Military Review

Small-sized automatic machine Dragunov

42
During his life, designer Yevgeny Fedorovich Dragunov created approximately 30 samples of rifle weapons. Today, his name is inextricably linked with the SVD sniper rifle, which was put into service in the 1963 year, but still has not lost its relevance. At the same time, like any designer, he had enough interesting projects that did not go into mass production. One of these little-known types of weapons that remained “behind the scenes” is the small-sized Dragunov-MA machine gun.


In 1973, in the Soviet Union a new development work was initiated on the topic “Modern”, which included the creation of an 5,45-mm small-sized machine gun designed to arm artillery crews, crews of armored vehicles, grenade launchers and technical units. That is, those military personnel for whom the machine gun would become a weapon of self-defense. In accordance with the declared TTKh, the new small-sized machine gun was supposed to maintain single and automatic fire, have a length of no more than 750 mm with the butt unfolded and no more than 450 mm with a folded, weigh no more than 2,2 kg, while the target range should be 500 meters .

Soviet designers of gunsmiths M. T. Kalashnikov, I. Ya. Stechkin, A. S. Konstantinov, S. G. Simonov, S. I. Koshkarov were involved in the work on the creation of a small-sized automaton on a competitive basis. In 1975, another well-known Soviet designer, EF Dragunov, joined the creation of the 5,45 mm caliber compact submachine gun. The weapon developed by him for the low-impulse cartridge 5,45x39 mm was designated MA - small-sized machine gun.

Small-sized automatic machine Dragunov


One of the requirements contained in the terms of reference for development was the widespread use of plastic parts in the design. At that time in the department of the chief designer of "Izhmash" there were already works on the manufacture of a number of parts from molded plastic - glass-filled polyamide for the AK-74 submachine gun. As a result, in addition to the plastic pistol grip and shop, the machine gun was able to get a new butt, handguard and receiver pad.

It is worth noting that the design of plastic parts has a number of features. A plastic part provides a noticeable reduction in labor intensity and becomes advantageous when there are no fittings in it (in the ideal case) or the number of metal parts poured into plastic is minimized. However, the most common arrangement of domestic small arms, when the moving parts were located in the box, on top of a closed detachable lid, did not allow the body part to be made unreinforced. Inevitably, it was necessary to pour guides for moving parts, a reflector into the plastic, and also to bind the front insert and the back plate of the box with a power structure. As a result, the output was a metal structure that was “poured over” with plastic.

Therefore, in order to get a really full body part, Evgeny Dragunov used the original layout. The upper part of the construction consisted of a barrel with a low receiver box, in which the bolt with a slide frame was suspended. A plastic box was hinged to the front liner of the receiver, in which the trigger mechanism was located. In the back, a folding butt was attached to the bed. When assembling a small-sized machine, the bed was fixed relative to the receiver by a return mechanism. For this purpose, a single reinforcing part was poured into it, having a hole under the protrusion of the return mechanism.



This design significantly affected the weight of the weapon, allowing the machine to be lightened to 2,5 kg with an unloaded magazine. In the back of the box was a metal butt with a folding nape folding over the top of the receiver. Its use has significantly reduced the dimensions of the weapon (total length 735 mm, with a folded butt - 500 mm). The shape of the parts was chosen so that after the butt was folded, the transverse dimension of the small-sized machine gun did not increase, and the folded butt did not interfere with the aiming of the weapon. The latch, which fixed the butt in the fighting position, is located in the rear of the box of the machine. Fixing the butt in the folded position was made using the second latch located on the butt so that pressing the latch and tilting the butt could be done with just one movement.

The first samples of the small-sized Dragunov machine gun possessed a barrel pad, which consisted of the right and left halves (similar to the SVD rifle). With further work on the design of MA, this site has changed. In the subsequent samples of the machine, it already consisted of a lining and a spring-loaded forearm. The stock, receiver pad and spring-loaded forearm were made of glass-filled polyamide - AG-4В.

