You can follow Dr. Jens Wehner on Instagram, where he posts photos from air planes etc.: instagram.com/jagdfliegen/ Want to see more interviews with experts? Consider supporting me on Patreon or Subscribestar, these supporters make trips like this possible. Additionally, you will get early access (no ads) and other features, more info here: » patreon - www.patreon.com/join/mhv » subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
In such cases I usually ask - had anybody used it too or copied it? And indeed, germans used captured ones and had produced copies. So I guess when an opponent SHOOTING at them still believes it's an idea worth a merit, it says a lot.
@@TheArklyte because Russians used 7.62x25 submachine guns massively. If mainstream would be rifles like in 1940, no German would bother with producing those breastplates.
@@AKUJIVALDO If mainstream would be rifles like in 1940, no German would bother with producing intermediate round rifles either. If machine guns weren't mainstream, then no one would bother with tanks. And if nobody bothered with muskets, crossbow would still be in use. But that's not how technological progress works;)
I think the shape of the armor around the neck is for protection against fragments of bullets which fracture after impact and deflect upwards. Because otherwise they would hit your throat and that can´t be good for you. You can even see this feature in medieval armor where it was used against arrows which deflected from the breastplate. Great Video as always!
Very insightful comment, was going to mention the medieval armor thing myself. Another aspect of this is how the gunshield of the panthers were redisgned as the projectiles deflected from them down on the top armor.
Absolutely for spall/fragmentation going up into the soldiers neck; as pointed out by others, this is visible in historical armours. As for the holes along the top edge, I submit it would be for a collar of some sort (padded, leather, etc), for the comfort of the solder, so he's not having the metal edge rubbing against his skin.
I would also argue its more artillery shrapnel or grenade blasts than bullets. Artillery caused the most casualties in WW2, and the close combat the Soviet SMG shock troops were involved in grenades would probably have been the weapon of choice on both sides. The armor may not be able to stop rifle rounds, but if it could stop or deflect pistol caliber rounds from MP40's, and artillery shrapnel and grenade fragments, then everyone would want it and in close urban fighting it would be very effective. Plus I image the psychological effect of knowing you had something to try to stop deadly prohectiles from hitting your vital organs may have helped those troops adopt a more aggressive mindset
The neck thing is 100% for bullet fragments or any fragments for that matter that bounce up. Medieval breastplates had the same design to protect the neck from deflected arrows and fragments of the arrow.
when it comes to stopping bullet fragments, I've even seen modern lv4 armors plates using combining of an outer metal ring additional to the usual fragment coating to stop bullet fragments.
early WWI body armour didnt have this and fragments of deflected bullets tended to ricochet up into the throat and also the jaw of the soldier wearing it. so they went over to add this to later versions of the body armour in WWI.
@@joe125ful C'mon throat protection is very basic. Although i love Soviet technology, especially their tanks, this ain't the manifestation of their skill.
I’ve seen a photo of a young Russian soldier wearing one of these in an original photo and he clearly had three non penetrating low caliber hits right in the chest. I’m sure they saved a few lives.
It is good to see that the Military History Museum of the Bundeswehr in Dresden has the same battered chirstmas tree that we usually have around the house at March.
Germans weren't fleeing towards the Soviets they were running to the western forces to surrender. The Soviet and German engagements were incredibly more violent
If a bullet is stopped by the plate it may fragment in all direction and you don’t want those fragments hitting the soft parts of the neck from below. Modern armor plates use an anti spalling coating to avoid this
One thing i wish they touched on is how it affected weapon handling. Modern plates are designed to affect shouldering a rifle as little as possible, this thing looks like it would impede somewhat accurate firing from the shoulder
@@Jack72607 there are indeed reports that breastplate made weapon-handling problematic and it was one of the reasons why regular infantry was basically never issued any. Trade off of additional mass and bulk was not worth of meager protection benefit, even when you factor in artillery shrapnel.
I imagine this is kind of like helmets of the period. Not really there to protect against direct hits by rifles, but it can still deflect glancing shots, pistol rounds and shrapnel. A bullet that would otherwise have caused a serious wound in the side will instead hit the highly angled side of the plate and glance of. Shrapnel from artillery that would otherwise have killed a man standing with his torso out of cover to shoot will now bounce of, that sort of thing.
