King of the night sky in daylight

I'm sorry that with this part of our stories this is the case. We can still see a few "thirty-four" at the parades, the ZiS-5 is still quite normal. But representatives of our aviation remained only in museums and on pedestals.

It’s a shame that in other countries there are still Mustangs and Messerschmitts in private collections. They say there are our fighters. Everything is in working condition. All fly.

A visit to the Po-2 holiday, dedicated to the Day of Aviation in Omsk, can be interpreted in different ways. It's great, of course, that there were people who restored it to such a state. And it is a pity that only Polykarp's airplane was able to fly.

Five years ago, 9 May in the air parade in Samara, flew alongside two veterans: IL-2 and Po-2. All that remains of our flying history. And here is another one. Great.

The night horror of the German troops and the loyal friend of the partisans, chattering with their little motor, made circles above the airfield. Still not fast, but still confident.

And the author of the pictures told me the following: "Seeing and appreciating this, I would award these girls (" Night Witches ") just because they flew on it."

Comments

[wadim13]

Here is one of the main advantages of the socialist state - defense enterprises are not privately owned, but state owned. Eliminating the factor of "maximum profit by any means", our industry during the war years was able to create huge quantities of cheap and deadly effective weapons.

[veteran66]

Quote: wadim13

cheap and deadly effective weapons.

but this is rather out of despair ... it was much more difficult to create a real night bomber, train the crews for it and establish support. I read a book about "night witches" - the girls took such a risk, but what a risk, to die due to the imperfection of the technique that was

[qwert]

Quote: veteran66

I read a book about "night witches" - the girls took such a risk, but what a risk, to die because of the imperfection of the technique that was

At the same time, German aces considered Po-2 the most difficult goal. It was even easier to bring down Wellington at night, because they did not reward him for his destruction. Sometimes cheap and even archaic equipment is more effective than something more sophisticated. Kalashnikov assault rifle is another example

[ZVTSO]

Quote: qwert

At the same time, German aces considered Po-2 the most difficult target.

No need to retell the stories invented by sovagitprop. Unfortunately percale burned very well.

Quote: qwert

Sometimes cheap and even archaic equipment is more effective than something more sophisticated.

The history of such cases does not know.

Quote: qwert

Kalashnikov assault rifle is another example

What is an example? Where and in what is the AK-47 archaic and cheap? A fairly complex and expensive weapon. With insufficient efficiency. Therefore, it was replaced by the AK-74. This is a completely different weapon if you are not in the know.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: SEC

percale

from which the I-16 was built was much less fire hazardous than the English "Kitihawk", which could catch fire from several bullets hitting the wing. A large amount of magnesium in aluminum made it impossible to extinguish an incipient fire. Golubev, who had transferred to a "foreigner", with a pain in his heart recalled his I-16 all in patches, but never burning. Po-2 burned when it hit the gas tanks, burned almost instantly, it's true, but try to get into the gas tank in the dark.

Quote: SEC

Sufficiently complex and expensive weapons

One M-16 can buy three Kalashnikovs. And if Chinese, then a small cart.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

One M-16 can buy three Kalashnikovs

The fact of the matter is that the AK-47 can only be sold cheaper than cost. In fact, the army does not need a single normal country in the world. He and the USSR was not needed.

[vladimir_krm]

That's what in Iraq, the Americans changed the M-16 to AK. That in the sand does not work, but I want to live.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: vladimir_krm

Something in Iraq, the Americans changed the M-16 to AK. That in the sand does not work, but I want to live

And especially they chased after the PCA.
It’s funny. The Bolshevik passion for ridiculous myth-making has not yet been eradicated.
Strange, but people hawala. I don’t understand the other thing that takes place, the stupidity of people, or simply its permanent readiness to believe in all sorts of funny tales?

[bastard]

Quote: veteran66

Quote: wadim13
cheap and deadly effective weapons.
but this is rather out of despair ... it was much more difficult to create a real night bomber, train the crews for it and establish support. I read a book about "night witches" - the girls took such a risk, but what a risk, to die due to the imperfection of the technique that was

A real night bomber is much more difficult to create, yes! It is no less difficult and costly in terms of finance and time to prepare a crew for it. I hope you won't argue? The U-2 (Po-2) was created as an aircraft of initial training, forgiving the beginner the most gross piloting mistakes, it even had to be driven into a tailspin deliberately, by the way, even Kamanin's 14-year-old son flew on it in war. Even furniture factories and bed workshops produced this unique machine, in total for the period 1928 - 1954 .. 33000 of them were built, my dad also told me how he made his first jumps from it before the army, getting out on the wing. The same UT-2 A. Yakovlev cost much more in production, although it came with the same engine. Po-2 was used as a liaison, headquarters, postal, ambulance, reconnaissance aircraft, as an artillery fire spotter and reconnaissance aircraft, including the weather. And in peacetime, also as an aircraft for agricultural and forest patrol aviation, for which he earned the nickname "maize", "skit", "forester", etc.
Polikarpov managed to create a universal vehicle
This aircraft could be controlled not only by any pilot, but even by a student of any flying club, ordinary boys and girls of that time.
Regarding the risk: didn't the fighter and bomber pilots risked flying on a combat mission? They, too, could be shot down and they were also hunted. They tried not to use "Kukuruznik" as a night bomber during daylight hours (but that was also the case), and our girls were brave, resourceful and prudent, they knew what they were doing and were eager to fight, to beat the fascist reptile. I would like to see how Putin, Medvedev and Surkov with the Prokhorovs and Dvorkovichs, if anything (God forbid), will recruit girls from nightclubs, taverns and spas, and from other stops.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: villain

UT-2 A. Yakovleva

pilots did not remember with a kind word, this plane claimed the lives of many pilots with its fortresses during landing.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: veteran66

it was much harder to create a real night bomber,

In Korea, the Po-2 regiment with great success smashed American jets at airfields and without any loss on its part. The Americans could not find the Po-2 opposition. And is this a (un) real night bomber?

Quote: veteran66

from hopelessness

started, but the effect was amazing. According to the conclusions of the special commission investigating the effectiveness of the bombers, it was found that only Il-2 are second in accuracy to Po-2, after Po-2 in third place is Pe-2.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: wadim13

our industry during the war years was able to create, in huge numbers, cheap and deadly effective weapons

And can you give at least 1 example of this?

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

Quote: wadim13
our industry during the war years was able to create, in huge numbers, cheap and deadly effective weapons

Quote: SEC

And can you give at least 1 example of this?

Here are two for you:
PPSh and partisans.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

PCA!

PPS-43 probably? And what was the effectiveness of the PPS-43? It was cheap, no one argues with that. But with efficiency ... With this, the Soviet weapon on the cartridge 7,62x25 mm TT was all very bad. Have PPSh, too, if we are talking about him. A kind of "elongated bayonet", figuratively speaking. I didn't pull a real full-fledged submachine gun.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

PPS-43 probably? And what was the effectiveness of the PPS-43? It was cheap, no one argues with that. But with efficiency ... With this, the Soviet weapon on the cartridge 7,62x25 mm TT was all very bad. Have PPSh, too, if we are talking about him. A kind of "elongated bayonet", figuratively speaking. I didn't pull a real full-fledged submachine gun.

Do not distort! PPSh produced 6 million units, PPS - 2 million units. and has been used sparingly (see Wiki).
It turns out that Schmeiser pulled on a full-fledged submachine gun?
PPSh has a higher rate of fire than Schmeiser.
The aiming range at PPSh is 200 - 300 m, at Schmeiser - 100 m. The caliber at Schmeiser is yes, more.
Did you by any chance fought for the Wehrmacht? And then I have a grudge for my grandfathers on the Germans and all the Reichs in general. Schoolboy, Edren-root! As far as I know, an artist from Austria, who decided to "liberate" the USSR from the Bolsheviks, with the super-genius Schmeisser in service, lost to the "ugly Stalinist regime", including because of the characteristics of the PPSh.
And we still studied and disassembled-assembled the PPSh at the lessons of the NVP (initial military training).

