Military Review

About TT pistol and "plagiarism" in weapons

33
Already several times he came across in comments to articles on such an unpleasant moment as a comparison of a TT pistol with Browning pistols, and the emphasis in such comparisons is that Tokarev copied his pistol, removing some elements from it. Despite all my respect for Browning, the Russian gunsmith is also worthy of being noted as one of the greatest stories firearms weaponstherefore I will try to explain in detail what the similarities with the TT of individual models are, and what the difference is. I hope that this article will clarify many points, and the resource will no longer meet the message with the words "copied", "plagiarism" and so on, after all this is a very strong insult for the designer, and just a person who did a lot for the development of domestic weapons, and the more that is not alive. Three models were chosen for comparison: the TT itself, the M1903 Browning pistol and also the Browning pistol, but with the name Colt M1911, which people usually try to draw analogies with until the end of it and TT. Go!


Let's start with the Browning pistol model 1903 of the year. If you look at this weapon in comparison with a TT pistol, then it is impossible not to notice a very, very strong external similarity. It is this superficial examination of the weapon that gave rise to the opinion of the people about the full identity of the pistols, the M1903 even has a fuse, due to which it looks more attractive in comparison with the TT. In principle, there is nothing surprising in the fact that they draw analogies between two fundamentally different samples of pistols (I’m running ahead), because the easiest way is simply to look at one picture, at the other, and say, “So the knife is identical!”. It is much more difficult to at least run through the text with a description of the weapon and find lines that say that, despite all the external similarity, the weapon is built with different automation systems, that is, completely different in everything except appearance and that TT, and M1903 - pistols. But let's start with the external differences. As already noted above, the M1903 has an automatic fuse switch, as well as an automatic safety key on the back side of the weapon grip, this is of course not found in the TT. In addition, the M1903 trigger is hidden, although you can find some instances with an external trigger, but very few of them. Different weapons and the method of implementation of the slide delay, and the shape of the handle, and so on. Now let's look inside the pistols, and you can even whistle what they see, because if the external weapon is similar, then inside you can not find anything at all in common.

First of all, it should be noted that the M1903 is built according to the automatic scheme with a free stroke of the shutter, while in the automatic equipment the TT is built according to the scheme with a short stroke of the weapon. The trigger mechanism of a single-action pistol, which, subject to the presence of a hidden trigger and the inability of its smooth descent, makes the weapon not entirely safe to handle, but this is offset by the presence of safety devices, so that, in general, the weapon fully meets the safety requirements. If you look closely at the image of the gun, you can see a cutout on the casing-shutter, the purpose of which is not entirely clear. This cutout is designed to facilitate the disassembly of the weapon. The fact is that the barrel of the pistol is removable, and it is this part that keeps the cover-shutter from moving forward for complete removal. So, in order to disassemble the weapon, it is necessary to delay the casing-bolt all the way back, use the fuse switch to fix it and turn the barrel. After that, remove the shutter-casing from fixation and, holding it with a hand, remove the weapon with the barrel from the frame, after which the barrel can be separated completely. Such an original design is both a positive and a negative quality of the weapon, as an easy change of the barrel allows you to replace the worn out with a new one very quickly and even “on the knee”, but for service this feature is clearly negative. Due to its simplicity and reliability, this pistol was in service with many countries, plus the 9x20 cartridge was used in it, which was relatively effective at that time, but at the same time rare enough, which slowed down, but did not stop the spread of weapons. These pistols also got into the Russian Empire, but in very limited quantities to arm the Metropolitan Police.

So, it’s clear that this pistol can’t even claim to be even a little like the TT, since these are really two completely different types of short-barreled weapons. Well, the external similarity can be explained by the fact that Tokarev probably liked the appearance of the weapon, or it was a “request” from above, as well as the removal of the automatic fuse that was present in the original design of the TT pistol. In addition, there is an unconfirmed rumor that Tokarev was trained in Belgium, which I personally believe with difficulty, and most likely this rumor stems from the fact that many people consider Tokarev’s pistol and the aforementioned Browning pistols to be completely identical. In general, 50% of the myth has been dispelled, another 50 are left, but they will be the most difficult, since not everyone will agree with me further and will have to give examples when there were similar situations in the arms history, and no one even thought to call it imitation, and even more plagiarized.

