Поиск сообщества

Приключения американцев в России 2. Гаранд и М-1… "Опасность заключается в том, что как только западные державы Европы усмирят русского царя и получат господство над восточной частью Европы, они обратят потом свое внимание на Америку, на нас". Посол США в России Сеймур в письме от 13 апреля 1854 года госсекретарю Уильяму Марси. Современным жителям США и России зачастую довольно сложно представить, что большую часть новейшей истории эти страны воспринимали друг друга как "естественные союзники". Например, вскоре после своего избрания президент Линкольн созвал специальный совет "по срочному перевооружению армии России". Шаг вполне логичный, учитывая опасения федерального правительства, что Англия вступит в войну на стороне мятежных штатов. Хотя разработанный этим советом план так и не был реализован, военно-техническое сотрудничество между США и Россией вскоре приобрело весьма большой размах. Во второй половине XIX века на вооружении русской армии были приняты две винтовки, сконструированные знаменитым героем Гражданской Войны генералом Х.Берданом. Также на вооружении армии и полиции поступили револьверы "Смит-и-Вессон". Общее число заказанных их США револьверов превысило 250 тыс, из-за чего третья модель стала больше известна как "русская". В годы Первой Мировой войны Россия стала основным покупателем винтовок Винчестера М 1895. Конструкция Джона Браунинга, приспособленная под русский патрон, довольно неплохо показала себя при отражении вражеских атак – перезарядка "скобой Генри" позволяла развить большую скорострельность, чем болтовый затвор. Однако и надежность М1895 в условиях окопной войны оказалась не очень-то высокой – винтовка показала себя чувствительной к загрязнению и склонной к отказу при низких температурах. При этом разборка ее была значительно труднее штатной "трехлинейки" Мосина. К следующей войне СССР, казалось, подготовился лучше, приняв на вооружение самозарядную винтовку Токарева. Но падение качества производства в военное время, равно как и замена кадровой армии наскоро подготовленными новобранцами негативно сказалось на боевой карьере СВТ. После многочисленных донесений с фронта об отказах самозарядки Токарева она была снята с производства – сохранился лишь небольшой выпуск автоматического варианта в роли эрзац-пулемета. Тем не менее, руководство Красной Армии вовсе не переставало мечтать о самозарядке. Сложившаяся в ходе войны система смешанного вооружения пехоты пистолетами-пулеметами и винтовками фактически "выключала" часть бойцов из огневого боя на дистанции свыше 200 метров. "Трехлинейки" же были слишком медлительны, чтобы успеть нанести врагу серьезный ущерб. И желанные самозарядки, в принципе, можно было получить – из США, в рамках программы ленд-лиза. Требовалось лишь выяснить, насколько они реально хороши. В июле 1943 года на стрелковом полигоне ГАУ Красной Армии было проведено испытание винтовки Гаранда. Характерно, что сравнивался Гаранд не только с отечественной СВТ-40, но и данными трофейной G-41(m) (фирмы Маузер). Первой из определявшихся боевых характеристик стал отстрел на кучность боя. № пп. Наименование винтовки Прицел Дальность в метрах Радиус рассеивания R100 (см) Ч50 (см) 1 7,62 мм самозарядная винтовка Гаранда (США) 1,1 3,3 6,6 100 300 600 12,2 28,3 67,7 4,9 11,3 28,7 2 7,92-мм самозарядная винтовка G41(m) (немецкая) 1 3 6 100 300 600 8,0 30,0 83,3 4,2 14,7 34,7 3 7,62-мм самозарядная винтовка Токарева обр. 40 г. 1 3 6 100 300 600 