Military Review

The first assault - Russian

165
The first assault - Russian


Automatic rifle Fedorov - weapon unfulfilled future

These weapons opened a new era in the small arms of the Russian army during the First World War. Do not happen in Russia the February Revolution and the subsequent Bolshevik coup, the automatic rifle V.G. Fedorov in droves would receive shock infantry, aviation, navy and armored vehicles.

Assault rifle

How to properly name the gun product of the outstanding Russian designer Vladimir Grigorievich Fedorov, is still discussed in the special literature literature. Fedorov himself called it "automatic". However, experts are still arguing whether Fedorov’s product can be considered a classic assault rifle or automatic, as they are usually denoted in Russia, or it belongs to the class of automatic rifles. However, there is also the name historically that existed during the First World War - “Fedorov's handgun-machine gun”, and even “machine-gun”.

Vladimir Fedorov was not only a talented weapon designer, but also a major theorist of small arms. Tactical and technical requirements (TTT) to assault automatic weapons, that is, to the class of assault rifles, automatic, developed for the first time by VG Fedorov, became classic.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, these TTTs sounded almost revolutionary in the field of military technology. A new weapon was supposed to have mass and dimensions, convenient for an individual fighter actively moving on the battlefield. The weapon should have been able to fire by single shots and bursts, having for this an interchangeable high-capacity magazine. It was supposed to allow the fighter to instantly open fire on the move, but at the same time to possess the ability of an accurate shot from the stop at medium-distance distances. In principle, the Fedorov rifle meets all these requirements in the same way as the modern American assault rifle M16 or the German Heckler-Koch G36. Thus, Fedorov’s weapons product was apparently the first in the world to adopt a special assault rifle.

The fight against "Bergman" and "Mauser"

The military thought of imperial Russia, in terms of the development of promising small arms, as, indeed, in other areas of armament, usually reflected only on the subject of weapons already launched into production in Western countries. This feature of the Russian military department could not but affect the fate of the development of automatic weapons. While in all the leading countries of Europe, design work on the creation of automatic weapons was carried out on the basis of state order and financing, in Russia, the developers of automatic weapons could only count on their own pocket and possible favorable attention of their direct bosses.

At the turn of the twentieth century in Russia there were, to varying degrees, individually developed designs of automatic rifles by designers Glinsky, Glubovsky, Privalov, Velitsky, Shchukin. A very promising automatic design based on the processing of the Mosin three-line rifle was offered by Ya.U. The Grove In the 1907, the capital theoretical leadership of V.G. Fedorov, "The basis for the design of automatic weapons." However, in spite of the seemingly already existing practical and even theoretical basis, the work on designing automatic rifles did not arouse any interest in the Russian military ministry, were not supervised by anyone, and, accordingly, did not go beyond individual, semi-handicraft invention.


Vladimir Fedorov. Photo: V. Shiyanovsky / RIA News


The West has indirectly helped. In 1914, the major of the Italian army, Betel Revelli, created a twin submachine gun under the 9-mm cartridge, which was later called the “Aviation submachine gun Villar-Perosa М1915”. Almost simultaneously, the French launched into production, albeit technically capricious, but a massive machine gun based on the Shosh automatic rifle (Chauchat Model1915). The British developed the Farkauer Hill rifle with a drum magazine on 20 cartridges.

However, the main motive for the Russian military department were, of course, the German automatic weapons design. The Germans began using the Mauser 1910 / 1913 automatic rifle, equipped with a translator for automatic firing and a replaceable magazine for 25 cartridges. In addition, there was information about the promising start of an exceptionally successful design of the German machine gunner Hugo Schmeisser MP.18 submachine gun, the release of which was subsequently mastered by Theodor Bergman’s company.

As a result, the Russian military department finally paid attention to the problem of the production of domestic automatic weapons and remembered the long-time gun project - the VG gun-gun. Fedorov.

Gun "unfinished"

The long lack of interest in domestic development of automatic weapons and government funding in this area could not be in vain. The so-called “Fedorov handgun-machine gun” turned out to be the only model of automatic small arms, which was developed and put into service in Russia during the First World War. As noted by the well-known gun specialist S.L. Fedoseev, during the years of the First World War in France, for example, five new types of automatic small arms were created and put into production, and eight in Germany.

Fedorov's automatic rifle could have been brought to the adoption of mass industrial production much earlier than its appearance in the troops at the beginning of 1916 - the beginning of 1917. Back in 1909-1912. she successfully passed the commission, field tests and military trials. For its development V.G. Fedorov was even awarded the great Mikhailov Prize (Gold Medal), issued every five years, but the rifle hit the industrial workshops only in the middle of 1914.

What it was connected with today is hard to say for sure. Most likely, with the overall strategic and technological inertia of the Russian state machine. Former War Minister A.A. Polivanov, in his diary entries from February 21 of 1912, indicates, for example, that Tsar Nicholas II "was at the lecture of Colonel Fedorov, the inventor of the automatic rifle, and told him that he was against introducing her into the army, since then there would not be enough cartridges." For objectivity's sake, it is worth noting that the extremely low educational level of draftees in the army of the Russian Empire caused the well-founded fears of the tsar and those generals of the General Staff who were seriously expecting an increased, pointless ammunition by yesterday’s bastard peasants.

Another objective reason for such a significant delay in the introduction of the V.G. Fedorov became the inescapable "Achilles' heel" of all the weapons store systems in Russia - the welted (flanged) "Russian" 7,62-mm rifle cartridge. (Its feature was the presence of a welt or flange - roughly speaking, a protruding edge on the bottom of the sleeve, which technologically made it difficult to use it in other types of weapons).

Arisaka comes to the rescue

By the end of 1914, it became obvious to the Russian military command that the shortage of infantry rifles and cartridges to them was already reaching catastrophic proportions on the front. In the 1915 campaign of the year, the Russian army was part of an acute shortage of all types of weapons and military equipment, but rifle-cartridge “hunger” was particularly acute. By this time, the efforts of General Edward Germonius, involved in the purchase of weapons and military equipment abroad, signed contract No. XXUMX between Russia and Japan for the purchase of 3027 thousands of Arisac rifles of the 200 model of the year and 1897 million of their cartridges. In addition, the Japanese side yielded to Russia in excess of the contract another 200 million rifle cartridges.


War Minister Alexei Polivanov. Photo: US Library of Congress


This was just the beginning - by the end of the Great War, Russia had 728 thousands of Arisac rifles, they were armed with entire divisions and even corps. With an English loan, Russia ordered 660 million 6,5-mm cartridges in England, and Japan was obliged to supply 124 million cartridges.

The 6,5-mm Arisaka cartridge in no small degree contributed to the fact that the automatic rifle Fedorov from the “paper project” finally became a reality. The designer himself, long before the arrival of Arisaka rifles in the troops, came to the conclusion that the 7,62-mm power of the “Russian” rant cartridge was excessive for automatic weapons, and the protruding welt (flange) of this cartridge created difficult to interfere with the mechanisms of the bolt group and magazine . The Russian army clearly required a modern cartridge suitable for use in automatic weapons. V.G. Fedorov in 1912-1913 I developed my own 6,5-mm cartridge of “improved ballistics”, but it was unrealistic to organize its industrial production in Russia in the conditions of war.

The Japanese 6,5-mm rifle cartridge, which was massively supplied to the Russian army, came in very handy, since it completely removed for the relatively small series of Fyodorov’s automatic machine guns any danger of “cartridge hunger”. This cartridge had very good ballistics, which provided flatness of firing, acceptable power, and, taking into account production on modern technological lines in England and Japan, high standardization of recoil energy.

The use of the 6,5-mm cartridge allowed to literally transform the weapon by V.G. Fedorov. The rifle received a barrel shortened from 800 to 520-mm, which immediately markedly improved the balance of the weapon. In fact, the flangeless cartridge Arisaka (the flange was in favor of the cartridge dimensions only on 0,315 mm) made it possible to introduce a flag rate firing translator into the system, to make a slide gate cover, to develop a series of replaceable magazines for the weapon.

Informal troop testing

Oruzhieved S.L. Fedoseev, in one of his works, gives information about how a Japanese rifle-assault rifle, tested for the troops, modified for 6,5-mm. The long-term, overlapping tests, traditional for the Russian defense ministry, have been replaced in the crucible of real combat operations with quick and clear assessments of the interested army structures.



Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich. Photo: US Library of Congress


21 February 1916 Maritime Headquarters requested to transfer at least 10 Fedorov machine guns "in view of the extreme need for such guns in naval aviation." The chief of military aviation, Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, highly appreciated the automatic rifle after combat use in Lieutenant Colonel Gorshkov's 10 aircraft division. “General Fedorov’s machine gun showed excellent results,” the Grand Duke addressed to the Main Artillery Directorate (GAU). - I ask for a dress for a hundred of such guns for aviation squads. A shotgun is better than Shosh’s gun in every way. ” The commander of another squadron, the staff captain I.N. In his report, Tunashevsky was even more categorical, “Fedorov’s machine gun was the only one suitable for a light airplane.”

Summing up the feedback received from the front, GAU in 381 magazine from 6 September 1916 of the year made the definition that “marked guns of General Fedorov could be used, except for aviation, and on armored cars, especially cannon, where there is no possibility to put a machine gun. In addition, Fedorov’s automatic rifle could be used for field positional warfare as an infantry weapon. ”

However, even before this definition, 14 August 1916, the Chief of General Staff, General P.I. Averyanov sent the following directive to the Main Military Technical Directorate: “In the circumstances of the present wartime, it seems necessary to form now a company armed with automatic rifles of Major General Fedorov’s system according to a special state here ...”.

In August-October, the 1916 of the year at the Officer Rifle School based on the company of the 189-th Izmail Infantry Regiment of the 48-th Infantry Division was formed and trained a “special purpose team”. The team was armed with Fedorov's automatic rifles, and in addition, according to the prescription, they were supplied with “all new technical improvements”: optical sights, prismatic binoculars, portable field rifle boards of the GVTU Technical Committee system, new Adrian steel helmets. In fact, created a sample of the Russian army in the near future.

At the beginning of 1917, a company of machine gunners of the 189 Infantry Regiment of Ismail was sent to the Romanian front. On 30 on April 1917, according to a report by the Chief of Staff of the 48 Infantry Division, this separate company consisted of an 3 officer and a 138 of lower ranks. Further reporting by the division has not been preserved - the time has come for “fraternization” and the rapid collapse of the Russian army. A number of automatic rifles Fedorov was involved in infantry and air units of the Western Front.

Innovative specifications

The Fedorov machine gun was for its time a high-tech product: the production of this gun could be carried out only with the use of a milling machine.

Automation of the system was innovative: the action of reloading cartridges was based on the use of recoil energy in the short course of the barrel. Even today, such a principle of action of rifle automation remains in demand in the army and hunting systems.


Japanese flangeless 6,5-mm rifle cartridge Arisaka. Photo: wikipedia.org


The barrel bore was locked using two swinging cheeks located on the sides of the breech breech and closing the special bolt lugs. Under the effect of recoil shot, the barrel and bolt moved back — the front ledges of the swinging cheeks raced onto the ledge of the fixed box of the bolt group and turned, freeing the bolt. Under the influence of a compressed recoil of a powerful return spring, the barrel and bolt, throwing out the cartridge case and taking the next cartridge, returned to their previous position, and the swinging cheeks, rising up, locked the bolt.