About TT pistol and "plagiarism" in weaponsWhen comparing the TT with the Colt M1911 (for comparison, the Colt M1911 will be taken under the .38 ammunition) really have to sweat to defend their point of view. The fact is that the weapon is built according to the same automation scheme and is minimal for two pistols. And one could really talk about the complete similarity of weapons, if not for a few “buts”. First of all, it should be noted that the TT uses a completely different ammunition, and this already makes the weapon different in characteristics. But even if you do not take into account the characteristics of the pistols, then simply adapting the pistol for a new cartridge is already quite a serious job, as you say, I don’t need to fill my fur coat with my pants. Well, okay, let's leave the question of the difference in ammunition. In addition, there are many other differences in the two weapon models. So first of all, the absence of devices protecting TTs from accidental firing is striking, except for the safety trigger cocking, but here we can say that there is nothing difficult to remove from the design of this all. Much more interesting is the difference in the trigger mechanism, which is made in the TT! Separate removable unit! which is not the Colt M1911. It seems that there seems to be no big difference, but this is not at all the case; a completely redesigned trigger mechanism is a significant part of the weapon as a whole, which greatly influences the final result. Something like that.

Thus, it is permissible to say that Tokarev took Browning's development as a basis and adapted them to other requirements, improving in some way, worsening in some way, but is it worth calling it plagiarism? For example, take one of my favorite cases in gun history. Everyone knows that 80 percent of pistols are currently made according to the Browning scheme, which has been modernized to one degree or another. This also includes a scheme with a short barrel stroke, where locking occurs by means of a protrusion above the chamber and a window for ejection of spent cartridges. So, Browning developed a pistol with precisely this scheme of automatic operation, already without locking individual parts, although this weapon went into series only after his death. And there already Glocks and SIGs pulled themselves up. But if you move a little back on the timeline, you can see that exactly the same scheme was used by Webley & Scott in 1908, which began developing its pistol, and in 1910 it was already produced. Now I will explain what happened. Webley & Scott modified the scheme of operation of Browning automatics, significantly simplifying it, and subsequently, many years later, Browning used the scheme modernized by Webley & Scott. Well, tell me now, who, from whom and where did you steal what?

To talk about plagiarism in the world of weapons is, of course, a very interesting matter, but one should not forget that even completely identical samples in terms of their structure can differ radically in characteristics due to the ammunition used, because of the difference in quality and method of processing parts and so on and so on and so on. However, this does not mean that, having made a minor modification of any scheme of work, the manufacturer has the right to shout that he has made a revolution in the world of weapons, but this is a little from another opera. Actually, there are not so many schemes of operation of the automatic, options for trigger mechanisms, devices for protection against accidental firing are also far from infinite, add to this a “game” with coatings of parts and materials from which they are made, and we get a very small number of different options for weapons in which it will all be combined. But everyone wants to make money, someone attracts the attention of customers with an already earned name, someone with very high quality, someone with a weapon, and someone with low prices, as a result there are no completely identical samples, even if the weapon is made as a copy under license from the copyright holder. Here is the illegal copying of weapons by small groups of national craftsmen - yes, this is plagiarism, although in no way will the weapon be the same as the original one, by the way, it is not always the difference for the worse, sometimes vice versa. The work of a gunsmith is akin to the work of a composer. One has a limited supply of solutions and a very rare case when there is something new worthy, and the other has a limited supply of notes, new ones, unfortunately, also cannot be invented. So you have to twist, composing, using "chords" and debugging the "game technique". In general, the next time you look at two identical weapons in your opinion, remember that no one blames the composer for using the same notes as his colleagues.
Author:
Photos used:
ohrana.ru
33 comments
Ad