Also very important protective function of a steel helmet would be to hold against big pieces of earth and stones that got blasted into the air by an explosion, falling down with dangerous speed.
@@blorblor5438 yep, I know, that's mostly the reason they got introduced back in ww1. But that is not as big of an issue for the body, nor something that a breastplate protects you from. After all, a lump of hard dirt that causes a nasty concussion on your head is probably just a really nasty bruise on your back, nine times out of ten.
@@blorblor5438 In WW1 helmets proved extremely valuable in the mountains, were it was very easy to have falling rocks raining down on you. Artillery fire doesn't need to be that exact: just fire into the mountain above the enemy troops. I'm not sure but in WW1 it is possible that armies distributed helmets first among mountain troops, or that the need for helmets was first spotted in mountain warfare.
@@BelleDividends afaik the adoption of helmets was not motivated by the mountain troops (the French and Germans didn't really fight in the mountains) but by the sheer number of soldiers stuck in hospitals due to head injury. (not) fun fact, some time after the adoption of steel helmets by the British army, an officer discovered that the % of soldiers in for head injuries was down but that it shot up for the number of death by head injuries, and wanted to have steel helmets unadopted as they were clearly (to him) ineffective, but he just didn't understand statistics
im not sure about it being totally useless, considering how many people died due to fragments of mines, grenades or bombs during ww2. There is also hand to hand combat and let's be clear, you are not going through this with your knife. Fact of having some kind of protection would also mosty likely boost the morale of a person wearing it.
@@chadrowe8452 considering how popular flak vests became, ballistics are also important, the bullets statistically are not the biggest thing u have to worry about.
The psychological value actually seems like a potentially relevent and unexplored factor here. But yeah, I'm guessing this could prove useful against spalling, splinters, and fragments of bullets or explosives i.e. not direct hits.
Ian McCollum mentioned in his video on the MP7 that in the 1980's Russian paratroopers used body armor that protected against pistol ammunition. Not the same armor of course, but maybe still the same doctrine. The idea was that Soviet paratroopers were used for a more tactical role, to land in the rear area's behind the front where they encounter artillery crews, support personnel, etc. People who are mostly armed with personal protection weapons. In those situations it makes sense to use light armor.
WWII's VDV is not the Cold War's VDV. Cold War VDV rolled around in light APCs, IFVs, and mortar carriers. They were intended to go fast and cause mayhem in the rear. They are still the most heavily armed and armoured airborne unit of any nations. They do that to remedy the inherent weakness of leg infantry airborne: once they are on the ground, they are immobile, have weak hand weapons only, and are not protected, except by digging in, which makes them even more immobile The WWII VDV was basically used to reinforce cut off positions, kinda like the American airborne in Bastogne. The role that the Cold War VDV would have done in the offensive was filled by partisans in WWII Soviet offensives. To use the element of surprise to capture and hold key terrains in conjunction with a Soviet ground offensive.
It could stop mild shrapnel and 9mm parabellum and that's what it was made for to stop pistols and SMGs during an assault when Assault Engineers got close to the enemy Trench/Bunker line to take it out and it provided protection that was better than nothing. It protected them well and was effective against P38's, Lugers, MP38/40's, and most of the 9mm weapons and was ok against mild shrapnel.
@BippB yeah, this is fairly good option too. Soviet infantry really loved hth combat, for example - during the operation "Spark" one rifle company cleaned german trenches in height only with sapper shovels and knives.
@@platinumsun4632 after few unsuccesful attacks on german trenches in height one commander was decided to capture enemy positions sneaky. One company crawled to german positions before dawn, and slauthered germans in hth. Unfortunately - other commanders in this part of front didn't trust to possible success of such action, and doesn't supported this company, when they captured trenches. Company held this positions untill they was exhaust their ammunition, and was forced to retreat with heavy losses.