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

Do not distort! PPSh produced 6 million units, PPS - 2 million units. and applied limitedly

Why did you write this? For what?

Quote: villain

It turns out that Schmeiser pulled on a full-fledged submachine gun?

You may be well off. I don’t know anything about it.

Quote: villain

PPSh has a higher rate of fire than Schmeiser

Use the correct terms. Schmeiser, it's more like an assault rifle than a submachine gun. The rate of fire of PPSh / PPS and MP-38/40 is exactly the same.
If you write about the rate of fire, then the increased rate of PPSh / PPS was actually their drawback. Although the Bolsheviks promoted this as a virtue for propaganda purposes. Based on illiterate people. Which shavat. Still hawala.

Quote: villain

Sighting range at PPSh - 200 - 300 m, at Schmeiser - 100 m.

And what is so modest? Write already 1200-1300 m. Or 2200-2300 m. It's free.
In fact, the effective range of the PPSh / PPS was 30 m. The MP-40 had 60 m. Both of them are below the norm. The normal effective range for submachine guns is ~ 100 m. The same should be their aiming range. There is no need to go further.

Quote: villain

Schoolboy, root-edren!

Is that what you call yourself?

Quote: villain

with the super-genius Schmeiser in service, lost to the "ugly Stalinist regime", including because of the characteristics of the PPSh

This is where the PPSh did not help at all. And the MP-40 was an auxiliary weapon in the Wehrmacht. In contrast to the Red Army, where there were "companies of machine gunners". In fact, suicide bombers. After all, the effective firing range of the MG was 450 m. And the German Mauser 400 m. Compare this with the 30 m of the "machine gunners". But people again hawala stories about "cool machine gunners". The entire USSR consisted of such "stories". Some kind of just a pathological continuous lie.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: SEC

The normal effective firing range for submachine guns is ~ 100 m.

I brought you the European pre-war standards for submachine guns. The next step in Europe was various kinds of rifles with an effective range of 400 m. This is considered the norm, because corresponds to the physiological capabilities of the human eye.
At that time, the Americans had their own view on small arms. They made self-loading rifles with an effective range of 400 m and weapons with an effective range of 200 m.
One of the representatives of such weapons was Thompson's submachine gun. A brilliant thing. On a pistol cartridge (a submachine gun) he gave an effective (and aimed) range of 210 m !!! Like a carbine rifle !!! In the OGPU and border troops before the war, this weapon (procured by the USSR) was called a light machine gun.
But the regular American M2 submachine gun was unsuccessful. Due to the wrong gauge.
During the war in Germany and after the war in the USSR, at one time weapons were produced with an effective firing range of 300 m. And nowhere else in the world did such weapons were produced.
In Germany, it was called "assault rifle" and was forced to issue. Due to the catastrophic drop in the density of fire for the Germans. The concept of a "single machine gun" played a cruel joke on them. Having lost in the effective firing range of 100 m, the Germans compensated for this with the density of fire. After the war, the Germans no longer released such an ersatz.
In the USSR, after the war, the AK-47 assault rifle was produced. Not forced. And from illiteracy and stupidity. In the early 70s, it was discontinued and replaced with a weapon of a new operating principle, the AK-74. The effective firing range of the AK-74, when using a lower power cartridge, is about 400 m. This is a different weapon. And ballistically, there is nothing in common between the AK-47 and AK-74.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

After the war, the Germans no longer produced such an ersatz.
In the USSR, after the war, the AK-47 assault rifle was produced. Not forced. And from illiteracy and stupidity.

What kind of fools were sitting in the USSR Ministry of Defense and where were you then? You should urgently consult Marshals Grechko, Agarkov, Ustinov, etc. and point out to Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov gross miscalculations and shortcomings in the design of the AK-47. So severely, in a fatherly way to blame the KB and military representatives. Well, then we would have kicked everyone’s tail!
So, and now immediately do the homework, the mother will check. What was asked there? Ta-a-ak, herbarium, application and composition, yeah. And the textbooks wrap!

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

What fools were sitting in the USSR Ministry of Defense

That there is a cartridge 7,62x39 mm. They adopted "macaroni" back in the 50s. There was laughter all over the world.
And as for the 5,45x39 mm cartridge, I generally keep quiet. Torment continues with him. But this one is nothing. Only slightly weaker than normal.
And what kind of trick did these same figures throw out before the war. This is not a fairy tale to say, nor to describe with a pen. There were not enough resources, everything was poured into the trash. Note, they didn’t steal, but they did it. So, in the end, their USSR was pissed away. Concerns about "defense capability". So they called this mismanagement.
All violent activity was imitated. With zero result. As a result, in WW2, they fought with the tsar’s weapons and sovereignty on a cartridge of 7,62x25 mm.
The "history of the creation of the ZIS-3" stands apart. It's just a "song". Giant 12-year government spending ended in a banal AND UNSUCCESSFUL plagiarism on the German Pak 97/38 mod. 1941 The plagiarism was unsuccessful (the Soviet patron of the late 30s was unsuccessful), but in the traditions of the Bolsheviks it became "the best in the world." Although the ZIS-3 itself, as a construct, without taking into account ballistics, was nothing. But there is no cannon without a cartridge. But in the complex it turned out badly.

Quote: villain

and point out to Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov gross miscalculations and shortcomings in the design of the AK-47

Do you understand the difference between the terms "ballistics" and "construction"? I have a feeling that it is not.
And there are also claims to the Kalashnikov design. For example, the cost of a product is very high. Because of the receiver.

Quote: villain

It’s harsh, fatherly to blast KB and military representatives

Gee-gee. What is common between the KB and military representatives? You just decided to write me all the words you know?

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

You just decided to write me all the words you know?

Not all ish. I know many different words.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SEC

The "history of the creation of the ZIS-3" stands apart. It's just a "song". Giant 12-year government spending ended in a banal AND UNSUCCESSFUL plagiarism on the German Pak 97/38 mod. 1941

Gorgeous. And in what way did the ZIS-1941 that appeared in the summer of 3 become the plagiarism of Pak 97/38, which appeared at the very end of 1941? Not otherwise, Grabin had a personal DeLorean ...
And in general, how can one compare a mass divisional gun with a highly specialized anti-aircraft gun?

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexey RA

And how is it that appeared in the summer of 1941 ZIS-3

Wrong for a year. ZIS-3 appeared in the army in the spring of 1942. And in February of the same year, she passed state tests, after which it was put into service. This is reflected in its name "... arr. 1942". And in January 1941. it was shown to Stalin. And in December 1941. the gun was factory tested. And at the very end of November 1941. The ZIS-3 was basically ready. I recommend that you read documents, not murzilki like "Memoirs of G." You won't find anything sensible there. One delirium for the glory of itself, mostly.

Quote: Alexey RA

Pak 97/38, which appeared at the very end of 1941?

Autumn 1941
Just then, Grabin received from Stalin the task of establishing a large-scale production of the F-22USV. And I thought about how to accomplish this task. As a result of his thoughts and acquaintance with imported equipment, the ZIS-3 was born. Even the muzzle brake of the ZIS-3 was of the "German" type. The F-22USV batch on the ZIS-2 machine (they are trying to pass it off to us as a supposedly ZIS-3 arr. 1941) was equipped with a "Soviet" type muzzle. In addition, these guns had a different carriage (ZIS-2). This happened after 23.11.41/2/22, after the ZIS-22 was discontinued. The backlog of gun carriages had to be used, so an F-1941USV with a muzzle was installed on them (swinging parts were in stock). It is interesting that the stock of swinging parts of the F-34USV appeared because in November 500. a batch of F-22s (about XNUMX pieces) went to the front on F-XNUMXUSV carriages.

