Shutter operation.
Shutter in cocked position:
Half-platoon; safety trigger:
The shutter operation is somewhat clumsy. First you need to pull the trigger back completely. Then you need to pull down the lever in front of the trigger and open the shutter. Then everything is like with other bolt-action rifles - insert a cartridge, close the bolt, shoot. If the shot is not fired, the cartridge is removed using a special hook.
Carcano took something from the Doersch & von Baumgarten rifle, which the Italians liked, but showed shortcomings.
Pavlov 03/26/2016 - 22:30
Carcano cartridge. Although it is similar to the Dreyse cartridge, it has several significant differences. The cartridge performs obturation using a rubber disk at the bottom of the paper sleeve; with Dreyze and Chaspeau, obturation is carried out by the shutter itself. The bullet expands, Minier type and cuts into the rifling, caliber 17 mm; the tray is only for installing the capsule. Dreyse has a pallet cut into the rifling, which is much more massive than Karkanov’s.
Pavlov 03/26/2016 - 22:38
There are four models of needle Carcano. Top down:
* Moschetto d'Artiglieria (the engineering troops have the same)
* Moschetto da Carabinieri Reali a piedi (for mounted gendarmes the carbine is the same, only with side swivels)
* Carabina da Bersaglieri
* Fucile da Fanteria
Bayonets in the same order:
Pavlov 03/26/2016 - 22:45
But the Carcano is also a very rare rifle. Although approximately 400,000 of them were converted, few survived. Many were converted into shotguns, many simply went to waste. The presence of a bayonet is also nice. And the carbine is in very good condition, so although Karle’s absence is even more striking, I’m very happy with the new toy.
Pavlov 03/27/2016 - 18:19
Dulo Carcano. The caliber is 17.4 mm, although in reality it can be as much as 17.8 mm.
Sighting range of the carbine = 300 m. Pay attention to the axis of the aiming bar - this is how the derivation is corrected.
Chernomor 03/27/2016 - 18:43
Amazing.
I was always amazed at how actively gunsmiths of the 19th century explored the topic.
Nikolay, congratulations on your purchase!
Sergey S St. Petersburg 03.28.2016 - 15:10
How interesting... Nikolay, I join in the congratulations... Congratulations
Pavlov 03/28/2016 - 18:07
The rifle was not in service for long, but managed to see action. For example, in 1870 during the capture of Rome.
TerMind_LT 03/29/2016 - 08:42
On the right side of the barrel there is a strange protrusion, like the basis for a capsule nipple. Could it be that barrels (or blanks) from capsule rifles were used for the barrels of this rifle?
Sergey S St. Petersburg 03/29/2016 - 09:03
At the very beginning, Nikolai pointed out that these carbines are a conversion of muzzle-loading model 1844... With uv
swiss2 03/29/2016 - 13:43
Thank you very much for reviewing a very rare rifle!
Can I ask a little more additional questions?
Pavlov
Model 44/67 conversion of a muzzle-loading carbine mod. 1844
Why are there no traces of alteration visible on the wood? Or were the boxes all new?
Pavlov
The hammer is fully cocked, but the mainspring is uncocked. Carcano will transfer this decision to his next model, arr. 1891Comparison of Carcano shutters mod. 44/67 and arr. 91:
How is this one? How does it work? And right away the question is: could the shutter elements, even the main elements from the 60s, migrate to the 90s?
PavlovCarcano shutter. Unlike other needle rifle bolts, it does not seal, the cartridge does.
Three of the four needle rifles in service in large quantities - Dreyze, Chaspeau, Carcano. Carla is missing...
How do you rate these rifles comparatively in your opinion? It is clear that Dreize is the oldest, but Chaspeau, Carcano and Carle are almost the same age. I came across an almost unfounded opinion that Carle was the most perfect, after him Carcano, so it would be very interesting to know your opinion.
Pavlov 03/29/2016 - 16:56
Why are there no traces of alteration visible on the wood? Or were the boxes all new?The carbine has a new stock. Only some infantry rifles had stocks preserved, see scan from the book about Carcano. The positions of the trigger and the spring bushing are also shown there. The bushing (tubetto) is behind the spring, pushed back - the spring is released. At Carcano arr. 1891 is a similar bushing, but works slightly differently. See the description of the shutter parts and their operation:
How do you rate these rifles comparatively?Pros - the bolt is simple and compact, the cartridge provides obturation. Disadvantages - large caliber (alteration), the long stroke of the trigger does not allow normal grip of the neck of the stock, you need to move your thumb on the other side to reach the trigger with your index finger. The rifle is more modern than Draize, so some decisions are better. Ballistically inferior to Chaspo. I can’t compare it with Karle, I haven’t held it in my hands.
swiss2 03/29/2016 - 17:33
Student2 30.03.2016 - 15:26
First of all - congratulations! A rare thing, and a pleasant one at that.
It’s also interesting because the barrel, or rather its rear end, became the receiver. It can be seen that the stop for the bolt was the location of the nipple on which the capsule was put on.
But this required precise work, I slightly blocked the “window and cutout”, and that’s it, the sighting sights looked to the side with an angle.
Compared to Jaspo, the shutter looks too sophisticated; the advantages of a longitudinally sliding shutter are not realized. The extra action of unlocking the bolt and cocking the hammer could already have been invented, even when the bolt was moving back, or even when chambering.
Time to search for what to say..
Pavlov 30.03.2016 - 20:36
Compared to Jaspo, the shutter looks too sophisticatedThe Carcano shutter is simpler than the Chaspeau shutter. Complete disassembly of Carcano is done without tools; for Chaspo you need a key. Most importantly, there are no rubber or leather seals, Chaspo’s Achilles heel.
All three bolts require separate manual cocking. With Draise, you still have to compress the spring after closing the bolt, you have to press the trigger forward - an unnecessary movement.
Franc53 04/07/2016 - 12:31
Always admiring old weapons, the care of execution, the work of craftsmen, but how sad that almost everything was destroyed... and they continue to look at it, and it’s nice... but to have it?