The trigger mechanism of the automatic rifle Fedorov allowed to conduct both single and automatic fire, for which the weapon was equipped with a special translator of the rate of fire. The attached box magazine of the machine was designed for 25 staggered cartridges. In case of need for fast loading, the magazine could be filled from a special clip, inserted from above into the slots of the box - the shutter was kept in the rear position with a simple but reliable slide delay.

The undoubted "highlight" of the machine Fedorov was a convenient front handle to hold - the original structural detail, clearly ahead of its time. The return to this detail on domestic weapons (for example, on the modification of the Kalashnikov assault rifle) occurred again only at the end of the twentieth century. Initially, a rifle-assault rifle stood a folding frame sight, similar to the sight on the Japanese Arisaka carbine. Choosing this type of sight, Fedorov apparently proceeded from the fact that the ballistics of the 6,5-mm cartridge for the machine gun was similar to the ballistics of the “native” cartridge of the 6,5-mm Arisaka. Subsequently, this scope was replaced by a more convenient sector.

The Fedorov rifle is distinguished by a rational and beautiful design, even from the standpoint of today. A metal box-like lining on the fore end of the forearm, a stylish hold handle, a narrow turned neck of a lodge, an impressive store horn and a powerful shutter handle on top give Fedorov's gun a unique “predatory” look, testify to the exceptional quality of the weapon. Throwing a gun into the shoulder removes all doubts about the surprising, even unique balance of this weapon. If there is a balance, then with a good chuck (and the dignity of 6,5-mm Arisaka is not in doubt), the shot “from Fedorov” even from an adapted stop, logically, should have been canceled.

Ruined by revolution

Fedorov rifle shared the tragic fate historical Of Russia. Based on its design, technical documentation was prepared for a whole family of small arms, including, in addition to the machine itself, also a 6,5 mm light machine gun, a 6,5 mm automatic rifle and a shortened (for armored vehicles) 6,5 mm self-loading carbine.


Fedorov machine M1916. Photo: MilitaryFactory.com


However, long-term plans for the production of these weapons were not destined to be embodied in the metal: Russia was rapidly falling into a revolution, with its inevitable chaos, general treachery and blood flows.

Mass production of the machine was initially planned to be launched at the Sestroretsk Arms Plant, then the idea arose of transferring this production to a new machine-gun factory in the city of Kovrov, Vladimir province. By a GAU prescription from 18 in January 1918, VG himself was assigned to the Kovrov plant. Fedorov, and he was sent to the assistance of the largest specialist weapons, the former head of the Tula Arms Plant, P.P. Tretyakov. However, 21 March 1918, all work at the Kovrov plant was stopped due to compelling financial and organizational reasons. The plant's cash register was devastated, the workers either ran away or fiercely rallied, the supply of materials for production was completely stopped. In addition, the continuation of any contracts with subcontractors was unrealistic for the plant management due to the policy of “demobilization of military enterprises” conducted by the Bolsheviks.

Russian being, even in provincial Kovrov, crawled limply and meekly under the guillotine of Bolshevik arbitrariness.
Author:
Originator:
http://rusplt.ru/ww1/history/pervaya-shturmovaya--russkaya-12916.html
165 comments
Ad

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

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Crang
    Crang 20 September 2014 08: 18
    +20
    What bolshevist arbitrariness? The Bolsheviks then supported the bulk of the country's population. The future showed how right she was.
    1. Civil
      Civil 20 September 2014 08: 52
      +18
      Russia lost the 1st world, with a roar, society could not stand the load ... and itself betrayed its country, like the USSR in 1991.
      1. Metlik
        Metlik 20 September 2014 10: 44
        +12
        Quote: Civil
        society could not stand the load ... and itself betrayed its country


        Nobody betrayed the country. Millions of soldiers of the empire were dying for the king, who did not care about their death. When they came to kill the king, no one stood up for him.
        1. Civil
          Civil 20 September 2014 11: 33
          +6
          Quote: Metlik
          Quote: Civil
          society could not stand the load ... and itself betrayed its country


          Nobody betrayed the country. Millions of soldiers of the empire were dying for the king, who did not care about their death. When they came to kill the king, no one stood up for him.

          Are these those who later fought in the Red Army? Or was the rotten royal officer who had sworn an oath and, after the king's abdication, immediately began to recognize the Provisional Government? It’s all one and the same - TRIEST. Exactly the same as in 1991 when they did not roll out Yeltsin with the liberals tanks!
          1. Metlik
            Metlik 20 September 2014 11: 58
            +9
            Quote: Civil
            the rotten royal officer who swore an oath and after the abdication of the king immediately began to recognize the Provisional Government


            For faith, king and fatherland.

            Faith is a very complex concept, it must be developed, giving answers to new, modern questions. The Bolsheviks had answers, the whites did not.

            Many tsarist officers sided with the Reds. And not because they were looking for personal gain. They always served the fatherland above all. The king betrayed them, placing himself above the fatherland. They follow the leader to the end only if they see that he serves the faith and the fatherland, and not his rogue friends.
            1. Asgard of Iry
              Asgard of Iry 20 September 2014 12: 07
              -17
              Well, just like from today's "leader" portrait oil painted))))
              1. litam3pz
                litam3pz 20 September 2014 21: 12
                0
                History goes in a spiral. Therefore, the comparison is not correct.
              2. Foxmara
                Foxmara 21 September 2014 07: 01
                0
                Poroshenko? Also a secret to me.
              3. DeGreen
                DeGreen 15 May 2022 21: 11
                0
                Would you close your mouth, Ukrainian
            2. pan_nor
              pan_nor 20 September 2014 13: 30
              +6
              The “whites” had answers. Many and different. Some for the father-king, others for the constituent assembly. The people were not satisfied with these answers.
            3. Interface
              Interface 21 September 2014 18: 47
              +10
              Do not happen in Russia the February Revolution and the subsequent Bolshevik coup, the automatic rifle V.G. Fedorov in droves would receive shock infantry, aviation, navy and armored units.



              Any anti-Soviet is either a mentally defective individual or a conscious enemy of the state.

              The author apparently forgot that in the tsarist Rassiyushka they did not produce light machine guns and machine guns, only Maxims. Fully imported Lewis and the party Madsenov.

              What are the n - th Fedorov automata ?! In the 1907 year, officers were allowed to acquire pistols at their own expense; they could not even supply the army even before the war.


              All these arguments about the "victorious Russian army" and the bastards of the Bolsheviks are the infantile fantasy of the Yedrosov imbeciles of the Young Guard from United Russia, as well as the Minister of Culture Medinsky, a latent anti-Soviet who is still a member of the "liberal club" of the United Russia.

              Liberty on the march, in short.
              1. vonWolfenstein
                vonWolfenstein 27 June 2019 18: 58
                0
                Any anti-Soviet is either a mentally defective individual or a conscious enemy of the state.
                I completely agree with you! The 1917 revolution was a natural and necessary stage in the history of Russia.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Signaller
            Signaller 20 September 2014 14: 12
            +5
            Who???? The question is of course interesting. In my opinion, in 1993, Yeltsin rolled out the Supreme Council in tanks. And Yeltsin-until 2000 rules. Then he handed over things to Putin. Sometimes you need to read a story. Well, at least sometimes.
          4. -Dmitry-
            -Dmitry- 22 September 2014 03: 23
            +1
            Thank you that the revolution was and history went as it went, otherwise with a greater degree of probability of 99,5% you would not have been born at all, and it would have been better in Russia without a revolution, there is still a very big question! Tsarist Russia would have won the Second World War also in doubt.
      2. Reddragon
        Reddragon 20 September 2014 11: 04
        +5
        Quote: Civil
        Russia lost 1 world

        Tsarism lost, but not Russia
        1. Civil
          Civil 20 September 2014 11: 34
          -8
          Quote: RedDragoN
          Quote: Civil
          Russia lost 1 world

          Tsarism lost, but not Russia

          What tsarism, he fought the people and lost! Tsarism is a form of government and not an independent state!
          1. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 20 September 2014 11: 50
            +3
            Slammed a minus. For the misunderstanding of such key concepts as a country, people and the state, as well as the relationships between them.
            1. Civil
              Civil 20 September 2014 15: 17
              0
              anomalocaris
              Learn materiel:
              TSARISM, aa., The Tsarist regime, a form of government, under which the supreme power belongs to the tsar, the monarchy. || adj. tsarist, th, th.
              People - 1) in the theory of constitutional law, the entire population of a given state, forming a single socio-economic and political community, regardless of its division into any national communities (in the constitutional doctrine of a number of countries, including the Russian Federation, the expression "multinational people" is used ). In this sense, modern constitutions speak of N. as "the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power" in the state (for example, clause 1 of article 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation)
              State - a set of political institutions, the main purpose of which is to protect and maintain the integrity of society in a certain territory.

              Less to you for not knowing the materiel!
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 20 September 2014 16: 07
                -7
                Baby, the fact that you know how to search for quotes on the Internet does not add to your understanding. Another minus.
                1. Civil
                  Civil 20 September 2014 20: 33
                  -1
                  Quote: anomalocaris
                  Baby, the fact that you know how to search for quotes on the Internet does not add to your understanding. Another minus.

                  Kid, go to school, there in a couple of classes there will be the subject History of Russia, the aunt teacher will explain everything))) go to sleep in peace.
                  1. litam3pz
                    litam3pz 20 September 2014 21: 18
                    +1
                    Do you know her ideally? The history of Russia in the sense of?
                  2. anomalocaris
                    anomalocaris 22 September 2014 15: 45
                    0
                    Baby, I graduated from school thirty years ago. Since then, everything has happened to me ... The history of Russia, believe me, but do not want to believe, check it, I know better than you.
              2. litam3pz
                litam3pz 20 September 2014 21: 17
                +2
                But I apologize, what is the constitution under tsarism?
              3. andrew42
                andrew42 21 September 2014 17: 38
                +1
                Well? Minus you slapped-I see. Arguments - I do not observe. I do not mean that tsarism is good or bad. Tsarism is weak. And this weakness is obvious - from the time of the chopping off of the heads of Charles the 1st in England and Louis in France. After that, both countries fell tightly under the financial pressure of the Rothstld companions. Tsarism is such a model that the reaction of the bulk of the population to the cutting out of the national elite is outrageously inhibited. As well as the reaction of the elite to the brainwashing of the population by foreign competitors. After the overthrow of the national elite in the metropolis, the tracing of the unsuccessful reaction was the same (in England - the defeat of the royal militias from the peripheral counties, in France - the defeat of the Vendéite Auvergne, in Russia much longer and more painful - the defeat of the Siberian army, the defeat of the Cossacks, the defeat of the Antonovshchina , suppression of Kronstadt and the Putilov revolt, further - smaller). Oddly enough it sounds, but apart from the VKPb-KPSS, no one has yet built a faster-acting model for the "people-ruling elite" ties. I do not consider the financial barons' world codela, they work in secret mode, they have a "network structure" everywhere and nowhere, they have 2 thousand years of quiet systematic work, and they are not burdened with responsibility for any group of the population. So Tsarism turned out to be weak as a model of managing a nation state, whatever one may say - you see for yourself how informational processes accelerate geometrically even at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries.
                1. tokens2
                  tokens2 21 September 2014 18: 12
                  0
                  Oddly enough it sounds, but apart from the VKPb-KPSS, no one has yet built a faster model for relations "people - ruling elite"

                  In 1991, this "connection" was evident.
                  After all, since 1917 there was another connection, not noticeable
                  with the world code of financial barons ...

