New Speacial forces pictures

[petty officer1]

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/71/5168/20060227/1447/289469/289469.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/71/5168/20060227/1447/289469/289471.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/71/5168/20060227/1447/289469/289472.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/71/5168/20060227/1447/289469/289473.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/71/5168/20060227/1447/289469/289498.jpg

[Red Guard]

it's funny how they train special forces after people went to some 3rd rating south american country.............

[petty officer1]

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060320/1472/294500/294500.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060320/1472/294500/294501.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060320/1472/294500/294504.jpg

[warkuo]

Compare to there...thee Chinese special force dont look that good :roll:

[Liberator]

Compare to there...thee Chinese special force dont look that good


Might not look good... But Looks does not do a thing once in action. What you really need to look at is how well they do in action.

[Gollevainen]

Hey guys, try to keep on focus to the fact that we dont allow oneliners in the actuall defence discussion! Only place where we look them trough our fingers, is the members club room.

[Shingy]

Are the Chinese SF any good in comparison to the west?
I would just like to point out the 6th pic with the guy jumping looks really funny.
Those pics of those SF what country are they from?

[Finn McCool]

Those guys were from the US! I think the second one was from the Invasion of Panama, but the first one was probably just training.

[Nethappy]

Well If any of you from china you mind of see a TV show about there the defence force. Part of it is bullshit.. i can tell. But something did get me interested, a group of what they call SF scale up a 10 storage building, fully arm and armoured, without using anything apart from his own body. It was fun to watch.

[PiSigma]

i wouldnt say china have crappy SF just from a few publicly released pics that have troopers posing for the camera. didn't they have SF competitions every year for SFs from a lot of nations. china always take 1st or 2nd in a lot of the events in there.. can't remmeber what its called. but that's what prove if the guys are good not some pictures.

[Nethappy]

I am sure I dun wanna go up aganist any of these guy in hand to hand combat.

Yep it hand to hand trying to type in a hurry

[Shingy]

I am sure I dun wanna go up aganist any of these guy in hang to hang combat.

Why? i know they are trained in a martial art but im not sure what it is so i have no idea whether it is deadly or not.
I think its hand to hand combat right? unless im completely mistaken on what you meant

[ger_mark]

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060320/1472/294500/294501.jpg

what is that guy doing there?

he seems to be very confident with his "weapon" since his friend is hiding in the bush :p

[MIGleader]

i wouldnt say china have crappy SF just from a few publicly released pics that have troopers posing for the camera. didn't they have SF competitions every year for SFs from a lot of nations. china always take 1st or 2nd in a lot of the events in there.. can't remmeber what its called. but that's what prove if the guys are good not some pictures.

I will have to disagree. Actual combat is what proves SF's true abilities and value. Chinese SF's always score well because of their discipline and ability to take pain.

[Nethappy]

Discipline and ability to take pain is a very important part of SF. When we are out there we migh be 100 km away from closest friendly force. There is a chance that you not going to get airlift to the closest field hospital is ya get wound anytime soon, and in the case of most minor wound you a expected to keep on fighting and at 110%, cos they need every man they have.

Discipline, training, specialize skill, durable and endurance it what get a SF ready for actual combat. Actual combat is where you gian experience. Your experience is as important as your training but your discipline is your most important thing.

[BruceLee]

What's up with the guy jumping through the fire, they should take pics of actual special forces guys instead of paid actors jumping through fake fires in a photo studio. I mean, come on, you can totally tell that the guy w/ the fire is not a soldier.:nutkick: :nana: :nono: :nutkick: :spam:

The pix are pretty cool actually, considering that they are americans. Especially the first and second pictures. I can tell that the first two are americans, but the rest are pretty awesome and hardcore!! Cheez Whiz rulez all!!!


:china: :china:

Just to clear thinz up, im not at all related to the original Vince Lee.


:) :) :) :) :)

[swimmerXC]

BruceLee
PLEASE READ THE RULES TO THIS FORUM, IF YOU WEREN'T SUCH A NEW MEMBER YOU WOULD ALREADY HAVE 2 WARNINGS (1 WEEK BAN)... TRIPLE POST AND ONE-LINERS!

[Nethappy]

What's up with the guy jumping through the fire, they should take pics of actual special forces guys instead of paid actors jumping through fake fires

It a standardize training for most elites force not just SF to jump though fire and run though fired door etc. It quite a nice method to get the soldier mentality prepare for the future. It take a lot of guts to run and/or jump though a burning environment which the heat and flame a normally quite intense.

[BadKarma]

I think Chinese SF are over-rated compared to anything in the West, specifically the U.S. America has over 30 years of unconventional combat experience underneath its belt. It's SF operates around the world in a variety of roles from advisers to counter terrorism. For all the talk about their military, China hasn't been in a single armed conflict since its disasterous run in with Vietnam in the late 70's. No experience.

[MIGleader]

American SOF so far have had limited engagemnet with a real enemy. Grenada? not a real fight. Similar goes for many other "conflicts". The last time american SOF's got a real fight was vietnam, earlier than china's run in

China does send its troops to foreign nations as UN peacekeepers. It also deploys SOF in xinjian against terrorist and rebels. troops also serve as protection for dignataries if needed.

[drunkhomer]

American SOF so far have had limited engagemnet with a real enemy. Grenada? not a real fight. Similar goes for many other "conflicts". The last time american SOF's got a real fight was vietnam, earlier than china's run in

wut about first gulfwar, somalia, kosovo, afghanastan, present day iraq?

[Disguise]

One thing that disturbs me is how they use bright yellow buckets in one of the shots. I certainly hope that's not part of standard PLA gear... As for experiance in asymetrical warfare, all the PLA really did in the Chinese Civil War and the WWII was guerilla warfare. They ought to have some experiance in that field by now.

[MrClean]

Limited? Well then name me one country who has had any more past SOF experience. Otherwise the U.S. has the most experienced and trained SOF personnel in the world. And I'm not just saying that because I'm American, and totally biased at that. But I have actually had the opportunity to meet a couple different guys that are REAL SF guys. Like I knew a couple dudes who were Rangers, and then there was another guy who was part of a USMC recon squad. And let me tell you, they were definatly some of the most professional guys that I have ever met in my life....

I mean, they were serious, totally kill you with their bare hands kind of guys, but then again they were also really cool. Let's just say I'm happy that they are on our side

[RedMercury]

I think Chinese SF are over-rated compared to anything in the West, specifically the U.S. America has over 30 years of unconventional combat experience underneath its belt. It's SF operates around the world in a variety of roles from advisers to counter terrorism. For all the talk about their military, China hasn't been in a single armed conflict since its disasterous run in with Vietnam in the late 70's. No experience.
Your last statement just destroyed the credibility of the rest. Look up the Sino-Vietnam war of 84.

[Nethappy]

Limited? Well then name me one country who has had any more past SOF experience. Otherwise the U.S. has the most experienced and trained SOF personnel in the world. And I'm not just saying that because I'm American, and totally biased at that. But I have actually had the opportunity to meet a couple different guys that are REAL SF guys. Like I knew a couple dudes who were Rangers, and then there was another guy who was part of a USMC recon squad. And let me tell you, they were definatly some of the most professional guys that I have ever met in my life....

I mean, they were serious, totally kill you with their bare hands kind of guys, but then again they were also really cool. Let's just say I'm happy that they are on our side


Boy, I can kill you with my bare hands if I need too and I am just a reserve. It doesn't really mean much.

Well have your got the opportunity to meet SF guy from other countries. If not your statement doesn't have much credibility.

SF experience hmm. Half the time we wouldn't even know what they are doing. It clandestine operation.

[isthvan]

Limited? Well then name me one country who has had any more past SOF experience. Otherwise the U.S. has the most experienced and trained SOF personnel in the world. And I'm not just saying that because I'm American, and totally biased at that. But I have actually had the opportunity to meet a couple different guys that are REAL SF guys. Like I knew a couple dudes who were Rangers, and then there was another guy who was part of a USMC recon squad. And let me tell you, they were definatly some of the most professional guys that I have ever met in my life....

I mean, they were serious, totally kill you with their bare hands kind of guys, but then again they were also really cool. Let's just say I'm happy that they are on our side

Name one country? OK. United Kingdom. SAS ring a bell? Russia (Specnaz)? Australia? French African operations? Israelis? Germans? Ask some Middle East terrorist (preferable Palestinian) would he like to meat some GSG-9 boys… He would probably wet his pants and run like hell…
US have great SF, with great equipment and training but you must agree that some other countries have SF in same league… Maybe they have smaller SF but they are still very capable… And they too have a lot of experience…

[Gollevainen]

Ok, how many of you have served in SOW forces of any country? This isent forum for kids to argue whos commandoes are best...they all are trained military profesionalist, well suited for dedicated task given to them and no one should go and spread BS that some of them arent good and mine's are better. There are no way to compare these units, unless they engage each others in real combat situation. In some occasion, there have been held various SOW 'cahmpionship games', and usually these dedicated 'elite' troopers gets beaten up by beer-bellyed estonian reservist.
So as we lack any first hand info over this matter, its rather pointless to argue over it.

Ps. AND these guys are mostly for looking good in TV, if you wanna idiolise some real soldiers, try artillery mens, the ones that actually makes the difference in wars:D :D ;)

[Nethappy]

I got invited to a mini contest the other day, as thet know I used to serve in the Aust. Army. 1st cdo regt Australia army reserve, yeah have fun. I still got my ass kick in by a PLA Solider. These guy are deadly in hand to hand combats. Better then anything in I seen in the aussie army.

Ps. AND these guys are mostly for looking good in TV, if you wanna idiolise some real soldiers, try artillery mens, the ones that actually makes the difference in wars
This is very true, TV make SOF seem some super soilder which can do anything. But most special forces are train for a specific main role while all the other become 2nd. For example the 1st cdo regt is consider a SF, but trust me they suck in SR, they suck in hostage rescue. But we are 2nd to non in recovery and DA mission. We will go anywhere to destory or recocery anything we need too.. hehe

[BrotherofSnake]

Similar goes for many other "conflicts". The last time american SOF's got a real fight was vietnam, earlier than china's run in


The Battle of Mogadishu.

American SOF so far have had limited engagemnet with a real enemy. Grenada? not a real fight.
How wasn't Grenada a real fight?