The principle of operation of the automatic equipment of the Dragunov MA is the removal of powder gases. Locking was done by turning the bolt on the 3 lug. The trigger trigger used ensured single and automatic firing. The power supply of the automaton was carried out from AK74 regular stores (for 30 cartridges). In order to reduce the height of the receiver and simplify the disassembly process, a separate pusher with a slide frame was used in the design of a small-sized machine gun. The opening of the gas chamber was through, and the cork played the role of the front wall, which at the same time was the fixator of the flame arrester.



Traditionally, for Evgeny Dragunov’s developments, the trigger mechanism was made by a separate assembly, which was fastened in the box with protruding ends of the trigger axis and the axles of the mainspring support. The mechanism was made according to a scheme with a change in the direction of action of the moment of the mainspring, which in everyday life for brevity was called a scheme with a "blockage of the trigger." A compression spring was used as the combat spring. In the process of cocking the direction of the force of the mainspring passed through the axis of rotation of the trigger, after which the spring began to squeeze the trigger from the bolt carrier. The trigger went over the so-called “dead point” and ceased to interact with the moving parts, thus eliminating the friction between the trigger and the frame during roll-in and at the end of the rollback. Upon arrival in the forward position, the slide frame pressed on the self-timer, pulling the trigger of the weapon from the dead center. The same scheme of functioning of the trigger mechanism was previously used by Dragunov in the PP-71 submachine gun (later known as “KEDR”).

The fire interpreter was in the box at the front edge of the trigger guard on the right. The translator had 3 installations - “P” (fuse on), “AV” (automatic fire) and “OD” (shooting with single cartridges). When installed in the “P” position, the translator's flag goes into the hole of the trigger guard, which allowed simultaneously with the grip of the handle to determine by touch the position of the translator of fire. The long interpreter pen, when in the “P” position, is located in the upper position, which prevents movement of the bolt carrier frame.

On the small-sized machine gun Dragunov was used diopter sight. It had two firing range settings - 300 and 500 meters. The base of the sight rotated relative to the receiver of the machine, while performing the function of the latch of the return mechanism. When dismantling the MA in order to move the return mechanism forward and separate the receiver from the box, the base of the sight had to be rotated 90 degrees. The use of such a construction minimized the possibility of improperly assembling weapons, since, if the base of the sight did not fall into place, aiming from a small-sized machine gun was impossible.

In the first modification of the Dragunov machine, a flame arrester was used, which in its design was similar to that on the AKS74U. Further, in order to enhance the extinction of the muzzle flame during firing and the formation of a compensating effect, asymmetrically arranged slits appeared in the front part of the flame arrester MA.



The first tests of a small-sized automaton demonstrated the viability of the design, however, some parts and assemblies of weapons required improvements. When tested in difficult conditions, the automatic trigger machine misfired. This happened because of the insufficient progress of the self-timer, which did not provide a reliable pull-out due to the dead center. To eliminate this delay, it was necessary to re-arrange the mechanism. At the same time, the used scheme with the "blockage of the trigger" turned out to be, as they say, a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this solution made it possible to eliminate braking of the slide frame on the trigger, but on the other hand, when the frame arrived in the front position, in order to pull the trigger out of the dead center, it was necessary to overcome the force of the compressed combat spring, which caused significant losses energy moving parts at the end of the run. As a result, the design and dimensions of the pusher in the gas unit had to be changed several times. Due to the shorter length than the pusher of a SVD rifle, it lost its elasticity and began to deform during operation.

At the same time, to the parts made of plastic, there were no serious complaints. True, during the tests for the service strength of the weapon, when a small machine gun fell on the pistol grip, it behaved rather unusually. The plastic box of the automaton absorbed when it hit the concrete, after which the weapon, like a ball, jumped almost a meter.

By the accuracy of shooting with automatic and single fire from different positions, MA Dragunov showed almost the same results as AKS74U. Like many short-barreled firearms with a powerful cartridge, the Dragunov machine gun had a slightly increased vertical scatter of hits, but for the solution of the tasks assigned to the weapon the accuracy of fire was considered sufficient. One of the advantages of the Dragunov compact machine was the upper location of the butt. Due to this, the sample turned out to be flat, without protruding dimensions (except for the reloading handle) parts, which ensured the convenience of carrying the weapon on the belt in any positions.

