Winchester, which did not become "Kalashnikov" (part of 3)

As a result, all these developments resulted in the American patent No. 681,481, issued by 27 on August 1901 to Mr. Thomas Johnson on a very unusual carbine, which then appeared in the metal in 1905 - 1906. and dubbed "Model 1907 of the Year." The primary sample, judging by the schemes from the patent documentation, was still quite archaic. The store was located in the butt, like the Spencer carbine, although there were already two important new parts: a free bolt and a bolt pusher protruding from the forearm under the barrel.



Carabin M1910.

On the 1907 model of the year, the free gate has been preserved, the “pusher” has been preserved, but the store has received the Lee system. And that's it - this is how a very interesting one was born. weaponwhich the company has produced for half a century, from 1906 of the year to 1958 of the year. Shop on 5 or 10 cartridges, located directly in front of the trigger guard. The only cartridge proposed by the “Winchester” for the 1907 model of the year was the .351SL centerfire (i.e., central combat) with a bullet weighing 12,96 g. (Caliber 8,9-mm).


The first sheet of patent number 681,481.

The carabiner was produced in standard finish, and a deluxe with a pistol grip. In 1907, its price was $ 28. In 1935, Winchester offered a special “police rifle” - an option that was distinguished by a number of small improvements and a bayonet.


The second sheet of patent number 681,481.

The “Winchester Model 1910 of the Year” (also known as the “10 Model”) was produced before the 1936 year. This rifle had a magazine for four rounds of .401 caliber self-loading hard drives or .401 WSL (10,3-mm caliber) with a bullet weighing 16,2 g. The price of this model was $ 30. Weight of models of different editions ranged from 3,6 kg to 4,1 kg, length - 970 mm, barrel length 510 mm. The truth and the weight of the free gate, and the springs connected with it, turned out to be not too small either - 1,2 kg. The speed of the bullet was 653 m / s (.351SL) - a very good indicator. The advantages of weapons include the fact that the bolt was covered in the receiver so that the dirt inside almost did not get, and it was very convenient. In this case, the sighting range of shooting was equal to the 400 steps, that the military, who believed that the 1200 steps are not enough, seemed to be small.


The third sheet of patent number 681,481.

Incidentally, there was also a sample of 1903 of the year, but with the .22 ammunition of “side-fire” caliber, and with a magazine in the butt of the 1901 patent of the year, but it was not as popular as the subsequent samples.


Winchester model 1903 of the year. You can clearly see the "socket" for charging the application store.


Winchester model 1903, disassembled.

Reloading the carbine was unusual, but convenient. He put his fingers on the cap of the rod under the barrel (or put it in something hard), pressed, pulled back all the way and released. And that's it! Carabiner reloaded! There was practically nothing to break in the carbine itself, so its design was simple and, therefore, reliable.


“Police model” - disassembly scheme.

For a long time carbines were sold as hunting weapons, including here in Russia. But then the First World War began and the attitude towards them immediately changed. The Winchester factory reports that in the 1915 year, the 150 carbines of the “1910 model” and 25000 .401SL cartridges were ordered by the French government. 7 December 1917 of the year was ordered about 400 000 .401SL cartridges for the "model 1910", that is, they, apparently, quite actively used. There are data on the 500 order for carbines of the “1910 model” Russia, dating back to 1915 and 1916.


Model 1907 with a larger magazine.

The French government first ordered 300 1907 rifles in October 1915, and soon followed an order for 2500 rifles. The order of ammunition for these rifles exceeded 1,5 million .351SL cartridges to 1917 year. Subsequent orders in the 1917 and 1918 years also amounted to 2200 1907 carbines of the year. In accordance with the factory records, these rifles were modified to conduct fully automatic fire and were equipped with Lee “Navy” rifle bayonets. These rifles were designated the "1907 / 17 model", and used magazines on either 15 cartridges or 20, with a rate of fire from 600 to 700 rounds per minute.

Winchester, which did not become "Kalashnikov" (part of 3)

Model 1907 with a magazine for 20 cartridges and a bayonet from Lee "Navy."

Where was this weapon used? And here is where: with the start of aviation battles, the Winchester semi-automatic hunting carbine model 1907 of the caliber .351 and Winchester 1910 of the caliber .401 began to use ... observers on two-seater airplanes.


Patron 351WSL.

Then they began to apply already in land battles. In particular, they armed the assault units during the Brusilov Breakthrough in June 1916 of the year, and also used them in France. And if we assume that they fired not with pistol but “intermediate” cartridges and, in addition, with automatic fire, under which they were reworked, what does this work? "Typical trench broom", and with good slaughter. And this was the first machine gun, in any case applied at the front before our machine gun VG Fedorov! After all, in the summer of 1916, at the Officers' School of Oranienbaum, Fedorov’s automatic rifles only armed a company of the 189 Infantry Regiment of Izmail, and sent it to the Romanian front as part of the 158 soldiers and 4 officers only in December 1 of the same year. But this, so to speak, is an inference based on dates and logic. The most interesting thing begins when studying books by Soviet authors on stories small arms, that is, when referring to sources of information.


Avtomat VG Fedorov arr. 1916

So, in the well-known book of A. B. The “Handbook ...” beetle (edition of 1993 of the year) of the hard drive is, one way or another, mentioned on the 483,498,526,608,669,678, 684 pages, but about 1907 / 10 samples. Not a word was said, as if they simply did not exist! What did the Beetle not know about? Did he look at all the catalogs on weapons that were sold in Russia? Yes, I knew, of course, I mentioned, even on p. 535, that there were, say, samples of automatic weapons, including the hard drive, and then again I went about Russia's priority with regard to Fedorov's machine gun. And that she was the first Russian automatic rifle in 1916 to receive baptism of fire. And that's right! What's wrong? And not so - a trifle: “automata” in the course of the “Brusilovsky breakthrough” were already used, therefore, his work was supported, and even earlier the same Winchester machine guns were purchased by the Russian government on advice (and how would our military otherwise know about it?) military attaché in France. Moreover, if someone is going to think that there is at least some derogation from the creative genius of our compatriot, then this person is clearly mistaken. Look at the dates.

Both Fedorov and Thompson began working at the same time almost at the same time, working in parallel (in the history of technology, this happened very often!), And at the same time they prepared their samples. And it’s not our designer’s fault that our military preferred to buy American carbines instead of stepping up work on their own development. Although ... not so much bought. We looked - “how does it work ?!” And only after that Fedorov was given the “green light”. It is logical, by the way! But from the point of view of ideology, then yes - we had such a fad: to push out all our own and diligently conceal someone else's. Well, what did such distortions in informing the society lead to? We even know very well!


Advertising carbine M1910 in Russia, and even with a silencer!

