While working on articles in the series "Stories about Weapons", "One's Own Among Strangers" and "Another Lend-Lease", the amount of used materials and photographs has long been calculated in terabytes.
And here, inevitably, you begin to think and compare. Moreover, as we have already written more than once, the history of the appearance of this or that type of weapon was not just a detective story, but with such twists and turns of the plot that Mrs. Agatha Christie would have gnawed her elbows.
But we decided to seriously aim at something that we hardly ever did. For analysis and comparison.
There are things that compare with each other as long as they exist. T-34 and T-IV, I-16 and Me-109D, IS-2 and "Tiger" and so on.
And, what is most interesting, the topics find their readers and still cause heated debate.
Let's say right away that if we start comparing the above characters, it won't be soon. As practice has shown, so many weapons are waiting in the wings that we will leave the T-34 and the "fourth" alone for now. There are no less interesting characters.
And there is such an interesting point. Usually, when it comes to comparisons, for example, of combat aircraft, the bulk of those analyzing for some reason knocks everything together. Front-line fighters, fighter-bombers, the beginning, middle, end of the war usually fall into one heap and a certain "rating" is built from them.
Oh yes, on top of everything is usually polished with a deck A6M2, which is "Zero". You can't do without it. But a certain amount of unscientific fiction has already been said, just as we launched a touchstone. When we divided the planes according to the stages of the war. It turned out fine.
It's the same with artillery. Especially with an anti-tank one. If in the first half of the war, the anti-tank missile system and the 37-mm cannon solved the majority of the tasks, then closer to 1945, such blanks were flying over the battlefields that it was just right to think about sea battles. 75, 76, 85, 88, 100, 105 millimeters … Who is bigger?
Therefore, there is such an idea that for a normal comparison it is necessary to divide all weapons into two huge heaps. Pre-war and military. That is, adopted by countries during the war, even if only as a modification.
And only then, spread out on a tablecloth, compare.
In addition, we think that it is worth remembering that not only the Soviet Union, Germany, Great Britain, the USA and Japan fought. There were also participants who were armed with their own developments. And it's not a fact that technically it was all wretched and lagging behind.
And there were those who did not seem to have fought, but simply supplied others with excellent marks. Bofors, Hispano-Suiza, Oerlikon and others.
In general, there are very, very many nuances, but we think that it is precisely the stage-by-stage examination of weapons samples on a temporary direct basis that can become very, very interesting. Moreover, there will be something to argue about and something to disagree with. But it is in disputes that truth is born, isn't it?
What do we want to aim at? For all.
Ships. By class. Battleships, cruisers, leaders, destroyers, submarines, aircraft carriers.
Tanks. SPG. Armored personnel carriers and armored vehicles.
Artillery by class. Anti-tank, field, howitzer. Mortars, including jet ones.
Weapon. Rifles. Automatic and self-loading rifles. Submachine guns. Hand and easel machine guns. Pistols and revolvers.
Aircraft by class. Separately - aircraft armament, cannons, machine guns, large-caliber cannons and machine guns.
Anti-aircraft guns and guns.
Engineering technology.
Mines, grenades, bombs and so on.
The cycle turns out to be not just big, but huge. But “Stories about Weapons” has been going on for several years, and it seems to be enjoying a certain popularity. So there is a certain confidence that such a cycle will be interesting and useful.
However, everyone in the comments will be able to express their views. We promise to listen. Perhaps the readers will have such proposals that it would be foolish to pass by.