13,4 46,3 94,0 3,8 14,7 27,0 Стрельба из Гаранда велась патронами фирмы Винчестер выпуска 42 года. Из G-41 – польскими патронами 30-х годов. Данные по СВТ взяты из отчета 41-ого года. Как видно, и американская и немецкая винтовка дали лучшую кучность боя, чем СВТ. Согласно отчету, это способствовали несколько факторов. Во-первых и американская и немецкая винтовка тяжелее СВТ на 600 и 800 гр. соответственно. Во-вторых, самозарядка Гаранда имела диоптрический прицел и превосходила обе сравниваемые винтовки по длине прицельной линии. Меткость и удобство винтовок определялось выполнением задач и упражнений по курсу КОП (Курс огневой подготовки) двумя квалифицированными стрелками-испытателями. Сделанные ими выводы звучали так: 1. Самозарядная винтовка Гаранда удобна и имеет хорошую меткость, так как все упражнения и задачи обоими стрелками выполнены с оценками «хорошо» и «отлично», кроме оценки «посредственно» для второго стрелка по задаче №2. 2. Самозарядная винтовка G-41(m) неудобна и имеет плохую меткость, так как из выполняемых задач и упражнений пять оценок «посредственно» и только по одной оценке «хорошо» и «отлично» и одна оценка «плохо» то есть ни одного попадания. Следующим этапом стало выяснение практической скорострельности винтовок – по мишени с кругом 100 мм на дальность 100 метров. № пп Наименование винтовки Стрелок 1 Стрелок 2 Средняя практическая скорострельность выстрелов в минуту Число патронов Время в сек. Число патронов Время в сек. 1 7,62 мм самозарядная винтовка Гаранда (США) 16 16 16 30 31 29 24 24 24 42,5 41,0 45,0 32-34 31-35 33-32 2 7,92-мм самозарядная винтовка G41(m) (немецкая) 20 20 20 60 59 63 20 20 20 57 50 55 20-23 20-24 19-22 Повышенная практическая скорострельность самозарядки Гаранда, по отзывам стрелков, объяснялась удобством заряжания обоймы, ее автоматическим выбрасыванием после отстрела последнего патрона и удобством быстрого прицеливания диоптрическим прицелом. И, разумеется, одним из главных параметров, который интересовал советских военных, была надежность винтовки в различных условиях эксплуатации. № пп Наименование условий 7,92-мм самозарядная винтовка G41(m) (немецкая) 7,62 мм самозарядная винтовка Гаранда (США) 7,62-мм самозарядная винтовка Токарева обр. 40 г Задержек Шт. % Шт. % Шт. % 1 Детали нормально смазаны – – 2 4 3 6 2 Детали густо смазаны 2 4 – – 5 10 3 Сухие детали 3 6 – – 4 8 4 Угол возвышения 70-80° – – 1 2 3 6 5 Угол склонения 70-80° – – – – 3 6 6 Оружие и патроны нагреты до 70° 3 6 – – 8 16 7 Оружие и патроны охлаждены до -50° 2 4 1 2 9 18 8 Запыленное оружие при сухих деталях 20 40 3 6 6 12 Всего задержек 30 7,5 7 1,75 41 9,75 Как видно из таблицы, Гаранд по надежности превзошел и СВТ и "немца", для которого, впрочем, решающим оказалось лишь одно испытание из восьми – стрельба при сильной запыленности, когда энергии отводимых газов просто не хватало для нормальной работы автоматики. Казалось бы, выводы из результатов испытаний должны были быть сделаны вполне однозначные – вот оно, надежное и точное оружие для бойцов Красной Армии. Но были еще несколько параметров, очень важных для офицеров ГАУ. У них было упомянуто в самом конце акта об испытаниях. "В сборке, разборке и чистке самозарядная винтовка Гаранда сложнее, чем самозарядная винтовка Токарева и требует больше натренированности. Например, чистка канала ствола с казенной части при помощи шомпола невозможна. По весу самозарядная винтовка Гаранда (4,513 кг) и 7,92-мм самозарядная