As for the Thompson carbines, it turned out that their fire on the aircraft was very effective, and the bullet pierced even the 6 mm steel sheet, although the distance is unknown. But it is known that, along with the 1907 model's hard drive of the year, a small amount (about 600) of the semi-automatic 1903 model's hard drives of the year was delivered to France for training shooting of observers at fast-moving targets. They were used as pigeons, which at that time were destroyed as far as possible in the rear simply because they could carry enemy reports.


Store increased capacity for M1910.

Not less than 600000 of the original .22 side-fire cartridges were spent on pigeon shooting. These small-caliber hard drives could only conduct semi-automatic fire, but they had a very high rate of fire in the presence of stores ready for firing.


Marking caliber on the store.

Interestingly, in Cuba, a real submachine gun, the “Cuban Winchester,” has already been made from this Winchester. It was made of parts from different types of weapons and could shoot with decent accuracy at a distance of 25 yards with 9x19 mm cartridges, which were fed from ... luger snail stores.


Shutter frame with shutter and magazine. Behind the mounting screw, unscrewing which, you can disassemble the carabiner into two parts.


And so he understands!

Well, now a little fantasy, because without it, well, nothing can be! Watch carefully. At the end of the piston-pusher we put the cup in the shape of a hemisphere and the L-shaped lever on the left side with corrugation for the fingers. We connect this piston with the gate and install the simplest locking mechanism - the wedge. Under the barrel we make a hole for the exit of gases, again with the L-shaped tube at the end, the hole of which must be directed into the pusher cup. And what did we get in the end? In fact: the prototype of the Kalashnikov assault rifle!


The shutter is open. In the window you can see the neck of the store.

What would make such an alteration? While maintaining the caliber, but increasing the power of the cartridge (so that it becomes even more “intermediate” or less, someone likes it) - a greater range of fire, bullet speed and a greater striking effect. It would have been impossible to shoot such cartridges from a free-bolt weapon, but with a “piston-drive” bolt — as many as you like! True, the store would have to lengthen, but that's all! All other alterations are small and, as they say, within the limits of reasonable and the then technologies, at the level of the same DM rifle. Browning BAR, which appeared later, but much more severe.


Piston pusher model M1910. It is necessary to answer that the head of the piston is small, to press on it is hard work. And, okay for me, a man without practice. But the American police also decided! Well, and the soldiers pushed the piston on the wooden lining of the trenches and generally on any solid object!


Piston pusher "police model". As you can see, the piston has acquired a more convenient form!

That is, the Americans overlooked, missed such a modification of the 1910 mod carbine that it could well go down in history at the same level as our famous Kalash. But our gunsmiths, who held him in their hands, didn’t see anything “like that” in him either, because the main thing - the “social order” was absent at that time, and the inertia of thinking continued to remain just as monstrously huge!


Holding in the hands of the M1910, I was convinced that it was a very applied and convenient thing with the 20 magazine of ammunition, and with a shooting interpreter it was a very good weapon, convenient in all respects.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

26 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. D-Master 12 November 2015 06: 53 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Amazing Indeed, we are essentially talking about the first machine gun or assault rifle. I honestly have never even heard of such models. Thanks again to the author for the series of articles. I have kept the articles, since such pearls are not often consumed.
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 07: 28 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      And how surprised I was when this thing fell into my hands ?! And when I started reading about it, I was surprised even more. After all, there was only one step to the classic assault rifle and ... it was not made! No wonder we have a saying: IN ANY WISE OF A PRETTY SIMPLE. So it was here.
      1. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 15 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: kalibr
        After all, there was only one step left to the classic assault rifle and ... it was not made!

        Or maybe there was no point in doing it? After all, it cannot be said that assault rifles on a classic cartridge in the world enjoyed some demand and success.
  2. alex-cn 12 November 2015 07: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The most amazing thing in Russia is that these guns survived until the mid-70s. I happened to see this in the commission department of a hunting store. They didn’t allow me to hold on, although they knew me well there (a threaded one nevertheless). The weapon was beautiful and neatly made. We bought it quite quickly, but here was the situation with the cartridges ... however, our hunters of those times were sharp on inventions.
    1. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 18 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: alex-cn
      The most amazing thing in Russia is that these guns survived until the mid-70s.

      So M1907 and mass-produced until 1957.
  3. bunta 12 November 2015 07: 53 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    And if we assume that they fired not with pistol rounds, but with “intermediate” cartridges and, in addition, with the automatic fire under which they were remade, then what does this turn out to be? “Typical trench broom”, with good slaughter. And this was the first machine gun, in any case, used at the front before our machine gun V.G. Fedorova!


    An “intermediate” cartridge is not only power, but also the speed, weight, and shape of the bullet, on which the flatness, accuracy and range of effective fire depend. "Trench broom" is a term referring to submachine guns in caliber, bullet and flatness. So if you judge the priorities, you need to compare with MP-18 or Beretta M1918 with an effective range of no more than 200m. AF is a rifle cartridge weapon with high flatness and range up to 800-1000. Fedorov used the Arisakovsky cartridge 2,6K J which gave 2K J. at the output. That is, practically comparable power. But the effective range of his fire is several times greater.
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 08: 49 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Well, here I am about the same! By reworking the M1910 to remove gases, it was possible to use more powerful cartridges and get a real high-grade assault rifle.
      1. AlNikolaich 12 November 2015 12: 47 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: kalibr
        Well, here I am about the same! By reworking the M1910 to remove gases, it was possible to use more powerful cartridges and get a real high-grade assault rifle.

        So for the use of more powerful cartridges it is necessary not so much a gas outlet as locking
        shutter. But this sample did not have it! And judging by the drawings, attach a shutter lock
        nowhere ...
        And no matter what anyone says, the sample is somewhat strange and dumb ... Only reloading
        what it costs ... A free shutter weighing more than a kilogram, and even locked with a spring force
        9 kg! wassat
        And the technological complexity is generally surprising. Sensitivity to pollution, along the way, is very
        high ...
        That is, the Americans overlooked, spoiled such a modification of the carbine "mod.1910" that it could well go down in history at the same level as our famous "Kalash". But our armourers, who were holding him in their arms, also did not see anything “like” in him, since the main thing - the “social order” was absent at that time, and the inertia of thinking continued to remain simply monstrously huge!
        But they did not see in this sample, because nothing can be specifically seen in it ...
        In Garand M1, something is visible, in the Stormgevere, it can be seen, in the BAR Browning rifle the same is all
        necessary signs!
        1. kalibr 12 November 2015 13: 01 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: AlNikolaich
          And the technological complexity is generally surprising. Sensitivity to pollution, along the way, is very
          high ...