Incomplete disassembly of small-scale automaton MA designed by EF Dragunov: 1 - a box with a receiver, barrel and butt; 2 - bolt carrier; 3 - shutter; 4 - trigger mechanism; 5 - the return mechanism; 6 - pusher; 7 - gas chamber plug; 8 - handguard; 9 - cover forearm; 10 - forearm stop; 11 - flame arrester; 12 is a shop.


The estimated labor intensity of the production of the automatic machine MA Dragunov was comparable to the laboriousness of the production of the machine AK74. But by that time, as the design of the MA machine had finally taken shape, the USSR Ministry of Defense had already decided to adopt the AKS74U machine gun. Taking into account the fact that it was inexpedient to have in service two different in design, but similar in their technical characteristics of the sample, further work on the Dragunov small-sized machine gun was stopped.

A limited number of experienced models of the Dragunov small-sized machine gun were produced. The MA machine itself was the last truly major development of the famous gunsmith designer EF Dragunov, who during 40 years of work in the department of the chief designer of Izhevsk Machine Building Plant, created 27 samples of small arms, 10 of which were launched into mass production. Among these samples, the MA automatic was the last one that the renowned Soviet gunsmith brought from the stage of the drawings to the assembly and testing of finished weapons.

Tactical and technical characteristics of the MA Dragunov:

Caliber - 5,45 mm.
The mass of weapons with unloaded magazine - 2,5 kg.
Length - 735 mm (in a combat position), 500 (in the marching).
Barrel length - 212 mm.
Store capacity - 30 cartridges.
Firing Rate - 800 shots / min.
Sighting range of shooting - 500 m.

Information sources:
http://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-inf/malogabaritnyj-avtomat-dragunova
http://weaponland.ru/load/malogabaritnyj_avtomat_dragunova_ma/21-1-0-661
http://weapons.my1.ru/publ/oruzhie/avtomaty/malogabaritnyj_avtomat_dragunova_ma/4-1-0-27
Author:
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. D-Master
    D-Master April 28 2016 06: 56
    +2
    Cool machine gun. It is a pity that I did not even go to a small series. I think he would be very good for special forces. But alas, the brainchild of Mikhail Timofeevich is almost perfect and practically impossible to compete with him. Especially given the significant inertia of Soviet industry and the scale of enterprises sharpened for the production of various versions of AK.
    1. vkl.47
      vkl.47 April 28 2016 07: 32
      0
      AKS74U is far from an ideal machine gun. Otherwise, I would not have received the nickname “ok”
      1. Jackking
        Jackking April 28 2016 12: 49
        +4
        It is ideal for the functionality for which it was developed. This is not an assault version of the weapon - there are other models for this.
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr April 28 2016 14: 16
          +5
          Quote: Jackking
          It is ideal for the functionality for which it was developed.

          Ideal or not, only practice could show, when several varieties of machine guns were operated in the Army for some time, under different conditions. And so hung up on the fact that AK is the best of the best, and this is an axiom.
          There was also a Stechkin assault rifle in this weight category. Although structurally complicated, it is not more difficult than Nikonov, which was still adopted for service (but not in this category of "shortened").
          1. edge
            edge April 29 2016 11: 32
            +1
            Quote: Bad_gr
            And so hung up on the fact that AK is the best of the best, and this is an axiom.

            It’s unlikely that just the high interchangeability of parts and machine-tool production are one and the same. There is no need to be wise when everything is already there, cheap and cheerful, and for special production there was enough equipment kb
        2. edge
          edge April 29 2016 11: 28
          0
          Quote: Jackking
          It is ideal for the functionality for which it was developed.

