Myth-making continues, or V.V. Pluzhnikov’s “Rover”

43
On the pages of VO it has been noted more than once that the myth-making in stories the thing is harmful and dangerous, that you should not underestimate anything, but you shouldn’t exaggerate either. That we have a glorious enough story without convincing it, that it is not our fault, that we don’t have enough sources for many events, there are no details, but our history doesn’t get worse without them. Well, there are few details in the annals about the “Ice Battle”, but one phrase in the “Livonian Rhymed Chronicle” completely redeems their absence: “Prince Alexander was glad that he won!” And what more do you need? The enemies themselves admit that victory was on our side, well, let's be happy with that! And how many frank absurdities in the description of the Kulikovo battle? But we won? We won! How did your life end Mamai known? Known! Well, that's fine ...

Myth-making continues, or V.V. Pluzhnikov’s “Rover”

Here it is, A.A. Porokhovschikov: sitting in his "tank", And next is the general in charge of the test.




But it would seem that it’s easier to write about the times from us which are not so remote: I went to the archive, I ordered the right things, I looked and ... speak on this basis in print, indicating the number of cases and pages. It is possible to quote them literally, it will be only better. But no, even today there are people who continue to replicate the myths, so it remains only to wonder - why are they doing this?

I hold in my hands the next 5-th issue of the magazine "Technology-Youth" dedicated to the Victory Day. It has the “Club of OK” section, and in it there is an article by Vladimir Pluzhnikov with the author’s drawings “Do not go into the canister”, dedicated to ... yes, all the same tank by A.A. Porokhovshchikova! What can be opposed to this? Nothing! On the pages of VO about him there were materials and more than once, so why not write about him and the popular magazine TM? Another thing ... how and what to write, and this is what I want to talk about again. About this “tank” there is a whole article on Wikipedia, there are many articles on Yandex and Google, including mine, as well as articles by other authors. You can look, compare, be interested in the mismatch of interpretations and information blocks and ... conduct your own, albeit small, research - so who is right after all? Those who claim that it was a “miracle of Russian technical thought,” which was ahead of its time and was lost by the inertness of worthless tsarist military experts, or ... “an invention without a future,” raw and completely unrealizable, but capable of affecting weak minds.

And how did V. Pluzhinikov act in this case? Even no need to guess! I chose the first version and ... printed it, even without even thinking about it, which replicates absurdities all over the country. What kind? But: “On an average run, the tank overcame a ditch wide on top of 3 m and a depth of about ¾ m, with steep slopes about 40 degrees”. Well, the question immediately arises: how did the machine with a length of 3,6 m overcome a ditch wide in 3 m? What's this? "Batmobile" with wings?

Then a completely “patriotic” attack in the spirit of the day against the West (just like in the 1948 books): “... armament in a rotating turret (which was not the case in the first foreign tanks)”. But ... there was no tower on ATV! Well, the fact that he “provided for it”, because the Englishmen also “envisaged” the towers on their tanks ... There is even a photo. And what does V. Pluzhnikov not know about? Or on the contrary, he knows, but he tries to write “in the spirit of the day”?
Further - more interesting. "In order not to hold back the tests ... the body of the machine was first made of wood, initially without the tower and weapons." And next: “Armor protection was made up of cemented and hardened thin sheets. To soften the bullet blows sheets divided soft pads. Initially, individual sheets of armor were tested, then an “armored box” (body) was made. Putting it on the chassis of a car, they were tested for impenetrability by bullets and overall rigidity. ”


Armored "Ford" Porokhovshchikov.


Understand what is at stake? Not really, huh? Well, this is one of the methods of myth-making: to write in such a way as to create an impression. And it was created: that the body of the Rover was made of armor! In fact, the armor proposed by A.A. Porokhovshchikov had nothing to do with the body of the Rover (but it is not clear from the text of this!). She stood on the car (there is a photo!) In the form of flat sheets and ... everything! However, later authors did not stop saying that the “Rover” was designed specifically for this super-arm with a pad of sea grass - an idea that, of course, was innocently strangled by bad tsarist officials. But the fact remains: firstly, Mexican insurgents on Pancho Villa’s armored car also used armor with “sea grass”, and secondly, even the Powdersmen himself, proving his tank championship, didn’t remember about this armor - she It was a separate project and completely independent from “Rover”! Moreover, after its shelling, it was concluded that the usual five-millimeter armor provides exactly the same security, but it is lighter and less voluminous.

It should be added to this that the rubber track-ribbing tape did not have, and the drums themselves did not have annular grooves, that is, the crawler's slipping along the drums was ensured. Besides the question: how to fix a rubber torn caterpillar on the battlefield? Just change? The French tried in 20-s of the twentieth century to put such tracks on Renault tanks FT-17. And nothing they did not work! But they found out: it is possible to repair the track track. Rubber - no! Hence the conclusion: the promised high throughput of the car was, shall we say, doubtful. Yes, but “it” also had to float - but for this, the plywood case had to be airtight. To move on water, the Rover was supposed to rewind the track, and to steer - the steering wheels, and it is obvious that both speed and controllability, even with complete calm, would be equal to zero. In general, Porokhovshchikov proved to be much better as an aviator than the designer of the BTT.


