THE IDEA OF creating a weapon with a curved barrel was far from new at that time. Back in 1868, the Russian artillery general N. Maievsky, professor of ballistics at the Mikhailovsky Artillery Academy, proposed a project for a curved-barrel cannon loaded from the breech. True, he did this in order to increase the firing of a disk projectile. When fired from a gun with a barrel curved upward, a disc-shaped projectile mounted on an edge was pressed by centrifugal force to the top of the barrel and received the necessary rotation that the designers sought. One of the guns with a similar bore was made in Russia under the leadership of Professor Maievsky. Experimental firing from this gun, carried out in 1871-1873, confirmed the correctness of the calculations: a disk-shaped projectile weighing 3.5 kg with an initial speed of 480 m/s flew 2500 m, while an ordinary cannonball of the same mass under the same conditions - only 500 m. But the main thing is that this experiment proved the reality of firing from a curved weapon.
Using this idea, German experts created a device for firing rifles from behind cover. During the conduct of defensive battles in 1942-1943. On the Eastern Front, the Wehrmacht was faced with the need to create weapons designed to destroy enemy personnel, and the shooters themselves had to be outside the zone of flat fire, i.e. in trenches, behind the walls of buildings, etc.
The very first primitive examples of such devices for firing from behind covers from self-loading rifles G.41(W) and G.41(M) appeared on the Eastern Front already in 1943. In these same devices, in addition to self-loading rifles (whose use was quite justified), Mauser K98k repeating carbines could also be mounted. Although reloading them manually under enemy fire was quite problematic. Bulky and inconvenient, they consisted of a stamped and welded metal body on which a butt with a trigger and a periscope was attached. The wooden stock was attached to the lower part of the body with two screws and wing nuts and could be folded back. A trigger was mounted in it, connected via a trigger rod and a chain to the trigger mechanism of the rifle. In the upper part of the body, between the side walls, there was a support bar for the rifle butt, secured with a support screw. At the front, it was superimposed on an eccentric bushing, mounted on an adjustable screw of the adjusting lever, which was screwed in completely with a wing nut. A mark with two clamps was attached to the hinge on top of the body. on her inside there were stops that, with the help of two screws, were pressed against the support bar of the rifle butt body.
Due to their large mass (weight with a self-loading rifle G.41(W) - 10.4 kg; with a Mauser 98k carbine - 9.5 kg) and a center of gravity strongly shifted forward, targeted shooting from these devices could only be carried out after they were firmly fixed at close range. Devices for firing from behind cover were adopted by special teams whose task was to destroy enemy command personnel in populated areas.
In addition to infantrymen, German tank crews also urgently needed such weapons, who quickly felt the defenselessness of their vehicles in close combat. Armored vehicles had powerful weapons, but when the enemy was in close proximity to tanks or armored vehicles, all these weapons were useless. Without infantry support, a tank could be destroyed using Molotov cocktails, anti-tank grenades or magnetic mines, in which case the tank's crew was literally trapped. The impossibility of fighting enemy soldiers located outside the zone of flat fire (the so-called dead zones) of small arms forced German weapons designers to address this problem. Therefore, the curved barrel was a very interesting solution to a problem that had been facing gunsmiths since ancient times: how to shoot at the enemy from cover?
This problem was solved by Colonel Hans-Joachim Schaede, head of the production department of the Ministry of Armaments and Military Industry. At the end of 1943, Schaede proposed installing a curved barrel on the MG.34 tank machine gun for more effective tank defense.
At the end of 1943, Rheinmetall received an order to create special devices - curved barrels for the purpose of using them on all types of standard weapons designed for the 7.92x57 rifle-machine-gun cartridge. These devices were intended to reduce dead zones from distances of 150-200 m to 15-20 m. The first prototype of a special attachment with a curved bore (Krummerlauf, German - curved barrel) was put on a standard Mauser K98k carbine. The experimental barrel, bent by 15 degrees, had an internal diameter of the smooth channel of 10 mm, and an external diameter of 36 mm. But the results of firing from it were unsatisfactory. When they began testing carbine barrels, bent by 30 degrees with a radius of 250 mm, the first success was observed. Ultimately, the choice was made in favor of special curved barrels of 7.92 mm caliber with the above parameters, with an outer diameter of about 16 mm and a wall thickness of 4 mm. Experiments were carried out with trunks with curvatures of 15, 30, 40, 60, 75 and 90 degrees. The internal ballistics in these barrels were so carefully calculated that at firing ranges of up to 400 - 500 m they were similar to the ballistics of the bullet movement in a normal barrel, with the exception of a certain reduction in initial velocity and an increase in bullet dispersion. Moreover, despite the instability of the weapon during automatic firing, satisfactory results of shooting accuracy were obtained. Several similar devices were made for the MG.34 machine gun, but they were all destroyed during firing, and after less than a hundred shots. The German 7.92 mm rifle cartridge turned out to be too powerful for any curved barrel.
Then the German designers came up with a new idea: wouldn't a curved barrel work better with the 7.92x33 "intermediate" cartridge, which had a shorter bullet and significantly less muzzle energy. Tests revealed that the 43 cartridge turned out to be more suitable for this design and the machine gun is the only type of weapon in which the idea of a curved barrel can be put into practice. The machine worked by using the energy of powder gases coming from the gas outlet into the gas chamber. Naturally, in the presence of a curved nozzle, the flow of gases from the barrel was hampered, since the amount of gases flowing from the barrel into the gas chamber of the machine gun increased, and their impact on the moving parts of the machine gun increased and could cause their breakdown. To avoid this, there were gas outlet holes in the back of the nozzle to allow gases to flow out. Thanks to this solution it was possible to obtain normal speeds moving parts of the machine gun, equipped with a curved barrel attachment. Using a similar attachment complete with automatic machines ( assault rifles) MP.43 significantly expanded their potential capabilities, allowing them to conduct dense barrage fire instead of single shots from rifles.
In July 1944, the MP.43 assault rifle with a 90-degree barrel was demonstrated to the top leadership of the Wehrmacht.
In the first version, the rifled barrel had several gas outlets. When shooting a machine gun with a curved barrel-nozzle, the shooting accuracy was quite satisfactory. When firing single shots at a distance of 100 meters, the dispersion was 35 cm. The survivability of such a barrel was estimated at 2000 shots.
The tests provided the most convincing proof of the capabilities of the new weapon. On August 8, the leadership of the Wehrmacht Weapons Directorate (HwaA) issued an order to the Ministry of Armaments of the Third Reich for the production of 10,000 devices for shooting from behind shelters. However, this was somewhat premature, since tests of the MP.43 assault rifles revealed that a barrel with a 90-degree curvature could satisfy the armament needs of tankers only, but not infantry. On August 25, at a meeting of the Wehrmacht weapons department with representatives of the development company Rheinmetall-Borsig, it was decided to design a second model of the barrel, with a curvature of 30 to 45 degrees, weighing no more than 2 kg and survivability of up to 5000 rounds.
This device, called Vorsatz J (Project Yot), was intended both for street fighting (shooting from around a corner) and for firing from field defensive structures (shooting from trenches, etc.) It had an attachment point, similar to a rifle grenade launcher, i.e. A clamping device was mounted in the breech of the barrel, which consisted of two marks with a clamping screw. The adjustment device makes it possible to align the periscope sight and bring the rifle installed in the device to normal combat. Attaching a curved attachment to a weapon barrel can be done not only using a mark, but also using a bushing and other methods.
When developing weapons with a curved bore, the requirements for targeted shooting from trenches were initially taken into account. To ensure targeted shooting, two types of sights were created - mirror and prismatic. Shooting from curved-barrel machine guns with such sights is practically no different from shooting from conventional machine guns with optical sights. After the appearance of a special periscope sight for Krummerlauf, the capabilities of MP.43 / Stg.44 assault rifles (assault rifles) equipped with curved barrels - attachments with a barrel curvature of 30 degrees - increased sharply.
The sighting devices of the new device included a front sight and a periscope-mirror lens system, which allowed the shooter to fire a machine gun from the hip. The aiming line, passing through the sector sight and front sight of the machine gun, was refracted in the lenses and deflected downward. Periscope sights made it possible to conduct targeted shooting up to 400 m, providing sufficient high accuracy conducting aimed fire. Thus, when firing from an MP.44 assault rifle at a distance of 100 m with a series of 10 single shots, the dispersion ellipse was 30x30 cm, and at 400 m - 80x80 cm. When firing with continuous fire, the dispersion area increased significantly and was already 90x170 cm at 100 m. A version of the MP.44 assault rifle, equipped with a Vorsatz J attachment, received the designation Stg.44(V).
For testing, it was decided to produce ten similar Vorsatz J devices. On October 27, 1944, representatives of the Wehrmacht weapons department, the Ministry of Armaments, and manufacturing companies: Rheinmetall, Bush, Zeiss and Bergmann took part in comparative tests at the Rheinmetall test site various models twisted trunks. We tested barrel nozzles with barrel bore curvatures of 30 degrees and 90 degrees and several models of periscope sighting devices. A barrel nozzle with a curvature of 30 degrees, equipped with a periscope sighting device, turned out to be most suitable for use in infantry units, but military tests were required to finally resolve this issue. Therefore, it was decided to send six barrel attachments and two sets of three different types of sights to the infantry school in Doberitz for further evaluation.
After some delay, all devices were sent to Doberitz in mid-November. The infantry school received four options:
- two barrel attachments with metal sights mounted on the left and periscope mirror devices on the barrel;
- two barrel attachments with a metal sight on top of the barrel and periscope mirror devices mounted on the forend of the machine guns;
- barrel attachment with a metal sight on the left;
- barrel attachment with a sight on top of the barrel, the latter two in combination with a periscope sighting device mounted on steel helmet M 42.