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

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. understudy
    understudy 4 October 2012 09: 42
    +10
    Someone like it, but I liked the TT from the first acquaintance because it somehow fit comfortably in the hand.
    In fact, everyone can borrow something from everyone with a corresponding revision because it’s hard to come up with something completely new. The principles of automation are the same, but the execution is different.
    That is why disputes arise periodically about who has what and what ...
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 4 October 2012 15: 20
      +10
      Inspired by an article -Sorry, they make out very quickly ...
    2. Grenader
      Grenader 4 October 2012 18: 14
      +3
      I support. I had to shoot from it. TT left a good impression. Convenient, simple, excellent accuracy when shooting, excellent penetration.
      1. aviator46
        aviator46 4 October 2012 21: 31
        +2
        My father was a front-line soldier, he said that in the field, TT "did not like" dirt ..
        1. Kibb
          Kibb 4 October 2012 22: 30
          +4
          He did not like, and does not like, it just somehow does not fall into the general postulate about nothing unbearable "Russian weapons", often at the front they preferred a revolver (even about the fact that it was not possible to shoot from the tank slots from the TT, you can not say, ), and even if one arm is injured, the TT is generally useless (but again this is the problem of the chosen scheme, and not only Browning's scheme was so happy about it). But Tokarev has something to do with what they wanted from him, he did. Nothing bad can be said about his design talents - so as not to be accused of nothing such SVT is an excellent weapon, somewhat capricious, but who said that the weapon does not need to be looked after
          1. va3610
            va3610 14 January 2019 17: 30
            0
            Isn’t it really possible to recharge the TT with one hand? And this is how: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCqYnTCV8Sw
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. mongoose
    mongoose 4 October 2012 09: 47
    +1
    in vain the author fights ... on the British flag, everyone "borrows" from everyone. And ours were licked more than once. and TT, that TT is a good and cheap pistol, very technologically advanced, due to the simplification of the design and its use
    1. scrabler
      4 October 2012 10: 06
      +1
      "It's a shame for the state" simply, or rather, because as soon as the gunsmith did not immediately begin, such conversations are bad and such discussions have been going on for more than 40 years, they still cannot be discussed in any way (((In general, I am a peaceful person, so to speak to me need peace ... and preferably the whole smile
      1. mongoose
        mongoose 4 October 2012 10: 09
        +2
        and the Belgians won SVETu added to fn fal
        1. scrabler
          4 October 2012 10: 13
          +5
          Yes, let them go there even if they go to domestic traumatika, but our people are honest, if there is anything else where we are, we will do it quietly, unnoticed and will not get caught laughing
          1. Konrad
            Konrad 5 October 2012 17: 00
            +1
            Quote: scrabler
            if something where and slam, we will do it quietly

            The Chinese generally rub everything and do not blush.
      2. Alex
        Alex 30 December 2013 18: 46
        +2
        Quote: scrabler
        "It's a shame for the state" simply, or rather, for the fact that as soon as the gunsmith was gone
        Unfortunately, they began to run into Kalashnikov about Schmeiser during his lifetime. And for the same "armor-piercing" signs of external similarity.
  3. Evgeniy8104
    Evgeniy8104 4 October 2012 09: 57
    +1
    Well, even if plagiarism and what. The main thing is to be good. A TT convenient apt
    1. mongoose
      mongoose 4 October 2012 10: 57
      -3
      well, I wouldn’t call it convenient, but the exact one, yes, but it’s the merit of the cartridge, which is still not the most successful for the pistol, the unification with submachine guns made him choose, but let's say the gun, weapon, so that it would shoot itself , in attack pps, ppd, pps rule
      1. Splin
        Splin 4 October 2012 14: 20
        0
        Quote: mongoose
        standardization with submachine guns,

