Military Review

Russian "Unicorn"

Russian "Unicorn"

As in the XVIII century, the Russians invented the best artillery in the world.

23 July 1759, the position of the Russian troops was attacked by the army of Prussia. A stubborn battle unfolded on the heights near the village of Palzig, located in the west of modern Poland, at that time these were the eastern borders of the Prussian kingdom.

For the second year, the Seven Years' War was raging, in which all the major European states participated. That day, the Prussians went on the attack, to prevent the Russians from crossing the Oder and entering the heart of Germany. The stubborn battle continued for 10 hours and ended with the complete defeat of the Prussian troops. The army, considered to be the best in the Western Europe, the most disciplined and trained, lost only soldiers and officers killed by 4269 - almost five times more than the Russian troops! Our casualties that day were 878 soldiers and 16 officers.

The defeat of the Prussians and the relatively small losses of our troops were predetermined by the Russian artillery - some enemy attacks were repelled only by its fire, deadly and accurate.

"Newly introduced tools"

That day, July 23, 1759, for the first time in stories humanity artillery guns of the Russian army unexpectedly for the enemy opened fire over the head of their troops. Previously, the guns in the field battles were beaten only by direct fire.

On the eve of the Battle of Palzig, our army was the first in the world to receive light field guns invented in St. Petersburg, capable of firing both direct fire with grape-shot and explosive "grenades" and nuclei with "hanging fire", that is, on top of building their troops. It was this technical and tactical novelty that predetermined the defeat of the Prussians, despite their skillful and decisive actions.

Three weeks after the victory at Palzig, the Russian army collided with the main forces of the Prussian king Frederick II near the village of Kunersdorf, just a few kilometers east of Frankfurt an der Oder. 12 August 1759, the Prussian king, a brave and talented commander, managed to bypass the right flank of the Russian army and successfully attacked her. From 9 in the morning to 7 in the evening there was a stubborn battle - the first attacks of the Prussians were successful. But then, during the battle, they broke down the line, and Friedrich’s infantry crowded at the height of Mülberg, where they fell victim to the well-aimed fire of the new Russian cannons.

The battle ended with the unconditional victory of Russia. The baptized Kalmyks from the Chuguev Equestrian Regiment even defeated the personal guards of the Prussian king, bringing to the Russian command a hat of Frederick II who hastily escaped. This trophy is now kept in the memorial museum of Suvorov in St. Petersburg.

Reporting the victory over Frederick II near Kunersdorf, the commander of the Russian army, General-in-Chief Peter Saltykov, informed the Empress Elizabeth that “the great enemy cavalry and batteries harmed the enemy, especially from the newly invented guns and Shuvalov’s howitzers, the great enemy cavalry and batteries.

“Inventory”, “Inventing” - this term Russian people of the XVIII century called inventive activity. "Newly introduced" - that is, the newly invented tools. Howitzers are called "Shuvalov" by the name of Pyotr Ivanovich Shuvalov, an associate of Empress Elizabeth and one of the most prominent statesmen of the Russian Empire of the mid-18th century.

Peter Shuvalov was among those who, with the help of the Preobrazhensky regiment guards, raised the daughter of Peter the Great to the imperial throne. In Russian history, those events are considered the only absolutely bloodless coup d'état - despite the cruel customs of the time, during and after the “Guards Revolution” Nobody was killed or executed. Moreover, the new Empress Elizabeth, with the consent of her comrades-in-arms, abolished the death penalty in Russia. The Russian Empire was the only country in Europe where the state officially stopped killing its subjects.

Count Peter Shuvalov, being one of the closest to the Empress (his wife had been the friend of Elizabeth since childhood), was rightly considered the most influential politician of the Russian Empire. But unlike many “favorites” and “temporary workers,” Shuvalov used these endless possibilities for the benefit of Russia. Becoming a general field officer, that is, the commander of all Russian artillery, it was he who provided our army with the best tools in the world.

Count Peter Ivanovich Shuvalov. Reproduction from the book “Russian portraits of the 18th and 19th centuries. Publication of Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich Romanov

Under the leadership of Count Shuvalov was created a real scientific group. In fact, this is the first case in the history of Russia when not single enthusiasts, not individual scientists, but a whole group of qualified specialists worked on the creation of technical innovations.

