Cartridge for Mosin rifle. The legendary “three-line”: Mosin rifle

Model 1891 three-line rifle in the “infantry rifle” version, the rifle in the photo was made in 1892

Three-line rifle of the 1891 model in the “infantry rifle” version of the 1910 modification with an aiming rib designed by V.P. Konovalov, the introduction of which was necessary due to the transition in 1908 to pointed bullets, which differed from the old blunt-pointed ones in their flight path.

Three-line rifle of the 1891 model in the “dragoon rifle” and “Cossack rifle” version of the 1908 release. The Cossack rifle differs from the dragoon rifle in the absence of a bayonet.

Three-line rifle of the 1891 model in the “dragoon rifle” and “Cossack rifle” variants of the 1910 modification, with a V.P. rail. Konovalova

The 7.62 mm (3-line) rifle of the 1891 model (Mosin rifle, three-line) is a repeating rifle adopted by the Russian Imperial Army in 1891. It was actively used from 1891 to the end of the Second World War, and was modernized many times during this period. The name three-ruler comes from the caliber of the rifle barrel, which is equal to three Russian lines (the old measure of length was equal to one tenth of an inch, or 2.54 mm - respectively, three lines are equal to 7.62 mm). In the West it is known almost exclusively as the Mosin-Nagant rifle. Based on the rifle mod. 1891 and its modifications, a number of models of sporting and hunting weapons, both rifled and smooth-bore, were created.

In 1889, Sergei Ivanovich Mosin proposed a three-line (7.62 mm) rifle for the competition, developed on the basis of his earlier single-shot rifle, from which the bolt group and receiver were borrowed practically unchanged; Some ideas regarding the design of the store were borrowed from the newest Austro-Hungarian rifle of the Mannlicher system, tested in the same year, with batch loading of an in-line middle store, which was found to fully comply with all the requirements.

Later, at the very end of the same year, the Belgian Leon Nagant also proposed his system for the competition (in the same 1889, it had already lost in the competition to arm the Belgian army with the Mauser rifle). There were three copies of Nagan rifles, all magazine-operated, with a caliber of about 8 mm, although Nagan undertook to make a rifle with a caliber of 7.62 mm. The Nagant system was considered generally benign, but required improvement. Of particular interest to the Commission was a well-designed magazine loaded from clips, reminiscent of the magazine of the Mauser system rifle that had just been adopted in Belgium.

As a result of their testing, as well as comparative tests with the Austrian Mannlicher rifle, it became possible to finally determine the requirements for the new rifle, in modern language - to draw up technical specifications for it. It was decided to adopt a 7.62 mm caliber (three Russian lines), a barrel and a sight based on the Lebel model (but with a change in the direction of the rifling stroke from the left to the right adopted in France), a longitudinally sliding rotary bolt, locked with a separate combat mask (since the replacement cylinders in the event of a breakdown are cheaper than replacing the entire bolt), the magazine is in the middle, permanent, loaded from a frame clip with five cartridges. As a result, in 1889 the commission was renamed the Commission to develop a model of a small-caliber gun.

Since neither the Mosin rifle nor the Nagan rifle fully met these requirements, the designers were asked to develop new systems based on them, which, thus, were initially doomed to be largely similar in design, being created on the basis of the same developed by the Commission of the barrel and cartridge, which comprehensively determine all the ballistic properties of the weapon, and due to the requirements set out for it, using the same type of bolt and magazine, and having differences only in the specific design of these elements. In fact, Mosin and Nagan were tasked with creating their own versions of bolt groups and magazines for the existing barrel.

At the same time, in 1890, 23 more systems were examined, which, however, did not show any advantages over those already selected for further comparison, Nagant and Mosin.

After the delivery of a pilot batch of modified Nagant 3-line rifles from Belgium in the fall of 1890, large-scale comparative tests of both systems began.

Based on the results of initial tests, the Nagant rifle showed some advantage, and at the first stage of the competition the Commission voted for it by 14 votes to 10. However, this vote was not decisive, since the first stage of the competition was essentially of an introductory nature. In addition, many members of the commission considered that the tests showed the equivalence of the presented samples - this preliminary assessment of the Mosin design, in their opinion, was associated mainly with the lower quality of finish compared to the Nagan demonstration samples, while the Mosin rifle as a whole was simpler and structurally more reliable. The difference in the quality of finishing was quite natural, taking into account the fact that the Mosin rifles at that time were ordinary prototype weapons manufactured in semi-handicraft conditions, which were at the very early stage of development - while the Nagant rifles presented for comparison with them, executed “with amazing precision” and very well finished, they represented a further development of a design that had already been submitted to a competition in Belgium and was ready for mass production back in 1889.

Moreover, it was written that: “Taking into account ... that the guns and clips presented by Captain Mosin for experiments were made under extremely unfavorable conditions and, as a result, very inaccurately, the guns and clips of Nagant, on the contrary, turned out to be made amazingly accurately, General Lieutenant Chebyshev did not find it possible to agree with the conclusion that both tested systems were equally good. In his opinion, in view of the stated circumstances, Captain Mosin’s system had a huge advantage.”

Having become more familiar with both systems and the results of military tests (300 Mosin rifles and 300 Nagant rifles were tested), the members of the Commission reconsidered their opinion. During test firing, the Mosin rifles had 217 delays when feeding cartridges from the magazine, and the Nagan - 557, almost three times more. Considering the fact that the competition essentially boiled down to the search for the optimal design of the store, this alone clearly spoke of the advantage of the Mosin system in terms of reliability, despite any “adverse conditions.” In addition, the Commission came to the conclusion that: “... the foreign Nagan’s pack guns, compared with the same caps. Mosin, are a more complex mechanism to manufacture... and the cost of each gun will undoubtedly increase.”

Moreover, we were talking about more than significant costs: even according to the most conservative estimates, the production of the Nagant system would have resulted in additional costs in the amount of 2 to 4 million gold rubles for the first million rifles produced, that is, 2-4 rubles for each, moreover, that the total amount required to rearm one Russian soldier averaged about 12 rubles. In addition, an additional 3-4 months were required for the development of the design by industry, in the conditions of Russia's already emerging lag behind developed European countries in rearmament with new small arms, despite the fact that the Mosin rifle was already being prepared for production and was specially designed for a high degree of technological continuity with already produced Berdan rifle.

So in 1891, upon completion of military tests, the Commission developed a compromise solution: a rifle was adopted, developed on the basis of the Mosin design, but with significant changes and additions, both borrowed from the Nagan design and made taking into account the proposals of the Commission members themselves.

From the experimental Mosin rifle, it directly used a locking mechanism bar, a safety cocking device, a bolt, a cut-off reflector, a magazine cover latch, a method of connecting the feeder to the cover, making it possible to disconnect the cover with the feeder from the magazine, a hinged swivel; from the Nagant system - the idea of ​​​​placing a feed mechanism on the magazine door and opening it down, a method of filling the magazine by lowering cartridges from the clip with a finger - therefore, the grooves for the clip in the receiver and, in fact, the cartridge clip itself. The remaining parts were developed by members of the Commission, with the participation of Mosin.

Changes borrowed from the Nagant rifle (the shape of the loading clip, fastening the feed spring to the magazine cover, the shape of the cut-off reflector) somewhat increased the ease of handling the rifle, but even if they were removed they did not deprive it of its functionality. For example, if you completely abandon clip loading, the magazine can be loaded with one cartridge at a time. If you disconnect the feed spring from the magazine cap, cartridges will still feed, although there is a greater risk of losing the spring during cleaning.

Probably, the name “Commission Rifle Model 1891” would most fully reflect the authorship of the design of this rifle, by analogy with the German “Commission Rifle” (Kommissionsgewehr) Model 1888, also developed at one time by a commission based on the Mannlicher and Mauser systems.

The authorship of the new rifle was absolutely clearly formulated by the then Minister of War P.S. Vannovsky in his resolution regarding the adoption of the model for service: “The new model being manufactured contains parts proposed by Colonel Rogovtsev, the commission of Lieutenant General Chagin, Captain Mosin and gunsmith Nagan, so it is advisable to give the developed model a name: Russian 3-line rifle of the model 1891".

On April 16, 1891, Emperor Alexander III approved the model, crossing out the word “Russian”, so the rifle was adopted for service under the name “three-line rifle of the 1891 model.”

Mosin retained the rights to the individual parts of the rifle he developed and awarded him the Grand Mikhailov Prize (for outstanding developments in artillery and rifle units).

This was not the first time that a model created on the basis of a specific system with extensive additions was adopted by the Russian army under an impersonal index, without mentioning the name of the author of the original system; for example, a rifle developed on the basis of the Karle system (in the original Russian documentation - Karlya) was adopted in 1867 as a “quick-firing needle rifle of the 1867 model.”

Subsequently, however, voices began to be heard that such a name violated the established tradition of naming small arms models of the Russian army, since the name of the designer was crossed out from the name of the model adopted for service. As a result, in 1924, Mosin’s surname appeared in the name of the rifle.

At the same time, both in the Manual of 1938 and its reprint of 1941, in the brochure for OSOAVIAKHIM in 1941 “The Rifle and Its Use,” and in the Manual of 1954, the rifle (in the version after the modernization of 1930) is simply called “mod. 1891/30”, without mentioning any names, despite the fact that the designations of other models (self-loading rifle and carbine by F.V. Tokarev, submachine guns by G.S. Shpagin and A.I. Sudaev, etc. ) in similar literature were almost always provided with notes like “designs of such and such” or “systems of such and such.” Thus, it is likely that during this period they continued to officially use the “impersonal” name in relation to the rifle based on the years of its adoption. In the manual from 1938, the authorship of the rifle is also directly indicated: “The 7.62-mm rifle model 1891, adopted by the Russian army in 1891, was designed by Captain Mosin together with other members of the commission formed for this purpose.”

