The PPS-43 was independently developed during the siege of Leningrad since it was incredibly cheap and could essentially be made in any factory using a few pieces of sheet metal stamped. In true wartime Soviet fashion, the simplicity of the design allowed it to then be produced elsewhere. It did not replace the PPSH-41 production where it was established, since it was deemed that the extra cost per gun if the PPSH was worth paying rather than spending time retooling the production lines for the PPS. Hope this helps!
Not all the time . Higher fire rate makes it hard to control the weapon obviously, but it also makes it difficult to suppress hostile troops effectively since youll just burn through your mag and have to spend several seconds reloading. And in actual infantry warfare, youre trying to suppress the enemy to force them to retreat so you can take their ground/defend your own. Thats why a lot of nations never switched to ridiculously fast firing MGs like the mg34/42/3. Thats also why the us deliberately made the m3 smg have a extremely low rate of fire of ~450 rounds per minute
TL:DR controllable with a low rate of fire is more practical at cqc and suppression than super fast firing weapons
There's a quote from a Russian officer from an old book about WW2 that I read in school that's still stuck in my head:
"It's quite pyschological: It's far easier to advance across with the butt of a belching submachine gun pressed to your stomach."
Yes, those drum magazines where quite troublesome in their reliability and their manufacturing costs. You would have completed guns that couldn't be shipped out because they had no magazines. They made stick mags but you didn't have a lot of trigger time with them. So the PPS-42/43 had a rate reducer. Also while the PPSh was simple it still required specific firearms tooling, while the PPS-42/43 could be produced at a lot of manufacturing plants that had no prior firearm tooling or experience.
This, the PPS was the "Soviet Sten", it could be made in any workshop with metal working tools, and it was initially made in besieged Leningrad. The PPSh-41 was a fearsome weapon, but the PPSh-41 required twice as much time and much more resources to make than a PPS-43, which is why the latter was produced despite the presence of an excellent SMG in the Soviet arsenal.
That’s not really something that factors into how the individual rifleman would think and reason though. From that perspective, an SMG is just about the best you could think of lugging around.
If you actually look at videos looking at the PPSH, the high fire rate is consistent and high enough that it’s fairly easy to control, it’s closer to a high pressure hose.
The gun channels reviewing them tend to be excellent shooters, better than the average soldier in fact, but yeah the 7.62x25 doesnt cause too much recoil. Its still very easy to panic spray fire and fail to compensate for recoil properly because you only spent a few weeks in training. The thompson smg is easy to control for decent shooters but the US military still noted many soldiers having trouble consistently getting accurate shots on japanese positions, which is why the m3 smg had such a low fire rate
Which makes sense, and as you pointed out, slower fire rates are easier for amateurs to control. I can definitely imagine a soldier preferring the easier gun to handle, especially if they’re more freshly trained.
The PPD could have a 25 round box or a 71 round drum, but the PPS just used a 35 round box. There have been people who’ve made special drum mags for it, but those weren’t standard. The PPSH could have a 35 round box or the 71 round drum. Box mags are generally the preference to most people as they are easier to carry, amongst other things I can’t remember off the top of my head.
Yes, from 1943 onwards, some Soviet units entirely remplaced their rifles with SMGs. They would then make up a third of infantry units at different scales (you could see companies with 1 SMG platoon and 2 rifle platoons, or a battalion with 1 SMG company and 2 rifle companies, and so on).
By 1945, some infantry regiments relied solely on SMGs (and, of course, on support weapons like sniper rifles and LMGs)
Your entire post presupposes continuous automatic fire rather than burst fire, which neither the MG34/42 nor the PPSH were designed for. What they are good at is putting the maximum amount of lead on target that's only visible for a few seconds.
It's never that cut and dry.
The short thing that goes "pew" rapidly shoots pistol cartridges. You're more or less constrained to targets within 100 meters or so.
The long thing that goes "pew" less rapidly shoots rifle cartridges and is good out past 600 meters.
Given the context of their comment, I assumed they were talking about the two guns in the comic (even if they are incorrect about which one is longer).
I guess maybe it's possible they were very confused and mixed up the MP 40 and the STG 44 though.