                  That's just it ... the monarchs were independent.
                  But they were cleverly bred. I would even say masterly. Because everyone was doing it !!! the most advanced minds, in all !!! spheres of life. And in the military even more so. In the name of progress.
                  However progress is tricky laughing And the monarchy has "trump cards".
                  VKPb-CPSU passed its proficiency test in 1991. Against the backdrop of the monarchs ... with the collapse of their empire, they handed over the country with such disgrace and crash. That the right is not even a word.
                2. anomalocaris
                  anomalocaris 22 September 2014 15: 40
                  0
                  Here's another minus for you. For Siberia. You don't understand about this nichrome.
            2. Interface
              Interface 21 September 2014 18: 16
              +1
              The state has many concepts, including territory (= state), country (= state), people (= state).


              You wanted to be smart here, only you don’t understand the concepts yourself, while hyperbolizing your own significance, slapping the minuses to a respected user and publicly declaring this.

              Your minus, as well as your opinion against the background of other 10,15 and more --- does not mean anything.
              Do not bully your nose.
          2. litam3pz
            litam3pz 20 September 2014 21: 14
            +1
            The state fought, the people do not need a war in FIG. So the state in the person of Nikolashka has lost, or rather, profuca.
        2. Signaller
          Signaller 20 September 2014 14: 20
          +4
          LOST STATE. Who was in power ?? 7 yes what's the difference. Betrayal came from the head. The people are just sorry. And who thought of him ???? Revolutionary expediency above all.
          1. Naum
            Naum 20 September 2014 20: 30
            -5
            The Russian people then betrayed everything: Vera, the Tsar and the Fatherland, left the trenches after the agitator-Jews who promised peace and comrai on earth, who allowed them to plunder the "plundered". Then all this will turn into the dispersal of the Constituent Assembly, the "temporary" abolition of freedom of speech and assembly, the Civil War, surplus appropriation, "decossackization", enslavement of the peasantry on collective farms, the Holodomor, the Gulag and other "delights" of the Soviets. The people fooled by the Bolsheviks paid a terrible price for their naivety. Now Ukraine has stepped on the same rake.
            Now minus it!
            1. tokens2
              tokens2 20 September 2014 20: 56
              +4
              The Russian people then betrayed everything: Faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland

              Rather ... the people were deceived. This is more precisely.
              Including with the help of those whose duties it was to stop cheating.
              The trenches were that "spark" from which the flame flared up.
              The huge garrisons in the cities without "business" are also incomprehensible. The coup was brought on with bayonets! And all who were clearly opposed were driven under the enemy machine guns.
              But social-left ideas could well have been implemented peacefully without blood flow. At least some would be accurate. Including universal secondary education!
              I didn’t even think of putting you a minus.
            2. andrew42
              andrew42 21 September 2014 17: 47
              +1
              Why minus? Rather, a plus. But I cannot help but notice that if the national elite does not keep its nose in the wind, and does not oppose the brainwashing of its people, if it does not report on the crisis, and does not start the most severe measures in accordance with the laws of wartime, then there is another outcome as "leaving the trenches "you don't have to wait. If the elite does not understand who is "calling the tune" and in whose interests the war is going on, if it pays with its blood not only for the country's independence, but it is not clear for whose gesheft, the outcome is also clear. On the contrary, the margin of safety is striking that they did not begin to run out of the trenches at the beginning of 1916. Do you know why? - Yes, because there was no signal for a coup, early. It was necessary to let the Europeans kill each other for another year. 100 years later you look at the Kaiser, at Nicholas II, at the Emperor of Austria-Hungary, and you are amazed. What blind men!
        3. Bayonet
          Bayonet 21 September 2014 08: 24
          0
          Quote: RedDragoN
          Tsarism lost, but not Russia

          Again, citizens of the same country begin to moan about the First World War lost by the Russian Empire, forgetting that the Russian Empire fought on the side of the war winner and call it a loser, at least illiterate.
          And no one asks himself the simple question "when did it end and what state existed at that time on the territory of the former Russian Empire"? The answer is simple. The First World War ended on November 11, 1918, and the Russian Empire ceased to exist on September 14, 1917 with the proclamation of the Republic.
          So the Russian Empire, and even less so Emperor Nicholas II, have nothing to do with the defeat in the First World War, but the Bolshevik government headed by Ulyanov and the state entity that they created then became the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic has the most direct relation to this defeat. Here it is.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Signaller
        Signaller 20 September 2014 14: 17
        +1
        Also an interesting question. Russia was, figuratively, an hour from the victory, and all were muddied by the Bolsheviks. The Brest peace treaty with the German command concluded in 1918 lowered Russia nowhere else, in order to maintain the power of the Bolsheviks. By the way, February 23rd, what we celebrate every year is the date of the decision to conclude this obscene world. So read the docs. Apparently the story is bad for you at school.
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 20 September 2014 14: 39
          +3
          Yes. History, judging by you, is taught very badly nowadays. They muddied everything up to the Bolsheviks and without them. Lenin, by the way, did not even hope to live up to the revolution, but here on you - Nicholas was "persuaded" to renounce, although such a procedure was not provided in the Russian Empire (with his abdication, the story is generally muddy), Mikhail refused the throne, and you will get a Provisional Government. Eat it with porridge.
          The Brest peace was a necessary measure for there simply were no other options.
          1. Civil
            Civil 20 September 2014 15: 19
            -7
            The option to fight to the bitter end was!
            1. anomalocaris
              anomalocaris 20 September 2014 16: 11
              +2
              To what end and who would fight? Excuse me, order No. 1 destroyed the army, the whistle in the economy has stolen everything that has been established with great difficulty since 1914. Most importantly, nobody solved the land issue, but they yelled about the war until the end ...
              No baby, you don’t know the story. Otherwise, they would not write nonsense.
            2. Eggor
              Eggor 20 September 2014 16: 31
              +6
              Quote: Civil
              The option to fight to the bitter end was!

              So they fought. And they won. Against the foreign invaders of the West and the traitors of Russia that joined them. The 1918-1923 war was essentially not a civil war, but a domestic one.

              The combat operations of the troops of foreign states on our land in 1918-1922 have been practically erased from Russian history. On the contrary, the myth of the fratricidal civil war that the Bolsheviks allegedly unleashed is awakening in every possible way. For the amount of technical, human and financial investment, the British War Secretary Churchill called the Denikin army “my army”. “It would be a mistake to think,” he wrote in the book “The World Crisis”, that throughout this year (1919 - BS) we fought on the fronts for the cause of hostile Russian Bolsheviks. On the contrary, the Russian White Guards fought for our cause! ” Boris Sokolov

              1. andrew42
                andrew42 21 September 2014 18: 19
                0
                The time was such that many fought "for their own." Like, are you for the Bolsheviks, or are you for the Communists? - I am for the International! There are no simple processes. During the establishment of the power of the Bolsheviks, the main processes were 2: 1) the destruction of the Russian national elite and the settling of the "bottom" of the empire. 2) the struggle of these very "lower classes" with foreign invaders, plus the running of many from Reds to Whites and vice versa, plus "Russians are chopping Russians", as it is now fashionable to "cliché". And these processes, which have different vectors in the Russian field, often add up to the result outside. For example, in terms of countering intervention. At least, the collaboration of the White movement with the interventionists is an evil myth. Pikul has a wonderful novel "Out of the Dead End", about the fight against the intervention in the North (Arkhangelsk, Murman, Karelia and even Vologda with Kotlas "). the interventionists and national traitors have practically erased the red / white border, while Pikul is a fan of facts.
            3. Naum
              Naum 20 September 2014 20: 34
              -2
              Yes, just stupidly take up the defense and hold out for several months! The trouble was that in the first 3 years of the war the best, most patriotic masses of soldiers were knocked out. Replacing them was unworthy!
        2. Pissarro
          Pissarro 20 September 2014 16: 32
          +5
          apparently you were poorly served in the school where the front line was and in what condition the army was at that moment, which you figuratively called the hour before the victory smile
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 21 September 2014 08: 31
            +1
            Quote: Pissarro
            what was the state of the army

            And who corrupted the army with all his might, sending his agitators there?
        3. Naum
          Naum 22 September 2014 21: 00
          -1
          Quote: Signaller
          and everyone was muddied by the Bolsheviks.

          These svoes worked out the Kaiser's tranche for the device of the Russian revolution, which was supposed to bring the Empire out of the war. And she brought it out - with shame, with costs, in the company of losers. Just without any indemnities. This was the Great Betrayal of Russia, which was never evaluated by the Military Tribunal. It is a pity that that foolish generation of antichrists - "revolutionaries", which made their descendants suffer a lot, has gone forever. From heaven they are watching everything today and are hardly happy about what they have done. They took a walk, of course, they were notoriously robots!
          It must be understood that the extreme right ideology (fascism) and the extreme left (Bolshevism) are two radical misanthropic ideologies. For all their opposites, they are locked in their criminal extremes. I have nothing against the communists. People believe in fairy tales - this is their right. But when they begin to hammer their nonsense into other people's brains, then Bolshevism begins. Truth is beyond these theories of theories. She is in the Savior’s Sermon on the Mount. She is in His commandments. There He says ALL. This is not difficult to understand, it is difficult to accept and observe.
    2. max73
      max73 20 September 2014 18: 09
      0
      to the author and publisher - thanks! For myself, I learned something new ... well, and for those who arranged a discussion in the discussion ... off-topic, dig trenches ...
    3. Reserve officer
      Reserve officer 20 September 2014 22: 37
      +2
      The future is us. And now it’s already clear that the victory of the Bolsheviks in the Civil War is due only to the support of the peasantry. Which promised to give land. But they only promised.
      In 1913, Russia was a leading world power. And in 2014?
      Returned to a much worse condition. So why did millions of our citizens in the Civil War give their lives? This is a very difficult and painful issue for our country. So do not obscure the country's history with cheap slogans.
      1. stoker
        stoker 21 September 2014 01: 36
        +6
        "... In 1913 Russia was the leading world power ..."

        Are you in your mind to write that? If you and others like you are our future, I'm scared. This is not a "figure of speech".

        Russia in 1913 it is a poor, illiterate, poorly interconnected peasant territory. Almost complete lack of industry. Under the tsarist regime, she had no chance for the future. NO KIH.

        Another 5 years of this autocratic insanity and the country would inevitably be blown to pieces. This was understood by everyone, from Western liberals to Social Democrats, from bourgeois industrialists to workers and peasants. They just saw different ways out. History has shown that the Bolsheviks were in "perfect order." And history, as you know, does not tolerate subjunctive moods.

        Therefore, when in February 1917. this thoroughly rotten state hut collapsed (by the way, the Bolsheviks had nothing to do with it) all of Russia rejoiced. Not a single real political force supported neither the autocracy, nor the royal family and its close circle.

        As for the author ... Well, as in one article it can be written that the country in the conditions of war was never able to establish sufficient production of the simplest rifles and ammunition for them and at the same time blame the Bolsheviks for not letting the army equip the technically more complex automatic weapons.

        The author, you probably do not know that the Bolsheviks for 18 (!!!) years from 1922 to 1940 from 12 (!!!) states of Russia destroyed by the Civil War and the intervention, where serviceable steam locomotives were measured in dozens, and the Putilov plant in Leningrad "produced" lighters, under the conditions of the economic and political blockade they built the second economic power in the world - the Soviet Union. And they returned, by the way, almost all the territories lost during the Civil War. Except for Poland and Finland.

        Graphomania is one of the vices of man. And often a disease.

        The article is an example of real "dill". It just grew up in the Russian field. And so - no difference.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 21 September 2014 11: 52
          0
          Quote: stoker
          Russia in 1913 it is a poor, illiterate, poorly interconnected peasant territory. Almost complete lack of industry.

