20:10 "The spring guide acts as the ejector" - that is one of the most elegant, simple, mechanically beautiful things I have ever seen. So simple, and yet I've never seen that before. A perfect example of "the best part is no part".
The journey that SMG designs took from inception until the end of WWII never ceases to amaze me. Drum magazines on some earlier models of SMGs are more complex than this entire gun.
@@andrewdenzov3303 Definitely not a Quick Death, or the HK MP5 would never have surged in popularity in the 70s/80s & CZ Scorpion EVO wouldn't sell MILLIONS of units today. 9MM = Less Flash, Noise than 5.56.
@@wizkaqueefa9003 mp5 is only example BTW. And I don’t know how much money HK spent to marketing. Very few things one can do with SMG and can’t do with assault rifle. More over Israeli counter terror units works with rifles and they have a lot more experience than any unit.
Damn, you are telling me CT operators in a near war zone use different equipment than law enforcement in peace countries? I’m shocked, shockedI tell you!!!! /sarcasm if it even needs saying
Kalashnikov recalled listening to Sudaev telling him to make his designs simpler. If he hadn’t died young he would’ve given Kalashnikov serious competition.
I could imagine both AS and AK names on rifles as both designers battle it out with respect. Had he lived post ww2 and with the amount of respect and prestige Sudaev had still. I think Kalashnikov would of definitely improved the AK faster to battle with AS.
Absolutely crazy that this guy stamped out this design literally the moment he graduated. That guy had some ideas in his head and he was itching to try them
Nah. What's crazy is that he had the capacity to do it.. it's so much harder to get that kind of support and production capacity.. last time I looked at a Bridgeport I about sharted.
15:45 & 16:20 - Engineer here. With zero actual evidence to back up my hypothesis, I believe the lighter gauge sheet metal and the top stamping (upper receiver and barrel shroud) being divided into two separate stampings are both changes that were made to allow this gun to be manufactured on the smaller stamping presses that were available in Leningrad. It is exactly what I would do if I had designed the top stamping like the PPS-43 and then forced to manufacture it on smaller presses.
I think you've got that backward. The 43, with its thicker steel and one-piece receiver cum barrel shroud, is a derivative of the 42. They made 45,000 of the 42s with what they had available, then refined it in the 43. One-piece stamping = fewer operations and less stuff to wear out in the field. That's also why the 43 uses the recoil guide rod as the ejector, instead of having one riveted to the top of the magazine tower.
@NC Dave I get that. But the changes he refers to didn't happen in the order he seems to say they did. The early ones (-42) had a 2 piece stamping made of lighter metal, riveted at the barrel trunnion. The later ones (-43) had one piece stampings made of heavier steel. Nobody took the design for one stamping and cut it into two pieces because they only had a smaller machine. They went the other direction: they got rid of the two piece design because it was faster to make and more durable.
This gun and video right here embodies the channel so perfectly. As a lot of us do I know the PPSh-41 and the PPS-43, the overall historical setting elements like the siege of Leningrad and that guns (and tanks, etc) were made there, but I never actually knew about the PPS-42 specifically. Nor did I know anything about Sudayev, not that he was so young, that he actually went INTO Leningrad to set all this up, that he died so tragically young, and I hadn't put together that the AS-44 was also his work.
Pps-43 is my favorite designed firearm, its design was so purposeful and barebones that the result is nothing but necessity. Every little detail and piece had to be there in order to have a military SMG, but nothing more. Its nice to see the subtle changes done between the 42 and the 43.
@@MintyLime703 At that point, you're harming the effectiveness of the gun. Sure, it will be simpler, but also less efficient in its role and more likely to be lost in combat, requiring you to build more guns than you would have had you just made them properly in the first place.
@@MintyLime703 It still has to have basic military functionality, so some form of stock and sights are necessary (no matter how crude). the trigger guard could be done away with though
The PPS-42 and PPS-43 were probably the "best" SMGs of WWII, when analyzed holistically (balancing logistics and performance). You can shovel train loads of these out, and they're at least 80% as good as *anything* produced during WWII that was less expensive than a really nice *rifle* . Several other, far more expensive to make, SMGs were *less* capable and reliable. And the production logistics were only the beginning - the ability to simplify magazine issue and the fact that it used half as much ammunition, basically, add up in reducing the logistics burdens on field units trying to support the guns.
If you need a lot of guns, really-really fast then the PPS-42/43 is absolutely the best gun, Sten comes in second but the lack of a conventional front grip breaks the 1st place. (opinion)
@@LazyLifeIFreak I have never noticed an issue with a lack of vertical fore grip on the Sten to be an issue, much I haven't notice the lack being important on Sterlings, AKMs, pretty much every 5.56mm assault rifle (I got out before the US Army put rails on "ALL THE THINGS!!!" and the rest of the world followed, and most pre-May transferrable MGs lack fitment for VFGs because May 1986 was even *before* I enlisted), etc. The barrel shroud on the Sten makes a very good hold location, especially if you use the clip on "ejection port hand stop" Canada manufactured during WWII. Give me a Sten with known *good* magazines with feed lips within spec, and I'll be perfectly happy. Although the *need* for a loading tool (the joke amongst many Sten owners is the loading tool is what the federal government should regulate as an NFA controlled item, not the receiver) for the Sten is a major downside... albeit one shared with many lauded WWII SMGS. But the PPS-43 is still better than a Sten Mk2, and *at least* as good as a Sten Mk5 (the real advantage of the Mk5 is the improved *balance* from the pistol grip and wood stock more than anything else, IMNSHO... although the front sight and anti-rotation pin for the barrel are also nice improvements...) But finding "good" Sten mags can be as trying as finding a replacement mag for a PPSh-41 that runs reliably in a particular gun, whereas PPS mags *just work* and don't require a loading tool.
