Infantry weapons through the eyes of an engineer

Several samples of small arms fell into my hands weapons Second World War Patriotic and Wehrmacht. As they say, there was an opportunity to slowly twist, figure it out, try "on the tooth." Compare what is called "face to face". Well, here's what happened in the end...

Comments

[Konnick]

I'll try to watch it, but the beginning is delayed and when the voice-over asked - Is this an infantry? ... the specialist said that it was an infantry, not a carbine. But there was no infantry model 1891/30. And it was just a rifle, which, along the barrel length, corresponded to the Dragoon 1891 model.

[Luminman]

Hello colleague! I watched your video with great pleasure - this is exactly what is so critically lacking in VO! You mentioned design school with national characteristics, about which I can give one curious example. Somehow I had a chance to jump for several months on crutches of a domestic manufacturer, in which the adjustment of the palm rest was for a Phillips screwdriver, the height of the stop for a classic screwdriver was adjusted, and a hex key was required to tighten the screw for the anti-slip device. Thus, near me was a whole arsenal with a tool ...

I can give you one more example. Everyone probably remembers when imported washing powders began to appear in the early 90s, which had a small handle for easy carrying. I still remember how it was vigorously discussed by Soviet citizens not spoiled by such a service - a trifle, but it is convenient to carry. I can give another example - a container for eggs (who remembers, before eggs were transferred simply in a plastic bag)

[Konnick]

a trifle, but it is convenient to carry.

And how convenient it was to have accessories in the butt, and why is it this telescopic, in the USA there are a lot of rubber shock absorbers replaceable on the butt, cheap and cheerful. Why did they complicate the design of the AK for the sake of left-handers, is it possible that something like hockey sticks can be produced in right and left versions.
I have not encountered weapons at work, but I can well distinguish the German school from the American one. And the Russian school is divided into the school of a normal person and the school of the Bauman school.

[Luminman]

Quote: Konnick

I can well distinguish the German school from the American

If you choose cars as the object of difference, then the differences are noticeable to the naked eye. Of these, only Japanese cars stand out - they are somehow faceless ... The same applies to consumer electronics ...

Quote: Konnick

And the Russian school is divided into the school of a normal person and the school of the Bauman school

Can you explain what a normal person's school is? And how does it differ from the Baumanskaya school?

[Konnick]

Can you explain what a normal person's school is? And how does it differ from the Baumanskaya school?

A normal designer makes a design with technological quality, and Bauman, based on a super-skilled worker, it’s not for nothing that there is an anecdote about finalizing it with a file. Let me explain, I encountered three times with the products of the designers of this school. I had to heavily rework the drawings into a digestible design documentation for the workers. Tell me, how can you show parts in detail drawings in the design position for assembly, and not for manufacturing? Plays a role in the drawing, even such a trifle as the part is located in the machine or fixture plays a role. Once I had to give someone else's drawings and tell the locksmith to look at the drawing on the contrary to the light

[Luminman]

Quote: Konnick

A normal designer makes a design with technological quality, and a Bauman one counts on a super-skilled worker

In my opinion, in our country there has always been one school - Bauman, leading its history from the imperial vocational school for mentally retarded teenagers.

Metallurgy was created on the model and likeness of German metallurgy back in the 20-30s. The tank industry originates from the tank Christie etc. Japanese optics is repelled by Zeis and Schneider-Kreuznach optics. Korean cars are copied with small additions Opel...

Quote: Konnick

Even such a trifle as a part is located in the machine plays a role in the drawing

Very roughly speaking, the drawing only reflects the dimensions of the part. And the technology of its manufacture always goes to the drawing, for example, starting from how to approach the machine and at what angle to sharpen the cutter and ending with how to properly put the finished part in the box. I remember this from school, when I studied as a turner in the Criminal Procedure Code ...

[Konnick]

A very naive approach. For example, it is necessary to observe the unity of bases . And as for weapons .... I would like to compare the drawings for the 41-year-old PPSh and the modern ones for the AK-12, that's where the difference will be. I met the documentation of the 40s, just perfect, everything you need. And according to the drawings of the early 60s, he learned to draw up his own drawings. I have a designer's path from Ordinat Reiss to super-duper Autodesk, whoever is in the know will understand. But I’m not a pure nerd designer, I also periodically led work teams from a borer 6 and a welder with NAKS (I myself have one) to a former locksmith with 20 years in prison, the latter really gave me the “call sign” Nauka ... but this yes, lyrics.

[Konnick]

In my opinion, in our country there has always been one school - Bauman, leading its history from the imperial vocational school for mentally retarded teenagers.

Metallurgy was created on the model and likeness of German metallurgy back in the 20-30s. The tank industry has its origins in the Christie tank, and so on. Japanese optics is repelled by Zeis and Schneider-Kreuznach optics. Korean cars are copied with small additions Opel...

If we had one Bauman school, then there would be no need to create in the model and likeness of German, American and Japanese technology.
And so we had the Kharkov Tank School, the Magnitogorsk Metallurgical School, the Mariupol and Kharkov Carriage Schools, the Kiev School of Welding, the Moscow Aviation School and, of course, the St. Petersburg Shipbuilding School. Graduates of the Moscow Aviation Institute and the Bauman School worked for me, in addition to graduates from other universities, so I learned some principle.

[Konnick]

And of course the Tula weapons school, Kovrov and Izhevsk. Izhevsk is the weakest, like Nizhny Tagil tank, compared to Kharkov, Leningrad and Chelyabinsk.