That is, it also points to the “commission” origin of the rifle’s design, although without directly mentioning individual borrowings from the Nagant system. Abroad, the name Nagan is often placed next to the name Mosin, as well as in the names of the Tokarev-Colt and Makarov-Walter pistols.

Production and operation of the three-line

Production of the rifle began in 1892 at the Tula, Izhevsk and Sestroretsk arms factories. Due to the limited production capacity of these factories, an order for 500 thousand rifles was placed at the French arms factory in the city of Châtelleraut (Manufacture Nationale d "Armes de Châtelleraut).

The first combat test of the Mosin rifle took place in 1893 in a clash between a Russian detachment in the Pamirs and Afghans; according to other information, during the suppression of the Yihetuan (“Boxer”) uprising in China in 1900-1901.

Already in the first years after the rifle was put into service, changes began to be made to the original design during the production and operation of the weapon. Thus, in 1893, a wooden barrel guard was introduced to protect the shooter’s hands from burns; in 1896, a new cleaning rod was introduced, longer and with a head of increased diameter that did not go through the barrel, which simplified cleaning the weapon. The notch on the sides of the magazine box lid, which would wipe the uniform when carrying a weapon, was eliminated. These improvements were also made to the design of previously released rifles.

On March 21, 1897, the 500,000th rifle was produced. At the end of 1897, the first stage of rearmament of the Russian army with a rifle mod. 1891 was completed and in 1898 the second stage of rearmament began.

By the beginning of the Russo-Japanese War, approximately 3,800,000 rifles had been supplied to the army.

After the adoption of a cartridge with a pointed (“offensive”) bullet into service in 1908, in 1910 a new version of the rifle was adopted for service with a sight of the Konovalov system, corresponding to the ballistics of the new cartridge.

By the time Russia entered the First World War, the Russian army had 4,519,700 rifles in service, with four variants of the rifle in production - dragoon, infantry, Cossack and carbine. During the war, the Russian military industry manufactured 3,286,232 three-line rifles, repaired and repaired 289,431.

Due to a catastrophic shortage of weapons and problems in the domestic industry, the Russian government began purchasing rifles from several foreign systems abroad, and also ordered 1.5 million model rifles from Remington and Westinghouse in the United States. 1891/10 Some of them were never delivered to Russia - after the Revolution they were confiscated by the US government. Today, American-made Mosin rifles are among the rarest and most collectible, along with rifles made in France in the city of Chatellerault. Due to the same shortage of weapons, it was even necessary to arm the shooters with imported weapons chambered in a non-standard cartridge - so, according to the memoirs of the gunsmith Fedorov, the entire Russian Northern Front since 1916 was armed with 6.5 mm Arisaka rifles, supplemented by a small number that used the same cartridge “automatic rifles” (automatic rifles) of Fedorov’s own system, which were available to selected shooters in the company.

A large number of rifles were captured by German and Austro-Hungarian troops.

During the course of hostilities, significant shortcomings of the rifle in its then form were revealed, primarily related to the unsuccessful design of the clip, which reduced the rate of fire in combat conditions, and the design of individual elements of accessories, such as fastening a bayonet with a collar, a ramrod stop device, or the design of stock rings, which when directly compared with German and Austrian models, they left a very unfavorable impression.

The greatest number of problems, however, were caused by the lag of the domestic industry and the extreme rush to manufacture rifles in the pre-war period, due to which each of them required careful fitting of parts and debugging to ensure reliable operation, which was exacerbated by the recent transition to pointed cartridges, which are more demanding to work with. feed mechanism, as well as the heavy contamination of both rifles and cartridges that is inevitable in trench warfare.

Rifles taken from the reserve and transferred to the front without modification caused many delays when reloading, some of them could not fire even one full magazine without disrupting the feed. Numerous organizational shortcomings were also revealed, primarily the disgusting training of ordinary riflemen and poor supplies, in particular, the lack of high-quality packaging of cartridges sent to the front.

During the Civil War, two types of rifles were produced in Russia - dragoon and, in much smaller quantities, infantry. After the end of the war, from 1922, only the dragoon rifle and carbine mod. 1907.

In the first years of Soviet power, there was a wide discussion about the advisability of modernizing or replacing the existing model of the rifle with a more advanced one. During its course, it was concluded that the rifle mod. 1891, although inferior to new foreign analogues, subject to a number of improvements, it still fully satisfies the existing requirements for this type of weapon. It was also noted that the introduction of a new type of repeating rifle would be essentially pointless, since the repeating rifle itself is a rapidly becoming obsolete type of weapon, and the cost of developing a fundamentally new type would be a waste of money.

In addition, it was noted that a change in the rifle model must necessarily be accompanied by a change in the standard rifle cartridge to a new one, devoid of the disadvantages of the existing three-line, in particular, having a smaller caliber with a greater lateral load of the bullet and a cartridge case without a rim - the development of a completely new rifle model for an outdated cartridge would also was regarded as meaningless. At the same time, the state of the economy, still emerging from post-revolutionary devastation, did not at all give reason for optimism regarding the possibility of such a large-scale rearmament - as well as the complete rearmament of the Red Army with an automatic (self-loading) rifle proposed by Fedorov.

Fedorov himself considered the introduction of a self-loading rifle in addition to the existing magazine rifle to be useless, since the resulting gain in the firepower of the infantry squad was negligible - instead, he recommended, while maintaining the current model magazine rifle, supplementing it with a large number of light hand-held rifles (in his terminology - “ maneuverable”) machine guns of a newly developed successful model.

As a result of the discussion, a committee was formed in 1924 to modernize the rifle mod. 1891.

As a result of modification of the dragoon version of the rifle, as shorter and more convenient, a single model appeared - a rifle of the 1891/1930 model. (GAU index - 56-В-222). Although it contained a number of improvements relative to the original model, in comparison with analogues in service with the armies of states that were potential opponents of the USSR, it still did not look the best. However, by that time the repeating rifle was no longer the only type of infantry small arms, so in those years the emphasis was placed primarily on the creation of more modern and advanced types - submachine guns, machine guns, self-loading and automatic rifles.

In the 1920s - 1930s in the USSR, Mosin rifles were used in the general education system and OSOAVIAKHIM for shooting training, and the “Voroshilov shooters” movement became widespread.

In 1928, the USSR began serial production of the first samples of optical sights, specially designed for installation on a rifle mod. 1891.

In 1932, mass production of the sniper rifle mod. 1891/30 (GAU index - 56-B-222A), distinguished by improved quality of processing of the barrel bore, the presence of an optical sight PE, PB or (later) PU and a bolt handle bent down. A total of 108,345 units were produced. sniper rifles. Currently, Mosin sniper rifles are of collector's value (especially the “registered” rifles that were awarded to the best Soviet snipers).

In 1938, a carbine mod., modernized similarly to the main model, was also adopted. 1938, which was a modification of the 1907 model carbine. It became 5 mm longer than its predecessor and was designed for targeted shooting at a range of up to 1000 m. The carbine was intended for various branches of the military, in particular artillery, engineer troops, cavalry, communications units and logistics employees, such as transport drivers, who needed a light and easy-to-handle weapon, mostly for self-defense.

The latest variant of the rifle was the carbine mod. 1944, distinguished by the presence of a permanent needle bayonet and simplified manufacturing technology. Simultaneously with its introduction, the rifle itself, model 1891/1930. was discontinued from production. The shortening of infantry weapons was an urgent requirement put forward by the experience of the Great Patriotic War. The carbine made it possible to increase the maneuverability of infantry and other types of troops, since it became more convenient to fight with it in various earthen fortifications, buildings, dense thickets, etc., and its combat qualities were both in fire and in bayonet combat compared to a rifle practically did not decrease.

After the fairly successful Tokarev self-loading rifle (SVT) was adopted into service in 1938, it was assumed that in the early 1940s it would almost completely displace the Mosin rifle in the Red Army and become the main weapon of the Soviet infantry, following the US Army, which adopted in 1936 armament self-loading Garand rifle. According to pre-war plans, in 1941 it was planned to produce 1.8 million SVT, in 1942 - 2 million. In fact, by the beginning of the war, over 1 million SVT had been produced, and many first-line units and formations, mainly in the western military districts, received regular number of self-loading rifles.

However, plans for the complete re-equipment of the Red Army with automatic weapons were not carried out due to the outbreak of the Soviet-German war - since 1941, the production of SVT as more complex in comparison with the repeating rifle and submachine gun was reduced significantly, and one of the main types of weapons of the Soviet army there remained a modernized rifle mod. 1891, although supplemented by very significant quantities (more than half of the total number of small arms at the end of the war) of self-loading rifles and submachine guns.

In 1931, 154,000 were produced, in 1938 - 1,124,664, in 1940 - 1,375,822.

In 1943, on the occupied territory of Belarus, railway engineer T.E. Shavgulidze developed the design of a 45-mm rifle grenade launcher; in total, in 1943-1944, in the workshops of the Minsk partisan unit, Soviet partisans manufactured 120 rifle grenade launchers of the Shavgulidze system, which were installed on Mosin system rifles.

Production of the main rifle mod. 1891/30 was discontinued in early 1945. Carbine arr. 1944 was produced until the start of production of the Kalashnikov assault rifle. Rifles and carbines were gradually removed from the army's arsenal, replaced by the SKS carbine and the Kalashnikov assault rifle (although a number of model 1944 carbines continued to be used in the paramilitary security system).

In 1959, the Izhevsk plant shortened the barrels and stocks of the surviving rifles mod. 1891/30 up to the size of the carbine arr. 1938. The “new” carbines were produced in large quantities and entered service with private security forces and other civilian organizations. In the West they received the designation 1891/59.

Mosin rifles and carbines continued to be used in the armies of Eastern Europe and around the world for several more decades. As a weapon for infantry and irregular armed forces, Mosin rifles were used in many wars - from Korea and Vietnam to Afghanistan and conflicts in the post-Soviet space.