          I do not know why you decided this. Everything is closed there, dirt has nowhere to go! That's just in Garanda is where to pour in ...
          And this sample did not have it! That's right, but the wedge insert is quite possible.
        2. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 59 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: AlNikolaich
          But they did not see in this sample, because nothing can be specifically seen in it ...

          They did not see anything there, because in the concept of an “assault rifle” on a cartridge with a classic bullet it is impossible to see anything.
          The Germans there during the war saw an opportunity to increase the density of fire, which they had was catastrophically low. Let at the expense of other performance characteristics.
          It is hard to say what “Soviet designers” saw there. True, they soon realized that they had misplaced. And all this "ingenious weapon" was dumped in the trash.
          Also on this topic after 1MB experimented:
          1. French with an automatic carbine of Ribeirol chambered for 8x35 mm SR. Quite naturally did not make out anything.
          2. Americans from Winchester with the same miracle (Barton) on a .345WMR cartridge with a 9 mm pointed bullet. They also did not find anything attractive.
          3. Also, such weapons were created in Switzerland and Italy, a little later in Denmark and Germany. And no one found anything interesting in it.
          They didn’t rush after the “brilliant Soviet designers” even after adopting the “brilliant AK-47”. Dumb, probably? No, on the contrary, smart. And it turned out pretty soon. After adopting the M16A1. And M16A2 to this day in its performance characteristics will easily and simply plug into the belt of any of the competitors.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. tropic 18 December 2015 06: 13 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        Get a real high-grade assault rifle.

        What for? What is happiness in such an assault rifle? Who needs it?
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: bunta
      An “intermediate” cartridge is not only power, but also the speed, weight, and shape of the bullet, on which the flatness, accuracy and range of effective fire depend.

      "Intermediate cartridge", this is its power within certain limits. Everything else about the “real intermediate” and the “fake intermediate” is the fantasy of sofa designers.
      Quote: bunta
      So if you judge the priorities, then you need to compare with the MP-18 or Beretta M1918 with an effective range of not more than 200m.

      In fact, the effective range of M1907 is 375 m. This is more than even the AK-74. Not to mention the AK-47.
      Quote: bunta
      AF is a rifle cartridge weapon with high flatness and a range of up to 800-1000

      Gee-gee. The effective range of the "Fedorov fart" is 180m. Even illiterate Bolsheviks understood what kind of "happiness" it was. And in time they gave such a "weapon" a knee in the ass.
      Quote: bunta
      But the effective range of his fire is several times greater.

      A strange statement against the background of the fact that M1907 has this indicator more than 2 times more. And what do you think means "effective fire range"? What do you mean by this concept? Why is something not standard?
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. tropic 18 December 2015 06: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: bunta
      An “intermediate” cartridge is not only power, but also the speed, weight, and shape of the bullet, on which the flatness, accuracy and range of effective fire depend.

      Intermediate cartridge is a cartridge of a certain power. And that’s all. Further your fantasies. Of course, cartridges with smokeless powder are considered. The fact that the 6,5 mm cartridge of Arisak was called a rifle at the beginning of the 20th century does not at all mean that it should be called so in the 21st century.
  4. Vladimirets 12 November 2015 07: 59 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Thanks for the article, but let me comment. Expression "It was unusual to reload a carbine, but convenient." not entirely correct in relation to automatic and semi-automatic weapons in this context. request
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 08: 47 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Well, yes, right, as they say "the devil is hiding in the details." But here the "devil" is so tiny that I did not notice it.
  5. gross kaput 12 November 2015 13: 13 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    [i] There is data on the order of 500 carbines of the “Model 1910” by Russia, dating from 1915 and 1916. [/ i]
    There is data on the order of 250 carbines in 1915. through the company "JP Morgan and Company" which arrived in the Republic of Ingushetia in 1916 just in time for the beginning of the Brusilovsky breakthrough, and then some "historians" added up 250 ordered from 250 delivered and received 500 delivered in 1915 and 1916.
    [I]In particular, they were armed with assault units during the Brusilovsky Breakthrough in June 1916, and they were also used by infantry in France. And if we assume that they fired not with pistol rounds, but with “intermediate” cartridges and, in addition, with the automatic fire under which they were remade, then what does this turn out to be? “Typical trench broom”, with good slaughter. And this was the first machine gun, in any case, used at the front before our machine gun V.G. Fedorova! Indeed, in the summer of 1916, at the Oranienbaum Officer's Rifle School, Fedorov’s automatic rifles only armed a company of the 189th Izmail Infantry Regiment, and sent it to the Romanian front consisting of 158 soldiers and 4 officers only on December 1 of that year.[/ i] And if you do not fantasize, then the supply of "assault" Winchesters M1907 / 17 ie with the possibility of ed. fire with a bayonet and a store of increased capacity in the French units came at the end of 1917 beginning of the 18th century [i] And that's right! What's wrong? And not like that - a trifle: “machines” during the “Brusilovsky breakthrough” were already used, therefore, his work was supported,[/ I]
    the story with Fedorov’s rifles has been described so many times (both by Fedorov himself and by our contemporaries on the basis of archival documents) that such “highly scientific fictions” are absolutely inappropriate.

    [I]Both Fedorov and Thompson began working on new weapons almost simultaneously.[/ I]

    [I]As for Thompson carbines, it turned out[/ I]
    It turned out that the author didn’t even bother to find out that General Thompson and his “annihilator” later became known as “Tommy Gan” have nothing to do with the Winchesters 1905/1907/1910, the author of this design is Comrade Johnson. laughing
    Well, the pseudo-scientific talk about transferring a Winchester to a gas outlet doesn’t even make sense - because you have to start telling the very basics of small arms devices - I’ll just say if sewing boobs to Thai trance doesn’t affect its ability to give birth to children - the design as a whole does not allow laughing
    In general, another amateurish hack, you can only add that neither the 1907/17 Winchester nor Fedorov’s machine were modern machines, the first was an experienced Ribeirol machine created by him in 1918, the cartridge .351 WSL was reused under 8 mm light bullet Lebel’s rifle cartridge, and Winchester’s carbine was originally used for experiments, but it was not suitable for further development and Ribeirol designed his machine gun, which is the first machine gun in the modern sense of the word.
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 14: 03 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: gross kaput
      To work on a new weapon and Fedorov and Thompson began almost simultaneously [/ i]
      Here you are completely right. Johnson, of course. Moreover, Johnson was written at the beginning of the article. It was necessary to be more careful. As for the rest ... So I didn’t think up the 500 number, it was known to me. Did you find her a clearer explanation? Very good! Well, where have you been before? Why didn't you find all this yourself and did not write, Sergey, without any errors?
      Quote: gross kaput
      Winchester's carbine was originally used for experiments,
      You write this yourself, so what are we talking about? Well, somewhere you see something different, well, thank God. I have already told you that you should write about something better. And where is "our answer to Chamberlain?" Does not work? Well, then you have to endure my work, they are bad or good, but you don’t give us any better, so to speak, "the standard from St. Petersburg boy."
      1. gross kaput 12 November 2015 15: 25 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        I already told you that you wrote about something better.