History has preserved their names for us. Among those who worked for the glory of the Russian artillery, three stand out: Mikhail Vasilyevich Danilov, Matvey Grigorievich Martynov, and Ivan Fedorovich Glebov. All of them are officers of the Russian army, professional artillerymen. Then the artillery was the most "scientific" branch of the army - the commanders of gun calculations needed to know the basics of mathematics, physics and chemistry.

But Danilov, Martynov and Glebov were not just gunners. In the middle of the 18th century, Colonel Glebov was in charge of all garrison schools for training artillery specialists, captain Martynov was the head of the St. Petersburg artillery school, and captain Danilov in the same school headed the laboratory for the production of fireworks and illuminations. Fireworks then demanded the most "advanced" knowledge in chemistry and pyrotechnics - Empress Elizabeth, daughter of Peter I, wanted her fireworks to be better than European ones, and in fact it was so.

"Close" and "secret howitzers"

In the 1753 – 1757 years, continuous gun firing took place on the Vyborg side of St. Petersburg. “A great multitude of gunpowder and other supplies were shot,” - as captain Mikhail Danilov later wrote in his memoirs.

At the initiative of Count Shuvalov various samples of guns were tested. Since the time of Peter the Great, a quarter of a century has passed, the artillery of European countries has stepped forward, and the guns of the Russian army still remained at the level of the Northern War with the Swedes. But the war was advancing with Prussia, and the commander of the artillery sought to quickly overcome the emerging backlog.

In those few years, the Shuvalov team created and tested many different samples. weapons. At that time, science was still far from theoretical calculations and subtle experiments; therefore, work on the improvement of Russian artillery was carried out by trial and error. Experimented with various shapes and sections of cannon barrels, to the extent that they tried to make even rectangular. Some samples of guns, invented by the team of Shuvalov, were immediately rejected, some tried to adopt, despite the doubts and difficulties. And only one sample in all respects turned out to be almost perfect.

Initially, Matvey Martynov and Mikhail Danilov created an artillery installation in the form of two barrels on the same gun carriage - this gun was immediately called “the twins”. It was assumed that when shooting with a canister, and especially with “rods”, that is, finely chopped iron rods, the striking effect will be greater than that of a conventional cannon. However, experiments have shown that the effectiveness of such a double gun is no higher than that of ordinary single-barreled guns.

With all the variety of samples and projects, Count Shuvalov was especially fascinated with a short tool, in which the inside of the trunk was a smoothly expanding oval cone. That is, the bore was not round, as usual, but oval, parallel to the ground (the horizontal diameter is three times the vertical). According to Shuvalov, with such a cross section, the canister flying out of the barrel should have been spread horizontally, while in the case of a conventional cannon, much of the bullets went upwards, that is, higher than the enemy, or downwards, into the ground.

In fact, Feldtseykhmeister Shuvalov dreamed of a kind of “machine gun” capable of sending a mass of lead bullets neatly along the horizon and mowing slender ranks of Prussian grenadiers. Invented gun with an oval section of the trunk immediately received the name of "secret howitzers." Outwardly, such a gun was no different from the previous ones, and so that no stranger could see the oval bore, by strict order of the general field officer, under pain of the death penalty, the artillerymen were obliged to always put a case on the gun and remove it only immediately before shooting.

The first tests seemed to be successful, and in a burst of enthusiasm, Count Shuvalov ordered to make 69 of such tools. However, further exploitation and combat use showed that with a slight improvement in the damaging ability of the car fire, such a “secret Shuvalov howitzer” has a number of significant drawbacks: the road is in production, difficult in the loading process, and most importantly, because of the cross section of the trunk, it can only fire the canister.

As a result, the most successful of the projects of the Shuvalov team was an artillery gun, outwardly much simpler and more ordinary than the exotic “twin” and “secret howitzer”.

Russian "Unicorn"

The result of the most successful experiment, conducted in March 1757, combined the best properties of mortars and guns. The newborn cannon was decorated with the family coat of arms of the Shuvalov family - an image of the mythical beast of the unicorn. Soon all the guns of this type were forever nicknamed "Unicorns" - not only in army slang, but also in official documents.

The guns of that time fired with cores or canister along a flat trajectory — parallel to the ground or with a slight elevation. For mounted shooting with a high elevation angle, short-barreled mortars were used to fly over the walls and fortifications to the cores and explosive bombs. The "Unicorn" became a universal weapon: it was shorter than conventional cannons and longer than mortars.