"Tank Porokhovshchikov" from the "Historical Series" TM. Nothing, by the way, is not a confirmed image, but it's beautiful, isn't it ?!


But 25 September 1916, the newspaper Novoye Vremya published an article “Land Fleet”, translated from the London Times. It talked about cars, called "tank" (and the name was translated as "tub") and now Porokhovshchikova this newsApparently, it struck a chord, and he wrote a “reply” to it - “Land Fleet — a Russian Invention!”, which appeared in Novoye Vremya four days later. In it, he wrote that his car - a prototype of the English "lohaney." Anyone familiar with the device of the British tank Mk.I, referred to in this article, can search for the degree of similarity of both cars. But hardly anyone will argue that there is no similarity in principle. Even the one-track undercarriage did not become Porokhovshchikov’s know-how, because back in 1832 (!) The Englishman George Giktot had tested a steam tractor with a single cloth track.

Here in January 1917, A.A. Porokhovshchikov presented the project “Rover No.2”. It was a tracked vehicle with the usual booking: by this time he was already tired of promoting his “algae sandwich”. But on the other hand, he put on him the original “multi-storey” turret - out of three independently rotating rings, each of which was supposed to contain a machine gun. They were to be managed, of course, by three machine gunners, and the fourth member of the crew was the driver and was sitting in the hull, and in case of need he could shoot a machine gun in a frontal armor plate. The military project was reviewed, and the report on it indicated that it was impossible for three machine-gunners to fit in one tower - all the more so since for some reason they didn’t indicate Powershowers. Such important details of the design as the system for feeding cartridges, withdrawing spent cartridges and cooling machine guns were not worked out. As a result, the verdict: “The Commission finds that the project“ All-Terrain Vehicle ”of the construction of Porokhovshchikov in its present form does not deserve any attention.” Again, the world experience of using such towers was? Was! On the Spanish tank Trubia, the turret was double, with two machine guns and ... it turned out that it was almost impossible for two machine gunners to work in it. Two machine guns and two people! And here are three ...

In 1922, the newspaper Izvestia VTSIK published an article entitled “The Tank’s Homeland - Russia”. It hinted that the corrupt royal satraps handed over England documents for the Rover, and that it was this documentation that served as the basis for the creation of the first British tanks. Why such an article was needed clearly - it was necessary to encourage the people, to show that we were not afraid of the “Englishwoman” with her tanks, but we also stole them. The fact that the tanks “Killen Straight”, “Little Willy” and MKI only in a drunken sleep can be considered similar to the Porokhovshchikov car did not worry anyone. Soon the article was forgotten, especially since Porokhovshchikov himself in 41 had been shot for espionage. But after the Great Patriotic War, they remembered about it and began to replicate it. And why - also understandable. It was necessary to encourage the people and show that the "Country of the Soviets" ahead of the rest. True, frankly far-fetched fiction about the transfer of drawings to England yet did not repeat. But on the other hand, the Rover itself was now painted only this way: with a case of armor instead of plywood, with an indispensable machine-gun turret over the driver’s seat and, understandably, without an air intake in the forehead, which would really be extremely inappropriate on a tank. By the way, he is not in the author's drawing of V. Pluzhnikov in the journal TM - and why is he in such articles ?!

And now about the "inert tsarist generals." After all, when Porokhovschikov with his proposal turned to the Special Committee on Strengthening fleet and promised a lot of things, but he didn’t provide any concrete drawings. And only on January 9, 1915, at a reception at the head of the supply of the North-Western Front, General Danilov, he laid out ready-made drawings and cost estimates for the construction of his All-Terrain Vehicle. So, what can we say about their excessive credulity. After all, they approved the project, gave permission to build, and the money - 9660 rubles 72 kopecks - was written out. At the same time, the design data for the car were specified in a special report No. 8101. And so, V. Pluzhnikov should go to the archive, since he is in Moscow, not in Podolsk, and you can get there by metro and see this report and others, materials attached to it. Then he would have known that the cost of the "tank" amounted to 10 rubles 118 kopecks, and here Porokhovshchikov for some reason included money for the purchase of two pistols, seven fathers and even ... "a tip to couriers in Petrograd." What? You can’t forbid to live beautifully, especially with state money! Well, and in the report on the test results it was indicated that “the built copy of the All-Terrain Vehicle” did not show all those qualities that were due to the report No. 85, for example, it could not walk on loose snow with a depth of about 8101 foot (1 cm), and the course tests on water was not made ... ". So there was no need to write to V. Pluzhnikov that "the Russian military authorities did not find money for the serial implementation of the project." There was nothing to serialize!

So, it turns out, who is reviving the old myths of the Soviet era - one of the regular authors of TM. And this is despite the fact that, as it has already been noted, the necessary archive is at his side!


And now these “Porokhovshchikov’s tanks” have appeared and ... why not? "And I see it so" - what do you say to that?