Varnas 04/07/2016 - 14:33
Carcano cartridge. Although it is similar to the Dreyse cartridge, it has several significant differences. The cartridge performs obturation using a rubber disk at the bottom of the paper sleeve; with Dreyze and Chaspeau, obturation is carried out by the shutter itself. The bullet expands, Minier type and cuts into the rifling, caliber 17 mm; the tray is only for installing the capsule. Dreyse has a pallet cut into the rifling, which is much more massive than Karkanov’s.a few questions, if possible.
1- one of the two problems with weapons chambered for a caseless cartridge is obturation. They are still working on it. Could Dreyze and Chaspo have allowed this?
2- why an expanding bullet for breech loading?
3-The drayze has a tray for centering the ovoid bullet, why else did they make the plunge? And a massive pallet increases recoil.
Pavlov 04/07/2016 - 16:33
obturation.. Could Dreyze and Chaspault have allowed this?Partially. Chaspo has a rubber seal, which worked well if clean. According to the instructions, the shutter could withstand more than a hundred shots without replacement. Dreyse does not have a separate shutter; they relied on an exact fit of the bolt to the breech of the barrel. The contact surfaces were under a cone, the breakthrough was retracted forward.
Towards the end of the life of the Dreyze rifles, a Beck modification appeared, where the obturation was improved by using a rubber seal (but not like Chaspo, the design is different, see scan below). This made it possible to significantly increase the initial speed of the bullet. However, the bulk of Dreise was without a shutter.
Why an expanding bullet for breech loading?As already said, Carcano is a remake. They have a wide range of calibers, from 17.4 to 17.8 mm. An expanding bullet will work equally well on everyone. Krynka’s bullet is also expanding. Dreyze’s pallet performs several functions:
* Gives rotation to the sub-caliber bullet.
* Leading of the bore is avoided.
* The tray carries the primer.
Varnas 04/07/2016 - 22:01
Dreyse does not have a separate shutter; they relied on an exact fit of the bolt to the breech of the barrel. The contact surfaces were under a cone, the breakthrough was retracted forward.Dreyze on the first scan? Didn’t such a long needle jam in the channel through which gases somehow break through due to carbon deposits?
Towards the end of the life of the Dreyse rifles, a Beck modification appeared, where the obturation was improved by using a rubber seal (but not like Chaspo, the design is different, see scan below). This made it possible to significantly increase the initial speed of the bullet.This shutter probably lasted longer than 100 shots? And what speeds and bullet mass did you get?
P.S. It’s a pity they didn’t think of tightening the shutter with powder gases, like on Le Bange’s shutter.
As already said, Carcano is a remake. They have a wide range of calibers, from 17.4 to 17.8 mm. An expanding bullet will work equally well on everyone.I didn't think twice. Standardized ammunition for a non-standard caliber rifle.
Dreyse's tray performs several functions:But how do I understand that the sub-caliber is only for the depth of the rifling, the bullet slides along the fields of the rifling? Should the pallet (wooden?) have some kind of recesses, or be hexagonal (the bullet in the back too) so that it does not rotate relative to the bullet?
* Gives rotation to the sub-caliber bullet.
* Leading of the bore is avoided.I thought waxed bumana covering the bullet would cope with this. Or does this require several revolutions, as for bullets on cartridges such as Berdan?
P.S. Was the lead for bullets of that time pure or with antimony for hardness?
only there was a salted felt circle (Carcano’s was rubber):Surely it’s cheaper, but what about the resource?
Pavlov 04/07/2016 - 23:11
Didn’t such a long needle jam from carbon deposits?The needle did not jam, but the needle weakness all have needles. Dreyse's needle can be changed easily and quickly; you don't even need to disassemble the shutter. Chaspo and Carcano need dismantling.
And what speeds and bullet mass did you get?Chaspo has an initial bullet speed of over 400 m/sec. Dreyse has 295 m/sec. Podevils-Lindner has 390 m/sec.
It’s a pity we didn’t think of tightening the shutter with powder gasesThat is, how did they not think about it? This is exactly how Chaspo’s seal works.
does the bullet slide along the rifling fields?No, the bullet is sub-caliber and will not hit the rifling. The pallet screws it in.
the pallet (wooden?) must have some kind of recessPallet made of paper, papier-mâché. The only notch is a bullet socket. The Podevils-Lindner is not a needle rifle. The shutter cylinder was easily changed, see drawing above.
Varnas 04/07/2016 - 23:52
Chaspo has an initial bullet speed of over 400 m/sec.I thought that the speed there was like that of Reffi’s buckshot, over 500.
That is, how did they not think about it? This is exactly how Chaspo’s seal works.The first time the image did not load. But as I understand it, all the pressure is taken by the rubber ring. It seemed to me that with such a design, the front part of the shutter, pressed by gases after compressing the shutter, should be equipped with a rigid stop so that the shutter would last longer.
Podevils-Lindner is not a needle rifle. The shutter cylinder was easily changed, see drawing above.Is there something in between a needle rifle and a pin cartridge? The cartridge case extractor is invisible, therefore the cartridge case is paper, like Dreyse, but the needle does not need to pierce the entire cartridge?
Pavlov 04/08/2016 - 12:12
something between a needle rifle and a pin cartridgeSystem with a semi-unitary cartridge with external ignition - a capsule like the “donor” (Podevils-Lindner reworked from a Podevils muzzle-loading rifle, bolt and Lindner cartridge). The fire impulse from the primer burned through the paper wrapper of the semi-unitary cartridge. That is, they are not related to either the needle or hairpin ones.
like the card player Reffi, over 500Have you thought about the recoil of a rifle with such a muzzle velocity? At Reffi it is 1558 ft/sec = 545 m/sec, but there is a carriage there.