@@geodkyt One can adjust to any gun if given enough time and training, I just personally prefer the conventional front grip style, which on a convenient note also serves as the magwell and handgrip making operating in low light conditions a bit easier, at least for the PPS-42/43. One could say I prefer pears to apples, both being fruit. *shrug*
OK to shoot... as far as anything with a folding stock of that type can be... lol (Shot one of those, a PpSh and a Steyr/Solothurn MP34 in Warsaw recently. (Wanted to steal the Solothurn...) Indoor range - but you can't have everything!
It’s really not that heavy , I have one and a ppsh41 . The mp5 feels heavier, doesn’t help hk took a 308 gun and only shortened it for 9mm so it’s way more bulky then it needs to be.
@@warwickben No the mp5 is not "way more bulky" than it needs to be, and yes the fact that HK scaled down the g3 very much helps- you get a 1000x better trigger, you fire from a closed bolt, shave off half a kilo AND get much better practical accuracy because there is no 3 pound bolt chuging away inside the reciever. The mp5 is in a class of it's own. PPS43 is great when compared to other designs of it's era. But pales in comparison even with a sterling.
This thing reminds me of a passage in my favourite book, Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson: “There turns out to be not much fiddling necessary. An unlettered tundra farmer with bilateral frostbite could get this thing up and running in ten minutes. If he’d stayed up late the night before-celebrating the fulfillment of the last five-year plan with a jug of wood alcohol-maybe fifteen minutes. Shaftoe consults the instructions. It does not matter that these are printed in Russian, because they are made for illiterates anyway. A series of parabolas is plotted out, the mortar supporting one leg and exploding Germans supporting the opposite. Ask a Soviet engineer to design a pair of shoes and he’ll come up with something that looks like the boxes that the shoes came in; ask him to make something that will massacre Germans, and he turns into Thomas Fucking Edison.”
I've heard about the Arnold connection with his father being ex SA. But how did you find out about Vlad's father? I can't find sources of him being in the seige of Leningrad specifically. Can you link me a source I'd like to read up on it.
@@kingofthesandbox7467a quick glance at the wiki shows his father was in the general army by 1942 and Putty himself was born into an established domicile in Leningrad.
The PPS-42/43 are like work trucks. They're simple, grungy, and cheap, but they're all you need to do the job and do it well. Whereas something like the Thompson is more like a Cadillac, expensive, more complicated, meant to do the same job of getting you from point A to point B but from an entirely different design philosophy.
I love how simple it is! And maybe the fact that the factories making it weren't really gun factories helped? Like with the Sten SMG. Enfield designed it, as the simplest SMG ever, and handed the production over to the Triang company, a manufacturer of toys. Toys made out of stamped sheet metal. Triang looked at the drawings, and asked if it was okay if they simplified the damned thing! Because they knew a thing or two about simplifying. And yes, they were allowed to. Maybe the same thing happened with the PPS-42? Thinking outside of the box is easier if you never were in the box to begin with.
Hard to remember something that isn't know to all but the most hard core students of firearms. I only knew of the 43 because of the availability of the parts kits.
It is so amazing to see the pinnacle of simplicity in automatic firearms, and compare them to the earliest automatic firearms from pre-WW1, which are hilariously complex things. This channel is very educational.
As always,a very interesting and informative piece. Can I make one suggestion Ian. When markings are hard to see, take a still photo and trace over the markings in a highlighted colour. It would make things much clearer and no need to move the gun around trying to get a clearer picture of the markings.
I think this might be the most interesting gun video I've ever seen. It's practically a course in how to make a really simple effective SMG should you be thrown back in time or whatever.
It is amazing how fast the Soviets developed the SMGs. Going from "who needs those silly things" to PPD to PPSh to PPS to AK-47 (not an SMG but adopted to replace them) in such rapid succession.
I had a pleasure to run through rounds from 43 (retrofitted with semi-auto disconnector due to polish legal compliance tho), it was a fun gun to fiddle with.
Not even a Sten can come close to the "farm tool" vibe coming off the 42 here, especially side-by-side with the smoothed contours of the 43. Thanks for posting.
@@jumpkickman1993 during WW2 yes, after WW2 when the enemy isn't knocking on your doors you can start making high tech stuff like AEK-971, T-62, MiG-25 and Ka-50.
Post-acceptance improvements also brought down the cost price: for example, production of a T-34 tank in 1941 was 269K rubles, in 1942 it went down to 193K, and by 1945 - to 135K. Cost price of PPSh in 1941 - 500 ruble, a year later - 400, by the end of the war - 148.
Ian really has one of the most interesting jobs ever. Getting to see so much history and get to touch it and learn about it and tell about it. Weapon design has been a stable of humanity, ever since opposing thumbs, and guns are the most changing thing ever added to the battlefield.
