Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 77

chinese small arms thread

This is a discussion on chinese small arms thread within the Army forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; How did the US acquire the Type 81? Is this in Iraq? http://bp1.blogger.com/_3wZSwFvZzqM/...0862bb38d5.jpg...

  1. #61
    Ryz05 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    422

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    How did the US acquire the Type 81? Is this in Iraq?

    http://bp1.blogger.com/_3wZSwFvZzqM/...0862bb38d5.jpg

  2. #62
    UCSDAE's Avatar
    UCSDAE is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    70

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    not suprise at all. there all reports that arms dealers, in lieu with the ppl in charge of savage dumps and refurbish old, used up weapons or weapon system to sale to buyers that are.. a bit cash strapped...or are facing a transportation problem(like the insurgents in Iraq, although I doubt they lack any of this).

    As for the hissing and smoke problem with the 95, the smoke is from too much lube. if u use too much, that's what happens. but switching from conventional layout to bullup is a bit of getting use to.

    Type 03 is....i dont like it, just personal opinion.
    Last edited by UCSDAE; 02-20-2007 at 11:43 PM.

  3. #63
    ahho is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    530

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by UCSDAE View Post
    not suprise at all. there all reports that arms dealers, in lieu with the ppl in charge of savage dumps and refurbish old, used up weapons or weapon system to sale to buyers that are.. a bit cash strapped...or are facing a transportation problem(like the insurgents in Iraq, although I doubt they lack any of this).

    As for the hissing and smoke problem with the 95, the smoke is from too much lube. if u use too much, that's what happens. but switching from conventional layout to bullup is a bit of getting use to.

    Type 03 is....i dont like it, just personal opinion.
    what don't you like about type-03, i want to hear your opinion. For me i am indifferent as it looks like the type-81 in some ways

  4. #64
    UCSDAE's Avatar
    UCSDAE is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    70

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    it's one of those thing that u just dont like but u cant quiet explain why. However, the type 95 does offer tactical flexibilty because of it's length and is easy to manuver in CQC,and that is a advantage bullpup has over conventional layout. The type 03,if it were to obtain the same flexibility, has to have a retractable/foldable stock, just like the M4 and M16 in Iraq. besides, if u fold or retract the stock, that would just kinda make your conventional layout rifle into a de facto bullpup.
    if u fired an AK with the stock folded(or any assault rifle for that matter), u will realized that it becomes even more difficult to control the recoil and fire with acceptable accuracy. This might be so for me cuz i m a noob when it comes to marksmanship(comparing to some of our members).
    Last edited by UCSDAE; 02-22-2007 at 02:26 AM.

  5. #65
    sumdud's Avatar
    sumdud is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    1,842

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    I can't imagine anyone who can fire better with folded stocks. Afterall, your shoulder is much more rigid than your jointy hands. If you shoot a gun without stock, you split the recoil in 2 instead of 3, what'd you expect?
    There is no reason for there to be a Type 03 (or 05 for that matter) IMO when you have the Type 81.
    Come to think, this just sounds like going from Rk-62 to 76 to 95.

    That Type 81 could be coming from Afghanistan too, as it does share border with China and Pakistan. (I hope that soldier is from the Bay Area.)

    I want Asia on my front porch and America as my backyard.
    Disclaimer: By America, I meant the Continent. And yes, I know Asian homes have neither a backyard nor a porch in the American sense.

  6. #66
    ahho is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    530

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by sumdud View Post
    I can't imagine anyone who can fire better with folded stocks. Afterall, your shoulder is much more rigid than your jointy hands. If you shoot a gun without stock, you split the recoil in 2 instead of 3, what'd you expect?
    There is no reason for there to be a Type 03 (or 05 for that matter) IMO when you have the Type 81.
    Come to think, this just sounds like going from Rk-62 to 76 to 95.

    That Type 81 could be coming from Afghanistan too, as it does share border with China and Pakistan. (I hope that soldier is from the Bay Area.)
    just wondering, what was the difference internally between type-81,97 and 03/05??? all i know is that 81 is ussing the russian round while the other use the 5.8mm round

  7. #67
    dannytoro is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    49

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    ...I'm very partial to the little Czech S.61 as a back up gun. Plus you can go silently hunting in trenchs at night with it too:



    .....Then unscrew the silencer and stock and back on the thigh holster it goes....
    Last edited by dannytoro; 02-25-2007 at 10:21 PM. Reason: change phrase

  8. #68
    sumdud's Avatar
    sumdud is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    1,842

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Hmm? Wrong thread?

    I want Asia on my front porch and America as my backyard.
    Disclaimer: By America, I meant the Continent. And yes, I know Asian homes have neither a backyard nor a porch in the American sense.

  9. #69
    dannytoro is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    49

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    ...Oh, I thought they wanted ideal firearms, not just chinese ones. Sorry, my mistake

  10. #70
    f.hind's Avatar
    f.hind is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    50

    PLA Troops with Type 97?