        This is not to please unification with submachine guns. Our industry just learned how to produce a pistol cartridge for Mausers. And we did not release other pistol cartridges, besides the revolving cartridges. A little later they established 6,35 but it is rather weak.
        1. mongoose
          mongoose 5 October 2012 12: 16
          0
          and nevertheless, given the unification of calibers, pistols. rifles and submachine guns, and cartridge production, not so difficult, made one caliber, made a friend, say 9mm Mauser just spit
      2. Brother Sarych
        Brother Sarych 4 October 2012 14: 45
        -4
        When they made the TT, no one thought about submachine guns yet ...
        1. Splin
          Splin 4 October 2012 14: 55
          +1
          There was PP Tokarev (1927) under a revolving cartridge - but you are right, this is just an idea.
        2. scrabler
          4 October 2012 15: 00
          +1
          And what, for example, PPT? 1927 year.
          1. scrabler
            4 October 2012 15: 48
            0
            How is the idea ??? Well, let's look at this issue http://topwar.ru/17447-opytnyy-pistolet-pulemet-tokareva-ppt-sssr-1927-god.html though an experienced but quite a valid model, and not only for a revolver cartridge.
            1. Kibb
              Kibb 4 October 2012 19: 06
              0
              Well, let's. Before your article, Cyril, I knew about the existence of the PPT. Samples under another cartridge, let's set aside. Let's take the Nagan node.
              I'll try to formulate a few "ideas", just as questions, although not specifically related to this article
              1. The creation of a normally functioning PP under such an exotic cartridge - this already says a lot about the designer.
              2. I have never seen PPT live, but judging by the numerous photos, there is a very high culture of construction and manufacturing, unacceptable in mass "peaceful" production for the USSR at that time (and for the "military" production of other countries)
              3.Usually they wrote that border guards used somewhere in the anti-terrorist operation, but this is not clear where
              And about the TT specifically, I still don't like it, I'm sorry (this may be purely subjective), except for the removable trigger, I don't see any advantages in it. But I also hate talking about "who screamed at whom"
              1. scrabler
                4 October 2012 19: 33
                +1
                You will laugh, but I also see many drawbacks in TT, which I did not mention in the article, not to say that I have a plurality of opinions in my head, no matter what kind of weapon it is, but in this case it’s not allowed on 100, but on 98% for sure.
                1. PPT for such a cartridge says about the economy of the designer, who decided to use those ammunition, which was in prosperity, because sometimes it depends on this adoption. But in this case, Tokarev missed.
                2. Remember the first AK, in which about punching and did not hear, the golden weapon turned out when milling, but nothing came up with how to get out of the situation, then I think the same solution would be found if it became a weapon for armament.
                3. I didn’t hear about the border guards, but I’m trying to find the facts that the weapon was in the small amount that there was reliable information, I just don’t remember exactly where it was mentioned.
                On the whole, I agree that the PP for revolving cartridges, and, moreover, for a not quite conventional design, is a rather bold decision that had very little chance of getting mass distribution. The main thing that was such a weapon and not only on paper, I mean this smile
                1. Kibb
                  Kibb 4 October 2012 20: 07
                  0
                  Quote: scrabler
                  PPT under such a cartridge speaks of the economy of the designer

                  Undoubtedly, I wrote about this in the commentary to the article on PPT
                  Quote: scrabler
                  Remember the first AK

                  Why only AK, we can also recall the "golden" PPD34, which most likely was the reason for their withdrawal from production, and not the mythical neglect of the military to PP (at the same time, the adoption of SVT is not even a penny)
                  In such discussions, I am always annoyed not by the topic itself, but by extreme points of view such as "Russia is the homeland of elephants" - "The Russians only knew how to copy what"
                  Quote: scrabler
                  On the whole, I agree that the PP for revolving cartridges, and, moreover, for a not quite conventional design, is a rather bold decision that had very little chance of getting mass distribution. The main thing that was such a weapon and not only on paper, I mean this

                  Well, that’s what I’m talking about. In general, I don’t know another PP under a revolving cartridge (not to mention such exotic things as Nagan). With a big stretch - only the M1 carbine in the automatic version
        3. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 4 October 2012 22: 22
          0
          In principle, no one objected, but put the minuses ...
          1. Splin
            Splin 4 October 2012 22: 27
            0
            Quote: Brother Sarich

            In principle, no one objected, but put the minuses ...

            Do not worry, then most likely the American flag is annoyed.
        4. bunta
          bunta 5 October 2012 21: 06
          +1
          Quote: Brother Sarich
          When they made the TT, no one thought about submachine guns yet ...

          I wonder what would Hugo Schmeiser say about this? request
          1. Splin
            Splin 5 October 2012 21: 44
            0
            Quote: bunta
            I wonder what would Hugo Schmeiser say about this?