        The classic “soviet” approach - only it’s very cheating and cheap, because from the same logic it is possible to criticize, for example, a car or a TV, only those who have done such a thing. Doesn’t it seem kind to you that criticizing the product (and the article is the same product) should be the user (in this case, the reader), regardless of whether he can do better or not?
        Quote: kalibr
        So after all, I did not come up with the number 500, it was known before me.

        This is where my approach differs from yours - you pulled out the first digit that you got, absolutely not bothering with either checking it or checking the source, which is why I say that you are hacking. Well, with regards to me, in the near future I plan to post articles on silent weapons on the VO series, but unlike you, I have been collecting general information for many years, but I’ve been engaged in collecting specifics for each sample for about a year - because I don’t like when I’m jammed with my nose and do not poke the link.
  6. gross kaput 12 November 2015 13: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    PS what can be added? If a person wants to be deceived, then he will be deceived, this applies to all those who admire these pseudo-historical articles of the author with dazzling "discoveries and sensations", because admiring frank hack, even if written smoothly and beautifully, you do not look very winning light.
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 14: 11 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Here you can say that in this way you also record yourself as something very worthwhile, and all others into people "in a not very advantageous light." That is, simply everyone knows nothing, they do not understand, and it turns out that there are too many "deceived", that is, simply stupid, and you are alone ... well, just such an expert that you can't fall up! Perhaps this is too hasty judgment, eh? Attempting to humiliate others, and thereby elevating oneself, speaks of hidden complexes. Well, it happens. But all the materials in front of readers. The Internet is open to all, so, as they say - take and use, check, criticize, who is against. I already answered you: show the sample and I will applaud you first.
      1. gross kaput 12 November 2015 15: 35 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        Here we can say that in this way you also write yourself down into something very worthwhile, and all others in people "in a not very winning light"

        Well, you just don’t need to smoke, turn everything upside down - exalting yourself as a loved one - who does not toss beads in front of pigs, the author of many books, etc. etc. this is your destiny, but I really don’t understand these people - maybe these are your acquaintances. but I wrote my comments on the analysis of your stocks, including for them - any sane person would just check on my “Tips” (I even gave the names of patent holders in Latin transcription so that patents could be found at once) the relevance and quality of your articles.
        Quote: kalibr
        An attempt to humiliate others, and thereby exalt oneself, speaks of hidden complexes

        Well, let’s say that complexes like me, like any person, have nothing to do with “self-assessment in history”; laughing
        In this case, only one of my "complex" is manifested - I can not stand hack workers, especially in terms of what I have been fond of since 13 years.
        1. kalibr 12 November 2015 16: 27 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          To get involved in a person, of course, you will not forbid! I have the same enthusiasm once a month for the next department of philosophy who bring new ideas with new concepts of universal happiness and Kant’s recesses. But it’s not enough to know your worth, it’s necessary that you give it to others. I was given. And you? And then, why do not you answer a specific question: why not write better? And why is this a cheap approach, in my opinion a very reasonable one! And if you make good stuff, BO will only benefit from it. I always say that one or two or three articles on a very good level can be written by anyone who has been doing something for a long time. It’s harder to work as a journalist and write every day. Flaws? Yes, there are, but the one who does nothing is not mistaken. And it is possible and necessary to correct others respectfully, and it can be quite different. Did you write to me about the crane valve? I answered you! You did not like the author. I gave you respected Dragunov. Was the answer? Not! So do not polemize.
          And about the "friends" it is you cool. Even I don’t know how this can be made up!
          And, by the way, and where does the relevance of articles? I'm not writing about Ukraine? Or is it "to the heap", so the hand took?
          1. gross kaput 12 November 2015 17: 39 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: kalibr
            In my next department of philosophy, the same enthusiastic people once a month bring the Tolmuds with new concepts of universal happiness and Kant's deepenings.

            Again, "steepness" flooded, the very complex in which you are trying to blame me? They forgot only once again to subtly hint about their popular science works. You can take a look from my side - I have been fond of firearms since I was 13, from the beginning of the 90s I bought all the books that were just beginning to appear, I urgently served in the Marine Corps where I met all the main examples of the Russian rifle range live, with 98 Ministry of Internal Affairs where 2000s he held the position of weapons inspector and had the opportunity to get acquainted not only with standard models but also with seized glands among which there were such ones that you can’t find in museums, and became friends with many forensic experts, so that access to their literature and interesting glands appeared not passing specifically through me.
            Since about 2003 began to help search engines first in finding information on the samples of weapons and information they found and then in processing and searching for archival materials. In 2008 He quit the Ministry of Internal Affairs and went to work on the experimental production of the Basalt State Scientific Production Enterprise where for a year of work he was able to look at weapons from the other side - from the side of developers and designers. So it was just as an armament professional that I took place and I don’t need to prove it to myself or anyone, there are enough people professionally associated with armaments for whom my opinion is authoritative and who still ask me for advice.
            Quote: kalibr
            You do not answer a specific question: why not write better?

            And why should I definitely write - is it not better or worse?
            And why, for example, do not you need to repair the 1895 hard drive before writing an article? I've been repairing it, and you?
            Once again, I’ll write a better excuse then and criticize here does not channel, but the statement first thoroughly understand the subject and then write completely appropriate.
            1. kalibr 12 November 2015 20: 16 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Well, I finally “knocked out” a biography of you, otherwise you know everything about me, but I have to guess. Now it’s clear where the donkey’s ears are growing, how did someone dare to get into my “legal garden”, has an opinion, and he still writes good reviews - ah-ah. And I? And the works of his popular science and together 250 winchesters wrote 500 ...
              You see, I'm just glad that it turned out that you are so well versed in weapons. Because I really speak very often here and in other places as a journalist (and a member of the Russian Union of Journalists and the international union). This has its pros and cons. And it is clear that you can’t know everything, and you shouldn’t. A piece of truth must always remain somewhere there. I have written to you many times about Dragunov and Shokorev and the crane shutter. You do not answer, right? So leave yourself yours and yours to others. Criticize? How much you want! But it is better, and without a face from which, a mile away, it can be destroyed by the “youth subculture” in its pure form. Then, too, I will not quote the Bible in response. As for the repair of the hard drive, this is my friend's business, not mine. I wrote that the materials will be on interesting samples of his collection. Here they will end and the palm will finally pass to you!
              1. Major_Vortex 12 November 2015 21: 39 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                The tsarist army bought different hard drives, if you were interested in this topic, you should know the facts. But the hard drives were not the best choice for our climatic conditions. And yes, the company is good, the weapon is beautiful. For the civilian market will do. But this is not enough for military weapons.
                Many famous gunsmiths designed self-loading rifles at the turn of the century. The advent of smokeless gunpowder and a unitary cartridge spurred gunsmiths to create such systems. Only the army was not in a hurry to switch to such a weapon, until it satisfied them in terms of its characteristics.
              2. gross kaput 12 November 2015 23: 38 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: kalibr
                I’m already writing to you about Dragunov and Shokorev and the crane shutter. You do not answer, right?