Shuvalovsky “Unicorn” 1-pound on the mountain (landing) gun carriage - Sample 1775. Photo:

But its main difference from the previous guns was the design of the “charging chamber” - the barrel bore in the breech rear of the gun ended with a cone. In the previous guns, the completion of the barrel bore was flat or semicircular, and with mortars, the wide barrel bore designed for bombs and nuclei ended in a narrower one, where a gunpowder charge was laid.

The core, bomb, or tin "glass" with the grape-shot, when loaded into the barrel of the Shuvalov's "Unicorn", rested against a tapering cone, tightly sealing the expelling charge of gunpowder. And when fired, the powder gases gave up all the energy to pushing the projectile, whereas in the case of the former guns, some of the powder gases inevitably burst into the gaps between the core and the walls of the barrel, losing energy.

This allowed the “Unicorns” with a shorter barrel than the usual cannons to shoot an impressive distance for that time - to 3 km, and when the barrel was raised to 45 ° - almost twice as far. The short barrel made it possible to double the speed of loading and, accordingly, shooting.

This will seem unexpected to the modern reader, but the barrel, which is shorter than that of a cannon, has given a noticeable advantage in accuracy. Indeed, at that time, the production of artillery barrels was not yet perfect, the inner surface of the barrel bore had inevitable microscopic irregularities, which, when shot, informed the charge of unpredictable rotation and deviation from the predetermined trajectory. The longer the barrel, the greater the impact of such irregularities. Therefore, the relatively short "Unicorn" had better accuracy and accuracy of shooting than conventional guns.

Shuvalov’s team sought not only to increase the striking power and accuracy of artillery, but also to lose weight so that new guns could maneuver faster and easier in field battles. "Unicorn" was very easy and maneuverable. The Russian 12-pound cannon of the 1734 model of the year fired 5,4 kg cores and had a weight of 112 pounds barrel, and the Unicorn, which replaced its half-weight Unicorn, fired at the same range with more powerful 8 kg cores, had a barrel four times lighter. To transport the 1734 cannon of the year, 15 horses were required, and the “Unicorn” required only 5.

Centenary of "Unicorn"

It is significant that all the creators of the best artillery gun in the 18th century were the sons of the companions of Peter I. The father of Count Shuvalov fought the entire Northern War and finished it with the commandant of Vyborg defeated by the Swedes. Ivan Glebov’s father, as a boy, entered Tsar Peter’s “merry troops” and during the war years with the Swedes, he served as chief of supplies for the Preobrazhensky regiment, the first in the Russian Guard.

Father of Mikhail Vasilyevich Danilov got into the same Preobrazhensky regiment at the very beginning of its creation and, despite the rank of an ordinary soldier, more than once fought alongside Peter I. “My father, serving as a soldier in the guard, was in campaigns with the sovereign in 1700 year, when the city of Narva was taken by storm from the Swedes - this is what Mikhail Danilov wrote in his memoirs. - During that assault, my father was wounded hard: his left hand shot three fingers of a canister, half each, big, index and middle fingers. The sovereign, inspecting the personally wounded soldiers himself, cut off his fingers from my father’s fingers, cut them with scissors, deigned to say to the sufferer from the wound for comfort: “It was hard for you!”

In essence, the creators of the Unicorn were the second generation of Peter's reforms, when the acts of the first Russian emperor finally brought impressive results, turning Russia into the most powerful state of the continent.

"Unicorn 12-pound" - Sample 1790 g.Photo:

The prototypes of artillery guns, created by Mikhail Danilov, Matthew Martynov, Ivan Glebov and other specialists from the “Shuvalov team”, were cast in the metal by fifty Petersburg craftsmen under the guidance of the cannon master Mikhail Stepanov.

Very quickly, mass production of new tools for the 18th century was launched. By the beginning of the 1759 of the year, 477 of various “Unicorns” of six calibers weighing from 3,5 t to 340 kg had already been manufactured.

The steel mills founded by Peter I in the Urals had already turned into a giant industrial complex at that time, and Russia began to smelt more metal than any of the states of Western Europe. Therefore, to implement the experiments of Count Shuvalov, there was a powerful industrial base - hundreds of "newly invented tools" were cast in just a few years, whereas previously it would take more than a decade to manufacture such a quantity.

