Green's rifle: the first among the Russian "breech-loading" ...

Green's rifle. The hammer is cocked. (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

"Tell the Emperor that the British do not clean guns with bricks: let them not clean them either, or God bless, war, but they are not good for shooting," Lefty said clearly, crossed himself and died "
NS Leskov "The Tale of the Tula braid Lefty and the steel flea"

Russian rifle drama. Let's make a reservation right away that actually cleaning weapons and very much attention was paid to its saving in the Russian imperial army. So all Leskov's words about the "brick" are from the realm of fantasy. That is, it could have been, and it probably even happened somewhere, but it was contrary to the charter and in violation of the rules. But the fact that the lag in the field of armaments was obvious is undoubtedly. And today we will finally start publishing a series of articles on how this gap was overcome after the Eastern War. Moreover, VO already had articles (and many!) Devoted to the Mosin rifle and even a bayonet to it. But there was no material about what happened after the six-line primer rifle was adopted in 1856. In 1859, a Cossack rifle was developed, and in 1860, a Cossack rifle entered service - based on the infantry and dragoon models, and ... story muzzle-loading small arms in Russia ended. Our military has finally realized that the time for such weapons has passed, and it is necessary to re-equip the army with rifles that are loaded from the treasury. Where to get them?

A suitable sample was found in the same 1859 in the United States. Suitable in the sense that it met the requirements of our military: it was supposed to be a primer rifle, into which existing muzzle-loading rifles could be converted relatively easily and cheaply. The cartridges for it, as before, should have been glued in the troops, well, and it had to be simple so that our "stupid" soldiers could use it. For some reason, such a judgment existed among our gentlemen officers regarding our "gallant little soldiers". It was said about them that "the soldiers' fingers are too rough", and they will begin to lose the primers for primer guns. When they found out that no, they are not rude, and no one loses the primers, and they put on perfectly - they began to assert that it is difficult to teach an ordinary infantryman to use the rifle scope, which had divisions from 200 to 1200 steps. Therefore, for the infantry rifle, the scope was made only 600 steps, and for the dragoon rifle - 800! And this is after the Crimean War, where, as you know, the French choke Thouvenin showed good aiming accuracy at a distance of up to 1100 m!

Well, now they began to say, they say ... there is nothing more complicated than a primer rifle for our soldier to offer. But let it then, as in the West, be charged from the treasury. Where did we get such a strange distrust of our own soldier, we will not find out now. However, the fact that it was because of him that our supreme military ranks tried to choose weapons, albeit not the best, but the simplest and cheapest, is undoubtedly. However, not only ours. In the United States, after the Civil War, American cavalry received the Springfield single-shot carbine, although the seven-shot Spencer and the 12-shot Winchester already existed. But ... expensive, "the soldiers will not be able to handle this weapon." Well, yes, the cowboys could, but the soldiers, for some reason, cannot. But no one doubted the need for piping, multi-colored uniforms, sultans and brass ammunition!

So the slogan of the day was "simplicity" (which is often worse than theft!) And ... so that the soldiers themselves glue the cartridges. Here, by the way, it should be remembered that on the eve of the war, our soldiers were given 10 rounds a year for practical shooting! And now let's think: how long did it take to glue such a cartridge, fill it with gunpowder and fix a bullet in it? Well, let's say six minutes. So, working continuously, a soldier could make these same 10 rounds in just one hour. And in eight hours - 80! However, this was not the case. That is, there was time to scrub the buttons, but to prepare cartridges to teach the soldier to shoot well - alas, no.

So, as you can see, it was quite difficult to satisfy the tsarist generals then. However, a sample suitable for testing was still found - and not somewhere nearby, but still there in the United States. It was a breech-loaded single-shot rifle developed by US Army Lt. Col. James Durrell Green. The Green Rifle was the first bolt action rifle adopted by the United States Army and used during the North-South Civil War. Moreover, this rifle was well, very original, even unique in its kind! Green patented it on November 17, 1857 with US patent No. 18634, but he got a ready-to-use sample two years later ...

Green System Patent (US Patent Office)

Green's rifle used an unconventional cartridge in which the bullet was placed behind the powder, which made the shooting process unusual. She also had an oval section of the bore according to the Charles Lancaster system. The oval bore of the barrel twisted along the entire length of its barrel, ensuring the rotation of the bullet. She also turned out to be the first small-caliber rifle (13,5 mm) adopted by the US Army, and the only rifle with an oval drill in the US Army.

Green's rifle (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

In May 1862, Captain Thomas Jackson Rodman of the US Department of Arms tested the Green's rifle and ... criticized its design, noting that the location of the capsule from the bottom is inconvenient, since they easily fall off the hose. The bizarre design of Green's patented cartridge also made the rifle difficult to use. But despite the negative reception, the US Department of Arms still signed a contract for the supply of 900 Green rifles at a price of $ 36,96 per piece, which was significantly more expensive than the then muskets.

The rifles were delivered to the Washington arsenal in March 1863, where they remained throughout the American Civil War. In December 1869, they were transferred to the arsenal of New York and remained in storage there, and then sold at auction in 1895 as historical curiosities.

True, about 250 rifles were apparently sold to militias in Massachusetts at the beginning of the Civil War, because the bullets of Green's patented cartridges were then discovered on the battlefield of Antietam - apparently, these rifles were used there. And so this rifle would have remained among the weapon curiosities of the "great rifle drama of the United States" if it was not clear why (or, on the contrary, it was very clear why) had not been paid attention to by the Russian government, which ordered 2100 guns from Green (according to American data - 3000 ) for testing in Russia, and he also received a small contract for 350 rifles from Egypt. Since Green did not have his own manufacturing facilities, the rifle was manufactured by the AH Waters Armory in Millbury, Massachusetts. About 1859 rifles were produced from 1860 to the early 4500s.

So, what kind of weapon was it, since our military liked it so much? Here, its main feature should be noted: Green preoccupied the problem of reliably obturating a traditional paper cartridge and created a rifle that fired his own patented paper cartridges in .53 caliber. These cartridges were unique in that the powder in them was located in front of the bullet, and not behind it. The idea was that when firing, there will be another separate bullet in front of the cartridge - and so it will fly forward, while the rear bullet will expand under the pressure of the powder gases and will act as an obturator.

Green's patron

Due to the non-standard design of the cartridge, both the bolt itself and the order of firing from this rifle were unconventional in this rifle. The shutter was a structure that consisted of two parts: an external shutter and a piston located inside it. The outer bolt was hollow, which allowed the piston to move back and forth along it, with the bolt handle being connected to the piston.

The shutter is open. Top view (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

To fire, it was necessary to press the safety button located behind the bolt, thereby releasing the bolt, then turn it up, take it back and place a bullet without a cartridge in the chamber. Then, without turning the bolt handle, move it forward so that the piston can push the bullet into the chamber until it stops.

The shutter is closed. Top view (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

Then the bolt handle was again retracted, and this time it was necessary to put a cartridge with a bullet into the receiver. Now the piston had to be pushed forward again to place it in the chamber. After that, the shutter was closed by turning the handle to the right.

Green's rifle. The shutter is open. (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

For a shot, the lower ring trigger had to be cocked halfway, and a primer was put on the cone of the brandtube. Then the hammer had to be cocked completely - finally, it was possible to shoot from the rifle by pressing the trigger. After the shot, the firing process had to be repeated, with the last bullet always remaining in the barrel, and at the same time it was clear that it was there.

As already noted, when the hammer was cocked, the percussion capsule was not held by anything on the hose and could easily fall off from it from the shock.

In Russia, rifles were delivered with a barrel length of 35 inches (87,5 cm) and a total length of 153 cm (without bayonet), and with a bayonet - 198 cm.The rifle weight was 4300 g without a bayonet and 4650 g with a bayonet. The Dragoon version has traditionally been lighter and shorter. In the rifle in the United States, smooth cylindrical bullets were used, and in Russia, cylindrical-conical bullets with three grooves, into which a donkey was stuffed. (Institute of Military Technology in Titusville, Florida)

And what was found out as a result of testing this rifle with us? That the two-bullet barrel locking system does not work well. If the bullet did not expand very much, the gases would still break through, and if it did, then the bullet could not be pushed out of the chamber further into the barrel and had to be driven back out of it with a ramrod. The magnitude of the expansion of the bullet depended on too many variables: the composition of lead, the composition of gunpowder, its amount in the charge, that is, on factors that could not be unified at the level of technology at the time. Although, yes, cartridges for it, as well as bullets, could still be made directly in the troops by the hands of soldiers. As a result, this rifle was never adopted by the Russian army - the first pancake in the field of military cooperation between Russia and the United States in the middle of the XNUMXth century came out lumpy ...

PS The author and the site administration would like to thank the curator of the Institute of Military Technology (Titusville, Florida) Corey Wadrop for permission to use photographs from his article on the TFB website.

PSS Not so long ago I decided to try my luck again at the State Historical Museum (State Historical Museum), asked for permission to use photos from their website as illustrations for my articles on VO. The answer is: the price for a 2nd class photo, that is, not for printing, but in electronic media - 17 rubles per piece! Comments, as they say, are superfluous here! And at the top we have something they say about the patriotic education of our citizens on the glorious examples of history ...

To be continued ...

Comments

[Kot_Kuzya]

It is difficult to teach an ordinary infantryman to use the sight of a rifle rifle, which had divisions from 200 to 1200 steps. Therefore, for an infantry rifle, the scope was made only 600 steps, and for a dragoon rifle - 800! And this was after the Crimean War, where, as you know, the French choke of Thouvenin showed good aiming accuracy at a distance of up to 1100 m!

Nonsense! The generals were right. Even the SVD with a telescopic sight and incomparably better ballistics has an aiming range of 1300 m, while the effective firing range at a tall figure is 800 meters. 600 steps is 450 meters, this is the maximum effective firing range of the AK-74, and the ballistics of the AK-74 bullet is even ridiculous to compare with the ballistics of the bullets of the then rifles with initial velocities of 350-400 m / s.

Where did we get such a strange distrust of our own soldier, we will not find out now. However, the fact that it was because of him that our supreme military ranks tried to choose weapons, even if not the best, but the simplest and cheapest, is undoubtedly.

Russian generals preferred cheap weapons not because of distrust of the soldier, but because the country was extremely poor, and the army was the largest in the world. And in order to equip this huge army, it was necessary that the weapon was cheap. Well, the principle of simplicity for the army has never been canceled. The simpler the weapon, the faster you can teach a soldier to use his weapon, it will be more reliable and the less likely the soldier will break the weapon.