What is the result? As a result, here is such a miracle - the “myth-model” on the site Karopka.ru - a forum of modellers. And again, there is nothing wrong with this model itself - well, it could be that way - it means that we have a model from an alternative history, and why should it not be ?! Bad is different: in the comments when discussing it, I came across the following text: Mikhail Ukolov. Lyubertsy, 31 year. "Few people know that in 1913, the aircraft designer
A.A. Porokhovshchikov created such a unique prototype of all-terrain vehicles. There was also his more powerful version - Rover №2, armed with 4-machine guns, but his project was despicably sold to the British. So there were the famous "diamonds". Moreover, it is known that Porokhovshchikov developed and improved the “Rover” No.3 - it was meanly exported to America and served as the prototype for the Christie tank and, accordingly, the T-34. It is necessary to open the monument to Porokhovshchikov as the father of world tank building. 5 January 2015 of the year, 15: 01.

Here, as they say, neither subtract nor add! I don’t even want to comment on this, because here on the pages of VO people meet mostly knowledgeable people and ... let them laugh a little bit about it! How do we sometimes write here - “what do you smoke or what kind of mushrooms do you eat?” But laughter turns out to be bitter. Patriotism is, of course, good and every decent citizen of his country must be a patriot. But not so! I am sure that we do not need such ignorant patriots! And we also don’t need the myths that create them, enough time has passed and the archives and affairs that historians need (at least with respect to the “Tank of Porokhovshchikov”) have long been open, thank God! By the way, if this is how they say now, "joke", then the bad one - someone younger might think that this is the way it is!

As for TM, then, as they say, “God is their judge.” I collaborated with this edition from 1996 of the year to 2007 of the year, they published my magazine “Tankomaster” and to it two more “umbrella brands”: “Aviamaster” and “Flotomaster”. But it was said still ancient: "Plato, you are my friend, but the truth is more precious!"

PS: By the way, what was required to write? And it was necessary to write that the Russian land was always rich in talents. What else in 1914 was found a person who thought of ... managed to interest the military, tried to create, but for subjective reasons - all people - people and they have their flaws - could not adequately complete the project. However, the military did not even think about backing up his work with well-educated engineers, creating a team and, deducting money from the inventor's salary for pistols, hats and "tips for couriers", continue working! Well, the author of the article, most likely living in Moscow, can only be reminded that the work in the archives has not been canceled, and that the correspondent card of the employee TM is a good key in all respects. Therefore, problems with finding new and really interesting information for those who have it, usually does not arise!
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

43 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    1 July 2015 07: 36
    It is a pity that there is neither paper nor a protractor with a ruler at hand (you know, you know the old fashioned way), but something tells me that an all-terrain vehicle would have overcome a ditch of such a profile, at least theoretically. Who has the opportunity to confirm or deny ...
    1. +3
      1 July 2015 10: 55
      I wonder why minus, I hope not the word "protractor" made me angry ...
    2. 0
      1 July 2015 19: 25
      Theoretically, it is not necessary! Practically necessary! The fact is that the Renault FT-17 closest to him in size - 4100 mm long (with a tail of 4950) could cross a ditch of only 1,35 m and 1,8 m with a "tail". The "all-terrain vehicle" did not have a "tail", the bow of the hull was extremely unsuccessful. And nevertheless, with a length of 3,6 m, it easily forces a ditch of 3 m, while a Renault with a "tail" and fairly modern tracks, only 1,8 m. I'm afraid to explain how this can even maybe one protractor won't be enough!
      1. +1
        1 July 2015 22: 02
        For kalibr. It was the front part, or rather the front part of the track, that led me to the idea that a ditch of such a profile and size (depth 75 cm) the machine (theoretically) must overcome, just a protractor and a ruler would be enough to check. practice is very different from theory - and the tape should be with lugs and soil density and engine power and driver qualifications, etc., etc.
        Quote: kalibr
        Purely theoretically not necessary! It is necessary practically!

        And whether it is necessary?
        1. -1
          1 July 2015 22: 45
          Indeed - is it necessary ?! Probably so everything is clear!
        2. -2
          1 July 2015 22: 49
          Indeed - is it necessary ?! Probably so everything is clear!
      2. +4
        2 July 2015 05: 15
        Ask yourself a simple question. Why when they write about the width of the overcome ditch, its depth is not indicated?

        Yesterday, in my car with a length of 4650mm, I overcame a ditch with a width on top of 6000mm, a depth of about 0,2m and a steep slope near 45 degrees. What am I - BETMAN ????

        Of course not, rolled down - rolled out. It should be about the height of the wall to be overcome.
    3. +1
      2 July 2015 12: 14
      you can just read about "little Willie" at the "all-terrain vehicle" the results will be even more modest.
  2. +13
    1 July 2015 07: 41
    The author is absolutely right, after all, it is not specialists who are actually engaged in myth-making (although this happens), but amateurs (in a bad sense) -journalists. And this is very sad, since not so many people read special literature, and the majority of popular publications. "This is how unhealthy sensations arise" (C).
    Roughly the same situation with Mendeleev's tank - there was a project, an interesting project, but it is presented almost as a finished product with unsurpassed characteristics, but the matter did not even come to the model, unlike, for example, the Tsar-Tank project by Lebedenko , the same ended in nothing.
    1. 0
      1 July 2015 18: 13
      And for some reason, they are always sold in addition to the British ...
      1. Alf
        0
        1 July 2015 21: 00
        Quote: kalibr
        And for some reason, they are always sold in addition to the British ...