Quote: Alexey RA

And in general, how can one compare a mass divisional gun with a highly specialized anti-aircraft gun?

Gee-gee. Can you name at least some three fundamentally different details of these "different guns"? Everything is the same. And the purpose is also the same. Miscellaneous, just the name. And part of the ZIS-3, for some reason, had a higher elevation angle. Foolishly, most likely. And then, one to one.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SEC

Wrong for a year. ZIS-3 appeared in the army in the spring of 1942. And in February of the same year, she passed state tests, after which it was put into service. This is reflected in its name "... arr. 1942".

That is, until February 1942, guns did not exist in nature. And on July 22, 1941, the first prototype ZIS-3 was not shown to anyone (the very model for which Grabin received a reasonable drag - for a small UVN). And Kulik in 1941 twice did not send the gun to military tests.

Quote: SEC

Autumn 1941
Just then, Grabin received from Stalin the task of establishing a large-scale production of the F-22USV. And I thought how to accomplish this task. As a result of his thoughts and acquaintance with imported equipment, the ZIS-3 was born.

In fact, this task was feasible without ZIS-3. There was such a gun - ZIS-22-USV - the F-22USV mobility.

Quote: SEC

And the purpose is also the same.

Oh, really Pak 97/38 was part of the German artillery divisions? And worked with PDO during artillery training?

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexey RA

That is, until February 1942, guns did not exist in nature

Until the end of November 1941. By December 1941. the cannon was mostly finished, but it had not even passed the factory tests yet. As a result of which a number of changes were made to its design. And in 1942. there were still state tests (12.01). Based on their results on 12.02.41. GKO decree # 1274 was issued: "On the results of field tests and on the adoption by the Red Army of the 76-mm divisional gun ZIS-3, design of the plant # 92 NKV."

Quote: Alexey RA

And on July 22, 1941, the first prototype ZIS-3 was not shown to anyone (the same model for which Grabin received a reasonable drag - for a small UVN)

These are tales. Fantasy memoirists. There is no documentary evidence of these fantasies.
Even on 10.08.41/3/3. in a conversation with Stalin, Grubin does not mention anything about ZIS-XNUMX. Although Stalin directly asked him if there was any secret van der Waffe in the coffin of Grabin. Like, very large quantities of guns are needed. After which he gave the task to think about how to make a lot of them and cheaply. From this moment begins the history of the creation of the ZIS-XNUMX.

Quote: Alexey RA

And Kulik in 1941 twice did not send the gun to military tests.

He could not do this physically. Because 20.06.41/16.06.41/5 from the post of head of GAU was dismissed. And on the same day he handed things over to the new head of the GAU. And the order was signed on June XNUMX, XNUMX. XNUMX days Kulik handed over the case. I already wrote to you, be guided by documents, but not memoirs.

Quote: Alexey RA

In fact, this task was feasible without ZIS-3. There was such a cannon - ZIS-22-USV - F-22USV mobvariant

Maybe. They were generally produced at 4 factories (also the Stalingrad plant "Barrikady", the Sverdlovsk plant №9 and the Leningrad plant №232 "Bolshevik"). "Barricades" produced F-22USV until the very life of Stalingrad. In addition, I have already mentioned the F-34 party on the F-22USV carriages and the F-22USV party with diesel fuel on the ZIS-2 carriages.
But without the ZIS-3, the task of conveyor release of the gun could not be solved. Here we must pay tribute to Yelyan and Grabin. They turned a big deal. I already wrote that the ZIS-3 construct was good. The Soviet cartridge of the late 30s was bad. From this, the overall effect is unimportant.

Quote: Alexey RA

Oh, really Pak 97/38 was part of the German artillery divisions?

The Germans, like the rest of the world, except for the Red Army, did not have such a concept as a "divisional gun". It was a throwback from WW1.
As for the artillery preparation with the help of three inches, do not tell. With its propelling part. Money down the drain. In the Bolshevik style.

[shasherin.pavel]

L-11 gun for the T-34 1940 of the year, F-32 tank gun for the KV-1, F-34 tank gun for the T-34 1941 of the year. The f-34 guns could not go to the front without tanks. Grabin mounted the 76 mm barrel on the carriage of the ZiS-2 anti-tank gun with a caliber of 57 mm, which had a limited angle of elevation of the barrel, which reduced the firing range compared to the F-22 SPM. The ZiS -2 recoil devices were significantly weaker, since the 57 mm gun shell weighed only 3 kg., And a muzzle brake had to be installed, which absorbed 30% recoil. In the same way, howitzers were able to mount the 122 mm barrel on the 152 carriage. Since the German gunners, having familiarized themselves with the F-22, took it into service and armed them with anti-tank self-propelled guns.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

The f-34 guns could not go to the front without tanks.

Well, I’ll clarify the barrel group of the F-34 gun. I thought it was clear to everyone.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

The "history of the creation of the ZIS-3" stands apart. It's just a "song".

Most gracious! They didn’t put a ZIS-3 cannon on the maize, and did not even try: it would not take off.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

They didn’t put a ZIS-3 gun on a maize, and didn’t even try: it won’t take off

Have you tried and failed?
But didn’t you try to set backwards? And shoot along the take-off? Try, I give an idea.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: SEC

macaroni

Statistics show that every second FBI member has a spare Makarov pistol. They just can't laugh. Can you explain why America's cops switched to a less powerful cartridge? When shooting indoors, a powerful cartridge pierced through the criminal and struck a second policeman in a straight line or ricocheted. "Macaron" is a police pistol, it is a pity that it was changed in the army, but the police in the city are the best.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

Statistics show that every second FBI member has a spare Makarov pistol

FBI, is this an army? The conversation was about army weapons.

[Alexashka964]

Quote: SEC

In the USSR, after the war, the AK-47 assault rifle was produced. Not forced. And from illiteracy and stupidity. In the early 70s, it was discontinued and replaced with a weapon of a new operating principle, the AK-74. The effective firing range of the AK-74, when using a lower power cartridge, is about 400 m. This is a different weapon. And ballistically, there is nothing in common between the AK-47 and AK-74.

Have you ever seen this weapon in your eyes? I don’t ask about shooting from him. AK-47, AKM (you can make such a comparison) is a weapon with an SIGHT firing range of 600-800 meters (due to the characteristics of the ammunition), AK-74 is a lightweight copy of the AKM, chambered for 5,45x39 mm. Sighting range of 625 m. (On the growth target). Ballistics are really different, the mass of the bullet varies by more than 2 times. bullet drag + technological and special features (such as armor-piercing, etc. ammunition). By the way, 5,45 caliber ammunition has a high tendency to ricochet, which reduces the effectiveness of weapons at long distances.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexashka964

AK-47, aka AKM (you can make such a comparison) - a weapon with an SIGHT firing range of 600-800 meters (due to the characteristics of the ammunition),

And why do weapons with an effective range of 300 m aiming range of 600-800 m? Ammo spent in vain? The weapon must be BALANCED.
The communists knew how to stir up some strange and useless crap, and then pass it off as an "outstanding advantage." True, then they themselves gave up this "outstanding weapon". But the weapon still remained "outstanding". The question arises, which member was refused? What was missing?
But they will not answer this question. They know why they refused, but they will not answer. And I'll tell you what was missing, the effective firing range. AK-47 (AKM) were ersatz weapons. Why the Germans adopted it during the war is clear and understandable. Why it was adopted by the strategists in red trousers ALREADY AFTER THE WAR is completely incomprehensible. And they didn't use it for long. How the Vietnam War happened, how they looked at the results of the M16A1 (weapons with ammunition of a completely different principle of action), so they poured "the most outstanding weapon" into the ditch. And they did the right thing. An even more correct decision was not to accept it at all. As the whole world did. After all, nowhere in the world were automatic rifles (assault rifles) on the classic bullet released anymore. There are few rich fools in the world. Basically one of two things.