            The quote was about the Red Army. We really considered the Thompson PP and the MP-18 "police weapons". Then our emphasis was on the machine gun and automatic rifles of Fedorov. But due to the unification of the cartridge, they had to be forgotten.
            1. Kibb
              Kibb 5 October 2012 22: 01
              0
              Quote: Splin
              We really considered the Thompson PP and the MP-18 "police weapons

              It was believed correctly
              1. Splin
                Splin 5 October 2012 23: 36
                0
                Quote: Kibb
                It was believed correctly

                It would be correct to consider the PP as a "trench weapon". It was created for assault groups, both from one side and the other.
                1. Kibb
                  Kibb 5 October 2012 23: 59
                  0
                  In either case, the cool attitude of the military towards the PP is quite understandable. In the case of Thompson and PPD (and not only with them), this is also aggravated by high cost, with dubious tactical capabilities
                  The Paraguayan and Finnish wars are not an indicator - the conditions are too specific. However, no one refused to use the PP, but was not going to do the main infantry weapons, it was just a big war that made its own corrections — massive automatic weapons were needed and the PP came up to this role best, after the war everything back to square one
        5. Alex
          Alex 30 December 2013 18: 48
          +2
          Quote: Brother Sarych
          When they made the TT, no one thought about submachine guns yet ...
          What are you? .. Trouble ...
      3. kush62
        kush62 5 October 2012 18: 50
        0
        Quote Mongoose: but a gun, a weapon, say, so that it would shoot itself,


         What is the first duty of a soldier in a war? 
        - Die for your homeland! 
        - Wrong. The first duty of a soldier is to make enemies die for your homeland!
  4. Kibb
    Kibb 4 October 2012 10: 27
    +1
    TT for me personally is inconvenient, and not at all the best gun. And whoever got what they got there, so in weapons business borrowing is really an ordinary thing
  5. neri73-r
    neri73-r 4 October 2012 10: 55
    +4
    I hope that this article will clarify many points, and messages with the words "copied", "plagiarism" and so on will cease to be found on the resource


    Do not hope that such words will be found and the better we have the situation, the better we will live, the more they will be and they will sound louder. From the West, no one has yet canceled the information war against Russian civilization !!!
  6. revnagan
    revnagan 4 October 2012 10: 57
    0
    Quote: Evgeniy8104
    Well, even if plagiarism and what. The main thing is to be good. A TT convenient apt

    I would not say. The fight is strong, sharp, the recoil is strong ... I like the Nagant more (from the "oldies").
  7. neri73-r
    neri73-r 4 October 2012 11: 06
    +1
    Well, about the gun, I liked the TT, I shot from it, in addition to convenience, I liked the sound of the shot, so biting, powerful, I feel a powerful cartridge. The main drawback, as far as I know, was the difference in the time of failure of the automation and the barrel during heavy use. Now I don’t remember what had obviously worn out earlier, that is, for example, when using the barrel, it was not worn out, and the automation wore out and needed to be replaced. And the requirements for weapons, so that everything would wear out at the same time, according to the principle - died, so died.
  8. borisst64
    borisst64 4 October 2012 11: 23
    +6
    Until now, the indicator of the protection of a bulletproof vest is - "not penetrated by a bullet from a TT pistol." By the way, not every armor can boast of this.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose 4 October 2012 11: 54
      +3
      features of a powerful "Mauser" cartridge with a small caliber, gives high penetration, but low stopping effect, which is bad for short
    2. Kibb
      Kibb 4 October 2012 13: 19
      +1
      The TT itself has nothing to do with it; the Mauser cartridge is a very powerful thing.
      As for the pistol, it was apparently made as a temporary standard. Therefore, it turned out to be as simple as a bayonet. The shape of the handle is inconvenient (although for some it looks normal, it tastes and has a color ...). The impact is sharp. The accuracy is higher only in comparison with the PM, but still not bad. The lack of a fuse is surprising. They say about the store self-popping. Removable USM-a definite plus.
      In general, they tried to replace TT with another model before the war, but as usual it turned out that "there is nothing more permanent than temporary"
      1. mongoose
        mongoose 5 October 2012 12: 20
        0
        as they tried to rearm the Red Army on SVT
        1. Kibb
          Kibb 5 October 2012 12: 44
          0
          They didn’t try to rearm completely, they should have been in the department about half the state (only the states fully succeeded, and even the Marines on guards and colts could only dream up to the 43rd), but the total number of issued SVTs is more than MP40, nevertheless MP recognizable PP, but SVT didn’t have this very well, although in the photo and newsreel there are a lot of them. The attempt was very strong - a half million were released quite a lot. MP 38/40 released about 1,2 million
  9. cucun
    cucun 4 October 2012 12: 02
    +8
    Just got tired of listening from not very good. smart critics that AK was licked from Sturmgever 44. I was tired of explaining that they only look alike, one hell is Kalashnikov licked from the Fritz ... am
    1. mongoose
      mongoose 4 October 2012 12: 26
      +2
      and here there is absolutely nothing in common from a structural point of view, except for the principle of a gas outlet pipe, but here the stormtrooper was not the first, it also used CBT
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 4 October 2012 13: 46
        +2
        Well, SVT is far from the first. As for the external similarity of SHG and AK, I usually propose to conduct a thought experiment (you can also physically in a graph editor) - transfer the front sight to the gas outlet, and the sight to the lid of the swollen box, you can use a handle like AP15. And after that you can revise, say, "Pirates of the XNUMXth century"
    2. Kibb
      Kibb 4 October 2012 13: 25
      +1
      Well, with the SHG44 and AK everything is clear, there is nothing in common between them, and the appearance is, as it were, not quite the same — move the front sight to the usual place for Western rifles, and that's all, nothing in common. With TT and PM everything is more complicated, but again I repeat - there is nothing terrible in this, absolutely normal phenomenon in the arms business
    3. Civil
      Civil 4 October 2012 13: 55
      +1
      it’s very difficult to invent something really new in firearms, the progress here has slowed down, although over how many years the arquebuses (c) have been in service)))
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 4 October 2012 14: 09
        0
        Quote: Civil
        it’s very difficult to invent something really new in firearms