        Nobody else needed such "masterpieces" for x ...
  3. +7
    1 July 2015 08: 11
    Russia entered World War I, completely lacking its own tractor and automotive industries. Only repair and manufacture of spare parts. Exception plant Russo-Balt. This area could not be the basis for the deployment of tank production. So the all-terrain vehicle Porokhovschikova is just the experience .. the son of difficult mistakes ...
    1. Elk
      Elk
      +2
      2 July 2015 16: 20
      .Exception plant Russo-Balt.

      Not an exception. Up to half of the components were imported.
  4. -7
    1 July 2015 08: 43
    I have not read such abominations about a Russian engineer. He was the first, the first, you see, and you reproach him for not making the T-90. Did you walk badly in the snow? And what kind of tank could such a thing then? Did not provide for the cooling of machine guns? Sir, have you ever seen those machine guns? This is Maxim with water cooling in the barrel casing. What else is there to provide? A cooling system with a cooler on heat-conducting tubes like a computer? Your competence in technical matters per person.
    1. +8
      1 July 2015 09: 14
      Quote: Engineer
      He was the first, the first, you see, and you reproach him

      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Танк_Менделеева
      designed 5 years earlier, a conceptually much more viable design.
      Quote: Engineer
      This is Maxim with water cooling in the barrel casing.

      and the sleeve, and the placement of the machine gun in the armor plate, and the removal of powder gases, matter. Shoot in a tight box when the hot shells fly in the face, and we will return to discussing this issue. Righteous fervor is a good, but critical mindset, all the same is more valuable to an engineer. So what about
      Quote: Engineer
      Your competence in technical matters per person.

      still more careful. In general, Prokhovshchikov reminds me of my previous director. To grab a bigger advance, start doing it (having mastered the most expensive part of the estimate at the lowest cost) and dissolve on the horizon, with the cree that infringe it and prevent it from working.
      1. 0
        14 July 2015 21: 51
        Quote: fennekRUS
        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Танк_Менделеева
        designed 5 years earlier, a conceptually much more viable design.

        5 years or more viable?
        Designed in the years 1911-1915 shipbuilding engineer V.D. Mendeleev. Being the first project in the world super heavy tank, was distinguished by the highest indicators of firepower and armor protection for its time.
        Combat weight, 173,2 t
        This is a stillborn monster, such as a mouse and no more. Did you read about him yourself or are you a writer?
    2. +2
      1 July 2015 16: 38
      PS: By the way, what was required to write? And it was necessary to write that the Russian land was always rich in talents. What else in 1914 was found a person who thought of ... managed to interest the military, tried to create, but for subjective reasons - all people - people and they have their flaws - could not adequately complete the project. However, the military did not even think about backing up his work with well-educated engineers, creating a team and, deducting money from the inventor's salary for pistols, hats and "tips for couriers", continue working! Well, the author of the article, most likely living in Moscow, can only be reminded that the work in the archives has not been canceled, and that the correspondent card of the employee TM is a good key in all respects. Therefore, problems with finding new and really interesting information for those who have it, usually does not arise!

      And where is the infamy?

      "The commission finds that the project" Rover "construction Porokhovshchikov in its present form does not deserve any attention." Commission is not me!
      1. +2
        1 July 2015 18: 46
        A. B. Shirokorad "Wonder Weapon of the USSR" 2005, published by "Veche", there are worse projects described Bekauri, Kurchevsky, etc. they and the design bureaus had the resources, but the result?
        N. V. Yakubovich in the book "Aviation of the USSR on the eve of the war" 2006, published by "Veche" bows to A. S. Yakovlev for the fact that he stopped the work of such specialists. \
        No one says that it is necessary to stop developing. It is necessary to carry out work, but it is also necessary to understand the prospects of development.
        And about the talents please: Mgebrov, Sikorsky, Zhukovsky, Tsiolkovsky ...
    3. +1
      1 July 2015 17: 33
      Quote: Engineer
      This is Maxim with water cooling in the barrel casing. What else is there to provide?

      But what else:
      Since the machine gun has water cooling and is used as the main weapon, this cooling should be intense.
    4. Elk
      Elk
      +1
      2 July 2015 16: 22
      He was the first, first, you see,

      What was he the first? Porhovshikov, as well as Kurchevsky, Bekauri and others like them, was an adventurer from engineering. And nothing more than that.
  5. +1
    1 July 2015 08: 44
    In Britain, the same "interesting" tank projects.


    http://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/4811157.html
    1. +4
      1 July 2015 09: 17
      Quote: igordok
      In Britain, the same "interesting" tank projects.

