Military Review

Experienced Submachine Gun Evelina Owen (Australia)

32
In 1942, the Owen submachine gun was adopted by the Australian army. it weapon was actively used during the Second World War and some conflicts of the next decades. The submachine gun Owen was notable for its simple but successful design, which ensured maximum production cheapness with decent fighting qualities. However, this design did not appear immediately. Before its creation, the author of the project developed a less successful model of small arms, which, however, is of great interest from the point of view stories and technology.


Self-taught gunner Evelyn Owen began working on promising systems of small arms in the late thirties. In the 1939 year, at the age of 24 years, he independently completed the development of his first submachine gun, and then without any third-party help he produced a prototype of this weapon. All parts of the submachine gun were made by Owen in his own workshop. Despite this kind of handicraft origin, the finished sample turned out to be quite interesting, but a number of ambiguous solutions did not allow the project to go any further than the prototype tests.

Creating a new weapon, E. Owen planned to develop the most simple system that could be produced in large quantities at the lowest possible cost. At the same time, as stated, his architecture of a submachine gun could be modified to use different types of ammunition. However, for solving these tasks, the self-taught constructor used not the most successful and worthy ideas that ultimately affected the future fate of the project.

Experienced Submachine Gun Evelina Owen (Australia)
General view of E. Owen submachine gun


Owen's lack of sophisticated equipment affected the appearance of an experienced submachine gun. Outwardly, he recalled some similar developments of the time, but the ideas used led to a lot of serious differences. For example, Owen used the original design of wooden fittings. Its main element was a box, combined with a butt and having a pistol protrusion. The stock was taken from the existing factory-made weapons. When assembling the submachine gun, Owen cut off its front part and also equipped it with an additional handle. It was assumed that the hand of the arrow controlling the fire would lie on the neck of the butt, while the handle would be used to hold the weapon with the second hand.

On the upper surface of the box was a receiver, which consisted of two parts. The bottom was fixed on the bed, and the top had a U-shaped cross section and was a lid holding all internal parts in place. All metal parts of an experienced submachine gun had an extremely simple design and were connected or fastened with the help of bolts and other similar products. This feature of the weapon was due to technological limitations associated with equipping a gunsmith workshop.

Automatic weapons prototype based on the principle of free shutter. Inside the receiver was located a movable bolt of a cylindrical shape with a returnable spring. E. Owen proposed an extremely simple design of the shutter and trigger mechanism, which could be made in the conditions of his workshop. The shutter was made in the form of a cylinder with a drummer at one of the ends. The second end was connected with a relatively long stem, passing through the reciprocating-combat spring. At the free end of this rod was located a flat plate - the shutter handle. The latter had a small cutout on the upper face and, apparently, should have been used as a rear sight. For cocking the weapon should pull such a rear sight. In addition, when shooting, he moved back and forth.


Receiver and store, right view


The trigger mechanism consisted of only one part, simultaneously performing the functions of the trigger and the sear. Behind the receiver on the upper surface of the neck of the butt a special curved lamellar spring was fastened with a screw, in the middle part of which there was a protrusion. When moving backward, the shutter handle, combined with the whole, bent the spring down, and then clung to its support. To make a shot, you had to press the spring against the butt and thereby release the shutter handle.

The barrel of the .22 caliber (5,6 mm) was welded to the long upper part of the receiver by welding. It was one of the few welded joints in the entire prototype design. The barrel was located with some offset relative to the receiver. In addition, only the upper part of the latter was present in the area of ​​its breech, and the side parts ended at some distance from it. This arrangement of the barrel was due to the unusual ammunition system used by Owen.

It can be assumed that the design of the ammunition supply system, like other features of an experienced submachine gun, was primarily due to technological problems. Probably not being able to make a relatively convenient detachable box or drum shop, E. Owen was forced to make a system resembling that used on revolvers.