U.S. Special Operations Forces conducted a lot of missions in both Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Also, remember the four man SEAL team that was almost wiped out about a year ago? That was not a limited engagement.

[Gollevainen]

This is very true, TV make SOF seem some super soilder which can do anything. But most special forces are train for a specific main role while all the other become 2nd. For example the 1st cdo regt is consider a SF, but trust me they suck in SR, they suck in hostage rescue. But we are 2nd to non in recovery and DA mission. We will go anywhere to destory or recocery anything we need too.. hehe


Yeah, hostage rescue operations comes usually the most reported action of different SOW troops, and unfortuanetly failures in these seems to catch more headlines than succeded ones. Like in here finland, We have this dedicated SWAT type of police unit called KARHU, which have managed to do most unfortunated incidents of police shooting criminals (which is very rare in finland only about ten cases in last twenty years). And the media gives an image of them that when ever they enter the crime scene things begun to explode and heads begun to drop...

And in other cases, when dedicated military SOW are used in these operations, lie in Russia...in the moscow theather and in Beslan...these Spetnaz are propaly trained to wartime rear area longrange patrols or sabotage/recce missions...to thorw them to do work of Police authorityes...you have disastour in your hands and kids in US fall into false feeling that their 'cooler' units are much better than lousy russians.

[Nethappy]

One may point I want to point out is you can't judge how good any group of SOF is just because of the news, an offical report of an country or TV becos half the time is BS.

NEWS - Like to make thing seem bigger then it is.
TV - It BS from the start.
Offical government report - Hmm some country like to make themself better then they really are, while other try to hide how good they really are.

Every SOF is train for a specific, you can't really said who is better. They all have thier up and down.

For example, the US SOF have the best training and equipment but some could argue they are over depend on techology.
They said Chinese SOF down have the experience but some would argue they do with CT operation in xinjian and has gain a vast amount of experience in guerilla gain from WW2, Chinese Civil War and vietnam.

Guerilla warfare is one of the most important tactic use by SOF nowaday and it be one of the mosst important for many year to come.

[petty officer1]

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308130.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308131.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308132.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308133.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308134.jpg

Mod edit: merged with existing chinese special forces thread

[petty officer1]

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308135.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308136.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20060501/1540/308130/308137.jpg

Man! when Was this unit started? They looks great!

[New2u]

They just formed because of the 2008Olympics...
and their are not the army's special forces, they are with the PAP.

Here some pics of the army's special forces.
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showgallery.php/cat/3127
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showgallery.php/cat/3127/page/26
ect..

http://forum.china-defense.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1635&d=1146376392
http://forum.china-defense.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1636&d=1146376392
and with NATO guns...

[MIGleader]

The Battle of Mogadishu.


How wasn't Grenada a real fight?

U.S. Special Operations Forces conducted a lot of missions in both Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Also, remember the four man SEAL team that was almost wiped out about a year ago? That was not a limited engagement.

yes, as i remember, mogadishu was a more of a failure than sucess, and eventually led to u.s pullout. And these were just a bunch of somalian teenagers on drugs. Nothing like the PLA spec ops.

in grenada, the u.s marines and rangers were sent in. no spec ops.

Snow wolf was started in December 2002, but not revealed to public until last weekend

[petty officer1]

New2u They just formed because of the 2008Olympics...
and their are not the army's special forces, they are with the PAP.

Here some pics of the army's special forces.
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/...y.php/cat/3127
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/...t/3127/page/26
ect..

http://forum.china-defense.com/attac...5&d=1146376392
http://forum.china-defense.com/attac...6&d=1146376392
and with NATO guns...

Why are they using G36 on one of your picture? And one more question. Why In some picture chinese special forces don't wear any type of gloves? Glove have two good thing.

One, Cover the hand that is light in color, so sniper can't pick you up.
Two, protect you hand.

In that http://forum.china-defense.com/attac...5&d=1146376392 picture they wear gloves. Are they real special forces in china, or some other asian country, or just military fans?

[BrotherofSnake]

yes, as i remember, mogadishu was a more of a failure than sucess, and eventually led to u.s pullout. And these were just a bunch of somalian teenagers on drugs. Nothing like the PLA spec ops.

Uh, most the Somalis were battle hardened vets with more experience than some of the Delta guys.

The mission wasn't exactly a failure, in that U.S. forces captured some of Aidid's top lieutenants.
in grenada, the u.s marines and rangers were sent in. no spec ops.

Snow wolf was started in December 2002, but not revealed to public until last weekend
Last I checked, Rangers were under SOCOM.

Also, U.S. Navy SEALs participated in the invasion of Grenada.

[Finn McCool]

You're all forgetting something...

In your disscussions about the experience levels of various special forces units, you are forgetting that many of the operations undertaken by these units, especially US Special Forces/CIA paramilitaries, SAS, Chinese units are never revealed to the public. So for all you know, they could have been quite busy, but it never came to the surface.

[Kampfwagen]

An excelent point Finn. And another good point about the Russian SF from Gon (honestly, I cant really remember his full name. I stink with remembering titles and names).

To generalize that the Somali's were just drug-addicted teenagers is generalizing the point. Many of them had experence in civil conflicts and many of the higher ups trained their soliders bassed on Afghani Muhadjeen tactics. It's kind of obvious when you look at how they brought down those two UH-60 helicopters with RPG-7's.

And SEAL's were prominent during the intervention of Greneda. They were the ones who extracted the President and his family if I remember correctly. They did engage ground troops and a BTR-60 V.I.A AC-130 gunship suppourt.

The 75th Ranger Regiment is considered a Special Operations group under the USASOC (United States Army Special Operations Command. A.K.A SOF under SOCOM). They conduct traditional or special operations actions including seizure of enemy airfeilds and other vital positions and conducting direct action operations.

As far as comparison goes, you really can not compare so easily. If I had to say the BEST ones bassed on operations that I personaly have heard of? I would say that SAS is definately one of the top contenders. Delta Force, from what little information I have heard of (Including acting as sonic-gun weilding guards to alien slaves in underground tunnel networks...This of course not one of the deciding factors) they definately rank up there. The Exploits of the Aussie SAS and Canadian special forces groups (Such as their JTF units and their Sniper units) are also coming to light. They as well seem very skilled. I don't know much about GSG-9 or KSK, and even less about GIGN. But from what I hear, they are very exclusive clubs.

The only Special Forces I can really knock would have to be the North Korean SF groups. They are a resource squandered abducting prominent South Koreans to whatever bizzare whim Kim Jong Il has at the time.

[Nethappy]

In your disscussions about the experience levels of various special forces units, you are forgetting that many of the operations undertaken by these units, especially US Special Forces/CIA paramilitaries, SAS, Chinese units are never revealed to the public. So for all you know, they could have been quite busy, but it never came to the surface.

I been stating this point for a while. I mention clandestine opt of a while now.

Why are they using G36 on one of your picture? And one more question. Why In some picture chinese special forces don't wear any type of gloves? Glove have two good thing.

One, Cover the hand that is light in color, so sniper can't pick you up.
Two, protect you hand.


It may be a personal choice, as most SOF allow a large quantity of personal choice with it gear.

As far as comparison goes, you really can not compare so easily. If I had to say the BEST ones bassed on operations that I personaly have heard of? I would say that SAS is definately one of the top contenders. Delta Force, from what little information I have heard of (Including acting as sonic-gun weilding guards to alien slaves in underground tunnel networks...This of course not one of the deciding factors) they definately rank up there. The Exploits of the Aussie SAS and Canadian special forces groups (Such as their JTF units and their Sniper units) are also coming to light. They as well seem very skilled. I don't know much about GSG-9 or KSK, and even less about GIGN. But from what I hear, they are very exclusive clubs.

Aussie Army - SASR - TAG
Hong Kong Police - SDU
South Korea Army - 707th Special Missions Btn
Japanese Police - SAT
China PAP - Internal Guards Corps - Special Police
Singapore Army - Commando Formation - Special Operation Force

These a possible the best CT forces in Asia

Can anyone find any pic on these PAP unit during operation training and not just posing for the camera. As it's possible to get a view of how well trained up these guy are by seeing the way they cover there corners when they are clearing a room and the during entree.

They just formed because of the 2008Olympics...
and their are not the army's special forces, they are with the PAP.

Well if they are specially trained for the 2008 Olympics most likely because considerable of hostage situation happen during Olympics in recent years.
Well they should be using JS not the Type 95, as it going to over penerate.

An entree team of 4 JS and 2 type 95 with a possibly of 1-2 attached Type 91 would be good mix.
As the assault rifle are better at covering long corridor and large room, it would also supply abit of extra fire power. Nevetheless the JS submachine gun would be best use in confined space and would have lower chance of over peneration during a hostage situation. The Type 91 grenade launcher would allow a fast response when a smoke (for artificial cover - a very effect method to response to sinper) or a stun grenade is needed.

[Kampfwagen]

I did not know that the PLA's Spec-Op's were using JS SMG's. I always thought they used either Type 79's or Type 85's currently. So the JS is in service?

[Nethappy]

I did not know that the PLA's Spec-Op's were using JS SMG's. I always thought they used either Type 79's or Type 85's currently. So the JS is in service?

Well I am not sure.
But the JS seem more suitable for Spec-Op's or PAP operation.

- The bullpup configuration should allow better handling in CQB situation
- The integral silencer allow more stealth
- The 9mm is more suitable Calibre, compared to the 7.62mm and 5.8mm it should increase lethality and reliability without over penetrating.

[Kampfwagen]

Alternatively though, a bullpup configuration in a Submachine gun must not be too popular an option for some reason. About the only bullpup SMG's I have heard of are the AUG SMG and the FAMAS G2 SMG derivitive. Of course, these are just assault rifles rechambered to fire 9MM rounds and not dedicated SMG's like an MP5 or Uzi. Most SMG's are designed for CQC and compactness anyway, but I guess a little more couldint hurt.

If it is the PAP, then they might just opt for a modified Type 79. I imagine it would not take a whole lot of reworking to modify the firing rate and chamber it to 9MM.

[Nethappy]

There is really not much problem with a bullpup smg, althought it hasn't been battle proven.