So, working continuously, a soldier could make these same 10 rounds in just one hour. And in eight hours - 80! However, this was not the case. That is, there was time to scrub the buttons, but to prepare cartridges to teach the soldier to shoot well - alas, no.

I repeat once again - the country was extremely poor, and the army was the largest in the world, and gunpowder and lead were expensive. Don't overlap the current capabilities of the arms industry with those of the mid-19th century.

[mmaxx]

That's why I constantly heard that for a simple conscript the tank should be simpler. Otherwise he will not master it at all.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

“Where did we get such a strange distrust of our own soldier, we will not find out now. However, the fact that it was because of him that our top military officials tried to choose weapons, albeit not the best, but the simplest and cheapest, is undoubtedly. "

Russian generals preferred cheap weapons not because of distrust of the soldier, but because the country was extremely poor, and the army was the largest in the world. And in order to equip this huge army, it was necessary that the weapon was cheap. Well, the principle of simplicity for the army has never been canceled. The simpler the weapon, the faster you can teach a soldier to use his weapon, it will be more reliable and the less likely the soldier will break the weapon.

Recruitment was canceled in 1875. I think for a quarter of a century it was possible to mold a soldier from a recruit. The time factor you specified is negligible for the period under consideration. Today it is necessary to put skills and abilities into the head of a recruit in one year. Then such a rush, in principle, was not needed.
To consider our soldier "stupid and incapable" was a banal excuse of that time. Duty words for mediocrity, "it's not my fault, he came himself."
Economy and poverty. Even more utter nonsense, though traditional for our army. I don’t remember who said from the classics “if you save on your army today, tomorrow you will feed someone else's”.
Ultimately, an example of the "hero of this article", without a hundred grams of how to shoot you will not figure out.
In the war of 1877-1878, we were eating it with a full spoon. Fortunately, at least we won. The rest of its wars, the Russian Empire lost.

It was possible to overcome all three identified problems, for this only two things, desire and will, were needed.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Napoleon said this:

... "The people who do not want to feed their army will feed someone else's"

By the way, when the army was recruited, the most unfit guys from the villages were sent to the army, and 95% of the population lived in the villages then. It was unprofitable for the community to send a hard-working and skilled guy to the army, and the most lazy, stupid or inept people were rallied. So the generals' fears were well founded.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

It was unprofitable for the community to send a hard-working and skilled guy to the army, and the most lazy, stupid or inept people were rallied. So the generals' fears were well founded.

Eco "inept" of that very Napoleon and won!

[Kot_Kuzya]

Even a monkey can be taught a lot in 25 years. A clumsy he is smarter and more capable of a monkey.

[CTABEP]

You wrote there above that the Russian Empire, except for the Turks in 1877-1878, did not defeat anyone)

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: CTABEP

You wrote there above that the Russian Empire, except for the Turks in 1877-1878, did not defeat anyone)

Where did I write this?

[kalibr]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

when the army was a recruit, the most useless guys from the villages were sent to the army,

Wrong! The landlords floated the most lively, from whom one could expect trouble. And the lazy were quickly taught not to be lazy-ha-ha!

[Simargl]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

I think for a quarter of a century it was possible to mold a soldier from a recruit.

What nonsense? Is it possible to keep a recruit for 25 years, so that in the 26th year he is something of himself ?!

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

Today it is necessary to put skills and abilities into the head of a recruit in one year.

And before his call for 15 years, they teach things that have nothing to do with agriculture. At the very least, a conscript knows how to learn (even the most worthless)! In addition, the task of the conscript army is mainly to provide a reserve.

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

To consider our soldier "stupid and incapable" was a banal excuse of that time.

Not an excuse. And it's not just the soldiers, but also the training system.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

In the war of 1877-1878, we were eating it with a full spoon. Fortunately, at least we won. The rest of its wars, the Russian Empire lost.

The Berlin Congress can hardly be called a victory. As a result, this war was also merged. So it turns out that the last victory was the war of 1812. Over the past hundred years, the RI Romanovs really have nothing to boast about.

It is no coincidence, in the time of troubles, that Mishka Romanov was elected by the boyars to the tsar for his small mind and quiet disposition. One Peter I stood out. All others are nothing like rulers.

[Ryazan87]

Over the past hundred years, the RI Romanovs really have nothing to boast about.

Indeed) the Caucasus and Transcaucasia annexed, the whole of Central Asia to the Afghan border and the Amur region with Primorye. The last 100 years RIA, yeah, yeah.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Ryazanets87

The last 100 years RIA, yeah, yeah.

Well, yes, well, yes .. Something worked out with guns against bows and arrows. And then in Turkestan there were a couple of lapses. And a little in the opponents of the state, everything is so sad .. War of 1828. - drain. The war of 1853 is a drain. War of 1877 - drain. The war of 1905 is a drain. The war of 1914 was a disaster and the end of the Republic of Ingushetia.

Moreover, earlier they took Berlin and stormed Stockholm and washed their boots in the Adriatic Sea. It looks like Catherine II was the last sensible ruler of the empire.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Saxahorse

It looks like Catherine II was the last intelligent ruler of the empire

Alexander III was not bad, he pinned the liberals and other terrorists to the nail, did not involve Russia in "small victorious wars." If it had not died at a relatively young age, then the Republic of Ingushetia would not have lost to the RYAV and would not have fought in WWI for the sake of French and British interests.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Alexander the Third was not bad, he pinned the liberals and other terrorists to the nail, did not involve Russia in "small victorious wars"

It was Alexander III who dragged the empire into the war with Germany. Before him, both Germany and Austria-Hungary were allies at the very least for almost 100 years. Buying on the promises of the French and the British (!), Getting enemies right at the border in exchange for loans (!), Frankly, is not very smart.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Don't write nonsense. Relations with Austria-Hungary were forever worsened during the Crimean War, when Austria-Hungary declared an alliance with Britain and France, and put forward a number of demands against Russia, threatening to start a war otherwise. Prussia supported Austria-Hungary and offered Russia to accept the conditions of Austria-Hungary.
Three reasons contributed to the creation of the Franco-Russian alliance: 1) the Germanophobia of Alexander III; 2) the dreams of the top of the Russian government to include the Slavic peoples in the Balkans in Russia, which automatically made Austria-Hungary and its ally Germany enemies of Russia; 3) after the defeat in 1871, France badly needed an ally on the continent against Germany, England was not suitable for this, since it did not have a strong army. Russia became the only option, and the French simply bought this Franco-Russian union with their loans, and Russia really needed the money.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Don't write nonsense. Relations with Austria-Hungary were forever worsened during the Crimean War,

Don't repeat nonsense :) Relations were ruined before the 1953 war, when the Romanovs almost openly negotiated with Turkey about a war against Austria and with Austria about a war against Turkey. Simultaneously! The result, as expected, was the alliance of all against the Republic of Ingushetia. Relations were finally finished off in 1878, when, before the war with Turkey, they entered into an alliance with Austria-Hungary and promised Serbia to her. However, having approached Constantinople, the Romanovs suddenly "forgot" about the promises. Prussia in those negotiations acted as the guarantor of the agreement, it is not surprising that Bismarck was furious. The result, as expected, was the Berlin Congress where the Romanovs were publicly put in place. They were offended ..

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Three reasons contributed to the creation of the Franco-Russian alliance:

This is exactly what I am writing about! Yes, these are the very reasons plus the "resentment" mentioned above. And at the core, we see not an objective benefit for the Russian empire from this very Franco-Russian union, but pure whim of the Romanovs, which cost our empire dearly in the end.

[Kot_Kuzya]

You contradict yourself. You blame Alexander III for the deterioration of relations with Austria-Hungary

It was Alexander III who dragged the empire into the war with Germany. Before him, both Germany and Austria-Hungary were allies at the very least for almost 100 years.

Then you write without batting an eye

Relations were finally finished off in 1878, when, before the war with Turkey, they entered into an alliance with Austria-Hungary and promised Serbia to her. However, having approached Constantinople, the Romanovs suddenly "forgot" about the promises. Prussia acted as the guarantor of the agreement in those negotiations, it is not surprising that Bismarck was furious.

In 1878, Alexander II was the king, not the Third. So Alexander III cannot be blamed for the deterioration of relations with German countries.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

In 1878, Alexander II was the king, not the Third. So Alexander III cannot be blamed for the deterioration of relations with German countries.

It is possible and necessary. Alexander 2 realized that he was "wrong" and his dissatisfaction remained on a personal level. Alexander 3 launched a full Germanophobic program. Customs war, repression against German citizens, demonstrative anti-German unions, it was he who finished off the remnants of relations. It is difficult to call the Franco-Russian alliance an alternative, especially since France itself is deliberately weak and its type is a temporary ally England, a longtime enemy of Russia.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Saxahorse

Alexander 2 realized that he was "wrong" and his dissatisfaction remained on a personal level

Did Alexander II tell you personally about this at a seance?

Quote: Saxahorse

Alexander 3 launched a full Germanophobic program. Customs war, repression against German citizens, demonstrative anti-German unions

So even England, which was then the "workshop of the world," suffered from the influx of German goods, let alone Russia, which would have been flooded with cheap and high-quality German goods without customs duties. Alexander III was forced to impose duties on German goods in order to allow his own industry to develop and prevent it from being strangled by German goods. This is a normal practice, there are now huge duties on the import of imported cars, for example, a used Toyota in Japan is bought for 400 thousand, with customs clearance it becomes 900 thousand. And the people in the Far East are already scratching their turnips, and many are transplanted to Lada and other brands of Russian production, since they may be slightly worse in quality and not so comfortable, but they are new, at the same price. Without these duties, no one would buy Russian-made cars, everyone would drive second-hand foreign cars, and the Russian auto industry would collapse and disappear.

Quote: Saxahorse

It is difficult to call the Franco-Russian alliance an alternative, especially since France itself is deliberately weak and its type is a temporary ally England, a longtime enemy of Russia.

And with whom else can Russia create an alliance? It will not work with Germany, since Russia claims the Balkan Slavs, and this makes an alliance with Germany impossible, since Austria-Hungary is ALREADY an ally of Germany, which also claims to the Balkan Slavs. An alliance with the Turks is also impossible, since the Russian elite has been dreaming of the straits and the installation of an Orthodox cross on the Hagia Sophia for hundreds of years. It is also impossible with England, since England and Russia are strategic enemies, and since the end of the Crimean War, the conflict between Russia and England is ready to break out again at any moment. All that remains is an alliance with France, with which Russia has practically no contradictions.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Alexander III was forced to impose duties on German goods in order to allow his own industry to develop and prevent it from being strangled by German goods. This is normal practice

In fact, the dominance of German goods replaced the dominance of the French and British. There were almost no Russian companies in Russia by the end of the 19th century, everything either directly belonged to foreigners or was controlled through banks, too, entirely foreign. We won nothing.