Receiver and store, left view


The front wall of the receiver with a hole for outputting the bolt outward had a greater height and protruded beyond the lower surface of the box. In its lower part there was another hole. A similar detail was attached to the breech breech. In the holes of these two strips of metal entered the axis of the drum like a revolving.

The fixed magazine of the submachine gun was a metal ring with 44 chambers for .22 LR cartridges. Inside the ring there was a Y-shaped part for installation on the central axis. In addition to the axis of the store was attached spring, similar to the sentry. It had to be twisted when outfitting the store, so that when firing it could turn it and serve the next cartridge. In order to avoid the loss of cartridges on the rear surface of the magazine was provided a ring of metal of small thickness. In the area of ​​the breech breech was a corner, responsible for holding the cartridge when firing. On the left surface of the receiver provided the L-shaped spring, mounted in the rear of this unit. According to some reports, it was used by the cartridge supply system.

The experienced submachine gun Owen had extremely simple sights. A welded front sight was located near the muzzle of the barrel, and as a pillar it was proposed to use a movable shutter handle with a notch. Given the handicraft nature of development and assembly, as well as the characteristics of the cartridge, such sights cannot be blamed for the deterioration of the accuracy of the fire.


Receiver box, top view


In preparing the submachine gun for use, the shooter had to open the lock of the magazine’s rear cover and place the cartridge in the 44 chambers. After that, the lid returned to its place, and the spring was in charge, which was responsible for turning the magazine. After that, it was necessary to cock the weapon, pulling the bolt handle and hooking it to the support of the leaf spring. Safety devices were not provided, so after the shutter was raised it was immediately possible to fire.

Pressing the spring, acting as a trigger, led to the release of the shutter. Under the action of the reciprocating spring, he shifted forward and led to the ignition of the propellant charge of the cartridge. In addition, he moved in the direction of the L-shaped spring located on the left wall of the receiver. Under the effect of recoil of the shot, the bolt went back, compressed the spring and reached the extreme rear position, in which it was fixed due to the interaction of the handle and the stop on the spring of the trigger mechanism. At the same time, the store was being prepared for the next shot.

According to reports, no extraction system cartridge or cartridge case from the drum was not provided. Moving back, the bolt released the side L-shaped spring. Through an uncomplicated system, it influenced the ratchet of the store and allowed the latter to turn on a full turn on the 1 / 44. In this case, the weapon was ready to fire. For the next shot, you should press the trigger spring again. No means of changing the mode of fire were envisaged; the submachine gun could only fire by burst. This did not exclude the shooting of single or short bursts, but in this case, the shooter was required a certain skill.


Barrel and drum for ammunition


In 1939, Evelyn Owen was able to demonstrate his design to the representatives of the Australian army. He pointed to clear advantages in the form of simplicity and low cost of construction, and also noted the possibility of a relatively simple conversion of weapons for the desired cartridge. Perhaps he hoped that such advantages of the design developed by him would be of interest to the military, so that it would be possible to continue working on advanced weapons.

Representatives of the defense ministry familiarized themselves with the development of the self-taught gunsmith and praised his enthusiasm. On this, however, and stopped. In its current form, as well as after some possible improvements, the submachine gun of E. Owen could not have high characteristics and, as a result, was of no interest to the army.

Owen's workshop did not differ well-equipped, because of what the young gunsmith had to use a lot of compromise and, as a result, strange or wrong ideas. For example, the trigger mechanism offered by him on the basis of a plate spring with an emphasis did not differ in high reliability, and in certain circumstances even represented a danger to the soldier and his comrades. Naturally, the design of this site could be improved, but in this case, cardinal processing of several weapon assemblies at once was required, followed by their complication.


Top-rear view of submachine gun


The second weak point of the project was the drum shop with a turn due to a separate spring. The design proposed by Owen ensured the fulfillment of the tasks set, but did not differ in convenience and reliability. For example, to reload the store, it was necessary to remove the back cover, knock out all 44 spent cartridges with a ramrod, and then place the 44 new cartridge in their place. The recharge time could be reduced only through the use of automatic mechanisms for extracting the cartridge and ejection of spent cartridges. The introduction of such devices without major structural changes was impossible.