          would bring the condition and he would go to reconnaissance
      2. Dam
        Dam April 28 2016 18: 46
        0
        And also: shorty, mother's dick, etc. They do not like him in the army, they do not like him
      3. sub307
        sub307 April 29 2016 05: 50
        +2
        vkl.47
        "AKS74U is far from an ideal machine gun ...
        And what is an "ideal automaton", and does "nature" exist?
      4. The comment was deleted.
  2. Wolka
    Wolka April 28 2016 07: 09
    +1
    an interesting development, but the topic of MA has not lost its relevance now ...
  3. qwert
    qwert April 28 2016 07: 17
    +11
    I did not notice any particular advantages over the shortened Kalashnikov. At least such, to master the production of another sample.
    1. CTABEP
      CTABEP April 28 2016 07: 51
      +2
      The folded stock is clearly more convenient than on the AKSU, give the fire translator, but probably that's all. And these are trifles, as they say.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn April 28 2016 20: 31
        +2
        The cover of the receiver for one with the barrel, set the bars of a weaver or picatini and sculpt anything, from a collimator to a night lamp
        1. Jackking
          Jackking April 29 2016 12: 44
          0
          There is a side bar for this ...
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 19 May 2016 18: 49
            0
            Well, the side bar has many drawbacks, for example, a larger mass and a shift of the centering to the side, as well as an increase in dimensions, well, not universality, you can’t stick it with a flashlight or a fuse.
            for example, on a weaver bar, you can combine a collimator with a night vision device and a monocular, which does not require removing the main collimator if you need to shoot at distant targets or at dusk, put the necessary appendage and go ahead.
  4. uskrabut
    uskrabut April 28 2016 09: 15
    +8
    An interesting machine gun turned out, but it didn’t work out much before Kalash. The result is a model unified with the AK-74. My opinion is that a submachine gun under a less powerful and small-sized cartridge (the same PPS) is better as a small-sized assault rifle.
    1. Record Nadoev
      Record Nadoev April 29 2016 09: 51
      0
      Quote: uskrabut
      My opinion is that a submachine gun under a less powerful and small-sized cartridge (the same PPS) is better as a small-sized assault rifle.

      That's right, PP. But there was no normal cartridge. Now it is, so you can safely sculpt.
  5. Verdun
    Verdun April 28 2016 10: 45
    +3
    The development is curious. But it seems to me erroneous the idea of ​​using small-caliber cartridges in machine guns with a shortened barrel, which does not have a serious firing range. At close range, bullets with high stopping power are needed, which the 5,45x39 bullet is unable to provide.
    1. Forever so
      Forever so April 28 2016 11: 01
      0
      You're right. Here if we talk about unification, it would be possible to make an automatic shnyag under the Makarovsky cartridge. Put a screw store, it’s 80 rounds of ammunition could have a stock. Again, the store would not stop crawling out of the hatch.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun April 28 2016 11: 31
        +4
        So now there is such a PP - Bison.
      2. Droid
        Droid April 28 2016 14: 44
        +3
        You try to shoot at 200-300 m Makarovsky cartridge ...
        1. Record Nadoev
          Record Nadoev April 29 2016 09: 56
          +1
          Quote: Droid
          You try to shoot at 200-300 m Makarovsky cartridge ...

          They don’t shoot at 200-300 m from the submarine. Even at 200 m they rarely shoot. Standard range 100 m.
          1. Droid
            Droid April 29 2016 23: 01
            0
            That you will explain to the enemy on the battlefield ...
            1. Record Nadoev
              Record Nadoev April 29 2016 23: 32
              0
              Quote: Droid
              That you will explain to the enemy on the battlefield ...

              This is called, if only that, but I’ll blurt out.
              1. Droid
                Droid April 30 2016 07: 32
                0
                Exactly. So you will blurt out something. For example - do not shoot and come closer, otherwise my gunner will not shoot further than 100 m. And the bronik, even anti-shatter, does not pierce at point blank range.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. gladcu2
      gladcu2 April 28 2016 17: 13
      +1
      Verdun

      Close range, how many meters?

      I hope you did not mean the distance of hand-to-hand combat in which the pistol bullet is the master of the situation.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun April 28 2016 17: 36
        0
        Of course not. But even at 50 - 100 meters from 5,45 there is no big sense. In any case, the Dragunov weapon described in the article created a light, pointed, machine-gun bullet, which is bad for close combat.
        1. Record Nadoev
          Record Nadoev April 29 2016 09: 57
          0
          Quote: Verdun
          But even at 50 - 100 meters from 5,45 there is no big sense.