[Luminman]

Quote: Konnick

Tula weapons school, Kovrov and Izhevsk. Izhevsk is the weakest as well as Nizhny Tagil tank compared to Kharkov, Leningrad and Chelyabinsk

We have one engineering school! Everything else is applied particulars, tailored to a specific production. Let me give you an example: in one vocational school they require to wear a dressing gown for work, in another - an apron. The technology of production does not change from this in any way ...

[Konnick]

We have one engineering school!

I do not agree. I will explain using the example of the Zhdanovsky (Mariupol) heavy engineering plant and Uralvagonzavod. I'll start with tanks. Almost all tank corps in the USSR were cooked on ZhZTM and sent to UVZ. Now, when the Urals weld welds, especially the new towers for the T-90M are cracking. And this depends not only on steel and electrodes, but also on designers and technologists. Almost all UVZ specialists are graduates of the local polytechnic or now UTSU, there has never been a welding faculty, unlike the same Zhdanovsky and Chelyabinsk institutes. Chelyabinsk has the status of "National Research University"
Now about the level of car building

It's called Find One Difference.
At the top is a picture with an earring of the dead center of the author of the cart Khanin from Kharkov, well, it's like Kalashnikov, only a wagon. The cart was called Khaninsky. UVZ decided to improve the unimprovable, but the car bounced when braking during testing. It turned out they raised the earring mount by 15 mm to the bolster. I informed them, they sent a new curved earring (6 pos.) in the bottom picture, with the hope that the force will go around the circumference and will press the beam. It didn’t work out ... but they didn’t back down and welded a safety device from jumping out into the vertical lever and called it modernization, and for 15 years already this earring has been showing the stupidity of UVZ designers and the current top technical managers of Russian Railways and the same UVZ.

[Konnick]

Very roughly speaking, the drawing only reflects the dimensions of the part. And the technology of its manufacture always goes to the drawing, for example, starting from how to approach the machine and at what angle to sharpen the cutter and ending with how to properly put the finished part in the box. I remember this from school, when I studied as a turner in the Criminal Procedure Code ...

In a good drawing, even the dimensions suggest the manufacturing technology.

[Konnick]

Japanese optics is repelled by Zeis and Schneider-Kreuznach optics.

They recalled that once the optical school reached the most advanced frontiers, the meniscus telescope of the Maksutov system alone was worth something. The Japanese never came up with their own.

[Konnick]

If you choose cars as the object of difference, then the differences are noticeable to the naked eye. Of these, only Japanese cars stand out - they are somehow faceless ... The same applies to consumer electronics ...

Little do you know about the differences between American and Japanese cars.
And the differences between American and German appeared in World War II. American Studebaker and Willis were simple and reliable. More specifically, if briefly using the example of Kübelwagen and Jeep, then the Jeep has a dependent suspension on springs with a powerful water-cooled engine with antifreeze and a simple connection of the front axle, we went down this path with our GAZ-64, no one knows who before, and the Kübelwagen has an independent torsion bar like on our Zaporozhets with crooked legs and rear-wheel drive with an air-cooled engine, everything borrowed from Volkswagen. Even our own M-1 had the most reliable Ford-V design. Stalin did not just want to leave only Studebaker from trucks in lend-lease deliveries, he was much more reliable and had the simplest all-wheel drive transmission. After the war, we began to replicate it, and I studied with the grandson of the chief designer of GAZ, Lipgart.
If we take the modern industry, I can tell you about a different approach to the design of foundries. German workshops have equipment with hydraulic drives, American with pneumatic drive. The Germans carry liquid metal from the furnaces to the pouring in bucket tubes suspended from the monorail with many arrows, the Americans use just a flat floor and diesel loaders with a bucket. As a result, when a German breaks down, the entire shop stands up, and another loader is taken from the American from the parking lot. Attitude to ventilation - the Germans equip each sneeze with suction, while the Americans do, for example, in the smelting section a simple 16-fold exchange ventilation with dusting of workplaces. But now everything is averaging, but before there were design schools and you could tell a lot more, I can live until retirement, there is a little left, I will be a blogger
Americans are not stupid according to Zadornov, they are the best designers and workers, but all this goes into oblivion ...

[ycuce234-san]

Quote: Luminman

I can give another example - an egg container

Previously, household baskets were widely used, therefore, in the 50-90s, it was pointless to have hands and ears for carrying on the packaging of products and household goods. The wolf from the electronic toy of those years used baskets to collect eggs. But baskets are expensive, and are intended for wealthy families (you can look at their modern prices for quality products or at prices for duffel boxes), so with the impoverishment of the population, this option appeared for residents from the ghetto, in the form of a handle on the package.
https://fishki.net/4098450-o-sovetskih-hozjajstvenno-bytovyh-korzinkah.html

[Konnick]

this option appeared for residents from the ghetto, in the form of a pen on the package.

The packaging will kill us. I was in the hospital, the nurse boasted about how cool and disposable everything they had, I said that whole mountains had already grown outside the cities from this cool, we are changing the landscape of the planet with garbage ...

[ycuce234-san]

Quote: Konnick

The packaging will kill us. I was in the hospital, the nurse boasted about how cool and disposable everything they have

In medicine, disposability is an advanced and technological solution and the volume of medical waste is small - it is completely burned in small incinerators. Otherwise, you will have to have steam autoclaves and gamma-sterilization units on the balance sheet in the hospital, and carry prepared tools and consumables hundreds of kilometers to small first-aid posts and outpatient clinics. In the field, it is impossible to ensure sterility without the technology of disposable consumables, etc.

[Konnick]

it is completely burned in small incinerators.

I'm talking about packaging, look in your trash can, all the garbage from the packages.