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

this makes an alliance with Germany impossible, since Austria-Hungary is ALREADY an ally of Germany,

Auto-Hungary was created with their own hands. The uprising in Hungary was suppressed and Hungary was presented to Austria, the Romanian principalities had previously controlled, given to Austria. They conquered Bulgaria and lost their influence there in a few years, they themselves gave it to Austria and Germany. After all, the Romanovs offered a German prince to them as tsars.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Saxahorse

In fact, the dominance of German goods replaced the dominance of the French and British. There were almost no Russian companies in Russia by the end of the 19th century, everything either directly belonged to foreigners or was controlled through banks, too, entirely foreign. We won nothing.

The state behind the barrier is one thing, and it is quite another to be far away.

Quote: Saxahorse

Auto-Hungary was created with their own hands. The uprising in Hungary was suppressed and Hungary was presented to Austria, the Romanian principalities had previously controlled, given to Austria. They conquered Bulgaria and lost their influence there in a few years, they themselves gave it to Austria and Germany. After all, the Romanovs offered a German prince to them as tsars.

Do you have a personal dislike for Alexander III? And here the help of Austria in suppressing the Hungarian rebellion of 1848? Alexander III then generally crawled under the table. And the conquest of Bulgaria and the gift to the Germans are all the merits of his older brother.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Do you have a personal dislike for Alexander III?

I seem to have a personal dislike for all the Romanovs at once. Oddly enough, the era of palace coups and "crazy empresses" gave the country much more than the decorous and law-abiding decay of the last Romanovs.

Mismanagement has always been the main problem of the Russian Empire.

[Ryazan87]

Those. with "nothing to boast" - neatly merged. And Shamil's troops fought with bows, aha.

And then in Turkestan there were a couple of lapses.

Well, the British were misfires. With the Zulus, for example, or the Afghans. AND?

War of 1828 - drain.

- did not understand who was leaked to? Turkey or Persia? Something new.

The war of 1853 is a drain.

- yeah. With 4 states. I don’t know of any examples who did it well - the Germans didn’t do it either. And from the Crimean left very safely, it should be noted.

War of 1877 - drain.

- military issues have been resolved. Diplomacy is screwed up, that's right.

Stockholm was stormed

- in 1814 and Paris was stormed. By the way, unlike Stockholm.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Ryazanets87

Those. with "nothing to boast" - neatly merged. And Shamil's troops fought with bows, aha.

The victory of the empire over the gang of abreks, let's face it, is a shallow reason for triumph. Well, in order to immediately quarrel with four states, you also need to be able to ... Oh, those Romanovs ...

[Ryazan87]

The victory of the empire over a gang of abreks, let's face it, a shallow reason for triumph

frankly, you are not very good at trolling.

Well, in order to immediately quarrel with four states, you also need to be able to ... Oh, those Romanovs ...

Oh, those Louis XIV, Charles XII, Frederick the Great and Wilhelm II. After all, they managed

[Bobik012]

Someone Bonaparte spoke about a foreign army, and a little differently. In general, monsieur, reading you I remembered: "Stirlitz flogged nonsense, nonsense squealed softly"

[Simargl]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Nonsense! The generals were right.

What nonsense? Change yards to feet and everything will fall into place. However, the salvo, nevertheless, was not effective at 300 m, as in muzzle loaders, but at 1000 m.

[Ryazan87]

"Russian" step - 71 cm. 600 steps = 426 meters. Regarding confident shooting at 1100 m from the Thouvenne choke - well, such a thing. If you are in a dense column of 1000 soldiers in full height, but in an open field, you may end up. For SVD, a working distance of 600-700 meters is normal.

[Simargl]

Quote: Ryazanets87

Regarding confident shooting at 1100 m from the Thouvenne choke - well, such a thing.

You cut the "sturgeon"! I think it's not worth comparing weapons for salvo fire with those sharpened for knocking out individual onlookers.
It should be borne in mind that despite the appearance of a rifled and relatively long-range rifle, the infantry has not yet dressed up in khaki, has not dispersed, and has not laid down in the trenches. And the "cross" on the chest still adorned. So compared to smooth-bore rifles, rifles gave a good increase in range. And accuracy, I think, too: whatever one may say, nobody canceled the Magnus effect, but where the round bullet will turn is a law ... of probability or meanness ...

[Ryazan87]

Well, I have given below the data on the tests of the Luttich choke (which are even slightly better than Tuvenne). At 1000 m on a static target in polygon conditions - 21 hits out of 100 shots. I mean, they just hit the target.

[Simargl]

Quote: Ryazanets87

At 1000 m on a static target in polygon conditions - 21 hits out of 100 shots.

The tactics of using infantry have not changed yet: the same dense formation, which is effective for a salvo and against cavalry. Those. "target", in real conditions, approximately 15x1,5 m.

Quote: Ryazanets87

I mean, they just hit the target.

They did not go far from the Middle Ages: the soldiers lost their armor and shields, tk. replacing the bow pierced them (cuirasses of sufficient thickness appeared, but you can't dress everyone), while the infantry took over the functions of both pikemen and archers.
Uh ... what am I talking about? Aimed shooting from hand-held weapons was practically not practiced: they did not shoot at the "unit", but at the formation, which was quite dense. As in the days of archers ...
And the qualitative difference between smooth-bore and rifled is how much the bullet will fly away (not the sighting range with a given accuracy).

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Simargl

The tactics of using infantry have not changed yet: the same dense formation, which is effective for a salvo and against cavalry.

The tactics changed a long time ago. Line infantry is a poor target for a weapon with such ballistics. The greatest vertical error, and here the choke gives little, in fact they still fired one volley at close range and converged into a bayonet.

[Simargl]

Quote: Saxahorse

The tactics changed a long time ago.

Are you a PhiN adept? Or another alternative?

Quote: Saxahorse

Line infantry is a poor target for a weapon with such ballistics.

Perfect target!

Quote: Saxahorse

The greatest vertical error, and here the choke gives little

The shooter of you is so-so. No one will target a single person in a line (which, in your opinion, is a bad target for a weapon with such ballistics), they will shoot along the line.

Quote: Saxahorse

in fact, they still fired one volley at close range and converged into a bayonet

In fact, they started shooting from a distance of real fire (150-200 meters for smooth, 400-500 meters, and sometimes even further, for rifled ones), and ended at a distance of 30 meters, when the reload speed was not enough (the enemy will come up faster than you reload and shoot).
And so, for the general development: sights are rarely found on a smoothbore of those times, and on a rifled one - almost everywhere.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Simargl

No one will target a single person in a line (which, in your opinion, is a bad target for a weapon with such ballistics), they will shoot along the line.

It looks like you did not understand what exactly I wrote to you. Apparently you are all the more not a shooter :)

I will repeat it again. Poor ballistics results in a large vertical error that is highly dependent on distance. It doesn't matter if they miss one by one or along a line of approximately the same height. The infantry started running from about 100-150 meters no more. This is 14 seconds before melee. Nobody reloaded the smoothbore in the field, it was simply impossible to make it in time, only if they were shooting from behind cover such as walls, ditches, etc. Therefore, a volley at close range and further melee.

[Simargl]

Quote: Saxahorse

It looks like you did not understand what exactly I wrote to you. Apparently you are all the more not a shooter

I know how a gun and a rifle shoot.
And I can shoot.
And I know what the vertical spread gives.

Quote: Saxahorse

I will repeat it again. Poor ballistics results in a large vertical error that is highly dependent on distance.

Bad ballistics, depending on the distance ... this is called the steepness of the trajectory.
But the technical variation in the vertical (not steepness) due to the unstable parameters of the cartridge took place.

Quote: Saxahorse

It doesn't matter if they miss one by one or along a line of approximately the same height.

The problem is not a miss, but will / will not. However, when the accuracy is 5 times different, and it affects.

Quote: Saxahorse

The infantry started running from about 100-150 meters no more. This is 14 seconds before melee.

14 seconds? I think, with a stick in hand and not very sportswear - that's 20-25, no less (from 100 m). And this is without the need to keep the line, and she was. You confuse the bayonet wars of the twentieth century when all it was already different. Or do you think that you started running at the same time? Then, too, there were no fools: it is better to reload and shoot, thinning out the attackers, than to immediately run. So the distance was less.
I repeat: they started shooting from the distance of actual fire, and this difference is about two times, because those who had a smoothbore survived - I don't understand.

Quote: Saxahorse

Nobody reloaded the smoothbore in the field, just do not have time

You have no idea how this happens. Watch the "battles" of the reenactors: even for the not well-trained ones - reloading is about 30 seconds, shooting in 3 ranks, a volley of 10 seconds is obtained (in reality, less).

Quote: Saxahorse

Therefore, a volley at close range and further melee.

In view of the above ... just what happens: the start of shooting from 150-200 m, after several volleys - hand-to-hand. This is for the same weapon. Rifle made it possible to push back the distance of the start of firing by 2 times. And to open disturbing fire from almost 1 km.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Simargl

Poor ballistics, depending on the distance ... this is called steepness.

I am writing about this. To get there, you need to know the distance very accurately, which is impossible. Yes, and the spread of the hinge plate when muzzle loading makes itself felt strongly.

Quote: Simargl

The problem is not a miss, but will / will not reach.

You bent it, of course it will fly at an angle of 45 degrees, but as I wrote above, you need to know the distance with an accuracy of meters, which is unrealistic in those days.

Quote: Simargl

14 seconds? I think, with a stick in hand and not very sportswear - that's 20-25, no less (from 100 m).

This is the army standard for running 100 meters in full gear. Those. not only with a drin. :) And yes, we started running, of course, strictly at the same time, strictly on command. As in Kutuzov's instruction - no further than 200 steps and then if there is no risk of breaking the line. And before that, with an even, measured soldier step. In even ranks. For this, the soldiers were tortured with shagistika, it is extremely important to pile up in a heap, one at a time in hand-to-hand combat cannot be attacked.

Quote: Simargl

inspect the "battles" of the reenactors: even among not very well-trained ones - reloading is about 30 seconds, shooting in 3 ranks, a volley of 10 seconds is obtained

Here you are contradicting yourself. Yes, actually a volley of 20-30 seconds. But reloading muzzle loading from the knee is problematic. The cannon is beautifully under reconstruction, but in real life, almost no one worked. And it makes no sense to shoot from 100 meters, the percentage of hits is too small. Therefore, when they saw that the enemy went on the attack, they calmly waited up to 20-30 meters and fired point-blank. Almost everyone got there.