The typical narrative is that the Soviets were under-supplied and didn't care about the lives of their soldiers. That's not really true, and even a cursory glance at the history will debunk that myth. There was 1 instance of the "1 man rifle, 1 man ammo" situation, and that was in a militia unit that was attacked while building fortifications for the regular army. The 'Human Wave' tactics were also a product of poor officer training in the early war. When you compare Russian and German casualty figures, they bear out the idea that an attacking force will take 3x higher losses than a defender. Likewise, the idea that the Soviets won the war by throwing an endless stream of men and material into battle is not dissimilar to American operations in both theaters. Regardless of your stance on their politics/economy, the Cold War era propaganda by NATO countries has really done a disservice to the study of Soviet participation in WW2.
At 12:00 you were talking about the neck guard on the armour and I think you were close when you mentioned ricochets however I would suggest shrapnel from the bullet. When the bullet strikes the armour head on and is stopped then it will fragment in all directions but mostly perpendicular to the plate which would send splinters towards the neck and face. The effect would be amplified at a more oblique angle to the face also the shape of the neck guard looks like it would catch those splinters. Thank you for the video. I really enjoyed it.
The thing is called "nagrudnik" which consists of na-grudj-nik, literally on-chest-thing, which would explain why its only covering the chest and not legs nor back nor head..
I think it was never intended for mass use. Just for certain storm troops in certain operations. It was used at battle of Koenigsberg very successfully. Germans never stopped to impress me as honest and decent people. The review is very unbiased.
The lip at the neck is to stop bullet splatter from spreading up to the head. The lead of the bullet splatters in all directions when a plate is hit. Very damaging. Modern body armor typically uses a coating to capture the splatter.. Some people inaccurately call that spalling, but that is not correct. Spalling is the shattering and projecting the base material, not the projectile. There you go.
The neck is almost certainly to stop bullet frag from hitting the neck when it splashes against the armor. We still see that problem with steel armor today.
Almost everything is better, then absence of armor. We used to laugh, when they gave us soviet-era steel helmets in Lugansk in 2014, but they saved a bunch of lives. When you go in combat without anything to protect you, almost everything can give you an injury, shrapnel, wall fragments. It will not matter much to you, because you will probably be dead, but your fellow comrades-in-arms are surely gonna miss your fire support.
Never been in combat, but I worked a bit on an "industrial" farm. Those padded vests, pants and also heavy shoes made quite a difference, I remember in my regular clothes I felt quite unprotected, then I realized how "thin" Jeans are actually are. Kicking a wood stump with a regular shoe or reinforced boot, makes quite a difference.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I'm no John Rambo either. I hope you'll never be in combat, not a very best place to be and stuff to do. I would say, that digging is more important, than the vest. Some folk are buying expensive armor and thinking, that they do not need to dig deep. And then some vogs landing near you. Stay safe and keep up the good work :)
@@alexanderlisin1134 thank you, I hope so too. Glad you made it out alive. Yeah, from all I read about WW2, digging was always mentioned, I guess some things never change.
Single ceramic plates weighs around between 2.5 - 3.5 kg. So it is nothing compared to todays standarts. Even a helmet with a ballistic visor weighs as much as this armor.
@@eyeswideopen7450 the body armor the Army uses(iotv) weighs about 30-35 pounds(around 16kg) but that's with the vest, plates and kevlar inserts(and I want to say neck, groin and delt protection included in that weight)
I thing to perhaps keep in mind is that today professional soldiers are well-trained, well-fed and picked from a pool of people in good physical shape - carrying around 3.5kg would be considerably harder for an average conscript in soviet army who was not well-trained, poorly fed and just about anyone who was not crippled was drafted.
This armour was used for protection from SMGs and blast fragments - given it was worn by engineers working with explosives and assault troops using grenades at close ranges the armour was intended to help protect in these environments. It was better than nothing but weapons generally outpace armour as what happened.
There is 2 type of granades tho. Frags and HE, Frag for defensive use because you usually have a cover for safe use and HE for assault when you maybe don't have a good cover and can be closer to the granade. This body armour is more likely against pistol cartriges and bayonetts or maybe even for enemy frags.
Very much like a steel helmet. Not gonna stop a direct hit at all, but it will protect you from ricochets, shrapnel, and so on. People think that body armor is supposed to make you Iron Man, totally bulletproof. Even modern body armor worn by the US military is only pistol-proof. It's hard to stop a rifle round without weighing a literal ton. Until Space Marines are a real thing, this kind of protection is the best we've got, and any advancements have been in weight reduction and flexibility.
