Military Review

From “Madsen” to “Pecheneg” is not an easy way!

79



History light machine gun dates back to the beginning of the last century. Russia was one of the first to use this new powerful weapon, moreover, during the first quarter of the century - only foreign-made. In the future, only domestic machine guns were in service. Over time, the outdated concept of dividing machine guns into manual and easel ones gave way to a more modern one, involving the use of single machine guns, used, depending on the situation, as hand or machine guns. Today, Russia has in many ways a unique sample of such weapons - a single Pecheneg machine gun.

For over a hundred years, these two names have separated. The rather capacious history of our machine gun originates from the Russo-Japanese War 1904 -1905, on the fronts of which from the Russian side a small amount of light machine guns from the Danish designer Madsen were used. Then they were called "machine guns".

This new type of weapon has positively manifested itself from the very beginning of the First World War. Despite the fact that all the Madsen light machine guns in the warehouses from the time of the Russo-Japanese War were given to the troops, the Russian army was in dire need of them.

At the final stage of the war, namely in 1917, Russia received the previously ordered 11000 Lewis light machine guns, Shosh 6100 machine guns, as well as a number of Colt machine guns developed by Browning in the West. At the same time, the French army had Shosh 91000 light machine guns.

For a more complete supply of the Russian army with machine guns as early as 1916, it was decided to organize the production of Madsen machine guns in the city of Kovrov. Tests of the first Kovrov machine guns were carried out in August 1917. in the presence of an artillery receiver specially arrived from Tula. It was ga Aparin, later a professor at VTU. Baumana, the largest specialist in interchangeability and tolerances.

1. 7,62-mm machine gun 6P41 "Pecheneg" with a night sight on the machine Stepanova


The first experience was unsuccessful - machine guns were not accepted by the recipient due to many manufacturing flaws, breakdowns of parts and a large percentage of delays.

By a GAU prescription from 18 in January 1918, an officer of the GAU Fedorov VT was sent to oversee the production of machine guns in Kovrov, since in parallel with the machine guns of Madsen, the plant had to produce a series of automatons of its design for 6,5-mm Japanese cartridge.

Subsequently, this outstanding scientist, designer and organizer of the industry played a prominent role in the development of the national arms school.

In January, 1918, the plant received an outfit for the manufacture of 9000 machines Fedorov and 10000 machine guns Madsen.

Fedorov arrived at the 9 plant in March. Together with him, Koprov was moved by a mechanic V.A. Degtyarev, who worked with Fedorov from 1906 and was involved in the creation of a self-loading rifle Fedorov.

Since the Kovrov Plant was in dire need of skilled personnel, a group of workers at the Sestroretsk Arms Plant was also sent to Kovrov with them. They all moved with their families.

Earlier, as a result of inspection trips to the front and business trips to England and France, where Fedorov had the opportunity to visit the French positions, he came to the idea of ​​the need to increase the firepower of small arms of the Russian infantry. He believed that some step in this direction could be made by converting his self-loading rifles into automatic (self-shooting).

When testing the first automatic rifles of Fedorov in the Oranienbaum rifle school, its head N.M. Filatov proposed to call this new type of weapon “automatic”.

Fedorov's machine guns in 1916 were armed with a special command of the 189 infantry Izmaylovsky regiment.

In Kovrov, the first Fedorov machines were made in September 1920, by the end of the year 100 units were produced. Automatic rifles were sent to the troops located in the Caucasus and Karelia. In particular, Fedorov's rifles were in the Toivo Antikainen ski detachment during his successful raid on the rear of the White Finns in 1921-1922.

The machine was in production until October 1 of 1925. By that time, all 3100 machines had been manufactured. Fedorov's automatic weapons were in service with the Red Army up to 1928.

After the Civil War, military experts, based on the experience of two wars, concluded that light machine guns for regular rifle cartridge are a necessary weapon for a platoon and company. Fedorov's machine gun did not solve this problem and could only be considered as an auxiliary weapon.

According to the then opinion of Artcom GAU, the easiest way a light machine gun could have been created by reworking Maxim’s machine gun, which was mass-produced at the Tula Arms Plant. It was assumed that the organization of production at the same plant of such a manual machine gun would not lead to high costs.

Alteration of the easel machine gun in the manual was performed by a former Cossack officer FV Tokarev.

As a result of tests carried out in 1925 by a commission chaired by S. M. Budenny at the Vystrel school training ground, a manual remake machine gun was accepted for mass production. He was given the name "MT" (Maxima-Tokarev).

Artcom GAU considered the problem of a manual machine gun for the Red Army to be so resolved and stopped financing the work on creating a specialized manual machine gun.

But civilian specialists of the Kovrov Design Bureau created by Fedorov did not agree with the military and continued to work on the creation of a light machine gun on their own initiative. Among them were V.A. Degtyarev, his closest assistant, G.S.Shpagin, senior master of the assembly section S.G. Simonov and others. Working and improving under the leadership of Fedorov, they were well oriented in the problem and had their own opinion, especially since they had a certain reserve in the direction of creating a light machine gun.

2. "Pecheneg" on a bipod in manual version


They were right because after the spread of MT in the army and the improvement of the production of a machine gun, a large number of comments were made to his address. The fulfillment of these remarks wiped out all the supposed advantages of the rework gun.

Back in 1921, Fedorov and Degtyarev developed an air-cooled light machine gun in the style of a Lewis machine gun.

The English Lewis machine gun is familiar to our readers in the movie “White Sun of the Desert” —the Red Army soldier Sukhov shot from him from the roof of an oil tank. The barrel of a Lewis machine gun is enclosed in a casing open from the ends, the length of which is longer than the length of the barrel. When firing, the powder gases, flowing out of the casing, create an ejection effect, entraining the air that passes along the barrel and cools it. The cooling efficiency is enhanced by wearing an aluminum radiator with high longitudinal ribs.

Looking ahead, we note that the latest Russian development of the Pecheneg machine gun, created by researchers at TsNIITOCH-MASH and tested in Chechnya, has the same cooling effect. This once again confirms the validity of the philosophical principle of the development of technology in a spiral.

In 1924, the city of Degtyarev, led by Fedorov, began to develop a specialized light machine gun for a regular rifle cartridge. These works ended with the adoption of the machine gun "DP (Degtyarev infantry)" in 1927.

In a similar way to create a light machine gun from the easel were German gunsmiths. Having made the same mistakes, they already in 1918 came to create a specialized light machine gun Dreize.

Tests of machine guns were carried out in comparison with machine guns of MT and German Dreise. The advantages of the DP machine gun were so obvious that it was put into service even before the end of military tests. The deputy chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council, S.S. Kamenev, who was present at the tests, wrote to K.Ye. Voroshilov: "... our Degtyarev machine gun is in many ways better than Dreyze ..."

The first domestic light machine gun turned out to be radically different from all known, very simple to manufacture and so perfect structurally that it immediately attracted the attention of foreign experts. His creator also showed himself as a designer of extraordinary thinking with his own special handwriting. Excellent characteristics of the machine gun DP were confirmed in battles at Lake Hassan and on the river Khalkhin-Gol.

The DP machine gun was not inferior in its qualities to any of its foreign counterparts, but during its operation, especially during the Patriotic War, a number of its flaws were revealed.

First of all, the weight of the machine gun of the DP together with the full ammunition load put to it was more than others, the dimensions of the machine gun were also inconvenient. It was the fault of the 47-charge flat disk store, which had a weight of 1,7 kg. Equipped shop weighed 2,8 kg. With a store of such capacity, the practical rate of fire of the machine gun was 80 ... 90 shots per minute, which, from the experience of combat use, was not enough.

In those days, ribbon feed for a light machine gun was considered unacceptable, and our rifle cartridge, which had an increased taper and edge, was extremely inconvenient for the development of the store. In this sense, the same rifle cartridge (if not worse) was among the French, and the characteristics of the semi-disk store of the Shosh machine gun also made one want something better. It only remained to envy the German gunsmiths, who had no such troubles with their excellent rifle Mauzer patron.

The following shortcomings of the DP were, in particular, a detachable fry, which was sometimes lost, and the location of the return and combat spring under the barrel. Such a spring, heating from the trunk, sat down, which led to the undershot of the cartridge and misfires. A number of other, less significant shortcomings were noted.