The first combat use of "Unicorns" and the first in the world to shoot over the head of their troops in a field battle was commanded by one of the creators of the new weapon - General Ivan Glebov, who received the order of Alexander Nevsky and the rank of governor-general of Kiev as a result of the war with Prussia.

In the second half of the 18th century, the Russian “Unicorns” turned out to be the best field implements in the world. The victories over the Turks, which gave Crimea and Novorossia to our country, were ensured by the perfect field artillery, which was superior to the Turkish one. Up to the wars with Napoleon, Russian artillery was also considered the strongest in Europe. The best European gunsmiths then imitated the Russians.

Already during the Seven Years' War in 1760, the Austrian allies asked Russia for drawings of new tools. Wanting to brag to Europe, the simple-minded Empress Elizabeth sent X-NUMX "Unicorns" and 10 "secret howitzers" to Vienna. There they were carefully studied by Jean Baptiste Griboval, a French officer who was then in the Austrian service. Returning after the Seven Years' War to his homeland, Griboval began to reform the French artillery according to the Russian model - later Napoleon himself would call him "the father of the French artillery."

But even half a century after the work of Shuvalov’s team, in the era of the Napoleonic wars, the Russian “Unicorns” were still superior to their European counterparts, making a considerable contribution to the victory of 1812 of the year. "Unicorns" were successfully used during the Crimean and Caucasian wars. On arms of the Russian army, these guns consisted of a century, until 1863, when the transition to rifled artillery began. And still for half a century, the ancient “Unicorns” were kept in warehouses in fortresses as the last mobilization reserve in case of a major war. Officially, they were written off from storage only in the 1906 year.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. BilliBoms09
    BilliBoms09 1 August 2015 06: 31
    Russian artillery has been one of the best in Europe since the time of Ivan IV the Terrible. Every year, English and Golan merchants bought dozens of cannons and thousands of pounds of cast iron cores. The lag appeared in the second quarter of the 19th century, when the Empire rested on the laurels of victory over Napoleon. And Russia was able to reduce the backlog from Europe only at the beginning of the First World War. And even then, not everything in heavy artillery, Russia lagged behind the Allies and Germany throughout the war.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 1 August 2015 06: 39
      Tsarism and corruption created a backlog in almost everything, even in small arms, to say nothing of artillery.
      1. Darwin
        Darwin 1 August 2015 09: 38
        At the beginning of the XVIII century, Andrei Konstantinovich Nartov (1693-1756), mechanic of Peter the Great, invented the original turning and copying and screw-cutting machine with a mechanized caliper and a set of interchangeable gears.
      2. Revolver
        Revolver 1 August 2015 09: 43
        Quote: cth; fyn
        Tsarism and corruption have created a backlog in almost everything, even in small arms
        Mosin Rifle 1891 not much inferior to Mauser 1898 or the same Lee Enfield, and perhaps superior to reliability and unpretentiousness, and Lebel, with whom France went through the entire First World War and started the Second, excelled in all respects. The Austrian Manlicher was more advanced, but also moody, especially he did not like sand. And Arisaka next to Mosin looked like a small carbine.
        The machine guns that Russia, Germany and Britain had variations on the theme of Maxim. Austria and France had local developments, but no better.
        The Nagan of 1895, of course, looked obsolete next to the self-loading Luger of 1908 or the Colt of 1911, but the same Britons used Weble's revolvers, no more advanced than the Nagan. And the Austrian Shteyr, although self-loading, did not have a special advantage compared to revolvers, because he was reloading not with a magazine, but like a rifle from a clip, and it was still that crap. Anyway, as a rule, the first couple of shots were of the greatest importance, but in this the revolver will not yield to self-loading, on the contrary, there are no wedges, cartridge poking, and other stops in shooting, and when misfiring it is not necessary to jerk - press the trigger, and he he will serve the next cartridge. And do not remove the fuse.
        So you express your beliefs about the backward and corrupt tsarist regime at a seminar on the history of the CPSU, where they will appreciate you. And here it’s not a ride, here the people are informed.
        1. fyvaprold
          fyvaprold 1 August 2015 13: 58
          Quote: Nagan
          used Webli revolvers, no more advanced than Nagan