        Well, the Germans have largely retreated, although if we dig deeper, we still find that something, somewhere, was already
  10. hohryakov066
    hohryakov066 4 October 2012 12: 07
    +2
    An excellent weapon. When firing, not everyone likes a "sharp" shot, but this is the price for using a powerful cartridge. I personally like it. For those who have always dealt only with the PM, it is at first unusual to use the trigger instead of the fuse, you get used to it quickly. But (in my opinion) when shooting, it is more balanced than PM and more accurate. And the similarity of the design is quite explainable by the fact that gunsmiths do not live in a vacuum, and ideas are in the air.
  11. gregor6549
    gregor6549 4 October 2012 14: 37
    0
    Each type of equipment in general and weapons in particular is developed by designers taking into account the availability of information about similar types of equipment both domestically and abroad, including patent intelligence and other types of information. One of the paradoxes of the USSR was that it was often easier to get access to information about foreign analogues than to information about such analogues within the country (secrecy, damn it). Further, even with complete information about the best analogs, it would be stupid to copy them, even if desired, due to the different levels of production technologies, the quality of raw materials and equipment, economic conditions and much more. The same TU4 bomber could not be copied 100% from its American counterpart (in my opinion B25), despite Stalin's strict order not to change anything in relation to the original. I had to change because there were no American materials, no American components, no American machine tools, or anything else. So with all the other "things" External similarity does not always mean a copy
  12. plump
    plump 4 October 2012 15: 14
    +1
    Not at all against tyring. But, since tyrit, so the best. laughing
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 4 October 2012 16: 05
      +1
      Tyrit will not be enough, even if this "steal" is the best. The main thing is that there is someone and what to reproduce and not just reproduce, but at least with the same quality. And this is more difficult, because the defense industry itself needs to be recreated, you can't steal it
      1. Cynic
        Cynic 4 October 2012 18: 10
        0
        Quote: gregor6549
        It’s not enough to flick

        The most important thing in this business! wink
        Won Kalash only lazy does not produce, but whose is the best? Here it is! And the TT barrel is far from the last, just like the TT!
        drinks
  13. 77bor1973
    77bor1973 4 October 2012 21: 54
    0
    Take the Chinese AK-47 and ours are different even with a cursory glance.
    1. plump
      plump 5 October 2012 09: 06
      0
      And what is the AK-47?
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 5 October 2012 12: 52
        0
        Quote: chubby
        And what is the AK-47?

