The most famous domestic submachine gun of the Second World War was and remains the PPSh. However, next to Shpagin's creation, throughout the war, another, slightly less well-known submachine gun designed by Sudayev went hand in hand. If PPSh was released in a circulation of 6 million copies, then PPS was produced in the amount of 2 million copies. Despite the impressive lag, the machine was still extremely popular among the troops. However, which of them was more loved by the front-line soldiers?
If the choice of a fighter between a machine gun and a rifle in the conditions of the Second World War was in most cases obvious and unambiguous, then the choice between different machine guns is a completely different matter. Despite the fact that PPSh and PPS were quite similar in terms of combat characteristics and even used the same cartridge, the opinions of different front-line soldiers about them could vary greatly. And although the front-line soldiers loved both machine guns in their own way, it would be unfair to recall that in addition to the strengths of any weapon, there are also weaknesses.
1. Why praised and scolded Shpagin?
First of all, the PPSh was praised by Soviet soldiers for its simplicity, since it was extremely and equally important, both in a combat situation and during recruit training. Effective fire from PPSh could be fired at a distance of up to 300 meters, which is very good even by the "rifle" standards of the Second World War. Most often, PPSh were used for combat at a distance of 100-200 meters. At the same time, PPSh also had very specific shortcomings ...
>>>>Ideas for life | NOVATE.RU<<<<
PPSh was scolded by Soviet soldiers for their solid weight, the quickly wearing out reflector of the spent cartridge case, frequent breakage latch of the receiver, frequent breakage of the shock absorber, the quality of production also left much to be desired trunk. Experienced soldiers also complained about the too high rate of fire, due to which the PPSh had delays as a result of cartridge leakage. Also, the front-line soldiers wanted to get a reduced shutter window, since there were more problems with the net to Shpagin than we would like.
2. Why were Sudayev praised and scolded?
First of all, the PPS was praised by Soviet soldiers for its lower weight and dimensions, as well as for its compactness due to the folding stock. It was possible to conduct effective shooting from PPS at a distance of 100-200 meters. At the same time, the machine gun caused even more complaints from the military than the ill-fated PPSh with all its “specifics”.
The low weight of the weapon is good. However, in the case of PPP, one serious drawback grew from this. Due to the low mass of the machine during firing, it threw up more, which, in turn, affected the accuracy of firing. In addition, the PPS was far from being so durable, and at times some of its parts naturally bent... There were even cases when the stock broke off from the machine gun. Went into the dressing and the receiver of the store. In general, the build quality left much to be desired even more than in the case of the PPSh. There was also the problem of misfires due to too deep entry of the cartridge into the chamber.
In continuation of the topic, read about why the lewis machine gun was such a thick trunk.
Source: https://novate.ru/blogs/060622/63210/