          Small correction - "Vebley" had a split frame with simultaneous automatic extraction of cases, which is much more "advanced" than alternate extraction of cases, and it was superior in caliber to the "Nagant". Otherwise, I completely agree with you. With respect.
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 1 August 2015 19: 33
            Quote: fyvaprold
            A small correction - "Vebley" had a split frame with simultaneous automatic extraction of casings, which is much more "advanced" than the alternate extraction of casings, and it was superior in caliber to the "Nagant"

            Your "flaws" were part of the tender requirements. Caliber 7.62 was chosen in order to use the same drilling and rifling equipment as for Mosin, and, if possible, dispose of defective rifle barrels. And piecewise reloading too. One of the main complaints about the predecessor of Nagant, Smith-Wesson, who had a break frame and automatic extraction, was the impossibility of recharging. I exhausted one cartridge, broke it - one cartridge case and 5 cartridges flew away - collect it. And if from a horse? Lack of cartridges and their relative high cost have been a scourge of Russia at least since the days of Suvorov - "Take care of the bullet in the barrel, for two, for three days, for the whole campaign!" (Science of winning), and most likely much earlier. Therefore, they prescribed it in the requirements - by the piece.
            And obturation also because of those requirements "to stop the horse at 50 meters." In the prescribed dimensions, weight, and caliber, this could be achieved only by increasing the muzzle velocity, and the obturation added almost 20%. From there, the main drawback of the Nagant is a difficult descent, especially with self-cocking.
            Believe me, I'm in the subject - I have such a locked in the closet (from children).
            1. BilliBoms09
              BilliBoms09 2 August 2015 03: 40
              The lack of ammunition and their relative high cost have been a scourge of Russia at least since the days of Suvorov - "Take care of a bullet in the barrel, for two, for three days, for a whole campaign!" (Science of winning), and most likely much earlier.
              Well, I agree with the cartridges in the first world round of shell ammunition overcame only by 1916. But about bullets, I think that Suvorov would introduce the complexity of the supply of that time, neither railway nor motor vehicles. The rest I agree plus.
              1. Revolver
                Revolver 2 August 2015 08: 38
                Quote: BilliBoms09

                Mutually +
        2. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 1 August 2015 18: 27
          Yeah, they remembered the mosquito, but the fact that the assembly of the mosquitoes was carried out in France. you didn’t have enough production capacities in Russia, but this is a fact. From whose stocks the Aurora and the Varangian descended? who developed the gun? Berdanka whose brainchild, maxim did not a resident of the United States developed? Maybe we had armadas of tanks and aircraft in the First World War.
          At least the episode of the defense of the Bayazet fortress will explain a lot to us about corruption, even gunpowder and food were stolen, and that even interesting in this situation, Russian soldiers overcame and won.
          1. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 1 August 2015 19: 20
            Quote: cth; fyn
            From whose stocks the Aurora and the Varangian descended?

            "Varyag" from the American ... I'll believe it. But "Aurora" is the brainchild of domestic shipbuilding! Do not mislead not well-read members of the forum! hi
            1. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 2 August 2015 04: 31
              No, about the Aurora and the Varangian, I gave the example correctly, tsarist Russia could not simultaneously build two such ships, because there was no equipment or specialists, the heavy industrial was in, therefore they ordered the construction abroad.
          2. Revolver
            Revolver 1 August 2015 19: 40
            Quote: cth; fyn
            From whose slipways Aurora and Varangian descended
            The Varangian was built in Philadelphia (Philadelphia, PA, USA). And Aurora - in St. Petersburg. Not in the subject - do not disgrace.
          3. BilliBoms09
            BilliBoms09 2 August 2015 03: 49
            Yeah, they remembered the mosquito, but the fact that the assembly of the mosquitoes was carried out in France. you didn’t have enough production capacities in Russia, but this is a fact.
            Where did you get such heresy from? You generally imagine all the technological complexity of producing a new type of weapon, especially during the war. Yes, Russia made purchases of imported weapons, but didn’t place orders for the production of mosquitoes abroad. Even maxims were produced, albeit under a license by H. MаXima, but in the Republic of Ingushetia, since we had our own unique cartridge.
            1. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 2 August 2015 05: 03
              Production of the rifle began in 1892 at the Tula, Izhevsk and Sestroretsk arms factories. Due to the limited production capacity of these factories, an order for 500 thousand rifles was placed at the French arms factory in the city of Chatellerault (Manufacture Nationale d'Armes de Châtelleraut), as well as in the United States from the companies Remington and Westinghouse 1,5 million rifles arr. 1891/10 Some of them were never delivered to Russia - after the Revolution they were confiscated by the US government.