      Then a lot of "interesting" things were designed. Everything was developed "by touch", as a rule, by individuals. There was no concept of application. So similar creations came out.
  6. -3
    1 July 2015 12: 48
    I recommend to all those interested to read the chapter "The Legend of the All-Terrain Vehicle" >> from the book "Tanks of the First World War" by Semyon Fedoseev. And in general, the entire section "Works in Russia" of this wonderful book.

    This article, in my opinion, is full of emotions, bile and is more suitable for any newspaper the color of a sunflower ...

    And, in continuation of the topic, a link to entertaining material

    http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/WWI/rusRover/3/
    1. +1
      1 July 2015 15: 34
      Actually, Mr. Shpakovsky is a rather competent person. Emotions, he does. But I have no reason not to believe him. I don’t remember him from unverified information.
      1. 0
        1 July 2015 18: 01
        I, it seems to me, did not write anything in my commentary on the veracity of the article.
  7. +3
    1 July 2015 13: 03
    Oh, Shpakovsky's "Tank Master" !! My favorite magazines ... I still leaf through ...
  8. -5
    1 July 2015 14: 27
    Yes, some nonsense. I'm not talking about Shpakovsky, but about the legend of an all-terrain vehicle. I perfectly understand that I want to be the first, but everything should be a measure. Popov’s radio, Mozhaysky’s plane, Porokhovschikov’s and Mendeleev’s tank, Fedorov’s assault rifle are legends that no one has seen, but OUR.
    1. Ulan
      +4
      1 July 2015 16: 20
      Fedorov's assault rifle "nobody saw"? Cool. Are you sure about that?
    2. +3
      1 July 2015 16: 32
      Quote: Maksus
      Fedorov assault rifle

      Minus set you for Fedorov. His machine gun was even in service with two armies: the Russian and Red, by no means in single copies ...
    3. +2
      1 July 2015 16: 50
      Well then Fedorov’s machine for what? It’s quite a serial machine.
      1. +4
        1 July 2015 18: 44
        Quote: 6 inches
        Well then Fedorov’s machine for what? It’s quite a serial machine.

        Yeah ... I remember that Kostin in "Uninteresting Time" with his help perfectly beat one of the "hitman's rules":
        “Pash,” Sergei asked the chairman, “and where did you get ... this?”
        He pointed to the machine gun.
        - So, when I fought in the eighteenth in the south, with Drozdovites, they captured me in the battle against the squirrels. I snatched it, it was an unusual thing, then I tried to shoot it - I didn’t like it: it’s complicated, it’s hard to ammo cartridges, it’s heavy. And then he got used to it - nothing ... It is a pity only, since the cartridges have already run out, but where to find such - I know ...
        Pasha-chairman turned the cartridge on the table. Sergey took a second lying around, looked.
        A little less than a rifle, a little more than a submachine gun. A sort of intermediate. Sergei remembered how the cartridges looked like, which the teacher - a former soldier showed them in the OBZh lesson. He gave me a grenade to look at, a black, ribbed, real lemon, and frightened that it might explode. Even once he brought a store from the "Kalash" and allowed to discharge-charge.
        - Pash, is this German rifle?
        - Why German? - offended comrade Povoden, - Our, Russian. Under the tsar, some officer came up with yayo jasco ...
        - Kalashnikov? - escaped from Sergei.
        - I remember. Maybe Kalashnikov ...
        Sergey incredulously looked at the machine. Is it true, the AK variant of the twenties?
        And he was still thinking of proposing machine drawings. Why drawings, if in this world machines were invented even under the tsar. Under the intermediate cartridge.
    4. +2
      1 July 2015 19: 54
      Soviet skiers with Fedorov rifles on a captured Finnish pillbox. It is a myth????
      In November 1899, the newly rebuilt Baltic Fleet battleship General Admiral Apraksin left Kronstadt for Libau. During a blizzard and storm, the battleship lost its course and ran into pitfalls off the southern coast of Gogland Island in the Gulf of Finland. The ship was badly damaged.
      The Maritime Ministry decided to call on Popov for help. Would his invention help here?
      When he was asked to arrange a radio link between Hogland and Kotka, he happily agreed. Popov understood that if successful, everyone would be convinced of the enormous benefits of wireless telegraph.
      During the rescue of the battleship, 440 radio telegrams were transmitted, which contained 6300 words.
      After the successful use of wireless telegraphy in rescuing an armadillo, the Ministry of the Sea ordered the introduction of a wireless telegraph on combat ships. Radio began to receive widespread practical use in the navy.
      \
      http://radiolamp.net/news/180-pervoe-prakticheskoe-primenenie-radio-radiotelegra
      f.html
      Is that a myth too?
    5. Alf
      +2
      1 July 2015 21: 06
      Quote: Maksus
      Fedorov assault rifle - legends,

      It may be a legend for you, but this legend fought in the Winter War.
    6. Elk
      Elk
      +1
      2 July 2015 16: 39
      Fedorov assault rifle