MP5 or Uzi are still the most widely use by law enforcement and SF is because they are battle proven and still very effective, lethality and reliability. Therefore it isn't necessary to spend that large amount of reasoure to replace them.

However IMO in PAP term it a better idea to switch to the JS.

[ahho]

JS is pretty good, but i don't get the design of JS though. Why bullpup instead of tmp/uzi like where you load the mag in the pistol grip??? The longer barrel makes no difference in close quarter combat

[MIGleader]

Probably so troops that are used to using the bull-pu type 95 can get a smoother transition into the SMG. Remember large amounts of PAP troops are ex-PLA soldiers. I would be very very surprised if the snow wolf unit guys didnt have any military experience.

[ahho]

Probably so troops that are used to using the bull-pu type 95 can get a smoother transition into the SMG. Remember large amounts of PAP troops are ex-PLA soldiers. I would be very very surprised if the snow wolf unit guys didnt have any military experience.

Well you got a point there, but wouldn't you want a compact gun like the tmp and since the army uses pistol, they should need a little bit more training on tmp style smg.

Just wondering, what special forces uses tmp type smg more than classic design smg???

[MIGleader]

Well, the js-9mm was designed primarily as a export project by norinco, and for police. Perhaps the PAP was impressed with the performance and decided to purchase a few.

the weapon itself was developed from the 95 to (cut development costs? any reason?). Thats the reason its a bull pup.

my final reason is that the PAP has fallen for the same "modern looking" fever of the PLA:D

[ahho]

ah yes cutting the cost, this is a good enough reason for me :D.

on other note, do the chinese special force use domestic weapons only or do they use foreign weapons also??

[Kampfwagen]

About the only 'Foreign' weapon I can think of that is still in use by the PLA is the Type 56. Though that is hardly a hostage-rescue weapon and only in the reserves.

The biggest draw of the bullpup design would be the compact nature of the design and lowered cost thanks to less complicated moving parts. (or something like that) But the biggest problem I can think of is that if one needs to reload in a CQC situation with a bullpup is that the magazine might take longer to reach and reload, since many in the PLA are probably used to standard configuration weapons. And of course, issues for those who are left hand dominant but I imagine they worked that out as well.

I have no problem with the JS personaly, but I simply had not heard of it being deployed by anyone in the PLA as of yet.

[Nethappy]

Well, there isn't enough infomation on the JS to make any judgement on it.
Nevertheless the longer barrel may improve accuracy at slightly longer range but not by much. Any improvement in longer accuracy without an increase in side could improve CQB capability in modern urban operteration as building and room nowaday can various in size greatly.

The longer barrel makes no difference in close quarter combat

The barrel does make a difference in close quarter combat. For example the TMP which is widely consider very controllable and comfortable to fire, has a barrel lenght of 150mm and without a stock. Which we mean it a capable weapon within the 25 yard, though accuracy maybe comprise at that range or during high rate successive shots by a very small amount while the spread may help probability of hit at that range. Nevertheless, probaility of hit is normally is undesirable for any hostage rescue spealize, pin-point is what they need as probaility of hit also mean hitting the hostage.

Whereas the MP5 with a 225mm barrel, a trained personally can provide accuaracy pin point shot at 25 yard with little trouble. For my personally experience I found the MP5 very easy to handle at 25 - 50m with appropriate sighting you can achieve a very high level of accuarcy.

[sumdud]

Comm'on guys, this thread is for photos, not the new SMGs. If you want to talk about the JS, open a new thread.
(Got some comments myself too.)

[MIGleader]

ah yes cutting the cost, this is a good enough reason for me :D.

on other note, do the chinese special force use domestic weapons only or do they use foreign weapons also??

The PAP special police does use some western made weapons. I dont know how the Chinese managed to import them though(Mafia?:D ). If they can import guns, maybe they can import bullet proof armor too.

[New2u]

It's not a western bullpup rifle.
It's our own Snpier Rifle!
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/individual/rifle_88.asp

[pathfinder]

The PAP special police does use some western made weapons. I dont know how the Chinese managed to import them though(Mafia?:D ). If they can import guns, maybe they can import bullet proof armor too.
The PAP Special Police units use domestic weapons such as Type 79 SMG and Type 95 assault rifle. They are more than self-sufficent in this area. As for body armour, Chinese armorers can manufacture the product at fraction of the cost as their U.S. counterpart, although inferior performance is expected.

It's not a western bullpup rifle.
It's our own Snpier Rifle!
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/individual/rifle_88.asp
Type 88 is not considered a dedicated sniping system by most. It's more suited to provide accurate fire support for soldiers beyond 400m, much like Dragunov. I have yet to see a rifle similar to M-24 or L96 AW in PLA service.

[MIGleader]

The PAP Special Police units use domestic weapons such as Type 79 SMG and Type 95 assault rifle. They are more than self-sufficent in this area. As for body armour, Chinese armorers can manufacture the product at fraction of the cost as their U.S. counterpart, although inferior performance is expected.

It is widely regarded as a fact that PAP units do use western made weapons.
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/orbat/papspecial.asp

proof beyond all doubt. I know pictures of PAP units with foreign guns are rare, but they indeed do use foreign weapons.

Chinese body armor is DRASTICALLY inferior to the u.s interceptor. the type 45 vest used by the PLA is rate to take only one shot, while the interceptor can take five spaced shots. The interceptor is also ony 16lbs, as opposed to the 45's 19Ibs. The only advantage i see in the 45 is cost, but putting living cost into the equation, it costs more in china than the interceptor would in america. ive heard the interceptor is more modular and comfortable aswell.

[Nethappy]

Chinese body armor is DRASTICALLY inferior to the u.s interceptor. the type 45 vest used by the PLA is rate to take only one shot, while the interceptor can take five spaced shots. The interceptor is also ony 16lbs, as opposed to the 45's 19Ibs. The only advantage i see in the 45 is cost, but putting living cost into the equation, it costs more in china than the interceptor would in america. ive heard the interceptor is more modular and comfortable aswell.

This maybe for the most of PLA maybe, but for SOF and so crack troops it a different story. They use more advance body armor. But how advance I am not sure, but the plating they use are quite advance i can said this much. Anyway, it a common thing to see different unit using very differnet era of equiment within the same base, i have seen it with my own eyes. It quite funny to watch too.
But my answer is yes most of PLA grunt use inferior body armor.

[sumdud]

Wait, doesn't China use the same armor suit that America have bought from China?

But would SOF use armor suits? They want speed.

Wait, didn't the US import a large number of Guardian God bullet vests from China? I don't know much about either the Interceptor or the God, but if the US did import Chinese vest (Steel Plate inserted) then I don't see why China's vest is inferior.

[RedMercury]

I don't recall reading about this, do you have the source? I know that the US bought some body armor for the Iraqi defense forces from Chinese manufacturers, but I'm not aware that they intend to use it themselves. Perhaps only for testing purposes?

This maybe for the most of PLA maybe, but for SOF and so crack troops it a different story. They use more advance body armor. But how advance I am not sure, but the plating they use are quite advance i can said this much. Anyway, it a common thing to see different unit using very differnet era of equiment within the same base, i have seen it with my own eyes. It quite funny to watch too.
But my answer is yes most of PLA grunt use inferior body armor.
Most PLA grunt's only body armor is his helmet. The airborne and fist units may be issued with body armor (perhaps only flak jackets), but the bulk of the infantry (not to mention arty troops, non-frontline troops) only have their helmets.

[Nethappy]

Most PLA grunt's only body armor is his helmet. The airborne and fist units may be issued with body armor (perhaps only flak jackets), but the bulk of the infantry (not to mention arty troops, non-frontline troops) only have their helmets.

Well not all PLA active grunt have body armor, but from my understanding they have been issue in certain unit base in some important area. Nevertheless, the base I have been visting (Can't said where, and dun bother asking!!! Job related sercet) are use heavy for logistic and procedure development. It should be area which has higher level of security, so I am not that sure about. As I need to be escorted in and out of the base.

[MIGleader]

Wait, doesn't China use the same armor suit that America have bought from China?

But would SOF use armor suits? They want speed.

Wait, didn't the US import a large number of Guardian God bullet vests from China? I don't know much about either the Interceptor or the God, but if the US did import Chinese vest (Steel Plate inserted) then I don't see why China's vest is inferior.

The deal ($20,000) was for iraqi soldiers and officers. I think type 56 rifles were also ordered. But as far as i know, the Guradian god is a version of the type 45 vest with modular webbing and new camo. The type 45 used aluminum-oxide plate, which can take only one hit.

[Jiaguy]

Well I also know some American SFs, ever see a 220 pound lineman (me) get thrown over a 160 pound, 5 foot 2 inches man's head... Ranger... but I think its not the special forces but the command that is the limiting factor in special forces operations.

Yes Chinese soldiers do have an enphasis on martial arts and I don't doubt that they can scale walls via drainage pipes as I have seen some crazy stuff being done in martial arts.

In command experience department the US is probably much better as it has had some expensive lessons in the past. While the individual soldier is probably strogn in different aspects; often it's the command's ineffectiveness in such tight situations that special forces face that causes disaster. Remember the average Ranger does not choose his entry or extraction vehicle, support, or armament those descisions are made above and I think in China's case may be to bureacratic.

I don't recall reading about this, do you have the source? I know that the US bought some body armor for the Iraqi defense forces from Chinese manufacturers, but I'm not aware that they intend to use it themselves. Perhaps only for testing purposes?


Most PLA grunt's only body armor is his helmet. The airborne and fist units may be issued with body armor (perhaps only flak jackets), but the bulk of the infantry (not to mention arty troops, non-frontline troops) only have their helmets.


Sorry fo the double post but...yes I think the US is using Chinese made body armor as the ones from a certain private/defense contractor factory (not all factories) seemed to perform the best in the world. Almsot all infantry units are equipped with body armor...the support staff are not. This would be hard to say though because there is no point doning body armor to guard a gate so they are not been seen outside training with armor... then again who really knows?

[eronyn]

Hello, i'm new here. This is the best intro i can give for now.

The PLAC spec ops are not trained like western troops. The course is alot more rigorous and most by the end are required to master 'Qi'. Breaking bricks is but one of the most mundane tests for these guys. Close range combat is an area that these guys master and i'm quite certain that the type 95 assault rifle will not on most occasions fail to provide them with adequate long range combat power. Yes, they are equipt with world class body armor, ones that the US employs for their own soldiers, and furthermore, are aided with the inherent quality of intellect.