During the tests, it was supposed to choose the best option that most satisfies all the requirements of the Wehrmacht. In addition, during tests at the infantry school it was planned to study survivability, shooting accuracy and the possibility of installing these devices in field defensive structures. And just two weeks later, the infantry school sent a test report to the Wehrmacht weapons department, which stated that none of the presented models of new weapons had proven themselves to be positive. The sighting devices were not rigidly fixed to the weapon, which had an extremely negative effect on the shooting accuracy. In addition, the sights were positioned in such a way that the shooter had to hold the weapon at the hip, and this, in turn, did not give the weapon stability during shooting. Such problems could only be solved with the help of a special device to stabilize the weapon when firing. Nevertheless, the infantry school nevertheless recognized the suitability of such weapons for arming the army.
On December 8, representatives of the Wehrmacht weapons department, Rheinmetall-Borsig and Zeiss met again to discuss an improved version of the Vorsatz J curved barrel attachment. At this meeting, a decision was made on new tests of three models of this weapon:
- barrel-nozzle with a curvature of 30 degrees with a prismatic periscope sighting device designed by Zeiss,
- barrel attachments with a curvature of 45 degrees, with the same prismatic periscopic sighting device and a set of prismatic lenses.
The two barrels with a 45-degree bend were intended only to test the sights, since tests conducted by Rheinmetall had conclusively proven that a stronger bend radius produced excessive recoil. The required number of machine guns equipped with these three devices was to be transferred to the infantry school by December 21. Thus, if the tests were successfully completed, a decision could be made to begin production of one of these models in a zero series of 3000 units.
In anticipation of this decision, Rheinmetall included 1000 30-degree barrels in its production plan in January 1945, although such proactive planning was quite optimistic. The improved version of the curved barrel nozzle did not perform the best in recent tests. The barrel attachment with a 30-degree curvature failed after only 300 shots, and barrels with a 45-degree curvature performed even worse. Failures of the periscope sighting devices were detected immediately, after 7 and 10 shots, respectively, and the barrel of one of the attachments was torn apart after 170 shots. The attachment of the barrel-nozzle on the machine gun was bent, and in general this design revealed excessive recoil. On December 24, 1944, it was decided to continue testing only with barrel attachments with a curvature of 30 degrees. Rheinmetall was ordered to produce 200 such devices, half of which were to be capable of firing rifle grenades.
At the same time, German gunsmiths did not forget about their tank crews. This was due to an increase in the caliber of tank guns and the dimensions of the tanks, which led to an increase in the dead space (not covered by fire) to several tens of meters. In addition, the abandonment of turret machine guns had already become the norm by this time, since the ball mounts of machine guns weakened frontal armor tank. Consequently, the possibility of hitting the enemy in dead space was also lost. Along with this, the Germans took into account one more factor - in 1944, the effective firing range of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (faustpatrons) increased significantly (up to 150 m). By this time it had reached the limits of dead space, and therefore well-trained grenade launchers could hit tanks while remaining relatively invulnerable to their machine guns.
The initial version of the new weapon was intended for installation in an open turret on tank turrets. The attachment had a curved barrel 355 mm long with a curvature of 30 degrees, as well as simplified sighting devices that excluded targeted shooting. But soon, concern for the safety of tankers during battle forced the designers to abandon the open placement of weapons on tank turrets and use its version with a barrel bore curved by 90 degrees.
The MP.44 assault rifle with a Vorsatz Pz (Panzer) barrel attachment had a barrel curvature of 90 degrees and was intended for use in armored vehicles. The nozzle barrel with an outer diameter of 25 mm and a total length of 476 mm was mounted in a ball mount on the roof of the turret, which provided the possibility of all-round firing. This design made it possible to reduce the dead space to 15 m. The dispersion when firing from this weapon ranged from 16 to 50 cm. In addition to the attachment for using machine guns in cramped fighting compartments of tanks, a special shortened sector magazine with a capacity of 10 rounds was developed.
Ultimately, Rheinmetall managed to produce 100 nozzle barrels, the exact configuration of which is unknown. The Grafenwoehr Infantry School, the Tank School, the Mountain Ranger School and the SS Tank School were informed that they could receive 25 barrel attachments from Rheinmetall after March 31, and test reports should be submitted to the Wehrmacht Armament Directorate by May 1945. However, by this time the war had already ended.
The negative test results of such a seemingly very promising weapon, as the Stg.44 (V) and Stg.44 (P) assault rifles appeared at that time, were influenced by several reasons. First of all, the design of the nozzle with a curved barrel influenced the deformation of bullets, which significantly affected the increase in dispersion. An additional negative factor was increased wear of the bore in the muzzle area, which led to even greater dispersion of bullets. The survivability of the attachments was no more than 250 shots, and it decreased in proportion to the increase in barrel curvature. Therefore, such weapons, rejected by the Wehrmacht weapons department, remained only in prototypes. The collapse of the German economy in the last months of the war did not make it possible to bring them into serial production, but after the war these samples served as the basis for both experimental and serial samples of small arms with a curved bore developed in the USSR and the USA.
Back in 1944, solving the problem of eliminating dead space, American designers created 11.43 mm M 3 submachine guns with a curved barrel. They could shoot through the dead space in front and on the sides of the car. In the same year, the Americans tried to adapt the tank version of the M 3 submachine gun with a curved barrel for infantry. However, like the Germans, this curved-barreled weapon remained only in prototypes.
Nevertheless, the very task of determining the prospects of small arms with a curved bore was not completely removed from the agenda. Soviet gunsmith designers began this work shortly after the end of the Great Patriotic War. The Red Army captured a number of German weapons with crooked barrels as trophies. On this basis, the first research and development work began on testing small arms barrels of various curvatures for the 7.62 mm TT pistol cartridge, 7.62 mm rifle cartridge, 12.7 mm large-caliber DShK cartridge and 20 -mm cartridge aircraft gun SHVAK. So, Kovrov gunsmiths created the PPSh on the basis of the Shpagin submachine gun new sample with a barrel bent by 30 degrees. However, during the research, negative results were obtained due to the low accuracy when firing from this PPSh even at short distances (up to 100 m). This was due to the fact that the direction of flight of the bullet did not coincide with the longitudinal axis of the direction of the weapon barrel, therefore the recoil of the shot was directed at an angle to the weapon itself. Because of this, the weapon deviated to the side.
And only a few years later, domestic gunsmiths returned to them again, but at a new stage in the development of weapons. Our designers, following the Germans, came to the conclusion that such weapons can only work effectively with an “intermediate” cartridge, since the best results on ballistic barrels were achieved with the 7.62x39 cartridge of the 1943 model. In the mid-1950s, Soviet gunsmiths began work on automatic weapons chambered for this cartridge. Thus, in 1956, the designers of the Kovrov OKB-575 developed a project for a 7.62-mm Degtyarev RPD light machine gun, equipped with a curved barrel nozzle. Along with this, it was decided to develop a project for a tank machine gun with a barrel bore curved by 90 degrees. This work was entrusted to N. Makarov, who worked out all the details of the curved-barrel unit based on the Kalashnikov AK assault rifle, and K. Kurenkov, who designed the ball mount. The machine gun was intended to arm tanks, or more precisely, to protect them at the closest range, in the dead zone, not covered by a standard machine gun. Field tests have shown that the system created by the designers can solve the problem of close-in defense of a damaged or damaged tank in battle, and that the installation scheme they proposed for placing the installation on the turret hatch is the only possible option. However, the difficulties associated with opening or closing the turret hatch, even after first removing the machine gun from the installation, and other smaller problems caused tank crews to have a negative attitude towards it. Therefore, the idea of protecting a tank with a curved weapon was considered inappropriate, and all work in this direction was stopped. Similar conclusions were reached abroad.
It should be noted that in addition to creating similar samples of automatic small arms, the possibility and feasibility of creating curved-barreled weapons using groove attachments and barrel attachments attached to the muzzle of the barrels was tested. At the same time, the angle of curvature during the research varied over a wide range, up to 90 degrees. The possibility of conducting research on nozzles-gutters was obvious, since, passing through a curved nozzle, under the influence of centrifugal force the bullet was pressed against the inner surface of the gutter. Research has found that the optimal angle of curvature of the nozzle is around 30 degrees. At large angles of curvature, special bullets (tracer, incendiary) are dismantled, in which case it is possible to fire only cartridges with ordinary bullets. The difference in the accuracy of combat when firing from a curved weapon compared to a conventional straight-barreled weapon at direct shot ranges (up to 350 m) is insignificant.
In this regard, the heavy one is more fortunate small arms- heavy machine guns. In the late 1940s - early 1950s in our country, OKB-43 launched large-scale work on the design of machine guns with a curved bore to equip long-term fortifications. And already in 1955, the Soviet Army adopted the BUK-3 collapsible installation, equipped with two 7.62-mm Goryunov KSGM curved-barreled machine guns. These weapons were used for a long time in stationary fortifications on the Soviet-Chinese border.
Despite this successful experience, all work related to the curved bore was practically stopped for several decades. It is only in recent years that interest in these weapons has resurfaced due to the need to combat widespread hostage-taking and other terrorist activities in which criminals hide in vehicles or premises. Often the problem of their destruction without risk to the hostages could be solved with the help of a curved weapon operating “from around the corner.” Thus, already in 1997, the Research Institute “Special Equipment” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs demonstrated at one of the arms exhibitions a drive for firing from behind cover. In this version, the standard 5.45-mm Kalashnikov AK-74 assault rifle, mounted on a tripod, received the ability to be remotely targeted using a lever. Aiming in this complex is carried out using a flexible light guide cable, and its output hole is located on the aiming line (exactly where the shooter’s eye is located), and the eyepiece is brought out to a place that is safe for the operator.