Quote: Alexashka964

AK-74 is a lightweight copy of AKM, chambered for 5,45x39 mm.

You're wrong. The AK-74 with the AK-47 (AKM) ballistic has nothing in common. These are two completely different types of weapons. They have ammunition of a completely different principle of action. Therefore, the AK-74, with much less power than the AK-47, has an effective firing range of about 400 m. effective range for firing a weapon on a rifle cartridge and a classic pool. Which is considered a full-fledged army individual weapon. And ersatz AK-47 with its eff. with a range of 300 m, he could only envy.

Quote: Alexashka964

By the way, 5,45 caliber ammunition has a high tendency to ricochet, which reduces the effectiveness of weapons at long distances.

You are misunderstanding the term "efficiency". The bullet's tendency to ricochet is a side effect of dramatically IMPROVING the weapon's effectiveness. The effect of the AK-74 bullet repeats the effect of a dum-dum bullet (expansive), but in a different way, not prohibited by the Hague Convention.
Actually a weapon on cartridges with such bullets, this is a natural disgust. But it is allowed, in the time of The Hague, they could not even imagine that the Americans would think of such a thing. Therefore they do. All. And the Chinese, too. They have their own cartridge.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: SEC

less power

??? smaller caliber, but the powder charge remained the same as that of the AK-47! like the sleeve, she only narrowed the dulce to a smaller caliber.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

?? smaller caliber, but the powder charge remained the same as that of the AK-47! like the sleeve, she only narrowed the dulce to a smaller caliber.

And their caliber is different.
And their weight is different.
And the case they have is completely different.
And their power is different.
And the principle of operation of bullets is different.
Total only 2 letters (AK) and similar numbers (47 and 74). As well as constructive systems.
But in terms of ballistics and efficiency, there is nothing in common between them.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

... The entire USSR consisted of such "stories". Some kind of just a pathological solid lie

Travel to the USA or Israel, you will live under the strict guidance and gentle, touching care of people (especially those who live outside their states, Yugoslavia, for example, Iraq, or Syria, Libya. You will find a list on the Internet.) Of their administration and among the crystal honest people. The border is not locked.

Quote: SEC

In contrast to the Red Army, where there were "companies of machine gunners". In fact, suicide bombers. After all, the effective firing range of the MG was 450 m. And the German Mauser 400 m. Compare this with the 30 m of the "machine gunners".

Have you read Suvorov-Rezun? I also happened.
I also happened to serve in the SA. There, in the shooting range, I fired a Makar at a distance of 50 and 100 meters, they made fun of me. What 30 m there are, from 100 m you can hit a growth target from a pistol, not in the top ten, of course, but the target is hit, at least in the shoulder, here is your efficiency. Before the army and a little after the shooting I was engaged. For example, the distance of a match pistol (5,6mm) is 50m. It is necessary to knock out "tens". And what is typical, just do not be surprised, I did it. The coach often deliberately moved the targets at a double distance, and in pneumatic training, too. So that the confidence in the competition was higher.
So from a pistol from 50 meters, if you have the skill, you can guaranteedly hit a chest target or a person, and even from a machine gun, even more so, the barrel is longer. Automatic weapons are designed to create dense fire, but a trained fighter from the PPSh, and even more so from the "Kalash", is guaranteed to blow the skull from a hundred meters. I personally had a chance to shoot from both. From the PPSh at the training camp about 30 years ago, they were brought from conservation, they say that they are still in storage. The PPSh is a very simple and reliable machine, it is a little heavy, but it is a plus for the kumpol with a butt in hand-to-hand combat. But you have to get used to charging the disc magazine, there were also the usual "horns", but he spits them out at once.
Mauser did not shoot.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

Travel to the USA or Israel, you will live under the strict guidance and gentle, touching care of people (especially those who live outside their states, Yugoslavia, for example, Iraq, or Syria, Libya. You will find the list on the Internet.)

After all, in all normal countries they care about the welfare of their compatriots. They call this "caring for people." And only the scoops are concerned about the welfare of HZ anyone. But not compatriots. And they also call it "caring for people." And what, do not people live in their own country? Compatriots only have a pick in their hands, a bowl of gruel in their teeth and a place on the bunk in the barracks?

Quote: villain

PPSh is a very simple and reliable machine, it’s a little heavy, but on the cumpole the butt in hand-to-hand combat is a plus.

God, how illiterate you are. You don’t know anything about army weapons. And you don’t want to know.

Quote: villain

It is necessary to knock out "tens"

Dozens need to be knocked out in a dash. Sporting weapons. Army weapons have their own tasks. Not sporting in nature.

Quote: villain

What 30 m there are, from 100 m you can hit a growth target from a pistol, not in the top ten, of course, but the target is hit, at least in the shoulder, here is your efficiency.

This "hit target" will then be bandaged, take Mauser in hand and make you a blind man. Keep in mind. You have absolutely no idea how an army weapon should function. Why does it even exist. Then you have targets in the shooting range. That’s some kind of crap.

Quote: villain

For confidence in the competition was higher

Exactly. I say, an athlete. And he talks about the army. Not understanding anything about it.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

Dozens need to be knocked out in a dash. Sporting weapons. Army weapons have their own tasks. Not sporting in nature.

Kaneshna, dear! You still tell the partisans that they don't fight with a hunting shotgun. As for the little ones in the war: I recommend V. Milchakov's book "Chicks of the Eagles" for extracurricular reading, where the teenager felled the Krauts from the small car, although he was fond of shooting before the war, under the "dictator Stalin" small children in sports goods were freely sold to adult citizens.

Quote: SEC

Keep in mind. You absolutely do not understand how army weapons should operate. Why does it even exist. Then you have targets in the dash. That’s some kind of crap.

Well, yes, in our army, they didn’t hang targets at the shooting range, but put up guards, and at practical exercises violators of the USSR borders shot at the bathhouse so that we would not faint from the sight of blood in battle. They were brought in wagons. And targets are for children. Army weapons, of course, are very different from sports ones: both the trigger on top and the aiming bar on the side. And if you bend the barrel, then you can shoot around the corner!

Quote: SEC

Exactly. I say, an athlete. And he talks about the army. Not understanding anything about it.

Here I’m caught! I am not an athlete, but a sportsman. Sport doesn’t help a sick person, but a healthy one doesn’t need a fuck. Well, march to learn lessons! I'm sick of you.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: villain

that they don’t fight from a hunting shotgun.

I see you are a supporter of the quack approach to solving problems. Want to fight melkashoy. Dig a ditch with a shovel. Etc. Have you heard anything about specialized things? About army small arms? About the excavator? Read something on this topic.

Quote: villain

Army weapons, of course, are very different from sports

You will be surprised, but very much. Completely different things. In terms of ballistics. See what this word means. It is important for firearms.

Quote: villain

Well, march to learn lessons! I'm sick of you

Parody your dad?

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

I see you are a supporter of the quack approach to solving problems.