All i can say for now.

[eric chu]

://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2006-08/10/xinsrc_21208031010429060170195.jpgnews.xinhuanet.c om/mil/2006-08/10/xinsrc_39208031010259213496172.jpg:china:

[petty officer1]

Just some newer ones for yall! (sorry about the "Yall", I am from Texas):p

http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20061019/1693/338635/338635.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20061019/1693/338635/338636.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20061019/1693/338635/338638.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20061019/1693/338635/338642.jpg
http://image2.sina.com.cn/jc/upload/118/5168/20061019/1693/338635/338643.jpg

And In some cases, PLA Will use SF in training for SWAT roles in Yunna and Canton provinces against drug trading and kidnapping. those provide some good experience for PLA SF. I heard in some cases chinese government don't even arrest those people. they just send in the PLA SF and kill all of them! Good experience for them.

And for those that read chinese can go read this book, Called "king of soldiers" in chinese, I got the half of the book here. It talk about a PLA recurit turn in to a PLA SF's story! enjoy:D

http://club.book.sina.com.cn/yuanchuang/writing.php?wid=10887

[silverster]

Hello, i'm new here. This is the best intro i can give for now.

The PLAC spec ops are not trained like western troops. The course is alot more rigorous and most by the end are required to master 'Qi'. Breaking bricks is but one of the most mundane tests for these guys. Close range combat is an area that these guys master and i'm quite certain that the type 95 assault rifle will not on most occasions fail to provide them with adequate long range combat power. Yes, they are equipt with world class body armor, ones that the US employs for their own soldiers, and furthermore, are aided with the inherent quality of intellect.

All i can say for now.


hmm.. dude... their exercises are scripted. And those 'Qi' people you see are probably fromt eh publicity dept...

[eecsmaster]

most likely not. PLA emphasis on close quarter combat is very, very well known. As for body armor, I personally haven't seens stuff from the mainland on par with the interceptors. But there are plenty of plates.

[utelore]

notice the men holding their weapons. Here are some keys to look at which show good training.
Both eyes are open as they look down the weapon and gain a site picture. Look at the way they hold their weapons all the same while moving in echelon right formation. These walk threw drills are creating something call **muscle memory** were troops no longer have to think and the weapon and tactics become part of the memory imprint in which complex actions just happen just like breathing. This unit is in the process of becoming a well oiled cohesive fighting unit.....cheers ute.

[green beret]

Might not look good... But Looks does not do a thing once in action. What you really need to look at is how well they do in action.

well, see the thing is that the U.S. Special forces have already seen combat many times over the past half a century from Korea to Vietnam, and Panama to Iraq and Afghanistan and a bunch of other small wars we fought. And may I add they did an awesome job in all of them.

But the Chinese special forces and the army in general... well hmmm have not fought one single war in the past few decades.

See, I have seen this alot from the Chinese: "Well your equipment might be better, but our soldiers will perform better in combat".

Well gee, guess we will never know because they have never been in combat in the first place.

[eecsmaster]

Rumor is that the PLA-SOF (which is structured as recon units in the Western sense) has been doing COIN in some of the board areas. Of course you don't hear about this through any official channels for obvious reasons.

[Gollevainen]

See, I have seen this alot from the Chinese: "Well your equipment might be better, but our soldiers will perform better in combat".

I will trow counter comment agianst what you said. You see, special forces, no matter where are by nature (just think the name) specialized units mented to perform task that normal mainstream units are not able. Or ability isen't the right word, it's more down to recource managment. It simply just isen't rational to train all your fighting units to airlandings, equipmentdiving ect. You just don't have enough recources to do so. As these task are still important, it wise to train smaller units to perform the task, hence the name "special forces".

Now to you comment: You are critisizing chinese when they raise training over equipment. Anyone ever served in army knows that it's exactly like that. No matter how fancy your equipment is, it's useless unless the troops can actually use it in the best way possiple and bringing the equipments best qualities in use. This ofcourse means in theory that if the training is equal, the units with better equipment is better...yeas, in theory. However in reality its bit different.
Modern technology has this one minor defaults, which is that people tends to be too reliant to it and forgot the basic prinsiples behind the task which the new fancy equipment is mented to perform. I've came agross this phenomenal during my armytimes. We had the privileg to operate old, (60's era) equipments and new 2000 era equipments. Altough the later was clearly superior with it's pure technical details, the older equipment was workprooven and it's analogity made us learn the given task form their fundamental basis. The differences between these two came best seen in proplem situation. When the new system went tilt (and technology does too often in filedsituations) we where left unable to perform our task until the damage was repaired which due the complexity of the technology in use mented that it had to be done far away from the damagespot. With the older equipment, there were only few proplems at the first place and even those were easily fixed becouse we knew how to adopt the system.

So what does this tells about chinese special forces? Well my point was that you cannot say that some unit may perform badly simply becouse it's equipment isen't state-of-the art. Special forces operations are pretty much down to training and human skills. To relying too much to technology may actually be a handicap when things goes wrong. Your senses, strenght, durability, observation skills and so on are in numb state and when it comes down to use them you are as usefull as boys playing computer games and suddenly dragged to the real battlefileds (slightly exxagerated but you get the point).

Experience is one issue that cannot be ignored, and yeas US special forces have huge ammount of that (tough one might argue that when the last time when US special forces were against an opponent that really made an efforrt?). But even experince is useless you can learn from it and adopt it to your training.

but in the end, wars are not won by SOFs and paratroops, it's all down to completely different persons. So trying to compare special force units is bit silly (for start from the fact that different units are mented to different tasks). If country A goes war against country B, it doesen't help if the country A has better SOF units....Infatry moves and SOFs, well stings, but it's the artillery that destroyes;)

[green beret]

No my friend, you got me all wrong.

I wasnt talking about equipment. I was talking about combat experience. that was what I was focusing on.

The PLA in general have not seen combat for what? 3 decades or something? that is the problem I was talking about.

You may have the best training in the world, but when the bullets starts flying it becomes a totally different thing.

See alot of the things, the tactics, the equipments, hand signals in the Army are perfected through combat. the two instructors in my ROTC units have both seen combat in Iraq, one of them have earend a bronze star for valor and another one silver star for valor. I tell you, they taught us alot of the things that were not taught in Army and corrected alot of the things that were wrong in the FM 7-8 (the field manuel).

and it is also through combat that you learn your weaknesses. Like for example, the ACU uniform the U.S. Army is using looks great and all, but the material is really weak they can torn in combat very easily, and now the Army is doing all it can to fix it. It is little things like this that will make a difference in combat.

and those are things that can not be learned in training alone. And this is something the PLA lacks. I doubt many of their combat instructors can abslutely seriously say that they have seen real combat.

[Gollevainen]

Well I was trying to say that judging some units capabilites is difficoult when you just focus on equipments and other factors that are not directly related to the actual unit.

Like I said the experience is a benefit, but still it's not that simple issue. You cannot say that if some country haven't fought a war in decades it would fail. In fact saying so is arrogant. When my country was dragged to a war in the 1939, it's entire army was only been existing less than 20 years. Still our mens fought hard and showed superior perfroming than our opponent which had fought several times during the time when our military had existed.

What counts in the battlefield is tactics, strategies and most importantly morale. The first two of those can be taken to their best by training and having experiences help there alot. But not with fightingmorale. All troops going to the battlefield, being in the army that have fought extensivily or that have not fought a war in decades are still 95% noobs and first timers. Only the officerbase may have had previous experiences the regular troops not. Do you knwo why? Becouse the morale...those soldiers that have saw one war are not going to go to another if they can choose so (there are ofcourse exeption) They are old and many have suffered injuries so no army would put them into the first line. So those guys that went to "liberate" Iraq in 2003 where 90% in the same starting point than the guys which would go where ever the CCP tells them to do if china goes war in future...

[green beret]

well, you also have to take in account how poorly the Russians were at the beginning of the Second World War. The Russian Army had just under went a purge before the war began. Most of the officers in the army from comany grade to flag grade were executed by Stalin (around 80% of the officers were killed), whats left of the officers were those whose where deemed loyal to Stalin but most of them horrible combat leaders.

the tactics employed by those officers were WWI battle tactics, thus they were obsolete. Like in the Battle of Suomussalmi for example, an entire division of Russian infantry were completely destroyed after their commander foolishly marched them into a Finnish Army ambush like it was still WWI.

Actually the subject of the Ruso-Finnish War actually supports my case. Most of the Russian officers were poorly trained and those who were comparativly well trained were trained in WWI style, because even their instructors were not trained in WWII style combat. And that is pretty much what led to the poor performance of the Russian Army in the war, of course on top of poor equipment and poor morale.

What does that have to do with the case of the PLA? Have you seen pictures of the PLA in combat training? They are still using the human wave tactic for Christ's sake! Look at those men charge, and look at those men die in combat.

PS. Man I can see us having a alot of great time discussing stuff like these. Mind if I add you in my friend list? =)

PSS. no hard feeling against the Brave Fins during WWII. They are great soldiers

[adeptitus]

I think training and battlefield experience goes both ways.

In old European battlefields, where men were lined up and fired their rifles in unision, the rifles weren't very accurate and the men rarely hesitated in firing.

But when firearm became more accurate, it was later discovered that many men in battle wouldn't aim and fire at an opponent, or would shoot over their heads.

This presented a serious problem, and was not remedied until decades later, when they modified basic/firearm training to condition the soliders to shoot. This mental/physical conditioning is learned during training and usually not on the battlefield (except for irregular units).

[Gollevainen]

Actually the subject of the Ruso-Finnish War actually supports my case. Most of the Russian officers were poorly trained and those who were comparativly well trained were trained in WWI style, because even their instructors were not trained in WWII style combat. And that is pretty much what led to the poor performance of the Russian Army in the war, of course on top of poor equipment and poor morale.

Not eentirely true. You see although the stalins purges had huge effect on red army's combat performance, it affected more to the moral than the actual training. We are down discussing about the expereinces role in training and military performance. You must remeber that Soviets had fought alongside the long civil war, against Japanese and Polish troops and gained valuable experiences from Spanish civil war, the first truly "modern war". Also the main soviet infatry fighting tactics were not "wwI" era, but the NPP tacticks developted in the 30's. In the light of the day the Soviet army was actually one of the most "modern" in many areas...