Also allowed to fire these relics for free most of the times. The auction houses know that him handling it will only increase the sale prices, and it's such a treat both for us and him.
Every designer should use KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. Very often the design is often underestimated because of its simplicity, when in reality anyone can produce a complicated design.
I fell for the looks of it's predecessor the PPSh-41 as a kid watching my favourite war movie; Cross of Iron [1977]. Most of the Germans pick up & use unmodified [still have drum] PPSH-41's & I just liked the shape if them & the fact that Steiner's men would rather use these over the MP40's which were another favourite of mine. Soon be time to watch it again as it's my usual Christmas day war movie choice.
Same here as a kid in the mid to late 80s. About 10 years ago I had the opportunity to buy a blank fire only PPsh-41 and went for it: ua-cam.com/video/X05ksdArjIQ/v-deo.html
Thanks for your tremendous attention to small details of this gun and its history. I think that no one ever wrote a true histiry of this gun with all possible episodes, so there can be interesting discoveries along this way yet.
This is a beautiful piece of engineering. In contrast, the Germans stuck with the MP40 for the entire war. The could barely equip their squad leaders with them. Commonwealth forces had the Sten, with a poorly designed magazine and associated unreliability.
Building this gun was like in old communist time joke: A guy works in a bike factory. He stole parts to build a bike for his son but every time he puts parts together a kalashikov comes out.
It's really overwhelming to think these were designed basically only with help of a cartridge on the table, straight out of the designers head, instead of modern possibilities to watch thousands of hours as a reference collection and choose best parts from thousands of proven models.
What I find most interesting about this is how gun design and production in this era were improved by the workers that actually built the weapon. Look at American, British, German, French, and the list goes on. The contribution of the " non-engineer types ", was tremendous. Something to be said for old school methods that were pretty much global. It never hurts to listen to the people that actually do the work.
Sometimes it is just multiple eyes on a problem. The designer does most of the work, but they are often too close to it to see where improvements can be made. I have seen this with software. I build something and it works, but the. The code reviewer finds small ways that it can be improved to be faster or more reliable.
Sudaev obviously really understood sheet metal manufacturing. I love the stock mechanism. Any other gun would have used a complicated push button release. Not Sudaev - a sheet metal lug and a simple spring against the pivot pin does the job.
Having watched these videos, it is sort of amusing how many variations on open bolt blowback sub machine guns there can be. How to make a simplest possible gun in the style of PPS, Sten, Owen, Grease Gun.... 😉 Props must be given for re-inventing the wheel, so to speak.
In case it's helpful, regarding the pronunciation of PPS, in English it'd be written Pistalyet Pulimyot Sudayeva. The о is unstressed, this pronounced as an а, е in pistolet is stressed and softens the л, which Americans can't really pronounce anyway. Since the е in пулемёт isn't stressed, it's pronounced like an и. The ё makes a "yo" sounds, but most Russians don't bother writing the dots, which is why English speakers think it's a е. Then the stress is on the а in судаева, and it's in genitive so it gets an а (which makes it "of Sudayev")
The things accomplished during WWII were amazing, with "necessity is the mother of invention" being so prevalent. I think it's just amazing how inventive people can be when they have to be.
It would be amazing to actually hold this gun knowing that it was actually used in combat in Leningrad. This is literally a piece of history. This is the kind of gun that belongs in a museum and I hope whoever buys it treats it with the respect it deserves.
Imagine going to work in a factory, starving, at risk of being bombed at any moment by the axis powers. All the while your neighbors are starving to death, freezing, or being blown up. It's amazing they still managed to produce something that still works 80 years later when I'm sure morale was a problem for workers.
Everyone always loves to gush over the fancy, high tech guns, but Ive always felt guns like this were far more impressive. Simple, reliable, the absolute bare necessities, and yet it still has some really solid design elements like that safety and folding stock. Form over function and all that
That trigger is so simple that it doesn't isolate the sear from the trigger. When you release the trigger the bolt will ride over the sear and you will feel that in your finger. Most systems have some play or other means to allow the sear to depress without that trigger slap but in Soviet Russia trigger slap teaches trigger control it seems. A primitive but effective firearm, it did help take Berlin after all.
It's fascinating how redesigning one part can eliminate an entire production step, i.e. a station on the production line and the people needed to man it. I watch the Munro Live YT channel, they tear down cars to compare how efficiently designed (or not) each is. The company tears down and does production analysis on all sorts of things but they only show the car stuff on YT. Regardless, it's interesting how production principles apply to guns or cars or even rockets.
Designers who not only know guns - but understand machine tools. Thanks for sharing - quite a story. A family story; when she turned 18 my Ukrainian / Canadian mother left the family farm in Saskatchewan to go work at the Bren Gun Factory in Toronto.
@@OlderSpud A compensator is intended to reduce muzzle climb, usually by cuts on the top side. I am confident a crude 1943 USSR 9mm machine pistol has no such device - back then, muzzle climb was no concern. Getting the barrel stuck with mud on the other hand, would cause what Chieftain calls "a significant emotional event". An exploding gun leading to injured soldiers unable to fight was a concern which was easily avoided by adding this device.