Plevna had a note about the disturbing fire in the description of the battles, as an example they cited a battery that rolled out to direct fire at 1000 steps. For two hours they fired at the Turkish redoubt, and the Turks at them with guns. For two hours of firing by the forces of the Turkish battalion, two wounded horses and one wounded soldier. And this was already shot from a rifled, though the same large-caliber.

[Simargl]

Quote: Saxahorse

but as I wrote above, you need to know the distance to within meters, which is unrealistic in those days

As I already wrote, a round bullet deviates also due to the Magnus effect, and in which direction - as the law of meanness will fall. This is in addition to other deviations, which are about the same for smooth and rifled bullets.
The difference in bullet speed of 10-15%, at a transonic speed, will give a vertical spread of 200 m about 20-30 cm. But the shape of the bullet gives a very big difference in the steepness of the trajectory: not only will the elongation give a large mass, and the streamlining of the pointed bullets, especially at supersonic, will be better, and therefore flatness.
If we draw modern analogies in ballistics, this is roughly the same as shooting from a smoothbore gun. In this case, the choke is also made of smooth-bore, but with a "paradox" nozzle. The most stubborn ones are shooting with a round bullet today, because it does not fly, does not hit and ricochets. The "paradox" is also almost never used. 12GA, by the way, is slightly larger in diameter,

Quote: Saxahorse

This is the army standard for running 100 meters in full gear.

You will be surprised how different things were 150 years ago. They didn't know how to run. The line was not supposed to break, because this "race" could hardly be called a "run" - there were other priorities.

Quote: Saxahorse

And yes, they started running, of course, strictly at the same time, strictly on command

Simultaneously with whom?

Quote: Saxahorse

As in Kutuzov's instruction - no more than 200 steps and then if there is no risk of breaking the line.

Kutuzov, it seems, has never seen a rifle.

Quote: Saxahorse

you cannot attack one by one in hand-to-hand combat.

Equal ranks were strictly for one thing: to resist the attack of the cavalry. You can attack with a bayonet in a thin formation. A dense formation is relevant if there is protection (at least - shields).

Quote: Saxahorse

Here you contradict yourself

Uh ... where?

Quote: Saxahorse

But reloading muzzle loading from the knee is problematic.

Why? Three ranks, two of them are charging, one is shooting. Often from the knee.

Quote: Saxahorse

And it makes no sense to shoot from 100 meters, the percentage of hits is too small.

It works on the hunt. In battle - no need to hit the spot - the main thing is that the combat unit ceases to perform its functions for the duration of the battle. That's why they shoot at 500 m.

Quote: Saxahorse

Therefore, when they saw that the enemy went on the attack, they calmly waited up to 20-30 meters and fired point-blank.

Those. here you do not contradict yourself? So at the same time they ran at each other, or waited? So did you manage to recharge or not? And "wait quietly" - isn't it stupid when you can shoot and reload, and if you don't have time, you have a bayonet? You already build a picture for yourself.

Quote: Saxahorse

Plevna had a note about the disturbing fire in the description of the battles, as an example they cited a battery that rolled out to direct fire at 1000 steps. For two hours they fired at the Turkish redoubt, and the Turks at them with guns.

So from guns or rifles? Ours in an open field, or at least some protective structures, natural shelters?

I never said that the range of the actual fire was 1000 meters or steps! I said that the range of actual fire was almost 2 times greater than that of a smoothbore.
Another important detail: ours did not know how to shoot in bulk.

[Bobik012]

For general development - sighting devices (then still unregulated) appeared on arquebusses in the 16th century, and since then have not disappeared anywhere.

[Simargl]

Quote: Bobik012

and since then have not disappeared anywhere

So, for general development: adaptations appeared, but not everywhere. And they did not always appear, before the appearance of primer guns / rifles, tk. looking through the sights at the moment of the shot, when the priming powder is burning on the shelf, is still a pleasure ... and you can remain without sight. Mass sighting began to appear in primer rifles already (smoothbore began to disappear in military affairs).
In modern times, some hunters remove the front sight: the bar is enough.

[Hunter 2]

Great Article about Interesting rifle. Although the information is known to me, thanks to Vyacheslav Olegovich for the material, I refreshed it in memory ! The illustrations and diagrams are great!
Prices for the publication of photos ... let's face it, Surprising! completely lost their conscience.

[Aerodrome]

everything that was previously invented for firearms, everything turned into a Kalashnikov assault rifle. Simpler, more reliable, nothing was invented.

[Hunter 2]

Quote: Aerodrome

Simpler, more reliable, nothing was invented.

There is an option for Weapons, it couldn't be easier ... Stone and Stick! with this we started to look like them and we will come, in the Fourth World War!

[Catfish]

I agree, colleague.

[Aerodrome]

"cobblestone is the Weapon of the Proletariat!" - may be attracted for "excrimism"!

[Catfish]

can attract for "excreism"!

But they will not be attracted "for storage".

Although, the devil only knows, it won't take long for them to come up with an article ...

[Lexus]

"If there were a person, there would be an article." (FROM)

[pmkemcity]

Quote: Aerodrome

"cobblestone is the Weapon of the Proletariat!"

proletarius civis are Roman citizens who, according to the Servius Tullius system (centuria system), were lower in property qualifications than citizens of the V class. Their name in society was explained by the fact that the only meaning of the proletarians for the state was expressed in the production of offspring - the future citizens of Rome. As Toynbee wrote, in ancient Rome, during the census, those people who did not have property wrote in the property column - “children” (forest). Hence their name arose - "proletarians".
Now everyone pays taxes, therefore there are no "proletarians" either. And they were enrolled, mainly in the navy.

[Bobik012]

They were not enrolled anywhere (proletarians) for enrollment in the army (in the militia) until Gaius Marius there was a property qualification and a very considerable one. The army was the lot of the elite

[pmkemcity]

Quote: Bobik012

They were not enrolled anywhere (proletarians) for enrollment in the army (in the militia) until Gaius Marius there was a property qualification and a very considerable one. The army was the lot of the elite

Your statement is both true and false.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: Hunter 2

There is an option for Weapons,

destructive power - controversial ...

[Catfish]

This is where you get to, and with what force.

[Boris Chernikov]

there is a simple example: SVT-40. a rifle that was loved by the marines, and which ordinary infantrymen did not respect, giving preference to a mosinka .. the reason is the different level of technical training

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Boris Chernikov

there is a simple example: SVT-40. a rifle that was loved by the marines, and which ordinary infantrymen did not respect, giving preference to a mosinka .. the reason is the different level of technical training

Where did you get this from Boris?
Maybe we will stop thinking in clichés, based on one memoir written four decades after the war.

[vadim dok]

Leo Tolstoy wrote "War and Peace" almost 50 years after the war. The first publication in 1865!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: vadim dok

Leo Tolstoy wrote "War and Peace" almost 50 years after the war. The first publication in 1865!

Leo Tolstoy wrote a fiction book, not a memoir!
Although he could, after all, a participant in the Crimean War.

[Boris Chernikov]

and what a memoir .. can you tell me?

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

That is, you are quoting without knowing the sources? Surprised !!!

[Boris Chernikov]

so I see and you don't know)

[Fat]

Quote: Boris Chernikov

SVT-40 rifle that the Marines loved

SVT were equipped with both VDK and border guards. There was nothing prohibitively complicated in her. Only there were not many of them, EMNIP was about 1,9 million, including 1942. For a war like the Second World War - not enough. In fact, in the first years of the war, 10-15 percent of the soldiers were armed with them ... The reasons for this were primarily the fact that the majority of SVT on June 22, 1941 were concentrated in the troops of the western districts and were lost in the first months of the war.
Also, a more complex SVT device, compared to the Mosin rifle, played a significant role, and it was physically impossible to teach a huge number of wartime conscripts to use this weapon in a short time. But with proper care, the SVT-40 did not misfire and was extremely dangerous in the hands of an experienced shooter.

[Boris Chernikov]

Well, about the marines, they took sailors from ships, who, in principle, had a greater understanding in terms of technology

[Simargl]

Quote: Thick

There was nothing prohibitively complicated in her.

However, even a modern conscript will deal with the operation of Mosinka in 10 minutes, and with SVT in a couple of days.
And this despite the fact that he already understands the importance of machine maintenance.

Quote: Thick

Also, a more complex SVT device, in comparison with the Mosin rifle, played a significant role, and it was physically impossible to teach a huge number of wartime conscripts to use this weapon in a short time.

Here! The problem is not that the complexity is prohibitive, but how far the fighter is from understanding the work of mechanisms: one thing is a sailor who passes the entire service inside a piece of iron, which is entirely composed of mechanisms, and another - when a man of iron only saw ax, knife, nail and ploughshare.

[Catfish]

Good morning friends!
Vyacheslav, thank you for continuing the weapon theme.
I apologize to you for the staff of the State Historical Museum, shame and shame, the little people are obsessed with money.
No, I understand that there are no longer those people that I knew and those with whom I was friends, but all the same
I feel guilty. I have no contacts there now, no, I would have brought them together without fail.
Thanks again, I'm looking forward to the next article.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Good morning everybody.
In the morning I opened the heading history - empty. The only relief from my heart was on the branch - Armament.
Concerning museums. Stupidity and arrogance spoil the reputation harshly and without turning. The question is, is the SHM administration the owner of the collection? What are the objectives of the tasks should such museums solve? Or is it all on paper?
Today, in my mind, small local history museums and the Hermitage, which have given green color to a number of cycles in VO, are better at this. The conclusion to the State Historical Museum is shame and contempt.
Administration of VO "rationalization proposal" can be held at the end of this year "competition for the best museum in the opinion of VO readers" from among those who gave the go-ahead for publications and photographs!
The price is a penny, but "the chicken is pecking by the grain." Especially if a small letter is sent to the museum.
It can be divided into three nominations "foreign museums", "domestic museums" and "private collections and collections"!
Thank you Vyacheslav for the essay on the gun (I can't even call it a rifle), good day guys and girls!
Regards, Vlad!

[Catfish]

... maybe we will hold a "competition for the best museum in the opinion of VO readers" at the end of this year ...

Greetings, Vlal! Well, that's a good idea.

[Hunter 2]

Quote: Sea Cat

... maybe we will hold a "competition for the best museum in the opinion of VO readers" at the end of this year ...

Greetings, Vlal! Well, that's a good idea.