By decision of the State Defense Committee of 14 in December 1944, the DP machine gun was replaced by the DP M machine gun, which had many of the shortcomings of the DP machine gun, but the previous power supply was left, i.e. practical rate of fire machine gun continued to be insufficient.

The desire to improve the practical rate of fire of the PDM led to a revision of the initial opinion about the unacceptability of band power for a light machine gun.

Back in 1939-1940. Some Kovrov designers tried to create a receiver for the DP machine gun, which allowed shooting fire from it with ammunition loaded into a machine-gun belt. But then these works did not arouse any interest in the military. Only in 1942, after repeated requests from the troops, were these works resumed. Tests at I944 at the GAU test site showed that with belt feeding, the practical rate of fire of the machine gun increases to 250 rounds per minute, which meets the requirements for practical rate of fire for the heavy machine gun. The barrel of the DP machine gun did not withstand such a regime - it was red hot and the bullets fell from the rifling.

3. "Pecheneg" with boxes for ribbons on 100 cartridges and night sight in laying


At the end of I944, the deputy chief designer of the Kovrov N2 plant was AI Shilin. with the participation of two other designers, the PDM machine gun was redesigned for band feeding. As the tape was used steel link tape machine gun SG-43. When testing a machine gun fire mode, by analogy with the set for the machine gun and when shooting up to 25000 shots obtained acceptable results.

This machine gun was adopted by the Soviet Army under the name "RP-46 (company machine gun model 1946 of the year)". As a battalion machine gun in service with the Soviet Army, the machine gun SG-43, which was completely structurally different from the company one, remained.

By the beginning of the fifties, Soviet weapon science and practice had reached a technical level at which one could already count on a positive solution to the long-standing issue of creating a single (company and battalion) machine gun.

It must be said that the idea of ​​a single machine gun was previously carried out in the German army, where at the beginning, the MG.34 machine gun designed by Louis Stange was used as a single machine gun. This talented designer, like domestic V.A. Degtyarev, F.V. Tokarev and S. G. Simonov, did not have an engineering education and also started with a gunsmith - in this capacity he worked for Louis Schmeisser. In the battles on the Eastern Front, and especially near Moscow, the MG.34 machine gun showed low reliability and was later gradually superseded by the much more sophisticated MG.42 machine gun developed by Dr. Werner Grünow.

Domestic weapon scientist, candidate of technical sciences M.Ye. Dragunov, the son of the creator of the famous SVD sniper rifle, told the author of these lines that, according to his father, the German weapons designers Werner Grunow and Hugo Schmeisser, deported there from Germany, worked in Izhevsk. They were provided with good working conditions and even the son of Schmeisser received a higher education in the USSR. In communication with Soviet specialists, Grunov promoted the idea of ​​a single machine gun.

In 1953, on an initiative basis, the most experienced engineer of the Tula TsKB-14, Nikitin GI, proceeded to design a single machine gun; his assistant was the engineer Sokolov Yu.M. Officially, such a task was issued to weapons companies in 1955. The tactical and technical requirements for a single machine gun approved by the Main Artillery Directorate for developers were obtained in January 1956.

After working at the design bureau, the Nikitin and Sokolov machine gun successfully passed detailed tests at the branch research institute NII-61 (now TsNIITOCHMASH) and was launched into serial production with the Samozhenkova E.S. machine. at the Kovrovsky mechanical plant.

One of the significant achievements of Nikitin was that he was able to work out the supply of a regular rifle cartridge with a rim "opposite" from a special elastic link. This link was designed as early as 1943 by the Tula gunsmith GA. Korobov and was used in some prototypes of heavy machine guns. With this feed, the cartridge from the tape link was pushed forward by the bolt in the direction of the chamber.

In 1958, a single machine gun from Nikitin and Sokolov with a positive assessment passed military tests. In Kovrov, several hundred machine guns have already been manufactured. In TsKB-14 engineer L.V. Stepanov A new tripod machine was developed, which had a number of significant advantages over Samozhenkov’s machine. So, he managed to reduce the weight of the machine from 7,7 kg to 4,5 kg and almost by 40% reduce the complexity of its manufacture.

Stepanov began the development of this excellent machine on his own initiative. Before he managed to achieve the opening of a special topic and, of course, financing, he worked within the framework of a public student design bureau at the Department of Machine Tools and Installations of the weapons department of the Tula Institute. This gave him the opportunity to use the advice of prominent professors - experts in the theory of the mast.

But it would seem that the resolved question of putting the Nikitin and Sokolov machine gun into service was postponed due to the demand of top management to check the PC machine gun developed in the design bureau of the Izhevsk plant (Kalashnikov also worked there). Several copies of the PC machine gun were already made by this time. The PC was designed for the standard ribbon machine gun SGM. The use of this tape entailed the use of the so-called "two-story" feed - the cartridge was removed from the tape when the bolt rolled back, simultaneously falling to the dosing line, and then sent to the chamber in the run-in. As a result of the re-tests that took place in 1960, a single Kalashnikov machine gun on the bipod as a manual (PC) and on a tripod machine as a machine gun (PKS) was adopted.

In 1969, the Samozhenkov machine was replaced by a Stepanov machine.

4. Designer "Pechenega" Valery Suslov


After adopting a single machine gun, the need for a machine gun SGM disappeared and he was removed from production in 1961.

The appearance of a single Pecheneg machine gun with the cipher Pecheneg at the end of 90-s is due to the fact that the PKM machine gun (PKSM) has ceased to meet a number of modern increased requirements for this type of weapon.

Firstly, a replaceable barrel is laid to the PKM machine gun, which causes a lot of inconvenience in storing and operating the machine gun. The fact is that the survivability of the automatic machine gun is 25000 shots, and the barrel can withstand only half of this resource.

Secondly, this is the so-called “haze” effect that occurs in the PKM machine gun after about a hundred shots of intense shooting. Heat flows from the trunk distort the field of view and the target becomes indistinguishable for about ten seconds.

Thirdly, it is a withdrawal of the average point of hits (STP) due to the temperature bending of the hot barrel when unilateral exposure to wind or precipitation. This disadvantage is particularly evident when using an optical sight mounted on the receiver.

Fourth, the way of mounting the bipod on PKM in the company version is not optimal for accurate shooting.

All these shortcomings have gone out of sight of the developers of the Kalashnikov machine gun who solved the problem hastily and "head on" without scientific analysis.

The machine gun "Pecheneg" was created in TsNIITOCH-MASH based on a number of scientific studies. First of all, the temperature balance of the barrel of a regular machine gun was studied. It turned out that as a result of an extremely uneven distribution of temperature fields, an uneven wear of the barrel bore occurs. Irregularity of heating can be reduced by an appropriate distribution of mass and cooled surfaces of the barrel. To remove heat from the heated surfaces, they need to be cooled, and then the exit was found in some increase in the mass of the barrel and in air cooling with an ejector suction of air like a Lewis machine gun. Using this idea almost a century ago, i.e. placing the barrel in the open end of the pipe, the developers killed three "birds with one stone":

The first is that they provided air blowing over the barrel, which, together with the other measures noted above, made it possible to do with a single barrel within the survivability of the automaticity of the machine gun. At the same time, the cooling fins on the barrel and the position of the air inlets are selected so that the greatest heat removal occurs in areas of high heat.

Secondly, the trunk was protected from the effects of precipitation, which made it possible to use optical devices effectively;


5,6. "Pecheneg" was run-in during the fighting in the Chechen Republic


The third - the presence of a long casing allowed the bipod to be located in the most favorable place from the point of view of reducing dispersion.

In the final stages of testing the machine gun developer had a lot to break his head over the elimination of the effect of "haze". Here, this effect already occurred much later than on PC and PKM machine guns - after about three hundred shots. But still it was less than the full ammunition, which was required by the TTZ (tactical and technical tasks) to shoot in a certain mode. Mikhail Chugunov, the head of the department, rescued him by proposing a special form of a handle that was meant to carry weapons at the same time and to divert the haze away from the shooter’s field of view. From this long inclined handle, the Pecheneg and PKM can be distinguished from afar.

In December, 1999, civilian weapons specialists, being in Chechnya at the location of one of the military units, had the opportunity to see and photograph this machine gun in combat positions. In March, the Pecheneg machine guns of 2000 were used by a detachment of the Khanty-Mansiysk Special Forces in the battles near the village of Komsomolsk. About the "Pechenega" there were the most favorable reviews.