At that time, many different projects of small arms, both Australian and foreign, were proposed. Thus, the improvement of the project of self-taught E. Owen did not make sense. The military department could order any other weapon that had already passed all the necessary tests and improvements. The young designer was praised, and afterwards he parted with him. In connection with this failure, he for some time lost interest in the creation of small arms and enlisted in the army. However, Owen’s career as a gunsmith did not end there. Just a couple of years after he entered the service, he began work on a new version of a promising submachine gun.

While working on his first project, E. Owen independently collected only one prototype of a new weapon, which was used in tests and demonstrated to the military. After the failure of the military, this prototype was not disposed of. He lived to this day and is now an exhibit at the Australian War Memorial Museum in Canberra.


On the materials of the sites:
https://awm.gov.au/
http://forgottenweapons.com/
http://guns.yfa1.ru/
http://warisboring.com/
http://strangernn.livejournal.com/
Author:
Photos used:
Awm.gov.au
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Hubun
    Hubun 7 December 2015 09: 03 New
    0
    nothing was specifically disclosed about the performance characteristics, but a mincer
    1. forwarder
      forwarder 7 December 2015 09: 35 New
      +2
      Quote: Hubun
      nothing particularly disclosed about TTX

      Disclosed. Cartridge .22 LR. Further it was possible not to write.
    2. bionik
      bionik 7 December 2015 09: 44 New
      0
      Quote: Hubun
      and in appearance a meat grinder meat grinder

      As Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov said, "A weapon should be beautiful, like a woman."
    3. psiho117
      psiho117 7 December 2015 19: 08 New
      0
      Mde, Monsieur Owen knew a lot about perversions ...

      Offer military PP under a small cartridge, and even with a fixed magazine and manual extraction of cartridges ...
      And for what did he do it all? Crashed, apparently.
      1. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 7 December 2015 20: 36 New
        0
        Purely police device
        1. Ilya Mikhalych
          Ilya Mikhalych 7 December 2015 23: 53 New
          0
          Rather, the gangster). For a raid on the grocery itself)
          1. Tankist_1980
            Tankist_1980 8 December 2015 11: 28 New
            0
            What a raid with a cartridge0.22 ??? negative
            1. Ilya Mikhalych
              Ilya Mikhalych 8 December 2015 16: 13 New
              0
              Do not underestimate .22LR, if you shoot where you need to, you can kill with one cartridge, and even more so from software
              1. topical
                topical 8 December 2015 16: 56 New
                0
                Quote: Ilya Mikhalych
                if you shoot where necessary, you can kill with one cartridge

                Can. But you have to get into the eye or open mouth. And from the "pistol" distance.
              2. The comment was deleted.
  2. martin-159
    martin-159 7 December 2015 09: 24 New
    0
    Handicraft. Somehow, a friend of mine in his basement collected PP better than 3 years in total.
    K.22LR
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 7 December 2015 10: 15 New
      +3
      Before the army, I tried to build a "wunderwaffle": a magazine with cartridges fed by a spring to the top; a longitudinally sliding rod (rod) sliding "through" the magazine (through holes) and feeding a cartridge into the nest of the "revolving" drum, after which the drum turned. .. For a long time the "construction" was not "assembled", and then I was "taken" into the army ... Maybe on time? what
  3. diglator
    diglator 7 December 2015 09: 30 New
    +8
    I immediately remembered the khrenorezki from "The Matrix"
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 7 December 2015 09: 58 New
      +1
      Mulia! I'm soooooooooo !!!
  4. forwarder
    forwarder 7 December 2015 09: 31 New
    0
    Representatives of the military department familiarized themselves with the development of a self-taught gunsmith and praised his enthusiasm. On this, however, and stopped. After the military refuses