Combat experience gained by the Russian armed forces and law enforcement agencies in numerous local armed conflicts of recent times, revealed the need to create a wide variety of types of such weapons. The greatest need for curved weapons is expressed by peacekeeping military formations and anti-terrorist security forces. So curved-barreled weapons have not lost their relevance to this day, and perhaps in the near future they will be in service Russian army new, most unexpected examples of these weapons will appear.
Curved barrels, rifle periscopes, helmet pistols and other types of weapons for shooting from cover
Projects in the arms sector often resemble children's fantasies with a strange plan, a gigantic scope and without any real prospects. This was the case with the development of super-heavy tanks and super-large-caliber guns, the idea of portable nuclear charges Finally, in the same row comes one of the most ruinous projects of the last 50 years - space wars. This feature of military thought is clearly illustrated by the devices that have constantly appeared since the First World War, which, according to the inventors, should make it possible to shoot from around the corner. Few of them have reached mass production, but designers continue to develop new options, and military and police departments test them.
Cautious Allies
Indirect fire systems existed in almost all armies that participated in the First World War. An example of a French trench rifle from the same period, made on the basis of the Lebel Mle 1886 rifle, has been preserved. The usual straight stock was replaced with a double curved one, two mirrors on the brackets formed a simple periscope. The soldier loaded the cartridge into the chamber, locked the bolt, placed the rifle with the fore-end on the parapet, and observed the sight and front sight of the rifle through the mirrors. It turned out to be easier to mount a standard rifle and a periscope on a special frame with a butt and a periscope.
In the British army they went even further: the Lee-Enfield rifle was mounted by the butt in a wooden or metal frame, on which, in addition to a periscope, a rough stock and a cable release, they also mounted a device in the form of a latch connected by rods to the bolt of the rifle. The British realized that such a design did not have to be mass-produced; it could be assembled on site from scrap materials, and to do this, it was enough to send the drawings of the device directly to the troops.
It was not easy to operate the “latch” of the arrow - it was generally inconvenient to handle distinctive feature indirect fire rifle systems of that time. Usually, for reloading, the entire structure had to be lowered into the trench.
The German army did not lag behind and also used devices for shooting from behind the parapet, in which standard rifles were installed.
 In 1916 American inventor Albert Pratt patented the pistol helmet. Barrel and magazine self-loading pistol were located on top of the fighter’s head, and the sighting shield in front of the face helped to aim the weapon. The design of the release using a pneumatic system was unusual: by blowing into the tube, the helmet owner caused the expansion of the bulb, which turned the lever and pulled the trigger. By the way, when turned upside down, this amazing helmet could be used for cooking. It's a curiosity, but the idea turned out to be tempting. 30 years later, in 1949, also in the USA, Albert Bernard De Salardi proposed the design of a helmet-mounted submachine gun. It was supposed to mount the weapon on a helmet, providing it with a periscope sight. The trigger mechanism here would also work from a pneumatic system - the fighter held a mouthpiece in his mouth, connected to the trigger by a flexible tube; to fire, all he had to do was clench his teeth. Apparently, the inventors didn’t care much about accuracy, but they did care about the convenience - the weapon is aimed synchronously with turning the head, you can stay in cover, and your hands are free. In 2006, Edward Bradley patented a frame with mounts for a rifle, an electron-optical sight, a periscope and a trigger device with supports on the torso and hips. Shooting had to be done from a prone position, while aiming the sight had to be done by moving the body |
Trench rifles
The First World War was also the first positional war. A typical position was a network of trenches, with the enemy's forward trenches separated by a hundred or two, or even tens of meters. This situation, when no one wanted to stick their head out of the trench again, gave rise to a natural desire to learn how to shoot from a rifle or machine gun, while remaining completely in cover. Inventive thought worked in the most different directions. And if “automatic” machine-gun turrets remained in fantasy drawings then, periscope sights and remote triggers even managed to find practical application.
Some similar devices were proposed after the Anglo-Boer and Russo-Japanese wars, in which there were both rapid-fire weapons and trench lines. With the beginning of the positional period of the First World War, small arms projects for indirect fire began to appear one after another.
In 1915-1916, specialists from the Main Artillery (GAU) and the Main Military-Technical (GVTU) directorates of the Russian military department examined all kinds of sights “for shooting from behind closures,” as they were called then. Many engineers proposed their projects. Most of the inventions were rejected, but by mid-1916, GVTU still placed orders for 20,000 different “gun periscopes.” The most interesting option, called the “mirror device,” was ingeniously designed. A small mirror in a rotating frame was attached to the end of the rifle butt, and shooting was reminiscent of the well-known shooting gallery trick of shooting backwards with aiming through the mirror - the soldier leaned his back against the front wall of the trench, put the rifle on the parapet, took aim through the inclined mirror, and pressed the trigger away from himself with his thumb finger. The design was universal: by attaching the same “mirror device” to the muzzle of the barrel, one could simply survey the terrain, and when fighting in enemy trenches, one could look beyond the bend of the trench.
The Second World War was tactically significantly different from the First World War. Even in positional defense against infantry weapons, high maneuverability was required here, the ability to quickly change positions and quickly open fire. There was no place for bulky trench equipment in these conditions. And yet attempts were made to return to the ideas of a quarter-century ago. In the early 1940s, the Wehrmacht received limited access to a device that was used with standard 7.92 mm Mausers and represented an improved version of the First World War designs. “Trench periscopes” were also made for 7.92 mm single machine guns MG.34 or MG.42. Aiming was again done using a standard machine gun sight through a pair of mirrors. A truly innovative invention was the weapon with a curved barrel.
Old tricks and new technologies
In close combat, they often stick out only the weapon itself from behind cover and fire a burst at random. This technique is especially popular in various irregular formations. At the same time, in combat on sharply rough terrain, a city street or in a building, they try to use various devices to safely “look around the corner”, the same mirrors on a handle holder, for example. It is not surprising that there are attempts to combine these two techniques using more modern technologies.
In the United States in the early 2000s, as part of the comprehensive Land Warrior IMD program (development of weapons, equipment and equipment for ground forces), a combination of digital camera, signal cable and miniature digital monitor. The image obtained in the sight's field of view is transmitted from the camera to a monitor mounted on the helmet in front of the shooter's eye.
A similar scheme was tested in France as part of the development program for a new FELIN equipment complex. The kit allows a soldier to “peek out” from behind cover by simply sticking out his arms with a weapon, and, if necessary, shoot.
 In 1953, the Leningrad OKB-43 developed a heavy-type armored mount for curved machine guns. It became the basis for the BUK and BUK-2 samples. A rotating installation with one or two KSGM curved-barreled machine guns, created on the basis of the 7.62-mm SGM machine gun of the Goryunov system, was mounted in the bunker. Typical problems with curved-barrel weapons were solved due to a relatively smooth bend of the barrel with a curvature of 50 degrees (the machine gun was mounted obliquely) and a ball mount that absorbed the recoil effect. The muzzle of the barrel and the head of the PPKS-3 periscope sight, protected by an armored casing, rose above the armored base; the machine gun itself, crew and ammunition were located below ground level. This eliminated the shortcomings of conventional long-term fire installations - the difficulty of camouflage, the vulnerability of the embrasure, and non-shootable sectors. The installation was mounted in a reinforced concrete casemate and provided all-round fire with virtually no dead space. Similar structures were placed, in particular, on the Soviet border in the Far East. A curved-barrel installation in an armored cap, created on the basis of a 7.62-mm Kalashnikov RPK light machine gun with a barrel curvature of 90 degrees (1960), was also intended for stationary fortifications of fortified areas. Casemate curved-barreled artillery guns were also developed |
Curves and mirrors
Although the curved-barreled weapon seems more like the subject of a joke, it is not humorous fiction at all. During the Second World War, Germany conducted thorough research, changing the types of cartridges and the bending radius of barrels with curvature angles of up to 90 degrees. For rifle cartridges, the maximum angle of curvature was about 30 degrees. Accuracy of fire (closeness of successive shots) from a curved barrel (Krummlauf), compared to a conventional one, turned out to be much worse, although tolerable at short ranges.
The Rheinmetall concern received a secret patent for curved barrels. Actually, we were not talking about the weapon itself, but about removable attachments with a curvature angle of 32 degrees for standard Mauser 98k carbines and MP.38 / MP.40 submachine guns. To reduce the load on the weapon's automation, a gas outlet window was made in the rear part of the nozzle. However, with powerful rifle cartridges, the attachments quickly wore out, and when installed on machine guns, they interfered with the operation of the automation.
Despite the obvious problems, in the 1940s a new potential area of application appeared for curved weapons, which then seemed very promising. In World War II, tanks began to be actively used, which rapidly changed and improved. An increase in the caliber of guns and the dimensions of tanks led to the expansion of the “dead” (non-shootable) space around the tank to several tens of meters. This area could be effectively used by infantry tank destroyers. At the same time, the requirements for strengthening the armor forced the reduction of the embrasures of front-line machine guns and the abandonment of hatches for firing from personal weapons. A curved weapon seemed like a way out. The work began, but from the middle of the war, by the time the first developments were ready, the offensive mission of the German army, whose main combat weapon was tanks, was replaced by a defensive one. And defense often had to be organized inside cities. As a result, the tank mounts did not have time to go into production, but since August 1944, about 10,000 attachments have been manufactured for use with 7.92 mm machine guns of the MP.44 type (StG.44, “Sturmgever-44”) in street battles. These machine guns, with an attachment that deflected the line of fire by 30 degrees, were used for shooting not so much “from around the corner” as from basement floors, bunkers and other natural shelters in the urban environment. For shooting from such weapons, two types of sights were developed - mirror and prismatic - depending on the type of periscope device placed between the standard sight of the weapon and the front sight on the curved barrel attachment.
The main disadvantages of shooting from such weapons remained the same as during the First World War: a sharp increase in size with deterioration in accuracy. A huge problem was lateral kickback, which is more correctly called overturning moment. Not only did the curved barrel deflect the direction of the bullet’s movement, but also the reaction of the bullet, as well as the flow of powder gases, sharply deflected the barrel, and with it the entire weapon, and it was difficult to take such “throws” into account when aiming.