Thus, three single machine guns were used in Chechnya:
-PC weighing kg 9 plus a spare kg trunk 2,3;
-PKM - 7,5 kg plus a spare barrel 2,3 kg;
- "Pecheneg" - 8,2 kg, has no spare trunk.

Without the slightest stretch, “Pecheneg” surpasses the best world analogues in its characteristics. All the more insulting that it was created for a long time due to the conditions of a total deficit of everything. The leading performer of this theme, a young and talented engineer Valery Suslov, after completing the work and transferring the documentation and prototypes to the Kovrovsky Mechanical Plant, quit.

After Suslov left, numerous approvals, inevitably arising during the development of any products by the plant, fell on the shoulders of his immediate supervisor, lead researcher, Candidate of Technical Sciences A.S. Disagreeable. Unwanted is known as an expert in the theory of silent shooting and as the developer of the low-noise version of the gun APS.

Certain efforts were spent on the invention of the abbreviation of the name of the machine gun, but in the proposed options there was no letter "C", and there were initial letters of the names of persons not very involved in the development of the machine gun. In the end, Kovrov specialists, who worked hard to develop the mass production of the machine gun, stopped at the customer index 6P41.

7. The fire from "Pechenega" is the author of the article.


All of the above, only in very general terms, describes the history of the creation of the national single machine gun. Beyond the brief journal article there are many surnames of Kovrov and other designers of light machine guns who worked in the same period. In particular, samples of S.G. Simonov, who made a great contribution to the development of the machine gun DP, A.I. Skvortsova, A.I. Bulkina, G.S. Garanin and others. Garaninsky single machine gun on a tripod machine Markov GP before 1957, it was a serious competitor to the Nikitin and Kalashnikov machine guns. In the battalion version of his machine gun was even lighter than Nikitinsky and PC. In his machine gun, Garanin used semi-free locking, which only the German designer, the author of the famous single machine gun MG.45, dared to dare to use on the rifle cartridge and on the MG.42 machine gun. Like Nikitin, Garanin used direct sending of our low-comfort rifle cartridge from the Korobov link.

The article bypasses the fashionable at the time machine guns under the "intermediate" cartridge - the participants in the hostilities respond negatively about them. Here are the words of one of the officers of the Special Forces of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation: "... RPK74 (just like the PKK) is not a machine gun! We did not take them to the war and never regretted it. because they cannot create a greater density of fire. They can’t put up a normal barrage or crush the enemy with fire ... ”End of quotation.


























Author:
79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Igor39
    Igor39 16 October 2013 08: 48
    +5
    I shot from RMB, from this I would shoot, feel the difference.
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 16 October 2013 09: 21
      +4
      I read somewhere that the development of "Pechenega-2" is underway, as if the early model was unmasking the shooter with a flame from the barrel. Knowledgeable people can enlighten, is this so?
      1. DuraLexSedLex.
        DuraLexSedLex. 16 October 2013 09: 50
        +4
        There was a topic on Pecheneg to put a muzzle brake-flash suppressor, or a muffler, in order not to unmask the shooter. Complete extinguishing of the sound of a shot, with such a caliber, is difficult to achieve, and it is not possible, but as far as I know, it turned out to "cover" the flame)) )
        1. Storyteller
          Storyteller 16 October 2013 10: 51
          +4
          I wonder what will happen with ejection barrel cooling? The problem.
      2. DuraLexSedLex.
        DuraLexSedLex. 16 October 2013 09: 51
        +8
        And there is also such a machine gun AEK-999 "Badger", so it was developed from the very beginning with a glushak;)
        1. Suvorov000
          Suvorov000 16 October 2013 11: 26
          +5
          "Badger" is much better than "Pecheneg", Kovrovtsi, as always, are non-standard and ingenious, only "Pecheneg" is the same PKM so that we don't step anywhere from it, and its indicators are head and shoulders above the "Pechenga" in Chechnya, too. , everyone praised, rejoiced, but that was all.
          1. luiswoo
            luiswoo 16 October 2013 14: 59
            +3
            Quote: Suvorov000
            "Badger" is much better than "Pechenega", Kovrovtsi, as always, are non-standard and ingenious, only now "Pecheneg" is the same PKM so that nowhere we go from it a step, and his indicators are head and shoulders above the "Pechenga" in Chechnya, too, he was tested, everyone praised and rejoiced, but that was all.

            They both PCM modernization. What exactly is “Badger” better than “Pecheneg”?
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. crazyrom
              crazyrom 18 October 2013 23: 24
              0
              probably a silencer. all the same, it’s good if they don’t know where you are watering them with lead.
      3. ayyildiz
        ayyildiz 16 October 2013 13: 13
        +1
        I personally liked PKM more than German XK-23 and MG-3!
        1. DuraLexSedLex.
          DuraLexSedLex. 16 October 2013 13: 55
          0
          So it wasn’t like talking about it .... recourse
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. The comment was deleted.
      6. Turtles
        Turtles 16 October 2013 13: 59
        +3
        In February 2000, the head of the special design bureau of the Degtyarev plant (Kovrov), Alexei Isakov, announced that work had begun on the modernization of the Pecheneg machine gun into the Pecheneg-2 variant. According to him, the need for a serious improvement of the Pecheneg machine gun is due to the shortcomings identified during the military tests. According to military experts, the Pecheneg machine gun does not quite fit into the armored vehicles that are in service with the Russian Armed Forces; when shooting, he unmasks himself with a torch of fire from the barrel. These and other shortcomings will be eliminated in the modernized version of the machine gun. Alexei Isakov emphasized that the barrel life of the upgraded Pecheneg-2 machine gun will be approximately doubled compared to the base model. The barrel will be made of a new steel grade.
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF%E5%F7%E5%ED%E5%E3_(%EF%F3%EB%E5%EC%B8%F2)
      7. The comment was deleted.
  2. cobalt
    cobalt 16 October 2013 09: 45
    13
    Monument to "Uncle Vasya" - to VA Degtyarev in Kovrov. We wish we had more people like that.
  3. svp67
    svp67 16 October 2013 09: 46
    +3
    The article is of course advertising. But there is nothing to be ashamed of, especially since the "Pecheneg" is really an excellent example of infantry weapons ...
  4. svp67
    svp67 16 October 2013 09: 48
    10
    And most importantly, buy weapons from true manufacturers and copyright holders, so as not to be in such a situation
    1. Akim
      Akim 16 October 2013 11: 40
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      that would not be in such a situation

      Some kind of dual feeling takes hold. Humanly, it’s good that he stayed alive, but he shot a bastard at someone ...
      1. DuraLexSedLex.
        DuraLexSedLex. 16 October 2013 12: 23
        11
        And I’m humanly sorry that the spring didn’t dig anywhere or the bolt didn’t go away)
      2. Roman_999
        Roman_999 17 October 2013 01: 28
        +5
        There are a lot of such videos on the net, and they are tearing up weapons, I’ll notice different weapons, always after the word Akbar! because what the modern warriors of Allah do is very far from His teachings.
        As for the "humanly pity", then no - not a pity! because compassion and the manifestation of sincere care is possible only in relation to People or animals or something else, but not in relation to these ...
        1. Revolver
          Revolver 17 October 2013 01: 59
          +1
          Quote: Roman_999
          There are a lot of such videos on the net, and they are tearing up weapons, I’ll notice different weapons, always after the word Akbar! because what the modern warriors of Allah do is very far from His teachings.
          No, just in full accordance with the teachings of Muhammad and his follower Abd al-Wahhab.
          Quote: Roman_999
          As for the "humanly pity", then no - not a pity! because compassion and the manifestation of sincere care is possible only in relation to People or animals or something else, but not in relation to these ...
          I absolutely agree, so much so that I will try to fill in your ellipsis. Options:
          - yours
          - dressings
          - fun
    2. Vasyan1971
      Vasyan1971 21 October 2013 11: 08
      0
      Mde. Allahakbar did not work ... or did it work?
  5. bunta
    bunta 16 October 2013 09: 55
    +4
    and even Schmeisser's son received higher education in the USSR.

    This is how myths are born. We will see this on Wikipedia soon.
    1. avt
      avt 16 October 2013 10: 45
      +7
      Quote: bunta
      This is how myths are born. We will see this on Wikipedia soon.