Design

Barrel and receiver

The rifle barrel is rifled (4 rifling, curling from left to top to right). Early samples have a trapezoidal rifling shape. Later, when they were convinced that the metal of the bullet was not enveloping the barrel, the simplest rectangular one was used. The caliber of the barrel, measured as the distance between the opposite fields of the rifling, is nominally equal to 7.62 mm, or 3 Russian lines (in reality, as shown by measurements carried out on a large number of rifles of different years of production and varying degrees of preservation, - 7.62 ... 7.66 mm). The rifling caliber is 7.94…7.96 mm.

At the rear of the barrel is a smooth-walled chamber designed to accommodate the cartridge when fired. It is connected to the rifled part of the barrel using a bullet entrance. Above the chamber there is a factory mark that allows you to identify the manufacturer and year of manufacture of the rifle.

At the back, onto the threaded stump of the barrel, the receiver is tightly screwed, which serves to house the bolt. A magazine box with a feed mechanism, a cut-off reflector and a trigger mechanism are attached to it, in turn.

Magazine box and reflector cut-off

The magazine box (magazine) is used to accommodate 4 cartridges and a feed mechanism. It has cheeks, a square, a trigger guard and a cover on which the feed mechanism is mounted.

The cartridges in the magazine are arranged in one row, in such a position that their edges do not interfere with feeding, which is due to the shape of the magazine, which is unusual by modern standards.

The cut-off reflector is controlled by the movement of the bolt and serves to separate the cartridges fed from the magazine box into the receiver, preventing possible delays in feeding caused by the edges of the cartridges engaging each other, and also plays the role of a reflector of spent cartridges. Before the modernization of 1930, it was a single part, after which it consisted of a blade with a reflective protrusion and a spring part.

The reflector cut-off is considered one of the key parts of the rifle design introduced by Mosin, ensuring the reliability and trouble-free operation of the weapon in any conditions. At the same time, its very presence was caused by the use of outdated cartridges with a rim, which were not very convenient for feeding from a magazine.

However, even the magazines of the Lee system, adopted for the English Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles, which also used a cartridge with a rim, did not have a cut-off reflector, instead of which the magazine had spring jaws on top and a diamond-shaped profile, thanks to which the cartridges were located in it so that the edge of the upper cartridge stood in front of the edge of the next one, and their engagement was excluded (herringbone). It was this scheme that later became generally accepted for magazines chambered for welted (having a rim) cartridges.

Trigger

The trigger mechanism consists of a trigger, a trigger spring, which also serves as a sear, a screw and a pin. The rifle's trigger is long, quite tight and without “warning” - that is, the trigger stroke is not divided into two stages with different forces.

Gate

The bolt of a rifle is used to send a cartridge into the chamber, lock the bore at the moment of firing, fire a shot, and remove a spent cartridge case or misfired cartridge from the chamber.

It consists of a stem with a comb and a handle, a combat cylinder, an ejector, a trigger, a firing pin, a mainspring and a connecting strip. On a sniper rifle, the bolt handle is elongated and bent downwards to improve the convenience of reloading the weapon and the ability to install an optical sight.

The bolt houses a firing pin and a coiled cylindrical mainspring. The mainspring is compressed when the bolt is unlocked by turning the handle; when locked, the firing pin cocking rests on the sear. It is possible to cock the firing pin manually with the bolt closed; to do this, you need to pull the trigger back (in this case, the trigger is the tip screwed onto the shank of the firing pin). To engage the safety, the trigger must be pulled back as far as it will go and turned counterclockwise.

Stock and receiver

The stock connects the parts of the weapon; it consists of a forearm, a neck and a butt. The Mosin rifle stock is solid, made of birch or walnut wood. The neck of the stock is straight, more durable and suitable for bayonet fighting, although less comfortable when shooting than the semi-pistol necks of many later models. Since 1894, a separate part was introduced - a barrel guard, which covers the barrel from above, protecting it from damage, and the shooter's hands from burns. The butt of the dragoon modification is somewhat narrower, and the forend is thinner than the infantry modification. The stock and receiver are attached to the weapon mechanisms using two screws and two stock rings with ring springs. The stock rings are split on most rifles and blind on the Dragoon model. 1891.

Sights

The sight is stepped on the rifle mod. 1891, sector on a rifle mod. 1891/30. Consists of an aiming bar with a clamp, an aiming block and a spring.

On a rifle mod. 1891, the sight was graduated in hundreds of steps. There were two rear sights on the sighting bar: one was used when shooting at 400, 600, 800, 1,000 and 1,200 steps, and the second, for the use of which it was necessary to raise the aiming bar to a vertical position, at a distance from 1,300 to 3,200 steps . There were also two versions of the frame sight: the original version, used until 1910 and designed for a heavy bullet, and the modernized one, with the Konovalov system rail, designed for a light, pointed “offensive” bullet of the mod. 1908. On a rifle mod. 1891/30, the sight is marked up to a distance of 2,000 meters; a single rear sight can be set to any position from 50 to 2,000 m in 50 m increments.

The front sight is located on the barrel near the muzzle. At arr. 1891/30 received a ring ear muff.

In 1932, mass production of the sniper rifle mod. 1891/31 (GAU Index - 56-V-222A), distinguished by improved quality of processing of the barrel bore, the presence of an optical sight PE, PB or PU and a bolt handle bent down.

Bayonet

Serves to defeat the enemy in hand-to-hand combat. It has a tetrahedral blade with fullers, a tube with a stepped slot and a spring latch that attaches the bayonet to the barrel, and a neck connecting them.

The rifle was brought into normal combat with a bayonet, that is, when firing it had to be fixed, otherwise the point of impact would shift significantly and at a relatively long distance it became almost impossible to hit anything with the weapon without a new reduction to normal combat. When shooting with a bayonet at a distance of 100 m, the average point of impact (MPO) on a rifle reduced to normal combat without it deviates to the left by 6-8 cm and downward by 8-10 cm, which is compensated by the new reduction to normal combat.

In general, the bayonet had to be on the rifle essentially constantly, including during storage and on the march, with the exception of movement by rail or road, in light of which it was very practical that its edges were not sharpened, like knife-shaped bayonets, since, with the established method of carrying, this could create significant inconvenience when using the weapon and cause injuries when handling it.

The manual prescribed that the bayonet should be removed, in addition to the cases noted above, only when disassembling the rifle for cleaning, and it was assumed that it could be difficult to remove due to its constant presence on the weapon.

The sharpened tip of the bayonet was used as a screwdriver during complete disassembly.

Until 1930, there was no spring latch; instead, the bayonet was attached to the barrel using a bayonet clamp; the shape of the blade was also slightly different. Practice has shown that over time such a connection is prone to loosening. In 1930, the mounting method was changed, but rifles were still shot with bayonets. Some of the modernized rifles also had a bayonet with a namusnik (an early version); later they began to make a namusnik on the rifle itself.

Carbine arr. 1944 had an integral switch bayonet of Semin’s own design. The carbines are zeroed with the bayonet in the firing position.

An interesting fact is that the sniper version of the Mosin rifle also had a bayonet, and it was set extremely tightly. In this case, it served as a muzzle weight, which significantly reduced the vibration of the barrel when fired, which had a positive effect on the accuracy of the battle. The slightest loosening of the mount, which was not uncommon on conventional rifles in the infantry, on the contrary, had a negative effect on the combat of the rifle.

Rifle Accessory

Each rifle was supplied with an accessory consisting of a wiper, a screwdriver, a muzzle pad for cleaning the barrel, a ramrod coupling, a pin, a bristle brush, an oil can with two compartments - for a solution for cleaning barrels and oil, as well as a gun belt.

Combat accuracy and fire efficiency

Rifles mod. 1891 and 1891/30 were high-precision weapons, allowing you to confidently hit a single target at a distance of up to 400 m, with a sniper using optics - up to 800 m; group - at a distance of up to 800 m.

In 1946, Senior Sergeant Nemtsev developed a method of high-speed shooting from a rifle. At the training ground of the Ryazan Infantry School, he managed to fire 53 aimed shots per minute from a rifle from a distance of 100 meters at the chest target, hitting it with 52 bullets. Subsequently, Nemtsev’s rapid-fire method became widespread among the troops.

Mosin sniper rifles of pre-war production were distinguished by amazing, by the standards of their time, combat quality, largely due to the barrel with a choke (narrowing of the channel from the treasury to the muzzle), with a difference in diameter between the breech and muzzle parts of 2-3%. When fired from such a barrel, the bullet is additionally compressed, which prevents it from “walking” along the barrel bore.

Advantages of the three-line

• Good ballistics and high power of the cartridge (at level .30-06), despite the fact that many analogues at that time still used black powder;
• Greater survivability of the barrel and bolt;
• Undemanding manufacturing technology and large tolerances;
• Reliability, trouble-free operation of rifle mechanisms in any conditions;
• Simple and reliable design of the shutter, consisting of only 7 parts; it disassembles and assembles quickly and without any tools;
• Cheap frame clip;
• Easily removable shutter for cleaning;
• A separate combat bolt cylinder, replacing which if broken is much cheaper than replacing the entire bolt;
• Cheap replacement of wooden parts.