[Foul skeptic]

I can give another example - a container for eggs (who remembers, before eggs were transferred simply in a plastic bag)

Plastic "suitcases" for eggs "a hundred years at lunch"

[Konnick]

Plastic "suitcases" for eggs "a hundred years at lunch"

Like a work of engineering

[Konnick]

It is impossible to watch, a lot of superfluous words. And I tried to look as a designer, but it turned out to be a set of stamps, which, unlike the simplicity of Russian weapons, are described with difficulties and delays. The video, if the text was being prepared, could have been reduced by half, and I did not come across an explanation of the difference between Russian design thought and another. The devil is in the details, and the design is in the equipment and materials. Now plastic mass has become available, so pseudo-constructors are molding pseudo-new weapons, since they have mastered 3D modeling. Previously, the designer had to know how to make it in order to draw a part, now it is no longer necessary. Lobaev bought a drop dead American machine, so he sculpts barrels by hand, a teaspoon per hour and tries to sell them for a million, but our army needs it?

[Catfish]

I completely agree with you Nikolay.
Some kind of crap in slippers.

[Luminman]

Quote: Sea Cat

Some crap

Can you explain what's wrong?

[Catfish]

See below, Nikolai explained everything popularly.

[Konnick]

Some kind of crap in slippers

From my collection

[Graf_mgk]

The evaluation of a weapon is not only its simplicity of design. Everyone has been arguing for a long time which rifle is better - the Russian three-ruler or the German Mauser K98 rifle. To begin with, I advise you to ask how many Russian three-line rifles were produced and how many German Mauser K98 rifles were produced. And the second moment, a patent for the production of a German rifle was bought by such countries as Japan and the USA, and the Russian three-line turned out to be useless to anyone, with the exception of countries such as Finland, etc. and so on.

[Konnick]

And the second moment, a patent for the production of a German rifle was bought by countries such as Japan and the USA

And I always admired Lee-Enfield, this rifle was also used by completely illiterate people, Basmachi and Dushmans, like the Chukchi loved Winchester, if not for the cartridges they would not have switched to the three-ruler. What a myth about simplifying weapons for use by the illiterate, the ingenious Shpagin said - Many can do it difficultly, try to do it simply ..., and the simplicity of design is the low cost of production and the reliability of the design. And you can teach how to handle weapons even an illiterate ... hay ... straw.

[Soldatov V.]

Probably easier than Sudayev's PP is not possible to do. It is still largely relevant today.
As a process engineer, I distinguish Russian, American, German design and technology schools. There is also English and French. In terms of shipbuilding, one can still distinguish Finnish, Czech, Romanian. In general, in principle, each country has its own design school.
In our personal opinion, we are losing the Russian design school, copying Western schools, at least in shipbuilding, in the automotive industry, in aviation. For example, how many polytechnic institutes we have and there are no fully designed cars by our engineers. The institutions are running idle. Young engineers have nowhere to realize themselves. We will buy and hire everything we need abroad. Remember? It's the same in aviation.

[Konnick]

As a process engineer, I distinguish Russian, American, German design and technology schools.

There is even a difference in design. We use the German principle of view arrangement in the drawings, the bottom view is a top view, the right view is a left view of the part. Americans have a left view, a top view from above, etc. For some reason, not a single graduate of an engineering university answered me correctly. Sometimes you have to translate design documentation into Russian technical ... into obscene language as easy as shelling pears
He was somehow engaged in adaptation for the production of a CD from Bosch-Rextrot for the mechanization of the stage of the Bolshoi Theater. The Austrians did not want to tell me why they put a tolerance of plus or minus 5 mm on an almost 20-meter metal structure when I asked them what the temperature was in the pit under the stage of the Bolshoi Theater, since no one canceled thermal deformation and at what temperature the operation will be at that and we will fit into the permit. I may have embarrassed them too much, their brains didn't work, but they worked only for the most severe tolerance for such a length of 20 meters without an expansion joint. The stage structures were mounted, but it turned out to be as difficult to manage as everything German ... in general, I did not see it in action, but the money was spent immeasurably. But now I know Big inside out and I have an idea about a ballet wagon, not a van ..

[Konnick]

For example, how many polytechnic institutes we have and there are no fully designed cars by our engineers. The institutions are running idle. Young engineers have nowhere to realize themselves. We will buy and hire everything we need abroad. Remember? It's the same in aviation.

This is a very complex topic, because the automotive industry reflects all the advantages and disadvantages of the totality of the entire industry. Once I wanted to design cars and realized that you can’t cook porridge, now my salary is 4 times higher than the salary of a VAZ lead design engineer, although the position is now retired. What do you want from them. There, all the money goes to top managers. Now designers of aluminum windows receive twice as much as a neighbor from the defense industry. And young people think that CAD programs automate the work of a designer, they do not automate, but mechanize. And you can’t become a real designer, they need to be born with exactly the curiosity that will help you become a designer, and not a narrow specialist in some car bodies and check them for rigidity all your career like one of my classmates at the VAZ .. I had at work and workshops, and bridges, unique metal structures up to 200 meters and simple structures such as devices, and wagons, and electronic devices, and even Garage Electronics for one admirer of the film, or rather his son. You have seen many of my projects. Someone sees them every day, of course I did not do it alone, in a team. An example of a designer for me is Nikolai Leonidovich Dukhov - a designer of tanks, their transmissions and three times Hero of Socialist Labor as the chief designer of our atomic and hydrogen bombs. He defended our country during the Great Patriotic War and defended it during the Cold War. Only few of those whom I have trained in designing are few, most are unsuccessful. I didn’t try it in the defense industry, it’s poor with us, you’ll die of hunger, it’s not under the Union, everyone is grabbing tops with assistants .. Although this week they looked at my resume from the Kalashnikov concern, look for d.ur.aka for 4 soldos .. Look at the designer Chukavin

Do you think he drives a Mercedes and has the same beautiful mistress as the neighbor in the photo? Only the same Chukavin cannot be replaced, and the neighbor is here today, and tomorrow he is gone and no one will notice.

