Hearted Youtube comments on Forgotten Weapons (@ForgottenWeapons) channel.
-
474
-
467
-
465
-
455
-
451
-
449
-
448
-
443
-
440
-
438
-
438
-
437
-
433
-
Well.. that's an LC... we used 'em few; only for do door guards and naval exercises, vessel boarding and that kind of stuff, the three that i'd held felt heavyer than my CETME L, i also felt better with the cheek againist the bakelite stock of the L than againist the LC wires stock, i didn't liked it. Also, that flash hider was the standard on the 98% of the CETME Ls of the Tercio Norte of the Royal Spanish Marine Infantry only the 1st serie CETMEs had that three lugs flash hider that you've in your L, the normal thing on my Tercio was the one on your LC, i think it was the 3rd serie/batch; the sights are the same one than on the L, but on the shooting range we only did 50m 100m and 200m with 'em, while with the L we did from 50m to 400m. The LCs that we had were much more realiable than the Ls, using the same mags and ammo, when we had an stopage with the LCs it used to be the mag; they were less used and less beaten, they still in few number on the inventory of the Armada, the CNP (Cuerpo Nacional de Policía = the cops) and the Guardia Civíl, and thankfully they'd gave few use to 'em too.
432
-
431
-
424
-
422
-
418
-
416
-
414
-
Ian,
Ok, it's way past time for me to say this...
I've been watching your videos for years, and from where I sit, you literally piss excellence.
You're incredibly poised, well spoken, well prepared, with seemingly no major flaws or any big flashy ego ever showing through. Just a superb professional, every time.
You present great quality, very interesting, not overly fancy or complicated, concise and easy to watch videos in an incredible volume. I believe your vids are equally valuable to both novices and experts alike. Your work reigns supreme atop so many others' in a really perfect niche.
I watch a lot of YouTubers across a broad spectrum of interests (many technical), and I must say that you sir, really are among the very best.
You don't seem to let your apparent success "go to your head" either.
Keep up the great work. Stay safe out there.
Jim, a Veteran, Spokane.
413
-
412
-
402
-
399
-
389
-
388
-
387
-
387
-
386
-
379
-
373
-
372
-
371
-
370
-
370
-
367
-
360
-
360
-
358
-
357
-
357
-
357
-
356
-
352
-
352
-
In 1943, USSR actually did some testing comparing Lend-Lease M1s and SVT-40s. The result was heavily in M1s favour, with M1s suffering 1,75% malfunctions compared to 9.75% on the SVT-40s. Indeed, the issues of quality control were well understood by Soviet experts, but unfortunately you cannot get an experienced industrial base without making mistakes. Consider that just 30 years prior the Russian Empire had a literacy rate of 30%. USSR was beating the odds here.
I would like to correct something that Ian said about USSR's adoption and then move away from the SVT. In 1940 the production of Mosin rifles was halted and stopped. The plan was to fully move to the SVT as the standard rifle. Even the sniper variant would be SVT only - the PU scope was developed specifically for the SVT, and it wouldn't be until 1942 that it would be adapted to the Mosin. Mosin used the older PE scope.
When Germany attacked, USSR did not have a running Mosin production. In autumn of 1941 the factories were restarted, and the idea of moving to the SVT fell off specifically because it was more expensive to manufacture than the Mosin. And USSR was having to equip tens of millions of men. The submachine guns were considered a good enough substitute for the volume of fire, since they were easier to produce.
Had USSR entered the war a year later, perhaps it wouldn't have returned to the Mosin. But with less than a year of production experience on the SVT-40, without having fully scaled it up, it was not practical to push ahead with the semi-auto concept if it meant being unable to provide enough rifles for the army. The Red Army had 30 million people serving throughout the war.
350
-
347
-
345
-
344
-
337