винтовка G41(m) (4,717 кг) не удовлетворяют современным ТТТ и имеют вес больше, чем самозарядная винтовка Токарева обр. 40 г соответственно на 0,613 и 0,817 кг." Со вторым пунктом еще можно было как-то примириться – в конце концов, неудачный опыт все той же СВТ достаточно ясно показывал, что гнаться за облегчением оружия в ущерб прочности и надежности не очень разумный путь. Но вот требование к обученности личного состава было наиболее критичным. Для многих свежепризыванных бойцов Красной Армии уход за оружием сводился к вытряхиванию песка после вражеского артобстрела. Выезжавшие на фронт комиссии регулярно фиксировали массовую утерю принадлежностей для чистки, масленок и прочего. Хотя постепенно ситуация с облученностью солдат выправлялась и в 43-м уже не была такой трагичной, как в 41-м, когда в рапортах встречались фразы: "из-за заржавленности затвора солдат не мог перезаряжать винтовку". Второй американской системой, которую испытали тогда же на НИПСВО, стал М1 Carbine. Интерес к нему в СССР появился еще в 41-м, когда офицеры ГАУ ознакомились с опубликованными в журнале "Army Ordnance" результатами конкурса на самозарядные карабины под патрон малой мощности. Но в 1941 идея создания нового патрона для советского руководства выглядела, мягко говоря, несвоевременной, а созданные в рамках той же концепции карабины под патрон пистолета ТТ (7,62х25) не могли показать каких-то существенных преимуществ перед пистолетами-пулеметами под тот же патрон. Как сразу отметили на полигоне в описании, "7,62-мм американский самозарядный карабин "М-1" является новым образцом индивидуального оружия с высокими маневренными качествами – в частности, его вес равен всего 2,250 кг". На этот раз стрельба в затрудненных условиях стала первой проверкой. № пп Наименование условий стрельбы Количество выстрелов Задержки Непродвижение патрона из магазина Итого задержек. % задержек. 1 При нормальной смазке деталей. 20 – – – 2 При углах склонения до 90° 20 – – – 3 При углах возвышения до 90° 20 – – – 4 При густой смазке деталей (75% ружейной смазки + 25% пушечного сала) 20 1 1 5 5 При сухих деталях 20 – – – Итого в различных условиях. 100 1 1 1,0 А вот испытание на кучность тоже обещало быть интересным. Здесь соперниками М-1 стали опытный карабин Дегтярева и трофейный М.Кв.42(Н) (MKb.42(Н) фирмы Хенель) проходивший тогда в советских документах как автокарабин. Наименование образца 100 метров 300 метров 500 метров Прицел R100 Ч50 Прицел R100 Ч50 Прицел R100 Ч50 7,62-мм американский самозарядный карабин "М-1" Мин. 8,4 3,6 Мин. 23,5 11,7 мах Цит перехватил 4 пули из 30 ниже точки прицеливания на 2-2,1 метра 7,62-мм отечественный карабин Дегтярева 1 21,7 10,7 3 64,7 31,0 5 131,3 45,0 7,9 мм германский автокарабин М.Кв.42(Н) 1 11,5 5,4 3 30,5 15,2 5 38,3 20,2 Вывод стрелков был неутешителен – по дальности прямого выстрела М-1 оказался практически равноценен состоящему на вооружении Красной Армии пистолету-пулемету Шпагина. Тупоконечная пуля из-за плохой баллистики в полете очень быстро растрачивала энергию. При таком положении все преимущество американца в легкости и надежности теряло смысл – особенно на фоне результатов трофейного "немца". В итоге М-1 был всего лишь "рекомендован к изучению" советским оружейным конструкторам. Заказывать его для поставок по ленд-лизу, разумеется, никто не стал. В 1943 в СССР уже полным ходом шли работы по созданию собственного "промежуточного" патрона и образцов оружия под него. Андрей Уланов.