        Come on, let's say we got used to calling quite different ships destroyers of the "Novik" type
  14. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 5 October 2012 09: 43
    +1
    yes ... thanks to the author, and Tokarev created a magnificent pistol, fact ...
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 5 October 2012 14: 17
      0
      May be enough? Tokarev VERY successfully copied. Not many can afford ...
  15. Andrey77
    Andrey77 5 October 2012 14: 14
    0
    I understand the author of the article. But plagiarism. Alas.
    1. scrabler
      5 October 2012 15: 05
      +1
      Well, what about plagiarism when a completely different USM? If so, then Glock, beloved by all, is copied from the Webley & Scott M1912 Mark I, too, after all, locking by the window to eject spent cartridges. Automation, though it is the basis, but not all in the weapon. But at the same time, no one dares to say it as this is the only thing that is the same in weapons.




      Well, if you want to find domestic plagiarism, it looks like this:



      And also:



      And Tokarev won't be offended! soldier
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 5 October 2012 19: 31
        0
        Quote: scrabler
        And Tokarev won't be offended!

        And no one is going to offend him. Webl and Glock are quite different trunks. IMHO it was much easier to explain your opinion on this issue on the basis of CZ75
        1. scrabler
          5 October 2012 20: 58
          0
          They are not just different, but completely different, everything is different except for the principle of operation. As well as the Colt M1911 with TT.
  16. Chukcha
    Chukcha 5 October 2012 21: 10
    0
    In general, the article is correct. Indeed, the overflow of ideas of weapons is a permanent process. And it is completely incomprehensible, therefore, who "ripped off" whom, and even ripped off? Any sane designer will always do something of his own, close to him in spirit, taking only the main previous idea, and modifying it to possible perfection.
    And this is normal.
  17. Kibb
    Kibb 5 October 2012 21: 17
    0
    Quote: scrabler
    M1911 with TT

    Well, no, they are very similar, for the rest I expressed my opinion, it doesn’t smell like plagiarism
  18. bistrov.
    bistrov. 6 October 2012 09: 28
    0
    It is quite obvious that when developing his famous pistol, Tokarev studied many foreign models of pistols, trying to find his own scheme. Otherwise, it simply cannot be. Is it possible to create any constructive model without examining everything that human thought has created before? The whole world goes this way. Is it plagiarism? Plagiarism is when, for example, China took and released a Kalashnikov assault rifle under its name. The similarities between Browning 1903 and the TT are purely external, nothing more, the most basic thing is that the automation schemes are completely different, besides, the TT has no fuse, and there are two Browning, the trigger is hidden in the M1903, and on the TT it’s open, with a preliminary cocking, which is one of the disadvantages of TT. Another major disadvantage of the TT is the spontaneous popping of the magazine out of the handle and the low survivability of some of its parts, which was the main reason for the Red Army to retain the Nagan revolver along with the TT. In addition, the TT bullet, along with high penetration ability, has a small stopping effect, that is, a person after being wounded by this bullet, it may not lose consciousness and retain the ability to move, and therefore continue to fight. This was the main reason why in the mid-50s the production of TT was discontinued and replaced with the well-known 9 mm PM. The total output of TT pistols is estimated at approximately 1. Currently, in connection with the development of personal protective equipment, TT was again in demand, it gained special popularity in the recent years in criminal structures, and not only, for example, among Chechen fighters, it was special chic to have TT in addition to standard weapons.
  19. Cynic
    Cynic 6 October 2012 18: 20
    +2
    Just my point:
    The discussion from TT and plagiarism is not the only one in the history of Russian weapons and not only!
    And the casket just opened!
    The Russians have nothing of their own, everything borrowed! Stolen!
    So, that is not the last time we will spit on the dirt that is poured with great pleasure on everything Russian!
    drinks
  20. Alex
    Alex 30 December 2013 22: 21
    +2
    Thanks for the article, I absolutely agree with the author: the external similarity and principles of the systems are always a reflection of the requirements and available technical solutions.
  21. Valery Semyonov
    Valery Semyonov 30 March 2021 10: 48
    0
    All designers work according to the principle: "consider all the options and choose the best one." And, if you have enough intelligence and time, do it better. So, you can't do without elements of borrowing. And this is the most rational approach. And - absolutely not ashamed.