              Military Publishing House, don’t believe me then Military Publishing House, believe me.
        3. Monster_Fat
          Monster_Fat 1 August 2015 18: 31
          "Small" Arisaka 6,5 mm was not a "toy", but was quite an advanced weapon at that time. It was Russia that purchased several tens of thousands of these rifles during the World War and millions of cartridges for them. The 6,5 mm cartridge from "Arisaka" was used by Fedorov for his first assault rifle. And about the revolver ... did you know that only the "officer" version of this revolver had self-cocking? The overwhelming majority of this revolver released in tsarist times was not self-platooning, the so-called "soldier's model"! And only in Soviet times, only its self-cocking modification was made. The Mosin rifle also had its drawbacks, by the way, uncorrected until the very end of its production: the bolt was removed by "deep" pressing the trigger and the soldiers often lost the bolts of their rifles in a hurry of battle - during the Patriotic War it was a disaster. Secondly, the inconveniently located bolt handle did not allow reloading the rifle lying down without changing the aiming line. But Mauser Mannlicher, Krag-Jensen, Lebel, Lee-Metford, etc. allowed to shoot and reload the rifle carried off the shoulder and without knocking down the sight. Maxim was a good machine gun, but Sokolov's wheeled machine was heavy and inconvenient for long-term carrying. Schwarzlose, Dreise and German Maxim had tripod machines with quick installation and removal of the machine gun. In addition, our rag tape was generally something with something and required constant and careful direction of its second number when shooting. I am already silent about the quality of the cartridges themselves, GAU was never able to achieve an acceptable quality of manufacture of cartridges for the entire world war at domestic enterprises and only by ordering the necessary machines and equipment abroad were they able to establish this production, but ... already under Soviet rule.
          1. Metlik
            Metlik 1 August 2015 20: 02
            Wanting to brag to Europe, the simple-minded Empress Elizabeth sent 10 “Unicorns” and 13 “secret howitzers” to Vienna.

            For such "innocence" under Soviet power, they shot and did the right thing. In the end, the dynasty of loafers finally degenerated.
          2. Revolver
            Revolver 1 August 2015 20: 43
            Quote: Monster_Fat
            But Mauser Manlicher, Krag-Jensen, Lebel, Lee-Metford and others. Allowed to shoot and reload the rifle drove away from the shoulder and without shooting down the sight.
            Lebel, speak? She had an integral underbarrel tubular magazine, equipment - the whole thing. Therefore, the store was cherished for serious business, such as repulsing a mass attack, there was a cut-off of the supply, and it was strictly forbidden to turn it off without an order, right up to the tribunal. And so they fired with manual reloading, individually inserting a cartridge into the chamber with handles, approximately like in a reed-gun. And how, while the sight did not go astray?
            In Manlihera there was a huge window for the automatic extraction of waste packs. Sand will fall - a wedge, disassemble-clean, and just did not like dust. And because of the high quality of workmanship and tight tolerances, both Mauser and Lee-Enfield were very sensitive to contamination, and they did not require a man for maintenance. And Mosin’s tolerance was wider (well, they couldn’t do it more precisely, and it wasn’t required), so the gaps were initially assigned more (well, how would the tolerances converge so that the entire gap would be chosen?), And largely because of this there was less sensitivity to pollution and lubricant quality.
            Yes, and with hand weapons about the same. In those conditions (well, let's say, in non-sterile trenches), where Luger is 1908, he is also known as Parabellum, he will wedge Nagana Pokh, know to push downhill, and so on 7 times. True recharge longer. But self-loading seems to have only 2 full-time stores, so the first reload, essno, is much faster, and then equip stores, and also individually.
            1. ty60
              ty60 4 August 2015 23: 39
              That's the same PPSh exceeded MP39 and Kalashnikov-M16. Sprinkle thickly with dust or dip in the dirt. It will immediately become clear who is ...
          3. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 2 August 2015 05: 37
            As for the shutter’s shutter, there’s not a deep press on the shutter, but first you need to open the shutter to its extreme rear position, and then press the shutter and voila, the shutter is separated.
  2. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 1 August 2015 06: 33
    But I wonder how all the same they milled the cone? Yes, and the oval trunk was drilled.
    1. BilliBoms09
      BilliBoms09 1 August 2015 06: 49
      There is such a city in Russia as Tula, so there, in the 17th century, a wedge-shaped shutter was developed. In Europe, only in the second half of the 19th Krup developed. And how did you milling.
      PS When asked why they did not use the shutter, it becomes convenient and profitable with a unitary charge.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 1 August 2015 06: 51
        Did we need it in the 17th century? Proof will be? Chet is hard to believe to be honest ...
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 1 August 2015 07: 00
          I found everything myself, the military publishing house is a serious printing house, and it is not a sin to believe this.
      2. avt
        avt 1 August 2015 08: 24
        Quote: BilliBoms09
        There is such a city in Russia as Tula, so there, in the 17th century, a wedge-shaped shutter was developed.