Varnas 04/08/2016 - 02:12
System with a semi-unitary cartridge with external ignition - a capsule like the “donor” (Podevils-Lindner reworked from a Podevils muzzle-loading rifle, bolt and Lindner cartridge). The fire impulse from the primer burned through the paper wrapper of the semi-unitary cartridge. That is, they are not related to either the needle or hairpin ones.I considered semi-unitary cartridges (I think Mallard) where there is a metal sleeve, charge and bullet, but the capsule fits onto a fire tube on the barrel/breech. It seems there was even such a kurez revolver (or just a patent) - with 6 rounds, but for each shot you had to put a capsule on the fire tube.
We thought about the recoil of a rifle with such a muzzle velocityNo 😊. This is also the problem with converted rifles - excessive caliber.
Pavlov 04/08/2016 - 02:26
The Chassepot is not a conversion rifle; the 11 mm caliber lasted a very long time in many rifles and was considered “small”. But the 11 mm bullet is also quite heavy, which at a speed of 420 m/sec gave quite a strong recoil. The later Gra M1874, Mauser M1871, Vetterli and others had no higher speed.
In principle, the limiting factor is man, how much recoil a soldier will endure. For example, Martini-Henry's recoil was considered by many to be almost unbearable.
Varnas 04/08/2016 - 11:31
Thanks for the information 😊.
swiss2 04/08/2016 - 13:24
The needle did not jam, but the needle is the weak point of all needle-bearing animals. Dreyse's needle can be changed easily and quickly; you don't even need to disassemble the shutter. Chaspo and Carcano need dismantling.
How often were the needles supposed to be changed for different needle rifles?
Pavlov 04/08/2016 - 16:50
I don’t know exactly how many shots were required. Probably a lot, since spare needles were issued to sergeant majors, not soldiers.
Ulix 04/27/2016 - 19:40
2 Pavlov
Do you have any information on Dreyse pistols?
Pavlov 04/28/2016 - 16:23
Finally managed to upload the photo.
Ulix 05/03/2016 - 23:56
PavlovBolt-action pistol.
What are Dreyse models?
Ulix 05/04/2016 - 12:01
Somehow the pictures aren't loading...
Ulix 05/04/2016 - 08:30
2Pavlov
Thank you.. Now I’ll puzzle over the translation))
Student2 08/30/2016 - 12:18
Varnas
But how do I understand that the sub-caliber is only for the depth of the rifling, the bullet slides along the fields of the rifling? Should the pallet (wooden?) have some kind of recesses, or be hexagonal (the bullet in the back too) so that it does not rotate relative to the bullet?
when fired, the force of inertia pressed the bullet into the pan, under its action the pan was bursting with gases, pressing into the rifling, and the bullet “settled” into the pan with slight longitudinal and transverse deformation. Those. I couldn't turn it around, because... it was wedged in the pan.
Any pointer-type bullet in modern hunting rifles settles on the shank in exactly the same way: with soft lead, it literally floats, losing its shape (that’s why bullets with axial channels of the Mayer type fly poorly on smokeless powder - the channel floats, the belts too, and it flies like a lead cylinder ).
It is clear that a lot depended on the quality of the pallet, and therefore there were sometimes complaints about the accuracy of Dreyse rifles. It is too difficult to ensure uniformity in the production of pins and when shooting through a dirty barrel.
Let's Live 08/30/2016 - 22:08
PavlovIn St. Petersburg, the exhibition of the Museum of Artillery presents several such models - not even machines - production lines for finishing muzzle-loading guns: turning trunnions, drilling barrel bores, forging. All models are functional - insert the workpiece and turn the drive handle, everything works, sharpens, bores. These models were made by students (graduates) of the St. Petersburg Artillery and Technical School. Well, like a school for junior artillery specialists, in modern terms. In total, several hundred such models of machine tools and the guns themselves, limbers and charging boxes have survived. These are real works of art.
In the museum, I couldn’t move away from the model of the machine that drilled the bore of guns, and also turned the trunnions - again, the cadets did it.
Let's Live 08/30/2016 - 22:21
And here is a photo of the prototype of the Karle needle rifle. The one that was brought to Russia by the Haburg residents Karle and Zons in 1866. This rifle was somewhat different from the one that entered service with the RIA in 1877 due to modifications.
Research into this issue revealed that the reason lay not in the shortcomings of the rifle itself, but in the cartridge. Since after the shot the unburned part of the paper sleeve remained in the channel, the bullets of the following cartridges, when moving along the barrel channel when firing, had this residue in front of them; the bullet flew along with the remainder of the cartridge, as a result of which its flight was incorrect,” reducing the accuracy of the rifle.
It was necessary to change the design of the cartridge and ensure that the remainder of the cartridge freely flew out of the barrel without following the bullet.
All these studies led, during the installation of rifle production, to the need to introduce changes both in the rifle and mainly in the cartridge.
Rice. 75. Position of parts of the Karle rifle before firing
The hastily introduced changes, however, could not completely correct the matter. Complaints continued to be received from the troops about the weapons being newly issued to them. The troops pointed out frequent bullet misses, gas breakthroughs into the bolt, and needle breakages. All these shortcomings due to the slowness of the rework forced the abandonment of the Carle system. A total of 200,000 of these rifles were produced.
Carle rifle. The basic data is as follows: caliber - 6 l!in. (15.24 mm), weight with bayonet - 4.9 kg, weight without bayonet - 4.5 kg, length with bayonet - 184 cm, muzzle velocity - 305 m/sec.
The barrel is the same as that of a 6-line muzzle-loading rifle; during the alteration, only the chamber was cut to accommodate the paper cartridge inserted from the treasury. The barrel was screwed into the receiver ab (Fig. 75 and 76), and a trigger spring b was attached to it from below with an upward-curved end, which served as a combat cock d.
To close the barrel treasury when firing, a dd bolt was used (Fig. 77), which was a cylindrical tube with two yazh stands at the rear end and two combat protrusions; between the racks a handle 3 was placed (Fig. 78), rotating on an axis and passing through the racks; in its raised (Fig. 77) and lowered
in its normal (Fig. 75) position, the handle was secured using special plate springs; its combat1 protrusions “were intended to connect the bolt with the receiver; when the bolt was turned, they entered the corresponding recess in the receiver,
Rice. 76. Position of the parts of the Karle rifle after the shot
holding the bolt when firing, just as this is done by the protrusions of the combat cylinder in a modern 7.62-lsh rifle; in front of the shutter there was a movable head k, under which there were several leather circles; they were aimed at eliminating the breakthrough of powder gases when fired, like that, as was done in the Vyamtovka Chasspo (see Fig. 76).