Flaws

• An outdated cartridge with a rim that made it difficult to feed from the magazine and required the introduction of an otherwise redundant part, quite complex to manufacture and vulnerable to damage - a cut-off reflector (later, during modernization, replaced by two parts that were easier to manufacture; however, the most advanced magazine systems ensured reliable supply of cartridges with a rim and without cut-off as a separate part, for example, the Lee system magazine for the Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles with a double-row arrangement of cartridges, which made it possible to increase the capacity of the rifle magazine from 5 to 8-10 rounds);
• Horizontal arrangement of the bolt cylinder lugs when locking, increasing dispersion; rifles with the best fighting already at that time had a vertical arrangement of the lugs with the bolt locked;
• A long and difficult descent without “warning”, interfering with accurate shooting;
• Frame non-spring clip, making loading difficult; The spring plate clips that already existed at that time, including the Mosin clip, were more advanced, although more expensive than the accepted Nagan clip;
• A long and extremely obsolete needle bayonet with a cranked neck, mounted on the barrel, and not on the stock;
• Infantry and dragoon rifles were sighted with a bayonet, that is, when shooting, it had to be on the rifle, otherwise the point of impact shifted significantly, which made the weapon ready for battle cumbersome; the bayonet became loose over time, as a result of which the accuracy of shooting from the rifle decreased; the Cossack rifle could be sighted without a bayonet, but was still too heavy and generally inconvenient for shooting from a horse and being carried by a cavalryman; the loosening of the bayonet has been eliminated in the mod. 1891/30, but the bayonet still had to be on the weapon when firing; This problem was completely solved only on the carbine mod. 1944 with the introduction of an integral switch bayonet, which also remained on the weapon when firing, but could be folded, increasing the ease of handling;
• A short bolt handle that is not bent to the bottom, making it difficult to open it, especially when the cartridge case is tightly “slung” in the chamber; the handle is strongly moved forward due to the design of the bolt and its horizontal position without bending down, which forced the shooter to remove the butt from the shoulder when reloading, thereby reducing the rate of fire; (with the exception of sniper modifications, which had a longer handle bent down); advanced models of those years already had a handle that was set far back, bent downwards, which made it possible to reload the weapon without removing the butt from the shoulder, thereby increasing the rate of fire - the handle of the Lee-Metford rifle can be considered a reference in this regard;
• It is worth noting that both the experimental Mosin rifle of 1885 and the Nagan rifle had a bolt handle moved back, located in a special cutout, separated from the window for ejecting spent cartridges by a jumper, which also strengthened the receiver; however, during testing of the 1885 rifle, it turned out that with this arrangement of the handle there were often delays during reloading, caused by the fact that the long sleeves of the soldier's overcoat fell between the bolt stem and the receiver, and it was considered necessary to abandon the separate cutout for the handle, returning to the same configuration receiver, like on a Berdan rifle;
• Straight neck of the butt, less convenient when shooting than the semi-pistol version on the latest models of rifles at that time, although more durable and convenient in bayonet combat;
• The Mosin safety is very simple, but inconvenient to use and short-lived due to the coloring of the safety protrusion with frequent use (how much a safety is needed on a repeating rifle is a moot point);
• Some lag behind advanced foreign analogues in the design of small parts and accessories, for example - outdated and quickly loosening stock rings, a sight vulnerable to impacts, less convenient than the side, lower “infantry” swivels (since 1910, replaced by also not the most convenient slots for belt passages, originally available on the dragoon rifle), inconvenient ramrod stop, etc.;
• Low quality wooden parts due to the use of cheap wood, especially on later releases.

Technical characteristics of the three-line Mosin 1891 (infantry rifle)

• Caliber: 7.62×54R
• Weapon length: 1306 mm
• Barrel length: 800 mm
• Weight without cartridges: 4 kg.
• Magazine capacity: 5 rounds

Performance characteristics of the Mosin rifle 1891 (dragoon and Cossack rifles)

• Caliber: 7.62×54R
• Weapon length: 1238 mm
• Barrel length: 731 mm
• Weight without cartridges: 4 kg.
• Magazine capacity: 5 rounds

The “Three Line”, or Mosin rifle, was created and put into service in 1891. It combined outdated technologies and modern scientific solutions. This made it possible to create weapons that proved themselves worthy on the battlefields of several world wars.

Mosin sniper rifle (photo)

The Mosin Sniper Rifle, due to its technical characteristics, was used for many decades, and the army of the Soviet Union abandoned it in the 60s of the 20th century, replacing it with the SVD.

During its operation, a number of upgrades were made, but still the Mosinka sniper remained a reliable weapon, capable of confidently hitting the enemy at a distance of up to 1 kilometer.

History of creation

It is worth noting that Tsarist Russia in the 19th century did not produce weapons of its own design and foreign weapons were assembled at factories under purchased licenses. However, attempts to develop and adopt a domestic rifle took place, and gunsmiths offered their projects to army officials for consideration.

Among them there were exotic samples that had several barrels and a drum loading system, in the manner of revolvers. But despite such a flow, the command refused, arguing that the presented options did not meet the criteria. In particular, in terms of the reliability and accuracy of guided fire.

This went on for quite a long time and it seemed that foreign dominance in the arms market in Russia would never end. The situation was disrupted by an event that came from a completely unexpected direction.

The famous scientist and chemist Mendeleev in 1891, after several years of experiments, discovered the formula for pyrocollodium smokeless gunpowder. This chemical composition had more power than simple gunpowder and at the same time cost several times less.

Another factor was the creation of a new type of cartridge, which used a newly discovered chemical composition. Veltishchev designed this ammunition, taking as a basis the French cartridge for the Lebel gun.

Simultaneously with the advent of the three-line cartridge, technical innovations began to appear, marking the beginning of a new era of weapons - the era of repeating rifles. The advent of store-bought food had a positive effect on the rate of fire of rifles, and the armies of the world began to introduce new models into infantry and cavalry units. The Russian Empire was no exception.

The generals of those times faced a difficult choice. On the one hand, the license for the production of the Nagant rifle had already been paid for, on the other hand, the first sample of a completely domestic weapon appeared, a rifle created by Captain Mosin chambered for 7.62 caliber. A series of field tests were ordered to make a final decision.

caliber of Mosin rifle cartridges

After all the checks and tests, the commission made a number of conclusions about both presented samples. In particular, the Belgian Nagan had better characteristics in terms of accuracy and rate of fire, but experienced problems in conditions of increased pollution. Another drawback was the indecently large number of misfires (almost 2 times more than the Mosinka).

The positive aspects of the Mosin rifle were: high reliability and simplicity of the mechanism, a low number of failures and ease of production. As a result, it was decided to adopt the “three-line”, but with a magazine from a Nagant rifle.

Mass production of the rifle did not start immediately, but several years after the events described above. The reason was the low industrialization of Tsarist Russia and the long process of establishing technological lines.

Cartridges for "Three-line"

Simultaneously with the adoption of the Mosin rifle, the production of new ammunition began. The cartridge for the three-ruler consisted of 3 parts:

• blunt-pointed bullet enclosed in a jacket:
• smokeless powder propellant charge;
• a bottle-shaped cartridge case with a pronounced rim (the rim was necessary to facilitate the transition to the production of new ammunition for cartridge factories).

The caliber of the three-line cartridge was 7.62 mm or three lines, according to the measurement system adopted at that time. For this, the rifle received its nickname in the infantry units - “three-line”.

Modifications

Mosin's "Three-line" was adopted, the technical characteristics of which differed in 3 modifications, for different branches of the military. Basically, barrel length:

• option for infantry. Long bayonet and barrel;
• cavalry variation had a shortened barrel and a different principle of fastening the belt;
• Cossack version was not equipped with a bayonet and had the shortest barrel length.

The bayonet that was supplied with the rifle had a tetrahedral shape, was attached using a pipe-shaped coupling, and the tip had a horizontal sharpening. This design feature was considered obsolete.

An interesting fact about this bayonet was that it was used as a screwdriver when disassembling a gun. For this purpose, a tip of this shape was provided.

During combat operation, another unpleasant fact was revealed. The bayonet could not be removed, and the weapon was always carried in a combat position. When the gun was unlocked, the balance and shooting accuracy were disrupted. The deficiency was corrected during modernization, already in 1930.

A little about the places of production

The industry of the Russian Empire at the time of 1891 did not make it possible to establish full-fledged production of the “three-line”. Therefore, the first batches of new weapons were ordered from the French Chatellerault.

Later, in 1894, the production of “mosinki” began at domestic arms factories. First at the Sestroretsk arms factory near St. Petersburg (it was led by Mosin himself), and then in Tula and Izhevsk.

During the First World War, Russian industry could not cover the needs of the army. The rifles were ordered from the USA and delivered by sea.

After 1917, a large number of guns that were never sent to Russia remained in warehouses in the United States. Later they were used to train recruits or sold to other countries.

1891 design

The Mosin rifle is a five-shot weapon with a rifled barrel and manual reloading. To fire, the barrel is locked with a bolt that has 2 stops located at different points. One in the front, the other in the horizontal plane. It is in the bolt that the mainspring and a simple firing pin are located.

To reload the rifle after firing, you had to do these steps:

• move the reloading handle to the rearmost position;
• remove the sleeve;
• move the reloader to its original position;
• remove the cartridge from the magazine and lock it in the barrel.

The receiver had manufacturer's markings.

Unlike modern rifles, the Mosinka had an integral box-type magazine. It housed 5 cartridges in one row.

Reloading occurred by inserting a cartridge through a specially designed window, accessible when the bolt was open. If necessary, the magazine was opened from below and all ammunition was removed.

The design of the magazine includes a cut-off reflector, which blocked the supply of cartridges when the bolt was open.

The stock is made of wood, usually birch. In addition, there are wooden linings on the barrel, which prevent burns to the shooter’s hands. Initially, the barrel was “naked” and soldiers were often injured because of this.

Sights are open type. Later, during the First Pestilence, they began to install optical sights, captured or domestic. Optics were extremely expensive and snipers were equipped with them.

When talking about snipers, I would like to note the sniper modification of the rifle released during the Great Patriotic War. More advanced technologies were used to produce such guns. In particular, a different metal alloy, chrome plating and a vertical method of cutting the barrel. Such rifles were marked “CH”.

The model showed the best parameters of range and firing accuracy. An optical "PU" - "Short Sight" - was used as a standard sight. By the way, such a sight was installed on anti-tank rifles - its resistance to damage was incredible.

There was also a not entirely successful modification of the “three-ruler”. It was called the Mosin carbine of 1907 and was characterized by low efficiency at long distances, poor design of the mechanism, a number of negative design decisions and unsatisfactory performance characteristics of the three-line.