But Like I said it didn't help them against us. We had no expereince from any wars exept from our own civil war which was notingh to compared to the one we where about to face. Our trainings and tacticks had no such benefits as our opponent had. But still we succeed. What really made the difference was tactical flexibility and innovation. We were quickly to adopt the changes in the battlefield and managed to use the changing enviroment to our own succes. But no more about finno-russian squarels in this thread...lets focus on china

What does that have to do with the case of the PLA? Have you seen pictures of the PLA in combat training? They are still using the human wave tactic for Christ's sake! Look at those men charge, and look at those men die in combat.


We cannot make assumptions based on pictures only. It's true the overall strategies and tactics of all branches of PLA have been inflicted by non-rational thinking and too much politically motivated doctrines. But things have changed alot. One thing being great plus to china is it's ability to adopt changes fast. The transformation of PLA to modern fighting unit has only strated in late 80's, but comparing the huge size and the level of this transformation, you can only be amaized! Not only have chinese clearly changed their methods far more flexibily than many others when coming to their own expereinces, but the lessons of other countries wars have been studied as well. The first Gulf war was one of the main turning points and it really put the chinese to speed. In only 15 years PLA is transformed to "quantity over quality" force into modern and very potent force which just keeps on expanding it's cababilities. It's not anyway near the level of USA and perhaps other western countries, but it's steadily narrowing the cap. Anyone that is looking bit more deeply into the chinese military sector cannot no longer use those worn-out clishes of human-wawes and ect. It's almoust an insult to the huge ammount of work that have been done

So I strongly suggesting to surf around this forum and better so in the main site www.sinodefence.com and learn more about chinese military...;)

[green beret]

ok corporal, and you should call me "sir" =p ah I am just joking.

I did some speed reading on some Chinese military related sites. yup I must admit they have changed alot from those human wave days. though I still quite frequently see infantrymen charge through opennings in mass. I thinks thats what gave me the impression that they are still using the human wave tactic. but you must admit they still use it, and it is outdated. and you must also admit they are going to get alot of soldiers killed with that kind of tactic. Although finding new soldiers is not a problem for them. But that is just cruel.

Now lets continue the debate on experience. There is also the equipment factor; are they properly tested in combat or not. the M-16 is a good example. A alot of problems were reported by U.S. soldiers after the M-16 were first issued to U.S. soldiers in Vietnam, for example, the M-16 jams frequently when it is not properly cleaned; mud and dirty can easily get inside the barrel; ect ect. These were not problems first forseen by the developers. And the only way they found out about those problems were through combat.

Well I guess since the type 81 is based on the Tk 47 there shouldnt be too much problems with it. But what about the new Type 95 (is that it?) and other newly issued weapons? I have heard former PLA soldiers said that the Type-95 rifles issued to their units were never used in exercises, they are instead stored in supply rooms to be prserved.

Anyhow, I dont really know the little details about the PLA Army training. I dunno how well they have tested the Type 95 rifle and all their other new equipments. So thats up to you to tell me

=)

[Gollevainen]

ok corporal, and you should call me "sir" =p ah I am just joking.

GTJ=0 ;)

I did some speed reading on some Chinese military related sites. yup I must admit they have changed alot from those human wave days. though I still quite frequently see infantrymen charge through opennings in mass. I thinks thats what gave me the impression that they are still using the human wave tactic. but you must admit they still use it, and it is outdated. and you must also admit they are going to get alot of soldiers killed with that kind of tactic. Although finding new soldiers is not a problem for them. But that is just cruel.

The tactic is as stubid as it sounds and yeas many men would die if they use it. But thats not the case any longer. Also the large numbers of mens running down a hill yelling their lungs out is good set for propaganda pics, which many of chinese military pictures are.

Now lets continue the debate on experience. There is also the equipment factor; are they properly tested in combat or not. the M-16 is a good example. A alot of problems were reported by U.S. soldiers after the M-16 were first issued to U.S. soldiers in Vietnam, for example, the M-16 jams frequently when it is not properly cleaned; mud and dirty can easily get inside the barrel; ect ect. These were not problems first forseen by the developers. And the only way they found out about those problems were through combat.

Well finding out wheter assault rifle stands for filed operational use is not anyway tied to combat. The enviromental conditions are comming from anture, and nature doesen't care wheter you are fighting or training. Our exercises were muddy and snowy, but due the kalashnikoviks phenomenal rugimendity, we were left only amaizing it's capabilities. Once my rifle was laying in the mud for several days without shooting with it(in artillerycrew the rifles are only in the way) and I was then suddenly forced to fire it in combat exersice without the ability to clean and maintenance the rifle. After the exercise I poned the gun for cleaning and there was lot of mud, needles and entire pinecone inside the gun and it still didn't jam while I was shooting with it...

Well I guess since the type 81 is based on the Tk 47 there shouldnt be too much problems with it. But what about the new Type 95 (is that it?) and other newly issued weapons? I have heard former PLA soldiers said that the Type-95 rifles issued to their units were never used in exercises, they are instead stored in supply rooms to be prserved.

Type 95 is only been issued to elite units and is under transition phase. The new calibre and Bulpub type rifle takes time to adjusting. But as for I know, the mechanism of the rifle is based to the Type 81 (which isen't exatly copy of Kalashnikovik, but a longheaded derivation) so it's rudgimenty should be as good as with old AK...

So thats up to you to tell me

I only know so little as I've come different side of the globe than chinese but thats why there is internet forums...

[green beret]

This is a shocker, it is on the PLA paratrooper.

It is on the performance of the PLA paratroops druing the Russo-Sino joint military exercise. It is going to be a short one, but hell, they issue weapons and ammos to their paratroopers AFTER they landed. And appearently they also lost an amor personnel carrier during the landing.

Hell, if their is a battalion just happens to move pass the DZ, I can see entire division of paratroopers getting completely wiped out this way.

PS. this aint rumor, it was in their news :p


http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/4301/329259xn7.jpg

If I am a sniper and I saw this, the only thing I would say is "jackpot" And this is the special forces, that red armband totally gave their position away. they sticks out like a sour thumb. =/ Hope they dont do that in real combat, they are gonna get alot of people killed this way.

See their uniform is on the ok side,it might take half a minute for me to figure out, those arent shadows of rocks; but that arm band, man they look like little beacons.

[netspider]

Again, what you heard about the paratroops was wrong , this rumor was first started by a Hongkong newspaper, and now it is getting spread all over the internet.

Regarding your comments on the Type 95 rifles, well, we may never say Type 95 get adopted in large quantity. There is always a debate on this bullput layout over conventional layout issues. If you see the PLA small arms development, after Type 95 came out, there was also Type 03 which use conventional layout. Around the world, France and British are using this bullput rifles, while Russia, German and US still use conventional layout rifles such as AK-101, G36 and M4, and G36 is usually considered as the best rifle.

Type-81 itself is a fine rifle, and it was combat proven in Sino-Vietnam border clash from 1984-1986. I don't see why PLA need to replace it, remember PLA along has more than one million soldiers, if you count armed policies, PLA may need to replace over two million rifles. That's a lot of money, and does it really increase PLA's combat ability by replacing Type 81 with Type 95? I don't think so. With this amount of money, there are many more important things can be done instead of replacing rifles for the sake of looking mordern.

This is a shocker, it is on the PLA paratrooper.

It is on the performance of the PLA paratroops druing the Russo-Sino joint military exercise. It is going to be a short one, but hell, they issue weapons and ammos to their paratroopers AFTER they landed. And appearently they also lost an amor personnel carrier during the landing.

Hell, if their is a battalion just happens to move pass the DZ, I can see entire division of paratroopers getting completely wiped out this way.

[green beret]

Man, is everything bad about the PLA prapaganda to you guy?

But this story on this one is true. It was reported by an offcial Chinese mainland news agency.

So HA!

Also I remeber seeing that in the news section of the Chinese offical-ish website, sina.com. So it should be true right, I mean doesnt your government monitor all the news or something =/ (<.<) (>.>)

[netspider]

The arm band does look stupid. You can find a lot of these type of pictures on PLA exercises, some pictures make you really wonder why they do this? For instance, I once saw a picture of PLA marine troops wearing orange vests during exercises. It is just stupid.

Things in China is very different, for instance, the military exercises are not just exercises, in some situations, they are also shows for media, for high rank officers to watch, and for propagada purposes. If you want to get serious about these pictures, you may get youself a lot of questions, such as "Why this guy wave a big red flag in the battlefield? Why these people conduct a WWII style human wave charge?" Trust me, they may just do this for propagada purpose because it looks good on picture. It is sad and really bad, but in many situations, it is true.


See their uniform is on the ok side, but that arm band, man they look like little beacons.

[netspider]

PLA propaganda is not necessarily bad, it does boosts the morale of soldiers and people. If you want to do serious analysis on PLA's capability, PLA propaganda tends out to be a very good source if you can decode the messages behind those plain boring official statements.

Man, is everything bad about the PLA prapaganda to you guy?

But this story on this one is true. It was reported by an offcial Chinese mainland news agency.

So HA!

[petty officer1]

Shows, shows. PLA banned any color other than green camo during sino-vietnam war already. those red star on those caps are like sniper targets. in PLA there are two type of combat uniforms. so PLA banned any color like red to be weared on soldiers' uniforms DURING battle
http://www.china-defense.com/history/laoshan/laoshan_2.html

1. "shows" camo uniforms
Example: the PLA SOF' s "show" uniforms have a big ass red insignia on their arm.

2. battle camo uniforms
Example: the PLA SOF's insignia will be green. almost can't be read from 2 meters away.

As for the Big ass red armband... it will easies for a media to spot and see where they are, their rank....

If you see some older sino-vienam war picutres. you will see no red armband or other "show" craps here in those "generals, look at us" excersice.

As for the paratrooper things, I personally believe it, but that is how we found problems. right?;)

[green beret]

As for the paratrooper things, I personally believe it, but that is how we found problems. right?;)


I was kinda totally disappointed though. I have been following stories about Chinese paratroopers for a while, since I want to become a paratrooper myself, I want to learn what their paratroopers are like. But when I found out about the story though, boy that was a big let down. they would be lucky if they survive the landing.