[Luminman]

Quote: Konnick

simplicity of design is the low cost of production and the reliability of the design

This does not happen in one bottle at once. Anyway, there is some compromise...

[vovochkarzhevsky]

The evaluation of a weapon is not only its simplicity of design. Everyone has been arguing for a long time which rifle is better - the Russian three-ruler or the German Mauser K98 rifle. To begin with, I advise you to ask how many Russian three-line rifles were produced and how many German Mauser K98 rifles were produced.

And what? Misinka 37 million, Mauser 20 million.

And the second moment, a patent for the production of a German rifle was bought by such countries as Japan and the USA, and the Russian three-line turned out to be useless to anyone, with the exception of countries such as Finland, etc. and so on.

But such a simple thought that politics interferes very much in the choice of a weapon sample did not occur to you?

[Graf_mgk]

Given the time of production, as well as the number of weapons copying the Mauser 98, but having a different name, this rifle can easily claim the title of the most massive non-automatic weapon in history. According to some estimates, the number of Mauser 98 and various copies of the original system produced worldwide is approaching 100 copies.

[Luminman]

Quote: Graf_MGK

a patent for the production of a German rifle was bought by countries such as Japan and the USA, and the Russian three-ruler turned out to be useless

And in our time, too, there are people who rush to the inscription Made in not ours...

[Konnick]

The evaluation of a weapon is not only its simplicity of design.

Ease of design is a very relative value, it is impossible to normalize it, but that's another story.

[Konnick]

And to say that this rifle is twice as expensive, then we must remember about twice the salary. Just like our aircraft, they say the Su-57 is half the price of the F-35, but we forget that in the USA the share of wages in the technological cost of production is 50-60%, unlike ours, our 20% ... everything is relative.

[Konnick]

There were 32 magazines for Zbroevka and it didn’t cover the aiming line, but lower bipods compared to the PKK.

[billy bones]

Alexey, thanks for the interesting material. Clear and convincing.
It would be interesting to see your opinion about the TT pistol.
Several times I managed to shoot from it. Compared to PM, it is easier to hit the target.
1 Less recoil means less time to return the gun to firing position. Let it be a fraction of a second, but in real combat contact this factor can be decisive.
2 Easier aiming due to longer barrel.
On the net, I have seen the opinion more than once that Americans prefer Yugoslav / Serbian of all TT options. And in general, TTs (apparently, both Chinese and Soviet ones too) are bought there, even with a huge selection of pistols.
And the Serbs made a fuse and, apparently, solved the problem of the store falling out, which happened with the Soviet TT.
The Hungarians also had a quite acceptable modified version of the TT for a long time.
Soviet TT veterans of the Great Patriotic War were generally rated low. In any case, compared with German pistols. I judge, in particular, by a series of memoirs published under the editorship of A. Drabkin.
Twice I saw on the net a mention of cases when some part that flew out from a Soviet TT knocked out the shooter's eye.
However, it seems that the problems are solvable.

[Konnick]

Alexey, thanks for the interesting material. Clear and convincing.
It would be interesting to see your opinion about the TT pistol.

It's probably not his skill level.

[Catfish]

The TT was simply dangerous to handle. The pistol did not have a fuse and, when a cartridge was sent into the barrel, it was placed on a safety platoon. When fired, even from a small height, the trigger was torn off and a shot occurred.
It is difficult to explain why Tokarev, taking Browning as a basis, managed not to improve, but to worsen his model.

[Konnick]

It is difficult to explain why Tokarev, taking Browning as a basis, managed not to improve, but to worsen his model.

Cheapness. This is how the Mauser did not become popular before the Civil War, it was just very expensive.

Soon there should be a monument to the designer and his weapons in Tula.
Minusator and will you minus it completely? Leave a comment, what's wrong?

[Catfish]

Leave a comment, what's wrong?

Where he is, anyway, there is nothing to say, and even if it were, he needs to know the letter.

[Catfish]

-1

Well, you at least say a word in defense of TT.

Although, if minus Tokarev, I completely agree.

[Konnick]

Although, if minus Tokarev, I completely agree.

And he looks at you

[Konnick]

I judge, in particular, by a series of memoirs published under the editorship of A. Drabkin.

Be careful, you need to filter. Drabkin sometimes has gag, as Astafyev did with a collection of his front-line myths. Of course, there is another "masterpiece" - M. Sukneva "I commanded a penal battalion", which they are trying to promote with fried facts, for example, how a blasting shell leaves only boots, a tunic and riding breeches from a person, and not vice versa, and how a Tiger from a cannon did not break through the wall of a cow farm . And a company of Basmachi and a company of Odessa Urkagans is a masterpiece. Although they don’t show this on TV, as one told how he left the teaching staff and took a rifle with a bayonet, as it is more convenient in a bayonet !!!!, how many of them divorced after real veterans died.

[billy bones]

Any memoir is subjective, of course. Like any person. But reading different memoirs, you can build a rough picture of what happened. In the memoirs, there were also high marks for TT. But such opinions are in the minority.

[Konnick]

In the memoirs, there were also high marks for TT. But such opinions are in the minority.