Mosin rifles are produced in a number of countries and are actively sold from military warehouses.

this year the gun became the best-selling gun in the United States

According to a number of services, the gun became the best-selling gun in the United States in 2012. It is used for sport shooting or for hunting large game.

Technical characteristics of the Mosin rifle (TTX)

The Mosin rifle has the following dimensions and tactical and technical parameters:

• Weapon weight 4.5 kg;
• Length without bayonet 130 cm;
• Length with attached bayonet 173 cm;
• Barrel length 51 - 80 cm;
• Caliber 7.62 mm or 3 lines by the standards of Imperial Russia;
• Type of cartridges used: 7.62*54;
• Rate of fire 55 rounds per minute;
• The bullet starts at a flight speed of 870 m/s;
• Sighting range with optics is 2 km.
• The destructive power of the Mosin rifle is 3000 m.

Advantages and disadvantages

The technical characteristics of the Mosin rifle have a number of positive and negative parameters.

Positive sides

• excellent ballistics;
• high cartridge power;
• long life of the barrel and bolt;
• manufacturability of production;
• low maintenance requirements;
• trouble-free operation in highly polluted conditions;
• ease of disassembly;
• high rate of fire.

Negative sides

• cartridge with a rim, outdated design;
• the presence of a “capricious” delay cut-off device;
• horizontal shutter stops;
• difficulty in equipping ammunition;
• sharp trigger pull.

Firstly, why the “three-line”? In the Russian Imperial Army, caliber was measured not in millimeters, but in lines. A line is one tenth of an inch, and three lines is 7.62 mm. In pre-revolutionary Russia, three models of “three-line” were adopted: infantry, dragoon and Cossack. They differed in length. In addition, the Cossack rifle did not have a bayonet.

As a rule, the “three-line” had a needle bayonet, although there were exceptions. For example, in besieged Leningrad one could find “three-line soldiers” with a kind of bladed bayonet. It is interesting that, contrary to popular belief, needle bayonets were never sharpened: this was not required to inflict a terrible laceration. And the mention of sharpening a bayonet in a poem by M. Yu. Lermontov, known from childhood, is nothing more than a beautiful literary device. The middle magazine of the “three-line” was designed to hold 5 rounds.

The first combat use of the “three-line” was the Battle of Andijan during the Pamir Campaigns, when Russian infantry practically mowed down the attacking enemy cavalry with repeating rifles. Then, perhaps the only complaint was noted about the thin bayonets of the rifle, which broke when trying to lift the enemy onto the bayonet in hand-to-hand combat. After this battle, the rifle also had an upper pad that protected the shooter’s hand from burns during intense shooting.

Portrait of S. I. Mosin

The weapon's sight was originally designed for 2700 steps. Among examples of long-range (more than 2 km) shooting, one can highlight an episode of the Russo-Japanese War, when an attempt by a Japanese landing party to inspect the 2nd rank cruiser Novik, which was sunk to the upper deck near Korsakov on Sakhalin, was thwarted. Having set their sights to the maximum distance, the Russian militia fired several volleys, after which the Japanese, having lost several people killed and wounded, left the sunken cruiser and did not return to such enterprises during the war.

This practice of firing multiple rocket launchers at columns or group targets existed until the First World War, when columns were finally replaced by rifle chains, and machine guns began to dominate the battlefield.

In 1910, in connection with the transition to a pointed bullet, which had slightly different ballistic properties, the sighting device and “three-rulers” were changed. Those that preserved the original sight before the introduction of the Konovalov rail remain very rare in museum collections.

The main production in Imperial Russia was concentrated at the Tula and Izhevsk arms factories. There are also rifles from the French factory Chatellerault. The Sestroretsk arms factory also produced training rifles. With the beginning of the First World War, in order to save and unify production, mainly the dragoon version was produced. The same trend continued in the USSR, where since 1923 only dragoons were produced.

Pre-revolutionary variants of the “three-line”

During the First World War, an order was given to the American companies Westinghouse and Remington to produce 2 million “three-line” cars. However, in the States, citing various reasons, this order was repeatedly postponed. How many rifles were delivered to Russia during the First World War and the Civil War and to whom they went are very complex questions. The American interventionists in Russia during the Civil War also had “three-rulers”. This was due to two factors. Firstly, the presence of a mass of such weapons in Russia simplified the supply of ammunition to American troops. And secondly, the manufacturers needed to fuse the rifles made in the States to someone. The “Russian rifle,” as it was called in the USA, produced overseas, differed from the Tula and Izhevsk ones with a walnut stock instead of a birch one.

All Model 1891 rifles produced in the United States were infantry models. In addition to the three variants of rifles, in pre-revolutionary Russia a carbine of the 1907 model was produced in small quantities, which was in service with machine gun teams and artillerymen. This weapon did not become widespread in the Russian army.

Only the dragoon model was left in service in the Red Army, and the rifle itself underwent minor modernization in 1930. Due to the appearance of the namushnik, the bayonet mount was changed, and the sight was changed from steps to meters. If the Tsar’s “three-line rifle” was sighted with a bayonet, that is, taking into account the ballistics of the bullet, shooting was carried out at long distances with an attached bayonet, then the Soviet rifle was sighted without a bayonet. Since 1935, the receiver has finally acquired a rounded shape instead of a faceted one.

The weak point of the rifle and all carbines created on its basis was the safety, which requires significant physical strength even for an adult. Since 1938, the production of the Mosin rifle was concentrated in Izhevsk, as the Tula Arms Plant switched to the production of the Tokarev self-loading rifle.

American troops in Arkhangelsk with “three-line”, 1918

The “Three Line” became the most popular Soviet small arms of the Great Patriotic War. In total, from May 1941 to the end of 1944, more than 11 (according to other sources, up to 13) million rifles and carbines based on the Mosin rifle were produced. Discrepancies in estimates of the number of firearms produced are not uncommon and are due to a number of factors. In mass production, there is always a certain percentage of defects, and in this case, a similar sample is returned to the factory for acceptance to eliminate faults. At the same time, in the documentation of the enterprise it will be considered a newly released unit, although it is the same rifle.

The production of the Mosin rifle (with the exception of the sniper model) continued until the end of 1943. Moreover, from 1942 there was a serious increase in the production of weapons, which cost 166 rubles in production, while the expensive SVT-40, which cost about 2000 rubles in production, clearly did not take root in the mass army. For example, in February 1942 in Mednogorsk (where the production of self-loading rifles was evacuated from Tula) 50 thousand SVTs were produced, while the Izhevsk plant produced 12 thousand “three-liners” every day. Therefore, the Red Army began the war with about a million SVT-40s, and ended it with the “three-line”, however, with a huge number of submachine guns.

In the USSR, two carbines were created on the basis of the “three-line”. The first in 1938. In essence, it was the same “three-ruler”, but 20 cm shorter and without a bayonet. There is an opinion that the carbine is a cavalry weapon. But in the Red Army, carbines of the 1938 model were used to arm artillerymen and sappers, and they appeared in the cavalry only during the Great Patriotic War. Before that, the Soviet cavalry had the same “three-line” units.

Sniper V.I. Zaitsev with a Mosin sniper rifle

During the Great Patriotic War, it turned out that there was no need for an ordinary shooter to fire at a distance of 2 km - heavy machine guns successfully performed this role. For street fighting and fighting in trenches, the “three-line” was long and inconvenient. It was necessary to create a more compact sample without resorting to a radical change in design. And such a model was created - it became the 1944 model carbine. The only difference was the presence of a folding needle bayonet of the Semin system, which was shorter than that of the “three-ruler”. Bayonet combat became very rare, and repelling enemy cavalry attacks was also no longer necessary. The 1944 model carbine was produced until 1949 only at the Izhevsk plant, until it was replaced by the 1945 model Simonov self-loading carbine.

Since 1931, a sniper rifle based on the Mosin rifle has entered service with the Red Army. It differed from the standard one in the better quality of the barrel, curved bolt handle and the presence of an optical sight. Therefore, the rifle was loaded not with a clip, but with one cartridge at a time. The sniper version of the “three-line” has proven itself well in battles, from the Khasan events of 1938 to the Great Patriotic War. Although there have been cases of combat use of the Mosin rifle in conflicts of the second half of the 20th century. The production of weapons continued until 1945. In the post-war period, due to the lack of a good sniper model (the SVT-40 was considered unsatisfactory as a sniper weapon), the “three-line” was left as a temporary measure until the creation of a new sniper rifle. But the temporary “three-line” remained for another 18 long years, until the Dragunov sniper rifle was adopted for service in 1963.

"BrahMit" for the Mosin rifle

Since 1938, attempts have been made to equip the rifle with a silencer. In this case, shooting was carried out over short (no more than 100 meters) distances. For firing, a special US cartridge with a smaller powder charge was used. The initial bullet speed was only 260 m/s and was subsonic. The disadvantage of such weapons was a very limited range of use: at a distance of more than 100 meters, even with an optical sight, the accuracy of fire was already unacceptably low. The army was not interested in such a novelty, but during the Great Patriotic War it found application in partisan and reconnaissance and sabotage detachments.

In the second half of the 20th century, the Soviet Union transferred some of the “three-rulers” to a number of third world countries, where they are less and less common, but end up in the lenses of film and television cameras. In the Russian Federation, the Mosin rifle formally remains in service, since there has not yet been an official order to remove this model.

This famous “three-line” became the most popular weapon at the beginning of the twentieth century. Although they call it “Mosin rifle” for short, in fact it had several creators and developers. because the caliber of its barrel was 3 lines (a line is an old Russian measure of length equal to approximately 2.54 mm, and three lines are equal to 7.62 mm). At the end of the 19th century, the tsarist army was armed with a four-line Berdan rifle, which no longer met the realities of that time and had many shortcomings. In 1882 S.I. Mosin began to improve it.

general information

Guard Captain Sergei Ivanovich Mosin, a hereditary military man originally from the Voronezh province, graduated from the artillery academy.