      It completely existed, was produced in an amount of about 3500 pieces. It was in service with the Red Army until 1931. Periodically used in combat operations until 2 ...
  9. -5
    1 July 2015 20: 10
    And what are the disadvantages for? Have you seen this "machine gun"? This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!! And it cannot claim the title of the FIRST AUTOMATIC. Connoisseurs, damn it.
    1. +2
      1 July 2015 20: 53
      And you know the difference between a self-loading rifle and an automatic rifle. First read the literature, and then from yourself stand a connoisseur.
      And in general, do you understand the difference between an assault rifle, an assault rifle, a submachine gun, a self-loading rifle and a stool? and special
      1. -4
        1 July 2015 22: 24
        Hey, wise guy, would you cover your mouth for a start? You and I didn’t drink at the Brudershaft. Read smart books can help.
    2. Alf
      +3
      1 July 2015 21: 12
      Quote: Maksus
      And what are the disadvantages for? Have you seen this "machine gun"? This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!! And it cannot claim the title of the FIRST AUTOMATIC. Connoisseurs, damn it.

      Self-loading rifle firing in bursts with a rate of fire of 600 v / m? Oh well..
      Rifles shoot rifle cartridges. Example-SVT-40 and ABC-38-cartridge 7,62x54, automatic Fedorov-6,5x50.
      1. -1
        1 July 2015 22: 25
        Well, as if I imagine - BAR, for example, also had a rate of 550-600 shot / min.
        1. Alf
          +2
          2 July 2015 20: 10
          Quote: Maksus
          Well, as if I imagine - BAR, for example, also had a rate of 550-600 shot / min.

          If you read my post more closely, you would notice that I said that self-loading rifles shoot with RIFLE cartridges. BAR also-cartridge-30-06. Tokarev assault rifle fired a 6,5x50 cartridge.
          Browning M1918 (eng. Browning M1918; Browning Automatic Rifle, BAR - Browning automatic rifle) - automatic rifle or light machine gun designed by John Moses Browning.

          The Americans themselves BAR never considered a self-loading rifle.
          1. 0
            3 July 2015 22: 32
            Fedorov's assault rifle (not Tokarev) shot a Japanese rifle cartridge!
            1. 0
              14 July 2015 22: 16
              Quote: elasurikowa
              Fedorov's assault rifle (not Tokarev) shot a Japanese rifle cartridge!

              it was a necessary measure since the cartridge factory built to produce the FEDOROV INTERMEDIATE CARTRIDGE of 6,5 mm caliber was mounted after the outbreak of the war and therefore began to produce cartridges for three that were missing /, and then the machine was only preparing for testing. Later it was adapted to Japanese cartridges, which were in stocks of more than 3 million.
              The exact data on the cartridge is not known, but it is believed that the bullet was lighter than 7 grams (arisaka - 10,4 g, 7,62x39 - 7,9 g.) Speed ​​- more than 800 m / s
              You can take an interest in cartridges with an automatic rifle cartridge of 7,62x45 9, and such), and you will understand that the Fedorov assault rifle was created for a real automatic rifle cartridge, and not for an Arisaku rifle.
    3. +1
      1 July 2015 23: 48
      This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!! And in no way can he claim the title of FIRST AUTOMATIC MACHINE.

      In fact, this weapon itself Vladimir Grigoryevich Fedorov in 1916, so called - AUTOMATIC.
      Expert, damn it!
    4. Elk
      Elk
      +1
      2 July 2015 16: 43
      Have you seen this "machine gun"?

      Seen, baby, seen. And read the NSD on it ... By the way, you can also see if you are in St. Petersburg and go to the Artillery Museum ...

      This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!!

      Well, for that matter, the AUTOMATIC rifle. For this sample had a translator firing. And, accordingly, he could shoot in automatic mode.
      And in no way can he claim the title of FIRST AUTOMATIC MACHINE.

      And what are the signs of the machine?
      Connoisseurs, damn it.

      And you, expert, damn it? Baby, I personally have been interested in questions of handguns (and not only) for more than a quarter of a century, but I can’t even say that I know everything and in the last resort. So turn off the pressure, and be more thoughtful.
    5. 0
      2 July 2015 17: 34
      you cons for what you need to be able to communicate. no more. you will respect people, they will respect you.
  10. +2
    1 July 2015 22: 49
    There are no miracles. In a state with underdeveloped engineering there were no compact engines with sufficient traction. ~ basics for the tank. What could we create if we felt sorry for our soldier? Perhaps only this. But this is an Austrian
  11. -4
    2 July 2015 00: 02
    Quote: combat192
    This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!! And in no way can he claim the title of FIRST AUTOMATIC MACHINE.

    In fact, this weapon itself Vladimir Grigoryevich Fedorov in 1916, so called - AUTOMATIC.
    Expert, damn it!

    And what next? The first car was called "self-run crew", and our tanks were called "tub". What's next? Linguist)))
  12. +3
    2 July 2015 00: 21
    As for the Fedorov assault rifle

    Quote: Maksus
    And what are the disadvantages for? Have you seen this "machine gun"? This is a self-loading RIFLE !!!! And it cannot claim the title of the FIRST AUTOMATIC. Connoisseurs, damn it.