Antoher well made, good looking, comprehensive and understandable presentation. I learned a lot about weapon design and soviet submachineguns in WW2. Thank you very much, Ian!
Just bear in mind that in besieged Leningrad it was produced by 12-15 years old kids during 12 hours long shifts. They, as factory workers, got an enlarged day norm of surrogate bread - slowly growing from 350g. since Dec. 25, 1941 to 600g. since Feb. 23, 1943.
Alexey Sudayev later designed other weapons. But, for me, the most interesting was the AS-44 assault rifle, for the 7.62 X 39mm cartridge. It would be a very promising rifle if ..⤵️
This SMG is always underepresented in film and history in favor of the PPSH which make many people think was the only smg the Soviets into service. The fact is by mid to the end of the war, the pps was seen far more in the hands of soldiers. Especially during the siege of Berlin.
Very informative video, as always. I have a Finnish KPm-44, it's like a PPS-42 and PPS-43 hybrid. It has features from both the PPS-42 and PPS-43. I also have an original Soviet PPS-43 and a Polish PPS-43/52 with a wooden stock.
I see some design features in most of these small smg's that have been reviewed lately that I see in my Keltec su2000, main difference seems to be the location of the magazine thru the pistol grip.
Thank you very much for this video. Such a detailed overview of the differences between PPS-42 and PPS-43 is missing even here in Russia. Looked with great pleasure. 😊
I've held that very gun and was told by it's first civilian owner that it originally came to the registry from the props department of universal studios.
20:10 "The spring guide acts as the ejector" - that is one of the most elegant, simple, mechanically beautiful things I have ever seen. So simple, and yet I've never seen that before. A perfect example of "the best part is no part".
I thought the same thing. Brilliant.
The journey that SMG designs took from inception until the end of WWII never ceases to amaze me. Drum magazines on some earlier models of SMGs are more complex than this entire gun.
Doctrine changes and leads to technology change. More guns, more firepower at close range. And quick death after intermediate cartridges arrived
@@andrewdenzov3303 Definitely not a Quick Death, or the HK MP5 would never have surged in popularity in the 70s/80s & CZ Scorpion EVO wouldn't sell MILLIONS of units today. 9MM = Less Flash, Noise than 5.56.
@@wizkaqueefa9003 mp5 is only example BTW. And I don’t know how much money HK spent to marketing. Very few things one can do with SMG and can’t do with assault rifle. More over Israeli counter terror units works with rifles and they have a lot more experience than any unit.
Damn, you are telling me CT operators in a near war zone use different equipment than law enforcement in peace countries? I’m shocked, shockedI tell you!!!! /sarcasm if it even needs saying
Peace time* countries
Kalashnikov recalled listening to Sudaev telling him to make his designs simpler. If he hadn’t died young he would’ve given Kalashnikov serious competition.
I could imagine both AS and AK names on rifles as both designers battle it out with respect. Had he lived post ww2 and with the amount of respect and prestige Sudaev had still. I think Kalashnikov would of definitely improved the AK faster to battle with AS.
Absolutely crazy that this guy stamped out this design literally the moment he graduated. That guy had some ideas in his head and he was itching to try them
Nah. What's crazy is that he had the capacity to do it.. it's so much harder to get that kind of support and production capacity.. last time I looked at a Bridgeport I about sharted.
Most of the stories from communist russia are fake. They wanted stories that were the most inspiring for the people under their control.
15:45 & 16:20 - Engineer here. With zero actual evidence to back up my hypothesis, I believe the lighter gauge sheet metal and the top stamping (upper receiver and barrel shroud) being divided into two separate stampings are both changes that were made to allow this gun to be manufactured on the smaller stamping presses that were available in Leningrad. It is exactly what I would do if I had designed the top stamping like the PPS-43 and then forced to manufacture it on smaller presses.
Could it be the other way? Maybe it was designed to be compatible with many factories as possible which is why it's of a certain size and thickness.
Dude you're right!
I think you've got that backward. The 43, with its thicker steel and one-piece receiver cum barrel shroud, is a derivative of the 42. They made 45,000 of the 42s with what they had available, then refined it in the 43. One-piece stamping = fewer operations and less stuff to wear out in the field. That's also why the 43 uses the recoil guide rod as the ejector, instead of having one riveted to the top of the magazine tower.
@NC Dave I get that. But the changes he refers to didn't happen in the order he seems to say they did. The early ones (-42) had a 2 piece stamping made of lighter metal, riveted at the barrel trunnion. The later ones (-43) had one piece stampings made of heavier steel. Nobody took the design for one stamping and cut it into two pieces because they only had a smaller machine. They went the other direction: they got rid of the two piece design because it was faster to make and more durable.
@NC Dave All good.
People always forget PPS 42. So thank you for this Ian, for sharing with us how great this firearm is
Well the channel is called forgotten weapons so he made justice to the name.
This gun and video right here embodies the channel so perfectly. As a lot of us do I know the PPSh-41 and the PPS-43, the overall historical setting elements like the siege of Leningrad and that guns (and tanks, etc) were made there, but I never actually knew about the PPS-42 specifically. Nor did I know anything about Sudayev, not that he was so young, that he actually went INTO Leningrad to set all this up, that he died so tragically young, and I hadn't put together that the AS-44 was also his work.
hoad no idea they existed atall, until HLL released the russian dlc xD
Pps-43 is my favorite designed firearm, its design was so purposeful and barebones that the result is nothing but necessity. Every little detail and piece had to be there in order to have a military SMG, but nothing more. Its nice to see the subtle changes done between the 42 and the 43.