Here's a scribbler, a Chukchi not a reader, a Chukchi writer, however! Pianist, eprst! Peterson and Richter nervously smoke on the sidelines. You are not Matsuev for the occasion? Fingers run and run. Is "Murka" weak on the keyboard? By the way, are the lessons done? No matter how we all have to blush at the parent meeting. Let's get back to the topic: Mauser and Schmeiser were not installed on PO-2!

Quote: SEC

Parody your dad?

Dad not to paw! Everlasting memory.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SEC

Use the correct terms. Schmeiser, it's more like an assault rifle than a submachine gun.

Ahem ... are you talking about MP-38/40? Assault rifle under a pistol cartridge, with an effective range of 100 m and with automatic shutter release?
Around the world, such a weapon is called SMG - a submachine gun.

Quote: SEC

And the MP-40 was an auxiliary weapon in the Wehrmacht. In contrast to the Red Army, where there were "companies of machine gunners". In fact, suicide bombers

As I understand it, you have not read the Charter and instructions on the use of submachine gunners. But in them it is written in black and white - how and when to use such units in order to maximize the use of the advantages of PP and eliminate their shortcomings.
For example, in the Infantry Fighting Manual of 1942, the role of machine-gunners is defined absolutely clearly: light infantry for reconnaissance and support of line infantry. The task - acting in small groups, to open the enemy’s defense system and seep through the weakly protected areas, and then engage in close combat, attacking from the flank and rear. Plus a tank landing, where the machine gunners again work at close range, protecting the tank from lovers of tele-mines, fausts and gas cans (the tank itself crushes targets at long distances).

With improper tactical use, all become suicide bombers - even heavy tank battalions.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexey RA

Are you talking about MP-38/40?

Actually about Sturmgewehr 44. This is a Schmeisser product. And not MP-40.

Quote: Alexey RA

and line infantry support.

From this place in more detail. How and whom could they support with their 30-meter fart. Then it was easier to form "companies of metalworkers". It would be more efficient.

Quote: Alexey RA

open the enemy defense system

Charming. Tell me how and what they could open if MG laid them from 450 m, Mauser from 400 m, and they could start putting Germans from 30 m. To write charters, not to carry bags.

Quote: Alexey RA

then engage in close combat, attacking from the flank and rear.

After that, it's understandable. But here's how to get to this "after what"?

Quote: Alexey RA

Plus a tank landing, where the machine gunners again work at close range, protecting the tank from lovers of tele-mines, fausts and gas cans (the tank itself crushes targets at long distances).

You are not that "watching a movie about the war." Watch War As War. It clearly shows what the tank landing party does at the very first shots.

Quote: Alexey RA

With improper tactical use, all become suicide bombers - even heavy tank battalions.

"Companies of submachine gunners" become such even when used correctly. Why is indicated above. Because nobody knows how they can get to the second phase of their task. Through the first. Where they will shoot them, as in a shooting range. Those. completely safe. The "submachine gunners" had nothing to answer with.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SEC

Charming. Tell me how and what they could open if MG laid them from 450 m, Mauser from 400 m, and they could start putting Germans from 30 m. To write charters, not to carry bags

You would read the Charter first. In collaboration with rifle units.
Moreover, the task of the machine gunners was just to find those places in which the defense was the weakest or even absent. And do not beat his forehead about machine guns. That is what is written in the Charter.

Quote: SEC

You are not that "watching a movie about the war." Watch War As War. It clearly shows what the tank landing party does at the very first shots.

Uh-huh ... after which this tank marines are mostly killed due to the lack of an armored "long arm". And the survivors gain invaluable experience - the life of a tank paratrooper is directly related to the integrity of his tank.
In Berlin, the tank marines were fairly effective in cleaning the "dead zone" of their tanks. Fortunately, the effective range of the "fausts" was even lower than that of the PP.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexey RA

Moreover, the task of the machine gunners was just to find those places in which the defense was the weakest or even absent.

Then they could be equipped with axes and pitchforks. The effect would be about the same. Only cheaper.
"Companies of machine gunners" is a veiled shortage of small arms. "Bad Nikolasha" in exactly the same situation bought weapons abroad. But Stalin generally did not order small arms under Lend-Lease. And massively armed the soldier with crap like the PP. "The Russian woman is still giving birth." The reptile is chipped.

Quote: Alexey RA

In Berlin, the tank marines were fairly effective in cleaning the "dead zone" of their tanks.

Berlin is a city. Fights in the city are radically different from battles in the field. In the city, PPs were a suitable weapon. But Berlin still had to be reached somehow.

[bastard]

Quote: SEC

Use the correct terms. Schmeiser, it's more like an assault rifle than a submachine gun.

Yeah, a nuclear-pumped blaster.

Quote: SEC

The rate of fire of PPSh / PPS and MP-38/40 is exactly the same.

Oh !?

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: SEC

MP-38 / 40 is exactly the same.

The machine gun of the 38 of the year and 40 of the year was not created by Uwe Schmeisser, but by the design bureau of the Yerma arms factory. He was nicknamed Schmeisser according to the police model of designer Schmeisser, who was supposed to replace the MP-38 in the troops. But he was never an assault rifle, as he had an 9 mm pistol cartridge.

Quote: SEC

PPP and MP-38 / 40 are exactly the same.

but not PPSh at which the rate of fire is theoretical in 1000 shots, compare the 600 shots at PPS and MP-38 \ 40.

Quote: SEC

increased rate of PPSh / PPS

what nonsense ?! there is the concept of practical rate of fire, when it is checked how many shots a shooter can produce when reloading a weapon, but in this case the loaded magazines change.
Idiocy full of everything written further. Bulletproof vest of the first category is considered if it stops a bullet from a TT with 10 meters. This is the standard all over the world. Armor penetration from TT surpasses even Mauser.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

Machinenpistole 38 years and 40 years not created by Uwe Schmeisser

This is you write to the wrong address. I also just wrote that the MP-40 is not Schmeisser's work.

Quote: shasherin.pavel

But he was never an assault rifle, as he had a 9 mm pistol cartridge.

So am I about the same. But Schmeisser just made the Sturmgewehr 44 assault rifle.

Quote: shasherin.pavel

but not PPSh at which theoretical rate of fire of 1000 shots

The "theoretical rate of fire" is correctly called the rate of fire. The high rate of fire of the PPSh is its disadvantage.
But just the rate of German and Soviet PP was exactly the same.

Quote: shasherin.pavel

what nonsense ?!

This is not nonsense. There is a typo. Everywhere further it is written about the rate of fire. And I meant the rate of fire, and not the rate of fire.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

there is the concept of practical rate of fire, when it is checked how many shots a shooter can produce when reloading a weapon, but in this case the loaded magazines change.

This is only part of the factors affecting rate of fire.

Quote: shasherin.pavel

Idiocy full of everything written further. Bulletproof vest of the first category is considered if it stops a bullet from a TT with 10 meters. This is the standard all over the world. Armor penetration from TT surpasses even Mauser.

Why are you writing to me in response to other people's sayings. I did not write this. You write your answers at.

[shasherin.pavel]

Quote: villain

Sighting range at PPSh -

-in 41, up to 1000 meters, namely a thousand, not a hundred. Soldiers from the front wrote to Shpagin that they rarely shoot from his machine gun at a distance of 200 meters, and Shpagin to the PPSh-42 machine gun (its difference is only in the reduction in production costs and a new sight, flip-over L-shaped pillars at 100 and 200 meters). But the bullet of the Shpaginsky machine gun hit targets at 1000 meters during testing. The weakest cartridge for a 5.5 mm pistol throws a bullet at a firing angle of 45 degrees at 1700 meters. (please understand that the bullet only falls to the ground at a distance of 1700 meters). 7.62 - 54 from the "Maxim" machine gun has a maximum firing range of 5 km. horizontally. Here you can recall the case when a policeman in New York fired into the air, and two blocks away from him, a bullet from his pistol hit a woman, hitting her in the shoulder and entering her body 20 cm. The examination showed that the bullet hit the woman at an angle at 85-87 degrees, that is, the bullet lost speed, just fell almost vertically, but the woman was wounded. This is the maximum firing range, but this is not an aiming range at which it is guaranteed to hit the enemy.