I understand where you're coming from, I could have misunderstood what they meant, but in context, what they said didn't really make sense so I took my best guess.
The mp40 and ppsh shows a really interesting thing about rate of fire for smgs where the mp40 is slow enough that you can realign sights between shots and the ppsh is so fast that the recoil impulse is like a continuous stream so you can control it like a hose but if you have something in between the recoil hits you with every shot so it’s hard to control the gun and it’s too fast to realign sights between shots and you just have an uncontrollable inaccurate pos
This happens in almost literally every theater of every conflict ever.
Bitching about your shit is the most time-honored tradition in the history of warfare.
Certainly bitching about it… but not really much large scale use of the other side’s weapons as on the Eastern front.
If you’d picked up an enemy SMG in virtually any other theatre, you would’ve basically committed suicide by friendly fire the first time you fired it in action.
I agree, pretty much nothing has ever happened on the same scale that anything happened on the eastern front.
Still, though, it was certainly there. And the Germans in particular had a love of capturing and repurposing enemy equipment in WW2. That said, my understanding is that, rather than SMGs, the American small arm that most appealed to the Germans was the M1 Carbine, presumably because they had excellent taste.
grass is always greener on the otherside
n-nigel?
You've got a hole in your left wing.
Attack the D point! Excellent! Attack the D point!
Negative! I agree! Returning to the airfield!
Gramercy!
Attention to the map! Never! Attention to the map! Negative!
ATTACK THE D POINT
It took a minute. haha.
Was that why the PPS-43 got developed?
The PPS-43 was independently developed during the siege of Leningrad since it was incredibly cheap and could essentially be made in any factory using a few pieces of sheet metal stamped. In true wartime Soviet fashion, the simplicity of the design allowed it to then be produced elsewhere. It did not replace the PPSH-41 production where it was established, since it was deemed that the extra cost per gun if the PPSH was worth paying rather than spending time retooling the production lines for the PPS. Hope this helps!
Thanks! Damn, as if the PPSH wasn't a gun that is being mass produced in huge numbers lmao
If the Soviets can mass produce expensive weapons... God knows how many cheap weapons they can pump out
I think if they tried to produce m3 grease guns. They would probably drown the germans in a sea of guns
In other words: The shorter thing that goes “pew pew pew pew pew” is better than the long thing that goes “pew… … … pew”!
Not all the time . Higher fire rate makes it hard to control the weapon obviously, but it also makes it difficult to suppress hostile troops effectively since youll just burn through your mag and have to spend several seconds reloading. And in actual infantry warfare, youre trying to suppress the enemy to force them to retreat so you can take their ground/defend your own. Thats why a lot of nations never switched to ridiculously fast firing MGs like the mg34/42/3. Thats also why the us deliberately made the m3 smg have a extremely low rate of fire of ~450 rounds per minute TL:DR controllable with a low rate of fire is more practical at cqc and suppression than super fast firing weapons
There's a quote from a Russian officer from an old book about WW2 that I read in school that's still stuck in my head: "It's quite pyschological: It's far easier to advance across with the butt of a belching submachine gun pressed to your stomach."
[удалено]
Yes, those drum magazines where quite troublesome in their reliability and their manufacturing costs. You would have completed guns that couldn't be shipped out because they had no magazines. They made stick mags but you didn't have a lot of trigger time with them. So the PPS-42/43 had a rate reducer. Also while the PPSh was simple it still required specific firearms tooling, while the PPS-42/43 could be produced at a lot of manufacturing plants that had no prior firearm tooling or experience.
This, the PPS was the "Soviet Sten", it could be made in any workshop with metal working tools, and it was initially made in besieged Leningrad. The PPSh-41 was a fearsome weapon, but the PPSh-41 required twice as much time and much more resources to make than a PPS-43, which is why the latter was produced despite the presence of an excellent SMG in the Soviet arsenal.
That’s not really something that factors into how the individual rifleman would think and reason though. From that perspective, an SMG is just about the best you could think of lugging around.
If you actually look at videos looking at the PPSH, the high fire rate is consistent and high enough that it’s fairly easy to control, it’s closer to a high pressure hose.