What do you know about it kid
Still plenty that could be removed and still have an SMG. The stock, sights, trigger guard, etc.
@@MintyLime703 That wouldn't be a functional military style smg, it would be a cartel special
@@MintyLime703 At that point, you're harming the effectiveness of the gun. Sure, it will be simpler, but also less efficient in its role and more likely to be lost in combat, requiring you to build more guns than you would have had you just made them properly in the first place.
@@MintyLime703 It still has to have basic military functionality, so some form of stock and sights are necessary (no matter how crude). the trigger guard could be done away with though
The PPS-42 and PPS-43 were probably the "best" SMGs of WWII, when analyzed holistically (balancing logistics and performance). You can shovel train loads of these out, and they're at least 80% as good as *anything* produced during WWII that was less expensive than a really nice *rifle* . Several other, far more expensive to make, SMGs were *less* capable and reliable.
And the production logistics were only the beginning - the ability to simplify magazine issue and the fact that it used half as much ammunition, basically, add up in reducing the logistics burdens on field units trying to support the guns.
If you need a lot of guns, really-really fast then the PPS-42/43 is absolutely the best gun, Sten comes in second but the lack of a conventional front grip breaks the 1st place. (opinion)
@@LazyLifeIFreak I have never noticed an issue with a lack of vertical fore grip on the Sten to be an issue, much I haven't notice the lack being important on Sterlings, AKMs, pretty much every 5.56mm assault rifle (I got out before the US Army put rails on "ALL THE THINGS!!!" and the rest of the world followed, and most pre-May transferrable MGs lack fitment for VFGs because May 1986 was even *before* I enlisted), etc. The barrel shroud on the Sten makes a very good hold location, especially if you use the clip on "ejection port hand stop" Canada manufactured during WWII.
Give me a Sten with known *good* magazines with feed lips within spec, and I'll be perfectly happy. Although the *need* for a loading tool (the joke amongst many Sten owners is the loading tool is what the federal government should regulate as an NFA controlled item, not the receiver) for the Sten is a major downside... albeit one shared with many lauded WWII SMGS.
But the PPS-43 is still better than a Sten Mk2, and *at least* as good as a Sten Mk5 (the real advantage of the Mk5 is the improved *balance* from the pistol grip and wood stock more than anything else, IMNSHO... although the front sight and anti-rotation pin for the barrel are also nice improvements...)
But finding "good" Sten mags can be as trying as finding a replacement mag for a PPSh-41 that runs reliably in a particular gun, whereas PPS mags *just work* and don't require a loading tool.
@@geodkyt One can adjust to any gun if given enough time and training, I just personally prefer the conventional front grip style, which on a convenient note also serves as the magwell and handgrip making operating in low light conditions a bit easier, at least for the PPS-42/43. One could say I prefer pears to apples, both being fruit. *shrug*
at the time SMGs with side mags were pretty common so the lack of avertical grip wasnt that rare
For the same reasons I'd argue the Owen gun as one of the best as well, even if it didn't get to prove itself as widely as the Soviet counterparts
I've handled a PPS-43. Heavier than it looks; probably helps to keep recoil down.
You didn't get to fire it?
@@Voltaic_Fire could've been demilitarized if they live in Europe, or could've been at a gun show in the States.
OK to shoot... as far as anything with a folding stock of that type can be... lol (Shot one of those, a PpSh and a Steyr/Solothurn MP34 in Warsaw recently. (Wanted to steal the Solothurn...) Indoor range - but you can't have everything!
It’s really not that heavy , I have one and a ppsh41 . The mp5 feels heavier, doesn’t help hk took a 308 gun and only shortened it for 9mm so it’s way more bulky then it needs to be.
@@warwickben No the mp5 is not "way more bulky" than it needs to be, and yes the fact that HK scaled down the g3 very much helps- you get a 1000x better trigger, you fire from a closed bolt, shave off half a kilo AND get much better practical accuracy because there is no 3 pound bolt chuging away inside the reciever. The mp5 is in a class of it's own. PPS43 is great when compared to other designs of it's era. But pales in comparison even with a sterling.
This thing reminds me of a passage in my favourite book, Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson:
“There turns out to be not much fiddling necessary. An unlettered tundra farmer with bilateral frostbite could get this thing up and running in ten minutes. If he’d stayed up late the night before-celebrating the fulfillment of the last five-year plan with a jug of wood alcohol-maybe fifteen minutes.
Shaftoe consults the instructions. It does not matter that these are printed in Russian, because they are made for illiterates anyway. A series of parabolas is plotted out, the mortar supporting one leg and exploding
Germans supporting the opposite. Ask a Soviet engineer to design a pair of shoes and he’ll come up with something that looks like the boxes that the shoes came in; ask him to make something that will massacre Germans, and he turns into Thomas Fucking Edison.”
Seems like a good way to improve a gun design. Straight out the factory and to a soldier, immediate feedback.