[Alexashka964]

Quote: SEC

PPS-43 probably

You, perhaps, relate to the history of Russian weapons sideways. Submachine guns began to be developed in the USSR in the mid-20s (!!!). The first PP was created by Degtyarev (PDP) back in 1934, and in the 39th it was quite successfully used in the Finnish campaign.
PPSh (Shpagin's PP) - a sample of 1941, and PPS (Sudaeva) 1943, are weapons of paratroopers and reconnaissance, and not to say that it is very successful, though cheaper and easier to manufacture, in comparison with analogues.

Quote: SEC

On a real full-fledged submachine gun did not pull.

And what is in your concept of "real" PP? A submachine gun is a device that can automatically fire PISTOL cartridges. And as for the 7,62x25 TT cartridge, you are very mistaken in its effectiveness. In terms of penetration, bullet speed, shot energy, the TT parton surpasses the same Luger 9x19 mm.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Alexashka964

You, perhaps, relate to the history of Russian weapons sideways.

You know better. But before writing a comment, it would not hurt to read what was discussed. And it was about PP created in the USSR during the war.

Quote: Alexashka964

A submachine gun is a device capable of firing automatic pistol rounds.

You can also shoot pistol cartridges from a slingshot. And rifles, you can also shoot. We conclude that the slingshot is universal and the best weapon in the world? No? That's it.
Shooting shooting discord. A full-fledged army PP shoots at the army standard for PP. Just PP shoots how it goes. All PPs on a 7,62x25 mm TT cartridge fired exactly that way. Due to the substandard cartridge. So that you are not particularly upset, I’ll clarify that the MP-40 was also not bad PP. And also because of the cartridge. But, of course, much better than Soviet PP. Their cartridge was still better. And Walter P38 on the cartridge of the couple even managed to get into the lower segment of full-fledged army pistols. Because of the long trunk. Nevertheless, it was air-conditioned. Unlike TT.

Quote: Alexashka964

In terms of penetration, bullet speed, shot energy, the TT parton exceeds the same Luger 9x19 mm

What are these "important indicators"?
To pierce something, there were PTRs. It is not part of the task of the gun and the PP to break through. This is an invented advantage.
Well, what about the speed of the bullet? Another invented advantage.
And about the energy of the shot you are mistaken.
The energy of the TT / PPSh shot is 487/690 J.
The energy of the P38 / MP-40 shot is 507/580 J.
And now the indicators of Soviet weapons must be multiplied by 2/3. Because of the caliber. And only after that they can be compared. In order to completely upset you, I will give you the numbers of the effective firing range (the main indicator of the quality of weapons). It includes all ballistics, including caliber and ballistic coefficient. bullets.
The effective firing range of the TT / PPSh is 0/30 m.
Effective firing range P38 / MP-40 is 35/60 J.
For reference:
For a good army pistol, the effective firing range should be about 50 m. Minimum - 30 m. As we can see, Walter was not a good army pistol. He was just fit. And TT was unsuitable.
For a good army submachine gun, the effective firing range should be about 100 m. Minimum - 60 m. As we can see, the MP-40 was not a good army submachine gun. He was just fit (on the edge of unsuitability). And PPSh / PPS were unsuitable.

[shasherin.pavel]

T-34-85, for example, cost 1945 in production cheaper than T-34 1941. PPSh-42 was created from scratch before packing in a box for 7 hours, PPSh -41 of the year for 14 hours. PPD - 48 hours.
PPP - 1 hour. All these products were cheaper than foreigners, except for the English machine. BM-13 and BM-8-48 have nothing to compare.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: shasherin.pavel

All these products were cheaper than foreigners, except for the English machine.

And why was it necessary to arm the troops with cheap but ineffective weapons? You did not wonder how many human lives were additionally lost per 1 saved ruble?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: wadim13

Here is one of the main advantages of the socialist state - defense enterprises are not privately owned, but state owned. Eliminating the factor of "maximum profit by any means", our industry during the war years was able to create huge quantities of cheap and deadly effective weapons.

Private property in the United States and Britain somehow did not stop doing the same.

[vladimir_krm]

In addition, the Po-2, created back in the 20s of the last century, is, in fact, a complete analogue of the stealth F-117: inconspicuous (there is almost no metal), night, almost silent ... :)

[parusnik]

The night horror of the German troops and a true friend of the partisans- a war worker. It’s a pity the representatives of our aviation remained only in museums and on pedestals. Thanks to those who give them a second life ..

[Barboskin]

Hard worker airplane, soldier airplane. He was needed and respected everywhere.

[bionik]

In the fall of 1941, the formation of aviation units manned by women began in the USSR Air Force. One of the female aviation regiments was armed with U-2 aircraft:
46th ("Tamansky") night guards bomber regiment
23 pilots who fought on the U-2, was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union.

[inkass_98]

It’s a shame that in other countries there are still Mustangs and Messerschmitts in private collections. They say there are our fighters. Everything is in working condition. All fly.

It also always pains me to watch when real technology of those times flies in bourgeois films, and in our country "Yak-52" or "Yak-18" portray all Soviet fighters, and "Il-14" aircraft are BTA. But for this we can say "thank you" partly to the post-war situation, when there was not enough metal, and the old aircraft was scrapped for the production of new ones, and partly to Nikita, who swept away from his feet all the heritage of the old style. Then everything that was possible was sawed on needles.

[Petrol]

such in the KhAI at the training aerodrome in flight condition

[nvn_co]

Well, not at the training airfield ... The training airfield was under the military department and there were MiG-21, MiG-23, maintenance equipment: technical specification, a couple of boxes, an imitation of a fuel and lubricants warehouse, a smoking room, a collapsed Yak-18. There was no runway at the training airfield, it probably disappeared in the 60s - 70s (I don’t know for sure), and this all pleasure in the 90s - 2000s was called an airfield thanks to the military department. Until you reach the airport from the top ten, and even in winter, and even in a suit ... Eh ... Yes ... As in another life, but it's nice, however, to remember.
And so, the airfield has now been turned into the institute's garages, and there is no more aircraft, helicopter, or rocket left there, except for any units or remnants of aggregates from the "cut and fuss" of the military. Po-2 was restored by a group of intuziazists, it seems like they met in K-2, by the way, it is stored there, and occasionally pulled out on KhAI Day, Student Initiation Day, and there for other holidays. They flew around like in Korotichi, and like like roofing felts on it, and then restored it again, on another ... the man crashed. In Korotichi, they even erected a monument to him in a forest plantation, I saw it myself.
But the car is a noble, school desk released into the sky of great aces !!! Yes, and Polikarpov is a genius. It is not for nothing that he is called the King of Fighters. And what a man he was! Smart, calm, kind, believing, by the way, conscientious. No more such people are born ... Sorry!

[veteran66]

Quote: inkass_98

we can say "thank you" partly to the post-war situation, when there was not enough metal and old aircraft were scrapped for the sake of producing new ones,

which metal? Half-wooden aircraft were percale, just the lack of desire for their prudent use after service. How the Tu-128s, which had expired, were destroyed - they simply drowned in the Kara Sea.