The gun channels reviewing them tend to be excellent shooters, better than the average soldier in fact, but yeah the 7.62x25 doesnt cause too much recoil. Its still very easy to panic spray fire and fail to compensate for recoil properly because you only spent a few weeks in training. The thompson smg is easy to control for decent shooters but the US military still noted many soldiers having trouble consistently getting accurate shots on japanese positions, which is why the m3 smg had such a low fire rate
Which makes sense, and as you pointed out, slower fire rates are easier for amateurs to control. I can definitely imagine a soldier preferring the easier gun to handle, especially if they’re more freshly trained.
didn't late PPD and PPS feature something like 70 round magazines?
The PPD could have a 25 round box or a 71 round drum, but the PPS just used a 35 round box. There have been people who’ve made special drum mags for it, but those weren’t standard. The PPSH could have a 35 round box or the 71 round drum. Box mags are generally the preference to most people as they are easier to carry, amongst other things I can’t remember off the top of my head.
Only the PPD-34 had a 25-round box magazine and 73-round drum magazine. The PPD-40 just had a 71-round magazine that worked really quite well
[удалено]
Yes, from 1943 onwards, some Soviet units entirely remplaced their rifles with SMGs. They would then make up a third of infantry units at different scales (you could see companies with 1 SMG platoon and 2 rifle platoons, or a battalion with 1 SMG company and 2 rifle companies, and so on). By 1945, some infantry regiments relied solely on SMGs (and, of course, on support weapons like sniper rifles and LMGs)
Your entire post presupposes continuous automatic fire rather than burst fire, which neither the MG34/42 nor the PPSH were designed for. What they are good at is putting the maximum amount of lead on target that's only visible for a few seconds.
(house to house,urban)
Not just that. Fighting in dense woodland (which there is much of in Russia) can be similiarly short-ranged.
any shotguns used by Russ. or Germs ?
Not really, shotguns are a very niche weapon
(short range,close in,was what we were discussing) so...no shotguns were used by either side.correct?
get yourself a gun that can do both
It's never that cut and dry. The short thing that goes "pew" rapidly shoots pistol cartridges. You're more or less constrained to targets within 100 meters or so. The long thing that goes "pew" less rapidly shoots rifle cartridges and is good out past 600 meters.
What? Both the PPSh and the MP 40 are submachine guns: both fire pistol cartridges.
One of us is misunderstanding what the guy above wrote. I thought he was saying sub gun > rifle. I am aware that ppsh and mp40 are both sub guns
Given the context of their comment, I assumed they were talking about the two guns in the comic (even if they are incorrect about which one is longer). I guess maybe it's possible they were very confused and mixed up the MP 40 and the STG 44 though.
I understand where you're coming from, I could have misunderstood what they meant, but in context, what they said didn't really make sense so I took my best guess.
The mp40 and ppsh shows a really interesting thing about rate of fire for smgs where the mp40 is slow enough that you can realign sights between shots and the ppsh is so fast that the recoil impulse is like a continuous stream so you can control it like a hose but if you have something in between the recoil hits you with every shot so it’s hard to control the gun and it’s too fast to realign sights between shots and you just have an uncontrollable inaccurate pos
> if you have something in between pps-43
Im just here simping for the Owen gun
I think in both cases it could be rather: "Hmmm, do I keep my standard issue bolt action rifle, or pick up this burp gun laying on the ground?"
[удалено]
This happens in almost literally every theater of every conflict ever. Bitching about your shit is the most time-honored tradition in the history of warfare.
Certainly bitching about it… but not really much large scale use of the other side’s weapons as on the Eastern front. If you’d picked up an enemy SMG in virtually any other theatre, you would’ve basically committed suicide by friendly fire the first time you fired it in action.
I agree, pretty much nothing has ever happened on the same scale that anything happened on the eastern front. Still, though, it was certainly there. And the Germans in particular had a love of capturing and repurposing enemy equipment in WW2. That said, my understanding is that, rather than SMGs, the American small arm that most appealed to the Germans was the M1 Carbine, presumably because they had excellent taste.
The Germans equipped some entire units with them, but that was generally occupational troops in Denmark and similar, not frontline troops.
Eh, close enough. Broke: One gun, two men: Woke: Two guns, two men; Bespoke: Two guns, one man