          The average annual growth rate of the Russian economy was ahead of the development of all other civilized states of that time, amounting to 8% in 1889–1899 and 6,25% in 1900–1913.
          1. stoker
            stoker 21 September 2014 13: 49
            +6
            Quote: Bayonet

            The average annual growth rate of the Russian economy was ahead of the development of all other civilized states of that time, amounting to 8% in 1889–1899 and 6,25% in 1900–1913.


            You do not understand what you are writing. I will explain.

            Two countries produce tractors. One - 10 pieces, the other - 1000 pieces. In year.
            The difference is 990 tractors.

            In a year. The first country has 20 tractors, the second 1100. The first country has a growth rate of 100%, and the second 10%. Oh how!
            And the real difference in real tractors has increased to 1080 pieces.
            They plow not on "percent", but on tractors.
            Now do you understand what this is about? If not - then the textbook "Mathematics, Grade 5", section "Interest".

            By the way, in 1913 no tractors were produced in Russia. Generally. No one.
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 21 September 2014 19: 38
              -3
              Quote: stoker
              Now do you understand what this is about? If not - then the textbook "Mathematics, Grade 5", section "Interest".

              Listen, Stoker! Do you like tractors? - Go in for tractors! Do not meddle in the economy, this is not yours!
              1. stoker
                stoker 21 September 2014 22: 00
                +3
                [/ Quote]
                Listen, Stoker! Do you like tractors? - Go in for tractors! Do not meddle in the economy, this is not yours! [/ Quote]

                Why is the economy not mine? How to cut off. Even somehow insulting? And what, yours or what? You will deal with percentages, maybe then you will be more relaxed about tractors. Well, you don’t like tractors, then maybe trucks? No? Weaving machines, machine guns (fashionable theme), passenger cars, rails? Of your choice. What aspect of the rapid economic development of tsarist Russia in 1913. Are you ready to discuss?
                1. Bayonet
                  Bayonet 22 September 2014 12: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: stoker
                  Are you ready to discuss

                  Take, for example, the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. So Russia, not beloved by you, dealt with this as soon as possible. Gigantic volumes of work and outstanding engineering solutions. The largest works of engineering and construction art on the Trans-Siberian Railway were railway bridges thrown across 28 large rivers of Siberia. One of the brightest examples of scientific and technical thought of that time was the bridge across the Yenisei. The laying of this “Siberian giant” took place on August 30, 1896. The total length of the Yenisei Bridge was 400 fathoms (about 850 m). Each of its six main metal farms had a length of 66 fathoms, 2 arshins (about 142 m), and a height of 10 fathoms (21,3 m). Such dimensions made this bridge the most significant engineering co! weapons of Russia. Its grand opening took place on March 28, 1899. In 1900, at the World Exhibition in Paris, the model of the Yenisei Bridge was awarded the highest award - the Grand Prix. For the first time, a major achievement of Russian scientists and engineers took a worthy place in a number of outstanding technical works of the XIX century, such as the symbols of the industrial era - the Eiffel Tower and the Machine Gallery. The Yenisei bridge was designed by a talented engineer, later a major scientist in the field of bridge construction L. D. Proskuryakov. He was the author of the design of the bridge across the Amur. The railway bridge across the Ob was designed by another prominent Russian design engineer and builder of bridges - N. A. Belelyubsky.
                  Unlike Baa, I am proud of my homeland - Russia!
              2. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 25 September 2014 16: 26
                0
                Some bayonet
                Baby, what are you eating for breakfast? A couple of eggs, a little sausage, cheese, probably melted, and a big mug of tea? Try to gobble up a couple of slightly fried euros and drink it with freshly brewed dollar.
                But the tractor is a very material value. The funniest thing, in which case, you will die of hunger, but the source, if he understands the tractors, will have a quite material and, most likely, tasty earnings.
        2. andrew42
          andrew42 21 September 2014 17: 59
          -2
          In part, I agree with you about the exaggeration of "leading Russia in 1913." But such praises about the Bolsheviks are in vain. When did industrialization start? Well, definitely not in the 20s. There it was akin to Chineseism - staff shortage, illiterate fuss. On the other hand - the shameless NEP, and Russophobia at the state level. Maybe for you the Bolsheviks of the 17th, the Trotskyists of the late 20s, the Stalinists of the 30s, the post-war party, the Brezhnevites, and the Gorbachev moles are the same guys. And for me, these are completely different qualitative compositions of the national state elite! Some are fundamentally different, and some are antagonistic in their essence and purpose. And the question "Russia 1913" or "Russia Red" who is more valuable than the mother of history - it remained forever unanswered. I think the truth is somewhere in between. But we were initially deprived of this middle choice. History is forged not only in Russia, there are so many world players.
        3. Bayonet
          Bayonet 21 September 2014 19: 34
          -1
          Quote: stoker
          Graphomania is one of the vices of man.

          Grafomania is a painful attraction to intensified and fruitless writing, useless writing. You wrote a lot of things here with a claim to the truth.
          1. stoker
            stoker 22 September 2014 01: 49
            +2
            [quote = Bayonet] [quote = source] A lot of what you wrote here, with a claim to the truth. [/ quote]
            Communication is becoming less constructive and more personal. I have a proposal to stop the exchange of views on this hot topic.

            Best regards
            Stoker.
        4. Reserve officer
          Reserve officer 21 September 2014 20: 48
          +2
          Mr. Stoker! Your comments are inspired by the experience of teaching scientific communism. However, the history course of high school you need to know:
          In 1909-1913 In Russia, there was a significant industrial pace and scale, based on the following factors:
          1. The active use of industrial technologies of the second technical revolution and the development of “new” industries: electric power, steel, oil production and oil refining, chemical, electrical, mechanical engineering.
          2. A new “wave” of foreign investment after a certain “lull” in the investment market, especially in new industries and banking.
          3. Favorable consequences of the Stolypin agrarian reform: the development of the commodity market, the active demand for agricultural technologies, the receipt of foreign exchange resources for the purchase of foreign equipment due to the activation of grain exports.
          4. Implementation of the large-scale military programs after the Russo-Japanese War and the system of state military orders.
          5. Stabilization of the financial situation in the country as a result of financial reform S.Yu. Witte - gold ruble, budget surplus, active trade and balance of payments, developed banking and credit system.
          Most of the published Russian statistics indicate that 1913 was the year of the highest economic recovery in tsarist Russia. The average annual growth rate of the Russian economy for a whole quarter of a century outstripped the development of all other developed countries, amounting to 8% in 1889-1899. and 6,25% in 1900-1913. (the slowdown is explained by the war with Japan and the attempt at the "first revolution"). In most historical scientific works, the period 1910-1913 is called an economic boom. In 1913, the per capita income of the Russian Empire was 40% of German and French. In the period from 1870 to 1913, the average growth rate of production per capita in Western Europe was 1,6% and was equal to that of Russia, but in Russia the population grew much faster [4].
          Moreover, not only agriculture, metallurgy, oil, forestry industries developed successfully, but also the most advanced: chemistry, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering (from 1909 to 1913, the production of internal combustion engines grew by 283,5%), aircraft construction (suffice it to name the most powerful in the world the aircraft "Vityaz" and "Ilya Muromets" by II Sikorsky).
          In 1913, in terms of production, Russia almost caught up with England, significantly surpassed France, 2 times overtook Austria-Hungary and reached 80% of production in Germany. Russia was the largest producer of agricultural products in Europe.
          However, what do I explain all this to you? Get out of your blinkers and read the relevant sources!
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 September 2014 21: 44
            +3
            Quote: Reserve officer
            1909 to 1913 the production of internal combustion engines increased by 283,5%)

            You don’t have to mislead people with interest, but it will turn out like with a surge of rape in Chukotka in the late 80s, when according to annual statistics there the growth of rape was as much as 200%, which led to an immediate commission from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the KGB, but it turned out just in the previous year there were no rape, but in the current one as much as 2. So, write in numbers how many did in 1909 and how many in 1913.
            Quote: Reserve officer
            aircraft construction (suffice it to name the most powerful aircraft in the world "Vityaz" and "Ilya Muromets" by II Sikorsky).

            Well, the planes themselves were built in Russia, but the instruments and engines were bought abroad, with the beginning of WWI on Muromtsy they urgently began to look for a replacement for the German "Argus", as a result, the first domestic aircraft engine RBVZ-6 appeared - as it’s fashionable to say - an unlicensed copy of a German Benz, and in two years 1916-1918 they built as many as 50 pieces.
            So, in theory, it was about the aviation industry - we could design a plane, we could build a glider, but we couldn’t equip it with an engine and equipment.
            1. tokens2
              tokens2 21 September 2014 22: 20
              -2
              Do not mislead people with interest,

              And what was the main reason for the war then?
              "Backwardness" and "decay" of Russia?
              By the way, the plans for the economy were on a grand scale, a "Stalinist" scale.
              And they still wonder what genius Gosplan was under Stalin. Yes, they licked all the royal plans!
              But the war began only then, in Europe, they sat down and calculated the near future of Russia. And they wept. Because of the defeat in the economy, there was a defeat in a possible war. And then the sunset of the idea of ​​Western civilization in general.
              The tsar had plans to move the economy with minimal military expenses. He had a plan in case of war. The plan as a whole was fulfilled. Germany was going to defeat.
              However, the Anglo-Saxons intervened, who also counted and wept (well, emigrants will not go to the USA, rather they will prefer to the Russian Empire for permanent residence after winning the Great War laughing )
              And they bought everyone and everything, promised sky-high gave. And naturally threw. No permanent residence was given ... such as Kerensky.
              1. gross kaput
                gross kaput 21 September 2014 23: 34
                0
                Quote: Lexi2
                And what was the main reason for the war then?

                not so much the increase in output of cars as a percentage ?! belay
                if you are responding to a post, then answer essentially, otherwise agitation-achingeya turns out.
                but in general the article is not about tsarism or Bolshevism, but about the AF and the branch is not historical-political, and anyway, how many trolls from the political sections immediately ran up.
          2. stoker
            stoker 22 September 2014 02: 19
            +2
            Quote: Stock Officer
            Mr. Stoker! Your comments are inspired by the experience of teaching scientific communism.


            Let's define ourselves somehow: either "Master" or "teacher of scientific communism".

            I really read all your posts with interest. In our free or involuntary dialogue, it is not opinions that clash, but beliefs. It is difficult to expect that they will change, so I propose that the discussion be curtailed.

            Sincerely.
            Stoker.
    4. Interface
      Interface 21 September 2014 18: 10
      0
      This weapon opened a new era in the small arms of the Russian army during the First World War. Do not happen in Russia February Revolution and the subsequent Bolshevik coup, rifle-automatic V.G. Fedorov would have received in strikes of infantry, aviation, navy and armored car units.


      Any anti-Soviet is either a mentally defective individual or a conscious enemy of the state.

      The author apparently forgot that in the tsarist Rassiyushka they did not produce light machine guns and machine guns, only Maxims. Fully imported Lewis and the party Madsenov.

      What are the n - th Fedorov automata ?! In the 1907 year, officers were allowed to acquire pistols at their own expense; they could not even supply the army even before the war.


      All these arguments about the "victorious Russian army" and the bastards of the Bolsheviks are the infantile fantasy of the Yedrosov imbeciles of the Young Guard from United Russia, as well as the Minister of Culture Medinsky, a latent anti-Soviet who is still a member of the "liberal club" of the United Russia.