MP40 is usually used within 50m. I would say the intent of this armour was protection from hand grenade and artillery fragmentation, especially in urban fighting. Probably why it was liked in Stalingrad.
At 50m a 9mm bullet still retains 80% of energy at muzzle. If the armor was reliably stopping the shots at 50m, then it would likely stop most shots even point-blank.
@@walterscientist Even in WW2 times powder loads were consistent enough to rely on. If it can only stop a 9mm at 50m, and not closer, then you’ll best not try to use it for that inside 50m.
@@josephk.4200 That is not valid assumption, if it stops reliably a perpendicular hit at 50m, then at lower ranges it will still stop shots as long as the hit is not perfectly perpendicular. Deflection from perpendicular of around 15 degrees is enough to reduce penetrating power by 20%.
@@walterscientist You have a fair point. But the takeaway is that this armour is really intended as a sort of flak jacket for close combat where fragmentation is one of the biggest sources of casualties. Just handguns and pistols being less likely to penetrate at close range doesn’t matter as much when most troops are armed with rifles.
The problem of hard body armor vs soft body armor is that hard body armor tends to turn bullets into small pieces of shrapnel, so you need neck and groin protection like this bib had. With soft body armor the bullet tends to fragment less and any fragments are cought by the layers of soft armor. Che out Oxide's channel where they test modern armor with soft and rigid parts and it shows why you'd want neck protection when using solid armor inserts.
8:10 I would tend to agree with the assessment that the “new submachine gun” is the STG-44, as the Soviets seemed to consider what we call the assault rifle an outgrowth of the submachine gun. (Basing this off of the fact that the AK was adopted as a replacement for the PPSH-41 and PPS-43)
Most high-powered bullets will go through a piece of 1/4 steel plate like butter. Lower powered bullets, depending on the range and how much energy was left in the bullet would likely still sit the wearer on their backside. Then if a raw plate did stop the projectile, it might not stop the energy of the impact from causing organ damage. During the American Civil War and WW1, they tried to develop steel body armour, but I don't think it worked against high-powered bullets because it wasn't thick enough and then the weight factor came into it ...... they probably couldn't carry a 1/2 to 3/4 inch plate on their chest and still be effective. Tail gunners in bombers wore vests made of titanium, but they were seated and I still doubt it would have stopped a 50 cal round.
The neck protection is probably to protect from ricochet, you can see design like this in medieval armor to prevent arrow from bouncing up in the neck or chin area, and it's the same principle that you need to keep in mind while desia tank at the time to prevent shot traps so it would make sense, and the bolt hole looks like fixation emplacement for the missing padding that you can see in photos. Great video as always and congrats for your book btw!
The smaller holes in the neck part of the breastplate are for securing padding, originally this armor came with a stuffed canvas padding held on by split pins, the larger hole in more or less the center of the breastplate doesn't appear to have served a function, at least I've never seen a contemporary photo of one of these armors with a hole like that. Also, if we take a closer look @ 0:48 or 9:50, the reflection from the ceiling lights reveals an indentation around the hole, which would indicate that it was made from the outside, and probably by something that came in a lot faster than whatever made the dent above. Now, there _were_ versions that had a 5th rivet on the front, but it was located higher and in the center, and the hole looks too big to be a rivet hole anyway. I reckon it could possibly be from a heavy machine gun like the DHsK 1938 or MG 131 or an anti-tank rifle like the Russian PTRD-41 or PTRS-41 - the German AT rifles fired a smaller caliber, or a lot bigger. If you could measure the hole accurately, we might be able to figure out if it was made by a firearm. EDIT: And as others have said, yup, the raised edge protecting the neck, is there to catch fragments, or prevent low-velocity direct impacts in the neck, it's been used for hundreds of years.