The quick defeat of the Wehrmacht army did not give German engineers time to fine-tune new models. But their experience interested the winners. After the war, such weapons were actively developed by Soviet gunsmiths. Two main directions emerged - tank weapons and fortification installations. To arm tankers, a development option was calculated for the Shpagin submachine gun, which was the most common in the Soviet army at that time, with a barrel curvature of 30 degrees. The model was created by Georgy Shpagin himself in 1945 in Kovrov and became a direct response to the mentioned German StG.44(J). An increase in dispersion and a decrease in the initial charge speed turned out to be a sore spot for this sample as well: when firing in bursts at a distance of 50 meters, almost no bullet reached the growth target.
Experiments were also conducted with barrels chambered for other common cartridges: the 7.62 mm rifle cartridge, the 12.7 mm DShK cartridge and the 20 mm ShVAK cartridge. With a powerful cartridge and a relatively long bullet, the problems typical for curved-barreled samples manifested themselves especially clearly. More or less acceptable results were achieved only with 7.62 mm intermediate cartridge model 1943 due to the relatively short bullet length and lower level of powder gas pressure in the barrel. The muzzle attachment, which deflected the throwing line by 45 degrees, was experimentally installed on a 7.62 mm manual RPD machine gun. And based on the classic Kalashnikov assault rifle, the Tula TsKB-14 even created a prototype of a machine gun with a barrel curvature of as much as 90 degrees for tank troops. By the way, the design of the curved-barrel assembly was carried out by Nikolai Makarov, the same Soviet designer who, a few years later, would create the famous 9-mm PM pistol.
Tests of this system at the test site showed that the curved-barrel installation is capable of solving the assigned tasks. However, it had to be mounted on the turret hatch, and it made it difficult for tank crews to quickly board and disembark the vehicle. And caring for a curved weapon turned out to be quite difficult. Inconvenience to use and a number of minor defects in the pilot plant led to the fact that it was never mass-produced. As Mikhail Kalashnikov himself said, on the sidelines this model was characterized as “very cunning.”
The use of curved weapons in tank forces aroused interest on the other side iron curtain, and German developments were also used there. In the USA, the M50 "Raising" and M3 submachine guns with a curved attachment were mounted vertically in a ball mount in the roof of the turret. The peculiarity of the design of the nozzle was that it was made not as a tube, but in the form of a curved, open chute, which made it possible to discharge part of the powder gases into the atmosphere. However, this did not eliminate the main drawback - bulkiness.
Remote controlled
A solution to ensure the secrecy and invulnerability of a sniper was proposed in 1998 by an American company, introducing Precision Remotes Inc. remotely controlled “sniper platform” TRAP T2 (Telepresent Rapid Aiming Platform). The main modules of the TRAP T2 system are a platform with weapons, drives and video cameras, a control unit and a computer with a monitor for the operator at the command post.
The modular design allows the installation to be used either only by the sniper-operator himself, or as an integrated system with simultaneous data transfer to the command post. In this case, data from the computer is sent both to the sniper operator’s sight and to the command post monitor connected to the system.
The platform is mounted on a tripod machine with leveling mechanisms, horizontal and vertical drives. The control unit can be placed at a distance of up to 100 meters, and the ballistic computer program is loaded into the laptop computer. The sniper operates a viewfinder connected to video cameras for viewing (to detect a target) and guidance (connected to an optical or electro-optical sight on a weapon), a control panel with video camera switches, and toggle switches for controlling the safety and trigger mechanisms of the weapon.
TRAP 2 became interested in security services for military facilities, counter-terrorism units, and special police units in the USA and Great Britain.
I'm shooting around the corner
The issue of “corner shooting” became relevant again at the turn of the century. Counter-terrorism operations and the fight against well-armed criminals have become everyday life in almost every corner of the world. Pinpoint conflicts in urban environments among civilians have become common, where it is impossible to take advantage of artillery support, and it is not always convenient to use grenades. In addition, attention to the personal safety of fighters has increased, which means that there is a renewed demand for systems that allow firing small arms, exposing the shooter to as little risk as possible. Is it possible to safely “look” around a corner and, having found a target there, fire an aimed shot, without bending the barrel and maintaining the portability of the weapon itself? It is possible if you bend the stock in the right direction.
In 2003, the American-Israeli company Corner Shot (which can be translated as “shot from around the corner”) presented an original design - a weapon consisting of two articulated halves. Based on the idea of Israeli counter-terrorism veteran Amos Golan, the design looks like a breakable stock that can be adapted for standard light weapons, say, a pistol or a submachine gun. In front of the stock there is a small video camera and a socket for attaching a weapon. A color monitor, to which the image from the camera is transmitted, and a trigger mechanism are mounted in the rear part. The camera is used for aiming within 400 meters, although taking into account the deflecting effect of recoil, it makes sense to fire at much shorter ranges. "Corner Shot" has become the most famous system in its class and is used in special forces of several countries, including India, Pakistan, China and South Korea.
*****
The history of attempts to create small arms that would allow firing while remaining completely in cover is not over. Over the 100-plus years that have passed since the appearance of the first samples, the main problems have not been solved and continue to manifest themselves in one form or another in every device. The main one is the extremely low shooting accuracy, caused by the inability to provide a normal stop and the resulting lateral recoil. Coupled with other difficulties - from bulkiness to maintenance problems - this led to the fact that only rare copies made it into mass production, and even then they did not become widely known. Most of Design delights of this type should be classified as oddities. But the boyish desire to shoot “around the corner” continues to excite the imagination of inventors and their potential customers.
Illustrations by Rostom Chichyants
A gun barrel appears above the parapet of the trench, and although the shooter is not visible, he fires accurately - all targets are hit. In the same way, a strange trunk appears around the corner, from the hatch of a combat vehicle and other shelters. In all cases, the shooter is hidden, outside the line of fire, in a safe place, but he catches the enemy in his sights. A weapon with a curved barrel allows such fire. This is not science fiction, but documentary newsreel footage from the Second World War. It was at this time that development was very active curved-barreled weapons(weapons for shooting around corners).
The very idea of creating a weapon with a curved barrel was far from new at that time. Back in 1868, the Russian artillery general N. Maievsky, professor of ballistics at the Mikhailovsky Artillery Academy, proposed a project for a curved-barrel cannon loaded from the breech. True, he did this in order to increase the firing of a disk projectile. When fired from a gun with a barrel curved upward, a disc-shaped projectile mounted on an edge was pressed by centrifugal force to the top of the barrel and received the necessary rotation that the designers sought. One of the guns with a similar bore was made in Russia under the leadership of Professor Maievsky. Experimental firing from this gun, carried out in 1871-1873, confirmed the correctness of the calculations: a disk-shaped projectile weighing 3.5 kg with an initial speed of 480 m/s flew 2500 m, while an ordinary cannonball of the same mass under the same conditions - only 500 m. But the main thing is that this experiment proved the reality of firing from a curved weapon.
Using this idea, German experts created a device for firing rifles from behind cover. During the conduct of defensive battles in 1942-1943. On the Eastern Front, the Wehrmacht was faced with the need to create weapons designed to destroy enemy personnel, and the shooters themselves had to be outside the zone of flat fire, i.e. in trenches, behind the walls of buildings, etc.
The very first primitive examples of such devices for firing from behind covers from self-loading rifles G.41(W) and G.41(M) appeared on the Eastern Front already in 1943. In these same devices, in addition to self-loading rifles (whose use was quite justified), Mauser K98k repeating carbines could also be mounted. Although reloading them manually under enemy fire was quite problematic. Bulky and inconvenient, they consisted of a stamped and welded metal body on which a butt with a trigger and a periscope was attached. The wooden stock was attached to the lower part of the body with two screws and wing nuts and could be folded back. A trigger was mounted in it, connected via a trigger rod and a chain to the trigger mechanism of the rifle. In the upper part of the body, between the side walls, there was a support bar for the rifle butt, secured with a support screw. At the front, it was superimposed on an eccentric bushing, mounted on an adjustable screw of the adjusting lever, which was screwed in completely with a wing nut. A mark with two clamps was attached to the hinge on top of the body. On its inner side there were stops, with the help of two screws they were pressed against the support bar of the rifle butt body.
Due to their large mass (weight with a self-loading rifle G.41(W) - 10.4 kg; with a Mauser 98k carbine - 9.5 kg) and a center of gravity strongly shifted forward, targeted shooting from these devices could only be carried out after they were firmly fixed at close range. Devices for firing from behind cover were adopted by special teams whose task was to destroy enemy command personnel in populated areas.
In addition to infantrymen, German tank crews also urgently needed such weapons, who quickly felt the defenselessness of their vehicles in close combat. Armored vehicles had powerful weapons, but when the enemy was in close proximity to tanks or armored vehicles, all these weapons were useless. Without infantry support, a tank could be destroyed using Molotov cocktails, anti-tank grenades or magnetic mines, in which case the tank's crew was literally trapped. The impossibility of fighting enemy soldiers located outside the zone of flat fire (the so-called dead zones) of small arms forced German weapons designers to address this problem. Therefore, the curved barrel was a very interesting solution to a problem that had been facing gunsmiths since ancient times: how to shoot at the enemy from cover?
This problem was solved by Colonel Hans-Joachim Schaede, head of the production department of the Ministry of Armaments and Military Industry. At the end of 1943, Schaede proposed installing a curved barrel on the MG.34 tank machine gun for more effective tank defense.
