Alexey Ivanovich Sudaev entered history small arms as the creator of one of the best submachine guns of the Second World War. He was the first of the Soviet designers in the 1944 year created a prototype of a machine gun chambered for 7,62x39 mm. Submitted by him in 1942 for testing the submachine gun was not inferior in combat qualities to the models of Degtyarev and Shpagin, but with the equipped magazine it was lighter than 1,7-1,8 kg, demanded in the manufacture of 2 times less metal and 3 times less labor costs.
Automation PPP worked under the scheme with a free gate. For firing from a submachine gun 7,62 × 25 TT cartridges were used. Shooting from PPP was conducted with an open shutter. Used trigger mechanism allowed firing only in automatic mode - bursts. The fuse was in front of the trigger guard. In the forward martial position of the submachine gun Sudaev's fuse was transferred by pressing the index finger before placing it on the trigger. The Soudaev submachine gun consisted of a barrel, a stamped receiver box, connected to the barrel casing by welding and riveting, a fire control handle and a butt. The metal butt of the submachine gun was made collapsible, it was folded up on the receiver box. Folding butt reduced the length of the weapon, which was one of the advantages of the model.
Alexey Ivanovich Sudaev
To improve the accuracy of fire on it was used a simple but quite effective muzzle brake-compensator. Sights PPP consisted of a fly and flip-pillar, which was designed for distances 100 and 200 meters, these fixed positions were designated as "10" and "20". The most effective was shooting short bursts of 2-5 shots. The power of a submachine gun was carried out from box magazines with a capacity of 35 cartridges. At the same time, they were not interchangeable with PCA stores and had an outlet on the 2 cartridge, which greatly facilitated the process of their equipment and provided the weapon with greater reliability of work.
28 July 1942, the Sudaev submachine gun under the designation PPS-42 was put into service, and after some improvements in the 1943, it received a new designation PPS-43. Production of small arms was initially deployed in besieged Leningrad. The city was surrounded by enemy troops, the supply of weapons to it was hampered, and the front demanded replenishment. From the end of 1942 to June 1943, Alexey Sudayev worked in the besieged city. In this case, the designer did not sit out in the rear, he repeatedly traveled to the operating units at the Oranienbaum bridgehead and the Karelian Isthmus to look at his weapon in action. I communicated with fighters, listened to their wishes and comments. After these meetings, he made changes to the design of his weapon, if they were really useful. And although the PPS did not become as famous as the PPSH, during the war years they produced a sufficiently large number, more than 500 thousand PPS-42 and PPS-43.
His future submachine gun Sudaeva secured himself in a fairly tough competition. At the second stage of the competition for the new submachine gun for the Red Army, which was held from April 26 to 12 May 1942, 7 samples were presented:
1. Degtyarev PDM (KB plant number 2 named Kirkizh) number X NUMX and number X NUMX.
2. Bezruchko-Vysotsky PPV (Artakademiya).
3. Zaitsev (OKE. A. Nudelman) 16 and 1 samples.
4. Sudaeva (SCI).
5. Korovin (KB plant number XXUMX).
6. Rukavishnikova (SCA).
7. Ogorodova (NKVD).
PPS-42 and PPS-43
Already at the testing stage of the presented samples by firing it turned out that only Bezruchko-Vysotsky, Degtyaryov, Korovin, Rukavishnikov and Sudayev models would be allowed to further tests. So Ogorodova submachine gun was not debugged, giving up to 7,5% of delays, and its important details were not thermally processed, which led to the failure of the weapon after the 120 shots. The Zaitsev submachine gun was also incomplete, sample No. XXUMX gave 1% of delays, and sample No. XXUMX gave 15,4%, which was the reason for their removal from testing. The submachine gun presented by Rukavishnikov gave 2% delays when tested by shooting, however, due to the overall originality of the design, significantly different from other samples, he was admitted to some further tests to determine the accuracy of the fight, the effect of different conditions on the operation of its automation and others specifications. This was to help deal with the feasibility of further refinement of this sample.