Oddly I'd just been reading about Japanese use of body armour in the 30s and into WWII. Originally the Japanese began implementing body armour during the Battle of Shanghai. Navy Units purchased armour privately, before these suits were transferred to Army units performing sentry duties. Apparently they seen use by these units in police actions - where they proved useful battling Chinese elements armed with Mauser pistols. These original vests were based on WWI era German vests, though over the years other vests would be used at Shanghai of various makes (notably one model was based on brigandine / scale mail). A simplified version of the German style vests covered in leather also saw use. During WWII the style of armour was formalised. Made up of steel plates covered in hessian. Even these though seen variation, with multiple models introduced. Of note there was leg armour also available (something I'm not aware of being used elsewhere). As the war continued, in its last years more types entered service - of an even simpler model. I'd note that its speculated that the Japanese also put older - far older - sets of armour into use. Whilst there's many photographs of Japanese soldiers wearing Samurai armour during sword training, apparently some of it made its way into combat use as well in China. This forum topic has loads of information: waralbum.ru/bb/viewtopic.php?id=1051
Thanks for a video on this fascinating piece of equipment! As of sources with more information - have you considered doing (virtual) interviews with people from russian military museums as they might have a deeper insight-knowlegde of their own historical equipment?
I own one in my collection and it stopped around 14 impacts before being pierced, and the fragment/bullet that pierced it came from behind so it wasn't gonna help much against that one anyway.
Neck protection is used since ages against ricochet, but more specifically in the time of firearms, the problem is that an impacting bullet can shatter and project a ring of fragments parallel to the armored surface, that will slice open anything in its path. A modern way to prevent this is to put a layer of rubber on the hard armored surface, to catch the fragments at the point of impact of the bullet. To visualize, imagine that you drop a balloon filled with milk on a hard floor. On impact, the milk will squirt sideways, in all directions parallel with the floor. If you want to protect your feet from this flow of milk, you can place an obstacle that will stop the milk. That's the neck protection. Or, you can place a fluffy carpet on the floor, that will catch the flow of milk once the balloon explodes on impact. That's the rubber. Another problem with bullets is that they don't ricochet like a snooker ball; they don't leave the surface with the same angle as they were coming. Instead, they tend to leave the surface with a trajectory that is parallel to that surface. Hence the high probability that they go for the neck after impact, because the surface of the upper part of the armor is actually directing the bullet upwards even if it was coming almost straight.
@@videodistro I'm talking more about debris from demolitions. Combat engineers were tasked with blowing up fortifications, going to be around lots of metal and other debris flying around. Lots of vets from WWII had shrapnel implanted just under the skin for life, probably could be stopped or deflected from a layer of steel.
Those things was made specifically for assault engineers not just any combat engineers. But you are correct it was assumed to stop shrapnel at the first place
In Leningrad during blockade was invented improved variant of SN-42. It wasn't mass produced, however, but was used together with SN-42 until end of the war. Named Pz-ZIF-20(panzirnaja zashita zavod imeni Frunze, basically "panzer protection, Frunze factory"), it was composed of multiple pieces for extra flexibility, had increased weight and protection. Later on it was used to create new version of SN-42 - SN-46, that was produced after war.
Also: wouldn’t the deflection of even low-velocity or just very very small splinters from grenades etc away from the neck mean the gorget made sense in the context in which it was successfully employed?
I remember a story from the siege of Budapest. A soviet unit, wearing the SN 42 armed with PPS mashice pistols, tried to clear a narrow street near the Buda castle. One of a defender, a young hungarian military cadet shooted them all with his 39M Király machine pistol, roughly at 100 meter. So yes this vest is good against 9mm parabellum but the mauser export 9x25mm cartrige is 50% more powerful, and even so used by a long barreled gun. Shame that so few made of that exellent gun. And sorry for the bad english! :D
I think that such armor protection could be realy useful in hand to hand combat, which was common in urban fighting. The knife or bayonet could have hard times penetrating that. The wound from field shovels were common in Stalingrad, from what I heard, so in this instances, this armor could give soldiers advantage.
Also effectiveness against grenades. In that fighting grenades were extremely prevalent, and being able to stop fragments from disabling or killing troops with the body armor would be incredibly effective
Neck thing is anti splatter protection. Similar to French medieval armor. In this case Bullets disintegrate on the impact and splatter can cut soft tissue of the neck. So this part saves your life. Nowadays armor plates that are made of ar500 and such use rubber/tar coating, similar to bed liners to capture the splatter. This works but multiple hits will remove the coating and therefore this old solution might be even better.
