Chinese infantry fighting vehicles

SpicySichuan

Senior Member
Registered Member
I believe the PLA troops does not wear body armour on military exercise
Do you know why? I know China is one of the biggest exporters of body armour, but it has left little for its own troops. NATO troops always wear body armour during exercises. Not sure why the PLA doesn't. Not enough defense budget?
 

vesicles

Colonel
Do you know why? I know China is one of the biggest exporters of body armour, but it has left little for its own troops. NATO troops always wear body armour during exercises. Not sure why the PLA doesn't. Not enough defense budget?

You know what? We have discussed this topic so extensively and so many times... Every scenario and every possibility has been discussed and discussed again... Please go back to those threads if you are interested and pleeeeease do not start this discussion again here! It's so exhausting...
 

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
Do you know why? I know China is one of the biggest exporters of body armour, but it has left little for its own troops. NATO troops always wear body armour during exercises. Not sure why the PLA doesn't. Not enough defense budget?

First this is OT, so bring it to the correct thread. Second, you know how big is Chinese military as compared to European militaries? A little bit of common sense would tell you that to equip every single soldiers with body armour even during exercises are going to be too expensive and not needed. Third, despite all the big hooha on body armour, they do have shelve life and can expire. So it is not wise to simply issue body armour to your men immediately even when there is no crisis or war happening, they will wear through these armour very quickly. and the cost to replace these armour is beyond your knowledge.

Finally, from that blurry photos, how to you tell the soldiers are not wearing body armour, do you mean, they need to looked like ironman to be consider wearing body armour?
 

no_name

Colonel
Has IFV pretty much replaced the role of APC seeing that it can also ferry troops or did IFV developed further from APC or is there some overlap between the two role?
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Has IFV pretty much replaced the role of APC seeing that it can also ferry troops or did IFV developed further from APC or is there some overlap between the two role?
There's always gonna be a need for both IMO. IFV are a little more expensive and design more for combat. APC are good for carrying troops and supplies in a not too dangerous areas where there's no threat from artillery, mortar, or from the skies.
 

Victor1985

New Member
Registered Member
First this is OT, so bring it to the correct thread. Second, you know how big is Chinese military as compared to European militaries? A little bit of common sense would tell you that to equip every single soldiers with body armour even during exercises are going to be too expensive and not needed. Third, despite all the big hooha on body armour, they do have shelve life and can expire. So it is not wise to simply issue body armour to your men immediately even when there is no crisis or war happening, they will wear through these armour very quickly. and the cost to replace these armour is beyond your knowledge.

Finally, from that blurry photos, how to you tell the soldiers are not wearing body armour, do you mean, they need to looked like ironman to be consider wearing body armour?
Yes but the soldiers must be carrying something on same weight to get used whit
 

Victor1985

New Member
Registered Member
There's always gonna be a need for both IMO. IFV are a little more expensive and design more for combat. APC are good for carrying troops and supplies in a not too dangerous areas where there's no threat from artillery, mortar, or from the skies.
IFVs also dont get to dangerous area. Or in very dangerous. Always they need to be covered by heavy vehicles. Those whit missiles on them are complementary to tanks.
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
First this is OT, so bring it to the correct thread. Second, you know how big is Chinese military as compared to European militaries? A little bit of common sense would tell you that to equip every single soldiers with body armour even during exercises are going to be too expensive and not needed. Third, despite all the big hooha on body armour, they do have shelve life and can expire. So it is not wise to simply issue body armour to your men immediately even when there is no crisis or war happening, they will wear through these armour very quickly. and the cost to replace these armour is beyond your knowledge.

Finally, from that blurry photos, how to you tell the soldiers are not wearing body armour, do you mean, they need to looked like ironman to be consider wearing body armour?

I agree with most of your post however as far as training is concern it is imperative to issue body armor to the troops who would usually wear them in real life scenerios.

I'm not equating it to this particular picture (because one picture is meaningless and no context) however generally speaking you want your training to be replicate actual conditions and that includes putting on heavy and or cumbersome gear that you would usually use in combat.

As a general rule, if you train with 25 ibs of gear but in real life you have to carry 100 ibs, you basically just killed yourself.
 
Top