[Aleksandr72]

This is not the only reason. The fact is that practically all aircraft in the West (with the exception of the famous British Mosquito) were made of metal - aluminum. In our country, in the USSR, aircraft were mostly represented by samples of mixed or wooden structures (with the exception of twin-engine bombers and transport aircraft - but it was they who, just after the war, were exploited very intensively, including for purely peaceful purposes, up to complete wear). Guess at a glance which aircraft is more durable and more practical in storage - all-metal or wood-woven. In particular, the average service life of a fighter in the Red Army Air Force in peacetime with hangar-free storage was determined at 2 (two) years. And of course - different attitudes towards rare technology after the war - in the West, aircraft were kept in airworthy condition mainly in private collections, which was ruled out for our country for obvious reasons. By the way, the Soviet aircraft mentioned in the article in private collections in the West are, as a rule, remakes (including those made in Russia in compliance with the technologies of the 30-40s and, as a rule, with imported engines - the American ones were installed on the same Yaki remakes) Allison).
I have the honor.
The photo shows an example of such a remake - I-16.

[Argon]

Yak-3M is not a remake and not a "replica", almost an independent design, recognized by the design bureau (even a separate letter was assigned to it), and certified as soon as possible. In principle, it can fly around the world. Well, it is clear not about any technologies 30-40 there can be no question.

[Dragon-y]

Now AN-2 depict German aircraft in films.
And computer graphics can be of varying degrees of clumsiness (in one of the films on the airfield (on the ground !!!) there were LI-2 with the TROUBLES removed, and the propellers of them continued to rotate !!!

[nvn_co]

This is because it happens that those who make films are lazy and greedy for money. Recently, I have not seen an inscription in films, they say that this was the adviser, or the consultant is General Ali Colonel. Lazy to check, see, search. A lot of mistakes in modern films, though ...

[Llirik]

On the day of the Navy this year, there was a reconstruction of the Pinsk landing operation in Samara. The flying Po-2 also took part. The plane really impressed me, a couple of weeks before that I saw it in the Museum "Military Glory of the Urals", and here it is in the sky. When he makes a U-turn on you ... - words cannot describe it. It is scary to imagine what a person feels at whom something newer comes in.

[RoTTor]

Four years ago, in Kiev, they performed a parody of an air show. But it was there that the restored Po-2 \ was shown. not yet flying. I'll find a photo - I'll put it.
So IL-2, the most massive combat aircraft, barely found.
We do not know how to protect our history.

This aircraft was so successful, cheap, easy to operate and reliable that almost every collective farm had its own flying club. Thanks to this miracle plane, the armies of our falcons were prepared.

And now it’s weak to make the same plane, we all buy Western SLA at fantastic prices!

[Leader]

Quote: inkass_98

But for this we can say "thanks" partly to the post-war situation, when there was not enough metal, and old aircraft were scrapped for the sake of producing new

This "tradition" continues to this day. As before, not only experimental, but also serial samples of weapons and equipment are being cut / destroyed - to the last copy.
I once got to the district level, trying to defend several samples of a rare "rifle" - there they referred to Moscow and demanded to carry out the order to destroy the weapons.

Quote: RoTTor

We do not know how to protect our history

We do not know how, do not want, do not remember.
Beginning the district service said with bitterness that except for us, specialists and weapon lovers, "no one else needs this." Scribbles - mountains, necessarily - suspicion of personal interest and corruption, and most importantly - you need to make an INDEPENDENT decision. For which you can be held responsible!
Is it necessary for them who are "in the chairs"? It's easier to say "follow the order!" ...

[miv110]

In our country, it is customary to associate only P0-2 and only women with night bombers, although most of the "night lights" were men and they fought in several types of machines. Below is an example.

Ural night light bomber aviation regiments in the Battle of Moscow (1941-1942)
More than 300 graduates of the Chelyabinsk military school of observer pilots in October 1941 went to the front as part of the regiments of night bombers. The 686th and 688th regiments completed their formation and went down to the front on November 11; The 685th regiment was formed from November 2 to 17 and departed for the front on November 17.

From the base in Zagorsk on PZ and P-5 planes, pilots of the 688th night lightly bomber aviation regiment made 5-7 night sorties per night, participating in battles near Moscow. The technical staff worked around the clock in the most difficult conditions of the cold winter of 1941-42. As a result of the coordinated actions of all parts of our army, German troops were driven back 100 km from Moscow.
In December 1941 - January 1942 The 688th regiment was transferred to the Datkovo airfield, then to Obukhovo, from where the Rzhev group of the enemy was destroyed. It was part of the 38th garden, from 28.02.42/39/XNUMX in the Air Force XNUMX Army.
The 698th night light bomber aviation regiment began its combat path in December 1941 at the Diaghilev airfield in Ryazan. Then there were the airfields of Tula, Kaluga, Mosalsk. During the Battle of Moscow, only one pilot, the future Hero of the Soviet Union, Sergeant V.F. Fufachev from November 1941 to April 1942 made 82 sorties.
On April 1, 1942, the 698th Regiment was disbanded. The flight crew was sent to the rear for retraining for new types of IL-2 aircraft. After retraining, the flight crew was sent to replenish other aviation units.
In December 1941, the 734th night light bomber regiment was formed and sent near Moscow, armed with U-2 aircraft and equipped mainly with the flight and technical personnel of the Sverdlovsk flying club and reserve pilots. Hero of the Soviet Union Major A. Ya. Flying is appointed commander of the regiment.
On December 15, 1941, the regiment became part of the Air Force of the 61st Army of the Western Front and from January 17, 1942 took part in the battle for Moscow. In view of the emergency situation, they tried to use the regiment’s planes from the very first days for daily bombing of enemy troops. Nothing good came of it. As a result, by the end of the first week of combat work, the number of the 734th nbap was halved. Only after that the command of the army, which included the division, apparently understood the flaw of the tactics of “victory at any cost” and no longer appointed night-lights for day work.
By May 1942, the 734th Regiment was already a fully operational unit. The regiment pilots made 1427 successful sorties and dropped over 3000 bombs on enemy positions. For the excellent fulfillment of the assigned tasks, 34 pilots of the regiment were presented for government awards.
Also, a night light bomber regiment was formed on the basis of the Chelyabinsk flying club itself. In February 1942, pilots and technicians with their materiel on U-2 aircraft flew to the formation in the city of Troitsk, where they became part of the 700th Aviation Regiment. At the same time, the 700th night light-bomber aviation regiment, besides Chelyabinsk residents, included natives of the Sverdlovsk region. This regiment was part of the 1st Air Army of the Western Front. In the summer of 1942, the regiment was awarded the title of “Guards”, and it became known as the 24th Guards Aviation Regiment of night bombers. (Source - URAL STATE MILITARY-HISTORICAL MUSEUM website)

[miv110]

An interesting and detailed article on the combat use of Po-2 can be found at http://www.airpages.ru/ru/u2_1.shtml
Taken from there: More than 60 regiments and squadrons of night Po-2 * bombers made up the air armada that the Nazis did not expect to meet with. And among all this mass of air units, contrary to the generally accepted opinion, only the 46th Guards NBAP was a female air regiment. All the rest are masculine. The misconception about the “femininity” of U-2 is so deep that one has to use the term “male aviation regiment” as if military aviation is not a male thing ...

[Gamdlislyam]

Quote: miv110

More than 60 regiments and squadrons of night Po-2 bombers

Dear colleague Vadim, in A. Drabkin's book "I fought in Po-2" there is information that about 2 regiments (one female) were formed and fought on Po-100. In addition, it also provides data that during the Second World War, about 40% of the tonnage of bombs was dropped by regiments of light night bombers.
And for the expanded comment you plus.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: Gamdlislyam

Dear colleague Vadim, at A. Drabkin's, in the book "I fought in Po-2"

Just some kind of universal soldier. Then he "fought on the T-34". That "... on Po-2". Doubt creeps in that he actually fought on something.