During WW1 armors were mostly used as a protection against shrapnel and not really pistol caliber since no one else really had sub-machine guns then Germany itself. So the neck protection with Soviet armor probably served the same purpose against shrapnel from grenades and artillery as well as from bullet fragments and ricochets.
Tokarev rounds are actually used to test body armor today, since it’s a fairly high velocity pistol round. If it could stop them, it might not be too bad
Die Übersetzung ist - Stalnoj Nagrudnik = Stahl Überbruster (Steel Overchester), was used by Surmtruppen ... die liefen und wurfen RGDs in die Schutzgräbern um die Leute von Granatensplitern zu schutzen, weil die liefen entlang deutsche Gräbern in die Richtung von Granatenexplosionen und könnten mit den eigenen Granatensplitern verletzt zu werden :(
The neck-guard should have stopped bullet splatter from pistol bullets shattering on the surface of the breastplate from injuring the wearer's neck. Similar features are found on plate garnitures from the late medieval/gothic periods (the V shaped feature on the upper breastplate, deflects ricocheting arrows and splinters from shattered arrows away from the neck), modern steel plate body armour panels have a thick rubber "truckbed like" layer to catch tiny bits of bullet splatter instead of a lip (like the SN42) or V-shaped feature (like medieval/gothic armour).
the shape of the neck is to prevent spalling. pistol rounds tend to hit and break up and spray lead in all directions. without the neck design, as it is, the lead would hit splatter and enter the neck. it also helps for grenade fragmentation, as well as for bayonet attacks. the knife can hit and slide against the steel and stop at the ridge at the neck. this design is based on medieval armor
Did the Soviets test the armor by itself or covered by a greatcoat and backed by a uniform? That might have made at least some difference in lethal penetration capability.
SN-42 wouldn't fit over a great coat anyway. It is not that large. You can probably fit it over a padded jacket but it also will make any sort of weapon handling issues much worse. Breastplate interfered with shouldering rifles quite significantly.
The neck gaurd is to protect from spalling. When shrapnel or bullets hit plate they brake up and separate into pieces following the length of plate straight through the chin,head etc. Even medieval armour had spalling protection sometimes a V shape on the chest to deflect fragments.
There is a picture in the Finnish SA-Kuva photo archive of a captive Russian child soldier and the Finnish soldiers are holding his body armor which had been shot at once but the armor blocked it.
Dr. Wehner mentions fragments and ricochets of bullets, but doesn't assume splinters from bricks, asphalt etc., which I think are more common in urban warfare than direct gunfire. This would also explain complicated neck protection (those splinters coming mostly upwards from ground level) as well as episodic usage of this type of armour - from Stalingrad to Königsberg/Warsaw/Berlin the Red Army didn't see much fighting in big cities.
@@Шарнхорст bad wording from me. What I meant was that urban combat in the East between Stalingrad and late war was relatively rare (with some exclusions, of course) and production of specialized storming equipment wasn't the priority (in fact, there is a research in Russian - planned production of SN-42 started in October 1942, peaked at winter 42/43, then reduced and was stopped in September 1943 - until late 1944, when it was reintroduced and probably continued until the end of war).
SN-42 is an outstanding thing for its time. It could stop shrapnel and pistol caliber bullets at close range. If the USSR could produce them for every soldier, this would be the greatest achievement of all countries at that time, that could have saved many lives. But of course this cannot be done for the 12 million army.
Most casualties (about 80%) back then were caused by artillery, and not necessarily splinters. Another "champion" would be a rifle rounds fired from MGs. These things have limited value seriously restricting mobility at the same time. The may be good in some niche roles like CQB only.
@@nikitaananjevas1614 I came across statistics that only 15% of the losses were from hand weapons. So the massive use of SN-42 would play a big role. For example, the nylon body armor used by the United States in Korea and Vietnam significantly reduced the percentage of deaths, and these vests were designed only against shrapnel. SN-42 could stop the burst from a submachine gun at close range.