*hands gun out window*
*soldier hands it back*
“This one jams. Give me another. Quickly now the Germans are changing their barrels.”
Russian weapons are reliable
Yeah, but the feedback might be in the form of a dead Hero of the Soviet Union.
The apocryphal story is that the staff tested their initial models by firing them out of the factory windows at Germans down the street
It’s amazing to see how much simpler they would make even this masterpiece of simplicity for the PPS-43.
Fun fact: Both Vladimir Putin's and Arnold Schwarzenegger's dad fought in Leningrad.
DAWG THIS TOOK ME A SECOND💀💀💀
I've heard about the Arnold connection with his father being ex SA. But how did you find out about Vlad's father? I can't find sources of him being in the seige of Leningrad specifically. Can you link me a source I'd like to read up on it.
@@kingofthesandbox7467
Quit calling Putin Vlad.
In Russian Vladislav is called Vlad.
Vladimir would be Vova.
@megawutt Sorry I don't know any russian no need to be hostile
@@kingofthesandbox7467a quick glance at the wiki shows his father was in the general army by 1942 and Putty himself was born into an established domicile in Leningrad.
The PPS-42/43 are like work trucks. They're simple, grungy, and cheap, but they're all you need to do the job and do it well. Whereas something like the Thompson is more like a Cadillac, expensive, more complicated, meant to do the same job of getting you from point A to point B but from an entirely different design philosophy.
I love how simple it is! And maybe the fact that the factories making it weren't really gun factories helped? Like with the Sten SMG. Enfield designed it, as the simplest SMG ever, and handed the production over to the Triang company, a manufacturer of toys. Toys made out of stamped sheet metal. Triang looked at the drawings, and asked if it was okay if they simplified the damned thing! Because they knew a thing or two about simplifying. And yes, they were allowed to. Maybe the same thing happened with the PPS-42? Thinking outside of the box is easier if you never were in the box to begin with.
People remember the PPSh-41.
People sort of remember the PPS-43.
People forget the PPS-42.
Really? I am keenly aware of it due to the historical significance and connection to Leningrad. More so than the '43 I think.
Happens to a lot of relatively small-run guns, especially if they get eclipsed by better replacements.
no we got a lot of semi auto version so of them, so they are commonplace
well the 43 is just the improved final version id argue they are the same gun at this point
Hard to remember something that isn't know to all but the most hard core students of firearms. I only knew of the 43 because of the availability of the parts kits.
It is so amazing to see the pinnacle of simplicity in automatic firearms, and compare them to the earliest automatic firearms from pre-WW1, which are hilariously complex things. This channel is very educational.
I'm impressed that the safety works to block the bolt, open or closed.
As always,a very interesting and informative piece. Can I make one suggestion Ian. When markings are hard to see, take a still photo and trace over the markings in a highlighted colour. It would make things much clearer and no need to move the gun around trying to get a clearer picture of the markings.
I think this might be the most interesting gun video I've ever seen. It's practically a course in how to make a really simple effective SMG should you be thrown back in time or whatever.
It is amazing how fast the Soviets developed the SMGs. Going from "who needs those silly things" to PPD to PPSh to PPS to AK-47 (not an SMG but adopted to replace them) in such rapid succession.
I had a pleasure to run through rounds from 43 (retrofitted with semi-auto disconnector due to polish legal compliance tho), it was a fun gun to fiddle with.
There’s beauty in simplicity
Not even a Sten can come close to the "farm tool" vibe coming off the 42 here, especially side-by-side with the smoothed contours of the 43. Thanks for posting.
My favorite Soviet SMG. Brutality simple but effective.
The only soviet smg?
Isn't that just the Soviet motto brutally simple but effective
@@RainbowRenegade no, why?
@@jumpkickman1993 during WW2 yes, after WW2 when the enemy isn't knocking on your doors you can start making high tech stuff like AEK-971, T-62, MiG-25 and Ka-50.
And PPsh 41 Soviet ?
Вау. Ян, большое спасибо за историю создания и разработки ППС. Очень интересно и познавательно.
15:43 Worth to mention that 43 magazine also have three holes to see if it's full, half empty or almost completely empty.
Post-acceptance improvements also brought down the cost price: for example, production of a T-34 tank in 1941 was 269K rubles, in 1942 it went down to 193K, and by 1945 - to 135K. Cost price of PPSh in 1941 - 500 ruble, a year later - 400, by the end of the war - 148.
Ian really has one of the most interesting jobs ever. Getting to see so much history and get to touch it and learn about it and tell about it. Weapon design has been a stable of humanity, ever since opposing thumbs, and guns are the most changing thing ever added to the battlefield.
Also allowed to fire these relics for free most of the times. The auction houses know that him handling it will only increase the sale prices, and it's such a treat both for us and him.
Every designer should use KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. Very often the design is often underestimated because of its simplicity, when in reality anyone can produce a complicated design.
I love it on pure aesthetics. It's slender and without clunky projections, and at 6.5 lbs surely easy to carry.
seeing the PPS 42 in comparison makes me appreciate the PPS 43 even more, and it was already one of my favourite WWII Submachine guns.