Rice. 77. Karle rifle bolt
Rice. 78. Karle rifle bolt handle
To break the cartridge primer, the bolt tube contained a firing pin with a mainspring and a clutch with a needle (see Fig. 75).
To fire a shot, the shooter pressed the trigger: the firing pin jumped off the trigger spring and (under the action of the compressed mainspring) rushed forward, as a result of which its needle broke the cartridge primer.
The cartridge for the Karle rifle (Fig. 79) consisted of a paper sleeve, a Minié bullet, a charge of gunpowder and a tray made from several circles of cardboard; a capsule was inserted into the tray; when fired, the front part of the cartridge case broke off at the bandage under the bullet and was carried away from the barrel; the rest of the cartridge case with the pan remained in the chamber chamber. The remainder of this moved forward when the next cartridge was inserted, and when fired, it was thrown out of the bore in front of the bullet.
The cartridge, in comparison with previous paper cartridges for flintlock and percussion rifles, was quite complex - the troops could only collect individual parts of the cartridge sent to them: capsules, pallets, gunpowder, iron cups for Mimieux bullets, which required more precise factory rather than manual fabrication in the troops.
The disadvantages of this unitary paper cartridge, in addition to the complexity of its design, were that the pallet, together with the leather seal in the rifle bolt, did not always protect against gas breakthrough; the part of the cartridge case remaining after the shot, in addition, contaminated the barrel. All these shortcomings forced us to turn to the introduction of cartridges with a metal sleeve.
Following the disappointing results of the Crimean War, the Russian command hastily began equipping the troops with rifled small arms. Already in 1856, a 6-line muzzle-loading rifle was developed. Its design was based on a Russian 7-line percussion capsule gun, in which the smooth 7-line barrel was replaced by a rifled 6-line one. For greater ease of loading, the barrel was shortened by 15 cm; the weight of the gun without a bayonet is 4.4 kg, with a bayonet - 4.8 kg; The weight of the charge, despite the decrease in the weight of the bullet, was left the same. The new charge was 1.12 spool versus the previous 1.1 spool. The mass of the bullet dropped from the previous 49.05 to 35.19 g. The initial speed from the previous 450 m/s due to the high friction of the bullet on the rifling dropped to 348.6 m/s. However, the firing range increased from the previous 213 meters to 853.
Russian percussion cap gun model 1845
Russian 6-line muzzle-loading rifle of the 1856 model: Caliber - 15.24 mm. Length 1340 mm. Barrel length 939 mm. Weight without bayonet 4.4 kg. Powder charge mass – 4.78 g. Bullet mass – 35.19 g. Initial bullet speed – 348.6 m/s.
However, as soon as this rifle was adopted into service, breech-loading rifles appeared among our enemies, and our enemies then were all countries except neutral Switzerland and distant America. The breech-loading gave the enemy an advantage in rate of fire. In addition, it was necessary to keep in mind that in order to load the weapon from the muzzle it was necessary to rise to full height; It was impossible to prepare a weapon for a shot while sitting or lying down. After the introduction of longer-range and more accurate weapons into the troops, it was necessary to take all measures to eliminate this shortcoming in order to better shelter manpower. Therefore, in addition to the desire to increase the rate of fire, the need for such protection of the shooter during loading was the main reason for the transition to loading from the treasury, in which all techniques for reloading weapons could be carried out in cover.
In view of all this in Russia Special attention on needle weapons. The tests were “subjected to the Dreyse and Karle systems. This latter was given unconditional preference, since it had already eliminated the main shortcomings of the Dreyse rifle. The bolt design had a leather seal, the needle was short, the bullet was guided along the rifling by its body, and not by a separate tray.
Due to extreme haste, the experiments were limited to a relatively small number of shots.
In 1867, a model of a rifle and cartridge was approved for the speedy conversion of 6-line muzzle-loading rifles into breech-loading ones according to the Karle system.
Carle-Zons needle rifle, 1867 Caliber – 15.24 mm. Weight without bayonet – 4.5 kg, Length without bayonet – 134 cm. Barrel length – 765.5 mm. Powder charge mass – 5.02 g. Bullet mass – 34.64 g. Initial bullet speed – 305 m/s.
|
Open bolt of a Krnka rifle
Closed bolt of the Krnka rifle |
The barrel of the Krnka rifle was the same as that of a 6-line rifle, loaded from the muzzle. However, unlike that barrel, in the breech of the Krnka rifle barrel there was a chamber drilled out for inserting a metal cartridge.
A box was screwed onto the breech of the barrel, which was also attached to the stock via a tail rotor. The box of the Krnka rifle had a slightly inclined semi-cylindrical groove for inserting cartridges into the chamber of the barrel; on the left side of the box there were ears through which a hinge bolt passed, which served as the axis of rotation of the hinged legs
Karle's rate of fire reached seven rounds per minute, but when the first batches of rifles arrived at the troops, serious shortcomings of the system were discovered, such as incorrect flight of bullets and poor accuracy. Research into this issue revealed that the reason lay not in the shortcomings of the rifle itself, but in the cartridge. Since after the shot the unburned part of the paper sleeve remained in the channel, the bullets of the following cartridges, when moving along the barrel channel when fired, had this residue in front of them; the bullet flew along with the remainder of the paper part of the cartridge, as a result of which its flight was incorrect, worsening the accuracy of the rifle.
It was necessary to change the design of the cartridge and ensure that the remainder of the cartridge freely flew out of the barrel without following the bullet.
In 1868, the Berdan rifle No. 1 began to enter service. But it initially entered service only with rifle regiments. The infantry regiments, of which there were a majority, were still left with the 1856 rifle - it was not possible to quickly replace a huge number of rifles.