    You're not right. Let's first determine the terminology of those years. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a rifle was called an automatic rifle, where reloading was not manual, but this rifle could not shoot in bursts. That is, in those years automatic rifle called what is now called self-loading rifle. The rifle that was capable of firing was called self-shooting.

    Besides. The name machine itself was born already during the war (this name is the invention of Fedorov). Although in those years it was called and self-propelled rifleand light submachine gun.
    Simple submachine gun, and sometimes heavy submachine gun were called in those years light machine guns, which fired mainly from bipods. It was impossible to shoot from their hands. The sample created by Fedorov was shorter than the submachine gun and had a cartridge that we now call intermediate. The very idea of ​​a machine gun (self-firing rifle) Fedorov implemented earlier than his competitors in other countries. The final version of the automaton appeared as a result of successive upgrades. And so it is called an automatic machine. By the way, a weapon in this form (short, with an intermediate cartridge) is really Fedorov's priority. Although already in the late 20s Sverchkov (the head of the shooting range) called it this way: "The Fedorov assault rifle is an automatic carbine capable of continuous firing" ... That is, the terminology itself changed for a long time and tediously. But the priority for this type of machine is undoubtedly Fedorov
    1. -1
      2 July 2015 16: 28
      All the same, I disagree - Fedorov was making an "automatic" chambered for 6,5 Arisaka, and this is a RIFLE cartridge. Automatic - a weapon under the INTERMEDIATE cartridge. The main salt is in this, and not in the design or anything else. Patron, do you understand?
      1. Elk
        Elk
        +1
        2 July 2015 17: 16
        Fedorov made an "automatic" chambered for 6,5 Arisaka,

        I will tell you a "terrible" secret. Fedorov made his own self-loading rifle chambered for OWN development. It was only in 1914 that the war began, later called the First World War. Our, at that time, God-anointed, decided that the fuck should not be engaged in the development of weapons during the war. Well, the sage was ... Accordingly, those two hundred pieces of rifles that were being prepared for military trials in 1915, as well as the production of cartridges for them, was stuck. In 1916 they were redesigned for the Japanese cartridge by inserting a new chamber (since its geometry allowed it), the barrel was shortened, and a detachable magazine was introduced. That's all
        At the expense of power. The 6,5x50 Arisaka cartridge from a 700mm long barrel gives 2600J of muzzle energy, for a Fedorov assault rifle - 1900J. SCS has muzzle energy in 2000J, and AKM in 1900 ...
        1. 0
          3 July 2015 22: 37
          Read the book Fedorova-Patriotic 7.62 x 54 cartridge proved to be too powerful for the normal operation of automation, and so we picked up a weaker Japanese cartridge.
          1. Elk
            Elk
            0
            4 July 2015 01: 31
            Read Fedorov's book

            Well, Fedorov's "The Evolution of Small Arms" describes this story. Read it carefully.
            By the way, Fedorov initially designed far from an intermediate cartridge. His cartridges were quite a rifle power and dimensions, they had only a reduced caliber.
            Here is his drawing, or rather one of the options (dimensions in inches):

            It was the fact that the cartridge was larger and more powerful than the Japanese one and made it possible to remake Fedorov’s rifles with little blood and quite quickly.
      2. 0
        14 July 2015 22: 20
        Quote: Maksus
        All the same, I disagree - Fedorov was making an "automatic" chambered for 6,5 Arisaka, and this is a RIFLE cartridge. Automatic - a weapon under the INTERMEDIATE cartridge. The main salt is in this, and not in the design or anything else. Patron, do you understand?

        I repeat once more;
        it was a necessary measure since the cartridge factory built for the release of the INTERMEDIATE PATRON FEDOROV of 6,5 mm caliber was mounted after the outbreak of the war and therefore it began to produce cartridges for three that were missing, and then the machine was only getting ready for testing. Later him adapted to Japanese cartridgesThere were more than 3 million of them in warehouses.
        The exact data on the cartridge is not known, but it is believed that the bullet was lighter than 7 grams (arisaka - 10,4 g, 7,62x39 - 7,9 g.) Speed ​​- in the region of 800 m / s
        You can take an interest in cartridges with a 7,62x45 assault rifle, and that was), and you will understand that Fedorov's assault rifle was created for a real assault rifle cartridge, and not for an Arisaku rifle.
    2. Elk
      Elk
      0
      2 July 2015 16: 56
      this name is the invention of Fedorov)

      Not Fedorova. And Blagonravova. And not during the years of WWII, but in 1922 ...
      1. 0
        2 July 2015 17: 30
        And not Blagonravov, but N.M. Filatov.