Vladislav, Konstantin I think the idea is interesting. Send Gratitude from VO readers and the VO Administration to the address of the museum, auction house or collector ... indicating the number of VO readers. For those who provided the materials, this is essentially an "advertising" campaign that introduces a wide range of people to the activities of these institutions. It's not difficult for us - but I think they will be pleased.

[The leader of the Redskins]

Greetings! Oh, I have one idea! I myself once "missed" this museum, but, I think, with the help of friends, I will be able to write an article)))

[Catfish]

Well, go ahead! We are only welcome.

[LiSiCyn]

Museum of Artillery and Missile Forces, St. Petersburg.

[Catfish]

I did not understand the meaning of your post a little. Have you had articles on VO and this museum contributed to their writing?

[LiSiCyn]

Quote: Sea Cat

Have you had articles on VO and this museum contributed to their writing?

No, he's just the best in my ranking. In second place is the Konstantinovsky Ravelin (Battery), Sevastopol.

[Catfish]

Clear. Konstantinovsky Ravelin saw only from the side, in Soviet times there was a naval special forces, there were enclosures with dolphins, so there was no way anyone could go there. But in the St. Petersburg Museum of Artillery, Engineering Troops and Signal Corps I have been, and more than once. This is a holy cause how I arrived in St. Petersburg - first of all to the Maritime Museum and there, and then the Hermitage and all the others.

[kalibr]

Quote: LiSiCyn

In second place is the Konstantinovsky Ravelin (Battery), Sevastopol.

Was there and was very interesting!

[kalibr]

Quote: LiSiCyn

Museum of Artillery and Missile Forces, St. Petersburg.

Oh, how long have I been there ...

[LiSiCyn]

Quote: kalibr

Oh, how long have I been there ...

I was in September. Want more.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

It can be divided into three nominations "foreign museums", "domestic museums" and "private collections and collections"!

A very interesting and sensible idea! By the way, I recently wrote to the Perm Museum of Local Lore with a request to send a photo. And his director immediately (!) Sent me two photos! They will be in the next article.

[Hunter 2]

Quote: kalibr

And his director immediately (!) Sent me two photos! They will be in the next article.

Vyacheslav Olegovich - Our Gratitude to the Director of the Perm Museum of Local Lore and to you personally!
Tell me, how should a publication permit from a "private" collector look like? There are Nice People who do not charge a fee for publishing Photos ... though they often ask not to mention their names and titles. Together - we collect illustrations for any material

[kalibr]

Quote: Hunter 2

Our gratitude to the Director of the Perm Museum of Local Lore and to you personally!

At the end of the article, of course, it will be. As well as everyone who helps. Right now I posted an article about Kofer's revolver for moderation - ay, everyone who wanted it - it's done! And there will be written gratitude to the one who helped. Any form of permission. In the West, they sometimes write like this: You are free to dispose of my photos from the site ... This will all remain on the Internet. And as usual - I, Ivanov Ivan Ivanovich allow ... please do not disclose my data on the Internet. That's all.

[Hunter 2]

All clear !
Nikolaevich was lucky with Kofer, a dream come true
And about LeMat - will there be an article? I can help with the photo ... true "remake" ... but even disassembled.

[kalibr]

Quote: Hunter 2

And about LeMat - will there be an article? I can help with the photo ... true "remake" ... but even disassembled.

Of course it will be. And the disassembled one ... send a photo, I'll see if it works ... I'll throw off the address in PM.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: kalibr

Right now I posted an article about Kofer's revolver for moderation - ay, everyone who wanted it - it's done!

From Nikolaevich dance with a tambourine !!!

In honor of the event, Nikolayevich's wife should give Nikolayevich a double portion of intoxicating drink !!!
I am jerky and happy for Nikolayevich, and for myself too!
With all sincere respect.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Okay, if today the stars converge on Perm and museums, then Vyacheslav will throw you one idea.

The Tsar Cannon - 2, has been lying at the entrance for a century and a half, and even the native Permians know nothing about it. Checked personally !!!

[kalibr]

508-mm weapon for monitors. kernels lie next to them under the snow.

[bubalik]

ote pane Kohanka
Today, 10: 35

kalibr
Today, 11: 54near kernels lie under the snow

,,, looking at the photo (impressive ) and after reading the comments, the anecdote was reminded of an oxygen tank disguised as a snowman and a jeep that wanted to drive

[3x3zsave]

In organizing all kinds of competitions, the most important thing is to stop on time. And then everything will end with the contest "cutest cute cat".

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: 3x3zsave

In organizing all kinds of competitions, the most important thing is to stop on time. And then everything will end with the contest "cutest cute cat".

Anton, let's stop at the cat! We will not hold the contest of the "cutest dog" !!!
How's your paw buddy?

[3x3zsave]

Of course we won't! Because the cutest dog is me!
The gypsum was left until the fifth.

[Korsar4]

Time of the event - March. How many worthy candidates.

[d ^ Amir]

with respect!!! very kind thought

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

In the morning I opened the heading history - empty.

There are recipes that Lyaksandra Vasilich drank off.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

In the morning I opened the heading history - empty.

There are recipes that Lyaksandra Vasilich drank off.

Without looking there I can paint all the favorite dishes of Leksander Vasilyevich with a couple of quotes and aphorisms!
It is instructive, but personally not interesting to me.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

Without looking there I can paint all the favorite dishes of Leksander Vasilyevich

And there the whole honest company is sitting.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Vladimir, dropped in. At home there are photocopies of both books from where the author has information. I read about five years ago. I even tried to make an ear on a cucumber. It is more delicious when you add pieces of red fish to the broth of trifles.

Of all Suvorov's dishes, I adore lean cabbage soup and potatoes without meat for sour cream.

[kalibr]

Come on, Konstantin. What an excuse here ... I would like more more ... They demand "self-sufficiency". Our party archives even demand money to be earned. And already here is Moscow!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: kalibr

Come on, Konstantin. What an excuse here ... I would like more more ... They demand "self-sufficiency". Our party archives even demand money to be earned. And already here is Moscow!

That is precisely Moscow - the capital, and provincial museums shine with their disinterestedness and responsiveness on the Internet !!!
Would be the size of France wherever it went, but many of us will visit Sakhalin for example or find time to get to Penza?
I personally only learned from your articles that there is a Museum of Local Lore on Sakhalin! So, somewhere there I put a tick - if fate will turn out, I will definitely have to look. And I will go to them not as a tourist-find, but a person who knows what to ask and what to talk about. At least confident that the museum staff are responsive and decent people who love their work more than money.
Ultimately, I will leave more money for a guide and some souvenir than for one entrance ticket!
However, the Perm Museum of Local Lore is already on my list, I've been there five times, but haven't been to the museum. How did I find out about him, and from the post Vyacheslav Olegovich. And the most amazing thing, I have already personally convinced myself that the director of the Perm Museum is a golden man, in the State Historical Museum all "greedy" are utterly unimaginable! I am a little flippant, but in fact the truth.
P.s. I'm definitely going to Perm next year. I will definitely visit the museum.

[Lech from Android.]

You can go hunting with such a rifle, well, even if you put a bayonet into a bayonet attack.
And so to fight with such a weapon is risky ... until you do a number of operations to load the weapon, the enemy will already be at bayonet distance.
Thank you Vyacheslav for an interesting description of this miracle of thought of American gunsmiths.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: Lech from Android.

And so to fight with such a weapon is risky ... until you do a number of operations to load the weapon, the enemy will already be at bayonet distance.

gee ... duck: "the enemy experienced a lot that day, which means that the Russian battle is daring, ours, hand-to-hand combat!" (C) Lermontov ... helped in hand-to-hand combat, that since ancient times, there was "fun", village against village, then district against district ... and street fighting, I will say, is very different from the "canons", there are no rules, just who won is alive. I still saw the times when the regions "converged", it was not too lazy to travel 20-30 km! to "swing"! I don’t remember a single death ... before the first blood, they didn’t kick the bedridden .. "shtaketin" yes ... in a fever they "used", but so that "kill" - not ...! they beat the head "on the" meat and didn't touch the bones. Those were funny times ... then the police began to intervene, and everything began to fade away. And the "boys" became different.

[pmkemcity]

Quote: Aerodrome

before the first blood, they did not kick the bedridden .. "shtaketin" yes ... in a fever "used"

I didn’t touch anyone on Saturdays ... We went to a foreign area - "school for school" in the early eighties, and in the seventies, they say, they were registered with whole classes.

[mmaxx]

Author! Only for the beginning of the article, this article should be banned by the censor. You encroached on sacred things in our army. Buttons, boots, badges, flat beds and polished shoes. With such a feed, our entire army will end.
Everything is simple. To engage in combat training - it is necessary for officers to strain. And to keep an eye on the boots, etc. will be enough for anyone.
We hear the same thing all the time.

[mmaxx]

ABOUT! Cons gone! Lovers of polished boots and flat beds pulled themselves up! The years given to the army are felt!

[Aerodrome]

Quote: mmaxx

And to keep an eye on the boots, etc. will be enough for anyone.

We had enough of the Pope Sergeant Major with 35 years of experience, he will "fuck off" and warm and cure, and help with advice. The Petty Officer was correct.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

the country was extremely poor

Not poor, but backward. Hence all the problems!

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: kalibr

Not poor, but backward. Hence all the problems!

And who is to blame for this? Are they really communists?

[The leader of the Redskins]

You are not in trend! Now, in all troubles and conflicts, it is customary to scold dill! Take an example even with Lukashenka!

[kalibr]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

And who is to blame for this? Are they really communists?

The feudal system that existed in Russia. And the communists ... yes, they are also to blame for cultivating purely feudal remnants in the USSR. Which ones or will you figure it out yourself?

[Kot_Kuzya]

That is, the fact that in the Crimean War the Russian army was armed with muskets is the fault of the communists and collective farms?

[kalibr]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

That is, the fact that in the Crimean War the Russian army was armed with muskets is the fault of the communists and collective farms?

Don't write nonsense. There are plenty of them written here without you.

[Kot_Kuzya]

By the way, how did it happen that in the First World War, the Russian army experienced a wildest shortage of not only artillery, machine guns, aircraft and shells, but elementary rifles and cartridges for them? For example, during WWI Russia produced 28 machine guns, while Germany produced 280. Germany produced 40 thousand aircraft and 60 thousand engines for them, while in Russia engines for aircraft were not produced at all. While in the communist USSR during the war years, 12 million Mosin rifles and carbines, 6 million PPSh, 500 thousand PPS, 130 thousand Maksims, 700 thousand DPs, plus several hundred thousand DT and ShKAS were produced. There is nothing to say about tanks and aircraft, the USSR produced much more of them than Germany.