At the end of 1943, Rheinmetall received an order to create special devices - curved barrels for the purpose of using them on all types of standard weapons designed for the 7.92x57 rifle-machine-gun cartridge. These devices were intended to reduce dead zones from distances of 150-200 m to 15-20 m. The first prototype of a special attachment with a curved bore (Krummerlauf, German - curved barrel) was put on a standard Mauser K98k carbine. The experimental barrel, bent by 15 degrees, had an internal diameter of the smooth channel of 10 mm, and an external diameter of 36 mm. But the results of firing from it were unsatisfactory. When they began testing carbine barrels, bent by 30 degrees with a radius of 250 mm, the first success was observed. Ultimately, the choice was made in favor of special curved barrels of 7.92 mm caliber with the above parameters, with an outer diameter of about 16 mm and a wall thickness of 4 mm. Experiments were carried out with trunks with curvatures of 15, 30, 40, 60, 75 and 90 degrees. The internal ballistics in these barrels were so carefully calculated that at firing ranges of up to 400 - 500 m they were similar to the ballistics of the bullet movement in a normal barrel, with the exception of a certain reduction in initial velocity and an increase in bullet dispersion. Moreover, despite the instability of the weapon during automatic firing, satisfactory results of shooting accuracy were obtained. Several similar devices were made for the MG.34 machine gun, but they were all destroyed during firing, and after less than a hundred shots. The German 7.92 mm rifle cartridge turned out to be too powerful for any curved barrel.
Then the German designers came up with a new idea: wouldn't a curved barrel work better with the 7.92x33 “intermediate” cartridge, which had a shorter bullet and significantly less muzzle energy. Tests revealed that the 43 cartridge turned out to be more suitable for this design and the machine gun is the only type of weapon in which the idea of a curved barrel can be put into practice. The machine worked by using the energy of powder gases coming from the gas outlet into the gas chamber. Naturally, in the presence of a curved nozzle, the flow of gases from the barrel was hampered, since the amount of gases flowing from the barrel into the gas chamber of the machine gun increased, and their impact on the moving parts of the machine gun increased and could cause their breakdown. To avoid this, there were gas outlet holes in the back of the nozzle to allow gases to flow out. Thanks to this solution, it was possible to obtain normal speeds of the moving parts of the machine gun, equipped with a curved barrel nozzle. The use of a similar attachment in conjunction with MP.43 machine guns (assault rifles) significantly expanded their potential capabilities, allowing them to conduct dense barrage fire instead of single shots from rifles.
In July 1944, the MP.43 assault rifle with a 90-degree barrel was demonstrated to the top leadership of the Wehrmacht.
In the first version, the rifled barrel had several gas outlets. When shooting a machine gun with a curved barrel-nozzle, the shooting accuracy was quite satisfactory. When firing single shots at a distance of 100 meters, the dispersion was 35 cm. The survivability of such a barrel was estimated at 2000 shots.
The tests provided the most convincing proof of the capabilities of the new weapon. On August 8, the leadership of the Wehrmacht Weapons Directorate (HwaA) issued an order to the Ministry of Armaments of the Third Reich for the production of 10,000 devices for shooting from behind shelters. However, this was somewhat premature, since tests of the MP.43 assault rifles revealed that a barrel with a 90-degree curvature could satisfy the armament needs of tankers only, but not infantry. On August 25, at a meeting of the Wehrmacht weapons department with representatives of the development company Rheinmetall-Borsig, it was decided to design a second barrel model, with a curvature of 30 to 45 degrees, weighing no more than 2 kg and survivability up to 5000 rounds. This device was called Vorsatz J (Project Yot), was intended both for street fighting (shooting from around the corner) and for firing from field defensive structures (firing from trenches, etc.) It had an attachment point similar to a rifle grenade launcher, i.e. . A clamping device was mounted in the breech of the barrel, which consisted of two marks with a clamping screw. The adjustment device makes it possible to align the periscope sight and bring the rifle installed in the device to normal combat. Attaching a curved attachment to a weapon barrel can be done not only using a mark, but also using a bushing and other methods.
When developing weapons with a curved bore, the requirements for targeted shooting from trenches were initially taken into account. To ensure targeted shooting, two types of sights were created - mirror and prismatic. Shooting from curved-barreled assault rifles with such sights is practically no different from shooting from conventional assault rifles with optical sights. After the appearance of a special periscope sight for Krummerlauf, the capabilities of MP.43/Stg.44 assault rifles (assault rifles) equipped with curved barrels - attachments with a barrel curvature of 30 degrees - increased sharply.
The sighting devices of the new device included a front sight and a periscope-mirror lens system, which allowed the shooter to fire a machine gun from the hip. The aiming line, passing through the sector sight and front sight of the machine gun, was refracted in the lenses and deflected downward. Periscope sights made it possible to conduct aimed fire up to 400 m, ensuring fairly high accuracy of aimed fire. Thus, when firing from an MP.44 assault rifle at a distance of 100 m with a series of 10 single shots, the dispersion ellipse was 30x30 cm, and at 400 m - 80x80 cm. When firing with continuous fire, the dispersion area increased significantly and was already 90x170 cm at 100 m. A version of the MP.44 assault rifle, equipped with a Vorsatz J attachment, received the designation Stg.44(V).
For testing, it was decided to produce ten similar Vorsatz J devices. On October 27, 1944, representatives of the Wehrmacht weapons department, the Ministry of Armaments, and manufacturing companies: Rheinmetall, Bush, Zeiss and Bergmann took part in comparative tests of various models of curved barrels at the Rheinmetall test site . Nozzle barrels with barrel curvatures of 30 degrees and 90 degrees and several models of periscope sighting devices were tested. A barrel nozzle with a curvature of 30 degrees, equipped with a periscope sighting device, turned out to be most suitable for use in infantry units, but military tests were required to finally resolve this issue. Therefore, it was decided to send six barrel attachments and two sets of three different types of sights to the infantry school in Doberitz for further evaluation.
After some delay, all devices were sent to Doberitz in mid-November. The infantry school received four options:
- two barrel attachments with metal sights mounted on the left and periscope mirror devices on the barrel;
- two barrel attachments with a metal sight on top of the barrel and periscope mirror devices mounted on the forend of the machine guns;
- barrel attachment with a metal sight on the left;
- a barrel-attachment with a sight on top of the barrel, the latter two in combination with a periscope sighting device mounted on an M 42 steel helmet.
During the tests, it was supposed to choose the best option that most satisfies all the requirements of the Wehrmacht. In addition, during tests at the infantry school it was planned to study survivability, shooting accuracy and the possibility of installing these devices in field defensive structures. And just two weeks later, the infantry school sent a test report to the Wehrmacht weapons department, which stated that none of the presented models of new weapons had proven themselves to be positive. The sighting devices were not rigidly fixed to the weapon, which had an extremely negative effect on the shooting accuracy. In addition, the sights were positioned in such a way that the shooter had to hold the weapon at the hip, and this, in turn, did not give the weapon stability during shooting. Such problems could only be solved with the help of a special device to stabilize the weapon when firing. Nevertheless, the infantry school nevertheless recognized the suitability of such weapons for arming the army.
On December 8, representatives of the Wehrmacht weapons department, Rheinmetall-Borsig and Zeiss met again to discuss an improved version of the Vorsatz J curved barrel attachment. At this meeting, a decision was made on new tests of three models of this weapon:
Barrel attachment with a curvature of 30 degrees with a prismatic periscope sighting device designed by Zeiss,
- barrel attachments with a curvature of 45 degrees, with the same prismatic periscopic sighting device and a set of prismatic lenses.
The two barrels with a 45-degree bend were intended only to test the sights, since tests conducted by Rheinmetall had conclusively proven that a stronger bend radius produced excessive recoil. The required number of machine guns equipped with these three devices was to be transferred to the infantry school by December 21. Thus, if the tests were successfully completed, a decision could be made to begin production of one of these models in a zero series of 3000 units.
In anticipation of this decision, Rheinmetall included 1000 30-degree barrels in its production plan in January 1945, although such proactive planning was quite optimistic. The improved version of the curved barrel nozzle did not perform the best in recent tests. The barrel attachment with a 30-degree curvature failed after only 300 shots, and barrels with a 45-degree curvature performed even worse. Failures of the periscope sighting devices were detected immediately, after 7 and 10 shots, respectively, and the barrel of one of the attachments was torn apart after 170 shots. The attachment of the barrel-nozzle on the machine gun was bent, and in general this design revealed excessive recoil. On December 24, 1944, it was decided to continue testing only with barrel attachments with a curvature of 30 degrees. Rheinmetall was ordered to produce 200 such devices, half of which were to be capable of firing rifle grenades.
At the same time, German gunsmiths did not forget about their tank crews. This was due to an increase in the caliber of tank guns and the dimensions of the tanks, which led to an increase in the dead space (not covered by fire) to several tens of meters. In addition, the abandonment of turret machine guns had already become the norm by this time, since ball mounts on machine guns weakened the frontal armor of the tank. Consequently, the possibility of hitting the enemy in dead space was also lost. Along with this, the Germans took into account one more factor - in 1944, the effective firing range of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (faustpatrons) increased significantly (up to 150 m). By this time it had reached the limits of dead space, and therefore well-trained grenade launchers could hit tanks while remaining relatively invulnerable to their machine guns.
The initial version of the new weapon was intended for installation in an open turret on tank turrets. The attachment had a curved barrel 355 mm long with a curvature of 30 degrees, as well as simplified sighting devices that excluded targeted shooting. But soon, concern for the safety of tankers during battle forced the designers to abandon the open placement of weapons on tank turrets and use its version with a barrel bore curved by 90 degrees.
The MP.44 assault rifle with a Vorsatz Pz (Panzer) barrel attachment had a barrel curvature of 90 degrees and was intended for use in armored vehicles. The nozzle barrel with an outer diameter of 25 mm and a total length of 476 mm was mounted in a ball mount on the roof of the turret, which provided the possibility of all-round firing. This design made it possible to reduce the dead space to 15 m. The dispersion when firing from this weapon ranged from 16 to 50 cm. In addition to the attachment for using machine guns in cramped fighting compartments of tanks, a special shortened sector magazine with a capacity of 10 rounds was developed.