The trouble is that these are such opinions on the Internet, and in the war there was no other pistol for comparison, except for another revolver. And with a gun, like in a movie, they didn’t run into the attack. The commander usually took, so as not to differ from his subordinates, a machine gun or a rifle with a bayonet and went on the attack indistinguishable from the general mass. Otherwise, he became a prime target, like a German memoir officer drunk and wearing a cap, unlike privates in helmets. It was the military correspondents who misled everyone, since they did not fit close to the front line, especially on the line of attack.

[Konnick]

About PPSh, almost everything is past .... over 600 rounds per minute ??? Do you want 1000? Again the myth about the selective selection of the disk store ... Wow ...

[Luminman]

Quote: Konnick

Again the myth about the selective selection of the disk store

So why is it a myth?

[Foul skeptic]

So why is it a myth?

Do not remember the contents of the box with PPSh capping? Namely, how many PPs were there and how many stores were in the box?

[Konnick]

So why is it a myth?

This is true for PPSh from the 41st to the 42nd year of release.

[Konnick]

What the ... or anon .... he downvoted everyone?

[Konnick]

Quote: Luminman

Quote: Konnick

simplicity of design is the low cost of production and the reliability of the design

This does not happen in one bottle at once. Anyway, there is some compromise...

Geniuses did it, an example of teaching staff.

[Illanatol]

Quote: Graf_MGK

The evaluation of a weapon is not only its simplicity of design. Everyone has been arguing for a long time which rifle is better - the Russian three-ruler or the German Mauser K98 rifle. To begin with, I advise you to ask how many Russian three-line rifles were produced and how many German Mauser K98 rifles were produced. And the second moment, a patent for the production of a German rifle was bought by such countries as Japan and the USA, and the Russian three-line turned out to be useless to anyone, with the exception of countries such as Finland, etc. and so on.

Three-rulers were produced more until the end of the Second World War. In general, the trunks are on the same level. Patents are not proof, there are too many subjective reasons when choosing an object to copy.
For me - that a mosquito, that a Mauser carbine was obsolete by the beginning of WWII. But to create a self-loading rifle (especially an automatic rifle) for the then cartridges is still a hassle. It is characteristic that in the USSR they coped with this better (SVT), which indicates the high level of the domestic design school.

[Illanatol]

Quote: Luminman

So why is it a myth?

Myth, not myth. Problem solved. Finally - replacing the store with a carob.
It is characteristic that this "flaw" did not prevent the Germans from using captured PPSh.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Curiously, during the war we produced half a million PPS, about six PPSh.
The Germans, on the other hand, were worthy of their MP-38/40 for one and two. Moreover, this craft is worse.
Somehow it does not fit with the songs of the liberals that the Germans were "thrown with corpses."

[Konnick]

Curiously, during the war we produced half a million PPS, about six PPSh.
The Germans, on the other hand, were worthy of their MP-38/40 for one and two. Moreover, this craft is worse.
Somehow it does not fit with the songs of the liberals that the Germans were "thrown with corpses."

Maybe at first. MG-34 is a powerful machine. But when we had a separate company of machine gunners with a platoon of snipers in each rifle regiment, the hegemony of the machine gun as the basis of the German squad’s fire power came to an end. machine-gun crews began to quickly knock out. it was not possible to fill up with corpses. This served as the development of Sturmgever to maintain the firepower of the squad without a machine gun. the first to switch to squads without machine guns were the SS troops. And the troops of the NKVD already in the late 30s had separate units of snipers. armed SVT. The Germans left machine guns in company and platoon subordination as separate units. The Germans distributed the power of one machine gun to 10 Sturmgevers. After the war, we went further by disguising a light machine gun as an AK, essentially the same AK, only with a thicker and longer barrel, and firing with a smaller flash and sound of a shot.

In the top picture of the NKVD, there each of them knocked out up to a hundred Nazis by the year 42. On the second platoon of snipers of a separate company of submachine gunners of a rifle regiment, there is a woman there

On April 30, 1944, a sniper of a company of submachine gunners of the 1199th Infantry Regiment (354th Infantry Division, 65th Army, 1st Belorussian Front), Corporal A.F. Kasatkina, was presented by the command of the unit for the next award for the destruction of 33 enemy soldiers and officers. By Order No. 315/n dated May 3, 1944, she was awarded the Order of Glory, 65rd class for the troops of the 3th Army.

Data on the final combat score of the sniper A.F. Kasatkina has not yet been found.

http://soviet-aces-1936-53.ru/snipers/abc/k/kasatkina.htm
The regiment once carried out a unique operation. There were many Donetsk miners and they dug an underground passage under the German positions and threw grenades at the Germans, but not with themselves. But that's another story. My hobby is to look for unnamed photographs of people.

,

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Maybe at first. MG-34 is a powerful machine.

The reliability of the MG was clearly not enough. The entire department carried spare parts in duffel bags. And what is it good for, rate of fire? So it is more important for aircraft machine guns.

[Foul skeptic]

And what is it good for, rate of fire?

A successful machine, an optical sight, a periscope sight and the possibility of firing from behind cover.

So it is more important for aircraft machine guns.

This does not mean that for the "earth" the density of fire is insignificant.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

A successful machine, an optical sight, a periscope sight and the possibility of firing from behind cover.

And also rapid overheating and unreliability of the design.

This does not mean that for the "earth" the density of fire is insignificant.

Infinite ammo is only found in computer games.
Actually, MG became vugdervffe already in the days of the Internet.

[Foul skeptic]

design unreliability.

Farfetched even for MG34 (well, or you have to remember about the springs in DP27), for MG42 it’s generally a frivolous argument.