I fell for the looks of it's predecessor the PPSh-41 as a kid watching my favourite war movie; Cross of Iron [1977]. Most of the Germans pick up & use unmodified [still have drum] PPSH-41's & I just liked the shape if them & the fact that Steiner's men would rather use these over the MP40's which were another favourite of mine.
Soon be time to watch it again as it's my usual Christmas day war movie choice.
I’ll show you where Iron Cross’s grow 👏👍
Same here as a kid in the mid to late 80s. About 10 years ago I had the opportunity to buy a blank fire only PPsh-41 and went for it: ua-cam.com/video/X05ksdArjIQ/v-deo.html
a beautiful design, engineeringwise.
simple yet sound.
Pronunciation of designer name is really good. Good job, much respect!
Thanks for your tremendous attention to small details of this gun and its history. I think that no one ever wrote a true histiry of this gun with all possible episodes, so there can be interesting discoveries along this way yet.
Came for the gun, stayed for the history. Looking forward to tomorrow!
This is a beautiful piece of engineering. In contrast, the Germans stuck with the MP40 for the entire war. The could barely equip their squad leaders with them. Commonwealth forces had the Sten, with a poorly designed magazine and associated unreliability.
Hearing the history, in the back of my head, I'm anticipating Othias having a surprise cameo saying, "War were declared."
Building this gun was like in old communist time joke: A guy works in a bike factory. He stole parts to build a bike for his son but every time he puts parts together a kalashikov comes out.
This ranks way up there for me. What a story. What a storyteller.
It's really overwhelming to think these were designed basically only with help of a cartridge on the table, straight out of the designers head, instead of modern possibilities to watch thousands of hours as a reference collection and choose best parts from thousands of proven models.
What I find most interesting about this is how gun design and production in this era were improved by the workers that actually built the weapon. Look at American, British, German, French, and the list goes on. The contribution of the " non-engineer types ", was tremendous. Something to be said for old school methods that were pretty much global. It never hurts to listen to the people that actually do the work.
Sometimes it is just multiple eyes on a problem. The designer does most of the work, but they are often too close to it to see where improvements can be made. I have seen this with software. I build something and it works, but the. The code reviewer finds small ways that it can be improved to be faster or more reliable.
Sudaev obviously really understood sheet metal manufacturing. I love the stock mechanism. Any other gun would have used a complicated push button release. Not Sudaev - a sheet metal lug and a simple spring against the pivot pin does the job.
always loved this 42 and the 43. such fascinating guns.
Ian, please do a comparison of the cheap to build WW2 SMGs like the PPS, Sten, Grease Gun...
I second this idea!
I love how you went in depth into the history of the gun, factories, and designs. Great video!
I can't believe the PPS-43 is a cost increased, additional feature version of something.
I really have no idea about gun design and designer but it's very enjoyable listening to your story telling. Cheers
Having watched these videos, it is sort of amusing how many variations on open bolt blowback sub machine guns there can be. How to make a simplest possible gun in the style of PPS, Sten, Owen, Grease Gun.... 😉 Props must be given for re-inventing the wheel, so to speak.
I love simplicity and this gun is a prime example of it!
Crude as the Soviet Union itself. A fitting aesthetic.
Absolutely genius machine design. Simplicity personified.
In case it's helpful, regarding the pronunciation of PPS, in English it'd be written Pistalyet Pulimyot Sudayeva. The о is unstressed, this pronounced as an а, е in pistolet is stressed and softens the л, which Americans can't really pronounce anyway. Since the е in пулемёт isn't stressed, it's pronounced like an и. The ё makes a "yo" sounds, but most Russians don't bother writing the dots, which is why English speakers think it's a е. Then the stress is on the а in судаева, and it's in genitive so it gets an а (which makes it "of Sudayev")
I would love to see a movie about Sudaev's time in Leningrad. Absolutely crazy.
The things accomplished during WWII were amazing, with "necessity is the mother of invention" being so prevalent. I think it's just amazing how inventive people can be when they have to be.
It would be amazing to actually hold this gun knowing that it was actually used in combat in Leningrad. This is literally a piece of history. This is the kind of gun that belongs in a museum and I hope whoever buys it treats it with the respect it deserves.
Ian getting back to the roots of Forgotten Weapons.
Can't wait to see him shoot it, I wonder how the longer length of pull works out.
The PPS is by far my favourite SMG from WW2. Aesthetic, simple, reliable and effective
Reliability and Effectiveness outweighs everything (except maybe quantity)
Sudayev's legacy lives on. Kalashnikov's slab type magazine was designed by Sudayev for his AS-44 assault rifle.
Imagine going to work in a factory, starving, at risk of being bombed at any moment by the axis powers. All the while your neighbors are starving to death, freezing, or being blown up. It's amazing they still managed to produce something that still works 80 years later when I'm sure morale was a problem for workers.
Thankyou for covering this. Not enough material out there on the 42
Seems like the most usable of the cheap wartime smgs. That safety is really slick for simple SMG. Ingenious engineering overall.
Ah, cool, I've yet to find a place that actually details the differences between the models of 42 and 43. Thank you for that.