          Yes? In fact, from the AK-74 from it and at 350 m there is a real sense. Of the smaller AKS74Us, of course.
          1. Verdun
            Verdun April 29 2016 12: 24
            0
            Of the smaller AKS74Us, of course.
            You try to get from AKSU at a distance of 300 meters, and I'll look at you.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. gladcu2
          gladcu2 April 29 2016 19: 32
          +2
          Verdun
          50-100 m for 5.45 is the most effective distance. Since the light bullet still retains an untouched supply of kinetic energy and will naturally transmit it in the form of a strong destructive shock. I do not think that after this your opponent will wish to run the remaining 50 m.
    3. Record Nadoev
      Record Nadoev April 29 2016 09: 55
      -1
      Quote: Verdun
      At close range, bullets with high stopping power are needed, which the 5,45x39 bullet is unable to provide.

      The 5,45x39 mm cartridge bullet has a very high stopping power. Much higher than the AKM bullet.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun April 29 2016 11: 37
        -1

        The 5,45x39 mm cartridge bullet has a very high stopping power. Much higher than the AKM bullet.
        Something I don’t remember writing anything about the AKM bullet in the comments on this topic. Using weapons with a shortened barrel of ammunition designed for standard-sized barrels is ineffective. Part of the energy of powder gases is wasted, the accuracy of the fire is reduced. A striking example is AKSU.
        1. Record Nadoev
          Record Nadoev April 29 2016 11: 43
          0
          Quote: Verdun
          Something I don’t remember writing anything about the AKM bullet in the comments on this topic.

          And what kind of cartridge do you offer in such a weapon? PM? So at his bullet in general, consider, there is no OD. Making a new cartridge? And who will do it? And for what? Only 5,45x39 mm remains.
          Quote: Verdun
          Using weapons with a shortened barrel of ammunition designed for standard-sized barrels is ineffective.

          This is an axiom. Of course, it is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick. But there was little choice, either "no" PM cartridge, or this one. Of course, we chose the best one.
          And now, with the adoption of the 9x19 mm cartridge, it is already possible to begin to be smart with normal PP on this cartridge.
          1. Verdun
            Verdun April 29 2016 12: 08
            -1
            Making a new cartridge? And who will do it? And for what?
            Create high-quality ammunition is almost more difficult than a weapon under it. I do not argue that this is a costly affair. But just then, the meaning in the development of new weapons becomes obvious. And if we talk about savings, then why is PPP worse than AKSU? After all, there is both a weapon and a cartridge under it.
            1. Record Nadoev
              Record Nadoev April 29 2016 23: 29
              0
              Quote: Verdun
              And if we talk about savings, then why is PPP worse than AKSU? After all, there is both a weapon and a cartridge under it.

              To everyone. That's all for everyone.
              And then there is logistics. PPP was relevant during the time of TT. And without TT, who needs it? The PM cartridge was also not suitable for a number of reasons (remember a bummer with APS). There was only the option of cutting AK-74. Which was done.
          2. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr April 29 2016 19: 48
            +1
            Quote: Record Nadoev
            And what kind of cartridge do you offer in such a weapon? PM? So at his bullet in general, consider, there is no OD.

            By the way, the lethal force of a bullet with PM is higher than that of a bullet with TT, including because of its stopping properties. Although the TT bullet has more energy than a bullet with PM energy.
            1. Record Nadoev
              Record Nadoev April 29 2016 21: 41
              0
              Quote: Bad_gr
              the lethal force of a bullet with a PM is higher than that of a bullet with a TT

              No, the lethal force is slightly (2,5-3%) higher for TT. And the stopping effect of the bullet is also higher, by 15-15,5%.
            2. Aqela
              Aqela 3 May 2016 21: 50
              0
              I would like to ask for clarification: where does the expression "lethal force" come from? And what does it mean? Maybe the "stopping action" is more accurate?
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 5 May 2016 12: 29
                0
                Quote: Aqela
                I would like to ask for clarification: where does the expression "lethal force" come from? And what does it mean? Maybe the "stopping action" is more accurate?