In 1885 they an original rack and pinion magazine was developed, which was later used in the “three-line”, which brought it great popularity.

Reliably ensured the supply of cartridges from the magazine and The cutoff-reflector prevented two cartridges from entering the chamber at once.

Watch the video:

This is not to say that there were no alternatives to this mechanism, but they were either much more difficult to implement or more expensive.

The Mosin design was a fairly successful compilation of the Bonnet bolts and the Mauser rifle of 1871/84. You can also check out. It was so convenient that the rifle could be disassembled and reassembled in any conditions, and no special tool was required for this. Read also the material about.

It should be noted that several other people besides S.I. took part in the creation of the famous “three-line”. Mosin: the barrel and cartridges were developed by Colonels Petrov, Rogovtsev and Staff Captain Savostyanov, and the loading method and cartridge clip were purchased from the Belgian Leon Nagan (the government bought all the documents from him for two hundred thousand rubles). Watch the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvsa5xuh38g

In 1891, by imperial decree, production of a new rifle began to equip the tsarist army.

For the development of the rifle, Mosin himself was awarded a cash prize, the Order of St. Anne of the Second Class and the Grand Mikhailovsky Prize (it was awarded only once every five years for special achievements in artillery).

The rifle at that time was produced in three types.

It was the most cumbersome version of the rifle, and without a bayonet it was almost ineffective. Often used over short distances.

During the Russo-Japanese War, the infantry rifle showed high destructive power and, at the same time, a number of shortcomings. The weapon of the first models (before 1894) had an unprotected barrel, and when fired, it became so hot that it burned the soldiers’ hands.

Later, wooden overlays began to be used. In addition, the bayonet mount was fragile and often broke under strong blows.

Made for cavalry and Cossacks. The barrel was 7 centimeters shorter than that of the infantry; a bayonet was not required.

Although the initial speed was slightly lower, overall it was a compact lethal weapon that quickly gained popularity among the soldiers of that time.

The short barrel and lighter weight made this type more convenient compared to the infantry one. The design of the belt was somewhat inconvenient (you could only carry the rifle on the left), the initial speed of the bullet was slightly lost, but in general the shooting results both with and without a bayonet were good.

In fact, these species differed only in the length of the trunk. The Mosin infantry rifle had the longest barrel and bayonet, the dragoon (or cavalry) had a smaller barrel and a slightly different version of the belt attachment, while the Cossack rifle had no bayonet at all, and the barrel was shortened.

The bayonet model was already a little outdated by that time - it was a tetrahedral bayonet that fits onto the barrel. When the weapon was dismantled, the tip of the bayonet could be used as a screwdriver. See also the material about the domestic rifle IZH 61.

Main characteristics of different types of rifles of 1891

The first half-million batch of Mosin rifles was manufactured in France (Chatellerault plant); later, in 1893-1894, domestic production was established at the factories of Sestroretsk, Tula, Izhevsk.

In the very first two wars in which the rifle was used (Russian-Japanese and World War I), all its shortcomings became apparent. Some of them were taken into account and adjusted; the dragoon version seemed optimal for use, and only this version began to be produced.

The main complaints were that without a bayonet it was impossible to shoot accurately. If it is not attached to the rifle, then the balance of the weapon is disrupted and the accuracy of the shot is lost, the shooting accuracy deteriorates significantly, and with a bayonet the rifle is very bulky and heavy. For information on what is the best 4.5 caliber air rifle, see.

Disassembly of the “three-line” was not intended, and certainly with fixed bayonets. Only in 1930 was it possible to eliminate this shortcoming. Then the most significant changes were made to the design of the dragoon “three-line”, and she changed the name slightly (became “model 1891/30”).

Mosin sniper rifle

The Mosin rifle is the ancestor of sniper rifles in Russia. The sniper rifle first appeared in 1931; it was designed on the basis of the 19891/30 model.

The sniper rifle had a select barrel with improved accuracy of fire, on the left side of the barrel there was a bracket, a bolt handle bent down, and a smaller and lighter sight. Watch the video:

The main difference, of course, was the presence of an optical sight, which was attached to the barrel on a special bracket. During the war, the Bramit silencer was sometimes used.

The optical sight increased 3.5 times (accuracy increased at a distance of up to 1300 meters), its weight was 270 g, its length was 169 millimeters, the field of view was 4° 30′. However, due to the installation of an optical sight, it was necessary to fire single shots.

Performance characteristics of the Mosin sniper rifle:

Advantages and disadvantages of the Mosin rifle:

One of the historical rifles is the English Boer rifle, about it.

Conclusion

The Mosin rifle, which in 1927-1928 became the basis for the development of a version of the first sniper rifle in the Soviet state, which was subsequently actively and successfully used in various wars and even in Afghanistan (already in 1979-1989), lives to this day. It is successfully modified: the Finnish version is SSG-96, the Russian version is “OTs-48”.

In total, from 1891 to 1965 there were About 37 million copies of these rifles were produced. Fans of pneumatics will be interested in material about. Also read.

I asked the author to return once again to this important and interesting topic. Open it deeper. Tell in detail the history of the creation of the famous rifle, which faithfully served the Fatherland in many bloody wars.

And here is this article in front of you...

« Mosin rifle - 124 years in the service of Russia

Recently, my article about Russian weapons as an object of information attacks from the West was published on Nikolai Starikov’s website and on his pages on social networks. I am sincerely grateful to readers for their feedback on the article, but I would like to continue this conversation from a slightly different, narrower perspective. This is partly due to the nature of the comments to the previous article. But more than that is required by the very logic of the development of the topic, to which, dear reader, we will return several times. The subject of this article will be one of the tactical tricks of our geopolitical opponents, which consists in creating and consolidating in the mass consciousness of the Russian people a myth about the chaotic randomness of all their achievements and a systemic mess in all spheres of Russian government. And since we started talking about weapons last time, let’s continue it (let me remind you that we were talking about Sergei Ivanovich Mosin and his legendary three-line rifle). In the final part of the article we will talk about purely practical things - the combat qualities of this weapon, incl. - from the perspective of today.

To understand the essence of the problem, you need to know its background. Therefore, let's start from the very beginning, which for our three-line model does not date back to 1891, when it was put into service. And not even to the eighties of the nineteenth century, when Sergei Ivanovich began work on his first samples. It all started earlier, with the predecessor of the Mosin three-line rifle - the 4.2-line (10.67 mm) Berdan rifle of the second model of the 1870 model. Yes, Berdan was a foreigner, an American. But, there are a few “buts” here, which will be discussed a little later. In the meantime, we’ll look a little further, into the 1870s, when military officials in European countries began to figure out whose rifle was better. As last time, I ask the reader to be patient, the article turned out to be quite large in volume. But this will be better for presenting and understanding all the vicissitudes of such a complex and very expensive event, which is the development and adoption of a new type of small arms for the huge army of the Russian Empire.

Predecessors of the three-line

In 1875, on the territory of the Volkovoye Field, which served as an experimental shooting range for the Russian Artillery Academy, comparative tests of the latest models of small arms of the armies of leading European countries - Russia, Prussia and France - were carried out at that time. The Russian army, having suffered with an incredible variety of outdated systems in the 1860s. (the period of the “weapons drama”, as aptly defined by the then Minister of War D. Milyutin), while it was just rearming with the aforementioned 4-line Berdan rifle No. 2 mod. 1870.

Since 1869, the French have been reworking their Chassepot needle rifles mod. 1866 under a unitary cartridge, and the Prussian army was armed with a Mauser rifle mod. 1871. In addition to these three copies, our specialists optionally tested and described a rifle by the American designer Hotchkiss. It was assumed that this system would be adopted by the French army, so the Russian military became interested in it in advance.

There was no secret made from the comparative tests - after field tests and the compilation of comparative descriptions of the tested rifles, Academy students were immediately given public lectures based on the results of the analysis of the design, ballistic and operational characteristics of the systems studied.
Our Berdan-2 rifle (as well as sources for studying it and any amount of ammunition) was available and well known. An experienced commission, deciding the fate of the 2nd model of the Berdan gun back in 1870, noted the advantages of the new model over all existing systems at that time.

The Mauser gun was presented in a single copy in Russia in 1875 and, interestingly, was a gift from Emperor Wilhelm to Russian Tsar Alexander II. In addition to the Mauser rifle and its cartridges, Academy specialists had the original instructions for the gun and information about its testing in the Prussian infantry training battalion. It is difficult to say whether the reason for such a broad gesture on the part of the Kaiser was family ties, but, as it turned out, in this case, our specialized services were insured in a timely manner: the Mauser rifle was well studied in Russia even before it was adopted for service in Germany (!). With the help of Russian military intelligence, fragments of barrels and parts of the “secret” rifle were taken from private German arms factories to Russia, which made it possible to theoretically calculate its parameters and ballistics with great accuracy.

And the Gra and Hotchkiss rifles were delivered to the GAU shortly before the tests thanks to the efforts of a Russian military agent in Paris. Here we must also assume that these guns were exported to Russia in a not entirely legal way, because there were only 90 cartridges for them and no technical documentation. All data provided for the analysis of these systems was obtained through a thorough study of French rifles at the Academy's experimental shooting range, where, using available ammunition, our specialists obtained all the necessary data on ballistics and materiel. Thus, there were all the prerequisites for an objective comparison of serial infantry rifles from leading European countries (at that time no one considered the USA a worthy adversary, even theoretically).

Without touching on the design details of the rifles participating in the comparative shooting, I will note that according to the test results, the Russian rifle turned out to be the most original structurally. Let's not forget that when the Berdan-2 system was adopted, the sliding bolt did not have a dominant distribution. The future has shown that the foresight of our State Agrarian University specialists has fully justified itself. After a detailed impartial analysis, the opinion of the Academy’s specialists was as follows: the domestic rifle in terms of rate of fire, reliability of extraction and ease of disassembly is superior to the best of foreign rifles.