[Gamdlislyam]

Quote: SEC

Just some kind of universal soldier. Then he "fought on the T-34". That "... on Po-2". Doubt creeps in that he actually fought on something.

dear colleague, I have to upset you, Drabkin Artyom Vladimirovich could not fight during the Second World War born in 1971.
Artyom Vladimir Drabkin (born July 25, 1971) is a Russian public figure, the head of the Internet project “I Remember,” the author of collections of interviews with veterans participating in the Great Patriotic War. Compiled a series of books of memoirs of veterans "Soldier's diaries" and "Trench truth." Scriptwriter for documentaries and TV shows.

[ZVTSO]

I knew it. But the names of his books came up clever. Misleading that written in the first person.

[brn521]

Not just nightly. Drabkin noted that he could fly in and land in weather that was non-flying for heavier aircraft.

[veteran66]

Quote: qwert

Kalashnikov assault rifle is another example

in general, I agree, but the AK was created according to the TTD corresponding to that time and in its simplicity its genius, the Po-2 is still a World War I fighter, it is forced to fit under a night lamp during the second ...

[Gamdlislyam]

Quote: veteran66

Po-2 is still a World War I fighter, forced to fit under a nightlight during the second ...

Dear colleague Alexei, Po-2 (before 1944 it was called U-2) made its first flight in 1928. It was created by Polikarpov N.N. on assignment (on a competitive basis) as a cheap and easy to manufacture aircraft of initial training. However, in the thirties it became essentially a multi-purpose aircraft. Including, since 1937, a modification of a light night bomber was developed and tested.

[veteran66]

"Po-2 (until 1944 was called U-2) made its first flight in 1928."
And if you look more deeply at the history of the creation of this aircraft - the first experience of Polikarpov, you will find out that this, as they now like to put it, is a deep modernization of the English De Haviland (if I'm not mistaken in the model) - a fighter of the times of the First World War. Yours faithfully....

[ZVTSO]

Quote: veteran66

deep modernization of the English De-Haviland (if I am not mistaken in the model) - a fighter of the First World War.

It is difficult to say how much De Havilland DH.60 Moth arr. 1925 (not a WW1 fighter) influenced the design of the U-2. But the one that influenced is definitely. And outwardly, too, is similar. For its time, the "Englishman" was a very good design.

[ZVTSO]

Quote: veteran66

but AK was created by TTD corresponding to that time and in its simplicity its genius

Nifiga itself simplicity. You try to carve a receiver from a solid forged blank of high-quality weapon steel. This is crazy. A lot of standard hours will go away. And how many weapons steel went into shavings? AK-74 was fabulously expensive. And it’s not at all as simple as the Communists painted.

[Mother Theresa]

I heard the story that the Po-2 could turn off the engine and start planning in a circle completely silently, the Nazis thinking that the plane flew off lost their vigilance and disrupted the disguise, after that the Po-2 bombed the engine and left. The truth is this or fiction.

[parusnik]

K. Simonov has a collection of military essays, one of the essays is called Rus-plywood in which he describes the actions of Po-2 and exactly what you are talking about Po-2 could turn off the motor and start planning in a circle completely silently

[Mother Theresa]

Thanks for the information.

[WUA 518]

Quote: Mother Teresa

The truth is this or fiction.

Fiction, PO-2 was not equipped with an engine start system, and the launch was carried out by turning the screw by a technician. And here is the extract from the RLE of the aircraft, I think it will immediately become clear why it was impossible to turn off the engine: Starting a hot engine
1 Do not rotate the hot motor screw.

[ZVTSO]

still quite normal salute ZiS-5
ZIS-5 stood on the KV-1 tank. Probably need to read ZIS-3.
The night horror of the German troops and a true friend of the partisans,
You also need to add "flying squalor". PO-2 as a bomber was shit. Because it was a training aircraft. And as a training aircraft, for primary training, it was quite normal. In general, I was always amazed at the habit of the Bolsheviks to slip something and then admire this shit. Pretending cleverly that "it was intended."
"Seeing and appreciating this, I would reward these girls (" Night ????? ") just for flying it."
Quite right. I fully subscribe. And I will add that they had more "eggs in pants" than many physiological egg-bearers.

[domokl]

Quote: SEC

still quite normal salute ZiS-5
ZIS-5 stood on the KV-1 tank. Probably need to read ZIS-3.

It is necessary to read ZIS-5 ... This is a car. But ZIS-5 is really a tool

[ZVTSO]

Quote: domokl

It is necessary to read ZiS-5 ... This is a car.

So is your car saluting? And what place?

[miv110]

If it comes to that, no one calls the Po-2 an ideal bomber, compromise solutions were used in all wars, but the Germans themselves confirm that this aircraft was successful in this capacity. Having experienced the so-called "harassing raids" on themselves, they themselves began to form subunits of light night bombers, using outdated or training machines such as "Henschel", "Gotha", "Arado", etc.

Hitler's "Po-2" (Go-145) article from http://ru-wunderluft.livejournal.com/300700.html

Soviet trophy - German Go.145A in the version of a light night bomber. Tested at the Air Force Research Institute

[miv110]

Soviet trophy - German Go.145A in the version of a light night bomber. Tested at the Air Force Research Institute

In the second year of the war with the Soviet Union, the leadership of the Hitler Air Force decided to create a squadron of night light bombers, which included training Goths Go-145, converted into light night bombers with the installation of bomb racks under the wing or cartridges on the sides of the fuselage.
Small-caliber bombs weighing from 10 to 100 kg and loudspeakers (like the Soviet U-2 "Voice of the Sky" / U-2GN with SGU-43) were suspended on the aircraft.
Since the fall of 1942, these light night bombers fought on the fronts of the Soviet-German war. 3 Such squadrons were deployed near Orsha, Soltsy (Novgorod region) and Rossosh (Voronezh region). A month later, they were reorganized into the so-called harassing squadrons and groups.
1.) St.KG \ Luftflotte 1 - was based near Soltsy and had four squadrons;
2.) St.KG \ Luftwaffekommando Don - based near Rossosh and also had four squadrons, in March 1943 it was renamed St.KG \ Luftflotte 4;
3.) St.KG \ Luftwaffekommando Ost - based near Orsha, initially it included only the headquarters of the group, and only in February 1943 it received three combat squadrons, in March 1943 it was renamed St.KG \ Luftflotte 6.
Along with squadrons, the Nazis had 1943 such groups by April 13. Goth Go Go 145 aircraft were part of these night attack aircraft groups, fighting until the very end of the war. The last case of widespread use of this type of aircraft was noted in 1945 in the Budapest area. Http://www.wunderluft.livejournal.com/300700.html

[Oldman]

I would like to make some clarifications in the process of discussing the wonderful U-2 machine.
1. There above in the discussion was mentioned a certain de Havilland, presumably DH.60. This device in no way could be a prototype of the U-2. Colleagues confused him with the Avro 504, which was captured in the 1919 from the British, and which became the prototype of the U-1 training aircraft created by Polikarpov.
2. Initially, the development of the U-2 was based on the project of a promising training aircraft created by the talented Russian aircraft designer Porokhovshchikov Alexander Alexandrovich. After the arrest of Porokhovschikov, Polikarpov continued to work on this aircraft, introducing some of his ideas (as well as Tupolev's) into the Porokhovschikov project. In June 1927, the U-2 completed its first flight. When (after testing) a decision was made to launch the aircraft in a series, Polikarpov opposed (the chief designer is against!) And proposed an alternative project, which, in the end, was adopted, because possessed undeniable advantages. So in 1928, the Polykarpov U-2 appeared.