Ultimately, Rheinmetall managed to produce 100 nozzle barrels, the exact configuration of which is unknown. The Grafenwoehr Infantry School, the Tank School, the Mountain Ranger School and the SS Tank School were informed that they could receive 25 barrel attachments from Rheinmetall after March 31, and test reports should be submitted to the Wehrmacht Armament Directorate by May 1945. However, by this time the war had already ended.
The negative test results of such a seemingly very promising weapon, as the Stg.44 (V) and Stg.44 (P) assault rifles appeared at that time, were influenced by several reasons. First of all, the design of the nozzle with a curved barrel influenced the deformation of bullets, which significantly affected the increase in dispersion. An additional negative factor was increased wear of the bore in the muzzle area, which led to even greater dispersion of bullets. The survivability of the attachments was no more than 250 shots, and it decreased in proportion to the increase in barrel curvature. Therefore, such weapons, rejected by the Wehrmacht weapons department, remained only in prototypes. The collapse of the German economy in the last months of the war did not make it possible to bring them into serial production, but after the war these samples served as the basis for both experimental and serial samples of small arms with a curved bore developed in the USSR and the USA.
Back in 1944, solving the problem of eliminating dead space, American designers created 11.43 mm M3 submachine guns with a curved barrel. They could shoot through the dead space in front and on the sides of the car. In the same year, the Americans tried to adapt the tank version of the M3 submachine gun with a curved barrel for infantry. However, like the Germans, this curved-barreled weapon remained only in prototypes. Nevertheless, the very task of determining the prospects of small arms with a curved bore was not completely removed from the agenda. Soviet gunsmith designers began this work shortly after the end of the Great Patriotic War. The Red Army captured a number of German weapons with crooked barrels as trophies. On this basis, the first research and development work began on testing small arms barrels of various curvatures for the 7.62 mm TT pistol cartridge, 7.62 mm rifle cartridge, 12.7 mm large-caliber DShK cartridge and 20 -mm cartridge of the ShVAK aircraft gun. Thus, Kovrov gunsmiths created a new model based on the Shpagin PPSh submachine gun with a barrel bent by 30 degrees. However, during the research, negative results were obtained due to the low accuracy when firing from this PPSh even at short distances (up to 100 m). This was due to the fact that the direction of flight of the bullet did not coincide with the longitudinal axis of the direction of the weapon barrel, therefore the recoil of the shot was directed at an angle to the weapon itself. Because of this, the weapon deviated to the side.
And only a few years later, domestic gunsmiths returned to them again, but at a new stage in the development of weapons. Our designers, following the Germans, came to the conclusion that such weapons can only work effectively with an “intermediate” cartridge, since the best results on ballistic barrels were achieved with the 7.62x39 cartridge of the 1943 model. In the mid-1950s, Soviet gunsmiths began work on automatic weapons chambered for this cartridge. Thus, in 1956, the designers of the Kovrov OKB-575 developed a project for a 7.62-mm Degtyarev RPD light machine gun, equipped with a curved barrel nozzle. Along with this, it was decided to develop a project for a tank machine gun with a barrel bore curved by 90 degrees. This work was entrusted to N. Makarov, who worked out all the details of the curved-barrel unit based on the Kalashnikov AK assault rifle, and K. Kurenkov, who designed the ball mount. The machine gun was intended to arm tanks, or more precisely, to protect them at the closest range, in the dead zone, not covered by a standard machine gun. Field tests have shown that the system created by the designers can solve the problem of close-in defense of a damaged or damaged tank in battle, and that the installation scheme they proposed for placing the installation on the turret hatch is the only possible option. However, the difficulties associated with opening or closing the turret hatch, even after first removing the machine gun from the installation, and other smaller problems caused tank crews to have a negative attitude towards it. Therefore, the idea of protecting a tank with a curved weapon was considered inappropriate, and all work in this direction was stopped. Similar conclusions were reached abroad.
7.62-mm curved-barreled machine gun Goryunov KSGM. Prototype (right view)
It should be noted that in addition to creating similar samples of automatic small arms, the possibility and feasibility of creating curved-barreled weapons using groove attachments and barrel attachments attached to the muzzle of the barrels was tested. At the same time, the angle of curvature during the research varied over a wide range, up to 90 degrees. The possibility of conducting research on nozzles-gutters was obvious, since, passing through a curved nozzle, under the influence of centrifugal force the bullet was pressed against the inner surface of the gutter. Research has found that the optimal angle of curvature of the nozzle is around 30 degrees. At large angles of curvature, special bullets (tracer, incendiary) are dismantled, in which case it is possible to fire only cartridges with ordinary bullets. The difference in the accuracy of combat when firing from a curved weapon compared to a conventional straight-barreled weapon at direct shot ranges (up to 350 m) is insignificant.
In this regard, heavy small arms - heavy machine guns - were more fortunate. In the late 1940s - early 1950s in our country, OKB-43 launched large-scale work on the design of machine guns with a curved bore to equip long-term fortifications. And already in 1955, the Soviet Army adopted the BUK-3 collapsible installation, equipped with two 7.62-mm Goryunov KSGM curved-barreled machine guns. These weapons were used for a long time in stationary fortifications on the Soviet-Chinese border.
Meanwhile, a clear world leader has emerged in the creation of “from-around-the-corner-of-arrows”. These are Israeli designers who, in three years, managed to develop a system that is now used by special forces in 15 countries. Russia is among them.
Florida-based Corner Shot Holdings LLC is made famous around the world by its inventor, Amos Golan, a Special Forces veteran who wounded several of his fellow soldiers during the storming of a building during the first Palestinian uprising.
Having moved to the USA, to Florida, after retiring, he began designing a device that would allow targeted fire at the enemy without leaving cover. The idea of bent barrels, obviously, did not appeal to the retiree due to its inherent disadvantages - bullet deformation, reduced shot accuracy, low life of the nozzle or barrel, difficulty in attaching sighting devices. But here's an idea remote control trigger, supplemented by the development of technical means that allow him to aim without getting into the enemy’s eyes, he liked it. As a result of his inventive talent, the CornerShot device appeared, which allows you to mount almost any pistol in its front part (some modifications even allow the use of an M16 assault rifle). In addition, a video camera with zoom is installed there, allowing for aiming; a rangefinder, infrared or laser sight can be added. Instead of a gun, a special device may be added to fire rubber bullets or spray tear gas. All information from the camera is displayed on a special monitor mounted on the back of the device, equipped with an aiming reticle and several indicators. From it, a fighter can use a joystick to control the angle of deflection of the front part of the weapon - up to 63 degrees from the standard aiming axis. The stock is borrowed from the Israeli Galil assault rifle and can also fold to the right. The obvious disadvantage of such a system is that the recoil vector of the pistol is shifted from the usual one, which makes it difficult to re-aim. Early samples of CornerShot, according to available reviews, had a kind of “childhood disease” - camera displacement after several shots, correctable only in an equipped workshop.
Initially, this device is positioned as intended for arming special and anti-terrorist units. But this is just one, the most obvious representative of a family of devices that allow you to fire from around a corner.
A much simpler, reliable and unpretentious device, although it loses some of its effectiveness, is an attachment to an optical or collimator sight, similar to the Accutact Anglesight, which does not eliminate the ability to fire from the normal position of the weapon, but allows you to aim from a position of ninety degrees relative to the central axis weapons. The only inconvenience of such a device is the fixed aiming angle plus some deterioration in image quality due to the loss of optical power when passing through the mirror system.
Despite this successful experience, all work related to the curved bore was practically stopped for several decades. It is only in recent years that interest in these weapons has resurfaced due to the need to combat widespread hostage-taking and other terrorist activities in which criminals hide in vehicles or premises. Often, the problem of their destruction without risk to the hostages could be solved with the help of a curved weapon operating “from around the corner.”
Thus, already in 1997, the Research Institute “Special Equipment” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs demonstrated at one of the arms exhibitions a drive for firing from behind cover. In this version, the standard 5.45-mm Kalashnikov AK-74 assault rifle, mounted on a tripod, received the ability to be remotely targeted using a lever. Aiming in this complex is carried out using a flexible light guide cable, and its output hole is located on the aiming line (exactly where the shooter’s eye is located), and the eyepiece is brought out to a place that is safe for the operator.
Another interesting device, this time from Belarusian designers - a collimator periscope sight PKP-2S.
Unlike the “Corner Shot”, the PKP complex is installed on all main types of domestic automatic weapons used by special forces, in particular, on all modifications of AK, AN, AEK, AS “Val”, VSS “Vintorez”, “Vikhr”, “Veresk” ” and other samples with a standard side rail for mounting the sight. The design of the control panel eliminates the use of complex electronic components, which increases its survivability of the product under the most difficult operating conditions.
The sight is designed to monitor the situation and fire from behind cover (from around corners, rocks, etc.) without risk to the shooter thanks to a special design - a rotating periscope attachment. The control panel housing with mounting bracket: mono-case cast metal shock-resistant and waterproof design.
The PKP product does not use toxic chemical or radioactive (tritium, cesium) illumination elements of the aiming mark used in imported collimator sights of the Trijicon type (Trijicon) of the Acog brand (chemically active backlight) and domestic collimator sights of the Thread type. A” or “Rakurs-A” (tritium). An LED is used to illuminate the aiming mark in the PKP sight, which does not pose a threat to the shooter’s health.
- Provides direct fire guidance to the target, as well as aiming when firing from behind horizontal and vertical protective shelters (trench ridges, corners of buildings, window sills, tree trunks, stones, etc.)