Also, fast overheating.

Are you sure you are ready to compare MG42 and DP27 in this parameter? Unexpected discoveries await you.

Infinite ammo is only found in computer games.

And what is this for? In aircraft machine guns, as it were, they are also not endless, and with the replenishment of ammunition during the battle, the problem is more significant .

Actually, MG became vugdervffe already in the days of the Internet.

But that's for sure Because at the time of its production, no one ranked it as a miracle weapon.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Farfetched even for MG34 (well, or you have to remember about the springs in DP27), for MG42 it’s generally a frivolous argument.

Well, yes, of course, it’s normal to carry spare bolts for the MG with the whole squad, but spare springs for the DP in the duffel bag of the second number are already a disaster.

Are you sure you are ready to compare MG42 and DP27 in this parameter? Unexpected discoveries await you.

Just done this recently. True, regarding the analysis of myths around ShKAS, but since there were also aviation versions of the MG, they were also hooked. And by the way, why only MP-42, MG-34, where did they go? And such a question, why did the Germans suddenly begin to change MG-34 to MG-42 during the war
Essentially, physics cannot be fooled, the higher the rate of fire, the higher the heating.

And what is this for? In aircraft machine guns, as it were, they are also not endless, and with the replenishment of ammunition during the battle, the problem is more significant

But nothing that the time of shelling the target of an aircraft machine gun and an infantry machine gun, to put it mildly, is very different.

But this is exactly. Because at the time of its production, no one ranked it as a miracle weapon.

So the fact is that his wunderwaffe is now recording him. And we should not forget that in addition to the weapons themselves, it is of considerable importance in what hands it is.
Take the same SVT, for one it is a nightmare, but for a technically competent and accurate person, it is an excellent weapon.

[Foul skeptic]

Well, yes, of course, carry spare shutters for the MG with the whole squad

What kind of legends are these (from the category of rails pierced by AKM PSs)?

spare springs for DP in the duffel bag of the second number

Sorry, but you do not understand what kind of springs you are talking about, if you write this. Will the second number buy them in the nearest supermarket? That's why they fought with dangling bipods, incomplete disks falling off the machine gun, they released the entire disk in one click, because the shooting continued after the trigger was released, and so on. In the SOVIET instruction from the GAU of 1944 (that is, samples of the wartime industry with all the consequences) for captured MG-42s, FIVE problems are prescribed when firing. Of which, for technological reasons, TWO are possible, for constructive reasons - ONE. In this case, the most common cause that all five problems have is a defective cartridge.
In the SOVIET NSD-38 to the DP-27 from NPOs (that is, samples of the peacetime industry), NINE problems are prescribed when shooting. Of these, FIVE - the cause is in different springs, and within the framework of one problem, several springs can be the cause at once. In general, the enumeration of the reasons that lead to delays takes up FOUR sheets, against ONE for the MG-42.

Essentially, physics cannot be fooled, the higher the rate of fire, the higher the heating.

In essence, the MG-42 provided a higher PRACTICAL rate of fire, that is, its heating did NOT worsen COMBAT use. Including because the replacement of the barrel takes less than 10 seconds and is done with one hand without changing the position of the machine gun. With DP-27, you need a second hand, you need a key, you need to be STRONGLY ABOVE the machine gun in order to be able to perform the operations required for replacement (in practice, remove it from the parapet and put it on the bottom of the trench). But you still have to change the barrel, because 250-300 shots (depending on the contamination of the regulator) before the change are not much higher than 150 for the "German". Even the finning of the trunk does not save. And the funniest thing when communicating with "Internet experts" is that they see on the Internet a rate of fire of 1200-1500 rpm and then they tell everyone and everyone about the excessive rate of fire. Unaware that the muzzle is removed from the muzzle in seconds on the machine gun and voila, the rate of fire of the MG is 960 high / min.

And such a question, why did the Germans suddenly begin to change MG-34 to MG-42 during the war

Labor intensity.

But nothing that the time of shelling the target of an aircraft machine gun and an infantry machine gun, to put it mildly, is very different.

Does this somehow cancel the stupidity of the "argument" about endless cartridges in computer games?

So the fact is that his wunderwaffe is now recording him.

Who? Name at least one promoter of the weapons theme, Ian Hogg, Maxim Popenker, anyone you know (I don’t touch designers at all), who would say such a thing. This is done by Internet inhabitants with an inferiority complex who are fixated on something. Therefore, they themselves come up with the idea that the "competitor" is allegedly a weapon, and then they themselves refute it in order to belittle the possible merits

And we should not forget that in addition to the weapons themselves, it is of considerable importance in what hands it is. Take the same SVT, for one it is a nightmare, but for a technically competent and accurate person, it is an excellent weapon.

I agree that ease of use and operation is an important quality, as it reduces the requirements for the operator. But so with the water you can throw out the baby.
PS By the way, you can find and compare the convenience of the process of equipping a DP store and a MG can (there is no question about the tape). MGs were good machine guns of their era, in which the advantages outweighed the disadvantages, whether anyone likes it or not.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

In short, you didn’t say anything new, you “forgot” about the asbestos glove for the MG, you are trying to prove that the construction of 125 parts is more reliable than their 68 parts, you are comparing the problems of DP of early series and late MGs, and so on.

[Foul skeptic]

In short, you didn't say anything new.