[kalibr]

They already wrote to you: all these are the consequences of the feudal system that has not been eliminated earlier. After 1917, it was largely eliminated. Which, of course, affected the release of weapons in the years of the Second World War. But some feudal remnants remained even in the USSR!

[IS-80_RVGK2]

Quote: kalibr

But some feudal remnants remained even in the USSR!

If only some. The trouble is that these vestiges still remain, and in the USSR they were just in bulk. One thing is that our socialism somehow did not very much resemble socialism with its formally people's power and the actual power of the party nomenklatura.

[Revolver]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

There is nothing to say about tanks and aircraft, the USSR produced much more of them than Germany.

That was our trouble. For one German tank or plane they paid three or four of ours. And it would be fine only iron, but there were crews in them, and they did not always survive. But there was nowhere to go, the question was about the survival of the country, so they did not stand behind the price.

[Kot_Kuzya]

That is, in your opinion, it was necessary to make fewer tanks and aircraft? And to throw the freed people into the attack with one rifle for two and five rounds for a brother, as was the case with the tsar-father?

[Revolver]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

That is, in your opinion, it was necessary to make fewer tanks and aircraft?

For the impossibility, especially in the first years of the war, to surpass the Germans in quality had to be taken in quantity. Unfortunately, the available technologies and materials did not allow making equipment of a higher quality, and there was not enough time for crew training either. It is no secret that fighter pilots at the school were trained mainly in takeoff and landing, and completed their studies at the front. Someone, like Kozhedub, graduated to three Hero Stars, but much more were shot down in one of the first sorties. By the way, by the end of the war, when the experienced and well-trained were knocked out, the Germans also began to put barely trained boys in the cab, with clear results. They even designed a jet fighter for such almost disposable boys, Heinkel He 162 Volksjäger (people's fighter), but there was no time to put it into production.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_162_Volksjäger
And the Japanese naval aviation ended by 1944, not because there were no planes - they were at least let out, but because experienced pilots who had gone through the pre-war school ended, and those who came to their place were only suitable for disposable kamikaze ...

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Nagan

For the impossibility, especially in the first years of the war, to surpass the Germans in quality had to be taken in quantity. Unfortunately, the available technologies and materials did not allow making equipment of a higher quality, and there was not enough time for crew training either.

In 20 years, the Bolsheviks pulled the country to the level of developed countries, in "Russia, which we have lost", there was not only aircraft and tank building, there was not even enough cartridges and rifles! As a result, the tsarist army received luli from the Kaiser's, although, unlike the Second World War, 75% of the Kaiser's divisions fought on the Western Front. In the Second World War, Germany threw 90% of its divisions to the Eastern Front, and this lasted three years, until June 1944.

[Ryazan87]

there was nothing like aircraft and tank building

aircraft construction was. And aircraft engines, by the way, did, though not enough. As for tank building, how was it in Germany in WWI? Or Austria-Hungary?

although, unlike the Second World War, 75% of the Kaiser's divisions fought in the Western Front

.
And this is relatively true only for 1914 (namely the Germans). And they handed out and received luli with varying success. Take, for example, the Warsaw-Ivangorod operation. However, it is not clear why these Austro-Hungarians do not count. Then at least exclude all Austrians and Sudeten Germans from the Wehrmacht.

It will be even more interesting when the losses of the Kaiser's army on the Eastern Front are clarified.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Ryazanets87

aircraft construction was. And aircraft engines, by the way, did, although not enough

Yeah, gliders for whatnots of that time do not need much cleverness to be made of slats and linen. But motors for aircraft were not made at all, all these gliders were equipped with imported motors, mainly French ones. The most important thing in an airplane is the motor, if there is a good motor, then the brick can be made to fly. In "Russia We Lost", not only did they not build aircraft engines, even automobile engines, made them, if I’m not mistaken, several hundred units at the Russo-Balt plant, but in comparison with Germany, France and Britain, where then tens of thousands of car engines were made a year, it’s just nothing.

Quote: Ryazanets87

However, it is not clear why these Austro-Hungarians do not count. Then at least exclude all Austrians and Sudeten Germans from the Wehrmacht.

Is it okay that Germany annexed Austria and the Sudetenland, and the Austrians and Germans of the Sudetenland became citizens of Germany and were drafted into the Wehrmacht? Is it okay that Hungary was an ally of Germany and, moreover, the most staunch and loyal ally, and hundreds of thousands of Hungarians fought on the Eastern Front, and they were not much inferior to the Germans in terms of stamina and combat effectiveness?

[Ryazan87]

Yeah, gliders for whatnots of that time do not need much cleverness to be made of slats and canvas.

- you really decide, then "there was no aircraft construction", then "a lot of mind is not needed." I do not argue that they did aircraft engines, although not enough. Read something on this topic. Barsukov was mastered (I don’t know if in the original).

"And nothing,"

- that's what I'm talking about. The Austro-Hungarian army must be counted. Russia pulled off 60 percent of the forces of the Central Powers (albeit partly not the best). And then "25% of the Kaiser's" (which is also wrong - more) create a false impression.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Ryazanets87

- you really decide, then "there was no aircraft construction", then "a lot of mind is not needed." I do not argue that they did aircraft engines, although not enough. Read something on this topic. Barsukov was mastered (I don’t know if in the original).

Aircraft building is impossible without engine building. I repeat once again - the engine is the most important thing on the plane. The glider is easy to do, but without a motor, the glider will not rise into the air. It is not for nothing that recently there was so much joyful hype in the news that the MC-21 made its first flight on domestic engines. And for the beginning of the 20th century, even a piston aircraft engine was a high-tech for the time, as is now the turbojet engine.

[Ryazan87]

I did not deny the importance of engine building - I disagree only with the theses:
"There was no aircraft construction in RI" - it was. And with that you seem to agree. By the way, the same "Dux", for example, has not disappeared even now - now it makes air-to-air missiles.
"RI did not make aircraft engines" - they did, although not enough.
If you like:
"... As already noted, the main reason for the failure to fulfill the production program was the insufficient capacity of the domestic engine-building industry. In 1914-1916, the country provided aircraft with engines only by one third, in 1917 - by 43%."
"... In 1917, the production of motors was carried out by the Mechanical Plant of the Russian-Baltic Joint Stock Company and Russian Renault in Petrograd, Gnome and Ron, Salmson, Motor and P. Ilyin's workshops in Moscow, Deka plant "In Aleksandrovsk. The propellers were manufactured by the Petrograd factories of F. Meltzer, A. Zass and E. Lanskoy," Integral "by A. Lebedev, Adamchik's workshop in Moscow. In 1917, 2227 people worked at the engine-building and propeller enterprises."
A significant expansion was planned by the 18th year, but alas ...
Still, there is a significant difference between “did not” and 43%.

[Kot_Kuzya]

... One of the main reasons for this is the lack of motors. Three engine-building plants in Russia from November 1915 to November 1916 were able to provide about 500 engines, another 1184 were imported from France and England during the second year of the war, and this was clearly not enough. By the end of 1916, the volume of supplies from the Allies increased, but it was not possible to completely eliminate the shortage of power plants for aircraft. Source and details: http://www.airaces.ru/stati/otechestvennoe-samoljotostroenie-v-gody-pervojj-mirovojj-vojjny. html

Well yes. If you hadn’t bought motors from the allies at all, then you would have argued that "Russia, which we have lost," completely, 100% provided itself with motors for aircraft ... For comparison, in 1916 Germany and France produced 8 thousand aircraft each, in Britain 6 thousand, and I believe that they all had engines on the aircraft of their own production.

As you can see, Germany, Britain and France each year multiplied the production of their aircraft, while the production of aircraft in Russia lagged behind the leading warring countries every year. The situation is especially catastrophic given the fact that most of the engines on these aircraft are imported.

[Ryazan87]

How did it happen that by the winter campaign of 1941 the Red Army came to a savage famine of shells (even faster than the imperial famine)? And in the fall the militias were supplied with Lebel from the royal purchases? It is even more curious when you learn about the true Soviet weapons drama - a severe shortage of magazines, disks and machine-gun belts throughout the war. And then you will also take an interest in the origin of more than half of the gunpowder used by the Red Army. Then think ..

[Kot_Kuzya]

Quote: Ryazanets87

How did it happen that by the winter campaign of 1941 the Red Army came to a savage famine of shells (even faster than the imperial famine)?

Sure sure. Apparently, it was General Moroz who forced the Germans to flee westward, 150-250 km from Moscow, and it was not Soviet shells that destroyed the German defenses, German tanks and manpower.

Quote: Ryazanets87

And in the fall, the militias were supplied with Lebel from the royal purchases?

Militias from the DNO supplied at the stage of arming the Lebeli, but they went into battle with Mosin rifles. If you read Isaev, he showed figures that before entering the battles, the divisions of the people's militia were fully armed with rifles, and satisfactorily with machine guns. Yes, they did not have enough artillery, but they were well supplied with small arms.

Quote: Ryazanets87

It is even more curious when you learn about a genuine Soviet weapon drama - a severe shortage of magazines, disks and machine-gun belts throughout the war.

That was why the PPSh switched to carob nutrition.

Quote: Ryazanets87

And then you will also take an interest in the origin of more than half of the gunpowder used by the Red Army.

Russia We Lost also supplied a large number of cartridges and rifles from allies and neutral countries - France, USA, Japan, etc. But the entire WWII Russian front was choking from the lack of rifles and cartridges, but in WWII the Soviet soldier did not experience a shortage of small arms and cartridges. Think and draw your own conclusions.

[Ryazan87]

Sure sure.

In fact, the Soviet offensive in the winter of 41 stalled for this reason. And even in the officialdom it was not hidden explicitly:

G.K. Zhukov "Memories and Reflections".
By the way, with armor-piercing shells and in the 43rd was "not very.

PPSh switched to carob nutrition.

It didn't get better, by the way. Although the key problem was with the power supply of the machine guns. But this is a separate interesting topic for discussion.

But the whole WWII Russian front was choking on the lack of rifles and cartridges

is an exaggeration. In the period 16-17, there was no "suffocation" in the army in the field. Although the situation was tense at times due to the insane desire of the Headquarters to cobble together more and more new formations. The practice was very harmful.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

That is, the fact that in the Crimean War the Russian army was armed with muskets is the fault of the communists and collective farms?

The blame is the same black and white who was rescued in Ulyanovsk. Now they say a high official - the deputy minister for ecology !!!