    Glad for the Australian military, they understood what the army needed and what not. In general, Owen’s product is not a weapon, but a curiosity from a layman. I doubt that the military got acquainted (if even got acquainted at all) with this homemade product with interest. One cartridge is worth it.
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 7 December 2015 10: 04 New
      +1
      Nope! What? On the same site, American shotguns with "bandoliers" in the form of a closed "ellipse" were somehow "advertised" .... Remember! So what? Mona to Americans, and to Australians - n-and-e-zya?
      1. forwarder
        forwarder 7 December 2015 10: 40 New
        0
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Mona to the Americans, and to the Australians n-and-and-za?

        It's not about the "bandolier". The point is a homemade .22 LR cartridge, which the 24-year-old layman decided to shake off the army. The military probably neighing heartily over this idiot.
        1. Major_Vortex
          Major_Vortex 7 December 2015 10: 57 New
          0
          Quote: forwarder
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Mona to the Americans, and to the Australians n-and-and-za?

          It's not about the "bandolier". The point is a homemade .22 LR cartridge, which the 24-year-old layman decided to shake off the army. The military probably neighing heartily over this idiot.

          Violet military who invented weapons, the main thing for them to shoot. But this homemade product does not know how to shoot. Accordingly, the value of such weapons for the military is zero.
          1. forwarder
            forwarder 7 December 2015 11: 04 New
            0
            Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
            the main thing for them is to shoot.

            The main thing for them is to kill. And a bunch of other important things. The .22 LR bullet can only do this with a lot of luck. Therefore, you will not find such "army weapons" in any army. But in shooting galleries, full.
            1. Major_Vortex
              Major_Vortex 7 December 2015 11: 06 New
              0
              Quote: forwarder
              The main thing for them is to kill. And a bunch of other important things. The .22 LR bullet can only kill with a lot of luck. Therefore, you will not find such "army weapons" in any army.

              You can kill this bandura. But it does not know how to shoot. Only occasionally.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  5. moskowit
    moskowit 7 December 2015 11: 22 New
    +3
    Interesting. Once again proves that the submachine gun, if desired and the presence of the barrel can be made from an alarm clock, sheaves and buckets. But locksmith skills and tools are needed. Subsequently, Owen was engaged in the modernization of the WALL.
    1. Alex
      Alex 7 December 2015 20: 30 New
      +2
      Quote: moskowit
      Interesting. Once again proves that the submachine gun, if desired and the presence of the barrel can be made from an alarm clock, sheaves and buckets.


      - Shura, note that if you wish, you can make an ordinary mowing machine and a Singer sewing machine
      I. Ilf, E. Petrov. "Golden Calf" (c)
  6. Bayonet
    Bayonet 7 December 2015 12: 21 New
    0
    And if with this, God forgive me, flop into the mud? Is everything kirdyk? what
  7. Massik
    Massik 7 December 2015 13: 10 New
    +3
    Quote: Bayonet
    And if with this, God forgive me, flop into the mud? Is everything kirdyk? what

    Glad for the Australian military, they understood what the army needed and what not. In general, Owen’s product is not a weapon, but a curiosity from a layman. I doubt that the military got acquainted (if even got acquainted at all) with this homemade product with interest. One cartridge is worth it.

    nothing was specifically disclosed about the performance characteristics, but a mincer

    Ekarny Babai connoisseurs-designers !!! am (Could put it much more rudely, but I think it's not worth it ...)

    You would have been pulled into Australia in the 30s of the last century and previously knocked out of the head all the knowledge of this century, I would have looked at what you gathered !!!
    1. Major_Vortex
      Major_Vortex 7 December 2015 14: 44 New
      +5
      Quote: Marssik

      You would have been pulled into Australia in the 30s of the last century and previously knocked out of the head all the knowledge of this century, I would have looked at what you gathered !!!