As for the arm-band, you are right, at least you definitely should be right. I was thinking, what kind f moron general would make his soldiers wear red armbands in combat?

[petty officer1]

PLA paratrooper is not bad at all. the excerise you talk about probably happened to US when they first time air drop a IFV out a sky, but it is so long ago, like 1940s.

My point is, porblems during excerise shows leadership what the porblem is and correct it. If you watch PLA tactic in the 1980 their folks have WAY, WAY more problems than today. that means they are improving!;)

all is just time....

[green beret]

yeah the armored personnel carrier too.

but I was talking about how they issued weapons and ammos to their soldiers after they landed. In sinodefence a few years back when it first started I remember seeing pictures of Chinese paratroopers jumping out of airplanes with full combat gears but no guns. at first I thought it is a practice jump, but thats untill I heard about the news this year. so the problem had lasted for what 4 to 5 years?

And trust me, we jump out of airplanes with full comabt gears AND gun and ammos here in the U.S. ;)

[Mr_C]

yeah the armored personnel carrier too.

but I was talking about how they issued weapons and ammos to their soldiers after they landed. In sinodefence a few years back when it first started I remember seeing pictures of Chinese paratroopers jumping out of airplanes with full combat gears but no guns. at first I thought it is a practice jump, but thats untill I heard about the news this year. so the problem had lasted for what 4 to 5 years?

And trust me, we jump out of airplanes with full comabt gears AND gun and ammos here in the U.S. ;)

Well to be truely certain why they did this we must find out the rationale of the leadership during the exercises. In Australia soldiers are often given their ammo after they have arrived in the AO. The reason for this is because in some exercises you are still ina civilian area whilst traveling to the AO. It is illegal to carry any sort of ammunition outside designated military areas. So therefore it is not unexpected that the PLA may have similar laws which address these similar situations.

Regarding the missing IFV during the paradrop. Well as u should know... shit happens all the time in the military and as mentioned before this is where we can find problems. However it is also good exercise for the men on the ground because they will need to develop their skills on adapting to such situations. It is much more important to get the soldiers to repond to changing and unexpected situations than having everything going right.

[green beret]

just read the news article again, appearly the Russian paratroopers that jumped with the Chinese did it with full combat gear and weapons and ammos. so nothing to argue about there anymore.

but I dunno much about international law. but if a military force took part in an exercise in foriegn soil, doesnt they have to obey the local laws too?

[adeptitus]

Personally, I'm not a big fan of paratroopers via air drop. The air drop process scatter the men and equipment over a wide area. Helicopter insertion is much more precise. The last major paratrooper deployement in actual combat was US invasion of Grenada in 1983, and I think it was said that ~50% of the forces (US army rangers) were scattered by the drop.

The bright arm bands and rock climbing photos are staged PR events. It's kind of like inviting visitors to see your troops hopping over an obstacle course and has very little to do with actual combat op. If it had been an actual combat op, I doubt they'd have invited the press, least some stupid reporter like Geraldo Rivera starts drawing map to show your position and battle plan to the enemy on broadcast TV.

In today's battlefield, by the time that your infantry moves foward, the enemy force has already been mostly destroyed or scattered by your air power and tanks/artillery. Infantry will be used to flush out pockets of resistance and deal with occupation. The type of warfare that they need be trained for is urban combat against irregulars. The Israelis are very good at it, and the US is slowly learning through Iraqi occupation experience. I suspect the Russians learned a great deal through Chechenya.

[mobydog]

Two things I like to comment on..

1) Human waves attack..

Human wave attack is not dead.. several circumstances and situations warrants it. Mountainous, rocky and high forested areas where armour units are hampered, for example.. sino-India war.

If we examine the WWI tranch war.. why does this situation exist ? Well, because both parties are equally matched in strength and technology.. neither owns the sky.. nor Armour units were available (early part of the war) and both sides has no lack of arty shells... and no assault rifle.

To say the US don't practice this tactic, is because since WWII (except Korea war) is that they have always been fighting Third rate militaries and have always had air-superiority... another reason is they have always fought wars on enemies homeland... that's why in Vietnam, The vietcon and NVA were always charging at them, while they hunker down in their firebase hitting meatwall and arty, naplaming and bombing them from the air. while the NVA has only Mortars and rpg.. whatelse can they do.. charge !!! The NVA obviously, in soul , wants them off their land, and the GIs had nowhere else to go. It's like trying to dislodge a tree.

Also, doing amphivious beach landing.. isn't that a form of human wave tactic ?

Should US be fighting another enemy with relative equal terms and could not obtain air-superiority.. and the enemy has tons of manpads, atms, armour, sizable competent Air force and a comprehensive sam networks... they would likely need to resort to human wave tactics to capture their objectives too.. don't you think ?

2) Ridiculious camo colours combo used by PLA, PLAN.

You notice that the PLAAF, PLAN and PAP paints their wares in White and armour units in bright blue/white.. and their marine units too.

Well, the reason.. I believe is that they are trying to portray themselves as a Docile entity and not a threat.. because of Western (more likely US) rhetoric harping the 'China Threat'.. because any half blind military commander would know those camo are not effective... in real war scenario, I believe the uniforms wil be very differently camo-ed.

[RedMercury]

If you read up on some Korean War sites, they dispel the myth of the ubiquitous human wave charge by the PVA. The PVA only used human waves when capturing the objective in a timely manner meant high casualties were acceptable (Chinese generals actually consider casualties, not as inhuman as the West dearly wants to believe "The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner. Life is plentiful. Life is cheap in the Orient.")

[mobydog]

If you read up on some Korean War sites, they dispel the myth of the ubiquitous human wave charge by the PVA. The PVA only used human waves when capturing the objective in a timely manner meant high casualties were acceptable (Chinese generals actually consider casualties, not as inhuman as the West dearly wants to believe "The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner. Life is plentiful. Life is cheap in the Orient.")Yes, I've read it too. The PVA's tactic was to assert pressure to the front, while trying to encircle them from thier flank, cutting off supply and escape route. The UN forces would usually panick and abandon their positions to escape, thus a quick victory over their objective.

However, I was in fact pointing to todays US/Isreal tactics used. Why was it possible...because they have enormous firepower and air superiority.. fighting a relative weak opponent. They bomb the living hell out of their enemy, precison bomb their strategic assets, and goes in with copters and armour, with pockets of boots to clean up remaining resistance.

Should they be fighting an enemy with equal terms, I suspect the US would not engage, or would have to resort to some form of human wave tactic to capture enemy's positions... how else ?

[green beret]

Should they be fighting an enemy with equal terms, I suspect the US would not engage, or would have to resort to some form of human wave tactic to capture enemy's positions... how else ?

As a future U.S. Army officer I cant see myself ordering a human wave attack under any condition, or do I think any other officers would do the same. Because a human wave assault is just plain foolish, it has tremendous cost of human lives, and it rarely gets the job done. And it is simply preposterous to think that the U.S. Army is designed to fight weaker armies.

This is the standard way used by the U.S. Army is capture an enemy position: Unit A found enemy position; Unit A engages the enemy and put suppressing fire on the enemy ; Unit B which has been following Unit A, flanks the enemy position and captures it.

This is the the tactic the Chinese used in the Korean War: Unit found enemy position; Unit A launches wave after wave of human wave attack on the enemy to put pressure on the enemy; Unit B flanks the enemy, cut off its retreat, and Unit A captures enemy position.

From this you can see that the purpose of the human wave tactic is the equal of that of the suppressing fire used by the U.S. Army. But the whole reason behind the human wave tactic is simply because the Chinese Army back than had little or no crew served weapons thus could not achieve fire superiority over the U.S. and thats why they had to use their soldiers' lives to achieve that.

[green beret]

after reading this, I want laugh big time!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

******** Ahem, did u read the rule of the forum, you need to respect people, and i think that was unrespectuful !!! Watch out !

First of all, who ever taught you WWI history deserves to be shot.

The reason the "human waves" were used in WWI was because the generals on both sides during the war were still using tactics of the 19th century. And reasons why 19th century warfare was fought with the so called huma n wave tactic is because the rifle, or in its earlier form, the musket, were used as an alternative to pikes, thus musketeers were marched into combat
in large formations just like the pikemen would.

But battlefield tactics were quickly changed after WWI, because the human wave tactic was not suitable for modern warfare anymore due to several factor. One is the rifle, the killing range of a single riflemen increased from 200m to 1000m with the introduction of the rifle. Two is the machine gun, capable of firing hundreds of bullets per minutes, entire company of charging infantrymen can be wiped out in minutes by a machine gun.

During the WWI, nearly 10 million men killed and 200 million were wounded on both sides in the period of 4 years. Military strategists of both sides after the war realized that battlefield tactics needs to be changed to avoid sacrificing so many lives.

Also let me ask you this:
have you ever been to combat? or have you at least played a game of paint ball before? I not, I want to invite you to play a game of paint ball with me, bring your friends too if you want.

paint ball is similar too real combat, but instead of firing bullets, you fire little balls of paint. It can be played with teams of any sizes, but we usually play with 40 vs 40. I can tell you right now, if your team just get up and charge blindly into our poistion you will get your ass raped big time, your team will be wiped out in the first minutes of the game.

but instead the best tactics is to split your team into smaller teams. the tactic we use to to send two or three teams out to locate the enemy position, and engage the team to pin them down. They would than radio to the rest of the team their location and size, the rest of the teams would than flank the enemy position and wipe them out.

And if we have to fight an enemy as strong as us, such as the PLA, we would still use the same tactic similar to the one described by me.

Two things I like to comment on..

1) Human waves attack..

Human wave attack is not dead.. several circumstances and situations warrants it. Mountainous, rocky and high forested areas where armour units are hampered, for example.. sino-India war.

If we examine the WWI tranch war.. why does this situation exist ? Well, because both parties are equally matched in strength and technology.. neither owns the sky.. nor Armour units were available (early part of the war) and both sides has no lack of arty shells... and no assault rifle.