[Ryazan87]

The armament of the French line infantry in the Crimean War was absolutely identical to the Russian one. Actually, the Allies rearmed themselves during the war. Even a relatively small British contingent even under Inkerman had at least two regiments with smooth-bore weapons.

[3x3zsave]

Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich!
The impression is that yesterday's article and this one, it is no coincidence that they go one after another.

[Revolver]

Where did we get such a strange distrust of our own soldier, we will not find out now.

This attitude survived both the Empire and, perhaps, the USSR. As a major at the military department told us, students, "Soviet military equipment must be sledge-resistant and fool-proof." He liked to repeat “The more oaks there are in the army, the stronger our defense!”, Although he himself was not an oak; on the contrary, the smartest man, even in comparison with civilian associate professors and professors.

[Nikolaevich I]

1.So all Leskov's words about the "brick" are from the realm of fantasy. That is, it could have been, and it probably even happened somewhere, but it was contrary to the charter and in violation of the rules.
However, this "story about a brick" was very popular in Russian (Soviet) literature! Even reputable military magazines and some serious weapons experts held this opinion in their articles! At the same time, it was argued that rifle barrels in some military units turned out to be worn down to "the thickness of a paper sheet"! But how such guns could hold a shot and how they could fight with such guns, the writers were no longer interested!
2. The muzzle-loading rifle Model 1856 is notable for 2 "veschii": a) The word "rifle" was for the first time officially approved for the name of rifled military rifles! ; b) The Cossack model of the rifle for the first time became the statutory state weapon of the Cossack troops! (before that, the Cossacks were armed "with whatever they had to" and the weapon was personal ...) Chernolikhov took a great part in the creation of the Cossack rifle ... why these rifles were often called "black-faced"!
3.He heard about the two-bullet system, but did not know that she was from America and took part in Civil War ... (maybe he once knew, but forgot, because I read about such a system at school age!). I think the system could be improved by making a special bullet ... but that would increase the cost of ammo!
4. The 60s of the 19th century is a very interesting period in the arms history of Russia! The Russian army was "looking" for its "rifle! I think that such a topic:" Russian "rifles of the first half of the 19th century, could be very interesting to Vyacheslav Olegovich! I" order "" Krynka "!

[kalibr]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

I "order" "Krynka"!

Everything has its time!

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: kalibr

Everything has its time!

Duc, we understand! We are waiting-sss!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

I "order" "Krynka"!

Nikolaevich got a taste !!! He asks for a pot of fresh milk.

[Nikolaevich I]

I will not give up the jar with "Baileys"!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Considering the electronic nature of the resource, the krynka with baileys will also be virtual!

[kalibr]

Vladimir! Not boasting, but such materials are difficult to make. As for Kofer ... well, Viktor Nikolaevich sent me two books at once. I looked at them ... downloaded the photos, translated the texts, corrected the horror that Google did - "barrels" instead of barrels, "grooves in barrels" ... Then I looked for photos again. Found ... requested "permisson" - no answer. From one auction, the answer came: give №№ ... Gave ... Answer - you gave 2, you need everything ... "Gave everything!" "Look ..." There is no answer ... There is no answer either from Tula ... From the museum ... Well, this is not surprising. And all this takes time, time, time. Now I have found two wonderful revolvers from 1790 from Tula on the website of the Metropolitan Museum. I downloaded their photos to my iPhone, but I can't go to my computer - "but public domain, know download." Ugh! And time has gone again ... And as a result, the actual article was written for some two hours. It took two days to provide it, and then a good person helped me. By the way, one of his books had 42 pages. I had to read everything! So this process is slow, Vladimir, alas. But useful for self-education.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: kalibr

Not in the order of boasting, but such materials are difficult to make

I understand this and appreciate your work! I myself have tried to write articles more than once ... I have collected material on 3 topics: 1. about revolvers ... (working title "Many-Faced Revolver" ...); 2. "Silently" - about the art of sappers in the past centuries; 3. The history of tank KAZ: the emergence of an idea, its development. But everything rests on the main obstacle: the search for copyright holders and the solution of problems with them! It takes more time, effort, nerves than writing an article, collecting material for it! Moreover, if the copyright holders are abroad! That is why I understand and appreciate! Sometimes I "hint" to you on topics that seem interesting to me not only for me, but also for others! 1. For example, don't you think that recently, little attention has been paid to multi-charge magazine rifles with magazines in the butt ... among them there are very interesting things ... for example, the Mag's 50-round rifle, model 1866 (USA) ; 2. Automatic rifles of the 19th century ...

[kalibr]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

It takes more time, effort, nerves than writing an article, collecting material for it! Moreover, if the copyright holders are abroad!

How true. But try ... the topics are very interesting!

Quote: Nikolaevich I

For example, don't you think that recently, little attention has been paid to multi-charge magazine rifles with magazines in the butt ... among them there are very interesting things ... for example, the Mag's 50-round rifle, model 1866 (USA); 2. Automatic rifles of the 19th century ...

Yes you are right. This is something worth considering.

[kalibr]

Vladimir! Found this rifle, the owner, wrote to him "give me permission". Let's see what happens. The rifle really is a dreadful thing, better than Evans ... By the way, Vladimir, I don't know (maybe already?), But in my opinion, you just need to order and read my book "People and Weapons". Have great fun! Find it on the authors website. today.

[Nikolaevich I]

Thanks for the recommendation! I will go to the site you specified! It is possible that I already have your book a long time ago; since often "open" your articles! I can't say for sure because I am now in a different city than my computer with the "archive", and very far from it!

[Nikolaevich I]

I wish you good health, Vyacheslav! I found the book ... started reading ... however, so far "in fits and starts" ... there are a lot of different troubles at the end of the year!

[Ryazan87]

However, this "story about a brick" was very popular in Russian (Soviet) literature! Even reputable military magazines and some serious weapons experts held this opinion in their articles! At the same time, it was argued that rifle barrels in some military units turned out to be worn down to "the thickness of a paper sheet"!

Moreover, the "serious" Arakcheev wrote:
"" It came to the attention of the Sovereign Emperor that the soldiers, when disassembling guns for cleaning them, handle them very carelessly, using moreover for cleaning them sand and sometimes the largest, why the guns are made of them incapable of action before their time, and the barrels, being bent in both directions, are close to breaking.... As for the damage to the guns, which in some shelves is revered as cleaning, such as: rubbing the barrel with sand from the inside and outside, shuffling it with all his might against the edge of a wooden table, pressing on the barrel with both hands so that sometimes it will bend, it is by no means should not allow; for friction with sand drowns the walls of the barrel and, consequently, takes away its strength ... and even harmful in the interior, because the bullet is easier to slide and less resistant to the inflamed gunpowder and therefore flies out of the barrel with less force.
The fact was that to clean the metal parts of the guns, they used a kind of abrasive paste with the addition of special clay (tripoli). However, it was expensive, and therefore ... "the triple, if necessary, can be replaced with powder from grated bricks ..." But this, of course, not for cleaning the barrel, because "The rust formed in the barrel bore, you can only wipe it with a salted rag, and resorting to other cleaning methods, in order to avoid damage to the gun, is strictly prohibited. Such a gun should be sent to the gun shop. "

[Nikolaevich I]

Yes, you are right ... for cleaning weapons (and not only ...) the trippel was intended and only outside the barrel! It was not allowed to clean the inside of the barrel with a tripod ... But, as Vyacheslav Olegovich wrote, there were enough slobs at all times and in different ranks! Guns, from which it was dangerous to shoot, and the bullets dangled in the barrels, were in the troops ... As one commander reported, at the beginning of the 19th century (before the war with Napoleon), guns of the 1700th year could be found in the troops! For a hundred years, the trunks could "burn out" ...

[Undecim]

A suitable sample was found in the same 1859 in the United States.
The first such sample was found earlier - in 1857 in Germany, in Stuttgart, from where Captain Ern brought a two-bullet rifle to Gillet. So, Russia was already familiar with such a system, where obturation was provided by a second bullet, when Green proposed his own version in 1859.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Undecim

The first such sample was found earlier - in 1857 in Germany, in Stuttgart, from where Captain Ern brought a two-bullet rifle to Gillet.

Most likely, during my school years were wonderful, I got acquainted with Gillet's two-bullet system ... Confuses me in your statement "about 1857." the fact that I met the earliest system of Gillet, model 1859; but not earlier ... Gillet's rifle was rifled, unlike Green's. Although, I came across an article where it was stated that Green's rifles with a rifled barrel were made for some customer (I don't remember now!). But it is possible that the Green and Gillet systems were confused ... By the way, Gillet's two-bullet pistols were also made ...

[Undecim]

In your wonderful school years, you could only get acquainted with an improved system - the Gillet-Trummer rifle, which appeared in 1859.

[Nikolaevich I]

Well, during my school years, I knew much more than many of my peers, thanks to access to one private library ... I read works on weapons-making and such well-known authors as Fedorov, Markevich, and books less known to the "masses"! Unfortunately, I no longer remember many of the titles of books and their authors! I remember that I had in my hands descriptions of the exhibits of the State Historical Museum, the Hermitage and some other museums. There were also foreign publications; incl. and in "foreign" languages! I could not read them, but see the "pictures" ....! By the way, the owner of the library sometimes translated texts to illustrations that interested me especially ...

[Bersaglieri]

But then with Berdan it turned out much more successful.

[motorized rifle]

Thank you for the article! Not in order of criticism, but ...

Therefore, for the infantry rifle, the scope was made only 600 steps, and for the dragoon rifle - 800! And this was after the Crimean War, where, as you know, the French choke Thouvenin showed good aiming accuracy at a distance of up to 1100 m!

Thorough with definitions. And then we can conclude if: "Let, so that we have ...", the sight was at 1100, but why waste little time, at 1150 ! Then we would!
You need to grasp the essence. Why 600 or 800 steps? As everyone knows, shooting accuracy (with hand weapons) depends on three factors:
1. The physical capabilities of weapons, ammunition and shooter;
2. Material and technical condition of weapons and ammunition;
3. Shooter skill;
Now let's take point one and see if a simple mechanical sight provides "good aiming accuracy at a distance of up to 1100 m". For one thing, it is possible to determine the nature of targets available to defeat at such a firing distance.
I do not know what the width of the front sight was at the Thouvenin choke, but it must be assumed that it was about the same as that of the Russian (Soviet weapons), i.e. provided an overlap of 2 thousandths.
Such a front sight width at a distance of 1000 m covers a target TWO (!) Meters wide. The width of a standard growth target (infantryman going on the attack), 0,5 m.
Then the front sight will cover the four infantry standing shoulder to shoulder (OR HORSE STANDING SIDE). It's a different matter for 600-800 steps. At a distance of 500m, the front sight covers a target 1m wide, and at a distance of 250m - 0.5m, i.e. just the size of the target. You can already get there.
And rifling sights for a longer range became expedient only together with magazine rifles, for firing a unit in one volley, which significantly increased the probability of hitting and ceased to be relevant with the advent of machine guns.

