(ASK) How well trained are the pla special forces?

paintgun · Apr 5, 2012

Bltizo said:
No duh, that's why "fighting local wars under informationized conditions" has been PLA's mantra over the last few years if not decade. I'm not sure why you bring up people's war; are you implying that past doctrine is affecting PLA SOF's current proficiency?

not directly, because it's a top down process

and changing doctrines, managing the transformation throughout the years is, i quote xinhui "a slow and painful process for the PLA"

fighting local wars under informationized conditions has been around for almost 2 decades, yet PLA has only managed the brigadization of some of its force structure very recently

if doctrines were to prevail as easily they are laid out, we would be seeing an informationized army with radios for each soldier no?

We've had pics of PLAN SOF intercepting pirate skiffs (check the naval piracy thread) but PLAN have not rescued hostages yet.

that made me recall a PLAN Marines exercise with some African country, Djibouti perhaps, instructing them how to do high speed intercept with boats

There are only two areas I find PLA lacking in compared to current NATO soldiers. One is mass use of NVG (to be fair not even all NATO soldiers are equipped in this case), the other is use of more capable scopes (The type 95-1 should remedy this a little. It comes with mass produced numbers of image intensification scopes and another one whose use escapes me). Apart from these two areas, I feel the PLA's new adoption of equipment closes the gap to a miniscule distance between them and western militaries, if not closing it completely.

other than the scopes and overall improvement of small arms quality, the one that 'upset' me the most is the lack of tactical radios, other equipments might be deemed as accessorial paraphelia, but i think radios are a very important means of communications between squad leaders and his team not just communication with higher echelons, this is even more important in SOF mission situations, where high coordination and close cooperation is imperative

good radios are expensive, so are scopes, and you have to feed them batteries, another logistical constraint on the personal level

Bltizo said:
but it's a little bit better than eyeballing how good SOF soldiers equipment looks...

don't we eyeball everything Blitzo, it's the basis of discussion and valuable information
we do it with every single plane and ships and AFVs, why single out a topic where an apparrent lack is showing

Blitzo · Apr 5, 2012

paintgun said:
not directly, because it's a top down process

and changing doctrines, managing the transformation throughout the years is, i quote xinhui "a slow and painful process for the PLA"

fighting local wars under informationized conditions has been around for almost 2 decades, yet PLA has only managed the brigadization of some of its force structure very recently

if doctrines were to prevail as easily they are laid out, we would be seeing an informationized army with radios for each soldier no?

My reference to local-wars-under-informationized-conditions was only countering your reference of people's war, which I still do not see its relevance to current PLA SOF proficiency. I fully agree informationization will be and is a long process, but that does not reflect on PLA SOFs.

I feel like it would be better for you to line out what exactly SOF proficiency, or capability, means

that made me recall a PLAN Marines exercise with some African country, Djibouti perhaps, instructing them how to do high speed intercept with boats

Instructing them? Wow are you saying PLAN marines need foreign assistance to learn how to intercept boats

other than the scopes and overall improvement of small arms quality, the one that 'upset' me the most is the lack of tactical radios, other equipments might be deemed as accessorial paraphelia, but i think radios are a very important means of communications between squad leaders and his team not just communication with higher echelons, this is even more important in SOF mission situations, where high coordination and close cooperation is imperative

good radios are expensive, so are scopes, and you have to feed them batteries, another logistical constraint on the personal level

I must say this supposed lack of radios is new for me.
Is it standard every NATO or US soldier equipped with radios during peacetime exercises? Radios aren't exactly highly visible during exercise photos, is that what you're drawing conclusions from?

don't we eyeball everything Blitzo, it's the basis of discussion and valuable information
we do it with every single plane and ships and AFVs, why single out a topic where an apparrent lack is showing

You can eyeball the length of a plane, estimate the displacement of a ship from pictures. You can't eyeball the proficiency of a service by a soldier's equipment anymore than you can extrapolate the capability of an air force by the condition of a single plane.
I'm singling out your logic. If you were to try and argue that the quality of a rifle was shoddy by pictures of a soldier equipped by it, then that would be reasonable. Trying to argue that the lack of advanced scopes or bad quality goggles or whatever is a reason why an entire service is lesser overall is ridiculous.

paintgun · Apr 5, 2012

Bltizo said:
My reference to local-wars-under-informationized-conditions was only countering your reference of people's war, which I still do not see its relevance to current PLA SOF proficiency. I fully agree informationization will be and is a long process, but that does not reflect on PLA SOFs.

i appreciate your opinion then

I feel like it would be better for you to line out what exactly SOF proficiency, or capability, means

sadly i'm not qualified to do so, what i can do is scratch on the surface and subjectively form an opinion, as i do with other PLA and military related subject

Instructing them? Wow are you saying PLAN marines need foreign assistance to learn how to intercept boats

shouldn't it be obvious Blitzo who was instructing whom, can i call that a cheap shot?