At the end of 1868, Lieutenant Baranov proposed a slightly modified Albini system, which was adopted by the Belgian army. The experiments gave favorable results. It was immediately decided to convert 10 thousand rifles using this system. Almost simultaneously, in January 1869, another system, also with a hinged bolt, was proposed for the modification of a 6-line rifle, namely by a Viennese gunsmith named Krnka. A special commission was hastily formed to test both systems in order to select the best one. Tests revealed some of the advantages of the Krnka system, which also turned out to be easier to manufacture and therefore cheaper. A sample of the Krnka system was approved for the conversion of 6-line muzzle-loading rifles.
Sylvester Krnka (1825-1903)
In his home country of the Czech Republic, Krnka is mainly known as the inventor of the pedal tram, in which all twenty passengers pedaled. The Krnka tram was presented in 1895 at the Slavic ethnographic exhibition in Prague and caused a great sensation in the press, but the project never came to practical implementation.
In the second half of the 19th century. A lot of breech-loading percussion guns appeared (Fig. 1).
The bolt designs of various rifle models were fundamentally no different from each other. The gunsmith designers were faced with the task of ensuring reliable sealing, that is, the tightness of the charging chamber. Capsule breech-loading rifles did not justify themselves, so needle systems with a unitary paper cartridge were rightfully considered more promising at that time, among which Prussian needle guns made by S. Pauli’s student Johann Nikolai Dreyse were especially popular. The first example of such a gun was released in 1827.
Fig.1. Perry breech-loading rifle
The sample, made by the master already in 1836, was needle gun with a sliding bolt, which used a unitary cartridge, the paper sleeve of which flew out when fired. At first they used an egg-shaped bullet, which was later replaced by a Minié system bullet. The percussion compound cake, replacing the primer, was located in a folder tray under the bullet. The striker needle pierced the powder charge and ignited the capsule with impact. Obturation in the treasury was achieved by tightly compressing the combat cylinder with a deep cup onto the conical edge of the barrel hemp, so that the powder gases did not get into the shooter’s face. I. Dreyze offered his rifle to the French government, but his development was rejected there. Only after comprehensive tests that took place in 1841 in Prussia, the Dreyse gun was adopted by the Prussian troops. The Model 1862 gun underwent minor design changes and was named the Model 1841–1862 gun.
The gun had an iron barrel, caliber 15.43 mm, length 905 mm, as well as four grooves (6 mm wide, 0.76 mm deep). The rifling stroke length (cutting pitch) is 732 mm, or 47.5 calibers. The sight was plate-type with 4 slots for shooting at a distance of up to 600 m. The weight of the gun without a bayonet was 4.65 kg, with a bayonet - 5.3 kg. Length without bayonet - 1424 mm, with bayonet - 1925 mm. The initial bullet speed is 295 m/s.
The cartridge case is paper (1.5 turns), with a glued cardboard bottom - a circle; the mass of the powder charge was 4.8 g - the relative charge was 1: 6.4. In front of the charge there was a folder spigel (bullet tray) with a cake of impact composition behind and a socket for an egg-shaped bullet in front.
" class="centertable" >
Rice. 2. Dreyse needle rifle model 1841. A schematic section of the breech of the rifle shows the moment of impaling the flammable composition
The bullet had a caliber of 13.51 mm, i.e. smaller than the caliber of the barrel itself. It was inserted into a deep socket of a folder tray, which cut into the rifling, compressed the bullet and gave it rotation. Bullet weight - 30.42 g. Cartridge weight - 40 g.
The Dreyse gun was the first breech-loading military gun, firing a unitary cartridge. At that time, the Prussian army, armed with breech-loading guns, was ahead of the armies of other states, equipped with cap and flintlock guns, which were loaded from the muzzle.
The Prussian needle gun Dreyse received its first baptism of fire during the campaign in Denmark in 1846. In the victorious battle of Almine, in which two companies of the 12th Prussian regiment, armed with needle guns, took part, experts noted their excellent fighting qualities.
However, for a long time there were doubts about the quality of the combat of needle guns, which were dispelled and finally refuted only 25 years later, after the campaigns of 1864–1866. during which the “new” rifle proved itself (especially in the Battle of Sadovo) from the best side. After this, all states hastened to arm their armies with breech-loading rifles. To do this, specialists from some countries, following the example of Prussia, began to convert muzzle-loading rifles to breech-loading ones, while others immediately switched to new breech-loading rifles.
Fig.3. Minie bullet for Veltishchev cartridge
The disadvantages of the Draize system compared to the new French Chassepot needle guns (model 1866) became apparent during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871. Even before the war, the German inventor Beck proposed an improved Dreyse rifle using a conical bullet built on the “plug and needle” principle*. Such a bullet increased the range from 600 to 1200 steps, qualitatively changing the trajectory and enhancing the penetrating effect of the bullet. Back's proposal was not accepted, but it was remembered during the war of 1870–1871, when the advantages of the Chassepot gun were discovered.
But time was lost and this interesting development was never brought to life. The Dreyse system lasted in Prussia for 30 years - a fairly long period for a time when new weapon systems became obsolete within 10 years.
As we remember, Dreyse offered his rifle to the French government, but was refused. And we must pay tribute to the French, they justified their refusal, albeit with a delay of 30 years. In 1866, the foreman of the arms factory A.A. Chassepot (1833–1905) offered the French government his 11 mm rifle, which was more advanced than Dreyze's gun. All the parts in the Chasspo system were well designed, using the latest developments in gun mechanisms. The bolt of the gun was sliding, the barrel was locked by turning the handle to the right, the bolt rotated 90° and its ridge entered into the cutout of the receiver. The trigger was not cocked automatically, but required a separate technique to cock it. There was a roller under the trigger to facilitate sliding of the shutter. Obturation was achieved using rubber circles placed on the front part of the bolt, which fits into the breech of the barrel.