- Created on the basis of the commercially produced collimator sight PK-01BC
- Additionally, it can be equipped with a television sight with a protected radio channel, an eye display with indication, and an adaptive stock of a special design
- Visible magnification – 1x
- Number of gradations of brightness of the aiming mark – 8
- Alignment range in horizontal and vertical directions – not less than ±1º
- Rotation angle of the eyepiece attachment – 360°
- The angle between the optical axes of the output windows of the eyepiece attachment is 45°
- Power source - one alkaline cell or AA battery, nominal voltage 1.5 V (1.2 V) - commercially available
- Continuous operation time without battery replacement – at least 400 hours
- Free from parallax
- Aluminum sealed housing filled with nitrogen
- Overall dimensions – 212x120x173 mm
- The mounting location of the sight on the weapon is a dovetail-type guide bar located on the side surface of the receiver
- Weight – no more than 0.58 kg
- Operating temperature range – from minus 40 to plus 55 ºС
- Low battery indicator – optional
- Anti-reflective coating - available
- Convenient and quick zeroing of the weapon (an open sight is visible in the field of view)
- Possibility of shooting at night in combination with night vision goggles type NV/G-14, night vision monoculars type NV/M-19
The combat experience gained by the Russian armed forces and law enforcement agencies in numerous local armed conflicts of recent times has revealed the need to create a wide variety of types of such weapons. The greatest need for curved weapons is expressed by peacekeeping military formations and anti-terrorist security forces. So curved-barreled weapons have not lost their relevance to this day, and perhaps in the near future new, most unexpected examples of these weapons will appear in the arsenal of the Russian army.
November 17th, 2014
An automatic barrel appears above the parapet of the trench, and although the shooter is not visible, the fire is aimed and the targets are hit. Also, bullets from the barrel fly precisely at the target when it appears around the corner, from the hatch of a combat vehicle and other shelters. In all cases, the shooter is hidden, outside the line of fire, in a safe place, but it is he who catches the figure of the “enemy” in the trailer, his fingers smoothly pressing the trigger at the right moment. A weapon with a curved barrel can conduct such fire. This is not science fiction, but documentary newsreel footage of the end of World War II.
The idea of a curved weapon arose with the advent of firearms. Devices for firing from cover were conceived by military engineers back in the 19th century. In 1868, artillery general Maievsky proposed making the cannon barrel curved.
However, the idea began to be realized in the 20th century. The priority in the implementation of this project belongs to Germany, which waged constant wars and was interested in preserving its soldiers and defeating more enemy soldiers. During the First World War, the Finns came up with a device with a periscope for the Mosin rifle.
After World War II, Western countries followed the path of creating special attachments for the barrel of standard weapons, while in the USSR they literally implemented the idea of a curved-barreled weapon.
Although the idea of a curved-barreled weapon has not become widespread, nevertheless, the ability to hit targets covertly and without danger to the shooter is very important when conducting counter-terrorism operations.
Let's look at this topic in more detail...
The history of curved weapons also knows anecdotal inventions. Back in 1917, American inventor Albert Pratt patented a pistol helmet. The barrel of the pistol was located on top of the fighter’s head, and the sighting shield in front of the face helped to aim accurately. To fire, the shooter had to blow into a special tube connected to an inflatable bulb behind the trigger. The “pear” expanded and pulled the trigger. In practice, the recoil of the pistol when fired would break the shooter's neck. Another American, A. B. De Salardi, in 1953, brought the previous invention to a submachine gun. The weapon is also mounted directly on the fighter’s helmet. The same periscope and flexible tube. It is enough to blow hard into the mouthpiece and the weapon immediately opens fire. The new machine gun did not go further than invention.
It was during this Second World War that the development of curved-barreled weapons was actively carried out. And, characteristically, this was done in the interests not of the infantry, but of the tank crews. This was caused, firstly, by an increase in the caliber of tank guns and the dimensions of tanks, which led to an increase in the “dead” (not covered by fire) space to several tens of meters. Secondly, the rejection of turret machine guns had already become the norm by this time, since the ball mounts of the machine guns weakened the frontal armor of the tank. Consequently, the possibility of shooting through the “dead” space was also lost. And thirdly, an increase in the effective firing range of anti-tank grenade launchers (“faust cartridges”). By this time it had reached the limits of “dead” space, and therefore well-trained riflemen could hit tanks while remaining relatively invulnerable to its machine guns. Solving the problem of eliminating “dead” space, American designers created Reising submachine guns, 11.43 mm caliber, with a curved attachment attached to the barrel. They could shoot through the “dead” space in front and on the sides of the car. In 1944, “tank” curved weapons began to be adapted for infantry.
The very idea of creating a curved weapon was not new. Back in 1868, artillery general N.V. Maievsky, professor of ballistics at the Mikhailovsky Artillery Academy, proposed a project for a curved gun, loaded from the ground. True, he did this in order to increase the firing of a disk projectile. When fired from an artillery system with the barrel bore curved upward, the “disc” mounted on the edge was pressed by centrifugal force to the top of the barrel and received the necessary rotation that the designers sought. One of the guns with a similar bore was made in Russia under the leadership of Professor Maievsky. Experimental shooting in 1871-1873 confirmed the correctness of the calculations: a disk projectile weighing 3.5 kg, with an initial speed of 480 m/s, flew 2500 m, while an ordinary cannonball of the same weight under the same conditions - only 500 m. But Most importantly, this experiment revealed the possibility of firing from a curved-barreled weapon.
Krummlauf (curved barrel) weapon system that allows you to shoot from behind cover. Consists of a Sturmgewehr 44 assault rifle, a curved barrel attachment and a sighting device.
Using this idea, German specialists created a device for firing rifles from behind cover, which was adopted by the Wehrmacht in 1943. The device was used for firing from a 7.92-mm Mauser rifle of the 1898 model and from a Walter self-loading rifle of the 1941 model, which made it possible to fire from behind cover, as a result of which such weapons received the name of a weapon for shooting around a corner. It entered service with special teams whose task was to destroy enemy command personnel in cities. The device consists of three main parts - the stock, the body and the periscope sight. The butt is wooden, attached to the lower part of the body with two screws with wing nuts and can be folded down. It houses a trigger, connected by means of a trigger rod and a chain to the trigger mechanism of the rifle. The body is made of sheet iron, stamped and welded. In its upper part, between the side walls, there is a support bar for the rifle butt, secured with a support screw. At the front, it is placed on an eccentric bushing mounted on the adjustable screw of the adjusting lever, which is screwed in completely with a wing nut. A basting with two clamps is hinged on top of the body. On its inner side there are stops that, using two screws, press the body of the rifle butt to the support bar.
The periscope rifle (1915) has a similar principle, but must be lowered down to reload.
The periscope is attached to the body using a basting; the adjustment device makes it possible to align the periscope sight and bring the rifle installed in the device to normal combat. Also, the German army created curved attachments for the 7.92 mm MP-44 assault rifle. The machine operates by using the energy of powder gases coming from the gas outlet into the gas chamber. Naturally, in the presence of a curved nozzle, the flow of gases from the barrel is hampered and, therefore, the amount of gases flowing from the barrel into the gas chamber of the machine increases, and their effect on the moving parts of the machine increases and can cause their breakdown. To avoid this, a special window is made in the rear part of the nozzle to allow gases to flow out. Thanks to this solution, it was possible to obtain normal speeds of the moving parts of the machine gun when it was equipped with a curved barrel attachment.
Attaching a curved attachment to a weapon barrel can be done not only using a mark, but also using a bushing and other methods. When developing curved-barreled weapons, the requirements for targeted shooting from trenches were initially taken into account. To ensure accurate shooting, two types of sights were developed - mirror and prismatic. Shooting from curved-barreled assault rifles with such sights is practically no different from shooting from conventional assault rifles with optical sights.
At the end of 1943, Hans-Joachim Schaede, head of the production department of the Ministry of Armaments and War Industry, proposed installing a curved barrel on the MG.34 tank machine gun for more effective defense of armored vehicles.
At the end of 1943, Rheinmetall received an order to create special devices - curved barrels for the purpose of using them on all types of standard weapons designed for the 7.92x57 rifle-machine-gun cartridge. These devices were intended to reduce “dead zones” from distances of 150-200 m to 15-20 m. The first prototype of a special attachment (Krummerlauf, German - curved barrel) was put on a standard Mauser K98k carbine. The experimental barrel, bent by 15 degrees, had a smooth internal channel with a diameter of 10 mm, and its outer diameter was 36 mm. But the test firing results were unsatisfactory. When they began testing carbine barrels, bent by 30 degrees with a radius of 250 mm, the first success was observed. Ultimately, the choice was made in favor of special curved barrels of 7.92 mm caliber with the above parameters, with an outer diameter of about 16 mm and a wall thickness of 4 mm. Experiments were carried out with trunks with curvatures of 15, 30, 40, 60, 75 and 90 degrees. The internal ballistics were so carefully calculated that at firing ranges up to 400 - 500 m they were similar to the ballistics of a bullet moving in a normal barrel, with the exception of a certain decrease in initial velocity and an increase in bullet dispersion. Moreover, despite the instability of the weapon during automatic shooting, satisfactory accuracy results were obtained. Several similar devices were made for the MG.34 machine gun, but they did not withstand the tests, collapsing within the first hundred shots. The German 7.92 mm rifle cartridge turned out to be too powerful for any curved barrel.
Then the German designers put forward a new idea: wouldn’t a curved barrel work better with the “intermediate” 7.92x33 cartridge, which had a shorter bullet and significantly less muzzle energy. Tests have revealed that the “short” cartridge is ideal for curved-barreled weapons and makes the machine gun the only model that allows the idea of shooting from cover to be put into practice. It worked by using the energy of powder gases flowing from the gas outlet into the gas chamber. Naturally, in the presence of a curved nozzle, the flow of gases from the barrel was hampered, since the amount of gases flowing from the barrel into the gas chamber of the machine gun increased, and their impact on the moving parts of the machine gun increased and could cause their breakdown. To avoid this, there were gas outlet holes in the back of the nozzle to allow gases to flow out. Thanks to this solution, it was possible to obtain normal speeds for the moving parts of the machine gun, equipped with a curved barrel nozzle. The use of a similar attachment in conjunction with MP.43 machine guns (assault rifles) significantly expanded their potential capabilities, allowing them to conduct dense barrage fire instead of single shots from rifles.