      Quote: bunta
      German weapons designers Werner Grunov

      Probably the next one will be about the fact that the Germans made the easel machine gun, and we called it the Goryunov machine gun. laughing In general, the author of the article can wish some patience or something. Well, if he undertook to conduct a historical excursion, it is desirable that the illustrations correspond to the time and when you write about Madsen, for example, you do not need to put a photo of Pechenega, otherwise it is somehow sloppy looks like.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. bunta
    bunta 16 October 2013 10: 18
    +6
    German weapons designers Werner Grunov


    Professor Werner Ernst Gruner! Werner Gruner.
  8. aszzz888
    aszzz888 16 October 2013 10: 35
    +2
    The machine gun is really good. They have been waiting for this in the troops for a long time.
  9. SIT
    SIT 16 October 2013 10: 46
    11
    Why does the author claim that MG34 showed low reliability and was replaced by MG42 for this reason? It was replaced because MG42 is more technologically advanced in production and therefore cheaper, which is important for a mass machine gun. For the soldier, an important advantage of the MG42 was the quick replacement of the barrel through the casing window, unlike the MG34, where for this replacement you need to disassemble the entire machine gun, starting with the removal of the stock. In terms of reliability, the 34th was in no way inferior to 42mu and was not removed from armament. An interesting MG34 chip can probably be attributed to the fact that in it the tape can be tucked both on the left and on the right. As for Pecheneg, with such an arrangement of bipods, let the author of the article try to transfer fire along the front. Not a single button would be left.
    1. bunta
      bunta 16 October 2013 11: 07
      +4
      Quote: SIT
      As for Pecheneg, with such an arrangement of bipods, let the author of the article try to transfer fire along the front. Not a single button would be left.

      Any location of the bipod mount assembly has its advantages and disadvantages.
      It begs the decision to make such a mount sliding.
      1. bunta
        bunta 16 October 2013 15: 49
        0
        Quote: bunta
        It begs the decision to make such a mount sliding.

        I won’t be surprised if it will soon be implemented in Israeli weapons. wink
      2. Srgsoap
        Srgsoap 16 October 2013 23: 10
        +2
        Just MG34 had the ability to install bipod in the muzzle, and in front of the receiver.
        1. bunta
          bunta 16 October 2013 23: 37
          0
          A little bit wrong. What is needed is a sliding one, that is, installed on any segment from the forend to the muzzle device. Moreover, the length must be changed with one hand.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 17 October 2013 00: 13
            0
            Screw the bar below and move the bipod anywhere. Moreover, you can use different bipod
    2. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 16 October 2013 14: 44
      +2
      ... this replacement must be disassembled the entire machine gun, starting with the removal of the butt ...In general, for replacement, you do not need to disassemble the MG-34 completely. See disassembly-assembly of the machine gun.
    3. rumpeljschtizhen
      rumpeljschtizhen 16 October 2013 20: 21
      0
      I completely agree .... the author didn’t read to see this with your remark, and mg 34 was left in production because it was supplied for armored vehicles where the ability to charge from different angles was extremely necessary.
      GERMANS generally inventors of a single machine gun !!! the rest is now variations on the theme
    4. Srgsoap
      Srgsoap 16 October 2013 23: 07
      0
      You are mistaken about changing the trunk. The receiver reclined relative to the barrel up and to the right, that's all. Here is a photo to illustrate. Germans continued to release MG34, for installation on equipment because of the possibility of feeding the tape from either side.
  10. Per se.
    Per se. 16 October 2013 10: 51
    11
    Degtyarev's light machine gun (RPD), could be modified as "Pecheneg". It is a pity that the RPD is popular in the same States, produced as an "assault carbine", but forgotten in our army. RPD, as a light belt-fed machine gun chambered for 7,62X39, could modernize and return to our army, complementing the heavier "Pecheneg".
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 16 October 2013 14: 48
      +4
      ... return to our army ...
      Undeservedly rejected. And in other countries, a very popular contraption.
      1. GastaClaus69
        GastaClaus69 16 October 2013 21: 29
        +3
        RPD
        Especially in countries with adverse climates: Africa, Asia. In the photo is an Egyptian soldier.
    2. rumpeljschtizhen
      rumpeljschtizhen 16 October 2013 20: 22
      +2
      In my opinion, I saw his version under an intermediate cartridge in the states .... by the way the solution for our army for the PKK
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 17 October 2013 07: 23
        0
        Quote: rumpeljschtizhen
        In my opinion, I saw his version under an intermediate cartridge in the states.
        If you are talking about RPD, then it was originally created for the intermediate cartridge 7,62X39. In the States, RPDs are sold to the public without the ability to use automatic (continuous) fire, under the guise of an "assault carbine" (see photo). Transferring the RPK to an intermediate cartridge is unlikely to be able to reduce its weight to RPD, it would be more logical to modernize and revive the Degtyarev machine gun, or create a similar light machine gun for an intermediate cartridge, like the "Minimi", "Negev", "Amelie".
  11. Rosomaha67
    Rosomaha67 16 October 2013 11: 14
    +6
    Quote: Per se.
    Degtyarev's light machine gun (RPD), could be modified as "Pecheneg". It is a pity that the RPD is popular in the same States, produced as an "assault carbine", but forgotten in our army. RPD, as a light belt-fed machine gun chambered for 7,62X39, could modernize and return to our army, complementing the heavier "Pecheneg".


    .... I agree completely, there was already an article on Top Var about the need for a machine gun with a tape feed chambered for 7,62x 39, and I spoke out on this subject there and gave arguments for such a need .....
    1. Akim
      Akim 16 October 2013 11: 42
      0
      Quote: Rosomaha67
      article on the need for a machine gun with a tape feed under the cartridge 7,62x 39,

      Then 5,45 is better
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 16 October 2013 16: 53
        0
        Quote: Akim
        Quote: Rosomaha67
        article on the need for a machine gun with a tape feed under the cartridge 7,62x 39,

        Then 5,45 is better


        Do you mean the possibility of creating a machine gun similar in performance characteristics to FN Minimi, the main type of power supply tape duplicating is a standard store? Yes, such a machine gun in caliber 5,45 is more appropriate (IMHO), if only for the reason that the caliber 5,45 is the most common. But the option for the cartridge 7,62x39 is also very interesting.
  12. Bagatur
    Bagatur 16 October 2013 11: 16
    +1
    Will there be new ammunition to replace this anachronism-cartridge with flanges? It is clear that this is not an easy business, but ... already the XNUMXst century ...
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 16 October 2013 17: 08
      +1
      Quote: bagatura
      Will there be new ammunition to replace this anachronism-cartridge with flanges? It is clear that this is not an easy business, but ... already the XNUMXst century ...


      It’s something like that, and the ammunition itself, I would like to think, is already being worked out by the designers, but by the time the organization of production and the creation of military and mobilization stocks of new cartridges are available, in the presence of workable samples of small arms in warehouses and in the troops (PKT, SVD, Pecheneg "...) Moreover, a host of other military problems (let me not list them) await immediate resolution. Whether it is expedient in the current situation is a question.
      1. 505506
        505506 17 October 2013 12: 12
        +1
        Looking at the constantly created and changing military uniforms, the Ministry of Defense is most interested in questions of expediency.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  13. Pimply
    Pimply 16 October 2013 11: 38
    +1
    I wonder if the insertion has no analogues and surpasses the world analogues - is this some kind of painful reflection?

    A very controversial topic with a non-replaceable barrel.

    What you really need now is a machine gun under 5.45
    1. bunta
      bunta 16 October 2013 11: 41
      +1
      Quote: Pimply
      What you really need now is a machine gun under 5.45


      And what does RPK74 with a drum magazine not stand for?
      1. Akim
        Akim 16 October 2013 11: 45
        0
        Quote: bunta
        And what does RPK74 with a drum magazine not stand for?

        Not a machine gun. So, a cross between Bobik and a pig.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 16 October 2013 13: 27
        +3
        Quote: bunta
        And what does RPK74 with a drum magazine not stand for?