These guns were chambered for a paper cartridge; the primer was placed in the breech of the cartridge, which was located behind the powder charge in the cartridge's cardboard tray. Thanks to this design of the cartridge, the firing pin needle was significantly shorter than in the Dreyse rifle, and therefore stronger. When fired, the cartridge case partially burned out and partially flew out of the barrel. If the cardboard tray remained in the chamber, then during the next loading it was pushed forward (in general, an ejector was not needed in needle guns).
The mass of the bullet was 23 g, the powder charge was 5.5 g. The maximum flight range of the bullet was 1800 m. The initial speed of the bullet was 430 m/s. The sight had divisions up to 1200 m, the length of the aiming line was 690 mm. The highest rate of fire is 19 rounds per minute without aiming, with aiming - 8–10 shots. The Dreyse rifle fired 5–9 rounds per minute, but had better combat accuracy. The barrel length of the Chasspo shotgun is 825 mm; rifle length without bayonet - 1313 mm; with a bayonet - 1890 mm, gun weight - 4100 g. The Chasspo gun showed excellent performance during the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71).
It must be said that losses from needle rifle fire in battles where one of the sides was armed with percussion muzzle-loading guns was 1:9! That is why interest in the needle system has continuously increased. In Russia, perhaps the first needle weapon was a pistol made in 1835 in Reval (now Tallinn) by G.F. Bartner. In 1856, in Riga, Andrei Gunst made the first needle gun, which had a very complex and unreliable bolt.
In the 60s of the 19th century. The weapons commission examined and tested a number of needle systems proposed by Russian gunsmiths: Adjutant General Totleben (1866), gunsmith Lebedev (1860), engineer-captain Vyatkin (1867), mechanical engineer from Riga Ludwig Andre (1867), Captain Kletochnikov (1868), Captain Galindo (1868), gunsmith Trummer, Staff Captain Terentyev (1860), Colonel Chagin (1865), Lieutenant Tishcheninsky (1865). ), Andreev (1867, with a sliding shutter), Averyanov (1868), Norman (1868), Konchevsky (1868).
For one reason or another, some systems were rejected, while tests of others were constantly postponed. In 1866, the Englishman I. Karle proposed his needle system. Comprehensive tests were carried out under the leadership of a prominent gunsmith, Colonel N.I. Chagina. During the tests, many shortcomings were identified. The Karle rifle needed a radical overhaul. I. Karle did not bother remaking his own rifle; a group of Russian gunsmiths led by the above-mentioned N.I. took on this work. Chagin. The masters of the Tula and Izhevsk arms factories worked on its improvement. Significant changes to the needle rifle were made by Taile, Zwickert and Fedor Nagel. Under Chagin's leadership, the shape of the charging chamber was changed, seven different samples of paper cartridges were tested, until finally they accepted the cartridge with the Minier bullet proposed by the chairman admissions committee Sestroretsk plant by Colonel Veltishchev.
The pace of testing the rifle was amazing. Having barely fired 2000 shots from it, on March 28, 1867, the needle rifle was put into service.
The great contribution of Russian gunsmiths to the creation of the needle rifle was also mentioned in the order of the GAU (Main Artillery Directorate): “... due to many inconveniences indicated by experiments in the original Karl model, significant changes were made to it, so that the real sample of the needle rifles adopted by us is no longer can be considered identical to the original Karl model. As a result of this... rifles converted and manufactured using the needle system are given the name “quick-firing needle rifles.”
V. Buyanovsky and P. Belderling, who took part in the creation of the needle rifle, noted the originality of its design, and D.A. Milyutin (Minister of War 1861–1882), comparing it with the then considered the most advanced French Chassepot rifle, wrote on January 6, 1869 in his report to the Tsar that the Chassepot rifles “in all respects should be recognized as inferior to our needle ones.” The 1867 model needle rifle had a caliber of 15.24 mm, a weight of 4.5 kg, and a length of 1340 mm.
The Minie bullet, weighing 34.64 g, developed an initial speed of 305 m/s. The sighting range of an infantry rifle was 600 steps (427 m), a rifle rifle - 1200 steps (853 m), and the rate of fire was 9–10 rounds per minute.
The haste with which the army was rearmed with needle rifles (the reasons are clear - the results of the Crimean War) led to the fact that those proposed in 1867–1868. The Armory Commission rejected the samples of needle rifles of Russian gunsmiths, despite the fact that they were recognized as “superior” in comparison with the “quick-fire needle rifle” of the 1867 model adopted for service.
Many Russian gunsmiths proposed their development of needle rifles, and among them were Captain Terentyev (1867), engineer-captain Vyatkin (four-line rifle chambered for Potte with pyroxylin (smokeless) gunpowder (1867), and gunsmith Vasily Lebedev.
Needle rifles were the fastest-firing rifles chambered for paper cartridges. Their rate of fire was 9–10 rounds per minute. They passed military tests, during which all noted shortcomings were identified and then eliminated. After extensive testing, the production of Veltishchev cartridges was established in Russia, and 215,500 of the rapid-fire rifles themselves were produced.
They entered service with the troops of the Caucasus, Turkestan, Orenburg, West Siberian, and East Siberian military districts. The rearmament of these districts ended in 1874. Russian soldiers fought with these rifles on the Caucasian front during Russian-Turkish war in 1877–1878 and they took Kare and Ardagan, Erzurum and Bayazet.
In the late 60s - early 70s of the 19th century. the armies of some states were armed with repeating rifles chambered for a metal cartridge (Spencer, Henry-Winchester in the USA, Vetterli in Switzerland), and the needle rifle with its unitary paper cartridge had already become an anachronism. YES. Milyutin wrote on this occasion that such a rifle could only be adopted “pending the introduction of another, more advanced weapon.”
The unitary paper cartridge used in the needle rifle was replaced by a unitary metal cartridge, which opened a new page in history small arms.
The development of small arms for several centuries proceeded at a snail's pace, for a long time limited to improvements in the lock and changes in design. However, the scientific and technological revolution in the 19th century turned this leisurely process into a rapid cascade of inventions following one after another. Russia, with its lagging industry, did not immediately manage to keep up with the leaders, which was clearly demonstrated by the Crimean War. But by the end of the century, the emerging technological gap was overcome.