      Liberty on the march, in short.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 21 September 2014 19: 57
        +1
        Quote: Interface
        in the royal Rassiyushka

        Ek, you are about Russia! Do not be ashamed to litter your homeland? Or is your homeland not Russia?
  2. igorspb
    igorspb 20 September 2014 08: 44
    +15
    I understand that the main thing in the article is to blame the Bolsheviks? Well ...
    1. igordok
      igordok 20 September 2014 13: 30
      +7
      In general, the article is good, but I don't like the arrivals of the revolution. The article is neither a plus nor a minus.
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 22 September 2014 19: 24
      0
      Quote: igorspb
      I understand that the main thing in the article is to blame the Bolsheviks? Well ...

      I hope you will not deny that the history of Russia did not begin in 1917?
  3. Alexander 1958
    Alexander 1958 20 September 2014 08: 45
    +12
    The article is interesting! A lot of factual material! But the author's message is rejected - "the Bolsheviks came and destroyed everything." Well, yes, they destroyed the old system and built a new one! After 20 years, this was the country that was able to defeat Hitler!
  4. Eggor
    Eggor 20 September 2014 08: 46
    +19
    3D Fedorov rifle mod. 1916 d. Complete disassembly

    1. predator.3
      predator.3 20 September 2014 09: 51
      +4
      Thanks for the shots!
    2. Duke
      Duke 20 September 2014 10: 50
      +4
      A unified system of machine guns and machine guns was developed by Fedorov.
    3. avt
      avt 20 September 2014 11: 08
      +7
      Quote: EgGor
      3D Fedorov rifle mod. 1916 d. Complete disassembly

      Quote: predator.3
      Thanks for the shots!

      Yes! Beautiful. The weapon is the pride of the Russian weapons school performed by Genius, ahead of time! By the way, I read his sayings that he did not replace the three-ruler. So really - the world's first assault machine!
    4. Rjn
      Rjn 20 September 2014 15: 40
      +2
      Yes, it’s beautiful and clear, but still, with any disassembly, the store disconnects first.
    5. saygon66
      saygon66 21 September 2014 15: 12
      0
      - It is similar to SCS .... The receiver cover is also separated. The location of the return spring ... The design of the shutter and the bolt frame ... Location of the fuse ..
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 21 September 2014 18: 47
        0
        AF bolt did not have.
        1. saygon66
          saygon66 21 September 2014 21: 45
          0
          - I do not say so! smile But some external resemblance ...
          1. saygon66
            saygon66 21 September 2014 22: 16
            0
            - By the way, in the video, the military video mentions that Simonov developed his first machine gun when he was familiar with Fedorov’s system ...
        2. gross kaput
          gross kaput 21 September 2014 23: 41
          0
          and SCS also does not have a frame, it has a shutter consisting of a stem and a skeleton
          1. saygon66
            saygon66 22 September 2014 13: 25
            0
            - L.E. Mikhailov. Designs of small automatic weapons. 1983. Part Number 9!
            1. gross kaput
              gross kaput 23 September 2014 10: 08
              +1
              You would have brought the picture from the Molotov’s passport to the OP-SCS - you’ll generally have a laugh there, open the NSD or the guide to the average SCS repair. They contain the racially correct names of the parts.
          2. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 22 September 2014 17: 37
            0
            The stem of the SCS is the leading link in automation. It was he who was affected by the plunger of the gas piston. In AF, the barrel interacted directly with the shutter during rollback.
            1. saygon66
              saygon66 22 September 2014 17: 55
              0
              - Looks like it's time to check the terminology! In Vick (not to be remembered for the night) I found out that the terms "bolt stem" and "bolt carrier" are the same thing. "Rama" as later.
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 24 September 2014 16: 27
                0
                It's time for you to verify UNDERSTANDING the operation of machines.
    6. doxtop
      doxtop 22 September 2014 13: 21
      +1
      Mda Complex system. However! I think if Fedorov were given time and resources, he would have brought her to an excellent state.
      He would simplify manufacturability, improve it, and mindful of the not unreasonable design mind ... in the future would create an excellent example of a weapon that could (if desired) be quickly transformed without firing problems by firing various cartridges!
      So it seems to me that Vladimir Grigorievich would have made the world's first "modular" system of small arms!
      History, as you know, does not like the subjunctive expression. Therefore, blessed memory of one of the galaxy of "first real" gunsmiths!
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 24 September 2014 16: 30
        0
        Alas. I personally doubt very much that the automation on a moving trunk is extremely capricious, plus there was, to put it mildly, no heaping.
    7. doxtop
      doxtop 22 September 2014 13: 25
      0
      By the way! About two years ago, I saw Fedorov's "machine gun" in action in a program about weapons. According to the initial sensations, the recoil is at the level of shooting from the AKM (AK-47), but the withdrawal is noticeably less! Apparently the mass of weapons in this case is a positive quality (remember at least the PPSh). )))
  5. gross kaput
    gross kaput 20 September 2014 08: 48
    +18
    The author of the story is better - Fedorov's "machine gun" was serially produced by the Bolshiviks at the Kovrov plant, although only about 3000 pieces were manufactured, and was in service with the 1st Proletarian Infantry Division (now ODON named after Dzerzhinsky) until 1928. And by the way, in Kovrov, with the Bolsheviks so hated by the author, Fedorov, on the basis of his rifle, created a family of weapons, including aircraft and tank machine guns, and also developed a theory of weapon unification - later embodied in the AK family.
    Well, about the first in the world - the question was closed by Fedorov himself, who in all his works calls his brainchild an automatic rifle. Well, as a remark - in 20-40 it was automatically machine guns in the USSR, quite officially, they were also called PPs, but because of this they do not become machine guns in the modern sense of the word.
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 20 September 2014 14: 20
      +8
      Quote: gross kaput
      Fedorov's "assault rifle" was serially produced at the Bolshiviks at the Kovrov plant, although only about 3000 units were manufactured, and was in service with the 1st Proletarian Infantry Division (now ODON named after Dzerzhinsky) until 1928.


      I wanted to write about it but you got ahead of me hi

      The author in the article repeatedly contradicts himself. Despite the good ballistics and rate of fire, Fedorov's "assault rifle" was not widely used, not because of the intrigues of the Bolsheviks, but because of the high cost, manufacturing complexity and not too high reliability.
      The remark is also not clear:
      Automation of the system was innovative: the action of reloading cartridges was based on the use of recoil energy in the short course of the barrel. Even today, such a principle of action of rifle automation remains in demand in the army and hunting systems.

      This type of automation at the beginning of the century was quite common, at present it is practically not used in modern systems.
  6. bunta
    bunta 20 September 2014 08: 49
    +3
    Many technical and historical errors. I will not put an assessment.
  7. aszzz888
    aszzz888 20 September 2014 09: 09
    +3
    In the first photo, the special forces are right.
    1. Eggor
      Eggor 20 September 2014 09: 14
      +9
      Quote: aszzz888
      In the first photo, the special forces are right.

      Winter 1939-1940 of the year, the Soviet-Finnish war.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Siberia 9444
        Siberia 9444 20 September 2014 09: 59
        +4
        And this is 1943 g difference on the face.
        1. Eggor
          Eggor 20 September 2014 10: 04
          +3
          Quote: Siberia 9444
          And this is 1943 g difference on the face.

          And behind the back of the fighters is the Fedorov-Degtyarev machine gun. Both for him received the title of Hero of Labor.
        2. Signaller
          Signaller 20 September 2014 14: 25
          -3
          Super shot. By the way, these are armor plates that are worn on them from a gun, if they hung on a hanger they made their way. But as for them, dressed in quilted jackets, she didn’t take the three-ruler either.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 20 September 2014 14: 31
            +6
            Quote: Signaller
            But as for them, dressed in quilted jackets, she didn’t take the three-ruler either.


            As for the "three-line", this is certainly an exaggeration, at least at real battle distances. I personally observed the holes in the side armor of the MT-LB remaining after the shelling from the PC (the same cartridge 7,62x54).
            1. 97110
              97110 20 September 2014 15: 44
              +1
              I didn’t see it myself, but some claimed that the armor of the armored personnel carrier was pierced from very close range by a smooth-bore 12-caliber rifle bullet by Rubeykin’s bullet. Their brains are not enough to assess this possibility. Who will say what?
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 20 September 2014 16: 16
                +3
                Quite possible. Especially if the cartridge with an enhanced charge. All the same, the energy of a 12-gauge gun is quite large, and the Rubeykin bullet chiseled from brass is a very hard metal.
                An article on this pool: http://www.ada.ru/guns/hunting/slugs/rubeykina/rub.htm
      3. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 20 September 2014 22: 40
        +3
        In the early thirties, Fedorov’s assault rifles were seized
        from the army due to lack of ammunition. So
        PPD was also seized as a "non-proletarian" weapon.
        But, faced with the Finnish Suomi, they returned again
        in the troops and the RPM and machine. And Arisakov’s cartridges
        our generously supplied Japan - the army under Hassan
        and Khalkhin-Gol!
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 21 September 2014 09: 06
          0
          As for the cartridges, you are not quite right. There were enough rounds. It was only a decision was made, and at that moment I think it’s right to leave only a three-line rifle and machine gun cartridge in service, having developed a heavy bullet for it. The armament was too colorful then.
          As for the submachine guns, you hit the sky with your finger. At that time, there was simply no intelligible concept of their application. And this applies not only to the USSR. With all the advantages of PP (simplicity, reliability, high density of fire), it has too small effective range. And this drawback is insurmountable. Yes, and their price, before the spread of stamping in their production, to put it mildly, was a little high. So all over the world they quite, fairly, were assigned an auxiliary role. By the way, the Finns M31 was used as an ersatz machine gun and only in very rough terrain was very effective.
    2. Normal
      Normal 20 September 2014 10: 07
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      In the first photo, the special forces are right.


      ENGINEERING OSNAZ - FOR SPECIAL TASKS
      Read more here
      topwar.ru/5982-finskim-volkam-ot-russkih-medvedey.html
    3. avt
      avt 20 September 2014 11: 10
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      In the first photo, the special forces are right.

      Quote: EgGor
      Winter 1939-1940 of the year, the Soviet-Finnish war.