                Search and find, the head answered in the old-timed topic that you asked about it and only you somehow missed by.
  7. chunga-changa 12 November 2015 15: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In general, it’s surprising, because Winchester already had a “pump” shotgun Winchester Model 1897. It would seem that it would have hurt to transfer the convenient and well-developed reloading scheme to a smaller caliber, what are these delights with pushers and hats for?
    1. kalibr 12 November 2015 15: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The human soul is inscrutable, as I tirelessly repeat. And I do not know the answers to your questions.
    2. gross kaput 12 November 2015 18: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: chunga-changa
      It would seem that it hindered to transfer a convenient and well-developed reloading scheme to a smaller caliber

      The key word here is "semi-automatic" and the hard drives of 1907 and others were conceived as semi-automatic machines. Well, there are enough pump-action rifles in the world, the same ringington released the first pump-action carbine in 1913, and now it produces the 7600 model, and other manufacturers have them. Moreover, the Finns even managed to remake the “Finnish AK” valmet m76 into a pump and called it YAK mark 1. Well, they do not enjoy great popularity for one reason because of the mass and complexity of the design they lose to the classic “bolts” of even direct action and are approximately equal in terms of these indicators the semiautomatic devices to which they lose both in rate of fire and in convenience.
    3. erg
      erg 12 November 2015 19: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Everything is simple. A semiautomatic device or an automatic machine is recharged as follows - take the shutter by the handle to its extreme rear position and release it. The return spring returns the bolt to its previous position. If you accompany the shutter with your hand while moving it forward, various “troubles” can arise, such as under-shutter, misalignment of the cartridge, etc. Therefore, the introduction of the reload mechanism of such weapons on the principle of a "pump" will require disconnecting the return spring at the time of reloading. And the introduction of such a rod for reloading is an attempt to speed it up so as not to take away the arms of which you hold the weapon. You can really use some kind of emphasis for reloading, especially when one arm, for example, is damaged.
      1. gross kaput 12 November 2015 23: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: erg
        . Therefore, the introduction of a reloading mechanism for such weapons on the principle of a "pump" will require disconnecting the return spring at the time of reloading. And the introduction of such a rod for reloading is an attempt to speed it up so as not to take away the hands of which you hold the weapon.

        Everything is really much simpler - like mutants - i.e. altering machine guns and self-loading into pumps has a much simpler meaning - in the world there are many lovers of military-style weapons, but there are countries where the possession of citizens by semiautomatic devices is prohibited - that’s for them alterations of military weapons in YAK mark 1 mutants are riveted.
  8. Pablo_K 12 November 2015 17: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    anyone interested http://ww1.milua.org/autoWin10.htm
    there by the way a lot of interesting things about the weapons of that time
  9. tolancop 12 November 2015 23: 21 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The author, in his admiration for Western weapons, does not notice the contradiction in what he himself wrote. Pay attention to the following: “.... Subsequent orders in 1917 and 1918 amounted to another 2200 carbines of 1907. In accordance with the factory records, these rifles were modified to conduct fully automatic fire and were equipped with bayonets from the Li Navy rifle. ” If the rifles from the order of 1917 were modified, then they could not get to the front at best in the middle of 1917.
    We read further: “.. Then they began to be used already in land battles. In particular, they were armed with assault units during the Brusilovsky Breakthrough in June 1916, and they were also used by infantry in France. And if we assume that they fired not with pistol rounds, but with “intermediate” cartridges and, in addition, with the automatic fire under which they were remade, then what does this turn out to be? “Typical trench broom”, with good slaughter. And this was the first machine gun, in any case, used at the front before our machine gun V.G. Fedorova! Indeed, in the summer of 1916, at the Oranienbaum Officer's Rifle School, Fedorov’s automatic rifles only armed a company of the 189th Izmail Infantry Regiment, and sent it to the Romanian Front, consisting of 158 soldiers and 4 officers, only on December 1 of that year ... "

    Those. according to the author’s chronology, the middle of 1917 came earlier than December 1916 ....
    The discovery however ...
    1. kalibr 13 November 2015 07: 50 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Look, just unbiased: http://wwxnumx.milua.org/autoWin1.htm
      Everything is the same there, just in other words. And why the word game? It is clear that the carbines came to "breakthrough" to us. Both earlier and later they entered France. And nowhere is it written that modified rifles hit us. I found the number 500, my opponent Sergey insists on the number 250. But in this case it does not matter. Two digits 250 and 158 and June 1916 and 1 December 1916 are important. With this you hope you will not argue? And it is clear that МХNUMX is not an “automaton” in the sense that we are putting into this word today. But the “Fedorov machine gun” is the same. These are steps to it. Perhaps it was M1910 to modify? Again, the French used it with the possibility of automatic firing. Transform it to a “gas drive”? Most likely, yes, I wrote about it, but it was difficult or not, what difficulties could be there, nobody knows. But "can" and "done" are different things. It was not done, by "can" passed for various reasons. One more step through this sample was not made, that's all. By the way, my opponent Sergey wrote about it this way: “and the Winchester carbine was originally used for the experiments, but for further refinement it was not suitable and Ribeirol designed his machine gun and is the first automaton in the modern sense of the word. " As you can see, everyone started with something ...
    2. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: tolancop
      The author, in his admiration for Western weapons, does not notice a contradiction in what he himself wrote

      Soon. Soon he will be called the "enemy of the people", apparently. "Right people" admire all of ours. Wrong, not ours.
    3. tropic 18 December 2015 06: 08 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: tolancop
      The author in his admiration for Western weapons

      Can you give some examples for the admiration of NOT Western individual weapons?
  10. Ilya Mikhalych 13 November 2015 00: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Interesting article. I did not even suspect the existence of something like that. Then the Americans invented something new, but now they simply hang the old woman M16 with plastic and that’s all. They stupidly. Article +
    1. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 33 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: Ilya Mikhalych
      and now the old woman M16 is simply hanged with plastic and that’s all.