Development of small arms: from evolution to revolution
For almost four centuries, handguns have remained virtually unchanged. It was a metal tube-barrel, sealed at one end (the blind end was called the “breech”) and attached to a wooden stock. A charge of gunpowder was poured into the tube, a ball-shaped bullet was placed, and to prevent all this from falling out of the barrel, a rag or paper plug (wad) was hammered on top using a ramrod rod.
When fired, a small amount of gunpowder was ignited - the so-called “primer”, which was located on a special shelf on the side of the barrel. Then, through a small hole in the barrel wall, called the seed hole, the fire was transferred to the main powder charge. The seed was set on fire using a special mechanism - a lock. In fact, the progress of firearms was initially limited by the development of locks - from the primitive wick, in which the simplest lever brought the tip of the smoldering wick to the seed, to the flintlock, which in its later incarnation ensured reliable and practically guaranteed ignition of the charge, could be kept cocked for a long time and operated practically indefinitely. any weather, except for very heavy rain.
It was after the invention of the so-called “battery” type of flintlock (this happened in France in 1610) that the design of small arms was “mothballed” for two long centuries. The materials from which weapons were made became stronger and more durable, production technology was perfected, but between the musket with which d'Artagnan went on the attack near La Rochelle, and the gun of a French soldier dragging his feet to the Berezina, the difference is for the most part purely external, yes and it was small.
Changes to the established design were made only by the turbulent 19th century with its sharp leap in scientific and technical development. Almost simultaneously (by historical standards) two things happened that had the most direct impact on the appearance of small arms. First, “mercury fulminate” was discovered, a substance that explodes on impact. It turned out to be too strong and capricious for use as a propellant charge, but it was able to successfully replace the primer. To do this, it was placed in a small cap called a piston or capsule. Now the ignition of gunpowder in the barrel occurred reliably, was completely independent of the weather and, most importantly, was instantaneous - there was no pause of about half a second, characteristic of flintlocks, while the seed flared up from sparks knocked out of the flint, and the fire flowed through the seed hole. This, as well as the absence of a flash of burning primer occurring right in front of the shooter’s face, made it possible to significantly increase shooting accuracy, especially at a moving target.
The second factor that powerfully influenced the evolution of small arms was the development of metallurgy, sufficient for mass and relatively cheap production rifled barrels. The idea of improving the stability of a bullet's trajectory by rotating it was not new. Back in the 16th century (and according to some sources, even at the end of the 15th century), examples of handmade firearms, in which the barrel bore had screw rifling that twisted the bullet when fired. A bullet rotating around its longitudinal axis flew more accurately and much further than a regular one. In addition, it could be given an elongated shape, more streamlined than a sphere - this further increased the firing range. The main problem was that if in a gun with a smooth barrel it was enough to roll the bullet into the barrel when loading, then in a rifled gun it had to be driven in with a ramrod, turning it in the rifling, which took a lot of effort and time.
While rifled weapons remained an expensive toy for noble hunters, this was not a big hindrance: carefully load the gun, leisurely aim, shoot, admire the result, leisurely reload... But in battle everything is completely different, and the price of a second is incomparably higher. And when we started talking about the use of rifling in mass-produced army weapons, the question of increasing the rate of fire came to the fore. Many designs have been developed to overcome the problem. The most viable of them turned out to be bullets based on expansion - in them the bullet had a smaller diameter than usual and fell into the barrel freely, without entering the rifling, and then it expanded, due to which it increased the diameter and entered the rifling. In some systems, the bullet expanded when loaded with ramrod impacts, in some it expanded already during the shot, under the influence of powder gases pressing on it.
However, all these designs were, by and large, only half measures. To completely overcome the problem, it was necessary to switch to a fundamentally different loading system - from the breech, and not from the muzzle. This principle was also not something completely new - almost simultaneously with the first samples of firearms, the idea of loading from the treasury arose. They tried to implement it in practice, but the technologies and materials were too primitive for the full implementation of the idea. Only in the 19th century was it possible to achieve sufficient strength of the metal and precision of its processing to create reliable and mass-produced breech-loading samples. They were no longer charged separately (gunpowder separately, bullet separately and wad on top), but with a unitary cartridge - that is, combining both the propellant charge, what it threw, and the primer for igniting the charge. At first, such cartridges were made of paper; later cartridges with a metal sleeve appeared, the design of which has not changed significantly to this day.
This long introduction serves the sole purpose of showing as clearly as possible the complexity of the situation in which the leading powers found themselves in the first half of the 19th century. The gun - the main weapon of the infantryman and cavalryman - which had not changed at all for several generations, suddenly began to develop at a mad gallop, and those who did not want to find themselves in the position of catching up had to develop, adopt and launch with no less speed completely new designs are put into production.
Race for the leaders
It was especially difficult during this period Russian Empire. Undeveloped production made it catastrophically difficult to introduce any fundamental innovations. Ingenious designers, of whom the country never lacked, could offer ingenious solutions, but everything stalled at the implementation stage due to the fact that there was neither the technology nor the capacity to implement them. For example, relatively long compared to European states, there was a transition from a flintlock to a capsule lock. In public official documents it was said that, they say, the soldier with his rough fingers will not be able to adjust the capsule into place, he will lose it and in general it will be inconvenient for him, so let him fight with the good old flint. The real reason for the delay was that Russia simply did not have enough mercury fulminate in the required quantity. chemical production appropriate level, and it had to be hastily developed from scratch.
British soldiers during the Crimean War - photograph by Roger Fenton
Crimean War 1853–56 clearly demonstrated to the Russian military that the departing train of progress must be quickly caught up. If the Russian army still managed to switch to capsule ignition by the time it began, then with rifled weapons the situation was much worse - only a few selected shooters had fittings (rifled carbines), the bulk of the soldiers were armed with smoothbore rifles. Accordingly, British and French soldiers, armed almost exclusively with rifled guns, had the opportunity to accurately fire from distances at which the Russians had no chance of hitting back. The sighting range of British Enfield rifles, for example, exceeded sighting range Russian gun model 1854 four times and was even larger than those of Russian cannons!