I think you've learned a lot :)

"forgot" about the asbestos glove for MG

And how did the asbestos glove become your argument for the unreliability or "badness" of the machine gun as a whole? If it provides convenience. And what we lacked in our spare parts for machine guns. The barrel of a machine gun is hot, regardless of whether it is MG or, for example, SG.
PS Tell you about the delights of replacing the barrel on the RP-46 - the pinnacle of the evolution of the DP?

trying to prove that a design of 125 parts is more reliable than their 68

It seems to me that you are trying to tell that reliability is determined by the number of parts. I will not describe why this is not so from the design point of view, but I will simply write a few examples that themselves, perhaps, will lead you to the "true path":
1) The design of the DPM has become more complicated compared to the DP, there are more details. Did it reduce reliability? Why was Degtyarev not shot in wartime for such sabotage? )))
2) The number of parts of the PK machine gun is 176. According to your logic, the PK is less reliable than the MG, and completely unreliable compared to the DP
3) PKM has 33 nodes and 192 parts. Which is more than that of the "dad" PC (30 and 176, respectively). Will you insist that the designers worked towards worsening reliability?

compare the problems of DP of early series and late MG

Do not make laugh with such "counterarguments".
1) the year the NSD-38 appeared - 1941. And the year the DP was adopted - 1928. So by 1941 the description for the DP ... was not at all early, but very "late" (after 1935, when changes) samples of the industry of PEACE time. There is no longer about those machine guns, for which in 1930 they issued "Instructions on fitting spare parts to Degtyarev machine guns in military weapons workshops." Kovrov sent LEKALA to the workshops of the military unit, according to which the gunsmiths adjusted the products locally (!!!).
2) In NSD-46, the Ministry of the Armed Forces simply copied NSD-38, we won’t see anything new for ourselves there (the same 9 points), it’s still an administrative structure. But the more corrosive GAU (if you remember, the one that evaluated the captured MG-42) in 1946, in the "Manual of the Service of the DP and PDM", according to estimates of WAR-time industry products, already painted 14 problems for the DP and PDM with the reasons causing them.
PS PDM did not correct the situation. Therefore, with the end of the war, they immediately found a replacement.

Yep, Germany knew. And for this reason, she spent, for example, a lot of money on the development and even the release of a small series of such a miracle as the Pz.Kpfw. I Ausf. F

1) How does this contradict the fact that Germany began to look back in 1937 for a solution to reduce the cost, labor intensity and material consumption of its single machine gun on the eve of a big war?
2) It is good to talk about the uselessness of this craft from the heights of afterknowledge. In 1939 you would have told other things))
PS About "a lot of money"... Do you have any specific figures? Most likely no. ))

[Konnick]

And such a question, why did the Germans suddenly begin to change MG-34 to MG-42 during the war

They didn't change, they added to it. Due to its compact casing, albeit with a casing without perforation, the MG-34 continued to be produced for armament of armored vehicles, it was not adapted for the MG-42, unless for installation outside.

[Foul skeptic]

And such a question, why did the Germans suddenly begin to change MG-34 to MG-42 during the war

Yes, I forgot to write in the last message - they decided to change the MG-34 not during the war, but back in 1937 (the beginning of R&D). Not because the reliability is critically low, but because it is expensive and difficult for MASS production. And the fact that a full-scale war would soon begin, when a LOT of weapons would be needed, Germany knew like no one else.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Not because the reliability is critically low, but because it is expensive and difficult for MASS production. And the fact that a full-scale war would soon begin, when a LOT of weapons would be needed, Germany knew like no one else.

Yep, Germany knew. And for this reason, she spent, for example, a lot of money on the development and even the release of a small series of such a miracle as the Pz.Kpfw. I Ausf. F
And this is far from an isolated case.

[KSVK]

I'm sorry, Author, but are you an engineer?
I personally didn’t hear in your video why the K98 is so much more difficult to manufacture than the Mosin rifle. Pfening bolt latch? Agree. Bent shutter handle? Firstly, it would be nice for you to figure out what the bolt stem is, and secondly, the bent handle makes it possible to put optics and, most importantly, increases the lever for applying force when turning the bolt / cocking the mainspring, which helps to increase the rate of fire and increase reliability when reloading . On sniper versions of the Mosinka, the shutter handles are also bent. And finally, history has put everything in its place and the design of the “mosinka” receiver is not used anywhere else except for it, and the design of the K98 box is used in almost ALL modern “bolt-on” rifles. Something like that.
PS Well, compare a machine gun with a submachine gun, forgive this as a fifth point with a finger. You would compare, say, DP27 with at least MG34. I'm not talking about MG42. And the advantages of PPSh over MP38 stem more from the advantages of 7,62x25 over 9x19 in terms of their use in submachine guns.

[Konnick]

I'm sorry, Author, but are you an engineer?
I personally did not hear in your video

Too amateurish approach from the author. I did not hear the engineering word.

[KSVK]

Quote: Sea Cat

It is difficult to explain why Tokarev, taking Browning as a basis, managed not to improve, but to worsen his model.

It's easy to explain. It is the simplification of the design. Why does a pistol need a safety catch that cannot self-cock? Lots of safety catches on single action revolvers? The trigger is cocked - ready to fire, let go - you will not shoot. What's easier. And USM is easier to manufacture. Accordingly, the cost.

[Konnick]

Accordingly, the cost.