        They say that Krupp, who claimed to be the first in the invention of the wedge shutter, when he saw the Russian model in St. Petersburg, wanted to buy it, but it didn’t, so he lies in Kronverka.
        Quote: cth; fyn
        Did we need it in the 17th century?

        For the same reason, the breech-loading, rifled rifles of the time that were exhibited in the Armory at the time of the USSR. I won’t say for the current exposition - I haven’t been there for a long time.
    2. Revolver
      Revolver 1 August 2015 09: 10
      Quote: cth; fyn
      But I wonder how all the same they milled the cone? Yes, and the oval trunk was drilled.

    3. JIaIIoTb
      JIaIIoTb 1 August 2015 10: 06
      There is such a technology, casting.
    4. Alex
      Alex 1 August 2015 13: 31
      Quote: cth; fyn
      But I wonder how all the same they milled the cone? Yes, and the oval trunk was drilled.

      I am not a specialist, but, as it seems to me, most likely shaped casting. His technology by that time was sufficiently mastered for such an operation.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 1 August 2015 15: 19
        They cast it, and then bore it on vertical machines. And one more thing, I read for a long time that when casting the barrel of the gun, the caliber was made smaller, because when copper and tin were mixed, a larger amount of bronze containing tin was in the gun’s mouth, which was removed by means of reaming. IMHO
      2. The comment was deleted.
  3. evil partisan
    evil partisan 1 August 2015 08: 13
    In the newsreel of the Battle of the Caucasus 42g. there are about 5 seconds. fragment where the unicorn lit up. He is being raised somewhere on the ropes up on a cliff ...
    1. avt
      avt 1 August 2015 10: 57
      Quote: Angry Guerrilla
      In the newsreel of the Battle of the Caucasus 42g. there are about 5 seconds. fragment where the unicorn lit up. He is being raised somewhere on the ropes up on a cliff ...
      Come on ! Hike the barrel from the regiment 76mm. Look carefully and see the shutter.
      1. evil partisan
        evil partisan 1 August 2015 12: 11
        Told this to his former studio director dock. movie. Sverdlovsk film studio. He saw in the archives of cinema and photo documents. A man extremely savvy in matters of military technology, history, etc.
        1. Djozz
          Djozz 1 August 2015 15: 21
          There is a trunk of a mountain cannon.
  4. boroda64
    boroda64 1 August 2015 09: 24
    thank ..
  5. ICT
    ICT 1 August 2015 09: 36
    Quote: Angry Guerrilla
    In the newsreel of the Battle of the Caucasus 42g. there are about 5 sec. fragment,

    Xnumx but not sure if it's a unicorn
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 1 August 2015 09: 57
      Quote: TIT
      Quote: Angry Guerrilla
      In the newsreel of the Battle of the Caucasus 42g. there are about 5 sec. fragment,

      Xnumx but not sure if it's a unicorn
      It looks more like the barrel of either a regimental or a special mountain howitzer, shown at 10:29
      1. evil partisan
        evil partisan 1 August 2015 12: 18
        Quote: Nagan
        It looks more like the barrel of either a regimental or a special mountain howitzer, shown at 10:29