      One could be glad for the "not stupid." But it doesn’t work out. After all, nothing better than the M16 has not been created today.
  11. tolancop 13 November 2015 15: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    Look, just unbiased: http://wwxnumx.milua.org/autoWin1.htm
    Everything is the same there, only in other words. And why the word game? It is clear that the carbines came to the "breakthrough" to us. And earlier and later they came to France. And nowhere is it written that we got modified rifles. I found the number 500, my opponent Sergey insists on the number 250. But in this case it does not matter. Two figures are important: 250 and 158 and June 1916 and December 1, 1916. I hope you will not argue with this? ...

    kalibr, I did not play with words. The author of the material issued a certain statement, and expressed categorically, and not at least in the form of a hypothesis. Moreover, on issues, let’s say, somewhat changing the priority in the invention of a certain class of weapons. It would be logical to see the evidence. And as evidence, data are given that do not fit in terms with those written in the same material. Well, how do you command this?
    I will not hide the link you provided, it is interesting, but the author did not bother himself with such links. T.ch. on your part, a criticism addressed to me like "the author is right, which is confirmed there and there" is not correct. The author issued a statement. As a justification, some data have been cited. The reader noticed a discrepancy. Obviously, in this case, the fault of the author, who did not provide consistent evidence for his claim. And the principle of "evidence you will find yourself in Tyrnet", I'm sorry, I do not accept.
    But the material itself is certainly very interesting.
  12. aws4 13 November 2015 21: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    article is normal !!! I would even say good, but I already had to read about this carbine so I didn’t open anything new ... whoever believes that this is the first assault rifle (assault rifle) or he still had a small step to the assault rifle in my humble opinion ... Now, if they had said 3-4 steps, I would have agreed))))) alas, he is far from the level of StG-44 ... so alas ... and even if we talk about the Fedorov assault rifle, then again in my humble opinion the rifle was much closer to the machine gun than this carbine ......
    1. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 38 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: aws4
      alas, even to the level of StG-44 he is far

      Oops! And not vice versa, by chance? Ballistics, an objective thing.
      Quote: aws4
      and even if we talk about Fedorov’s assault rifle, then again, in my humble opinion, his rifle was much closer to the assault rifle than this carbine .....

      Oops, the second time. What does the "Fedorov fart" have to do with ballistic assault rifles? Only formal, intermediate cartridge. But actually in terms of efficiency, this is a typical submachine gun. A submachine gun carbine on the intermediate cartridge means a design failure. No one ever needs such crafts.
  13. bunta 14 November 2015 17: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Nevertheless, the author should have removed the obvious rubbish about the Brusilovsky breakthrough. Now this nonsense has already been indexed by Google and is beginning to spread in the brains of neophytes.
    All hard drives referred to in the company directory are listed as sports or hunting ones and could get to Russian officers only in this form.
  14. Alex1977RUS 17 November 2015 17: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The inertia of consciousness is a great thing ... All Social Revolutionaries and other bombers, with their eyes burning, sculpted their bombs in the basements, or clutching a pair of revolvers in sweaty pockets, went to the next defenses ...
    And at the same time in the store you could safely buy a muffled rifle with optics.
    With delivery.
    And if you want, even finish it to a full car.
    Nicholas the Bloody I remember very fond of shooting a raven in the park?
  15. jogin 25 November 2015 11: 50 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    This rifle had a magazine for four rounds of .401 caliber self-loading winchester or .401 WSL (10,3 mm caliber) with a bullet weighing 16,2 g. The price of this model was $ 30. The weight of models of different issues ranged from 3,6 kg to 4,1 kg, length - 970 mm, barrel length 510 mm. True, the weight of the free bolt and the associated springs also turned out to be quite small - 1,2 kg. The speed of the bullet was 653 m / s (.351SL) - a very good indicator.

    Still, the n / s with the .401WSL cartridge with a 200 grains bullet (13 g) was 2141 ft / s (653 m / s). And the energy of the bullet is 2772 J. With a bullet weighing 250 grains (16,2 g) n / s, it was 1875 ft / s (572 m / s). The energy of the bullet is 2650 J. What kind of "free shutter" in this case can be discussed?
    And if we assume that they fired not with pistol, but with “intermediate” cartridges and, in addition, with automatic fire, under which they were remade, then what is this obtained? “Typical trench broom”, with good slaughter. And this was the first machine,

    Considering that the border between real rifle and intermediate cartridges lies in the region of 2000 ft-lb (foot pounds), it is very conditional that a cartridge with a heavy bullet can be called intermediate. But where does the "typical trench broom" come in?
    Perhaps the author still has in mind the 1907 model. It was a little different, weaker.
    A bullet weighing 180 grains (11,66 g) was accelerated to a speed of 1870 ft / sec (570 m / sec), which gave it energy in 1894 J. It was also not a “typical trench broom”. Usually so called submachine guns.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. jogin 25 November 2015 13: 11 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      And this was the first machine gun, in any case, used at the front before our machine gun V.G. Fedorova!

      Formally, the 1907 model. You can call it that. Because intermediate power cartridge. With an atypical bullet. It remains only to add that, unlike the "Soviet automatic weapons", this weapon was quite capable - an effective range of about 375 m. In contrast to 180 m, the "Fedorov fart". And 305 m from the AK-47. And 350 m in the AK-74. At the same time, the range of a direct shot at the growth figure was also very, very good, 305 m.
      The trouble with all these products with the loud name "automatic" (except for the AK-74) was common, this automatic weapons it was impossible to use normally in auto mode. Because already the second bullet flew God knows where. Therefore, weapons required lengthening the barrel and bipod. Those. all the "ingenious and exclusive Soviet automatic machines" on the classic pool are actually submachine-gun trimmings. With insufficient effective range. The weapon is strange, and it is not clear who needs it. Therefore, it was produced only in the USSR. And not for long in Germany, as an ersatz-wartime weapon.
      And it is not the fault of our designer that our military chose to buy American carbines, instead of intensifying work on their own development.

      It’s even inconvenient to compare the “Fedorov’s fart” with this weapon. Further, the Bolsheviks, who didn’t finish the “academies,” later guessed the true combat value of the “Fedorov fart”. And quite arrogantly they gave it to the author with a knee in the ass.
      In fact: the prototype of the Kalashnikov assault rifle!

      The Americans considered this a little happiness. And the whole world. In addition to one single country, the USSR. Where such an ersatz thought of doing on an industrial scale, and even in peacetime. True, not for long. Then they urgently presented them to “friends” and exchanged them for empty promises of deliveries of bananas.
      That is, the Americans overlooked, spoiled such a modification of the carbine "mod.1910" that it could well go down in history at the same level as our famous "Kalash".