Tests of the second stage of the competition for a new submachine gun were carried out under conditions that were as close as possible to the actual combat situation, based on the fire training course - KOP-38 and real combat episodes of the ongoing war. So, among other things, weapons were tested from a moving tank, and one of the tasks simulated an attack by partisans on a German convoy. During the tests, the best accuracy was shown by the Korovin submachine gun, followed by the Sudaev submachine gun with a slight margin. The members of the commission also checked the convenience of firing submachine guns in various positions of the shooter. The leader here was a modernized Degtyarev submachine gun. But the faculty also showed itself very well, limiting itself to the following remark: “Weapons are docile, but the draft of the butt creates inconvenience when using the handle. Uneven pace and uneven blows to the shooter's shoulder. The slot of the pillar is rather small, the eye is tired. The rest of the faculty does not create any inconvenience to the fighter when firing in all positions. "
The test program even included such an item as the convenience of firing a submachine gun from a tree. At the same time, the comments of the commission members arose only on the model of Bezruchko-Vysotsky, who was shaking badly, and on the model of Degyatrev, because of possible cases of pushing the shop latch by the knot that served as an arrow pointing, which led to the loss of the store. And when testing with a tank armor, oddly enough, the worst result was demonstrated by a sample of the Bezruchko-Vysotsky design, despite the fact that it was the only submachine gun with a tank stop. The best were the designs of Sudayev and Korovin.
Submachine gun system Bezruchko-Vysotsky
The next stage, which again sifted out part of the competitors, was the test of the reliability of the automation and the survivability of the weapon. Shooting at the survivability of a submachine gun was carried out with normal lubrication with short bursts and whole shops (on 30-35 cartridges) until 15 thousand shots were reached. After every 150 of shots, the barrel of the weapon cooled, after one thousand shots were completed, inspection, cleaning and lubrication of the submachine gun followed. The control shooting of weapons on the accuracy of the battle was repeated through 5 thousands of shots. At this stage, the Tula sample of Korovin was cut off, which gave 4,7% delays during 3917 shots. The reason, according to testers, was the wrong choice designer size of the chamber.
In the process of testing the survivability of weapons from samples of Bezruchko-Vysotsky, Degtyarev and Sudayev, the accuracy of the battle was checked every 5 thousand shots (3 series on 20 cartridges on 100 meters with a single fire from the stop). By the time the tests were completed, the accuracy of combat at the Degtyaryov and Sudayev submachine guns remained at about the same level, and in the Bezruchko-Vysotsky sample, it deteriorated approximately 2 times to 10 thousands of shots and 4 times to 15 thousands of shots. The deterioration of the accuracy of the battle in this model submachine gun depended solely on the wear of the barrel due to its poor condition. In the end result, only three samples were allowed to test for reliability: Bezruchko-Vysotsky, Degtyarev and Sudayev.
The conditions of this test were as follows:
1. Firing at elevation and declination angles close to 90 degrees.
2. Firing a weapon after dusting it with cement dust in a special box and blowing it with furs for 5 minutes while the sample is on one side and 5 minutes on the other side (the sample was lying on stands without touching the bottom, the store was inserted, spare stores were also in dust box with sample).
3. Firing when washed with kerosene and wiped dry parts of weapons.
4. Firing with grease guns guns.
The best results on the results of tests for reliability were shown by two submachine guns - Bezruchko-Vysotsky and Sudayev. At the same time, the results of the Sudayev submachine gun were particularly prominent. 15 405 shots were fired from the weapon and total 0,19% delays were received. Of these, with normal lubrication - 13 985 shots and 0,18% delays, under various conditions - 1420 shots with 0,3% delays.
For a better test of the operation of the automatics, the samples of Bezruchko-Vysotsky and Sudayev were subjected to additional tests: 1) shooting cartridges that were heated in a thermostat to + 60 degrees Celsius. The only result of this test was a reduction in the rate of fire of the Bezruchko-Vysotsky submachine gun; 2) shooting with the overcoming of a water obstacle by the shooter and the subsequent crawling along the sandy stretch of the coast. It turned out that the design of Sudayev was more reliable, the submachine gun was less sensitive to the ingress of sand. At the same time, the Bezruchko-Vysotsky submachine gun refused to work in all cases, and only after washing it in water again was it operational. Especially testers noted the unsatisfactory fastening of the lid of the shop in a Bezruchko-Vysotsky submachine gun. After testing for serviceability (throws from a two-meter height onto two types of surface: pavement, paved with sandstone and tamped sandy soil), the sample of Sudayev turned out to be better.