Americans’ adventures in Russia. Garand and M1 «The danger lies within western powers interest in us, after they taim the Russian Tsar and gain control over eastern Europe.” US ambassador to Russia Seimor in his letter to secretary of State William Marcy. It is hard for Russians and US citizens to imagine, that these 2 countries saw each other as «natural allies» most of the modern history period. For instance, soon after being re-elected, president Lincoln called up council for “immediate re-armament of Russian army”. Quite a logical step, bearing in mind that the federal government feared that United Kingdom might take part in the war on the rebel states’ side. Even though the plan developed by this council had never been put into life, the military and technical cooperation between Russia and USA soon took up a large scale. Two rifles, designed by famous civil war hero General H.Berdan, were put in service of the Russian army in the second half of 19th century. Smith and Wesson revolvers had also been supplied to the Russian army and police. The overall number of revolvers ordered form the US was 250 000, that is why the third model became known as the “Russian”. During First Wordl War, Russia became the largest buyer of the Winchester M1895 rifles. John Browning design, adapted to the Russian round, had proven itself reliable in repulsing enemy attacks – the lever action allowed for higher fire rate, compared to the bolt action. The reliability of the M1895 in trenched war turned out to be quite low – the rifle was very sensitive to dirt and low temperatures. Meanwhile its disassembly was far more complicated than the regular Mosin rifle. The USSR seemed to have had prepared much more thoroughly for the next war – the Tokarev SVT rifle had been put into service. The drop in production quality during the war, just like replacing the professional army with somewhat prepared rookies had played its negative part in SVT’s career. After a lot of failure reports from the frontline, the SVT had been put out of production, with just its automatic variant still being supplied as ersatz-machinegun. Nevertheless the Red Army commanders hadn’t stopped dreaming of a semi-automatic rifle. The system of mixed soldiers’ armament – with submachine guns and long rifles, basically made part of the soldiers useless at distances beyond 200 meters. The Mosins were too slow, to do any significant damage to the enemy. The desired semi-automatic guns could be acquired form the USA in terms of Land Lease contract. They only had to find out how good the guns were first. Garand rifle was bought to the test facility of the Main artillery department of the Red Army in July 1943. It is curious, that Garand was not only compared to the Soviet SVT-40 (Tokarev), but also with the German G-41(m) (Mauser). Accuracy was tested first. No. Rifle Sight Distance in meters Groupings radius 100% of all shots (см) 50% best shots (см) 1 7.62-мм semiautomatic Garand rifle (USA) 1,1 3,3 6,6 100 300 600 12,2 28,3 67,7 4,9 11,3 28,7 2 7.92-мм semiautomatic rifle G41(m) (German) 1 3 6 100 300 600 8,0 30,0 83,3 4,2 14,7 34,7 3 7.62-мм semiautomatic Tokarev rifle (SVT-40) 1 3 6 100 300 600 13,4 46,3 94,0 3,8 14,7 27,0 Winchester 1942 rounds were used to fire the Garand. Polish ammo of 1930-ies was used with th German Mauser. The SVT data had been taken form the 1941 report. As it is seen form the table, the American and German rifles had shown better accuracy, than the Russian SVT-40. This had several reasons, according to the report. First of all, the German and the American rifle are heavier than the Russian one by 800 and 600 grams respectively. Second, Garand had dioptrical sights and the line of sight length was the largest among all 3 rifles. Accuracy and comfort of the rifles was determined through carrying out tasks and exercises from the Basic Firearm Course (BFC) by qualified shooters-testers. Their conclusion was the following: 1. The Garand semiautomatic rifle is comfortable and has good accuracy, as all exercises done had marks “excellent” and “good”, except for “satisfactory” for the second shooter in exercise no2. 