        This is a PKK with a drum magazine. A drum store is not bad in itself. But for modern operations - especially urban ones - you need a 5.45 machine gun, with a removable barrel and dual (tape-store) power. Russian analogue of Minimi and Negev
        1. bootlegger
          bootlegger 16 October 2013 14: 42
          +6
          The very idea of ​​wearing a second barrel is vicious.
          This means that the designer didn’t think of something in the weapon, if it becomes necessary to replace the barrel.
          A technically advanced system should work without replacing the main parts.
          It’s the same as in a car, changing cylinders that are overheated during a ride or constantly adding antifreeze.
          A technically competent system should itself evenly redistribute heat.
          It’s better to make the weapon heavier, the accuracy of shooting is only good, than to drag it in the form of a spare barrel.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 16 October 2013 14: 57
            0
            Quote: bootlegger
            This means that the designer didn’t think of something in the weapon, if it becomes necessary to replace the barrel.

            Honestly, or what? The second barrel is needed so that the machine gun does not "spit" when the barrel overheats. And barrel overheating occurs after 100-150 bullets fired. At the moment, neither the thickness of the barrel, nor the new grades of steel, nor the design of the casings adequately compensate for this overheating. Don't you know?
            It's like driving a car on bald tires, and not adding antifreeze, if you compare. What bi awesome tires were not, they need to be changed.
            1. bootlegger
              bootlegger 16 October 2013 15: 51
              +5
              You confuse the main ones made constructions with consumables. Minimizing them is the task of the engineer.
              Antifreeze does not require daily topping up in a normal car. Modern cars usually need this only for maintenance. And on the first models of cars they did it almost daily, along with constant lubrication of everything and everything.
              You will not understand in any way that technical self-sufficiency is the degree of perfection of a weapon. And that which requires constant manipulations with oneself and replacement of parts is a crude construction.
              And the muskets also required a bunch of all kinds of devices and skills in service. The musketeers probably had no idea that it could be otherwise ...
              1. rumpeljschtizhen
                rumpeljschtizhen 16 October 2013 20: 25
                +1
                Well, you correctly explained everything pimply
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 16 October 2013 20: 53
                0
                Any weapon requires oil, normal cartridges and spare parts. And also - butts, sights and so on.

                There is no self-sufficiency, excuse me. Antifreeze also requires replacement.
                1. bootlegger
                  bootlegger 16 October 2013 21: 20
                  +2
                  Any normal weapon should shoot standard wearable ammunition.
                  But do you think it is normal to have one barrel for AKM or another automatic rifle? Why do you think that to achieve this in the design of a light machine gun is not realistic?
                  The design is based on the 7,62 mm Kalashnikov machine gun (PC / PKM). This allowed the production to be launched at a minimal cost, as well as to simplify its operation. The barrel group provides the shooting of at least 600 rounds in long bursts without compromising firing efficiency.

                  Alexei Isakov emphasized that the barrel life of the upgraded Pecheneg-2 machine gun will be approximately doubled compared to the base model. The barrel will be made of a new steel grade.
                  1. Pimply
                    Pimply 16 October 2013 23: 57
                    -2
                    Quote: bootlegger
                    But do you think it is normal to have one barrel for AKM or another automatic rifle? Why do you think that to achieve this in the design of a light machine gun is not realistic?

                    For a machine gun, the norm is almost continuous automatic fire, or massive fire in short bursts. The norm for an assault rifle (machine gun) is shooting in single runaway or short bursts. The standard ammunition of 5-7 stores for 30 rounds, which means no more than 150-200 rounds. Do you do the calculations yourself?
                    In the drums, in view of their dimensions and weight, you will be able to carry about 300 cartridges. Maybe - 450. In tape boxes stock from 600.

                    What's on AK, what is on M4, the trunk starts to warm up after two fast-paced stores. Spit - after 4.
                    1. Alex 241
                      Alex 241 17 October 2013 00: 02
                      0
                      Zhen I once asked you: is M 249 so good as he is praised?
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 17 October 2013 00: 41
                        +2
                        Minimi just did not enter the IDF - he lost in the trials to the Negev. Reliability failed. In principle, this toy has its own complaints. The very first parties of the Negev at one time were inferior in reliability to the old man MAG - that’s who was cool. But Negev weighed a lot lighter, compared with the MAG, was more convenient. However, then, in terms of reliability, he at least caught up with him.

                        Negev was very accurate, in fact a sniper, the barrel was conveniently changed compared to the same MAGOM, and there was a very convenient fuse. The theme with the fact that you can use stores is super.

                        Well, the weight of the cartridges, respectively - the "non-gavist" with the same ammunition was exhausted less than the "magist"
                      2. Akim
                        Akim 17 October 2013 05: 02
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Minimi just didn’t enter the IDF - Negev lost in the tests

                        That year, during the Perspective 2012 exercise, the military tested the Negev from the Fort and the Mini from the Mayak under 5,45 caliber. In general, I liked the Negev more, but because of the lobby they will take "Lighthouse" products. And most likely they won't take anything.
                  2. bootlegger
                    bootlegger 17 October 2013 11: 37
                    0
                    In tape boxes, the stock is from 600.

                    In fact, you confirm my words.
                    It turns out that Pecheneg practically fits into these parameters.
                    It is clear that the machine gun’s life before overheating is decided by an increase in mass. Will it be a spare barrel or ventilation, like Pecheneg’s, plus a massive heat-resistant barrel.
                    In fact, the main question is different.
                    I repeat, but isn’t it easier to immediately have a machine gun of increased mass than to carry this mass anyway in the form of a spare barrel? And then, in a hurry to change it in battle conditions?
                    At least a more massive machine gun will be more stable in shooting.
                    We do not lose anything, in terms of the transferred mass, and we gain the convenience of firing from massive weapons.
                    1. Akim
                      Akim 17 October 2013 12: 02
                      -1
                      Quote: bootlegger
                      I repeat, but isn’t it easier to immediately have a machine gun of increased mass than to carry this mass anyway in the form of a spare barrel? And then, in a hurry to change it in battle conditions?
                      At least a more massive machine gun will be more stable in shooting.

                      The spare barrel is not carried by a machine gunner, but by the second calculation number.
                    2. bootlegger
                      bootlegger 17 October 2013 12: 39
                      -1
                      And could carry cartridges smile
                    3. Akim
                      Akim 17 October 2013 13: 15
                      +1
                      Quote: bootlegger
                      And could carry cartridges

                      Which he does.
    2. rumpeljschtizhen
      rumpeljschtizhen 16 October 2013 20: 25
      0
      yes all over the world it’s so normal, but if you see no 2, the barrel is vicious ...........
      bullshit
  14. Igor39
    Igor39 16 October 2013 15: 08
    +4
    And how much higher is Minimi’s firepower? If a professional fires from RPK74 in short bursts, then can you shoot for a long time without overheating the barrel, or do you need to water it like in action movies, change the barrel and water it again?
    1. Akim
      Akim 16 October 2013 15: 17
      0
      Quote: Igor39
      If a professional fires from RPK74 in short bursts, aiming, you can shoot for a long time without overheating the barrel

      The cartridge 7,62x39, especially the low-pulse 5,45x39, is not excessive in power. If the conversation is about a rifle cartridge, overheating is not inevitable. The easel machine gun has the task of pouring lead over its own shelling sector.
    2. Revolver
      Revolver 17 October 2013 02: 08
      0
      Quote: Igor39
      And how much higher is Minimi’s firepower? If a professional fires from RPK74 in short bursts, then can you shoot for a long time without overheating the barrel, or do you need to water it like in action movies, change the barrel and water it again?
      What do you want to do against the Chinese tactics of the human wave? Only watering and stays, and pray so as not to jam. It can become very important for the Far East.
  • Hudo
    Hudo 16 October 2013 17: 11
    0
    Quote: bunta
    Quote: Pimply
    What you really need now is a machine gun under 5.45


    And what does RPK74 with a drum magazine not stand for?


    The inability to increase firepower, the growth of which is possible in a different sample, subject to the use of tape power.
  • beard999
    beard999 16 October 2013 15: 19
    +8
    Quote: Pimply
    I wonder if the insertion has no analogues and surpasses the world analogues - is this some kind of painful reflection?