      Yes . This is the special forces in the modern sense of the term.
    4. sso-xnumx
      sso-xnumx 20 September 2014 13: 38
      +3
      And this is special forces! To destroy bunkers and bunkers on the Mannerheim Line, students and engineers of construction specialties were selected from among the volunteers, and groups for the destruction of fort structures were organized together with intelligence units. Initially, they were armed with revolvers and grenades (with Mosinki, thank God, they immediately realized that they wouldn’t turn around in the bunker), but the revolvers did not justify themselves, there were not enough rounds and power. And one of the commanders remembered that in the warehouses of the Leningrad Military District, Fedorov's assault rifles and tuyeva heap of cartridges for them are stored. Here the guns turned out to be in place, and the rate of fire, and power, and more ammunition. After switching to AF, the commandos became more fun.
  8. Prikaz4ikov1992
    Prikaz4ikov1992 20 September 2014 09: 22
    -39
    Like the red-bellied ones, the farts caught fire.
    1. Azzzwer
      Azzzwer 20 September 2014 12: 27
      +5
      Quote: Prikaz4ikov1992
      Like the red-bellied ones, the farts caught fire.
      close your mouth, crawl out of the caches!
    2. An60
      An60 26 September 2014 18: 40
      0
      You, blue-eyed, have not been given a word.
  9. parusnik
    parusnik 20 September 2014 09: 28
    +1
    Fedorov’s rifle could be brought to armament and mass industrial production much earlier than its appearance in the army in early 1916 - early 1917. Back in 1909-1912 She successfully passed commission, training and military tests. however, the rifle got into industrial shops only in the middle of 1914...And then the Bolsheviks came and broke everything .. according to the author ...
    1. Eggor
      Eggor 20 September 2014 09: 43
      +3
      Quote: parusnik
      And then the Bolsheviks came and broke everything ... according to the author ...
      There is another version:
      It was 1918 year. At the plant, he was elected director (then this position was elected!) Degtyarev was appointed the head of the experimental workshop. The very next year, the machines were launched into mass production. In 1924, the team began to create a number of machine guns unified with a machine gun - manual, aviation, anti-aircraft, tank.
    2. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris 20 September 2014 10: 16
      0
      In 1912, the Fedorov rifle successfully passed field tests. A batch of 200 was ordered for military trials. Due to the outbreak of war, their production was suspended, Fedorov himself was sent abroad for weapons (this period is described in his book "In Search of Weapons"). Upon his return from foreign and front-line business trips, Fedorov made a decision to finalize this experimental batch. It’s about finishing! Not a single rifle, not a single machine gun was made from scratch. At the same time, the rifle was redesigned for the Japanese cartridge (plug-in chambers were made), and, based on the experience of his front-line missions, Fedorov created his own machine gun. It happened exactly in 1916. It was with this weapon that the company of the Izmailovsky regiment was armed.
      At the end of 1916 he was sent to the Kovrov plant, but then the February Revolution happened. And everyone immediately was not up to the machines.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 21 September 2014 20: 54
        0
        Quote: anomalocaris
        It was with these weapons that the company of the Izmailovsky regiment was armed.

        In 1916, the first Russian submachine guns appeared on the front — the 6,5 mm “Fedorov system“ light machine guns ”. They completely armed the “automatic company” of the 189th Izmail Infantry Regiment, operating on the Romanian front (3 officers, 138 lower ranks).
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 22 September 2014 15: 36
          0
          Can you read?
  10. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 20 September 2014 09: 36
    +2
    What a great example of small arms, it is a pity it has not been developed! 1916 and the tactical pen was already standing !! good
  11. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris 20 September 2014 09: 53
    +10
    Error on error. But the main mistake of the article lies in the premise that the AF could become the main individual weapon of the Russian army. Alas, with all due respect to V.G. Fedorov, his creation was too complex and technologically, and in operation and its operational reliability left much to be desired. The Russian industry "which we have lost" was simply not able to master its mass production, and army soldiers, simply due to lack of education, were not able to master its operation (by the way, this was largely repeated almost 30 years later with SVT-40 ).
    1. avt
      avt 20 September 2014 11: 12
      +4
      Quote: anomalocaris
      But the main mistake of the article lies in the premise that AF could become the main individual weapon of the Russian army. Alas, with all due respect to V.G. Fedorov, his creation was too complicated and technologically advanced, and in operation and its operational reliability left much to be desired.

      Well, he himself didn’t even say, and did not write in his books that this is a replacement for the three-ruler!
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 20 September 2014 11: 48
        0
        Well, so I wrote in my post about the article. Or didn’t you bother to read the article?
    2. tokens2
      tokens2 20 September 2014 11: 47
      -1
      Alas, with all due respect to V.G. Fedorov, his creation was too complex and technologically, and in operation and its operational reliability left much to be desired. The Russian industry "which we have lost" was simply not able to master its mass production, and army soldiers, simply due to lack of education, were not able to master its operation

      Fedorov's assault rifle did not have to be massive. This is a weapon of the "Brusilov breakthrough" of those years, and not a three-line soldier-comfrey with severe requirements for the reliability of a calendar year.
      A shaft of fire was created to break into defense on narrow sections of the front, and for this, millions of people who passed educational educational program were not needed.
      A weapon that could very well save the Empire when used properly.
      SVT-40 ... What educational program did not help?
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 20 September 2014 11: 54
        +2
        Hmm ... Hard case.
        Well, then the question is: how many AF units are needed to "break into the defense on a narrow sector of the front" and how, in your opinion, is this break-in carried out?
        1. tokens2
          tokens2 20 September 2014 12: 22
          0
          Hmm ... Hard case.
          Well, then the question is: how many AF units are needed to "break into the defense on a narrow sector of the front" and how, in your opinion, is this break-in carried out?

          Hmm ... then there were no tanks. Yes, and with artillery everything was not smooth.
          How much and what was in the Austro-Hungarian, German, Russian divisions is publicly available. To attack with such a ratio generally made no sense. Quantitative superiority only sharply increased the losses. Anyway, we needed "quality growth" from each attacker. And his weapons. Otherwise, mountains corpses, tears and screams in the rear, and then the revolution.
          1. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 20 September 2014 13: 27
            +2
            The defense in depth from the time of the Boer and Russo-Japanese wars was cracked in only one way - by massive artillery fire of all kinds and bombing attacks by aircraft. All. There were no other ways, no, and they are unlikely to appear. The role of small arms in hacking defense is deeply secondary. But after the infantry breaks into enemy trenches and the cleansing begins, its role increases many times over.
            To carry out the Brusilovsky breakthrough, almost all of the gun barrels that were possible were concentrated in several sections of the front, as well as huge stockpiles of ammunition.
            Z. And you did not answer my question.
            1. tokens2
              tokens2 20 September 2014 14: 31
              0
              The defense in depth from the time of the Boer and Russo-Japanese wars was cracked in only one way - by massive artillery fire of all kinds and aviation bombing.

              Boer war? give an example of air strikes. With hacking laughingwhat is there. And Russian-Japanese.
              Aviation began to break and crack only in WWII, and before that, reconnaissance. Which is not enough.
              Artillery, the god of war, is right. Russia had little heavy artillery. And the first salvo ... was always with the risk ... of getting a "response" from long-range guns, which were beyond the reach of Russian artillery fire. This means that the advancing infantry must constantly push the enemy. Any lag and stagnation ... threatens with the loss of artillery support from the enemy's artillery fire.
              The role of small arms in hacking defense is deeply secondary. But after the infantry breaks into enemy trenches and begins cleansing, its role increases many times over.

              And before the trench? Only hurray? On the western front, the Germans dug such "catacombs" ... with a friendly crawl during the attack.
              All the same, the defense in the west and in the east was different. Like the offensive.
              1. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 20 September 2014 14: 50
                0
                I would like to see how you will push the bunker with an easel machine gun.
                One more question: what was the difference between the defense of the Austro-Hungarian and German troops in the east from that in the west?
                Although whom am I asking? You didn’t answer my first question in view of your ignorance, you won’t answer this moreover.
                My advice to you, stop carrying nonsense.
                1. tokens2
                  tokens2 20 September 2014 15: 07
                  -1
                  I would like to see how you will push the bunker with an easel machine gun.

                  Apparently there was only hope
                  aviation bombing.

                  from your words.
                  What nonsense are you talking about?
                  Are you talking about PMA? After the bombing strikes of aviation, breaking everything and everyone. As well as the Anglo-Boer War, after which, apparently, "attack aircraft" appeared ... the meaning of discussing assault rifles and "attack aircraft" is lost. hi
                  1. anomalocaris
                    anomalocaris 20 September 2014 16: 06
                    0
                    You were asked specific questions; you did not bother to answer them. The phrase to which you are attached, because there is nothing more attached, is almost a verbatim quote from the charter.
                    The first massive aerial bombardment was carried out 165 years ago. On August 20-21, 1849, Austrian balloonists bombed Venice. And in the second half of the WWII, heavy bombers and attack aircraft existed, which were used by thousands of both sides.
                    Learn the mat part, baby.
                    1. tokens2
                      tokens2 20 September 2014 16: 39
                      0
                      Learn the mat part, baby.

                      You can’t find fault here. Politeness is not your hobby.
                      The phrase to which you are attached, because there is nothing more attached, is almost a verbatim quote from the charter.

                      Are you scribbling sms? You need to think before you write.
                      The first massive aerial bombardment was carried out 165 years ago. August 20-21, 1849 ........

                      amusing-amusing. Also apparently almost literal quote wassat crying
                      there was no full-fledged assault from the air in PMV. You can answer for yourself why.
                      In addition, Russia did not have a large number of airplanes, and even more so such charters.
      2. 97110
        97110 20 September 2014 15: 52
        0
        Quote: Lexi2
        A weapon that could very well save the Empire when used properly.
        What to save from? From the colonel, God's mercy (here is the answer to the experts on constitutional theories about the people and tsarism) ... Or from the cursed Bolsheviks? Half of the article is devoted to the difficulties Fedorov overcame by the grace of the organizational structure of management. Nothing could save the Empire, it rotted and fell. Since the empire was Great, then gurgled be healthy.
        1. tokens2
          tokens2 20 September 2014 16: 11
          -1
          What to save from?

          From trench warfare - the harbingers of revolution. A bloody and long war is needed only by arms magnates. As well as politicians looking far beyond the "horizon" ala Lenin. Too far.
          Or from the sworn Bolsheviks?

          Including from such figures as Trotsky.
          Well, the Tsar did not create a detachment. It is a pity. Although the guard was.
      3. Victor-cort
        Victor-cort 21 September 2014 01: 54
        0
        Quote: Lexi2
        Fedorov's assault rifle did not have to be massive. This is a weapon of the "Brusilov breakthrough" of those years, and not a three-line soldier-comfrey with severe requirements for the reliability of a calendar year.
        A shaft of fire was created to break into defense on narrow sections of the front, and for this, millions of people who passed educational educational program were not needed.
        A weapon that could very well save the Empire when used properly.
        SVT-40 ... What educational program did not help?

        You are completely wrong. The machine for that time was simply unnecessary, there was no tactics of application nor understanding its necessity (this is not only about Russia). Conditions for understanding by the military WHY need a machine gun, appeared only after the mass introduction of machine guns. Moreover, it is light machine guns with tape power. At that time, even the existence of such machine guns was not recognized by all military as necessary. The need for unified machine guns reached the world only after WWII (the Germans explained to everyone why they were needed for four years), our military STG showed what the machine should be like and how it should be used, and only the AK showed its world WHY the machine needed laughing so the story is long.
        And by the way, Fedorov is far from the first, he came up with his machine gun strongly under the influence of French and American systems, which were already used to clean trenches.
        1. tokens2
          tokens2 21 September 2014 08: 28
          0
          You are completely wrong. The machine for that time was simply unnecessary,

          The dispute of rate of fire and accuracy is long-standing. It was from this dispute that the German Empire appeared.
          A large-capacity replacement store was needed for sure.
          Ato ponimash called on a lot of people because of the mosquito and then received a civilian. And this despite the fact that the German did not even think of tearing to Moscow in WWI.
          Could not master in production? And not to replace the spear-mosin laughing Well then, it wasn’t x ...
          1. Victor-cort
            Victor-cort 21 September 2014 14: 02
            0
            Quote: Lexi2
            Could not master in production?