In the first version, the rifled barrel had several gas outlets. When shooting a machine gun with a curved barrel-nozzle, the shooting accuracy was quite satisfactory. When firing single shots at a distance of 100 m, the dispersion was 35 cm. The survivability of such a barrel was estimated at 2000 shots.
The tests provided convincing proof of the capabilities of the new weapon. On August 8, 1944, the leadership of the Wehrmacht Armament Directorate (HwaA) issued an order to the Ministry of Armaments of the Third Reich for the production in a short time of 10,000 devices for firing from behind cover. However, this was somewhat premature, since tests of the MP.43 assault rifles revealed that a barrel with a 90-degree curvature could only satisfy the weapon needs of tankers, but not infantrymen. On August 25, at a meeting of the Wehrmacht Armament Directorate with representatives of the development company Rheinmetall-Borsig, it was decided to design a second model of the barrel, with a curvature of 30 to 45 degrees, weighing no more than 2 kg and survivability of up to 5000 rounds.
Also, Wehrmacht Colonel Schede tried in the last months of the war to establish the production of guns with a curved barrel, capable of firing from shelters at an angle of 30 or 90 degrees. But the collapse of Nazi Germany did not give German engineers time to fine-tune new models.
Nevertheless, Soviet designers also decided to get involved in its creation. At the end of the Great Patriotic War, the Red Army captured a number of German curved-barreled weapons as trophies. At their base in the USSR, work began on barrels of various curvatures for the 7.62 mm TT pistol cartridge, 7.62 mm rifle cartridge, 12.7 mm large-caliber DShK cartridge and 20 mm ShVAK aircraft gun cartridge. Thus, Kovrov gunsmiths created a sample based on the PPSh submachine gun with a barrel bent by 30 degrees. However, during the research, its completely unsatisfactory accuracy was revealed even at a distance of up to 100 m. This was due to the fact that the direction of flight of the bullet did not coincide with the longitudinal axis of the barrel, therefore the recoil when fired was directed at an angle to the weapon itself. Because of what it deviated to the side.
And only a few years later, domestic gunsmiths returned to the topic of “crooked barrel”, however, at a new stage in the development of weapons. Our designers, following the Germans, came to the conclusion that such weapons can only work effectively with an “intermediate” cartridge, since the best results on ballistic barrels were achieved with the 7.62x39 cartridge of the 1943 model. In the mid-1950s gg. Soviet gunsmiths began work on automatic weapons for this ammunition. So, in 1956, the designers of the Kovrov OKB-575 developed a project for a 7.62-mm light machine gun Degtyareva RPD, equipped with a curved barrel nozzle. Along with this, it was decided to develop a project for a tank machine gun with a barrel bore curved by 90 degrees. This work was entrusted to N.F. Makarov, who worked out all the details of the curved-barrel assembly based on the Kalashnikov AK assault rifle, and K.T. Kurenkov, who designed the ball installation. The weapon was intended to protect tanks at the closest range, in the “dead” zone, not covered by a standard machine gun. Field tests have shown that the system created by the designers can solve the problem of defending a damaged or damaged tank in battle, and that the scheme they proposed for placing the installation on the turret hatch is the only possible option. However, the difficulties associated with opening or closing the turret hatch, even after first removing the machine gun from the installation, and other smaller problems, caused the tankers themselves to have a negative attitude towards it. In this regard, the idea of protecting an armored vehicle using a curved weapon was considered unpromising, and all work in this direction was stopped. Similar conclusions were reached abroad.
In addition, the possibility and feasibility of creating curved-barreled weapons using groove attachments and barrel attachments was tested. At the same time, the angle of curvature during the research varied over a wide range, up to 90 degrees. The possibility of using groove attachments was obvious, since, passing through it, under the influence of centrifugal force the bullet was pressed against the inner surface of the groove. Research has found that the optimal bend angle is about 30 degrees. With greater curvature, special bullets (tracer, incendiary) are damaged, and such weapons can only be fired with cartridges with ordinary bullets. The difference in the accuracy of combat when firing from a curved weapon compared to a conventional straight-barreled weapon at direct shot ranges (up to 350 m) is insignificant.
Curved-barreled machine gun M.T. Kalashnikov
7.62-mm curved-barreled (curvilinear) machine gun based on the RPK light machine gun. Prototype. The work on creating a prototype of a curved machine gun with a barrel curvature of 90 degrees was carried out by designers N.F. Makarov, who completed all the projects of the curved unit, and K.T. Kurenkov, who worked out the ball installation. The machine gun was intended to arm tanks, or more precisely, to protect them at the closest range, in the so-called. “dead zone”, not covered by a conventional straight-barreled (straight-line) machine gun. To solve the problem of close-in defense of a damaged or damaged tank, it was proposed to place this system on the hatch of the tank turret. The tank crews had a negative attitude towards this weapon. In this regard, the idea of protecting tanks with a curved machine gun was considered irrelevant, and all work in this direction was stopped.
The luckiest thing was for heavy small arms - heavy machine guns. In the late 1940s - early 1950s. OKB-43 launched large-scale work on the design of machine guns with a curved bore to equip long-term fortifications. And already in 1955, the BUK-3 collapsible installation, equipped with two 7.62-mm curved barrels, was adopted into service with the Soviet army. heavy machine guns Goryunova KSGM. These weapons were used for a long time in stationary fortifications on the Soviet-Chinese border.
Despite this successful experience, all work on curved-barrel weapons was practically stopped for several decades. And only in recent years has interest in it reappeared, generated primarily by the increasing frequency of terrorist attacks. The militants who commit them, as a rule, take hostages and hide with them in vehicles or in premises. Often, it is possible to destroy terrorists without risking the people they captured with the help of curved-barreled weapons operating “from around the corner.” Therefore, in 1997, the Research Institute “Special Equipment” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs created a “Drive for firing from cover” and demonstrated it at one of the weapons exhibitions. In this version, the standard 5.45-mm Kalashnikov AK-74 assault rifle, mounted on a tripod, received the ability to be remotely targeted using a lever. Aiming is carried out using a flexible light guide cable, and its input hole is located on the aiming line (exactly where the shooter’s eye is located), and the eyepiece is brought out to a place that is safe for the operator.
Combat experience gained by the Russian armed forces and law enforcement agencies in numerous local armed conflicts recently, has revealed the need to create a wide variety of types of such weapons. The greatest need for curved weapons is expressed by peacekeeping forces and anti-terrorist security forces. So crooked shooting systems to this day have not lost their relevance and, perhaps, in the near future new, most unexpected examples of such weapons will appear in the arsenal of the Russian army.
7.62 curved-barreled machine gun based on the RPK light machine gun. Prototype from the 1960s. Cartridge 7.62x39 mod. 1943, barrel curvature 90 degrees,
It should be noted that the possibility and feasibility of creating a curved-barreled weapon was previously tested using groove attachments and barrel attachments attached to the muzzle of rifle barrels. At the same time, the angle of curvature during the research varied over a wide range, up to 90 degrees. The possibility of conducting research on nozzles-gutters is obvious, since, passing through a curved nozzle, under the influence of centrifugal force the bullet is pressed against the inner surface of the groove. It was found that the optimal angle of curvature of the nozzle is around 30 degrees. At large angles of curvature, special bullets (tracer, incendiary) are dismantled; in this case, you can only shoot cartridges with ordinary bullets. The difference in the accuracy of combat when firing from a curved weapon compared to a conventional, straight-barreled weapon at direct shot ranges is insignificant.
Field tests have shown that the system created by the designers can solve the problem of close-in defense of a damaged or damaged tank in battle, and that the installation scheme they proposed for placing the installation on the turret hatch is the only possible option. However, difficulties in opening and closing the hatch, even after first removing the machine gun from the installation, and some minor defects caused a negative attitude towards it from tank crews. In this regard, the idea of protecting a tank with a curved weapon was considered inappropriate, and all work in this direction was stopped. Similar conclusions were reached abroad. For several decades they forgot about curved-barreled weapons. Only in recent years has there been an increase in interest in it due to the need to combat widespread cases of hostage-taking and other terrorist activities in which criminals hide out in vehicles or premises. Often, the problem of their destruction without risk to the hostages could be solved with the help of a curved weapon operating “from around the corner.”
In three years, Israeli designers have developed the Corner Shot system, which is now being tested by special forces in 15 countries, including Russia. Florida-based Corner Shot Holdings LLC is best known for its inventor, Special Forces veteran Amos Golan. Its CornerShot system does not have a curved barrel, but “breaks” into two main parts and is a hinged firing mechanism ( Colt pistols, Glock, Sig Sauer, CZ, Beretta, M16 rifle or spray guns tear gas or rubber bullets) and a control panel with a video camera, color LCD display, flashlight, infrared or visible laser pointer, silencer and flash suppressor. The rotation angle of the firing mechanism is up to 63°. 
Today in the United States, “curve-sighting” systems are being intensively developed under the “soldier of the future” program, such as the remote-controlled sniper rifle TRAP T2 (Telepresent Rapid Aiming Platform), which is controlled from a remote control and provides an overview of the terrain, aiming weapons at identified targets and transmitting video information to unit command posts.
For several years now, curved-barreled weapons have been tested as part of the Land Warrior EMD program (a comprehensive program for the development of weapons, equipment and equipping of ground forces) as an addition to the two-channel “sighting unit” for small arms.
Loading...