    Who, in fact, is “reflection”? It is you, on such phrases, who always react very painfully. Apart from you, nobody pays much attention to this ...
    Quote: Pimply
    Very controversial topic with a non-replaceable barrel

    And why is that? For example, Popenker about Pecheneg writes: “In general, the reviews about the new machine gun from the troops are positive. Due to the lack of interchangeable barrel, the machine gun has become more mobile and, therefore, more adapted with modern military operations .... When conducting a long battle, a machine gun can shoot up to 1000 rounds per hour without deteriorating combat characteristics and reducing the barrel’s life, which is at least 30000 rounds. ” And Isakov has already said more than once that "the trunk resource of the upgraded Pecheneg-M will be approximately doubled compared to the base model." Even with the development of machine-gun weapons for the "Warrior", they did not go for the introduction of a second (namely interchangeable) barrel. In a single machine gun for the units of the SV (OCD "Pecheneg-M") they left one barrel in the casing. True, there are two machine guns for special forces (OCD “Pecheneg-SP”), but they are not for “changing”, but for installing before the battle — one barrel is “long” and the other is “short” (necessary, for example, for greater convenience work of special forces in development). That is, directly in combat conditions, no one will carry the second barrel with them. So there is no "controversial" topic here. More than 10 years of army experience in operating the Pecheneg, including in real combat conditions, it shows that a single-barrel solution justifies itself.
    Quote: Pimply
    What you really need now is a machine gun under 5.45

    Who needs? It was the RF Ministry of Defense that expressed interest in the new machine gun for 5,45 caliber?
    1. bunta
      bunta 16 October 2013 23: 34
      0
      Quote: beard999
      is not less than 30000 shots

      The Ministry of Internal Affairs does not know.
      This figure has always been for the PC.
    2. Pimply
      Pimply 17 October 2013 00: 09
      -1
      Quote: beard999
      In general, the reviews about the new machine gun from the troops are positive. Due to the lack of interchangeable barrel, the machine gun has become more mobile and, therefore, more adapted with modern military operations ....

      Not only Popenker writes about Pecheneg. Max compiled a great encyclopedia. But it contains only general data. And the reviews found on the network somewhat reduce enthusiasm.

      Quote: beard999
      More than 10 summer army experience in operating the Pecheneg, including in real combat conditions, it shows that a single-barrel solution justifies itself.

      If they give you a scoop and say dig, you will dig them. Scoop can be good, with a comfortable handle, handy, made of good metal. Will this be so until you try to dig with a shovel? Have you had the experience of digging with a shovel? I have - yes.
      1. beard999
        beard999 17 October 2013 16: 00
        +1
        Quote: Pimply
        Max compiled a great encyclopedia. But it contains only general data.

        Popenker, his "encyclopedia", was based on the feedback of people who actually exploited PEP, left both in his forum and in person. Also, his opinion is valuable in that it is not biased. In no embellishment Max is not seen.
        Quote: Pimply
        And reviews found on the network somewhat reduce enthusiasm

        Whose "reviews"? I remember earlier, in LJ (in my opinion, Mokrushin), you were able to give only one "review". Firstly, it was the recall of the officer of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (and the PKP is an army machine gun and it is about its operation in the RF Ministry of Defense) and secondly, this officer said only that PKM is more convenient for him in ergonomics than PKP, and that this is exclusively his personal opinion. No more.
        Or did you find new “reviews” about the control panel? Give links?
        Quote: Pimply
        Have you had the experience of digging with a shovel? I have - yes.

        I certainly understand what you are writing about, however, try to do without demagoguery ...
        Hint that the control panel is used solely because there is no decent parking brake? Well, this is complete nonsense. Firstly, following your analogy, the “scoop” here is precisely the handbrake, and the “shovel” is just a single PKP. Do you have experience in firing from PKM / PKP? I have - yes ...
        Secondly, and this is the main thing - even for the promising BAS "Ratnik", the development of the "handbrake" has not been set. Real army (!!!) combat experience in operating the control panel showed that it replaces the handbrake remarkably. The combat characteristics of a single machine gun surpass those of a light machine gun.
        At the same time, this does not mean at all that people in Russia do not deal with handbrakes. Other power structures have a certain interest in them. The Ministry of Internal Affairs ordered a state machine gun from the STiS Scientific and Production Association (OKR Tokar), and the FSB received the corresponding research from TsNIITochmash. But even in this case, I do not exclude the possibility that in the end, both the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB will instead choose handbrake tuning PKM from Zenit (in the form of a “roll”), or an army modification of Pecheneg-SP.
  • rumpeljschtizhen
    rumpeljschtizhen 16 October 2013 20: 24
    -1
    There is definitely no normal analogue of the PKK (RPK garbage and not a machine gun)
  • bunta
    bunta 16 October 2013 11: 47
    0
    Quote: Akim
    Not a machine gun. So, a cross between Bobik and a pig.

    This is an argument for a nerd. I would like to specifically.
    1. Akim
      Akim 16 October 2013 11: 55
      +5
      Quote: bunta
      I would like to specifically.

      Persistence, accuracy of fire, he does not reach the machine gun. The PKK is far behind the RPD, which has become the victim of unification.
      The Americans also once called the M1918 light machine gun, although there were only machine guns in it.
      The Chinese slammed the AK, but they did not abandon the RPD (Type 56) in favor of unification.
      1. bunta
        bunta 16 October 2013 12: 16
        +2
        Quote: Akim
        Persistence, accuracy of fire, he does not reach the machine gun.

        These are requirements for the machine gun as a whole; replacing the drum with a tape will not increase accuracy and flatness.
        1. Akim
          Akim 16 October 2013 12: 53
          +2
          Quote: bunta
          These are the requirements for the machine gun in general,

          This characterizes the RPK / RPK-74 as under-machine gun. And the type of food - store or ribbon - is not the point. Both this and that is not bad, and even better combined, like the Negev.
          1. bunta
            bunta 16 October 2013 13: 05
            0
            Quote: Akim
            It characterizes

            as a departure from the topic. As for the advantages and disadvantages of the AK47 vs RPD, this is a separate issue and, if there was free time, we could gladly discuss it.
            I’m more interested in why some people think that tape nutrition better storefront. Although, speaking more correctly, I must say "why does anyone think that the combination of positive-negative characteristics, the use of belt feed of a light machine gun preferable store (in particular drum) ".
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 16 October 2013 13: 32
          0
          Firstly, he does not have a removable barrel. Why you need a replacement barrel needs to be explained.
          Drum stores are less reliable than conventional stores. There are still many disadvantages compared to the tape. By the way, the tape is better loose.
          Ergonomics. Does not meet modern requirements. And other cute little things.
          1. bunta
            bunta 16 October 2013 14: 36
            +2
            Quote: Pimply
            ... he has no interchangeable barrel.

            I asked not to leave the topic. On occasion, I can once again with pleasure walk on an unkillable topic. But for now, the only thing I have heard is:

            Quote: Pimply
            Drum stores are less reliable than conventional stores.
            Yes, that’s understandable! I'm interested in the advantage of the tape over the drum magazine on 75 cartridges. Assuming that the reliability of the tape supply and the store-drum are the same, what are the advantages of the tape over the store?

            Changing an empty magazine and reloading weapons is faster than with tape power. So or not? The additional weight of the tape, the inconvenience of an unsplit fired tape when maneuvering with weapons, the inconvenience of loose in the equipment of a new tape. These are all the advantages of the store over the tape. Now
            about the benefits of the tape in front of the store. Is there anything else besides reliability?
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 16 October 2013 15: 02
              +1
              Quote: bunta
              I asked not to leave the topic. On occasion, I can once again with pleasure walk on an unkillable topic. But for now, the only thing I have heard is:

              I did not understand something, what is the departure from the topic, and where did you ask for something.

              Quote: bunta
              Yes, that’s understandable! I'm interested in the advantage of the tape over the drum magazine on 75 cartridges. Assuming that the reliability of the tape supply and the store-drum are the same, what are the advantages of the tape over the store?

              The reliability of drum magazines is lower. In tape, especially loose tape, it is easier to correct the skew. The tape does not require the obligatory filling in "zinc" or other form of wearing, but the drum does. That is, you can carry the tape in bulk, saving weight.

              The drum is usually 75 rounds. In the ribbon box - 100-150.

              In a tape and in machine guns of tape power it is much easier to correct distortions and other problems that arise during operation.
              1. Akim
                Akim 16 October 2013 15: 35
                +1
                Quote: Pimply
                In a tape and in machine guns of tape power it is much easier to correct distortions and other problems that arise during operation.