        I looked. Thank. hi
        I can not determine. Not a specialist. request
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 1 August 2015 09: 41
    I would like to add that in 1754 in the St. Petersburg arsenal under the leadership of A.K. Nartova created a 44-barrel installation of 3-pound (76-mm) copper mortars. The barrel length of each mortar is 230 mm, the charging chamber is conical. Mortars are mounted on an horizontal wooden circle with a diameter of 1,85 mm. Mortyrs are divided into eight sectors of 5 or 6 mortirok. In battle, while some groups of mortars fired multiple salvos, others were charged. In the trunk part of Nartov’s battery there was a metal screw, which served to give the gun the desired elevation angle. Later, the inventor based on the same principle created a 24-barrel installation. In 1756, a 25-barrel installation was made of 1,5-pound (58-mm) mortirok (Captain Chelokaev's system). The length of each mortar is 500 mm. Charging chambers are cylindrical. Unlike the Nartov installation in the Chelokaev system, the mortars did not rotate in the horizontal, but in the vertical plane. The rotating part consisted of a wooden drum bound with iron sheets, on which there were 5 rows of iron forged trunks, 5 in each row. In the breech section, the barrels for the production of volley fire are connected by a common powder shelf with a lid. In addition, in 1743 several field rifled muzzle-loading guns made of steel were made in Tula. In this case, the accuracy of rifled guns significantly exceeded the accuracy of smooth-bore guns of the same caliber. However, the complexity of cutting guns on the one hand, and on the other hand, the high cost of guns and lead shells prevented their wide distribution. In Europe, they have not done this yet ... so to say that Russian artillery was not correctly lagging behind European art in the mid-50s. .
  7. Rostislav
    Rostislav 1 August 2015 10: 15
    They were officially decommissioned only in 1906

    Fantastic longevity! A deep bow to the inventors!
  8. kvs207
    kvs207 1 August 2015 13: 30
    Quote: Nagan
    It looks more like the barrel of either a regimental or a special mountain howitzer, shown at 10:29

    I will support, although the tool is undoubtedly outstanding. I read about it as a child and was very impressed.
    The video does not show the characteristic sagging on the trunk. And, simply, it makes no sense to climb the mountain and spend so much effort to install the "unicorn" there. it needs gunpowder, and smoky, wads and kernels, and so on. Accordingly, you need the skill of shooting from such a weapon, which, in addition, with a range is not as good as that of its modern guns.
  9. Vitail
    Vitail 1 August 2015 13: 34
    Glory to Russian weapons !!!
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 1 August 2015 22: 36
      Another one was fooling around. And on the topic there is nothing to say?
  10. moskowit
    moskowit 1 August 2015 16: 17
    Finally, I waited until they wrote about Shuvalov's howitzers, and the famous artilleryman Glebov was mentioned with a kind word. The creation of "unicorns" is generally a separate song in the history of RUSSIAN artillery. I read about it for a long time. I know from the books "History of Russian artillery" in 8 volumes. My father was the chief of artillery of the division in the 60s, so this edition, though not complete, was distributed among specialists, and was not intended for sale ... I learned so much interesting from these books. They still occupy the most significant place in my home library ...
    These books ...
  11. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 1 August 2015 18: 48
    I personally was very impressed with the moment when Russia replaced Turkey in the artillery championship. Unlike other approximately equal historical events, this happened on a well-known day ... more precisely, in three days. It happened at the Battle of Molodi.
    Then, after all, those who shot these guns often fired from cannons. So, the ministry of heavy industry of Turkey, teams of foundry workers with their guns, and so all of them, along with the rest of the army, came with the Janissaries ...
  12. etti65
    etti65 1 August 2015 19: 17
    With joy we have to realize that our weapons at all times were the best.
  13. izGOI
    izGOI 1 August 2015 20: 11
    Quote: cth; fyn
    Maybe we had armadas of tanks and aircraft in the First World War.

    And there were no Ilya Muromets planes in the sky. And "Novik" did not exist with its brothers. And in general the Russians fought (according to Leo Tolstoy) with the club of the people's war. SO SOMETHING ??????
  14. valeri311
    valeri311 2 August 2015 23: 34
    By the end of the 1th century, we no longer had our own advanced developments. There was such a mutually beneficial chain. We paid OKR Krupp and he transferred the entire set of CD to the Obukhov plant for serial production. The cannons of our main enemy - Great Britain - were not standing nearby. Problems appeared in the 20th century - 1 MV.
    Fast forward to 20-30 years. Soviet artillery - modernization of samples of 1 MV and joint development with Germany (Weimar, limited in the independent production of military equipment).
    Set out in the books of A. Shirokorad
  15. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 3 August 2015 18: 40
    But now, it is not known when the consequences of the Yeltsin era will dissolve