4.2-line rifle Berdan-2 mod. 1870

Now let's return to the name Berdan in the name of our rifle. Let’s omit the huge amount of historical information about the search for the best system for arming the Russian army, which was eventually found in the United States by Russian military agents A.P. Gorlov and K.I. Ginnius (the most competent specialists and real patriots who brought great benefits to Russia). Let me remind readers only that General Hiram Berdan was a hero of the American Civil War, where he commanded a sniper unit, and was the author of both models of the Russian “Berdanka” mod. 1868 and 1870 gg.

It is known that he gave Russia the rights to the design of his first rifle for 50,000 gold rubles ($38,000). But few people know that Gorlov and Ginnius made so many changes to the design of the rifle and its manufacturing technology (this also affected the cartridge) that they practically created a new type of weapon. At the same time, they worthily defended Russian interests in America, where the production of Berdan-1 began. Then they had to work on an incredible scale to organize the production of a new rifle in Russia. And already in 1870, the more advanced Berdan-2 rifle with a longitudinally sliding bolt was adopted into service with the Russian army - it was impossible for our country to lag behind in the race to improve infantry weapons. What’s interesting is that at first the second model Berdans were assembled in England, but our specialists did everything possible to establish their production at Russian factories.

Rifle Berdan-2 mod. 1870 and a three-line rifle mod. 1891 (photo by S. Eremeev)

A significant number of famous rifles were sold to hunters, incl. after conversion for a wide variety of cartridges - from a revolver cartridge for Smith & Wesson to a 12-gauge hunting cartridge. The well-known Dersu Uzala never parted with the Berdan-2 rifle. To this day, any converted hunting rifle in Russia is called a “berdanka”.

So, before moving on to the history of the development of the Mosin three-line rifle and its famous author, we specifically note that Russia in the 1870s had practically no modern machine production at that time, but the Russian army was armed with an excellent rifle , which even today evokes admiration for the beauty of its elegant silhouette and thoughtful design.

Becoming S.I. Mosin as a designer

Let's return to the Mosin rifle, which in the West is called the Mosin-Nagant rifle. To understand why, to this day, so much provocative misinformation and outright lies are being spread regarding the authorship of these weapons, imagine what kind of benefit in hard gold could be received by that foreigner who would “push” his design into service with the huge imperial army and navy rifles. And what a trump card for the commanders of the information war is any pretext that is in one way or another connected with foreign participation in the national weapons system of any country. In this case, our country. But that’s pretty much how it all turned out!

When designing the rifle, Sergei Ivanovich Mosin took into account not only the vast experience of the Russian weapons school, but also the generalized military experience of the Russian army, constantly fighting across the vast expanses of Eurasia in a wide variety of climatic zones. This is not surprising - his father was Ivan Ignatievich Mosin, who earned his “George” back in the Russian-Turkish war of 1828-1829, as a result of which the Black Sea coast of the North Caucasus went to Russia. Sergei Ivanovich walked to a high officer rank and extensive scientific knowledge through a long and thorny path of dedicated study, faithful service and constant self-education. The first important milestone in the biography of the future designer was the Tambov Cadet Corps, where Sergei Mosin entered in 1861. And already in 1862 he was transferred to continue his studies in the more prestigious Voronezh Mikhailovsky Cadet Corps. In 1867, Mosin successfully graduated from this educational institution, which by that time had been transformed into a military gymnasium with a predominance of exact and natural sciences in the program. For further studies, Sergei chose the Mikhailovsky Artillery School, although at first, due to a lack of vacancies, he had to study at the Third Military Alexander School in Moscow.

You can often hear that S.I. Mosin was allegedly self-taught and, in principle, could not design a rifle that was modern at that time and quickly organize its production in several factories at once. This is complete nonsense and an outright lie! The Mikhailovskoye Artillery School, which was founded by Peter the Great himself, had a long and remarkable history. It was the oldest and most prestigious military school in Russia, which produced officers with a very high level of professional training. The school's curriculum included a solid mathematical course, including integral and differential calculus, analytical geometry, the beginnings of higher algebra, and all artillery disciplines, including fortification and topography. That’s why Sergei Ivanovich sought to get there, whose potential at that time was already obvious.

Three years have passed. Mosin easily passed the final exams, receiving the rank of second lieutenant for his academic success and almost immediately leaving for his duty station in Tsarskoe Selo, where he quickly gained the authority of an intelligent and active officer. Interestingly, Soviet sources, which are more than favorable towards Sergei Ivanovich, nowhere indicate his desire or at least predisposition to any revolutionary activity. Rather, on the contrary, behind this restraint was Mosin’s sincere desire to devote his life to serving the Fatherland (which happened), which in no way fit into the essence of the destructive activities of assorted revolutionaries.

Go ahead. After a couple of years of successful service and ongoing systematic self-education, Sergei Ivanovich entered the Mikhailovsky Artillery Academy, which at that time was a real military university. This educational institution, where world-famous and recognized specialists of the highest level taught, graduated many outstanding creators of Russian and Soviet weapons. Sergei Ivanovich studied at the academy for two years, completed a full course of artillery sciences, in the summer of 1875 he brilliantly passed the final exams and was released from the academy in the first category with promotion to staff captain in field horse artillery, after which he immediately received an appointment to the Tula Arms Plant. Some sources note that the famous plant at that time was one of the most advanced and equipped weapons enterprises in Russia and Europe. The reason for this appointment was precisely Mosin’s excellent scientific and technical training and pronounced penchant for invention. I think the reader has long understood that talking about Mosin’s “homegrownness” as a designer and manager is simply inappropriate.

At the Tula arms factory

By the time Mosin appeared in Tula, the production of the Berdan rifle was in full swing at ITOZ. For five long years, Sergei Ivanovich, having changed several job specialties, in the role of “eternal deputy” was engaged in practical acquaintance with the smallest nuances of weapons production, until in 1877 he finally received his first leadership position. Needless to say that Mosin thoroughly studied all the small arms systems known at that time, while brilliantly mastering all the intricacies of organizing the technological process? And we can certainly confidently say that Sergei Ivanovich perfectly understood the need to develop a rapid-fire repeating infantry rifle. This type of weapon proved its destructive effectiveness in the hands of Turkish soldiers on the battlefields of the war of 1877-1878, when the Russian infantry could oppose the enemy only with single-shot Berdan rifles and even older Krnka rifles converted from flintlocks. The era of magazine weapons was coming.

The whole decade of the 1880s. for Mosin it turned out to be woven from an endless series of tests and a tireless search for the optimal magazine rifle system. At the height of the second scientific and technological (industrial) revolution, leading gunsmiths around the world were engaged in solving one problem - a radical solution to the problem of the rate of fire of infantry weapons. And here is the first success! In 1885, the first rifle designed by Mosin became the best of 119 tested systems, which did not go unnoticed, including. and abroad. But this was only the beginning, although in 1886 experiments with 4.2-line small arms systems were practically stopped in Russia - the whole world was switching to small-caliber weapons, which began to use smokeless gunpowder. The Empire needed a completely new rifle.

Work on a three-line rifle

In the form in which we know the Mosin three-line rifle, the rifle did not appear immediately. First, Sergei Ivanovich designed a single-shot version of the rifle mod. 1889. And only then, after several stages of the competition, the rifle received a single-row magazine with an original cartridge cut-off mechanism. It should be noted here that the experts of that time, like some today’s researchers, also did not consider Mosin to be the sole author of the new rifle. Minister of War Bankovsky imposed the following resolution in the weapons magazine of the Artillery Committee: “The new model produced contains parts proposed by Colonel Rogovtsev, General Chagin’s Commission, Captain Mosin and gunsmith Nagan, so it is advisable to give the developed model a name: Russian three-line rifle of the 1891 model.” .

Three-line arr. 1891 early release (photo by S. Eremeev)

From the point of view of a number of researchers and the official history of Russian weapons, this is a rather controversial resolution. Judging by the compensation payments to Nagant, something could really have been taken from a rifle of his design, although this, I repeat, is a very controversial and difficult point, the discussion of which is beyond the scope of our story (in reality, the design of the clip was taken from the Nagant rifle). It is possible that a number of people on our side were interested in adopting the Nagan system for service for the banal reason of the promised “rollback”, but the Belgian rifle was very expensive and actually had several serious design flaws. An important nuance was the difficulty of adapting it to the production capabilities of our weapons industry. Therefore, in the report to the emperor we still read the following: “The system proposed by Captain Mosin deserves in many respects preference over the system of the foreigner Nagan, both due to its simpler design and cheaper production, and the fact that with its adoption, our factories can sooner begin production of guns.” . As they say, no comments.

And in the order of the military department dated May 22, 1891 it was announced: “On the 16th day of last April, the Emperor deigned to approve the tested sample of a new pack rifle of a reduced caliber and the cartridge for it, as well as the pack clip for the cartridges, and deigned to call this rifle the “3-line rifle of the 1891 model”. Mosin’s surname was still not in the name of the rifle. To be fair, we note that the name of the revolver designed by Nagant, adopted by the Russian army in 1895, did not include the name of the Belgian manufacturer. There were no names of Smith and Wesson in the name of the 4.2-line revolver adopted in 1871 by the Russian army.

Sergei Ivanovich, who shared a state prize with the team of assemblers working with him for his participation in the development of the rifle, allegedly tried to fight for recognition of his authorship of the rifle, but to no avail. It is difficult to say here whether this is true or not, but it makes sense to note that such “oblivion” can be considered quite fair - after all, Mosin was in the public service, received a salary and actually worked on the rifle within the framework of the state technical assignment and by no means alone. The Russian state ideology of that time clearly did not provide for the exaltation of individual gunsmiths. It is also indicative that after the work carried out in the 1930s. modernization of the three-line, it never received the Mosin name. And in one of the Soviet military documents it was directly stated: “7.62 mm rifle mod. 1891, adopted by the Russian army in 1891, was designed by Captain Mosin together with other members of the commission formed for this purpose.”