                In addition. When the receiver is open, emergency service is really easier. Machine gun reloading is easier with the magazine, but the equipment of the drum itself is a long process, unlike the carob. Well, in general, the drum type of the store did not justify itself, and therefore changed.
              2. bunta
                bunta 16 October 2013 15: 37
                +3
                Quote: Pimply
                I didn’t understand something, what is the departure from the topic,

                Quote: bunta
                What does RPK74 not with a drum magazine?


                In fact:

                Quote: Pimply
                In a tape, especially loose, it is easier to correct the skew.


                Skew (cartridge?) Does not occur in the tape, but in the weapon. By the way, it is precisely in the scheme with tape power that this bias most often occurs, and not in the store food.

                Quote: Pimply
                The tape does not require mandatory filling in "zinc"

                Do the tapes equip the factory?

                Your arguments do not convince me of anything. The only and very first is reliability. But reliability does not happen on its own! Reliability has its own objective reasons that the designer works with. The reliability of the drum magazine is lower than the box one due to an objective reason - the drum is more complicated.
                But tape power is a completely different mechanism! It is not possible to compare the RPK-74 with tape power with the RPK-74 with store power, since there is no such machine gun.
                You want a 5,56 machine gun with belt feed, you want it to be healthy. But such Wishlist will not lead to anything until you convince the designer of the objective necessity. And objectivity does not work with the concepts of "ergonomics", "ease of skew correction" and other indicators that do not have specific numerical expressions.
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 16 October 2013 19: 47
                  0
                  Quote: bunta
                  But tape power is a completely different mechanism! It is not possible to compare the RPK-74 with tape power with the RPK-74 with store power, since there is no such machine gun.


                  About that and speech. And we are talking about the fact that we need a machine gun for 5.45 with a tape.
                  Quote: bunta
                  You want a 5,56 machine gun with belt feed, you want it to be healthy. But such Wishlist will not lead to anything until you convince the designer of the objective necessity. And objectivity does not work with the concepts of "ergonomics", "ease of skew correction" and other indicators that do not have specific numerical expressions.

                  What do I want under 5.56? Under it, he already is. Under 5.45, a ribbon of cabbage soup seems to work.
                  1. bunta
                    bunta 16 October 2013 23: 55
                    0
                    Quote: Pimply
                    Under 5.45, a ribbon of cabbage soup seems to work.

                    And what, the presence of tape power will increase the speed of a bullet, its flatness, accuracy of fire from a machine gun? The firing characteristics of such a machine gun will not differ from the RPK-74, since the cartridge will be the same. Well, what will be more reliable? A new machine gun from Kovrovites with tape power or RPK-74 with a drum can only show time.

                    Maybe you think, but are embarrassed to say that it would not be bad to raise the rate of fire to 1000 / s. such a device? I am for, and even for the two-tempo in such a light machine gun. But this is a requirement for a machine gun, and not a way of food.
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 17 October 2013 00: 49
                      -2
                      Quote: bunta
                      The firing characteristics of such a machine gun will not differ from the RPK-74, since the cartridge will be the same.

                      They will, because you cannot change the trunk, for example. And temperature changes in the barrel affect how the bullet flies, at what speed, and how accurately it hits.

                      As for the pace, I don’t even say that it has about 5.56-800 for the analogues on 1000. Believe me, I do not think this is so critical. On the contrary. Higher rate of fire - higher barrel warming rate. Although this is necessary, say, with severe pollution.

                      PKK shoots with a closed shutter.

                      The tape method allows you to carry more ammunition - you somehow forget about it all the time, maintain a higher rate of fire.
                      1. bunta
                        bunta 17 October 2013 01: 46
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        They will, because you cannot change the trunk, for example.

                        wink Again twenty-five. And who said that the "developed" Kovrovsky will have a replaceable barrel? Is the Mossad working? wink

                        The trunk withstands accuracy up to a certain heating temperature, this is an obvious thing. At what rate of fire, at what expense? A real battle or from a bulldozer in one long burst of 200-400 shots? Set the real task for stability, and as soon as we figure it out, we will need a replaceable barrel for such a device or we can meet your requirements due to steel, technology and construction.

                        Quote: Pimply
                        The tape method allows you to carry more ammunition


                        With one box store connection. And what is the gain? The total wearable ammunition will be 1 box on 150, and two stores on 75.
                        A weapon with a box with tape on the 150 is less maneuverable than with a magazine on the 75. In this case, the store changes faster than the box with the tape. Let's say the time to change the box with tape 4 sec. Change shop 2 sec. Where is the gain in pace?
                      2. Pimply
                        Pimply 17 October 2013 02: 03
                        0
                        Quote: bunta
                        With one box store connection. And what is the gain? The total wearable ammunition will be 1 box on 150, and two stores on 75.

                        Why? This is based on the number of rounds you counted. Have you tried to watch the dimensions? A drum-type store takes up a little less space than a modern Kevlar box, say. And in some cases, comparable in size to it. Because the design of a drum store is like that.

                        With what joy do you have a weapon less maneuverable? With what joy is faster change taking place? You need to change the drum twice as often. So much for the gain in pace.

                        Quote: bunta
                        The trunk withstands accuracy up to a certain heating temperature, this is an obvious thing. At what rate of fire, at what expense? A real battle or from a bulldozer in one long burst of 200-400 shots? Set the real task for stability, and as soon as we figure it out, we will need a replaceable barrel for such a device or we can meet your requirements due to steel, technology and construction.

                        You know, the more nonsense, you’ll excuse me. You can also tear down the wall with a fork. Is it necessary?
                  2. Akim
                    Akim 17 October 2013 05: 08
                    -1
                    Quote: bunta
                    Well, what will be more reliable a new machine gun from Kovrovites with tape power or RPK-74 with a drum can only show time.

                    Why are you comparing different classes of machine guns? Or "Pecheneg" will be put in the department according to the state? Or do you hear something about a new machine gun under 5,45?
                    1. bunta
                      bunta 17 October 2013 07: 57
                      +1
                      Quote: Akim
                      Why are you comparing different classes of machine guns? Or "Pecheneg" will be put in the department according to the state? Or do you hear something about a new machine gun under 5,45?

                      And you look at the discussion from the very beginning. According to Mossad, an 5,45 machine gun with tape power and interchangeable barrel is being developed in the carpet. Most likely on the instructions of the Tsakhal.
                  3. Droid
                    Droid 17 October 2013 15: 50
                    0
                    And what, the presence of tape power will increase the speed of a bullet, its flatness, accuracy of fire from a machine gun?

                    Increases combat rate of fire, for example, from 150 to 250 rpm.
          2. Droid
            Droid 17 October 2013 15: 47
            0
            I'm interested in the advantage of the tape over the drum magazine for 75 rounds.

            Mass and capacity. For example, an empty drum for 75 rounds of ammunition for the RPK weighs 0,9 kg, and a box with a tape for 100 rounds for the RPD weighs 0,8 kg.
            Thus, the additional weight per cartridge is 12 g per cartridge for a drum, and 8 g per cartridge for a box with a RPD tape. Moreover, the box can be replaced with a canvas container, for example.

            In this regard, sector stores look better. Although they have less capacity, less dead weight.
            1. bunta
              bunta 17 October 2013 23: 21
              0
              Quote: Droid
              Mass and capacity.


              You forgot (specifically?) About the complication of the tape drive mechanism, and hence the mass of the entire machine gun.


              RPD with a box and an equipped tape for 100 cartridges - 9 kg.

              RPK with a loaded drum on 75 cartridges - 6,8 kg.

              25 * (0,016 + 0,9 / 75) + 6,8 = 7,5kg This will be the weight of the PKK if you bring its drum to 100 cartridges.

              Total 9 - 7,5 = 1,5 kg of direct weight loss only due to the presence of the tape drive mechanism.
              1. Droid
                Droid 17 October 2013 23: 53
                0
                Total 9 - 7,5 = 1,5 kg of direct weight loss only due to the presence of the tape drive mechanism.

                DP does not have a tape drive and weighs 8,4 kg without a magazine. PCM with tape drive weighs 7,5 kg.
                This is the level of production and design technology. And the RPD barrel allows the shooting of 300 rounds in a row, while the PKK only 200.

