PLA Small arms

Originally Posted by paintgun

not a shooter myself but i can understand why some people despise bullpup ergonomics

and that barrel bipod/support

how many rounds in that magazine?

The "support" is just display stand, due to time and situation constraints I couldn't have it pics taken laid flat on the table...actually, my "enthusiastic" attitude in taking pics seemed to draw some attention back then, hopefully they didn't flag me on some watch list because I got the 052C destroyer to savvy on tomorrow...

The capacity is to be 50, gun weight @ 1kg (don't know if that means fully loaded, but the thing was light).

And for ergonomics...personally I don't feel that's an problem, but I'd agreed the gun isn't designed with rooms to integrate tactical attachments.

Yeah, that's me...

tactical attachments is one thing

the oft critical comment on the QBZ bullpups ergonomics (either the SMG variants or the ARs) is the selector switch and the spent casing ejector
the bullpup magazine location, well just like any other bullpup is another point

i'm beating on some dead horse, great shirt btw ;D

Another issue some times pointed out is switching shoulders. Although the PLA will train it's troops too be right handed as it's still a tradition, On the battle field there are times when the left will be the better choice like say in very close quarters or if you took a hit too the right shoulder.
Out side of that is the sight radius conventional assault rifles can afford long sight radi offering very good sight picture and accuracy well bull pups are built with shorter ones.

This is for the police.

It looks alot like the CZ805 Bren A1 carbine.
Any news on Caliber I don't think this is 556 or 762x39?

It states to be 10mm, and from the Chinese character, it states it is anti riot type of weapon.

The attachment on the bottom seem to be some kind of ray dazzler.

Looks more too me like a Riot munitions launcher. A dazzler would be more electrical where that looks more mechanical.
10mm makes some sense If you were firing rubber bullets and the like.

hello. I was wondering if there is any topic about machineguns in the Chinese army.
wanted to know what are the machineguns that the Chinese army uses.
if anyone has photos of the models used in the Chinese army.

Too My knowledge The Front Line PLA Ground forces Utilizes The Following
Selective Fire arms
Sub machine guns front line unit

1. Type 05 SMG
2. Chang Feng

Reservist

1. Type 85
2. Type 79

AR Front line

1. QBZ95B carbine
2. QBZ95
3. QBZ95G

Reservist

1. Type 81
2. Type 56

Boarder units

1. QBZ 03

LMG front line

1. QBB 95 ( Long barrel Qbz95)
2. QYJ 88

Second line units

1. Type 81

GPMG

1. Type 86 ( armored vehicles)
2. Type 80 (limited PLA MC)
3. Type 67 (Limmited tends too second line as PLA doctrine emphases Heavy and light)

HMG

1. Type 77 12.7x108mm
2. Type 85 12.7x108mm Improved model Type 77
3. W85 12,7x108mm not the same thing as the Type 89
4. QJZ-89 12.7x108 Infantry heavy MG
5. QJG 02 14.5mm

AGL

1. QLZ-87 mounted 35x32mm SR configuration suggests mounted
2. QLB-06 infantry 35x32mm SR some times call QLZ87B which would mean an improved model however it sacrifices capacity for a Configuration more suited too infantry in that it looks like a rifle

Hi,

New to the forums, so I can't yet post a new thread. This one will have to do.

I'm interested in finding out why Chinese infantry platoons use the same calibre round for their DMR. I know the round isn't identical, but outside of logistics is there a more concrete reason based in doctrine as to why they wouldn't follow US/Russian standards of using a 'battle rifle' round for marksmen?

As a bit of a side note, have their been any tests of the 5.8 round's effectiveness in various situations?

Originally Posted by inanon

Hi,

New to the forums, so I can't yet post a new thread. This one will have to do.

I'm interested in finding out why Chinese infantry platoons use the same calibre round for their DMR. I know the round isn't identical, but outside of logistics is there a more concrete reason based in doctrine as to why they wouldn't follow US/Russian standards of using a 'battle rifle' round for marksmen?

As a bit of a side note, have their been any tests of the 5.8 round's effectiveness in various situations?

An improved variant of DBP97, the DBP10, will be introduce alongside the new QBZ95-1 series, to standardize munitions used on all platforms, perhaps that answers your question.

But in any case, designated marksman, sniper, and even the whole concept of sniping is only not as alien to PLA in less than a decade ago - when they lost miserably in their first entry at the international sniping competition shows how lagging the PLA is in terms of weapons and training, if not the whole concept including weapons design, but they're catching up nonetheless.

As for round choice inanon. The PLA is not unique in Using a Single round as LMG' DMR and Infantry standard rounds. A number of nations issue DMR's of the Same Caliber as there standard issue. Even the US has Variants of the M16A4 built for use as DMR weapons and uses them from time too time. the key advantage is commonality of ammo in the Squad. the key disadvantage is Most modern Assault Rifle class rounds are weak penetration and on range compared too full battle rifle class rounds. So well the 762x54mm Draganov/Nagant round may reach father and be a better killer in Ballistic coeffent, It means that the unit deploying that weapon has too add a and equip a soldier who is different form the rest of his squad. and adds a level of logistical complexity that is unwanted.

Originally Posted by TerraN_EmpirE

As for round choice inanon. The PLA is not unique in Using a Single round as LMG' DMR and Infantry standard rounds. A number of nations issue DMR's of the Same Caliber as there standard issue. Even the US has Variants of the M16A4 built for use as DMR weapons and uses them from time too time. the key advantage is commonality of ammo in the Squad. the key disadvantage is Most modern Assault Rifle class rounds are weak penetration and on range compared too full battle rifle class rounds. So well the 762x54mm Draganov/Nagant round may reach father and be a better killer in Ballistic coeffent, It means that the unit deploying that weapon has too add a and equip a soldier who is different form the rest of his squad. and adds a level of logistical complexity that is unwanted.

Originally Posted by MwRYum

An improved variant of DBP97, the DBP10, will be introduce alongside the new QBZ95-1 series, to standardize munitions used on all platforms, perhaps that answers your question.

But in any case, designated marksman, sniper, and even the whole concept of sniping is only not as alien to PLA in less than a decade ago - when they lost miserably in their first entry at the international sniping competition shows how lagging the PLA is in terms of weapons and training, if not the whole concept including weapons design, but they're catching up nonetheless.

Thanks for the replies. Seem's its more a corollary to modernisation than a radically different philosophy towards small arms combat.