[kalibr]

Quote: motorized infantryman

And rifling sights for a longer range became expedient only together with magazine rifles, for firing a unit in one volley, which significantly increased the probability of hitting and ceased to be relevant with the advent of machine guns.

I don’t want to get into subtleties. I don’t know them. But I would have done like the French, it would not have become worse ... They could shoot at such a distance and knock out our servants at the guns, but we, it turns out, again no.

[motorized rifle]

I don’t want to get into subtleties. I don’t know them.

Yes, what are these subtleties! If you treat your work as entertainment literature, then it should not contain numbers, technical characteristics, "... and other things, bad ..." (c). Then the author sets some specific goal, and against the background of a story about something, this goal realizes.
For example: L.N. Tolstoy never disclosed the technical characteristics of the locomotive pulling the train under which Anna Karenina threw herself (or maybe she threw herself directly under the locomotive?), Even its brand is not named in my opinion! Nevertheless, the novel is there, filmed, read and watched.
As soon as some numerical values ​​appear, then immediately creativity turns ",,, trousers turn ... into original shorts ..) into a report ..., in one literary form or another. Agree, write an accounting report in literary form, for example in verses it is theoretically possible, but the numbers
(debit with credit) must match!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: motorized infantryman

For example: L.N. Tolstoy never disclosed the technical characteristics of the locomotive pulling the train under which Anna Karenina threw herself (or maybe she threw herself directly under the locomotive?), Even its brand is not named in my opinion! Nevertheless, the novel is there, filmed, read and watched.

Uh-huh to establish the driver and bring him to criminal responsibility! Shtob life did not seem like honey, otherwise he decided to crush literary heroes in the most interesting place!

[Ryazan87]

It was gratifying to read. I also note that the Thuvenne choke was famous for its poor ballistics. It cannot be said that this was an unprecedented know-how for the Russian army: since 1843, it has been in service with the "Luttikh" fitting. By the way, the accuracy of the Luttich (Tuvinne is definitely not better):

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Ryazanets87

I also note that the Thuvenne choke was famous for its poor ballistics.

And there is. Where does he get ballistics from:

Caliber …………………………………………………… 17,78 mm
Nozzle length .. …………………………………………… 1251mm
Length of the union with a bayonet ... …………………………… 2190 mm
Barrel length ………………………………………………… 865 mm
Rate of fire ……………………………… 1-2 rds / min.
Number of grooves ………………………………………….… 4
Rotation ……………………………………………….… Right
Sighting range of the choke …………… .. ……… 1100 m
Bullet weight …………………………………………………… .. 47,5 g
Bullet diameter …………………………………………………… ... 17,2 mm
Bullet muzzle velocity …………………………… 310 m / sec.
System ………. ……… muzzle-loading rod

The caliber is 17,78 mm and the speed is only 310 m / s, so for 1000 meters you can shoot along a mortar trajectory and it's not a fact that it will fly :)

[kalibr]

Do you think you opened America to me? This is not important, what matters is how many of them were in our army and how many Thouvenin fittings were in the French?

[Ryazan87]

Do you think you opened America to me?

I hope not - you are a professional historian.
In the French army, the Zouaves (3 regiments) and rangers (5 or 6 battalions, I don’t remember exactly) had fittings. In the Russian - partly in the guards, rifle battalions (also not completely), "fitters" in the infantry regiments (like selected riflemen) + a number of Hartung's fittings in naval crews. In a "vacuum" the proportion is about the same. Specifically in the Crimea - the French had an advantage.
However, the main problem was the level of training of French soldiers and non-commissioned officers, the availability of fresh combat experience. In the Russian army then units that fought in the Caucasus could compare with them. It should be noted that they won all the major field battles in Krymskaya - Kyuryuk-Dara, Bashkadyklar ... and they took Kars. Of course, against the Turks, but on the Danube nothing but Oltenica and Chetati did not work.

[kalibr]

Quote: Ryazanets87

all major field battles - Kyuryuk-Dara, Bashkadyklar, won in the Crimean region ... and they took Kars.

Just about, it was our hobby to take Kars, then give, then take again ...

[Korsar4]

They didn’t just give it away. Exchange for Sevastopol is not the worst option.

[kalibr]

Quote from Korsar4

They didn’t just give it away.

And how many times did you give it?

[Korsar4]

Times 3 - 4. And as a result of the Brest Peace, too.

[IS-80_RVGK2]

PSS Not so long ago I decided to try my luck again at the State Historical Museum (State Historical Museum), asked for permission to use photos from their website as illustrations for my articles on VO. The answer is: the price for a 2nd class photo, that is, not for printing, but in electronic media - 17 rubles per piece! Comments, as they say, are superfluous here! And at the top we have something they say about the patriotic education of our citizens on the glorious examples of history ...

Welcome to the world of real capitalism.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

Welcome to the world of real capitalism.

The world of real capitalism in the West: free photos on the website of the Metropolitan Museum in the USA, permission to use photos of the Arsenals in Vienna, Graz, Venice, Leeds, from the Ainu Museum in Hokkaido, available photos from the Tokyo National Museum, the Indian Museum in Washington! There, in the countries of real capitalism, they never asked me for money for a photo, including even the managers of AUCTIONS, where they earn money. There, practically everything in terms of this work is done free of charge - although here they say that for money they will sell their mother there. So maybe it will be sold here, because, as we do, basically everything is done for money. Do you think that after the articles, thanks are so easy? It is accepted there. And the money is with us. Although the Hermitage gives permission to publish their photos for free. The ice has broken!

[IS-80_RVGK2]

Capitalism has long been wrong there. What your colleagues are constantly talking about in the propaganda of correct capitalism. And yes, the backward countries of peripheral capitalism are a little different than the countries of post-industrialism.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

Capitalism has long been wrong there. What your colleagues are constantly talking about in the propaganda of correct capitalism. And yes, the backward countries of peripheral capitalism are a little different than the countries of post-industrialism.

I personally do not care what it is, right, wrong. I need the one with whom it is more profitable for me to work (and you too, through me you get access to information that you wouldn’t have otherwise!). So "right", "wrong" is not the right criterion!

[IS-80_RVGK2]

I personally don't need capitalism at all. Like a backward OEF. And so yes, your articles are interesting, although of course not all.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

I personally don't need capitalism at all.

We cannot change anything. We can only adjust!

[IS-80_RVGK2]

If we couldn’t change anything, our conversation would not go on the Internet now, but on a palm tree branch.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

If we could not change anything, our conversation would now be on a palm branch.

Change, and I'll see what you get ...

[IS-80_RVGK2]

Not one person changes, the masses change. The poor historian has gone today. They do not know and do not understand even such an obvious banal.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

Not one person changes, the masses change.

I read an article by G.V. Plekhanov "On the development of a monistic view of history."

[IS-80_RVGK2]

It's good. Only some strange conclusions were drawn. Apparently here again Pareto had his bad influence.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

Apparently here again Pareto had his bad influence.

Pareto's teaching is omnipotent, because it is true!

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

Not one person changes, the masses change.

And here, Makar, you are just wrong. Maybe one, if you know how. In the 90s Penza and the region were in the so-called "red belt". It takes a long time to explain what it was and why it was bad. I got tired of it and I made it so that we got out of it. That is ... one took and changed everything. And I have several such examples ...

[IS-80_RVGK2]

Quote: kalibr

That is ... one took and changed everything. And I have several such examples ...

You are a terrible person, Vyacheslav Olegovich. And at the same time, the father of the Penza democracy.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

And at the same time, the father of the Penza democracy.

No, Makar, no ... "gray cardinal". It will be more accurate ...

[IS-80_RVGK2]

How many times have I traveled through Penza. It will be necessary to somehow come, even for a little while, to look at the legendary Vyacheslav Olegovich Shpakovsky, to talk. After all, one is worth a whole museum. This is in the sense with all his talents as a propagandist, publicist and an exceptional amount of delusions.

[kalibr]

Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

an exceptional amount of delusion.

I have no delusions! For 66 years of my life I have lost them all!

[kalibr]

By the way, about capitalism ... I just made an agreement with an American weapons specialist that he would allow me to use the materials and photos of his website for free. So much for capitalism. And all VO readers will only benefit from this! And if they only used our sources, they would read very poorly designed articles. Do you need it? So today we are up to them ... catch up and catch up. Learn not to be greedy, poor and stupid! In the meantime, let's remove the foam from the bourgeois table!

[Saxahorse]

A completely insane design! Thanks to the author for the excellent, original material!

I read about Green's rifle more than once, but always in the form of a mention. Like "the first pancake is lumpy." Having seen in detail the construction of this "miracle", it remains only to agree. And who only thought this nightmare to be "simple"? I wonder why Dreise's rifle did not look at them, the level of the window bolt is much easier.

Although, yes, cartridges for it, as well as bullets, could still be made directly in the troops by the hands of soldiers.

It is curious that the first unitary cartridges for the Berdan rifle were also developed taking into account the possible manual reloading. The sleeve seemed to have to be reloaded at least 10 times. However, in practice, this had to be abandoned, the sleeves began to be collected and sent back to the cartridge manufactory. The quality of the soldier's cartridges turned out to be very low.

[kalibr]

We've always had a passion for saving on sleeping bags. They didn't save on etiquette!

[hohol95]

During maneuvers, uniforms deteriorate and horses get tired ... Scares and plaques lose their shine!
And then even the state money should be spent on various cleaning rags, and not on card games for gentlemen ochwitzers!

[zenion]

And the years were deliberately confused to confuse the Americans?

[hohol95]

As a result, this rifle was never adopted by the Russian army - the first pancake in the field of military cooperation between Russia and the United States in the middle of the XNUMXth century came out lumpy ...

They did not raise their own small arms designers ...
Everybody looked into the "mouth" of the foreign designers!
It's easier to buy it ... It seemed.

[Ivan Hangoverov]

I didn’t read any further hitting Lefty. The Crimean War perfectly showed who is fighting and who is stealing. Tsarism was also an abomination because it was LAZY to develop its own lead smelting, although there were deposits. The Romanovs bought lead abroad, and Russian soldiers were not taught to shoot "as a saving." Until the war with the European or Japanese army happened - well, everything worked poorly or poorly. Like a war with an enemy who knows how to shoot, so they had a pale appearance.