Everyone always loves to gush over the fancy, high tech guns, but Ive always felt guns like this were far more impressive. Simple, reliable, the absolute bare necessities, and yet it still has some really solid design elements like that safety and folding stock. Form over function and all that
That trigger is so simple that it doesn't isolate the sear from the trigger. When you release the trigger the bolt will ride over the sear and you will feel that in your finger. Most systems have some play or other means to allow the sear to depress without that trigger slap but in Soviet Russia trigger slap teaches trigger control it seems. A primitive but effective firearm, it did help take Berlin after all.
My wife's grandmother with who i spoke a couple of times about the subject, survived the siege of Leningrad, all 3 winters.
20:03 when he said “also” I immediately realised what was going on and started chuckling like an idiot. Clever engineering!
Looking forward to that range video with this piece 👌
Absolute excellent safety, it locks trigger and bolt!!! Submachine guns in early times were dangerous.
Thanks, again we learned a lot about the way industries have to make weapons both reliable an inexpensive.
It's fascinating how redesigning one part can eliminate an entire production step, i.e. a station on the production line and the people needed to man it. I watch the Munro Live YT channel, they tear down cars to compare how efficiently designed (or not) each is. The company tears down and does production analysis on all sorts of things but they only show the car stuff on YT. Regardless, it's interesting how production principles apply to guns or cars or even rockets.
Very interesting information and presented in such a clear and concise manner. Thank you for your time posting these videos.
автор молодец! некоторые подробности стали для меня новостью )
Designers who not only know guns - but understand machine tools. Thanks for sharing - quite a story.
A family story; when she turned 18 my Ukrainian / Canadian mother left the family farm in Saskatchewan to go work at the Bren Gun Factory in Toronto.
What an interesting story for one of the most iconic sub guns of WW2
Finally, been waiting for this.
Such a great episode, Love exciting story's connected to weapon's! Come for the firearms stay for the story!
Ian, the "compensator" is certainly a mud-guard.
If Sergei rams the barrel into the dirt it does not go boom the wrong way😉
It certainly works both ways.
@@OlderSpud A compensator is intended to reduce muzzle climb, usually by cuts on the top side.
I am confident a crude 1943 USSR 9mm machine pistol has no such device - back then, muzzle climb was no concern.
Getting the barrel stuck with mud on the other hand, would cause what Chieftain calls "a significant emotional event". An exploding gun leading to injured soldiers unable to fight was a concern which was easily avoided by adding this device.
OMG Did you read my mind Ian. I just think about this gun and Sudayev this day.
Antoher well made, good looking, comprehensive and understandable presentation. I learned a lot about weapon design and soviet submachineguns in WW2. Thank you very much, Ian!
?
?
That safety design is something else. I’m surprised it wasn’t copied more often.
So interesting. It's amazing how they was able to simplify such a simple design to start with! Thanks for sharing.
God bless all here.
4:35 Every factory in Soviet Union was an arms factory that may or may not have produced something else in between wars.
Дурное дело оно не хитрое но если нужно защитить семью придётся почесать голову.
Just bear in mind that in besieged Leningrad it was produced by 12-15 years old kids during 12 hours long shifts. They, as factory workers, got an enlarged day norm of surrogate bread - slowly growing from 350g. since Dec. 25, 1941 to 600g. since Feb. 23, 1943.
Hard times, tough kids. Glad they won!
A great example of less is more. Would like to see a performance comparison of these with the sten and the m3 grease gun
Can't wait for the shooting video tomorrow
Alexey Sudayev later designed other weapons. But, for me, the most interesting was the AS-44 assault rifle, for the 7.62 X 39mm cartridge. It would be a very promising rifle if ..⤵️
..its designer had not died prematurely. Could it be him in place of the famous AK-47? Who knows.. Anyway Sudayev was a genius.
As a fan of compact & simple things, i really appreciate machines like this!
My Grandson and I shot a PPSH 41 last weekend. Excellent weapon.
This SMG is always underepresented in film and history in favor of the PPSH which make many people think was the only smg the Soviets into service. The fact is by mid to the end of the war, the pps was seen far more in the hands of soldiers. Especially during the siege of Berlin.
That folding stock locking mechanism is very similar to how the SKS bayonet locks.
I would not object to having a a PPS-43 instead of a Thompson or an MP-40.
As much as I love the Thompson, it would probably be one of the last ww2 smgs I’d use if given the choice.
We are fortunate to have Ian preserve and present this history for us.
Very informative video, as always. I have a Finnish KPm-44, it's like a PPS-42 and PPS-43 hybrid. It has features from both the PPS-42 and PPS-43.
I also have an original Soviet PPS-43 and a Polish PPS-43/52 with a wooden stock.
There are times when you wish that old things could talk, and tell their story.
I see some design features in most of these small smg's that have been reviewed lately that I see in my Keltec su2000, main difference seems to be the location of the magazine thru the pistol grip.
Nice to see this rare gun being talked about!
Thank you very much for this video.
Such a detailed overview of the differences between PPS-42 and PPS-43 is missing even here in Russia.
Looked with great pleasure. 😊
I would be very happy with either firearm. They both are very beautiful simple guns. And an amazing peace of history.
I've held that very gun and was told by it's first civilian owner that it originally came to the registry from the props department of universal studios.
Willhelm Ritter Von Leeb: Neeeein!!! You can't start mass producing guns in a besieged city!
Alexey Sudayev: Haha, PPS goes BRRRRRRR.