take typical cartridges with typical bullets.
                    A NATO bullet for a military pistol weighs 7,82 g. For a service army pistol, 8,04 g.
                    Bullet of the Russian cartridge 5,3 g.
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    Did you come up with it yourself or did someone suggest it?

                    Prompted. And it would be nice to give you some advice. Otherwise, the forest in this place is dark.
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    Does your energy exist separately and is it energy that kills? It's funny, but we haven't invented blasters yet

                    Do you understand Russian poorly? It also says a certain amount of energy (no less) transferred over a certain period of time.
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    Lethal (stopping) effect of a bullet

                    These are not synonyms.
                    I didn’t read further, I kept my eyes peeled.
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    bullet 5,45 in terms of lethality, at the effective fire range of PP under 9X19,

                    Have you tried to compare the price of cartridges? And the billions of cartridges that will be needed during the war?
                    Quote: gross kaput
                    you blurted out something stupid and now you don’t know how to get out of it

                    I do not have your habits.
                    1. 0
                      10 March 2019 14: 09
                      Quote: qw3
                      A NATO bullet for a military pistol weighs 7,82 g. For a service army pistol, 8,04 g.

                      Ale, weirdo - once again, in hell. which one I would like to draw your attention to, NATO - STANAG 4090
                      Small Arms Ammunition (9 mm Parabellum) if you don’t understand what it is, I’ll explain it’s the NATO STANDARD FOR INTERCHANGEABLE PISTOL CARTRIDGE.
                      There is NO division in NATO between a cartridge for a military pistol and a service army pistol - these are your wet fantasies.
                      Actually, you are wearing the American MIL-C-70508, MILITARY SPECIFICATION: CARTRIDGE, 9MM, BALL, NATO, XM882, study the pressure and speed at your leisure


                      Quote: qw3
                      Bullet of the Russian cartridge 5,3 g.

                      In general, it’s a disgrace - the cartridge index already suggested - 7n35 - couldn’t they even find the information on the internet? http://www.dogswar.ru/boepripasy/41-patrony/7891-patron-s-pylei-so-sv.html
                      The 5.4N7 cartridge has a 21 gram bullet at a speed of 450 m/s and an energy equal to that of the M822.
                      Quote: qw3
                      Have you tried to compare the price of cartridges? And the billions of cartridges that will be needed during the war?

                      What was the purpose of this blurt anyway? A hint that instead of 5,45 mm weapons it is better to rearm everyone with 9X19? Bold, fresh - but it’s unlikely to find understanding among interested parties laughing
                      1. qw3
                        0
                        10 March 2019 15: 06
                        Quote: gross kaput
                        MIL-C-70508, MILITARY SPECIFICATION: CARTRIDGE, 9MM, BALL, NATO, XM882 study pressure and speed at your leisure

                        I have nothing else to do, just read stupid little books in English.
                        Quote: qw3

                        Quote: gross kaput
                        US standard

                        Quote: gross kaput
                        now a domestic manufacturer

                        You don’t adjust the numbers to fit your statements. And take typical cartridges with typical bullets.

                        Quote: gross kaput
                        In general, it’s a disgrace - the cartridge index already suggested - 7n35 - couldn’t they even find the information on the internet?

                        This is a non-serial cartridge. I already wrote to you, stop adjusting the numbers to your words.
                        Serial cartridge 7N21 with a bullet weighing 5,4 g.
                        Quote: gross kaput
                        A hint that instead of 5,45 mm weapons it is better to rearm everyone with 9X19?

                        A hint that PP is a full-fledged segment of army weapons all over the world. And it’s no good for this segment to be polluted by all kinds of AKSU.
        2. +1
          9 March 2019 22: 28
          Quote: qw3
          Weapons on the 9x18 mm PM cartridge are not military in any form, just like the PM cartridge.

          When they write something like this, I’m always surprised - what do you think of an army pistol cartridge?
          And the second question - to follow up - have you seen the results of PM bullet hits on a human carcass?
  57. 0
    24 March 2019 09: 32
    “They usually say and write that it was the simplest, reversible, with only two distances. However, at some factories, frame sights like this were also installed on PPSh.”

    So at first the sights were frame, and when it turned out that the distance at which the fire was carried out, as a rule, did not exceed 200 meters, they began to install simple reversible ones instead.
  58. 0
    28 March 2019 10: 10
    The article is so-so, but thanks for the photos, very interesting. I’ve read some debates about butts here -)) Question, have you ever fired from a machine gun with such a folding butt? I shot. This is complete crap - nothing better than wood has ever been invented.
    Disputes over cartridges are also empty talk; the most secret information on weapons in the West is the muzzle velocity. And those numbers that are given here for 9x19 are bullshit. PM at 315 m/s of a 6 gram bullet is difficult to hold with one hand, and if, as they write here, 395 m/s and even a 7 gram bullet, then it is difficult to hold with 2 hands.
    Do you really think that if our cartridge was better, the West would switch to it? If yes, then... well, come up with a term for yourself -))

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"