2. G-41 semiautomatic rifle is uncomfortable and has low accuracy, as there were five “satisfactory”, one “good” and one “excellent” marks, and one “bad” one (meaning 0 hits). The next was determination of practical fire rate at 100-mm target at 100 meters. N Rifle Shooter 1 Shooter 2 Average rate of fire (shots per minute) Number of rounds Time per sec. Number of rounds Time per sec. 1 7.62-мм semiautomatic Garand rifle (USA) 16 16 16 30 31 29 24 24 24 42,5 41,0 45,0 32-34 31-35 33-32 2 7.92-мм semiautomatic G41(m) rifle (Germany) 20 20 20 60 59 63 20 20 20 57 50 55 20-23 20-24 19-22 The high rate of fire of Garand was possible, according to shooters, by the comfort of clip loading, the automatic clip ejection after last shot and the speed of acquiring the target with dioptrical sight. And, obviously, one of the most important parameters, which Soviet soldiers were interested in, was reliability in different environments. N Envorinment 7.92-мм semiautomatic G41(m) rifle (German) 7.62 мм semiautomatic Garand rifle (USA) 7.62-мм semiautomatic Tokarev (SVT-40) rifle Misfires Qty. % Qty. % Qty. % 1 Normal lube parts – – 2 4 3 6 2 Thick lube parts 2 4 – – 5 10 3 Dry parts 3 6 – – 4 8 4 Angle elevation 70-80° – – 1 2 3 6 5 Angle elevation (down) 70-80° – – – – 3 6 6 Rifle and ammo heated up to 70° 3 6 – – 8 16 7 Rifle and ammo cooled down to -50° 2 4 1 2 9 18 8 Dusty rifle with dry parts 20 40 3 6 6 12 Misfires overall 30 7,5 7 1,75 41 9,75 As it is seen form the table, the Garand beat the SVT and the German rifle in terms of reliability. One test out of eight was crucial for it – fired when covered in dust, when there simply was not enough energy in gas for reloading cycle. It seemed that there should have been clear conclusions form these tests – here is THE accurate and reliable rifle for the Red Army. But there were a few other important aspects for the Main Artillery Department. They were mentioned in the end of the test report. “Disassembly, cleaning and maintenance of Garand rifle is more complicated, than the Tokarev rifle and requires more training. For instance, cleaning the barrel with the rod form the muzzle is impossible. In terms of weight, the Garand (4.513kg) and the G41(m) (4.717kg) didn’t meet the modern requirements of the time and are heavier than the SVT-40 by 0.613 and 0.817 kgs respectively.” The second point could be neglected – at the end of the day, the bad experience of the same SVT-40 proved that chasing weight cut at the cost of reliability is not the most reasonable way. But the educational requirements for the soldiers was much more crucial. For many newbies in the Red Army weapon cleaning came down to shaking the sand off the gun after the enemy’s artillery strike. All sorts of different commissions, that visited the front line constantly, reported equipment and tool loss by the soldiers. Though, slowly the soldiers’ education had improved and was no longer tragial by 1943, as it was in 1941, when “soldier is unable to reload due to rusty bolt” was common. The second American system tested at the facility at the same time was M1 Carbine. USSR became interested in it back in 1941, when the Main Artillery Department officers read the results of the tests for lower impulse ammo carbines in “Army Ordnance” magazine. But the idea of creating a new round for the army looked, somewhat, in the worng time in 1941. Besides, the carbines created for the TT round (7.62x25) didn’t show any significant advantages over the existing rifles at that time. As it was immediately pointed out, “the 7.62-mm semiautomatic American M1 carbine is a new type of personal, high manuevarable firearm – for instance, its weight is as low as 2.250 kg.” This time shooting in different environments was the first test. N Environment Number of shots Misfires Ammo stuck in mag Qty misfires % misfires. 1 Normal parts lube 20 – – – 2 Angle 90° (down) 20 – – – 3 Angle 90° (up) 20 – – – 4 Thick lubricant 20 1 1 5 5 Dry parts 20 – – – Overall in different environments 100 1 1 1,0 The accuracy test was also promising. The M-1was competeng with Degtyarev experimental carbine and the captured M.Kv.42(H) by Henkel, which was referret to back then by the Soviets as Automatic carbine. Name 100 meters 300 meters 500 meters Sight 100% of all shots 50% best groups Sight 100% of all shots 50% best groups Sight 100% of all shots 50% best groups 7.62-мм M-1 semiautomatic American carbine Min. 8,4 3,6 Min. 23,5 11,7 Max. 4 shots out of 30 below point of aim by 2-2.1 meters 7,62-мм Degtyrev’s carbine 1 21,7 10,7 3 64,7 31,0 5 131,3 45,0 7,9 мм automatic carbine M.Kv.42(H) by Henkel 1 11,5 5,4 3 30,5 15,2 5 38,3 20,2 The conclusion was disappointing – direct hit ballistics of M-1 turned out to be almost the same as the on of the PPSh. Flat nose bullet had lost energy really fast during the flight. With this kind of results, all the American’s advantages had become pointless, especially when compared to the captured “German” gun. As a result, the M-1 was “recommended for study” to the Russian designers. It was obviously not ordered within the Land Lease contract. USSR was working on making its own intermediate cartridge and a firearm for it full scale in 1943. Andey Ulanov.