                Well, the difference in weight between RPD +300 rounds in boxes with ribbons (14 kg) and RPK +300 rounds in 4 drums (13,16 kg), less than 1 kg.
                If the RPK is equipped with 8 equipped sectoral stores (320 rounds), then the total weight is 11,5 kg.

                So, not drums, but box-type high-capacity shops are better.
                1. bunta
                  bunta 20 October 2013 11: 32
                  0
                  Quote: Droid
                  DP does not have a tape drive and weighs 8,4 kg without a magazine. PCM with tape drive weighs 7,5 kg.


                  DP and PC are two different generations, of different levels of engineering development in the first place. So their comparison is not appropriate.

                  Quote: Droid
                  And the RPD barrel allows shooting of 300 rounds in a row, while the PKK only 200.


                  Not in a row, but only "intense fire without cooling the barrel."
                  Also not an indicator. Do you think that if there was a need to save 300 on the instructions of the Customer, then the developers would not have done it? The technology for manufacturing the RPD barrel has not gone anywhere (it has not yet been completed .. with polymers winked ) Obviously, the overheating time was reduced by reducing the weight of the barrel. But once the Customer is satisfied, what can be the claims to the product as a whole?
                  The PKK has something that is not in the RPD - the ability to conduct single fire. Due to this, it is possible to reduce the rate of fire intensity. Perhaps this factor influenced the decision to reduce the "intensity of intense fire without barrel cooling". In any case, this indicator is not the decision of the designer, but the customer's specification.

                  Quote: Droid
                  So, not drums, but box-type high-capacity shops are better.


                  But this is a botanical garden.
                  1. Droid
                    Droid 21 October 2013 23: 26
                    -1
                    DP and PC are two different generations, of different levels of engineering development in the first place. So their comparison is not appropriate.

                    Absolutely the same thing can be said about the PKK and RPD.
                    Also not an indicator.

                    This is an indicator that RPD is heavier, including due to a heavier trunk.
                    But once the Customer is satisfied, what can be the claims to the product as a whole?

                    The big dead weight of drum shops, their complexity, price and lower reliability.
                    In the PKK there is something that is not in the RPD - the ability to conduct a single fire. Due to this, it is possible to reduce the rate of fire.

                    The machine gun is actually not created for a single fire ...
                    Perhaps this factor influenced the decision to reduce the "intensity of intense fire without barrel cooling".

                    Not this factor. And the saturation of the armored personnel carriers, on which heavy machine guns were installed. In this connection, they decided to reduce the weight of a light machine gun while simultaneously unifying it with a machine gun.
                    But this is a botanical garden.

                    That's life. The adoption of RPK74 exclusively with sector stores confirms this. In the experience of operating a PKK with a drum, the troops resolutely refused the drums.
  • SIT
    SIT 16 October 2013 12: 24
    +5
    Or maybe on the contrary, consider the possibility of further unification, but on the basis of a 6,5 mm cartridge? Return to the roots, so to speak. Even at the dawn of everything and everything, Fedorov showed the optimality of this caliber for automatic army weapons. But there are no prophets in their own country. Following all the clear marching steps on the same rake as the whole world, we first hit machine guns, then an intermediate cartridge of a rifle caliber, but as the states finalize their Grendel, we again rush to catch up and overtake, translating from English to warehouses that Fedorov wrote back in 1916. How long !? Here the RPD with its tape power and an automatic machine for this caliber would really solve many problems in terms of density, accuracy, and the amount of ammunition carried.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 17 October 2013 00: 10
      0
      The 6.5 cartridge, which is now being considered now, is very different from the cartridge that Fedorov had in mind.
    2. bunta
      bunta 17 October 2013 01: 51
      0
      Here the Germans had such a cartridge 7,92x40, we actually repeated it in 7,62x39. One of the best rounds in the world turned out. But the Germans somehow cut him off and launched 7,92x33. And then this g ..- g.om turned out to be a cartridge. So no caliber decides.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 17 October 2013 01: 55
        -1
        Quote: bunta
        Here the Germans had such a cartridge 7,92x40, we actually repeated it in 7,62x39. One of the best rounds in the world turned out. But the Germans somehow cut him off and launched 7,92x33. And then this g ..- g.om turned out to be a cartridge. So no caliber decides.

        Caliber decides a lot. Including weight, and certain characteristics.
    3. Akim
      Akim 17 October 2013 05: 20
      0
      Quote: SIT
      Or maybe on the contrary, consider the possibility of further unification, but on the basis of a 6,5 mm cartridge?

      Is Russia such a rich country to move to a new caliber? Or do you have no other problems, how to spend a damn cloud of money? In this case, it is better to develop a bicaliber weapon.
    4. Droid
      Droid 17 October 2013 15: 59
      +1
      Or maybe on the contrary, consider the possibility of further unification, but on the basis of a 6,5 mm cartridge? Return to the roots, so to speak.

      You wanted to say get away from the origins?

      Even at the dawn of everything and everything, Fedorov showed the optimality of this caliber for automatic army weapons.

      Fedorov did not show any optimality of the 6,5 mm caliber. Fedorov advocated for caliber reduction, which was done by adopting the 5,45 cartridge.
  • Rosomaha67
    Rosomaha67 16 October 2013 15: 29
    +5
    Quote: Pimply

    Honestly, or what? The second barrel is needed so that the machine gun does not "spit" when the barrel overheats. And barrel overheating occurs after 100-150 bullets fired.


    ..... about a replaceable barrel for a "Pecheneg", it is possible that yes, practice will show, but the possibility of replacement had to be foreseen immediately, then I agree ....... but about 100-150 bullets after which overheating occurs I do not agree, even in combat conditions when using the PKM, overheating occurred much later, you just need to sometimes tear your fingers off the "trigger" (trigger), and not pour it into the white light as a pretty penny, and then it will be easier with overheating, besides everything you are wrong, for the PKM there is a 200 cartridge box, and by default it is assumed that this stock of b / n can be released without stopping and without delays from overheating, so of course you cannot get away from overheating, but much later, and with skillful use, then much later......
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 16 October 2013 17: 59
      +1
      Quote: Rosomaha67
      ..but about 100-150 bullets after which overheating occurs, I do not agree, even in combat conditions when using the PKM, overheating occurred much later, you just need to sometimes tear your fingers off the "trigger" (trigger)

      The initial overheating is already on the 100-150 issued in continuous fire mode with any small arms. The trunk is being changed somewhere to 300-350.
      1. Ivan93
        Ivan93 17 October 2013 21: 19
        +1
        And how many b / p does your gunner carry with him? I don’t know of a single real case that an experienced gunner would shoot 100-150 shots continuously and even at a fast pace, and if you give an untrained elephant a "volcano", it will overheat.
      2. bunta
        bunta 21 October 2013 23: 07
        +1
        For the sake of interest, do you occasionally browse the 7,62 mm PC tamper

        Chapter I. p3. "Barrel cooling air, allowing continuous fire 500 shotsThen if necessary to continue firing, the heated barrel must be replaced with a spare one. "
  • MAG
    MAG 16 October 2013 16: 26
    0
    Question to the author, permission from KARDEN to post his photo do you have? if not, at least a link to his site has been made.
  • Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 16 October 2013 17: 25
    0
    It is clear that this is a deep modernization of the PC. Ah yes Kalashnikov!
  • leonardo_1971
    leonardo_1971 16 October 2013 19: 18
    +9
    I tried to shoot from Pecheneg. There are no big differences from RMB. It's a bit heavier and when changing the position the handle is not balanced and the machine gun hangs down with the butt. Which is very inconvenient.
  • I think so
    I think so 17 October 2013 21: 14
    +1
    Purely advertising article. The machine gunner actually has a bunch of problems.
    1. Cooling casing. If dirt gets under the hood, cleaning the machine gun is a problem. If you do not clean it will not live long.
    2. It is practically impossible to use in armored vehicles.
    3. The carrying handle is unknown for what purpose, the roofing felts for cooling the carrying roofing felts ... does not perform any of the functions efficiently.
    4. About the beach from the trunk already ALL mentioned above.
    5. A whole kilogram heavier compared to RMB.
    6. And this is just what lies on the surface. Tests in the troops were few. Praise only from the words of the developers themselves. Etc. etc.

    I think this machine gun absolutely does not pull on the title of "single" ... bless you. There is no end to work there and it is unlikely that there will be any sense in the future.