That's what I said too, cheap

[Taoist]

Well, I didn’t have time to come home from work ... so there were already comments posted here. In principle, most of the expected - because the majority reads (as well as looks) "diagonally" and sees only and exclusively what coincides with their own opinion ... But this is so, remark.
In order not to run through all the posts, answering each personally, I still clarify a few general points:
1) I must apologize for the quality of the text, the costume and the video itself... For I am not a blogger and this video was recorded in one piece without editing, script and completely spontaneously. It’s just that the youngest daughter (this is her voice-over (she actually held the camera) brought these samples of weapons home after the event in order to clean them .... In the process, I noticed some features that were interesting in my opinion and decided to talk about them. Perhaps it turned out not very beautiful, but as I said, I’m not a blogger at all ...
2) I did not compare and did not consider the details of the design of the samples. The fact is that there are no (at least in technology) concepts of "better or worse" - there is "correspondence" and "non-correspondence" to the tasks set. And if, other things being equal, the technical problem is solved in the simplest (and therefore reliable) way, this is a much more "high class" of the engineering school. The principle of Occam's Razor also works in technology. That is what I wanted to draw attention to.

[Illanatol]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

The reliability of the MG was clearly not enough. The entire department carried spare parts in duffel bags. And what is it good for, rate of fire?

First of all - versatility. It completely replaced both the easel and light machine guns.
But in general, the problem with us and the Germans is not the most successful calibers. German rifle - generally "elephant". Well, for a machine gun, maybe nothing. But for manual self-loading or automatic weapons - not very much.

[Illanatol]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

Curiously, during the war we produced half a million PPS, about six PPSh

Our PPs were not only better, but also more technologically advanced (stamping). With us, they cost less than our magazine rifle, and with the Germans - more expensive.

[Illanatol]

Quote: KSVK

And the advantages of PPSh over MP38 stem more from the advantages of 7,62x25 over 9x19 in terms of their use in submachine guns.

Sorry, but your thesis is in conflict with the thesis of the previous one. If 7.62X25 is better than 9X19, then how to explain the fact that 9X19 is still used today (including in PP), and 7.62X25 is nowhere else?
It turns out that supposedly the best does not always remain.

One of the advantages of the PPSh was simply a hurricane rate of fire, which gave our fighters an advantage in fleeting battles at short distances (combat in the city) combined with higher accuracy. This is just - the design of the weapon itself was determined, and not the cartridge.

[Foul skeptic]

One of the advantages of PPSh was simply a hurricane rate of fire

From which they decided to abandon the teaching staff because it is an advantage? )))
Or does a coin always have two sides?

combined with higher accuracy. This is just - the design of the weapon itself was determined, and not the cartridge.

The design of the cartridge determines the momentum received by the bullet. And that means speed. And that means flatness of the trajectory. At the same time, the bullet's loss of speed depends on the lateral load of the bullet (that is, again, the steepness of the trajectory). And the transverse load depends on the design of the bullet, which is part of the cartridge. Therefore, it is somewhat hasty to assume that accuracy does not depend on the cartridge.

If 7.62X25 is better than 9X19, then how to explain the fact that 9X19 is still used today (including in PP), and 7.62X25 is nowhere else?

9x19 is used now, but 7x62x25 is not, not because "someone is better, and someone is worse," but simply because unification is taking place in a world divided into 2 military blocs. The production of the 9x19 cartridge was established in all countries of the bloc even before the formation of post-war geopolitical blocs.
PS Weapons under 7.62x25 are still used in the DPRK and China (for example, Type 85). Moreover, in the PRC, a new one is being developed even in the 21st century (the Q4 multi-caliber pistol of 2010).

[Illanatol]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

From which they decided to abandon the teaching staff because it is an advantage? )))
Or does a coin always have two sides?

And was the PPSh discontinued after the appearance of the Sudayev PP?
And nothing that PPSh produced an order of magnitude more than PPS?

Yes, the medal has two sides. It's nice to be able to use both.
The only thing I agree with is that I would have chosen the teaching staff myself. But only because it is lighter and more comfortable.
And with fleeting assault operations, a hurricane rate of fire - it happens.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The design of the cartridge determines the momentum received by the bullet. And that means speed. And that means flatness of the trajectory. At the same time, the bullet's loss of speed depends on the lateral load of the bullet (that is, again, the steepness of the trajectory). And the transverse load depends on the design of the bullet, which is part of the cartridge. Therefore, it is somewhat hasty to assume that accuracy does not depend on the cartridge.

This effect becomes decisive at medium and long distances. But even at short distances (up to 100 m), the PPSh was superior in accuracy and accuracy to its counterparts. Partly due to the large mass, partly due to the oblique muzzle, which prevented the barrel from moving upwards.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

9x19 is used now, but 7x62x25 is not, not because "someone is better, and someone is worse," but simply because unification is taking place in a world divided into 2 military blocs.

... which concerns both ammunition design and weapon design.

[tolancop]

Quote: Luminman

Very roughly speaking, the drawing only reflects the dimensions of the part. And the technology of its manufacture always goes to the drawing, for example, starting from how to approach the machine and at what angle to sharpen the cutter and ending with how to properly put the finished part in the box. I remember this from school, when I studied as a turner in the Criminal Procedure Code ...

I did not study at the Criminal Procedure Code, I started as an apprentice locksmith at a good factory. Piles of drawings passed through my hands, but I don’t remember that the manufacturing technology was indicated. In the explanation on the drawing, some features could be indicated, something like "drill such and such a hole in place", but that's all. And how to approach the machine and at what angle to sharpen the cutter EXACTLY WAS NOT. With the drawing there was a technological map (a small piece of paper) in which the sequence of technological operations was indicated by codes (0-blank, 6 - turning, 9 - milling, etc.) with a mark on execution. But this is somewhat different. If a drawing of a part came across that it was not clear how to make (the skill of a locksmith / turner / milling cutter was not enough or the possibility of the available equipment), a consultation was assembled from a worker, technologist, foreman, designer, if necessary, and the question was decided what to do with this thing. This happened quite often in pilot plants.