Americans’ adventures in the USSR PART 1. Submachine guns Before the start of the Second World War, the goal of developing a new semiautomatic/full auto rifle was the main one in the Red Army. However, research and manufacture of submachine guns was also among major tasks since the 1920ies. It was in the 1920ies that a batch of “Thompsons” was bought in the USA and handed over to the border troops of the Red Army. There is no precise data on its use. However it can be assumed, that “ Chicago Typewriter” showed to be quite effective, since the research and development of soviet submachine guns hadn’t slowed don’t, but on the contrary – were sped up. Moreover, one of the Thompsons participated in the comparison tests of soviet and foreign submachine guns, which took place in 1930. Eventually, in 1934 USSR put into service its own submachine gun – Degtyareva and with this the story of imported submachine guns had temporarily come to an end. However, after the start of the war, the legends of tons of German machinegunners forced the Soviet commanders to start forming their own divisions, fully equipped with submachine guns. Even though the PPSh (Shpagin submachine gun), which was put into service in 1941, was quite simple and technologically acceptable in manufacture, it had a few “narrow places”, interfering with the increase of mass production. The manufacture of an even simpler Sudaev submachine gun had only been started at the end of 1942. In these circumstances, the submachine guns supplied according to the terms of Land Lease were of great help to the Red Army. The major part of supply was still the Thompsons, which normally came as enginery (tanks etc) personell firearms. But being an important anti-nazi ally, “Uncle Sam” was also kept informed of the latest arms research. This is why Resising and the M3 “Grease gun” were also among the guns being tested at the Main Artillery Department test ground. The Thompson submachine gun was tested as a “military” version with a box-type 20-round magazine. Its weight with an empty magazine was 5,125 kg. The test results showed that Tommy gun’s single fire accuracy at 50, 100 and 200 meters was better than the Soviet submachine guns and was almost the same accuracy when firing full auto (short bursts 3-5 shots). Type of fire 50 meters 100 meters 200 meters Thompson PPSh (Shpagin) PPS (Sudaev) Thompson PPSh (Shpagin) PPS (Sudaev) Thompson PPSh (Shpagin) PPS (Sudaev) Single R100 8,2 11,7 14,7 18,2 23,7 22,6 48,5 64,3 52,3 Ч50 3,4 5,5 6,5 8 15,7 9,9 21,3 31,7 23,0 Full auto R100 12,6 – 15,5 29,2 25,3 29,2 82 55,7 60,7 Ч50 6,1 – 7 14,2 13,2 16 29,6 29,7 31,1 Thompson was functioning quite reliably in different conditions. Overall 18 288 rounds were fired through it during the tests with 986 misfires (5.32%). As it was noted by the people involved, the Thompson submachine gun’s automatics was quite sensitive to dirt. In their opinion, Tommy gun was to be cleaned after each 1000 rounds. The design of the gun, even in its simplified “war” version, was acknowledged to be far too complicated and not technological (production-wise). This was also the opinion in the US, where they had launched the development of a simpler and cheaper submachine gun. The feedback by the troops didnt add any optimism: “The Thompson submachine gun is not popular among troops, who prefer the PPSh (Shpagin), fore the Tommy gun has high rate of misfire and is uncomfortable in use. Red Army was supplied with Thompsons on January 7th 1942 and already by January 10th 1942 was massively sent to the workshops due to high misfire. The reason for that was tight bolt action in the receiver (low clearance) and lubricant being stuck on them (most likely – cod liver oil), because it froze at -16 -20 degrees Celsius), just as well as the extra tension against cloth oil seals, which were soaked with the same lubricant (the lubricant was the factory-supplied and came in the gun’s buttstock). There were no cleaning accessories supplied, which gave extra difficulties in use. Round magazine installation on the Tommy gun is uncomfortable and required special skills as there was no magazine stop. The mags were interchangeable. High oxidation (rust) resistance was noted compared to the PPSh. Magazine levers loss and wood stock burns were also common.” The next one at the test facility was the Reising submachine gun. According to reports, it was not put thought the full cycle of tests. Construcstion study showed it to be overall complicated, however some parts – like the delayed blowback and the original trigger group, which functioned as the fire rate slowing mechanism, were highlighted in the report as noteworthy to the Soviet designers. The bolt of the Reising was put through a separate study. Among all the imported guns according to the Land Lease, Reising was the only one with delayed blowback. The conclusion of Soviet officers was the following: “The delayed blowback allowed to reduce the weight of the moving parts, but made the system more complicated overall. It required usage of a