      In those years, the armies of the world have been using quite viable submachine gun models for many years. This is the 39th year, according to the article. In Australia in those years, apparently, there was no connection with other continents and they continued to hunt kangaroos with slingshots and leather guns in complete isolation from the outside world. crying

      And at the same time in the USSR: Soviet partisans in the Belarusian forest with the RPD arr. 1934/38:
      1. topical
        topical 7 December 2015 21: 53 New
        -6
        Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
        And at the same time in the USSR: Soviet partisans in the Belarusian forest with the RPD arr. 1934/38

        A very bad example. The cartridge of 7,62x25 mm TT is not far from .22 LR. Therefore, the effectiveness of Soviet farting was not much higher than Owen's perversion.
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 7 December 2015 16: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: Marssik
      would have been flown into Australia in the 30s of the last century and previously knocked out of the head all the knowledge of the present century

      But what, a lot of mind you have to guess that the camcorders of the drum clog with dirt? wink
    3. topical
      topical 7 December 2015 21: 49 New
      -1
      Quote: Marssik
      Ekarny Babai connoisseurs-designers !!! am (could put it much more rudely, but I think it's not worth it ...)

      Dear, have you noticed a date in the text? 1939 The 1MB was long over. Already everyone and everything about the army weapons and its optimal performance characteristics have long been known. In addition to the USSR, of course, which was simply self-isolated from the global information space, and elementary knowledge in this area of ​​the 20s reached it only half a century later. And Australia, this is not the USSR. There was no self-isolation.
      What can I say, Thompson's submachine-gun has been mass-produced for 18 years. In Austria, which was completely not advanced in armaments, already in the early 30s they produced specifically good Steyr MP30 and Steyr MP34.
      And then in 1939. allegedly some Australian idiot appears and allegedly tries to insert some kind of product on the .22 LR cartridge that is adequate to the army. In general, I doubt that someone from the military watched his "design". The story is generally more like an anecdote. And for a funny curiosity.
      1. Massik
        Massik 7 December 2015 23: 15 New
        +1
        Hmm .... I did not think that this site is possible.
        But what, a lot of mind you have to guess that the camcorders of the drum clog with dirt? wink

        Comrade Shtyk, imagine that I gave you a dozen different files, a hacksaw for metal and a rotor, and a piece of sheet metal. Then he demanded using these very tools to make a viable store for PP .... Well, how are the ideas? Whatever mud is clogging up, this is a must.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  8. Rebus
    Rebus 7 December 2015 13: 59 New
    +2
    Not a submachine gun, but some kind of submachine gun ...
  9. bionik
    bionik 7 December 2015 16: 02 New
    +3
    Quote: Marssik


    Ekarny Babai connoisseurs-designers !!! am (Could put it much more rudely, but I think it's not worth it ...)

    You would have been pulled into Australia in the 30s of the last century and previously knocked out of the head all the knowledge of this century, I would have looked at what you gathered !!!

    Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

    In those years, the armies of the world have been using quite viable submachine gun models for many years. This is the 39th year, according to the article

    Here is the MP-18 Maschinenpistole 18 - a German submachine gun. Adopted: 1918.
    1. Major_Vortex
      Major_Vortex 7 December 2015 16: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: bionik

      Here is the MP-18 Maschinenpistole 18 - a German submachine gun. Adopted: 1918.

      If we talk about the very first working samples of submachine guns, even earlier:
      Machinegun Villar Perosa OVP
      Cal. 9mm Glisenti (1910):


      Beretta Automatic Carabine, ex. Ovp
      Cal. 9mm Glisenti (1910):

