The PPS, what does it look like??

[Commissar]

Does anyone know where I could see a picture of the Soviet PPS (Not the PPSh)? I read about it in the Red Army Handbook but it didn't have a picture of it. Thanks.

[David Aitken]

This from Jane's Guns Recognition Guide:

[David Aitken]

Mind you, I have mention of various different PPD's and PPS's... PPD-34/38, PPD-40, PPS-40, PPSh-41, PPS-43... they all seem to follow the basic half-carbine half-SMG design (ie. wooden stock instead of pistol grip), with the exception of that pictured above, which presumably incorporated no wood because, as mentioned in the text, it was produced under siege.

[Commissar]

Any reason why they didn't use the drum mag like on the PPsh? And why is the title caption a PPS and then calls it a PPD?

[ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Commissar ]

[David Aitken]

Let's see... the PPD-34/38 was designed for a box magazine, but was then changed to a drum. the PPD-40 differed mainly in being specifically designed for a drum. These two guns have a short, tubular barrel and receiver and a wooden stock.

The PPSh-41 apparently replaced the PPS-40 to enable the use of either a drum magazine or a box, which is simpler to manufacture. I assume the PPS-40 looks the same as the PPSh-41, with a longer, squarer barrel and receiver than the PPD and an angled muzzle. The PPS-43 is an exception due to its manufacture under siege, presumably the reason for the lack of wooden stock, and the use of a box magazine (again, simpler to manufacture).

I think the reference to the PPD in the text above is a mistake.

[Skipper]

Is your question about this PPS, or about today's Stechkin? The latter is quite a different thing.