            Before the revolution, Russia was an agrarian country with very crap industry, and in the 20s and 30s the industry of the USSR was even worse (revolution after all) and at least somehow they could correct (but not completely) it only by the 1960s. So yes - they could not master. And most importantly, they simply couldn’t use it normally (as it happened with SVT, it is certainly not a gift, but its reputation has suffered much more from improper use), which seems simple and clear to us, then nobody knew. And the same World War I, in terms of tactics, turned out to be a big surprise for many military men.
    3. An60
      An60 26 September 2014 18: 43
      0
      Well, if the author persistently calls Mikhail (Aleksandrovich) Alexander Mikhailovich ... The photo is correctly written.
  12. bunta
    bunta 20 September 2014 10: 17
    +3
    Quote: Siberia 9444
    tactical pen was already standing

    This is not a "tactical" pen. Can you really imagine a grip for such a handle? The wrist rests against the magazine and the latch. This is a wrist rest with a normal hand grip. The hand rests on the edge of the palm. In addition, additional protection of the magazine latch from accidental hits on it.
    Those Romanians really made a "handle" to the AK. For this, MTC spoke contemptuously about them. In general, from the point of view of usefulness, "tactical" grips are the most useless part in a weapon.
    1. Siberia 9444
      Siberia 9444 20 September 2014 10: 36
      +1
      Perhaps you are right about the Fedorov assault rifle but the fact that a tactical hilt is a useless thing I want to disagree with you if the battle is in urban conditions, it is better to look at the target from the corners and destroy it much more conveniently. (the hand does not turn out and it is convenient to fight both with the left and right hands) hi

      We have specialists on the site hunting to listen to their opinion.
      1. Massik
        Massik 21 September 2014 17: 50
        0
        Purely urban adaptation, it is convenient to walk up the stairs with it. When you have to bend your back, you often need an extra lever very helpful.
        For fields and forests, a small triangular shape is better.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  13. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 20 September 2014 10: 29
    +2
    Very difficult to manufacture and probably to maintain a weapon. It is surprising that he was released in such quantities in the conditions of war.
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris 20 September 2014 10: 52
      +2
      During the war, released only two hundred pieces. See my comment above.
  14. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 20 September 2014 11: 06
    +1
    And we have a legend that when Antikainen's comrades went to disperse the Finnish puppet state in Ukhta, his squad was "head over heels" equipped with automatic weapons, including Fedorov assault rifles. laughing
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris 20 September 2014 11: 12
      +2
      Head over heels, not head over heels, but AF in the war against the White Finns (in fact, with rather rabid nationalists) was quite actively used.
  15. svp67
    svp67 20 September 2014 12: 01
    +2
    Do not happen in Russia the February Revolution and the subsequent Bolshevik coup, the automatic rifle V.G. Fedorov in droves would receive shock infantry, aviation, navy and armored units.
    In which there are HUGE doubts. At that time, the Russian industry could not fully provide the active army with a simpler Mosin rifle, and the War Ministry was forced to buy rifles all over the world, and here a completely new sample, more difficult to manufacture, and even under a "foreign" cartridge.
  16. Bosk
    Bosk 20 September 2014 12: 26
    +1
    There is a version that the word "Automatic" in relation to assault rifles belongs to Lieutenant General N. M. Filatov.
  17. bbss
    bbss 20 September 2014 14: 10
    +5
    The author raised an interesting topic, but could not reveal it. The blame for the poor introduction of the automatic rifle was laid on the Bolsheviks, and not on the degraded tsarist regime. It seems that the article for "Rain" has been written. He began for his health, and ended up as Bolsheviks. However, this model had no prospects. In addition to the design, which still needed to be adjusted, there was another colossal flaw, namely the "alien cartridge". There can be no question of any mass character on these ammunition. At that time, the military industry could support the production of only the main ammunition - the Russian three-line cartridge. Nobody belittles the role of Fedorov's "automaton". He was the first of the gunsmiths to implement in serial weapons the principles that underlie many modern models of automatic weapons.
    But the author knows the story poorly. Or worse, trying to distort the facts.
    1. tokens2
      tokens2 20 September 2014 15: 29
      -2
      The author raised an interesting topic, but could not reveal. The blame for the poor introduction of an automatic rifle laid on the Bolsheviks, and not on the degraded tsarist regime.

      Yes ... it’s a pity that the guards weren’t armed with this assault rifle! And the generals are guilty of that! But rather it’s a betrayal.
      But who interfered with the USSR by 1941? to have shock parts with predominantly automatic weapons? We realized ... and began to rivet individual battalions of machine gunners.
      On whom do you blame? On the degraded ...
      Or maybe the tsarist traitors general arranged a trench war laughing .A lot of all kinds of agitators were in those trenches.
      1. Pissarro
        Pissarro 20 September 2014 16: 58
        +1
        I also used to think why, in addition to Brusilov, other front-line commanders thwarted the offensive, complaining about unavailability, were they not traitors. Or maybe they didn’t see the point in frontal attacks with half a million corpses of their soldiers, for the comfort of allies. At the same Brusilov, one of the prices for the victory was the total death of the throne support - the guard. If the guard were not buried in the marshes of Stokhod, but in the capital, hell would riots and coups succeed there.
        1. tokens2
          tokens2 20 September 2014 17: 58
          0
          At the same Brusilov, one of the prices for the victory was the total death of the throne support - the guard.

          With all due respect to Brusilov ... I think he understood that the guards could greatly interfere with "disagreements".
          So the "high price" I think was not justified. Well, I will not argue that.
          The Germans also threw the guards into the "fire".
      2. Assistant
        Assistant 20 September 2014 22: 05
        +3
        But who interfered with the USSR by 1941? to have shock parts with predominantly automatic weapons? We realized ... and began to rivet individual battalions of machine gunners.


        Take a trip to the museum of the Brest Fortress - of the presented copies of the found Soviet weapons, the most are SVT, in second place are the RPM, and the three lines are no more than machine guns.
        They were going to transfer not only the shock parts, but the entire Red Army from a three-ruler to a semi-automatic rifle, and to give mobile units quick-fire submachine guns. The war prevented, I had to leave the three-ruler, and the submachine gun was actually the second main individual weapon. But after the war the idea was realized: the three-ruler, which was riveted by millions, was replaced by SKS and AK as the main individual weapon.
        1. tokens2
          tokens2 20 September 2014 23: 06
          0
          The war prevented, I had to leave the three-ruler, and the submachine gun was actually the second main individual weapon.

          This is called-chasing two rabbits ...
          And the release was rather big, more than 1 million pieces.
          Yes, the USSR had planned a lot of things. But in the end, again, I stayed with a mosinka, for there was no better. Although 1 million ... units are not such a small figure.
          The question is where was this million bully concentrated.
          Glory to the hero city of Brest. Maybe I will visit there again.
    2. gross kaput
      gross kaput 20 September 2014 17: 35
      0
      Quote: bbss
      He was the first of the gunsmiths to implement the principles in serial weapons that underlie many modern types of automatic weapons.

      For instance? which ones? Automatic / self-loading rifle? - Duc it was already implemented before him - the first Mondragon rifle adopted for service - already in 1909, an intermediate cartridge? Duc there it does not smell, Fedorovsky 6,5 cartridge is quite comparable with rifle Arisakovsky in power and in length it will also be larger, which ultimately made it possible to remake 1916 rifles for it by simply inserting the sleeve into the chamber. By the application concept? Duc was not it for AF at the time it was properly developed. And the main "witness" is Fedorov himself - who in all his works calls his "machine gun" an automatic rifle, and he became "the first in the world" after the adoption of the AK. Well, in fairness, the first, in the modern sense of the machine, was the Ribeirol automatic carbine of 1918. under a completely intermediate cartridge 8X35, then in 20-30xx with designs for quite intermediate ammunition, the Belgians, Danes, Swiss experimented, the Germans began similar research in 1935. and in the end, they were the first to adopt a full-fledged machine gun as the main infantry weapon.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 20 September 2014 18: 20
        +1
        Belgians, Danes, Swiss, Germans

        Forgot to mention Italians, Czechs and Americans. In the 20-30s, only the lazy did not deal with the intermediate cartridge, and we also noted the same, although there are not enough materials except for mentions. That's just the overstocking of warehouses, and the economic crisis put a fat cross on all this.
        Fedorov himself called his assault rifle a "machine gun". That is, the most lightweight light machine gun, adapted for aimed shooting on the move. Agree, from the same Lewis to shoot aimingly from a standing position (precisely aiming, not directed), to put it mildly, is difficult. In tactical terms, it was assumed that this unit would be a support weapon for a group of 3-4 fighters. This is how the French Mle1915 and the American BAR were used. Our PKK occupies the same niche.
        1. gross kaput
          gross kaput 20 September 2014 19: 06
          0
          Quote: anomalocaris
          Fedorov himself called his submachine gun a "machine gun". That is, the most lightweight light machine gun,

          Everything is somewhat different, in the Republic of Ingushetia there was no such thing as a "light machine gun"; there were machine guns proper - that is, in our understanding, easel, turret, aviation - Maksims and Colts-potato-diggers and there were "machine guns" - in a modern manner, these are the handbrakes - Madsen, Lewis, Shoshi. Further, if you carefully reread Fedorov's "Evolution of Small Arms" 1939 ed. then there you can see such an interesting thing - in the chapter devoted to the end of WWII, the term "machine gun" periodically flashes, but Fedorov applies it to a too wide range of weapons, so there are mondragon and Mauser rifles and much more, and he even names his products in one paragraph then a small-caliber automatic rifle, then a light machine gun, then an automatic rifle. But in the final paragraph of this chapter, he puts everything in its place - "automatic" he calls an automatic rifle with a large magazine capacity (20-25 rounds).
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 20 September 2014 20: 32
            0
            Sorry, misspelled not WWII but PMV
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 21 September 2014 11: 56
          0
          Quote: anomalocaris
          Fedorov himself called his machine gun a "machine gun"

          It was just that they had not yet come up with a name for this class of weapon, such concepts as "machine gun" or "assault rifle" appeared much later.
  18. EvilLion
    EvilLion 20 September 2014 14: 12
    +1
    What the hell is a revolution? author -> author -> author or another -sovetophobe, or simply does not own the question. It was under the Bolsheviks that the Fedorov assault rifle, after the dispersal of the "effective owners", was produced in a series of 2000+ pieces in the same way as many other types of weapons that tsarist Russia could not provide its army with even a quarter of what it needed.
  19. Signaller
    Signaller 20 September 2014 14: 34
    +1
    We can argue a lot here. Need-not, need-not. Actually, the armament of the army has such a fad as the price of weapons. Mosin's three-ruler for 40 years cost 6 rubles in production. PPD because of this did not begin to put in mass production-expensive-80 rudders .. PCA came out cheaper. And they riveted them during the Second World War at the price of 40-30 rubles, but the three-ruler cost 6 rubles. Here the question still arises. Of the three-ruler, you can shoot accurately and a corpse once. But from PPSh, yes, 300 meters is not a fact. Here and the price of ammunition, ammunition overrun. and any other entity. In short, why kill several times when you can get by with one shot if the fighter is properly prepared.
    1. Severok
      Severok 20 September 2014 15: 10
      +3
      Friendly, actually there is still the concept of tactical expediency of weapons. During the Second World War, the three-ruler became a weapon of positional combat, while PPS, PPSh and RPD were weapons of offensive combat. Do you, in general, imagine a fight in a trench with Mosinka in your hands?
      1. Assistant
        Assistant 20 September 2014 22: 09
        0
        Do you, in general, imagine a fight in a trench with Mosinka in your hands?


        Hand-to-hand combat. The fore-end form, the English box and the tetrahedral bayonet seem to hint.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 21 September 2014 01: 24
        0
        A great spear, actually.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 21 September 2014 01: 26
      0
      The cost of the three-ruler 90 rub. Those pre-war rubles. CBT cost 1000 +. PPSh I do not remember, but pennies. The release of three-rulers still exceeded the release of submachine guns.
  20. Severok
    Severok 20 September 2014 15: 07
    +2
    An excellent article and a shameful ending with another attempt to "stigmatize" those who did not want to bend their necks to world capital. Why does not the author condemn the current bureaucracy and double standards from the USA? Why did the author sensibly repost information about Fedorov's rifle and so nasally unsubscribe from himself?
    What for?
  21. Denimax
    Denimax 20 September 2014 20: 35
    +1
    Quote: Signaller
    PCA came out cheaper. And they riveted them during the Second World War at the price of 40-30 rubles, but the three-ruler cost 6 rubles.