        The undoubted merit of V.G. Fedorov is that he foresaw the prospect of developing a new type of hand-held automatic weapons, despite the serious resistance of officials of the War Department both in Tsarist times and in the first years after the revolution. “... Personally,” he wrote in another letter to N.S. To Okhotnikov from March 11 on 1961, the question was raised about introducing a new type of weapon - a light machine gun, then called by the definition of the former head of the Officer Rifle School N. Filatov the 1916 assault rifle. "Apparently, for the first time in the definition of N M. Filatov appeared the term "machine gun" for the name of a new type of small arms. So began the history of the domestic machine.
        1. Elk
          Elk
          0
          2 July 2015 17: 32
          Right It's just that now we have heat and brains are melting ... feel
        2. Elk
          Elk
          0
          2 July 2015 17: 45
          that he foresaw the prospect of developing a new type of hand-held automatic weapon,

          In fact, not only him. Back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, literate people understood that the power of a rifle cartridge is excessive, the ballistics is mediocre, and any attempt to create an automatic or self-loading rifle will end in an aggregate weighing 5-6 kg in weight. The same Root, Manliher, Krnka worked in this direction, but their work did not interest anyone before the war. During the WWII, submachine guns appeared, that is, weapons that used a rifle cartridge, but which allowed them to shoot more or less accurately from their hands. At the end of the WWII, the first samples of real machine guns appeared, but the war was over and nobody needed them again.
  13. 0
    2 July 2015 12: 33
    I think the ideal variant of a Russian tank for a PMA would be a medium-sized vehicle with a 76.2 mm mountain gun, a coaxial machine gun in the turret and onboard machine guns. You can also put a course machine gun. In theory, it would be possible to make partially sloped armor of 30-35 mm, which would be enough as "anti-cannon" armor at that time, the sides and stern could be covered with 15 mm armor against rifle and machine gun fire. In general, it would have turned out to be something somewhat similar to the "Garford-Putilov" only on a caterpillar track.
    1. 0
      2 July 2015 17: 33
      alas, nothing would have happened. The industry would not have pulled. And you described the ideal tank option for all parties.
  14. 0
    2 July 2015 20: 58
    Quote: Belgorod
    And you know the difference between a self-loading rifle and an automatic rifle. First read the literature, and then from yourself stand a connoisseur.
    And in general, do you understand the difference between an assault rifle, an assault rifle, a submachine gun, a self-loading rifle and a stool? and special

    Well, I'll get my own minuses. "Fedorov's assault rifle" is an automatic RIFLE. Made under a RIFLE cartridge from "Arisaki". We consider an AUTOMATIC weapon under an intermediate cartridge. Otherwise, we and ABC (made under the cartridge from the "three-line") will write into the machines rate of fire up to 800 rds / min.) The article correctly spelled-patriotism is good, from myself I will add, "hurray-patriotism" is bad. hi
    1. 0
      3 July 2015 05: 23
      What is the argument about? Everything seems to be right somewhere out there, each in its own period ..
      Better argue about beers :)

      Here is what the Big Encyclopedia of Weapons writes (Ex.2008g)

      Machine. Fedorov classified as an automatic only a self-firing rifle, which, instead of a permanent magazine, has a removable, attached or plug-in magazine, in addition, it has a bipod (!) And occupies an average position between rifles and light machine guns in terms of its characteristics (obviously hence the ")

      In the future, the name A. was assigned to a special type of self-shooting rifles and pistols, providing continuous (automatic) shooting with one pull of the trigger .. Until the 40's, these were the heaviest types of automatic rifles, approaching in their qualities more like machine guns. Single-shot weapons are now called self-loading ...

      During the Second World War, the name A. was assigned to the PP.

      Nowadays, this is the name of the second generation automatic rifles .. firing intermediate and low-pulse cartridges. Abroad, weapons of this type are usually called "assault rifles". The terms A and SHV are often used interchangeably, although the weapon has some structural differences.

      Interesting:
      In the book "Volokolamsk Highway" there is a name for a semiautomatic device, for example the phrase: "give the lieutenant a semiautomatic device". Obviously, we are talking about SVT.
      1. Elk
        Elk
        0
        4 July 2015 05: 23
        In the book "Volokolamsk Highway" there is a name for a semiautomatic device, for example the phrase: "give the lieutenant a semiautomatic device". Obviously, we are talking about SVT.

        This is Americanism. In the United States, a handgun chambered for a rifle cartridge with a continuous fire mode was called an automatic rifle. For example, the abbreviation BAR stands for Browning Automatic Rifle. A weapon that has only a single fire mode is called Semi-automatic, that is, semi-automatic. Before the revolution in Russia the names were used: "self-firing" and "self-loading". In the USSR, the names "automatic" and "self-loading" were established.
      2. -1
        14 July 2015 22: 32
        Quote: tasha
        Here is what the Big Encyclopedia of Weapons writes (Ex.2008g)

        and who said that the truth about terms is written in the "incyklopedia" containing a bunch of errors? Personally, I prefer to believe Fedorov, Tokarev, Kalashnikov, and not this tabloid book written for the sake of attendants by non-specialists.
    2. 0
      14 July 2015 22: 27
      Quote: fa2998
      Well, I'll get my own minuses. "Fedorov assault rifle" is an automatic RIFLE. Made under the RIFLE cartridge from "Arisaki".

      you read the literature on the creation of the Fedorov assault rifle. It was CREATED UNDER FEDOROV'S CARTRIDGE in caliber 6,5 and WAS REDUCED under the cartridge of Arisak.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"