I must say this supposed lack of radios is new for me.
Is it standard every NATO or US soldier equipped with radios during peacetime exercises? Radios aren't exactly highly visible during exercise photos, is that what you're drawing conclusions from?

you train as you fight, there is no difference between training, peacetime deployment, or into a warzone or conflict
when you pack you bring the whole thing or as you are told

discussing a particular photo would need the pertinent source, i have posted US Marines on Afghan deployment, one of them has radio with him, would you kindly post the pic you want to discuss?

You can eyeball the length of a plane, estimate the displacement of a ship from pictures. You can't eyeball the proficiency of a service by a soldier's equipment anymore than you can extrapolate the capability of an air force by the condition of a single plane.
I'm singling out your logic. If you were to try and argue that the quality of a rifle was shoddy by pictures of a soldier equipped by it, then that would be reasonable. Trying to argue that the lack of advanced scopes or bad quality goggles or whatever is a reason why an entire service is lesser overall is ridiculous.

You can eyeball if a J-10A carries a PL-12, and a J-8 only carry the PL-7, which plane and pilot is more proficient at BVR combat?

You can eyeball if a soldier carries with him an ACOG scope on deployment and also in training regiments, while the other one always use nothing but the iron sight on his rifle, which one is more proficient at long range shooting?

does not each individual and machine translates into the bigger institution and organization they form?

Blitzo · Apr 5, 2012

paintgun said:
shouldn't it be obvious Blitzo who was instructing whom, can i call that a cheap shot?

Of course it's obvious who you think was instructing whom, you already posted it. I'm wondering if it was a caption describing it.
But I haven't seen the picture so no it's not obvious to me.

you train as you fight, there is no difference between training, peacetime deployment, or into a warzone or conflict
when you pack you bring the whole thing or as you are told

That should be true, one should train in peacetime as would expect for wartime. But I think few of us are under the illusion that in war time the PLA will be equipped the same way they are now.

discussing a particular photo would need the pertinent source, i have posted US Marines on Afghan deployment, one of them has radio with him, would you kindly post the pic you want to discuss?

-gasp- one of your two pictures show multiple US marines seemingly not equipped with radios?

You can eyeball if a J-10A carries a PL-12, and that J-8 can only the PL-7, which plane and pilot is more proficient at BVR combat?

You can eyeball if a soldier carries with him an ACOG scope on deployment and also in training regiments, while the other one always use nothing but the iron sight on his rifle, which one is more proficient at long range shooting?

Yes, clearly you can, it is a comparison whose logic I agree with.
Let's continue from your example. You see one soldier carrying merely an iron sight, the other with a scope. Can you extrapolate either service to be more proficient than the other? Can you judge either service is better trained than the other? Clearly from pictures, even of regiments, we cannot.

In fact you admitted you do not know what indicates SOF capability, so why don't we rename this thread "How well equipped do PLA SOF look?" instead.

does not each individual and machine translates into the bigger institution and organization they form?

You can try and judge how well equipped a service may be from a limited set of photos which may but may probably not show how the entire service is equipped, and try and link equipment to the service's overall effectiveness and training. By then it's basically a blind guess.

It is ridiculous to judge the effectiveness or capability of an entire service based on appearances. End of Story.

paintgun · Apr 5, 2012

Bltizo said:
Of course it's obvious who you think was instructing whom, you already posted it. I'm wondering if it was a caption describing it.
But I haven't seen the picture so no it's not obvious to me.

good God! Blitzo you honestly think i was referring that the Djibouti-ans are instructing the PLA Marines?

That should be true, one should train in peacetime as would expect for wartime. But I think few of us are under the illusion that in war time the PLA will be equipped the same way they are now.

why do you think so? why would PLA train differently with the way they will go into combat?

-gasp- one of your two pictures show multiple US marines seemingly not equipped with radios?

how about the other one? not making a comment on that one?

Yes, clearly you can, it is a comparison whose logic I agree with.
Let's continue from your example. You see one soldier carrying merely an iron sight, the other with a scope. Can you extrapolate either service to be more proficient than the other? Can you judge either service is better trained than the other? Clearly from pictures, even of regiments, we cannot.

so we can not deduce that a PL-12 equipped J-10 is necessarily better at BVR than a J-8 with PL-7?

In fact you admitted you do not know what indicates SOF capability, so why don't we rename this thread "How well equipped do PLA SOF look?" instead.

i admit that i am not a service member or an instructor in the military, such is a qualified person to have a say of this matter in my book

that is however irrelevant with how this thread goes, as each of us hold our opinion and they weight equally the same unless, someone else who does have the pertinent experience weigh in and disprove us in one way or the other

You can try and judge how well equipped a service may be from a limited set of photos which may but may probably not show how the entire service is equipped, and try and link equipment to the service's overall effectiveness and training. By then it's basically a blind guess.

It is ridiculous to judge the effectiveness or capability of an entire service based on appearances. End of Story.

why the urge to end this 'story', err i mean thread
i think we can continue to discuss as long as we respect our different opinions

Blitzo · Apr 5, 2012

paintgun said:
good God! Blitzo you honestly think i was referring that the Djibouti-ans are instructing the PLA Marines?

If that wasn't what you were implying then why say it?

why do you think so? why would PLA train differently with the way they will go into combat?