special part – relatively complicated bolt carrier. Moreover, due to this fact, the disassembly and especially production of the Reising gun was more complicated, as it took a lot more precision in parts’ manufacture.” The other overseas guest – the M3 Submachine gun was of much more interest. It was known to the Soviet military officials as soon as it was tested, at the special bulletin for the officers of the Main Artillery Department stated that simple and cheap, “British Stan-type submachine gun – the T20 was being researched and developed in the United States. Its was to be used by the partisans and spies.” It showed similar accuracy to the Tommy gun at 50, 100 and 200 meters range. Also, the M3 showed good operation reliability in different conditions. And finally, the stamina test – 12 300 shots were fired prior to the first part breakdown – the spring of reloading mechanism lever and 17 000 shots until the sear broke. The sealing level and dust resistance of the M3, which provided it with the above described level of reliability, was highly rated by the Soviet officers. The Soviet blowback operating guns (the PPSh Shpagin and the PPS Sudaev) down side was the moving parts hitting the receiver end plate. In the M3, according to estimations, the recoil spring absorbed 99.4% of the recoil energy, which led to higher accuracy. It was the perfect result for a war-time simple design. In the conclusion of the test report it was stated: “The M3 submachine gun test carried out in may 1944 showed, that the firearm, put into service in the United States army in may 1943, not only outranks all the previous American submachine guns (Thompson 1923 and 1928, M1 and M1F1, and also Reising), but in terms of its certain qualities can be among world’s best submachine guns.” And finally, we can bypass one of the popular “legends”, related to the usage of American submachine guns by the Red Army. One of the versions, in particular, is written in the memoires of Dmitry Loza, who was one of the Sherman tank operators, supplied according to the Land Lease: “ Each Sherman tank was supplied with 2 Thompson guns. Caliber 11.43mm – huge cartdidge! But the gun was lousy. We had a few incidents. As a bet guys would put on 2 winter jackets, walked a bit away and then Thompsons would be fired at them. The bullet would get stuck in the jackets. That’s how sh..ty the gun was. Whereas we used to appreciate the German folding-stock submachine gun (referring here to the MP-40 made by Erma) for its compact size. Thompson was too big to be carried and used by the tank troops.” It is very unlikely, that Dmitry Loza had personally witnessed these “experiments”, most likely he heard someone’s stories, which he told many years later on his memoires. In reality, the small arms in the USSR were also tested for penetrating power. World War Two times standard penetrating power test was carried out by firing at the wooden package, which consisted of the 25mm thick wooden blocks with 25 mm empty spaces between them. Thompson gun penetrated three wooden blocks with all 10 shots at 50, 100 and 200 meters distance and the next – fourth one, with 9 out of 10 bullets. Even at 300 meters the first wooden block was penetrated by 10 out of 10 shots. Two winter jackets are undoubtedly think, but very unlikely to be more bullet proof than the 1 inch wooden block. However, it is possible, that there was some sense in legends like this one. In the Main Archive of the Ministry of defense of Russian Federation, there is a report on the condition of 3 million of 11.43 mm American pistol ammo, delivered via Murmansk. Initial visual examination showed that the ammo had residue and dirt under the cases, different primer depth and others flaws. The ammo was by different manufacturers and form different dates. The firing test showed the ammo to have had high percentage of defects, most common being the primers, which lead to gas blowback, case explosion, misfires, hard extraction and other abnormalities. Most likely, this “soup” was manufactured before the US factories set up production of military orders. And, obviously, used in combat, this ammo didn’t do any good to the reputation of the Land Lease arms among the Red Army troops. Perhaps, the reason was different – the ballistics of a large, heavy and slow .45ACP bullet. If sight adjustment or hold overs were not perfect, the bullets trivially didn’t even reach the target. The soldiers, after many rounds of misses, having being confident in their good aim, started to think of the bullets being weak. A somewhat similar situation arose in the Korean war, where the landscape features provoked aiming and range finding errors. The soldiers equipped with M1 Garands, which had larger direct shot distance, were less sensitive to these errors, whereas the soldiers with M1 and M2 carbines started legends of the ineffectiveness of the .30 Carbine cartridge against the enemy in thick clothes. As a result , many of the US soldiers became disappointed with the intermediate cartridge. Andrey Ulanov.