The military did not wait long and ordered a rifled gun with an expanding bullet. Since the elongated bullet weighed more than a round bullet of the same caliber, and pushing it along the rifling required a larger charge of gunpowder than its smooth-bore counterpart, recoil increased significantly, and it became clear that it was necessary to reduce the caliber of the weapon. Instead of the previously standard 7 lines (17.78 mm), they decided to make the standard caliber 4 lines (10.16 mm). However, it quickly became clear that for the production of such thin barrels, and even rifled ones, there were no tools of appropriate accuracy. After a series of discussions, we settled on a caliber of 6 lines (15.24 mm). The officer commission of the Artillery Committee developed the design of a new weapon, and in 1856 a “6-line rifled rifle” entered service. It was at this moment that the term “rifle” was used for the first time in official documents. It was considered clear and simply explained to the soldier the principle of the new weapon, and it really caught on instantly.
Private of the Sofia Infantry Regiment and clerk of the Divisional Headquarters. The private has a Model 1856 rifle.
army-news.ru
In the production of rifles of the 1856 model, they tried to switch from hand-made parts to machine manufacturing, as well as to the use of steel instead of iron in the barrel, but neither one nor the other was completely successful. Metalworking machines had to be purchased foreign, and they were very expensive, and Russia simply produced too little steel at that time, and there was not enough for rifles for the entire army.
The 1856 rifle turned out to be extremely successful and was noticeably superior to foreign analogues, including British ones, which were considered the most advanced. The evil irony of fate was that while it was being developed and put into production, progress made another leap - into service foreign countries Breech-loading rifles began to arrive en masse. Minister of War Dmitry Alekseevich Milyutin said bitterly:
“...technology advanced with such rapid steps that before the proposed orders were tested, new requirements appeared and new orders were made.”
And what began was what the same Milyutin called "our unfortunate gun drama". From 1859 to 1866, a specially organized commission tested more than one and a half hundred weapon systems - about 130 foreign and more than 20 domestic. As a result, we settled on the design of the English gunsmith William Terry, modified by the foreman of the Tula Arms Factory Ivan Norman. It was adopted in 1866 under the name "Terry-Norman rapid-fire percussion rifle."
The rifle was a modification of a rifle of the 1856 model - the breech of the barrel was cut off, and a sliding bolt was installed in its place. Having opened the bolt, the shooter inserted a paper cartridge into it and closed the bolt, after which he cocked the hammer and installed the primer. When fired, the capsule ignited the paper shell of the cartridge, and the gunpowder ignited from it. A simple ingenious system made it possible, instead of producing completely new weapons, to use huge stocks of old rifles, so that the problem seemed to be solved. But that was just the beginning of the gun drama. The train of progress accelerated again, and suddenly it turned out that ignition using a separate primer had already become obsolete. “Needle rifles” were already being used by geopolitical competitors - their primer was located in the cartridge itself, behind the bullet, and it was broken by a long needle piercing the cartridge. The Terry-Norman rifle did not remain in service for even a year, after which it was withdrawn with the wording “obsolete.”
It was replaced by the system of Johannes Friedrich Christian Karle, a German who lived in England. It was also a kit for converting an old Model 1856 rifle and was very advanced, superior to similar designs. The Karle rifle was adopted for service in 1867. Its production was launched at a large number of factories, both public and private. Several hundred rifles, manufactured first, passed military tests in Turkestan and earned positive reviews, but... Yes, yes, that’s right - progress managed to move forward again. Paper cartridges were no longer in favor; they were replaced by metal ones. The metal cartridge was waterproof, it could not be accidentally broken when loading the weapon in a hurry, and it did not clog the barrel with remnants of unburnt paper. The production of the Karle rifle was suspended - they did not remove it from service and withdraw it from the troops, but they did not make new ones.
First Russian weapons A rifle designed by the American Hiram Berdan was chambered for a metal cartridge. It was adopted into service in 1868, but it did not become widespread. Around the same time, a rifle designed by the Italian Augusto Albini appeared, modified by naval officer Nikolai Baranov. It was considered as a candidate for adoption when the rifle of Sylvester Krnka, an Austrian citizen of Czech origin, appeared. The Albini-Baranov rifle was simpler, the Krnka rifle was cheaper.
As a result of comparative tests, the latter was chosen (according to a number of researchers, the commission was biased and deliberately “sinked” Baranov’s system, but there is no evidence of this). Both went into production - in 1869, the Krnka rifle became the main weapon of the army (receiving the expected nickname “krynka” from the soldiers), and the Albini-Baranov rifle was adopted by the navy (there were only a few of it produced - about 10,000 copies).
Model 1869 Krnka rifle
It would seem that the goal has been achieved - rifles of perfect design have been adopted for service, and you can exhale calmly. But, as in previous times, it was by no means over. The fact is that the metal cartridge was, for obvious reasons, noticeably heavier than the paper one. Accordingly, the ammunition carried by the soldier was reduced, difficulties arose with supplies, and other similar things. A solution was found - to reduce the caliber of the rifle again. Fortunately, over the past dozen years, technology in Russia has improved enough for mass production of small-bore barrels, so the same 4 lines that were not approved in 1856 were adopted as the standard caliber.
A rifle for the new caliber was proposed by Hiram Berdan, already familiar to us. Unlike the previous model, it had not a folding, but a longitudinally sliding shutter and a number of other improvements. It was adopted for service in 1870 under the name “Berdan rapid-fire small-caliber rifle No. 2” (and the previous model, accordingly, henceforth became known as the Berdan rifle No. 1). It was this successful model in all respects that finally ended the “unfortunate rifle drama” of the Russian army, becoming its main weapon for many two decades. It was replaced only by the legendary “three-line” Mosin, which was put into service in 1891. But even after its appearance, the Berdan rifle continued to remain in service until the beginning of the 20th century. She earned the nickname “Berdanka,” which probably even those who are not at all interested in the history of weapons have heard. A huge number of Berdans were produced, and they are still found in the hunting version.