Simple -- costs. Investing massively into giving all troops high end body armour or NVG or whatever during peacetime would not be wise, instead you can cycle equipment through different regiments.

how about the other one? not making a comment on that one?

Well your position seemed to be that all US/NATO soldiers were equipped with radios, and from the second picture showing a good half dozen marines in a combat zone without radios, it effectively disproves your claim.
Unless the other picture is equivalent to "all US/NATO soldiers" then there's really no reason to mention it because it doesn't effect my position because of the other picture.

I think we can both see it is foolish to settle this question based on only two pictures, but going through some of the military picture threads popeye posts in, I think we can clearly see not all US/NATO servicemen are equipped with radios even in combat zones.

Besides, in a squad/fireteam, isn't there usually a dedicated radio operator which implies each soldier is not inherently equipped with a radio?

so we can not deduce that a PL-12 equipped J-10 is necessarily better at BVR than a J-8 with PL-7?

Didn't you read my post? I said I agreed with your comparison. I also agree with your iron sight vs scope comparison.

But extrapolating that to how well an entire service is trained based on the equipment of a few soldiers, like you were doing some two pages back, is a whole different ball game, and is not logical.

i admit that i am not a service member or an instructor in the military, such is a qualified person to have a say of this matter in my book

that is however irrelevant with how this thread goes, as each of us hold our opinion and they weight equally the same unless, someone else who does have the pertinent experience weigh in and disprove us in one way or the other

Even if there was an ex SEAL or SOF who popped onto SDF and somehow proved his past service, I wouldn't trust his opinion if he was assessing PLA SOF's effectiveness and training based on a few photos. You just can't do that.

why the urge to end this 'story', err i mean thread
i think we can continue to discuss as long as we respect our different opinions

There are certain things which need to be agreed on to continue various discussions unfortunately. In this case I see the point as whether you can assess a service's effectiveness and training based off appearances/pictures.

If we cannot agree on this point then there isn't a whole lot left to say.

A.Man · Apr 6, 2012

This Is A Regular Army Training In Tibet

[video]http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzUwMDg5NzM2.html[/video]

kyanges · Apr 7, 2012

Bltizo said:
If that wasn't what you were implying then why say it?

When I read it, he wasn't implying anything. I read it as the China Marines were the teachers right away. I think anyone who read it in reverse probably just made the honest mistake of reading it wrong. But anyone who insists on trying to get some admission from the other party that it was an underhanded implication of China's incompetence even after they were told they read it wrong, either probably doesn't want to admit their own mistake, or really wasn't that interested in really discussing anything to begin with. At least, that's what it looks like at this point.

---------------------------------

More to the discussion... Come on, there are plenty of other much more valid things to discuss than who really meant what, or what one thinks the other meant, or bla bla bla... Among them, I think, is that other readers might be more interested in just what sort of kit the special forces of the PLA have at their disposal, and how they might use it.

.

Blitzo · Apr 7, 2012

kyanges said:
When I read it, he wasn't implying anything. I read it as the China Marines were the teachers right away. I think anyone who read it in reverse probably just made the honest mistake of reading it wrong. But anyone who insists on trying to get some admission from the other party that it was an underhanded implication of China's incompetence even after they were told they read it wrong, either probably doesn't want to admit their own mistake, or really wasn't that interested in really discussing anything to begin with. At least, that's what it looks like at this point.

Well he wrote "that made me recall a PLAN Marines exercise with some African country, Djibouti perhaps, instructing them how to do high speed intercept with boats"...

If it was in any other context then I would've taken it as the PLAN instructing the other, but the line of his argument was more or less "against" the PLA's competence (vague, terrible term but I don't have the time to think of a more accurate one at the moment).
The sentence wouldn't have supported his argument in any way, thus I took it that he meant somehow PLAN marines were being instructed by the other to imply some incompetence on their part.
It's only in this post that you point it out, that I realized the sentence was literally just an incidental remark. I suppose that's what you get when you break up a post into individual posts to rebut each individual point... you start to assume everything is part of a larger point.
So no it wasn't me not wanting to admit a mistake before as I only recognized it now -- in fact I was trying to understand what he meant by the sentence, and asking about me calling cheap shots only muddied the waters even more. But from some of his previous arguments (namely the six points he listed in reply 15), I hope I can be forgiven for interpreting the PLAN-djibouti incident as a slight against the PLA's competence.

---

Now, let's move on.

A question which paintgun raised before was the subject of radios. Does anyone know if western/nato/us soldiers are all equipped with radios? I'm quite sure a squad usually has a dedicated radio operator so that would imply each does not have a radio...

bd popeye · Apr 7, 2012

Does anyone know if western/nato/us soldiers are all equipped with radios? I'm quite sure a squad usually has a dedicated radio operator so that would imply each does not have a radio...

I work with a man that is an Iowa National Guardsmen and is a radio operator. He told me all the radios are digital. I don't know if every grunt has one. I know each US Navy Seal has a communication device.

(ASK) How well trained are the pla special forces?

paintgun

Senior Member

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

paintgun

Senior Member

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

paintgun

Senior Member

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

A.Man

Major

kyanges

Junior Member

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

bd popeye

The Last Jedi