Talk:PSS silent pistol
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Revisions for accuracy.
No new information, but I am making a few corrections to the article. Be sure to look over the article so you know what they are. Feel free to comment or question me about them. MVMosin 16:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
In addition to moving that out-of-place sentence to a paragraph where it holds a little more relevance, and correcting the misuse of certain terminology, and adding some relevant links, I also removed this weapon from the "list of Russian weapons" page, and naturally removed the link to that page that was here. Do you have any identity verification on the engineer(s) that designed the weapon? If so, can you verify that he/she/them are/were of Russian origin and citizenship? If the answer to any of those questions is no, then the weapon does not belong on that list or in the "Russian weaponry" category. If the designer(s) is/was/are/were of various republican origin (If, say, for example, one was from Leningrad and the other from Minsk...) then that would make the weapon one of Soviet origin, as opposed to Belarussian or Russian origin.MVMosin 17:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
New information provided and requested.
I have some new information. I am working on getting a verifiable source to reference, but for now, I will post it here, as I am not sure how much objection there would be if I were to actually add such detailed information to the article without verifying it. The information in question follows.
- Due to its covert profile and performance, a water-proof version of the PSS was requested, sometime between 1980 and 1983, for use by the Committee's underwater OSNAZ team, Delfin. The PSS, being silent, effective, reliable, and sporting a very discrete profile, would have perfectly fit the bill for a sidearm for covert amphibious assault scenarios, such as covertly boarding a watercraft, if it had been water-proof. Other standard issue sidearms, such as the Makarov, were reliable and suited Delfin's needs on dry land, but being submerged in water for extended periods of time presented a problem. Delfin's specialised sidearm was perfectly water-proof, but did not work well when not submerged.
- Several attempts were made to create a water-proof PSS. There was even an attempt to exploit the novel mechanisms of the pistol, to allow it to work in and out of water, by changing the barrel and ammunition. In the end, the prototype Spetsialnyj Podvodnyj Samozaryadnyj Pistolet was an amphibious PSS, created by extending and reshaping the internal barrel and shortening the external barrel, and reinforcing and sealing the frame of the weapon to protect the mechanisms from moisture. While this did decrease muzzle velocity, (This was detrimental to the weapon's accuracy, range, and power.) it also allowed it to reliably be fired directly after coming out of the water, as well as keep its novel silencing system. The implementation of interchangable barrels and ammunition types to allow the weapon to function in and out of water was in development when the project was dropped.
- While the prototype could handle being submerged, its novel cartridge could not effectively manage water pressure. At a depth as small as one to two meters, the weapon became prone to misfiring due to the sealed cartridge becoming warped. The piston itself was also notably sensetive, and greater pressure could damage the piston, thus ruining the cartridge.
There you have it; the brief history of the SPSP, or Special-purpose Underwater Self-loading Pistol. I'm trying to get a verifiable source, but the source is rather sensetive.
Now for the new information I'd like to request: the designer is listed as "KGB." Is that sourced? If it is, does the source go into any specifics? Because saying that the Committee itself developed the weapon seems more than questionable... It seems to me that a team of engineers would have been developing this for the Commitee, as such personnel is seldom actually part of the Committee. MVMosin 00:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- In this case since the design would have been commissioned by the KGB with KGB oversight on the project, the designer should probably be listed as the KGB. Especially since I have doubts that the name of the person or people who designed it will become public knowledge.--LWF 00:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I apologise; I do not believe I adequately explained why this is important. I do so presently: the article asserts that the weapon was used by personnel of both the Committee and the Directorate, but a venture of only the Committee. Many people don't know, but these two organisations are notorious throughout Soviet history for faction politics; conflicting idealogy between them lead to power struggles that played huge parts in milestone events throughout the history of the nation. Sometimes, the internal conflicts between them were actually more influential than open conflicts of war.
On that note, I'm going to look into this. If this pistol was really commissioned by one of them, but used by both, then this co-operation is very likely the result of a greater event and the connection will certainly be of value to the article. MVMosin 02:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)