To say the US don't practice this tactic, is because since WWII (except Korea war) is that they have always been fighting Third rate militaries and have always had air-superiority... another reason is they have always fought wars on enemies homeland... that's why in Vietnam, The vietcon and NVA were always charging at them, while they hunker down in their firebase hitting meatwall and arty, naplaming and bombing them from the air. while the NVA has only Mortars and rpg.. whatelse can they do.. charge !!! The NVA obviously, in soul , wants them off their land, and the GIs had nowhere else to go. It's like trying to dislodge a tree.

Also, doing amphivious beach landing.. isn't that a form of human wave tactic ?

Should US be fighting another enemy with relative equal terms and could not obtain air-superiority.. and the enemy has tons of manpads, atms, armour, sizable competent Air force and a comprehensive sam networks... they would likely need to resort to human wave tactics to capture their objectives too.. don't you think ?

[rhino123]

after reading this, I want laugh big time!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

************************************************** ************************************************** ************************

First of all, who ever taught you WWI history deserves to be shot.

The reason the "human waves" were used in WWI was because the generals on both sides during the war were still using tactics of the 19th century. And reasons why 19th century warfare was fought with the so called huma n wave tactic is because the rifle, or in its earlier form, the musket, were used as an alternative to pikes, thus musketeers were marched into combat
in large formations just like the pikemen would.

But battlefield tactics were quickly changed after WWI, because the human wave tactic was not suitable for modern warfare anymore due to several factor. One is the rifle, the killing range of a single riflemen increased from 200m to 1000m with the introduction of the rifle. Two is the machine gun, capable of firing hundreds of bullets per minutes, entire company of charging infantrymen can be wiped out in minutes by a machine gun.

During the WWI, nearly 10 million men killed and 200 million were wounded on both sides in the period of 4 years. Military strategists of both sides after the war realized that battlefield tactics needs to be changed to avoid sacrificing so many lives.

Also let me ask you this:
have you ever been to combat? or have you at least played a game of paint ball before? I not, I want to invite you to play a game of paint ball with me, bring your friends too if you want.

paint ball is similar too real combat, but instead of firing bullets, you fire little balls of paint. It can be played with teams of any sizes, but we usually play with 40 vs 40. I can tell you right now, if your team just get up and charge blindly into our poistion you will get your ass raped big time, your team will be wiped out in the first minutes of the game.

but instead the best tactics is to split your team into smaller teams. the tactic we use to to send two or three teams out to locate the enemy position, and engage the team to pin them down. They would than radio to the rest of the team their location and size, the rest of the teams would than flank the enemy position and wipe them out.

And if we have to fight an enemy as strong as us, such as the PLA, we would still use the same tactic similar to the one described by me.


If enemy's strenght is as powerful as yours, don't you think by laying suppression fire on them don't actually work because they too have powerful firepower to pin you down. In in many cases, before your reinforcement or flanking unit could come in, they might already have sent units out to flank you and cut you off.

I believe that the best way is to infiltrate snipers or commandoes into their position and take out important targets and installations. Make use of your strenght against their weaknesses.

In any terms, shooting hell of a lot of bullets and pray they are enough is often not enough. I believe that each army would have their own weaknesses and strenght so in this case, before entering a war, info on the opposing army is of utmost importance in any planning by strategist down to commanders.

Just a thought.

[green beret]

Of course laying surpressing fire works.

There a few keys to achieve fire superiority over the enemy. Face it, when you get hit by an AK-74 round, you are about as ****** as getting hit by a M4 round. All is fair in battle for the infantry. Thus the key is bravery. When the enemy starts firing at you, if you just get down and get into a fetile position, there is no way you can win. The first thing you should do is get down on the ground and immediately starts returning fire. Than the commander would direct the machines guns and call indirect fire on the enemy position.

As for the flanking enemy thing. You see each forward unit is usually followed by a supporting unit. You will usually always have a squad (platoon, comany) in the front, and another one following it. So it all depends on the situation. If the enemy got pinned down, you can send the supporting unit to flank them, to the enemy tries to flank the forward unit, you can send the supporting unit to stop them.

And of course it is best to send in aircraft and use special forces to disrupt the enemy. but you are talking about strategy here, and I am talking about tactic.

[mobydog]

okay guys, it's time to calm down...

First of all, who ever taught you WWI history deserves to be shot.

The reason the "human waves" were used in WWI was because the generals on both sides during the war were still using tactics of the 19th century. And reasons why 19th century warfare was fought with the so called huma n wave tactic is because the rifle, or in its earlier form, the musket, were used as an alternative to pikes, thus musketeers were marched into combat
in large formations just like the pikemen would.May I asked what's your understanding of 'Human wave' is ?

Those musket cannon fodders were standing and advancing shoulder to shoulder, and later break into a charge, when it's up close... this is not case in WWI.

To me.. Human wave is charging your objectives with sizable infantry force to seize quick victory. Who doesn't want to bomb and do an armour run into the enemy's positions... if they had the means. But that doesn't mean, soldiers do not need to charge the location, if armour is hampered and bombing cannot dislodge them.. in the mountain ranges for instance.

But battlefield tactics were quickly changed after WWI, because the human wave tactic was not suitable for modern warfare anymore due to several factor. One is the rifle, the killing range of a single riflemen increased from 200m to 1000m with the introduction of the rifle. Two is the machine gun, capable of firing hundreds of bullets per minutes, entire company of charging infantrymen can be wiped out in minutes by a machine gun

During the WWI, nearly 10 million men killed and 200 million were wounded on both sides in the period of 4 years. Military strategists of both sides after the war realized that battlefield tactics needs to be changed to avoid sacrificing so many lives..Machine-guns were very present during WWI. I would say it was armour, sub-machine guns and proved air-power that shaped the tactics from the trench war....

Human wave tactics were still comonly used by all parties during WWII.. the Brits were very much into it in Africa, inspite of having armour and Air power. Because there were not much cover in the desert.. you need boots to secure and capture objective. You can't be shooting each other in the open.

Also let me ask you this:
have you ever been to combat? or have you at least played a game of paint ball before? I not, I want to invite you to play a game of paint ball with me, bring your friends too if you want. No thanks, I have been serving as reservist for 11 yrs now. I would recommend you War games and live firing exercises instead.

paint ball is similar too real combat, but instead of firing bullets, you fire little balls of paint. It can be played with teams of any sizes, but we usually play with 40 vs 40. I can tell you right now, if your team just get up and charge blindly into our poistion you will get your ass raped big time, your team will be wiped out in the first minutes of the game.Not when when I have arty, mortar, air-strikes and napalm exploding around you... and armour charging with me...

but instead the best tactics is to split your team into smaller teams. the tactic we use to to send two or three teams out to locate the enemy position, and engage the team to pin them down. They would than radio to the rest of the team their location and size, the rest of the teams would than flank the enemy position and wipe them out.Your enemy's leader must be an air-head.. what made you think your opponent doesn't do the same. Shooting paintballs in a limited space and engaging competent infantry force is two different things.

And if we have to fight an enemy as strong as us, such as the PLA, we would still use the same tactic similar to the one described by me.You ignored alot of other attributes.

How do you do airstrikes confidently if your enemy had air-defense and AC in the air ?

How do you get reinforcements or EVAC from the air, if your enemies had manpads ?

You arty me, and I arty you. You bomb me and I bomb you. You machinegun me, I machine gun you.... you got more armour than me , I have ATMs (Vice Visa)... understand what I'm getting at.

Of course, in the whole scheme of things, the war arena would be chaotic.. and you cannot have equal forces thru out the front line... then tactics, mistakes and some luck comes in... but it could go either way.. IF THEY ARE ON EQUAL TERMS.

[Gollevainen]

No need to make fool of yourself greeny by stating silly stuff like "paint ball is close to real combat" and so on...that could be taken offense by those who have actually beeing in one.

Also this thread is gone way to far from it's orginal topic which is chinese special forces pictures. So lets cut this off-topic stuff. If you wish to discuss more about some matters being discussed in here, why not start a new thread? (in the limits of our rules tough) :off :off

[Mr_C]

I agree with u golly, this comparison of paintball and infantry tactics is really insulting. And for those who have felt the tiredness, pain, sweat and plain fear of having all sorts of stuff flying around u..... its even more insulting. And this lack of understanding of strategy, tactics and history is not one bit pleasant.

Anyway, does anyone know the number of PLA special forces currently in service. Last time read a few yrs ago they said they had roughly 500 000 special forces of various types. Is this true?????? enlighten me

[RedMercury]

I agree with u golly, this comparison of paintball and infantry tactics is really insulting. And for those who have felt the tiredness, pain, sweat and plain fear of having all sorts of stuff flying around u..... its even more insulting. And this lack of understanding of strategy, tactics and history is not one bit pleasant.

Anyway, does anyone know the number of PLA special forces currently in service. Last time read a few yrs ago they said they had roughly 500 000 special forces of various types. Is this true?????? enlighten me
500k is probably high. It may include the count of "recon" infantry, since in the PLA, recon forces are quite a bit better than the ordinary infantry. Look at the orbat page on SD.

[isthvan]

Anyway, does anyone know the number of PLA special forces currently in service. Last time read a few yrs ago they said they had roughly 500 000 special forces of various types. Is this true?????? enlighten me

Well I cant currently find SF page on SinoDefence but IIRC PLA should have one regiment for each military region. Thats some 7000 SF(DaDui?) troops.
If we count in possible marine, navy and air force SF units number of dedicated SF personnel shouldn't surpass 20 000 men...

Also IIRC there is some additional ~ 30 000 men in various reconnaissance units but they shouldn't be considered as SF personnel...

[green beret]

I agree it is my bad guys.

forgive me? :(

The paintball example is a bad one, i realized it after i posted it.

guess the point i was trying to make is, the U.S. Army would never include rushing head on direct into enemy fire as part of its infantry tactic.

The first reason, the U.S. Army unlike the PLA does not have the man power to conduct such tactic. I believe the Chinese Army at any time can call up to 30 million reserves and throw them into battle. This is an unthinkable number for the U.S. Army. Thus the aim of the U.S. Army in combat is to minimize casualties, and the human rush (a better term i think) is the direct opposite of this.

The second reason, the U.S. Army is an all volunteer army. Though I believe in time of dare need, the congress can draft U.S. citizens into combat. But I doubt any one would dare to do that, because that would cause up risings in the U.S. So unless the U.S. is being invaded, we wont see a draft in the U.S. any time soon.