Imperial decree on the start of production of three-line dragoons

But the main thing was something else - as a result of this whole epic, a domestically developed rifle was adopted into service with the Russian army, after which the most difficult work began on establishing the production of a three-line rifle at the imperial arms factories. The tasks included ensuring complete interchangeability of parts of new weapons, including those produced at different factories, which was a new level of quality for our industry. Sergei Ivanovich began to do this, continuing to root for his brainchild with his soul. But here again we must understand that he could not solve such complex problems alone - a large number of people were working on this at the same time at several factories. Most likely, Sergei Ivanovich acted as a curator and coordinator of the work, which does not at all detract from his merits in this matter. Without going into unnecessary details, I will note that this task was completed by Mosin and “his team” on time and in full.

Gross production of the new rifle began at the end of 1892 at the Tula, Izhevsk and Sestroretsk arms factories. And by January 1, 1903, the rearmament of the Russian army with repeating rifles was completed. In total, the troops received 2 million 964 thousand rifles manufactured at domestic factories, and about 500 thousand rifles from the first batch shipped from factories in France. The long journey of the Russian rifle began across countless battlefields of large and small wars.

Russian soldiers with a Mosin rifle. World War I.

Operational features of the Russian three-line rifle

Some reader comments to the previous article about the Mosin rifle carry a whole set of myths, which let’s figure it out together. Fortunately, now any three-line model is available as a hunting rifle. Of course, the most affordable in all respects is the most common dragoon modification of the rifle (price at the end of 2015 is about 10-25 thousand rubles). These are mainly specimens arr. 1891/30

pre-war and war issues. Carbines in good condition are quite rare, rifles made before 1917 and the 1920s. - even rarer and they are expensive, and sometimes very expensive. Now you can buy a sniper version of the three-line rifle (price 20-40 thousand rubles). As a rule, these are weapons from the Izhevsk wartime plant with a PU sight on a Kochetov bracket.

The tsarist army was armed with three-line rifles of the following modifications: infantry, dragoon and Cossack. The carbine was not considered a full-fledged weapon at that time, but it was introduced in 1907 to arm the crews of machine gun teams, artillerymen, etc. In Soviet Russia, only the dragoon modification was left in service with all branches of the military, although in 1938 a carbine did appear, last modified in 1944 and produced in Izhevsk until about 1950. At the end of the war, the dragoon three-line was also discontinued - its excessive length in a maneuver war was obvious to everyone. During the war, a huge number of “three rubles” were produced, mainly in Izhevsk (in total, about 39 million Mosin rifles were made, according to various estimates). The working conditions for gunsmiths were terrible, and most of the factory employees were women and teenagers, which should also not be forgotten. Nevertheless, the production of rifles was increased to 12 thousand units per day (!), thereby fully providing the Red Army with small arms (we do not touch other infantry small arms in this article).

7.62 mm carbines mod. 1938 and 1944 (photo by S. Eremeev)

After the war, a number of three-rulers were collected from the remaining stock. Our rifles were also produced abroad, in ATS countries, for example, in Poland, Romania and Hungary. All Eastern European “mosinki” are terribly rusty in the barrels and, compared to Soviet ones, have a much shorter lifespan. In service with some units of the Soviet Army is a rifle mod. 1891/30

stood until about the 1960s, after which it was replaced by SKS carbines and Kalashnikov assault rifles (by the way, the names of the main developers were not forgotten in the names of these weapons). In the 1990s. Due to the shortage of SVD, old three-line wartime sniper models were used in combat units of the Russian army in the Caucasus in the 1990s. Interestingly, the three-line rifle has not yet been removed from service in the Russian Army. Here you should not confuse the terms “discontinued” and “withdrawn from service,” because the T-34 tank was withdrawn from service only in the 1990s.

The two photos above show the original three-line sniper rifles from the 1930s. with PE type sights

And this is the most common three-line sniper produced after 1942

Now a little terminology. The name “three-ruler” for our rifle comes from the bore caliber, which is equal to three lines (an old measure of length equal to one tenth of an inch, or 2.54 mm). Accordingly, three lines are equal to 7.62 mm, this is the caliber of our rifle based on the rifling fields. By the way, one line is equal to ten points. Ordinary dots placed in a row close to each other with a fairly sharply sharpened pencil. Difficult? And remember about arshins, vershoks, fathoms and other versts. The inch measurement system was used in the domestic weapons school even after the war (design drawings for the Kalashnikov assault rifle barrel were made in inches). However, remember also how the diameter of water pipes in our homes is still measured? What about car rims? That's right, in inches. And this doesn’t scare or confuse anyone, right?

Next, the design features of the cartridge. You can often hear about the obsolescence of our flange cartridge (which, by the way, is called Russian in the West). They say that because of the flange (welt), it is inconvenient and was already outdated exactly at the time of its development in 1891. In fact, this design was required by the specifics of the combat use of our rifle in cold regions - the “cap” of our cartridge is simply easier to pull it out of the cartridge belt (I know about the clips, but initially the three-line rifle was generally designed in a single-shot version). And the rifles of the armies of France and England in both world wars used cartridges of the same “outdated” design, but for some reason no one considers them obsolete. But we left the cartridge after the Second World War, fortunately they don’t look for good from good, and our armchair experts shouldn’t consider themselves smarter than domestic gunsmiths.

Range. Do not confuse the effective firing range with the effective fire range. On the three-ruler sighting bar there are numbers up to 2 km. This is a very long distance for modern large-caliber sniper weapons with precision optics. Yes, at 2 km a bullet from a three-ruble rifle will reach and kill a person, but at such distances they usually fired in volleys and at targets like an infantry column. But at 500 m from an open sight it is quite possible to hit a tall target with a three-line cartridge if your vision allows you to see the target. During the Second World War, our snipers effectively shot from sniper rifles up to 1 km, but real distances were limited to 400-600 m - the scope was only 3.5x magnification, which is still frankly not enough. The survivability of the barrel of our rifle is more than sufficient - 15-20 thousand shots while maintaining the proper parameters for combat accuracy.

Accuracy and accuracy of combat. I declare with full responsibility that a pre-war three-line rifle with a good barrel and high-quality cartridge is capable of providing accuracy, which is considered an indicator for modern weapons - within 1 MOA (one minute of arc or 30 mm at 100 m distance). I personally got an accuracy of about 1.5 MOA (40-45 mm) at 100 m when shooting from an open sight with a bulk hunting cartridge from a 1928 rifle with the original barrel. I have repeatedly encountered military-issue rifles with an accuracy of no more than 1 MOA. I know for sure about consistently positive results when shooting from a pre-war three-ruler with a rare diopter sight “Fighter” at a distance of 1 km at a tall target and very accurate shots at a small target from the same rifle with an installed modern sight at a distance of up to 1250 m inclusive. This is truly an indicator. So armchair warriors can once again be advised to break away from computer games and find an opportunity to shoot with well-preserved historical weapons before mindlessly repeating well-worn cliches.

Ergonomics. You can often hear that a three-ruler is an inconvenient rifle. Like, the bolt handle is straight and is too far from the shooter. More nonsense from armchair and computer theorists. Believe me, the bent and rearward bolt handle of the almost standard Mauser rifle for many is in no way more convenient than the bolt handle of our rifle. And the practical rate of fire of a three-line rifle in the hands of a trained shooter is comparable to a self-loading rifle - during the war, Sergeant Nemtsov developed a technique for rapid shooting from a Mosin rifle, which allows you to hit a chest target at a distance of 100 m 50 times within 52 seconds! It is one sighting shot per second, with reloading clips! So there’s no point in blaming the mirror...

The three-ruler has a comfortable stock, relatively low weight, excellent balance and good weight distribution. Go to a military souvenir store - now you can buy a model of almost any weapon, which is an emasculated combat model. Twist the three-ruble coin in your hands and throw it up. Many questions will disappear by themselves. Generally speaking, our rifle was at least no worse than its classmates.

In 1934 at VII Party Congress I.V. Stalin was presented with an unusual gift from Tula gunsmiths - a 7.62-mm sniper rifle mod. 1891/30

Conclusion

Probably, it is unlikely that anything would change in the military history of Russia if the name of Mosin was officially added to the name of our three-line rifle. In any case, this weapon is the personification of Russian military glory, this is undeniable. The three-line model, unlike the products of the Mauser brothers, was not initially designed for export and was mainly used by the armies of the Russian Empire and the USSR, not counting several countries of the Warsaw Bloc.

One of the strategic postulates states that the most important quality of any type of weapon is the ability to quickly and completely replenish it during a major war. That is, mass-produced army weapons should be as technologically advanced and cheap as possible. Here it is necessary to recall that before the war, the Red Army began to rearm with semi-automatic weapons, and the modern SVT-40 became the main infantry rifle. But, as you know, at the very beginning of the Second World War, the stocks of weapons available in warehouses and in the army were quickly exhausted for various reasons. And the evacuated factories simply could not cope with the production of a sufficient number of expensive and complex self-loading SVT (yes, there are still a considerable number of brand new SVT/AVT in warehouses from 1944, but at the end of the war the situation made it possible to resume the production of self-loading vehicles).

The rarest example is the Simonov ABC-36 automatic rifle.

SVT-40 (below) and AVT-40 (AVT - Tokarev automatic rifle, a regular SVT, at the beginning of the war it was forced to be converted to allow continuous fire).

Therefore, in the winter of 1942, our gunsmiths had to urgently restore the mass production of the Mosin rifle, while simultaneously bringing its manufacturing technology to the highest possible threshold. At the same time, the rifle did not lose its combat qualities. The front received the required amount of weapons. The three-ruler completely fulfilled its purpose. And, probably, it is no longer so important who has priority in its development. After all, people still call “three rubles” “mosinka”.

Soviet female snipers during WWII with three-line sniper rifles produced after 1942. Notice how beautiful they are!

Yuri Maksimov."