    What do you think? Possibly for long-term recon missions behind enemy lines?

  11. #71
    Gomer Pyle is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Kampfwagen View Post
    Actualy, during World Wars one and two and in Korea, it was common for soliders on both sides (Germany moreso in WW1) to urinate on their weapons to cool them down. It isint that far-fectched a concept. And no-one cares when their guns are sticky and smelly. In fact, bodily waste is sometimes welcomed.
    Not on thier weapons IN thier weapons! This is 100% true in the case of machine gunners! These were water cooled and the barrels were inside of a water jacket, with water supplies in shortage they were really left with no other option! I recently viewed a documentary about WWI and they mentioned this practice!

  12. #72
    Gomer Pyle is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Zergling View Post
    The design (AR-15, which is pretty much M-16) sucks by design. If you lay out its blueprints you'll find it's fundamentally flawed, it uses tolerances that are way too tight for a combat weapon. It's ammo sensitive to the point of being finicky, it uses soft alloy receivers and is fed from flimsy magazines that are too weak to operate properly when loaded to full capacity. (Hence you'll never see a true 30-round M16 mag)

    The worst part is the gas system. The rifle farts where it eats thanks to its direct gas impingement system. Compounding to that bad idea, we have the use of a tiny gas tube and a horrible breah design that is impossible to clean properly without the skills and tools of a dentist.
    The AR-15 is a M-16 that is simply the designation given to an AR by the military. Also the AK has as many flaws as the AR and they both have thier strengths that is why China dropped devolopement and production of the Type 56! They devoloped the 81 which is basically an AK and SKS combined because the type 56 did not have sufficient accuracy on semi auto fire and was uncontrollable on full auto!
    AK-47's are know for firepower not accuracy the AR is more of a precision tool and because of this it suffers in reliability! You have to understand where the need for assault rifle comes from, before assualt rifles troops generally had rifles and sub machine guns both of which had major disadvantages in battle! The rifle was cumbersome overpowered and has a slow rate of fire the submachine gun lacked power and accuracy! The solution was the assault rifle, basically a carbine with full auto fire select! The AR is more a rifle than machine gun and the AK is more a machine gun than a rifle! The AK is compared to a blunt stick and the AR to a precision tool! The newer AR platforms are using piston systems that vent outside of the breech solving the crap where you eat problem! The AK is good at laying down a wall of lead and the AR is good at making precision shots! The 5.56 causes more damage due to bullet yaw and has a higher velocity making it more accurate, that is why they developed the AK-74 and 5.54 round it's ballistics are simmilar to that of the 5.56! With the newer rifles like the SCAR who would want either of those outdated relics in a combat situation anyway?

  13. #73
    rhino123's Avatar
    rhino123 is offline Pencil Pusher
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Somewhere out there.
    Posts
    1,867

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Gomer Pyle View Post
    The AR-15 is a M-16 that is simply the designation given to an AR by the military. Also the AK has as many flaws as the AR and they both have thier strengths that is why China dropped devolopement and production of the Type 56! They devoloped the 81 which is basically an AK and SKS combined because the type 56 did not have sufficient accuracy on semi auto fire and was uncontrollable on full auto!
    AK-47's are know for firepower not accuracy the AR is more of a precision tool and because of this it suffers in reliability! You have to understand where the need for assault rifle comes from, before assualt rifles troops generally had rifles and sub machine guns both of which had major disadvantages in battle! The rifle was cumbersome overpowered and has a slow rate of fire the submachine gun lacked power and accuracy! The solution was the assault rifle, basically a carbine with full auto fire select! The AR is more a rifle than machine gun and the AK is more a machine gun than a rifle! The AK is compared to a blunt stick and the AR to a precision tool! The newer AR platforms are using piston systems that vent outside of the breech solving the crap where you eat problem! The AK is good at laying down a wall of lead and the AR is good at making precision shots! The 5.56 causes more damage due to bullet yaw and has a higher velocity making it more accurate, that is why they developed the AK-74 and 5.54 round it's ballistics are simmilar to that of the 5.56! With the newer rifles like the SCAR who would want either of those outdated relics in a combat situation anyway?
    I would agreed that M16 had better accuracy when compared to AK-series of rifle (earlier version at least). But when in real combat situation, I would rather shoot from a more reliable and rugged weapon than a weapon that give good accuracy but jammed every now and then.

    I have handled a M16 (M16S1 - Singapore made M16A1 rifle), and seriously the rifle sucks. It required too much maintainence and my rifle broke when I drop it on the ground accidentally once. Although the parts that broke can be reassembled easily, but if this happen in real combat situation, I cannot imagine myself having to fix that rifle while trying to hide from hostile fire. Of course I admit that I might get a poor quality rifle, but it really give me very bad impression on this weapon.