                :) I won’t say anything scientific, but in my own words:
                Bullet fired since
                TT pistol (cartridge 7,62 × 25) has an energy of about 500 J
                Bullet with PM (cartridge 9 × 18 mm) ---- bullet energy 300 J),

                but the TT bullet, piercing his victim through, flies further, taking with him most of his energy, and the wounded victim may well continue the fight.
                The bullet from Makarov, due to the larger caliber, has a greater stopping effect, and most likely it will get stuck in the victim, giving it all its 300j. Shock, and the enemy is no longer a fighter.

                Hence we have: although a bullet with a PM has less energy, the effect of hitting the enemy ("lethal force") is higher than that of a TT bullet.
        2. Aqela
          Aqela 3 May 2016 21: 48
          0
          A striking example is the edge of the Mosin rifle. Further 50 meters to shoot from it was useless.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. edge
      edge April 29 2016 11: 35
      +1
      Quote: Verdun
      The development is curious. But it seems to me erroneous the idea of ​​using small-caliber cartridges in machines with a shortened barrel

      in order not to fence a garden with ammunition, we needed a model under the main cartridge
  6. 2s1122
    2s1122 April 28 2016 11: 02
    +1
    probably, as always, they thought it was too complicated, that's all.
    1. Lex.
      Lex. April 28 2016 12: 09
      +2
      probably, as always, they thought it was too complicated, that's all.
      Not harder ak
      1. gladcu2
        gladcu2 April 28 2016 17: 15
        +2
        Lex

        It is not complicated, it is different.

        The army has the first criterion is a single machine. And the right supplier will not allow a hodgepodge of weapons in his unit.
        1. vomag
          vomag April 28 2016 20: 26
          +1
          I fought here for a year on a site with people who required 2 different assault rifles (in 5 different calibres) in the army .. and you are talking about suppliers ... and again on the article’s site that there are 2 assault rifles of different systems for service .. am ... everything got tired go go to the wall ....
    2. Lex.
      Lex. April 28 2016 12: 09
      +1
      probably, as always, they thought it was too complicated, that's all.
      Not harder ak
    3. Droid
      Droid April 28 2016 14: 45
      +2
      No. We considered that the AKS74U, as much as possible unified with the standard AK74, is preferable.
      1. Record Nadoev
        Record Nadoev April 29 2016 09: 59
        0
        Quote: Droid
        We considered that the AKS74U, as much as possible unified with the standard AK74, is preferable.

        Correctly counted.
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr April 29 2016 11: 10
          -1
          Quote: Record Nadoev
          Quote: Droid
          We considered that the AKS74U, as much as possible unified with the standard AK74, is preferable.

          Correctly counted.

          That is, it is assumed that a unit will have a bunch of broken machines and at least one worker should be assembled from them?

          And what of AKSU can be taken for AK74? Is that the trigger part. But in what cases can it be disabled? If the whole machine is broken, then there will be nowhere to rearrange.

          In general, I personally see no reason for a small machine to copy the design of the main one. It should be designed optimally for your task, and not be spare parts for other weapons.
          1. Droid
            Droid April 29 2016 23: 05
            +1
            Nothing of the kind is supposed. And it is supposed, first of all, to reduce the cost and simplify production.
          2. Aqela
            Aqela 3 May 2016 21: 52
            0
            No, well, why? They have the same shops. Butts. Ammunition too ... Oh yes! The surname of the designer - too! Is that not enough for you?
  7. DesToeR
    DesToeR April 28 2016 12: 38
    +16

    Video review
  8. Yarik76
    Yarik76 April 28 2016 14: 52
    +2
    Become a plus. On the topic - AKSU is a controversial thing in its essence, "a light barrel does not fit" the dimensions are large for AM, the same problems. Pilots prefer APS "tankers have no choice" which is a pity.
  9. 7zakharov
    7zakharov April 28 2016 21: 48
    +1
    it would be interesting to make a large machine gun according to the same turning point
    1. dmitriyruss
      dmitriyruss 16 June 2016 18: 43
      0
      There is such, or rather such -M16, from this "turning point" scheme, the main questions to the maintainability of this or that sample