So how will the U.S. Army using the human rush affect the army? Well I think we all know Saving Private Ryan, what most people dont know is that after the film as released West Point Military Academy's number of applicant dropped dramatically. That was when there the U.S. were not even fighting a war. Now imagine the U.S. Army has to fight fight that kind of war again. What will happen is that people will avoid the Army like the plague and no one will join the Army anymore.

Anyway, sorry again for my behavior before.

Ok I will stop highjacking the thread now.

moby if you want continue this, we can pm each other and continue from here.

[eecsmaster]

"Human Wave" is a term coined by NATO (really just the pussy whipped US army division) during the early days of the Korean War. It doesn't exist. Also, Green obviously has never seen true squad level PLA training pictures. Most pictures posted online ARE propaganda pictures.

[Chengdu J-10]

The Special forces Type 79/85 should have a foldable stock simular to the G36 assault rifle one. It is more stable to hold the gun and absorbs more vibration from firing giving better accuracy for automatic firing. And why doesn't the PLA design a rifle with a magazine holder simular to the M4 or M16, pushing the magazine in instead of rocking it like an AK-47? The M4 or M16 magazine is half hidden in the rifle with the other half exposed. While most of the PLA rifles magazines are fully exposed. With the trigger up high while the M16 or M4 carbines triggers are lower to allow the magizines to be burried or hidden in the rifle.

[sumdud]

To answer you, though off topic:

The AK/Eastern designs' fully exposed magazine slots allow for drums. If you compare Eastern drums to the Beta-Cs, Eastern drums save a lot of materials and are more ergonomic-i.e. it won't get in the way of your hand reaching for and pressing the trigger. Not a big deal on prone, but when charging, or using a bullpup, it's a problem.

[Chengdu J-10]

Is their any difference in performance between western magazine insertion into the rifle and eastern insertion to the rifle?
Western=Stick the magazine push in
Eastern=Rock n roll

Always been bothering me. Though the answer that always comes in my head is no. If no why doesn't the US us this kind of magazine insertion?

[mxiong]

I heard rumors say back in 2003 in Myanmar Chinese SOF from Chengdu Military Region went head-to-head with SFOD and those elite D-boys experienced heavy cansualties (~70 Deaths) and the whole operation failed miserably. Anyone has any info or confirmation? Personally I don't buy this story because Delta is always my favourite SOF in the world.

[Player 0]

I heard rumors say back in 2003 in Myanmar Chinese SOF from Chengdu Military Region went head-to-head with SFOD and those elite D-boys experienced heavy cansualties (~70 Deaths) and the whole operation failed miserably. Anyone has any info or confirmation? Personally I don't buy this story because Delta is always my favourite SOF in the world.

You heard this from where exactly?

[mxiong]

You heard this from where exactly?

One of my friends who was Recon specialist in PLA SOF told me the rumor. But he wasn't 100% certain.

[Finn McCool]

I heard rumors say back in 2003 in Myanmar Chinese SOF from Chengdu Military Region went head-to-head with SFOD and those elite D-boys experienced heavy cansualties (~70 Deaths) and the whole operation failed miserably. Anyone has any info or confirmation? Personally I don't buy this story because Delta is always my favourite SOF in the world.

Wait are you saying that the American Delta Force actually was involved in combat with Chinese special forces? I'm assuming that "SFOD" and "D-boys" is referring to Delta Force. If so, where did this happen? Why?

Personally I think that there is absolutely no way that this story could be true. How could these two forces come to grips? From your vauge language it seems that you could be talking about a training exercise but I'm absolutely certain that American and Chinese Special Forces (especially SFOD) would never train together.

[bd popeye]

Originally Posted by mxiong
I heard rumors say back in 2003 in Myanmar Chinese SOF from Chengdu Military Region went head-to-head with SFOD and those elite D-boys experienced heavy cansualties (~70 Deaths) and the whole operation failed miserably. Anyone has any info or confirmation? Personally I don't buy this story because Delta is always my favourite SOF in the world.

I find this story quite unbelievable if you are refering to the US Delta Force or any other US SOF,SEALS, Rangers ETC.. If such an event did occur it would be nearly impossible for the UD DoD to keep silent. Family members of the deceased service members would have come forth to one or more of the many news agencies in the US. Some unnamed source from the Pentagon would have been quoted. I just don't believe this action ever happened..

By the way, it's not that I don't think PLA SF could defeat US Delta Force. I feel the PLA SOF could defeat them in certian situations. I just do not believe this event ever occuried as discribed.

[10754750miles]

yea, i agree that 70 casualities are kind of high for special operation, and anything that magnitude could've result in media exposure already, let along pitting two countries elite SOF against each other just sounds a bit like a pleasant fiction. it would be like some f35s already shot down some j10s, a bit far-fetched. but what do i know, anything is possible, if there is some credible source for that, however, it would be an interesting read.

[Chengdu J-10]

Always bothered me. This image of the Beijing SWAT team one of the most highest regarded. The guy on the left with the red dot sight on his gun. What gun is he actually holding? Because it doesn't seem like the Type79/85 submachine guns, nor the Type 81/95 rifle. So what actually is the person armed with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SWAT_Demo.JPG

[mxiong]

Always bothered me. This image of the Beijing SWAT team one of the most highest regarded. The guy on the left with the red dot sight on his gun. What gun is he actually holding? Because it doesn't seem like the Type79/85 submachine guns, nor the Type 81/95 rifle. So what actually is the person armed with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SWAT_Demo.JPG
It looks like a crossbow. I heard it's actually Chinese SWATs' favourtie.

[isthvan]

Always bothered me. This image of the Beijing SWAT team one of the most highest regarded. The guy on the left with the red dot sight on his gun. What gun is he actually holding? Because it doesn't seem like the Type79/85 submachine guns, nor the Type 81/95 rifle. So what actually is the person armed with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SWAT_Demo.JPG

It is type 79/85 whit Picatinny rail and red dot sight and flashlight installed... I have seen better quality image of Beijing SWAT team whit this gun recently... I will try to find that image and post it here...

[sumdud]

No way..... why would Delta be in Myanmar? Even worse, 70 Delta force in a group??? XD LOL ROFL :rofl: what SOF has 70 people in a squad in the same operation?

[Scratch]

No way..... why would Delta be in Myanmar? Even worse, 70 Delta force in a group??? XD LOL ROFL :rofl: what SOF has 70 people in a squad in the same operation?

Hmm, I could think of some green berets with a larger group of indigenous fighters, but not more.

[Finn McCool]

I heard rumors say back in 2003 in Myanmar Chinese SOF from Chengdu Military Region went head-to-head with SFOD and those elite D-boys experienced heavy cansualties (~70 Deaths) and the whole operation failed miserably. Anyone has any info or confirmation? Personally I don't buy this story because Delta is always my favourite SOF in the world.

I think that this story was told to the soldiers in the Chinese SOF community to give them a morale boost. If they believe that they defeated a possible enemy with a very good reputation then they will have very high pride in their unit and will be confident, which is a good thing. I would even go as far as to say that this story came from the commanding officers in whatever unit it originated in.

[isthvan]

Beijing SWAT

http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/457/79surefire5km.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[amorphous]

I think that this story was told to the soldiers in the Chinese SOF community to give them a morale boost. If they believe that they defeated a possible enemy with a very good reputation then they will have very high pride in their unit and will be confident, which is a good thing. I would even go as far as to say that this story came from the commanding officers in whatever unit it originated in.

I doubt it. One has to have pretty good mental, besides physical, capability to be in the elite force. I tend to estimate that any one with an IQ level of a college student has very good odds of dismissing this story as pure rumors. I just can't imagine any officers would give them a story that's impossible to believe. The best stories to tell as morale boosters will be true stories with some exagerations.

[mxiong]

I doubt it. One has to have pretty good mental, besides physical, capability to be in the elite force. I tend to estimate that any one with an IQ level of a college student has very good odds of dismissing this story as pure rumors. I just can't imagine any officers would give them a story that's impossible to believe. The best stories to tell as morale boosters will be true stories with some exagerations.
Why do you think it's impossible to believe that 1st SFOD-D got owned by PLA SOF? ***********

Country bashing remarks and other slurs..i.e. racial, ethnic or otherwise are not permitted in this forum.

bd popeye super moderator

[10754750miles]

Beijing SWAT

http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/457/79surefire5km.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

oh wow, what is that they are using?

[isthvan]

Why do you think it's impossible to believe that 1st SFOD-D got owned by PLA SOF? Ignorant Yankees.

Mate there was no such conflict because you cant hide military operation in which you lose 70 Delta operators. Internet rumor by Chinese fan boys and thats it...


oh wow, what is that they are using?

It is type 79 whit Picatinny rail(red dot sight, flashlight and other goodies) installed.

[amorphous]

Why do you think it's impossible to believe that 1st SFOD-D got owned by PLA SOF?

It is not that I believe it is impossible for PLA to beat American special forces. I just think it is impossible for the two to have any major run-ins in the first place, let alone one inflicting major casualties on the other.

FYI, ignorant I might be, I am not a "Yankee".

[Gollevainen]

Just for reminder, do not even dare to continue this Chinese SOF vs. Delta in sandbox dirt trowing contest or there's going to be misbehaiving member vs. gollevainen contest....and quess who always wins:nono: :nono:

[10754750miles]

http://www.6park.com/news/messages/47288.html

i just found something regarding to the type 79, it has a better angle these picture here, it's not a military website tho. i wonder why do they use type 79, isn't that kind of old as a platform to put addons? why not type 95?

[isthvan]

http://www.6park.com/news/messages/47288.html

i just found something regarding to the type 79, it has a better angle these picture here, it's not a military website tho. i wonder why do they use type 79, isn't that kind of old as a platform to put addons? why not type 95?

Well there are few reasons but considering that mod type79 are seen only whit SWAT teams I would bet at two most possible reasons why they use them instead of type95:

1.over penetration of type95 rifle round compared to 7.62 pistol round of type79/85

2.good old " proven is better " mentality... Many of users prefer conventional weapons especially for CQB.

[Finn McCool]

Mate there was no such conflict because you cant hide military operation in which you lose 70 Delta operators.

I might be violati