Bernhard on the right was on to something. Jens on the left was not taking into account that most bullets that don't ricochet on that plate are going to splash and spall. This effect shoots lead in circle outward from the impact point. This often sends lead straight up your face. That neck protector is likely to deflect lead coming up from beneath towards the wearers face when 9mm rounds are splashing on it.. Very cool video, subscribing
The Neck protector piece is there to protect the soldier against bullet fragments, that forms after the 9x19 bullet impacts steel, flattents and then shatters into sharp shrapnel
the neck protection is for spall. when a round hits steel armor the round disintegrates and much of the spall is sent directly upwards. this protects the soldier from getting a neck full of metal.
Well I've not seen test of the WWII Soviet steel armor but the WWI Imperial German Sappenpanzer would definitely stop pistol bullets which would definitely be a big deal in WWII with many pistol caliber Submachine guns in use.
Wow! 740 comments! Thanks for the very interesting video on an unusual piece of Soviet equipment. It was very exciting to see you make a video like this as its a departure from the usual topics of WW2. ANd judging from the comments there are many people interested in these lesser known WW2 artifacts. I would love to see more. Perhaps a video on Soviet assault engineer tactics and equipment? German pioneer squad tactics in urban areas? Or especially any unusual assault equipment. And finally, or years i have been looking (with little success) for information on what I can only describe as German "hunter/sniper" teams which were using the first infrared scopes. I know pre-operational IR sights were used on German tanks, but could only see 500m in darkness which was no better than conventional high power arc lighting.
the new bulletproof vests are no longer heavy Bulletproof vests and tactical vests in the military should be combined at the same time Pockets should be placed over the bulletproof vest to fit the magazines
I think MHV is right about the neck thing protecting against ricochets and bullet splinters. It's basically the same thing as the V-Thing on medieval breastplates. (Todd did a great video a while back where they shot arrows at a breastplate) Also if you listen closely, you can hear Dr. Wehner's Saxon accent through his English.
I would say 9x19 *had* worse penetration than 7.62x25 at the time. But since then 7.62x25 fell into obscurity, while 9x19 had a lot of advancements since WW2. Between 7N31 and some other AP 9 mil out there i would say it's no longer the case.
before I watch the video I'm going to guess that it's main purpose was to reduce losses from artillery fragmentation. Having a steel helmet is good but also having a chest piece would further decrease the likelihood of a casualty too. Huh I didn't think it would even hold up to 9mm so that's pretty good for a paratrooper dropping behind the lines
It is a German one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-emelUXi-SWQ.html There might be more, but I need to go to the Archives first, since for German flamethrowers there seems to a lot of misinformation out there.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Oh yes . . . a Flammenwerfer 41 according to the photo I just found. I'm used to seeing photos of the Flammenwerfer 35 which had a vertical tank. When I saw the horizontal tanks and the green paint I leapt to the conclusion it was Soviet. I've done some cursory searches on the internet but can only find passing references to Soviet infantry flamethrowers and how there were deployed.
12:30 "I can't see it..." That's right! I've been to Dresden MHM last year. Many of the items shown are mounted up high on the wall, so you can't really see them. Also the little text with explanations are hight up on the wall with small lettering. They're nearly impossible to read! I don't know who's s***d idea this was.
the neck thing is just like medievil armor design. they had the same thing ilbiet for a different reason. in that case. it was meant to stop arrows from deflecting off the armor and skidding up into your throat. so that piece jutting out would stop the arrow and redirect it away from your neck. in this case. the piece is to deflect fragments created from a rifle bullet hitting the armor.
Even if I knew it wouldn't stop a rifle round I'd rather go into battle with it than without. I mean, I know my seatbelt isn't going to save me from every possible accident I could have in my car but it'll certainly increase my chances should things go wrong
There are certainly medieval breastplates that have a similar flattened V-shaped projection for catching arrows that ricochet upward to the face. That does seem the most likely explanation.
I bet wearing this thing caused its share of injury too, I can easily see someone getting a broken collar bone, rib(s) even knock a few teeth out somehow diving onto the ground with that attached to them. And what could be better than a wonderfully conductive and hard material wrapped around your torso in a place with horribly cold conditions. I like the collar though.
The neck protector is to stop ricochet from shattered projectiles splashing up under the wearers throat.Anyone who has shot metallic targets will verify this.