An important fact, which was established during the tests, was the unequivocal conclusion of the commission about the advantages of stores with double-row cartridges from both their reliability and the convenience of equipping such stores.
The tests of submachine guns would not have been completed without the new Shpagin model. From 30 May to 2 June, additional tests of its PPSH-2 were conducted at the NIHTPL. This submachine gun used automatics with a free gate. The fire from it was conducted from the open bolt, firing was allowed only in automatic mode. The role of the fuse on the PPSH-2 was performed by a folding dust cover of the groove for the charging handle, which had two cutouts for fixing the handle when the cover is closed and the front or back position of the weapon shutter. Meals were supplied from double row detachable box stores. The butt of the submachine gun was wooden, detachable (such a decision was considered by the military as a lack of weapons due to the possibility of losing the butt in battle), while PPSH-2 could shoot with the butt removed. In the design of the submachine gun was widely used stamping from steel sheet, on the muzzle of the barrel there was a compensator toss the barrel.
The technological assessment of the new challenger has shown that a worthy competitor has appeared in the competition for a new submachine gun for the Red Army. In the opinion of experts about this sample, it was said that it possesses better indicators than the sample of Sudayev, with the exception of efficiency and metal consumption, where PPP is better. Also PPSH-2 showed a lower rate of fire and the best indicators of survivability and the number of costs. However, a significant lack of weapons was low accuracy when firing bursts. According to the testers, this was due to the fact that the designer unsuccessfully selected the dimensions of the wooden butt and used the unfortunate construction of the compensator.
Soviet soldiers with PPP during the fighting in Budapest
The results of the second stage of the competition and additional tests with the participation of PPSH-2 were reviewed by a special plenum of the Artillery Committee of the Red Army Army GAN 17 on June 1942. At the same time, there was no unambiguous decision in favor of one or another sample. The Sudaev submachine gun was a little better in terms of “combat” indicators, and the PPSH-2 was slightly better in terms of technology. Both options still required some refinement, and the designers promised to bring their samples to the mind and meet the tactical and technical requirements as soon as possible. As a result, the final selection of a new submachine gun for the Red Army was again delayed.
As a result, the final “race” with the participation of the last applicants took place from 17 to 21 in July 1942. Both samples were tested on a special program of the Artillery Committee GAU. The tests were quite tough: the samples had to be dragged 10-15 meters across the sand with a rope tied to the butt, then wipe the bore and shoot: 70 shots (2 magazine). Also, the testers checked the reliability of the automatics of the weapon by making 1000 shots from each submachine gun without first cleaning the weapon and without interruptions designed to cool the barrel in the process of firing. The reliability of the automatic operation of the weapon at very low temperatures was also checked. Submachine guns were cleaned, lubricated with winter rifle grease and placed in a box with carbon dioxide at a temperature of -50 degrees Celsius, where they held 2 hours. Equipped shops were attached to the weapon. And if the freeze test could not withstand both submachine guns, the firing on reliability showed a clear superiority of the Sudayev system. When the weapon was contaminated with fine sand, the PPSH-2 gave 12,7% delays (147 to 1153 shots), and the future PPP - only 5,9% (68 to 1155 shots).
It is safe to say that it was this test that was decisive in the fate of the future faculty. Commission members concluded that the new Shpagin PPSH-2 submachine gun, in terms of the number of delays when firing under conditions of heavy pollution, did not withstand competitive tests. At the same time, the competition between the two designers started at the test site was transferred to the bureaucratic / paper plane, where not only the results obtained were important, but also the posts of supporters of a particular model of a submachine gun. In this regard, PPSH-2 did everything quite well, since the People's Commissar of Arms of Ustinov personally acted as his advocate. As a result, JV Stalin was personally able to resolve the dispute between two designers, who ordered to issue for the military tests on 1000 pieces of submachine guns of both models. In this case, the final choice in favor of PPP was made already in 1943 year. And he justified himself: the submachine gun remained in service after the end of the Second World War. And his copies were made not only in the countries of the socialist camp, but also in Finland, Germany and Spain. In the last two countries, the Finnish version of the 9х19 mm cartridge was issued in small batches.
Open source materials