      Boo-ha-ha. The whole world was neighing, and only the scoops were proud of the ridiculous Kalash in the classic pool. Because they were so explained. And for some reason they consider the ancient ersatz kalash history.
      In addition, mod. 1907, not mod. 1910. The difference between them, see above.
      But our armourers, who were holding him in their arms, also did not see anything “like” in him, since the main thing - the “social order” was absent at that time, and the inertia of thinking continued to remain simply monstrously huge!

      Oh, how much propaganda. No one has ever seen nifig in these ersatz. And even the USSR did not suffer with them for long. Then all this "brilliant creation" was merged into the trash. Quite rightly, by the way.
      True, then the second series of comedy began. Under the name AK-74. This product does not reach high-quality army weapons. But the AK-47 is far from him. It turned out something in between. Almost a weapon. Sub-gun.
      Holding in hands M1910

      It is completely not clear what the author writes about. If about M1910, then where does the "Soviet automatic"? If about M1907, then why does M1910 constantly mention?
    4. The comment was deleted.
  16. tropic 18 December 2015 06: 01 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    That is, the Americans overlooked, spoiled such a modification of the carbine "mod.1910" that it could well go down in history at the same level as our famous "Kalash".

    Kalash, namely the AK-47, went down in history as a historical absurdity. It is a pity that sofa designers and historians do not know this. The Americans too well versed in weapons to make such blunders. Therefore, quite naturally, they did not go down in history in this role.
    But they went down in history in so many other positions. And in a completely opposite role. This is the first working self-loading rifle on a rifle cartridge (M1 Garand). This is the first army automatic rifle (M16A1). And a lot of different things.
    1. aws4 18 December 2015 23: 13 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      yes, yes, you’re right .... the historical absurdity recognized around the world as the best mass infantry weapon of the 20th century ... and this is a respected fact ... I understand that you will now begin to ask who it is recognized by, etc. give examples of what the AK is inferior to other machine guns (rifles), although I myself know it, to tell that it was riveted by millions and distributed to everyone, etc. I know everything that you write on before it is not the first time I read what you write. ... everything is very simple ... open any search engine and enter in any language of the world - the best infantry weapon of the 20th century. and almost everywhere Kalash comes first ... with a friend, I introduced the same result in German and English .... whatever you would answer me your opinion is all your opinion (not authoritative) and nothing more, although you speak out very categorically .... and yet you have spoken out about sofa designers forgetting that the battle is not about design engineers but soldier soldiers ... I don’t know whether you are a designer or not, but a soldier is definitely a sofa .... .
      1. Kostya Andreev 19 December 2015 00: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        In vain you are so expert, the whole world, including progressive humanity, is mistaken and rivets this historical absurdity. And after half a century the tropic appeared and saw what the military, designers, bad and good guys using this weapon could not see. Thanks to him he tore off the covers, opened his eyes.
        for some reason I thought that SVT and SVS were at least no weaker than the guarantee. But the expert knows better.
        And what is the difference between an assault rifle, an automatic rifle, an automatic carbine, an automatic rifle?
        1. tropic 19 December 2015 01: 08 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Kostya Andrei
          the whole world, including progressive humanity, is mistaken and rivets this historical absurdity

          Those. one, far from the most economically and technically powerful country, riveting this absurdity for only 27 years, is it "the whole world"? Are you putting too much on this unfortunate Bolivar?
          Quote: Kostya Andrei
          that the military, designers, bad and good guys using these weapons could not consider.

          You are mistaken. In 1945 Americans examined and tested the StG44 very carefully.
          Here is an excerpt from the conclusion of the US Department of Arms of 1945:
          “Nevertheless, when trying to create light and precise weapons with substantial firepower by massive methods, the Germans encountered problems that seriously limited the effectiveness of the Sturmgewehr assault rifle. ... Despite the declared ability to fire in automatic and semi-automatic modes, the rifle does not withstand continuous fire in automatic mode, which forced the German army to issue official directives requiring the troops to use it only in semi-automatic mode. In exceptional cases, soldiers are allowed to fire fully automatically in short bursts of 2-3 rounds. ... Since this opportunity cannot be taken full advantage of, this extra weight puts the Sturmgewehr at a disadvantage compared to the US Army carbine, which is almost 50% lighter. "
          As a result, they were not only interested in the drawings, but also in the designers who made the StG44. But that is not the point. The Americans too well versed in the rifle, not to understand the complete impasse of the classic intermediate cartridge for the army. Moreover, in the 30s of the 20th century, all the armies of the world abandoned it. But the Germans fired such ersatz weapons only to increase the density of their fire at close range. And just because they got burned on the concept of a single machine gun.
          As a result, neither the Americans nor anyone else in the world released such weapons. As unnecessary.
          I'd add on my own, the recoil momentum of the AK-47 is 2% or more higher than that of the StG44. A spurious heat is up 4,5%. Those. this is an even smaller “machine” than the StG44. So, see above, the Americans have written everything to you directly. In fact, a semiautomatic device (self-loading) with the possibility of short-term automatic firing in critical cases, on a dead (not powerful enough) cartridge. As a result, a complete failure. After a quarter of a century, this “van der Wafer of the USSR” had to be merged with “friends”.
          Quote: Kostya Andrei
          for some reason I thought that SVT and SVS were at least no weaker than the guarantee

          You thought something was wrong. See their comparative tests in the USSR. I also propose to think about why the SVT-40 after WWII was not re-armed. Since she was so good.
          Quote: Kostya Andrei
          And what is the difference between an assault rifle, an automatic rifle, an automatic carbine, an automatic rifle?

          But this, dear, myself. I didn’t like your entry. Therefore, myself.
          Usually, when people ask for something to tell them, they are more polite.
          PS. PPC questions. You do not even know the basics. And allow yourself phrases like "I thought for some reason." Early.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. The comment was deleted.
          4. tropic 19 December 2015 07: 27 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: tropic
            In fact, a semiautomatic device (self-loading) with the possibility of short-term automatic firing in critical cases, on a dead (not powerful enough) cartridge.

            Inaccurately written. The word "short-lived" is superfluous here. Judging by the NSD, the fire could be fired with a combat rate sufficient for the machine (SMG). It was worse with another, with the accuracy of such an automatic fire. It was because of the insufficient accuracy of automatic fire that the AK-47 was more likely a semiautomatic device, i.e. self-loading weapons. And automatic fire could be used more or less effectively only at close combat distances. At the same time, the range of effective destruction, insufficient for a full-fledged army weapon, has not been canceled due to a weak cartridge.
            In general, some mouse fuss around a 7,62x39 mm cartridge and weapons on it is surprising. It would seem that everything is already for everyone, even in the USSR, 40 years, as is understandable. But no, there are some sofa designers who find this cartridge with some kind of "advantage" there. And these are not the strangest ones yet. The strangest ones find the "advantages" of 6,5 mm Hryundel and the like. These riflemen do not understand anything at all. So I recommend paying attention to the following things:
            1. Range effective defeat.
            2. Impulse of return.
            3. Parasitic heat dissipation.
            Now, if someone suddenly manages to balance these things, and this is impossible based on the laws of physics, then we'll talk. This is me to the fact that you will never have to talk at all.
            PS. In AF on the cartridge Arisaka Fedorov balanced only the heat sink. Which was completely unbalanced in its first version, on a Mauser cartridge. As a result, item 1 was performed by about 41% of the norm, which is bad. And p 2. was about 70% more than the norm (already Soviet, in the 61s), which is also bad. A beautiful "balanced" design, nothing to say.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. aws4 19 December 2015 01: 34 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          I already realized that in vain ... I won’t honestly honestly anymore)))))))))))) it’s a pity that his answers were deleted and I didn’t have time to read the fairy tale before bedtime, do you know from childhood that you would sleep better) ))))))))))))) But seriously, everyone understands that the AK is already outdated and to everything else it had its drawbacks like any other trunk ... but this does not mean at all that this legendary machine can be watered dirt and call absurd .....
          1. tropic 19 December 2015 02: 09 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: aws4
            but this does not mean at all that this legendary machine can be watered and called absurd ..

            You have obvious problems with understanding the Russian language. You cannot understand in any way that there was no "legendary AK-47". This is the same story out of the blue as the story of communism. Moreover, the authors of the "legend" are the same.
            In addition, look in the dictionary for the meaning of the term "mud." And then you carry all nonsense.
            Quote: aws4
            But seriously, everyone understands that the AK is already outdated and to everything else it had its drawbacks like any other trunk.

            You don’t even understand that there is no such single AK. Because the AK-47 and AK-74, these are completely different weapons. With completely different performance characteristics, but having some similarities in the mechanical part.
            If you notice, then AK-74 I never called absurdity. It is a decent weapon, which, however, needs some refinement.
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. tropic 19 December 2015 00: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: aws4
        recognized worldwide as the best mass infantry weapon of the 20th century

        Who is recognized? You? Or gorlopans, in parallel convincing the world of the inevitability of communism? The price of their words is known.
        Who else in the world has produced such a miracle weapon, except for the funny communists in the USSR? A specific question for you, who else? Didn’t think why? Think about it.
        And another question, why is this "brilliant weapon" stood in production in only one country in the world, and only 27 years old? You did not try to make logical conclusions? Give it a try.
        Quote: aws4
        open any search engine and enter in any language of the world - the best infantry weapon of the 20th century.

        You decided to make fun of your "argument"? You succeeded.
        Quote: aws4
        I introduced the same result in German and English with a friend

        You and your friend would be better at learning a theory. It would be more useful.
        Quote: aws4
        and even here you spoke about sofa designers forgetting that it’s not the design engineers who go into battle but the soldiers-soldiers

        But this is no longer funny. Design engineers are actually going into battle. And for a very long time. And warriors are just a tool that they use.
        Quote: aws4
        but the warrior is definitely a sofa

        Wah! How pathetic. When they wrote, did they wring their hands? Yes, it seems. Can you justify your opinion? Or also from the breed of gorlopanov?
        1. Kostya Andreev 19 December 2015 02: 14 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Don’t be offended by my friend, but you are an ignoramus of information. I at least admit that I don’t know much. I don’t know the heat dissipation and other crap, I’ll say how a person holding the M-16 several times in his hands, even not shooting from it, did not find any such advantages over Kalash, except for convenience (everything is under your fingers). Maybe Kalash has a weak cartridge, and the design is absurd, but he surely kills.
          Thank you, I learned that the German uniform machine gun is a failure, not when I did not know, the veterans, and who shot it was praised.
          I agree that the SVT is bad, so it was in the arsenal of the Wehrmacht, but they didn’t understand the weapon, here the Americans are.
          The trouble is that I will never know the difference between an assault rifle, an automatic rifle, an automatic carbine, and an automatic rifle.
          I doubt that you served in the army if you are quoting about automatic fire, (considering this a disadvantage) they shoot in short bursts, and only in exceptional cases are long, at least they taught me that way (because there is no cartridge plant nearby)
          Remember: a bad weapon, it won’t be popular, they say that it’s a good weapon, the living, to whom it saved their lives.
          1. tropic 19 December 2015 02: 34 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            but you are an ignoramus with some information.

            "The arguments of a smart janitor, poorly versed in the class structure of society, did not give Ostap any pleasure" - Ilf and Petrov.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            I don’t know the heat dissipation and other crap, I’ll say how a person holding the M-16 several times in his hands, even not shooting from it, did not find any such advantages over Kalash, except for convenience (everything is under your fingers).

            But this reminds me of a joke about the need to have great courage to speak on the stage without having a voice or hearing. You do not have what you yourself admit. But speak out.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            Maybe Kalash has a weak cartridge, and the design is absurd, but he surely kills.

            Those. you still do not understand that the AK-47 and AK-74, these are two completely different things in terms of performance characteristics. You need to understand this first. And then talk about what and how it kills.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            Thank you, I learned that the German uniform machine gun is a failure, not when I did not know, the veterans, and who shot it was praised.

            What nationality will you be? You have obvious problems with the Russian language. I wrote to you, I’ll just copy "because I got burned on the concept of a single machine gun." I'm talking about the concept, and you're talking about the design. Do you know the word "concept"? Does not look like it.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            I agree, SVT is bad, so it was in service with the Wehrmacht

            The Wehrmacht was armed with all the captured weapons. The Germans are a very economic nation. Moreover, they were loaded with huge ammunition depots. And why not use free SVT? You put the crane on maximum, and forward. But not for long. But the rifle is free too.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            and only in exceptional cases, long, at least I was so taught. (because there is no cartridge plant nearby)

            Yes, and again a smart janitor. Learn the difference between a machine gun (in English it is SMG) and other types of individual automatic weapons. Surprise, but cartridge factories are not necessary here. And then, stop writing about "long lines." Sick already. Use the term combat rate of fire.
            Normal modern automatic weapons regularly and efficiently shoot in different bursts. But within the combat rate of fire. If a weapon has any restrictions in this regard (for example, fire is not accurate in long bursts), this weapon is no longer suitable. Or limited to fit.
            Quote: Kostya Andrei
            Remember: bad weapons will not be popular

            Will be. Everyone will take it for free.
      3. The comment was deleted.