    Strange rates. PP in theory is simpler and should be cheaper. I remember the Uzi army, there in the receiver there is only a bolt-block and a return spring, and a barrel. On the shutter a separate part is only a spring-loaded grip for the sleeve. PP can be made from pieces of finished steel for stamping.
    1. Victor-cort
      Victor-cort 21 September 2014 02: 16
      +2
      Quote: Denimax
      Strange rates. PP in theory is simpler and should be cheaper. I remember the Uzi army, there in the receiver there is only a bolt-block and a return spring, and a barrel. On the shutter a separate part is only a spring-loaded grip for the sleeve. PP can be made from pieces of finished steel for stamping.

      You greatly confuse the software of the 80s and the software of the 30s of the release. At the time of its appearance, PCs were even more expensive than machine guns, there are milling and turning everywhere. As far as I remember, PPSh became cheaper than PD. The introduction of stamping and welding is WWII and after it.
      1. saygon66
        saygon66 21 September 2014 15: 27
        0
        - Steyr-Soloturn?
  22. Ishinomaki lie
    Ishinomaki lie 20 September 2014 22: 55
    -2
    (Assistant BY  Today, 22:09 PM ↑
    Do you, in general, imagine a fight in a trench with Mosinka in your hands?
    Saw. I saw it in the movies. Really so bayonets work.
  23. Victor-cort
    Victor-cort 21 September 2014 02: 22
    +1
    Almost AK .... 1908 laughing
    1. bunta
      bunta 21 September 2014 08: 58
      0
      What kind of apparatus?
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 21 September 2014 09: 20
        0
        Remington model 8. In the police version. But this is after the WWI and its motives. By the way, yes, this unit shot quite an intermediate cartridge (according to modern classification), but did not have an automatic fire mode
        1. bunta
          bunta 21 September 2014 10: 19
          0
          Short stroke. The rifle neck of the butt. The charm. One word Browning!
          1. anomalocaris
            anomalocaris 21 September 2014 12: 24
            +1
            The move is just long. Locking the bore - by turning the shutter.
            1. bunta
              bunta 21 September 2014 18: 04
              0
              Indeed: "The Remington Model 8 rifle is long recoil-operated and uses a rotating bolt head."
              Fuck you bet.
            2. The comment was deleted.
  24. Ols76
    Ols76 21 September 2014 05: 23
    0
    Fedorov rifle arr. 1916 in the context.
  25. Ols76
    Ols76 21 September 2014 05: 24
    0
    Quote: Ols76
    Fedorov rifle arr. 1916 in the context.
    1. saygon66
      saygon66 21 September 2014 15: 29
      0
      -Interesting feeder spring ... Why refused in favor of twisted wire ...?
      1. -Dmitry-
        -Dmitry- 22 September 2014 03: 35
        0
        Uh, and in which stores are coil springs ????
        1. saygon66
          saygon66 22 September 2014 13: 52
          0
          - The most widely used cylindrical coil compression springs made of round steel wire ... can be conical, barrel-shaped or in the shape of a prism. The springs of AK and PM stores, although they have a specific winding profile, belong to this species ... No? smile
      2. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 24 September 2014 16: 42
        0
        Ordinary, lamellar, riveted.
        Everything is outrageously simple, well, there was no normal spring steel then. There was nothing to wire the wire from. That is why the DP had a "pancake", BREN and "Chatellerault" - a store on top ...
  26. air wolf
    air wolf 21 September 2014 09: 21
    +2
    If at that time we had not taken into account the costs and accepted a cartridge of 20 mm in 30-6.5 years, then we would have been ahead of the planet for 50-70 years. And if an intermediate cartridge were made on the basis of it, then the world might have been a little different! And 5,45x39 would not be needed.
    1. Victor-cort
      Victor-cort 21 September 2014 14: 08
      0
      Quote: air wolf
      If at that time we had not taken into account the costs and accepted a cartridge of 20 mm in 30-6.5 years, then we would have been ahead of the planet for 50-70 years. And if an intermediate cartridge were made on the basis of it, then the world might have been a little different! And 5,45x39 would not be needed.

      as if all countries that had adopted a cartridge of caliber 6.5 mm from it, according to the results of operation, refused, and this was not without reason.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 21 September 2014 18: 46
        0
        We put not all and not completely refused.
      2. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 September 2014 21: 53
        0
        One of the reasons for abandoning 6,5 is not possible, at that point in time, to mass-produce special bullets (tracers, sighting, etc.)
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 22 September 2014 17: 31
          0
          This is just the tip of the iceberg.
          Small caliber cartridges have a very large Achilles heel, which is usually not mentioned. This is the power limit. Cartridges of caliber 6,5 had an energy of about 2500-2700J, while 7-8mm cartridges gave an energy of about 3200-3800J. Why so? And so it came and flows from the maximum pressure in the trunk. It is 320-360MPa. That's all.
          As you know, acceleration is directly proportional to the force acting on the body and inversely proportional to the mass of this body. The force acting on the bullet is defined as the product of the pressure difference by the cross-sectional area of ​​the bullet. Pressure is limited by the strength characteristics of the barrel, the area - by caliber. Accordingly, in order to increase the energy of a bullet, at the maximum allowable pressure, you can only increase the caliber.
      3. goose
        goose 24 September 2014 11: 28
        0
        but still, following WWII results, 80% of manpower was killed by mortars. So we invented the successful 82 and 120-mm mortars before the war - the main thing was done, and the rest, even the three-ruler of the time of the king of peas, could be pulled out + a maxim machine gun. If we take it big. The offensive power of assault rifles and assault rifles compared to heavy weapons and minuscule machine guns. But in defense, it’s not a fact that an assault rifle and PR are better than an ordinary store.
        1. anomalocaris
          anomalocaris 24 September 2014 15: 51
          0
          Well, well ... You are very mistaken in this matter.
      4. The comment was deleted.
  27. Babalaykin
    Babalaykin 21 September 2014 12: 15
    +1
    Previously, the article was more complete. It specifically indicated that Fedorov had developed a cartridge-weapon complex. But due to the lack of the possibility of setting up the production of this cartridge, he was forced to rework the machine under the cartridge from Arisaki. Which slightly reduced his fighting qualities.
  28. Gagarin
    Gagarin 21 September 2014 16: 36
    +1
    Here is a man who can save history for posterity
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. Gagarin
    Gagarin 21 September 2014 16: 38
    +1
    Photo of his replica
  31. The comment was deleted.
  32. The comment was deleted.
  33. Gagarin
    Gagarin 21 September 2014 16: 49
    0
    However, weigh! I didn’t know what was already for AK, sort of like a carbide rod.
    7,62X39 Expansive armor piercing.
  34. andrew42
    andrew42 21 September 2014 18: 35
    +2
    Nostalgic article. AF-yes, a grand breakthrough. And the technological base of production? - Did not have! It took at least another 6 years at the then pace of industrialization and management in order to at least provide a division with automatic weapons. But these peaceful years were not. Appatron starvation, starting with the defeat of Samsonov’s 2nd army, a couple of dozen assault rifles is clearly not relevant. The trial of the article, and so much was done during the war. It's like a time machine: well, for example, a couple of dozen lads with assault rifles and a portable ammunition arrived under Tsaritsyn. Well, the commotion can be done, perhaps even a single battle can be pulled to your advantage. And further? It was not even possible to provide Winter Guard when the people had a mess in their heads. Fyodorov’s machine gun didn’t save Russia, and he couldn’t save it. Just a conceptual breakthrough by which you can nostalgic, no more. By the way, even the Wehrmacht in the mass began WWII with a rifle.
  35. Barboskin
    Barboskin 21 September 2014 20: 11
    -1
    What does the Bolsheviks have to do with it? After they came to power, they tried to produce this machine gun, but it was very expensive and did not have a domestic cartridge.
    I believe that instead of the assault rifles, the tsarist military department should have ordered a light machine gun. To the extreme, copy Lewis or Shosh. However, the then government was a match for the owner of the Russian land. We were engaged in stupid searchlights, which the experimental party could make a splash, but were not suitable for mass weapons.
    1. Denimax
      Denimax 21 September 2014 20: 46
      0
      Just not Shosh. It was the worst light machine gun in history. You can find the video and evaluate its rate of fire, similar to a quick single fire.
      1. Victor-cort
        Victor-cort 23 September 2014 02: 33
        +1
        Quote: Denimax
        Just not Shosh. It was the worst light machine gun in history. You can find the video and evaluate its rate of fire, similar to a quick single fire.

        A dark story came out with shosh, as proof - shosh issued after the WWII were quite reliable. And if you remove the problems with reliability, then as a machine gun level separation shosh had no equal, not least at the price of manufacture. There is only one problem - for those times, one machine gun for separation is heresy laughing
    2. bunta
      bunta 21 September 2014 22: 28
      0
      For Shosh minus.
      1. Barboskin
        Barboskin 26 September 2014 10: 07
        0
        Regarding Shosh, there is a proverb, for lack of a cook with a cook they sleep. Better a bad machine gun than nothing.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  36. sky diver
    sky diver 21 September 2014 20: 39
    +1
    The article did not fully cover the topic of AF. I think it was better to work with the documents. And then write. Damp.
  37. Alexander
    Alexander 21 September 2014 23: 40
    +2
    If it weren’t, if it weren’t! History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood! You don’t have to go far for an example of the corruption of the tsar’s defense industry - the deal to buy the Chilean armadillos that failed because of the greed of the officials. And they oh how would have come in handy under Tsushima. Therefore, it is not necessary to shift the revolution or anyone else - no one knows how the first World War would end without a revolution, there would be a Second World War, and then tsarist Russia would resist.
  38. -Dmitry-
    -Dmitry- 22 September 2014 03: 32
    +1
    How many here, however, are indignant about the "bastards" Bolsheviks ... And it's okay that these "bastards" Bolsheviks raised the country, your parents, grandfathers, taught, and you yourself were taught, treated by someone? Is it not the hated "regime"?
  39. anip
    anip 22 September 2014 05: 18
    0
    Error in the prefix: "no-" and "no-"
    The prefix "no-" - if the root begins with a voiced consonant
    The prefix "bes-" - if the root begins with a voiceless consonant
    In this case - "beСflanged.
    ..
    If you are writing articles, then write in Russian and competently.
  40. goose
    goose 22 September 2014 15: 54
    0
    Quote: RUSNAC
    This refers to the PPD-34, the release of which was suspended due to design flaws.

    If you do not look at the effectiveness of the design, any experimental small series will have a crazy cost, because everything will be written off to it, and manual assembly and R&D as well.
  41. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 22 September 2014 17: 30
    0
    Yes, an excellent weapon ahead of its time.
    1. tokens2
      tokens2 23 September 2014 19: 39
      0
      Yes, an excellent weapon ahead of its time.

      There are no weapons ahead of time ... not at all.
      There are people stuck in time intervals laughing
      Who wants to constantly change the charters and terms of reference in production.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris 24 September 2014 16: 49
        -1
        And it's also hard to be a jerk ...
        Baby, charters, and those assignments CHANGE according to time and place.
  42. sds127
    sds127 30 October 2015 23: 57
    0
    read comments it was more interesting than article