  10. erg
    erg 7 December 2015 16: 33 New
    +1
    If the weapon is under a small-caliber ring-ignition cartridge (the capsule composition is located in the form of a ring on the bottom of the sleeve with a rim), then it is clear why such a store. Making a magazine with a classic way to extract a cartridge from it is problematic due to the design of the cartridge. When it comes to automatic shooting. It’s possible to use a self-loading weapon (Margolin pistol), but in the automatic, due to the higher heat of fire, there is a risk of ignition of the cartridge at the stage of extraction or damage of the cartridge. In my country, in my opinion, the same Margolin, but I could be wrong, also developed an automatic machine for such a cartridge. The store was about the same design as the described sample, but the cartridge was still removed from it with a special stock. If I find more detailed information, I will unsubscribe.
  11. gross kaput
    gross kaput 7 December 2015 16: 49 New
    +1
    For example, to reload the store, it was necessary to remove the back cover, knock out all 44 shot cartridges with a ramrod, and then put 44 new cartridges in their place. The reload time could be reduced only through the use of automatic mechanisms for extracting a cartridge and ejecting spent cartridges. The introduction of such devices without major structural changes was impossible. But religion does not allow to carefully comprehend what was originally written and consider photographs? You tell, according to your own words, about PP shooting from a free shutter - i.e. using the recoil energy that recharges through the bottom of the sleeve to the shutter for reloading, we look carefully at the photo - between the drum and the receiver there is a slot the length of the cartridge, plus a L-shaped spring on the left side entering this gap - all this does not even hint but shouts about the fact that the recoil energy through the bottom of the sleeve acts on the shutter and forces the shutter and the sleeve to move back while the L-shaped spring, after the shutter passes, acts on the sleeve pushing it to the right and removing it from the weapon. I foresee the question - where is the ejector? And he just doesn’t need it here because the light shutter and the small length of the .22 sleeve allow you to do without it quite calmly, and although many types of weapons with a free shutter can work without an ejector, it is necessary for them to extract a misfired cartridge or unloading weapons and in this revolver-PP, as in the revolver in case of misfire, the drum simply moves to the next chamber.
    1. Major_Vortex
      Major_Vortex 7 December 2015 19: 03 New
      +1
      Where does the ejector come from? wink This is a makeshift work of a beginner home-made man. I wonder where he stole such a drum? This cannot be done with the necessary tolerances without special equipment. Maybe he worked at some serious production, where there were appropriate machines and tools? With the necessary accuracy, even such a number of holes in the drum cannot be drilled so easily. Those who do not believe can try to make such a drum on their own.

      Here is the operation of the shutter and the "trigger", the picture is enlarged:

      There are no questions for the do-it-yourselfer. A twisted spring rotates the drum, and the head of the cartridge case .22LR rests against the stop at the moment when the cartridge is opposite the barrel bore. After the shot, the sleeve flies back, releasing the bolt to its extreme rear position and releasing the drum until it turns around and rests on the stopper with the cap sleeve of the next cartridge. The free bolt returns by the force of the compressed spring to the front position and pierces the next capsule - as in a conventional submachine gun with a free bolt. And so until the whole drum is shot.
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. saygon66
    saygon66 8 December 2015 05: 25 New
    0
    - The design of the RG-6 "meat grinder" magazine drive resembles ...
  15. gross kaput
    gross kaput 8 December 2015 12: 23 New
    0
    Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
    until he turns around he stops against the stopper with the cap of the next cartridge case

    .22lr? on such a massive drum and with a gramophone spring? I don’t think that Owen hoped that the limiter would not vaporize the sleeve capsule when it was hit by the edge of it at a stop.
    1. Major_Vortex
      Major_Vortex 8 December 2015 13: 36 New
      0
      Quote: gross kaput

      .22lr? on such a massive drum and with a gramophone spring? I don’t think that Owen hoped that the limiter would not vaporize the sleeve capsule when it was hit by the edge of it at a stop.

      How will he pierce the head of the case from the side? It is not sharpened like a firing pin and from the side, even with a strong impact, the head of the case will simply crumple. But you will not be able to spin the drum sharply to the speed required for this. This is for an ordinary small shooter. Look carefully at the photos from different angles. This is how this craft works. There are no other details there. On the left there is also a plate curved with the letter "G", screwed with the opposite end to the receiver. This detail should help cut off the spent cartridge case to the right when extracting the cartridge case during firing. The design is primitive to the point of impossibility. It was as if two people were assembling it: the drum was made by an experienced machine operator on serious equipment with good equipment, the barrel there may well be without rifling, and rather, with such a design, it has a decorative role, and the rest was done by hand, with a locksmith tool in artisanal conditions, plus a little welding ...
  16. Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 8 December 2015 21: 13 New
    0
    Quote: topic

    A very bad example. The cartridge of 7,62x25 mm TT is not far from .22 LR. Therefore, the effectiveness of Soviet farting was not much higher than Owen's perversion.

    Have you come up with yourself or read somewhere?
    1. topical
      topical 8 December 2015 21: 18 New
      -1
      Quote: BORMAN82
      Have you come up with yourself or read somewhere?

      Why should I come up with what anyone who knows at least a little knowledge of wound balistica knows? If you aren’t in the know, after the 2nd World War II the USSR sent all these van der wafers on a TT cartridge. You think because of its excessive efficiency?
      1. Bormanxnumx
        Bormanxnumx 9 December 2015 21: 59 New
        0
        The 7,62x25 cartridge resigned in the short barrel, and regarding PP class weapons. - So in the USSR, after the war, this class of weapons was practically not developed. The Czechs for their PP produced reinforced cartridges with a bullet speed on the pp barrel of 550 m / s and an energy of 780 Joules (standard cartridge up to 500 Joules). So they (the Czechs) did not doubt the effectiveness and wound ballistics.
        Regarding efficiency - catch interesting statistics :)) http://forum.travmatik.com/index.php/topic/1955-statistika-primeneniia-ks-pri-za
        schite-ot-medvedia /
        1. topical
          topical 9 December 2015 22: 39 New
          0
          Quote: BORMAN82
          The Czechs for their PP produced reinforced cartridges with a bullet speed on the pp barrel of 550 m / s and an energy of 780J. (Standard cartridge up to 500J.)

          In order to judge the effectiveness of this weapon, it is not enough to know the energy of a bullet. Still need to know the rest of its characteristics. And then draw conclusions.
          Quote: BORMAN82
          So they (Czechs) did not raise doubts about the effectiveness and wound ballistics.

          And who told you that they understood this issue? In the USSR, they began to understand this issue already in the second half of the 20th century. Somewhere between 9x18mm PM and 5,45x39mm.
          Quote: BORMAN82
          catch interesting statistics

          Statistics, this is good. But in this case, it is not needed. The effectiveness of weapons is evaluated by well-defined formulas. Simple, quiet and comfortable. Shooting range or hunting in this case is not required.
          1. Bormanxnumx
            Bormanxnumx 9 December 2015 23: 06 New
            +1
            Quote: topic
            And who told you that they understood this issue? In the USSR, they began to understand this issue already in the second half of the 20th century. Somewhere between 9x18mm PM and 5,45x39mm.

            The Czechs created their intermediate cartridge 7,62x45 at the same time as ours 7,62x39, and if it had not been for joining the Warsaw Bloc, they would have done well with this cartridge. It seems to me that these Czechs were well versed in weapons matters.

            Quote: topic
            Statistics, this is good. But in this case, it is not needed. The effectiveness of weapons is evaluated by well-defined formulas. Simple, quiet and comfortable. Shooting range or hunting in this case is not required.

            That's what all dumb-take bullets are tested on biological samples, but they could be counted on a calculator by a formula.
            Regarding statistics, according to the WWII, the combat effectiveness of 7,62TT, 9x19 and EVEN .45ASR was practically equivalent in combat conditions.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. topical
              topical 9 December 2015 23: 40 New
              -1
              Quote: BORMAN82
              The Czechs created their intermediate cartridge 7,62x45 at the same time as ours 7,62x39, and if it had not been for joining the Warsaw Bloc, they would have done well with this cartridge. It seems to me that these Czechs were well versed in weapons matters.

              But the Americans created their intermediate cartridge only in the early 60s. And only on a cartridge with a new bullet. Do you think that they were poorly versed in the shooter? Not at all, on the contrary. The creation of intermediate cartridges on the classic bullet just suggests that the "creators" did not understand the nifig in the shooter. This is me about the Czechs and the USSR. The Germans do not count, weapons on an intermediate cartridge during the war were created by them, like an ersatz, to replenish the density of fire. After they got burned on the concept of a single machine gun. Therefore, we decided to sacrifice efficiency for this, otherwise it did not work.
              I can estimate the external and wound ballista of the Vz.52, it was slightly better than that of the AK-47 and the "German". But he was also very far from a full-fledged army weapon. It is not clear what was there with the balance. The weapon is quite rare, so there is no information on this topic. Although, much worse than the AK-47. Humpty dumpty, damn it.
              Quote: BORMAN82
              they take bullets to be tested on biological samples, but they could count on the formula on a calculator.

              In fact, gelatin tests are in use. But that later. And first, they must. Those who know what to consider. However, today everyone already knows.
              Quote: BORMAN82
              Based on WWII results, the combat effectiveness of 7,62TT, 9x19 and EVEN .45ASR was recognized by experts as practically equivalent

              This is a false statement. Duck, simply put. Just this can not be in principle. Therefore, there’s nothing to argue about. Any simple formula for effectiveness refutes this statement easily.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  17. Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 10 December 2015 00: 26 New
    +1
    Quote: topic
    In fact, gelatin tests are in use. But that later. And first, they must. Those who know what to consider. However, today everyone already knows.

    This is a gelatin test in the YouTube murzilki, and real tests of the action of ammunition are carried out on "biological samples". For example, the Americans, when they were looking for an alternative to the 9x19Para cartridge for the FBI, shot at freshly killed rams. Probably they could not prove the effectiveness of the .40 Smith & Wesson cartridge on the calculator- "Well, stupideeeeeee ...." And ours did not hesitate to spoil the corpse meat during the tests of 5,45x39.
    Quote: topic
    Any simple formula for effectiveness refutes this statement easily.

    Are you talking about Ohm's Law formula or something else?
    1. topical
      topical 10 December 2015 00: 42 New
      0
      Quote: BORMAN82
      Probably they could not prove the effectiveness of the .40 Smith & Wesson cartridge on a calculator- "Well, stupideeeeeee ...." And ours did not hesitate to spoil the corpse meat during the tests of 5,45x39.

      What is the point of shooting at carrion? The concussion region is poorly visible. Gelatin is more convenient.
      Quote: BORMAN82
      Are you talking about Ohm's Law formula or something else?

      There are several of them. Well, at least Josseran for classic shell bullets.
  18. Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 10 December 2015 18: 59 New
    0
    Quote: topic
    What is the point of shooting at carrion? The concussion region is poorly visible. Gelatin is more convenient.

    http://padabum.com/d.php?id=37645 -полюбопытствуйте и все поймете :)
  19. aleks177
    aleks177 25 February 2016 00: 48 New
    0
    I had a very serious suspicion that Owen had fallen into the hands of a Russian-language magazine or newspaper with a description and photo of Blum's small-caliber machine gun, developed in 1935. Obviously, he did not know the Russian language, and having found the Russian-English dictionary in the library, he translated the description as best he could, and the pictures were of newspaper quality.
    Borrowed: a disk with cut-outs for cartridges, the return of the sleeve to the disk, a spring-loaded drive for turning the disk ... it forces the stock and handles.
    Missed - disk stops, USM design.

    Owen's spooky idea of ​​a "trigger-strip" - if not properly gripped, the bolt could cripple the shooter's finger.

    According to Blum, Jr., the hunting experts asked for the return of the cartridge case to the disk to shoot the wolves from the horse or from the plane without risking throwing the cartridge case where it is not necessary.