    Plus as quote from globalsecurity (M16 5.56mm Rifle)

    Quote Originally Posted by Globalsecurity
    Troops liked the light weight, but complained about insufficient range, lethality, and in some cases durability. While the M16 had been marketed as virtually "maintenance free," poor maintenance instructions (or even no instructions), a complete lack of cleaning kits initially, and jungle climate together with the direct gas system caused trouble. Its high rates of fire in the jungle environment had a larger impact on increasing American morale than on actually inflicting enemy casualties.
    a good comparison between an AK-47 and a M-16

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari..._AK-47_and_M16

    One note on this was that,

    7.62x39 mm round has shown to be more effective at penetrating cover, as evidenced in the Vietnam War where the AK-47-wielding Vietcongs could shoot through the trees enemies were hiding behind, but the M16-wielding Americans could not do the same.
    A study in 2006 found that 20% of soldiers using the rifle wanted more lethality or stopping power
    a paragraph above indicate that the rifle in question was M4 or M16.

    I believe the main reason for the Chinese not wanting to continue their Type 56 rifle production was the fact that they found a more accurate version in the form of Type 81 rifle. Then they began fielding the Type 95. And one of the biggest reason to change to 5.8mm rounds was that it was smaller and lighter and so troop could carry more rounds than 7.62mm rounds. Plus as claimed, the 5.8mm rounds have better penetration power... but I do not believe that it had better stopping power.
    Last edited by rhino123; 01-20-2011 at 01:28 AM.
    I am in my Shutter Happy Mode, shoot more, shoot more, shoot more!

  14. #74
    AssassinsMace's Avatar
    AssassinsMace is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    4,959

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Nice JS9.




  15. #75
    Gomer Pyle is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4

    Re: chinese small arms thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rhino123 View Post
    I have handled a M16 (M16S1 - Singapore made M16A1 rifle), and seriously the rifle sucks. It required too much maintainence and my rifle broke when I drop it on the ground accidentally once.I admit that I might get a poor quality rifle, but it really give me very bad impression on this weapon.

    I believe the main reason for the Chinese not wanting to continue their Type 56 rifle production was the fact that they found a more accurate version in the form of Type 81 rifle. And one of the biggest reason to change to 5.8mm rounds was that it was smaller and lighter and so troop could carry more rounds than 7.62mm rounds. Plus as claimed, the 5.8mm rounds have better penetration power... but I do not believe that it had better stopping power.
    There are many makers of AR style weapons China included, but here in the States there are only a few who have actual military contracts and it shows in thier products! The designs have improved over the years and they are totally modular weapon systems now and no longer just a rifle! There are numerous choices of calibers, accesories and gas systems and if you ever handled an AR built by the Smith and Wesson company you would be highly impressed! Not only were the first M-16s issued without cleaning kits and troops were told they did not need cleaned, they also issued dirty ammo that fouled the weapon horribly!

    The 7.62x39 round has alot of penetration but it is a slower round. Rounds such as the 5.56 and 5.45 have a velocity this improves accuracy they also inflict a great deal of hydostatic shock and tend to yaw creating far greater wounds. Believe it or not the U.S. designed the 5.56 to wound and not kill soldiers but it is very deadly out to 200 yards! The 5.45 Soviet round was devoloped because of the 5.56 round, there are many reasons why. Stopping power, can carry more ammo, smaller bolt better balances the AK design etc...

    That is correct they dropped the type 56 because they were not satisfied with its performance! The type 81 is designed from the AK-47 and the SKS, here is a good article on the 81


    "Due to the Sino-Russo ideological split in the early 1960s, the Russians never gave the Chinese licenses to produce the AKM and the RPK, the light-machine-gun variant of the AKM. The Chinese army had never been wholly pleased with the AK's performance and chose to design a new rifle instead of continuing with the existing Type 56, their designation for the AK."

    "The mission for a new indigenous military rifle started in the 1960s. The Type 63 rifle, a combination of SKS and AK features, came initially. It was proven to be unsatisfactory and was withdrawn from service by the mid-1970s. During the same period, among numerous other obscure research projects, the 66-136 experimental rifle emerged. The 66-136 laid the foundation for the development of the next generation of Chinese infantry rifle, the Type 81"

    I can't post links yet but this article can be found at Guns and Ammo. There is also a very good AR AK video on YouTube that compares them honestly, it was done by the Discovery channel.

    Does anybody have any info on the early Chinese SKS rifles made at the Jianshe Arsenal? Also there was a SKS variant with a shortened barrel that was exported from China during the 80's these went under the name of the Cowboy's Companion and Paratrooper models these were never military issue models just export gimmicks to get more sales! I basically am looking for info into where these were modified how many were made and any other history on them. The early chinese SKSs' are very nice examples of the SKS design!

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •