Oddly no scope? Maybe even an IAR variant with drum mags? I can only hope and guess.The DMR variant being carried over the shoulder (far left soldier).
QBZ-191 service rifle family
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Is the grenadier also supposed to be the DMR guy? I thought it would be two separate people for the two roles.
This was my first though as well, no scope. Even if it was IAR, most squad automatic have scopes now. The rear iron sight is flipped open, so I assume it was used on purpose.
It is 2 separate guys. Guy in front of the DMR guy is carrying an auto grenade launcher.
What is the source of this photo anyway? It is so low-res and candid looking. The noisiness implies a lower end camera phone, which further implies it is a personal photo. Very rare. I think PLA is kind of strict on this, no?
My mistake I thought you mean he was carrying the DMR for the grenadier rather than the rifle.
The noisiness could just be low lighting or artifacts from a still frame of a video.
deleted
I do find this set up a bit odd. A DMR is pointless without an optical sight. So from this I would deduce that the pictured weapon is either a DMR without an optic because the soldiers are on exercise or a march and didn't outfit their equipment fully (which doesn't make much sense either) or the weapon is the IAR.
The problem here is that IARs and other magazine fed squad automatic weapons (i.e M27 IAR, L86 LSW, QBB-95, RPK) cannot fully match the volume or sustained fire capability afforded by a belt fed LMG or GPMG. The benefit an IAR or magazine fed squad automatic weapon brings to the table is the capability to put down more precise suppression than can be easily afforded by a LMG or GPMG, but also more volume of and sustained rate of fire than a standard rifle but less than an LMG and GPMG (with bipod and heavy barrel) as well as ammunition and magazine compatibility.
To effectively use an magazine fed SAW concept as per my description above, a magnified optic is somewhat necessary. Even an unmagnified optic would be a large improvement for quick target acquisition, to get rounds down on the enemy as soon as possible.
Furthermore, if the optics aren't being used regularly, the whole QBZ 191 series of weapons is being ineffectively utilised. The 191 series has much greater accuracy than previous generations of Chinese small arms, this is exacerbated by the fact that these flip up iron sights are as they are designed, back up sights. They will not provide the level of accuracy or durability required for full-time combat use that may be afforded by built in iron sights that are designed for regular use.
The problem here is that IARs and other magazine fed squad automatic weapons (i.e M27 IAR, L86 LSW, QBB-95, RPK) cannot fully match the volume or sustained fire capability afforded by a belt fed LMG or GPMG. The benefit an IAR or magazine fed squad automatic weapon brings to the table is the capability to put down more precise suppression than can be easily afforded by a LMG or GPMG, but also more volume of and sustained rate of fire than a standard rifle but less than an LMG and GPMG (with bipod and heavy barrel) as well as ammunition and magazine compatibility.
To effectively use an magazine fed SAW concept as per my description above, a magnified optic is somewhat necessary. Even an unmagnified optic would be a large improvement for quick target acquisition, to get rounds down on the enemy as soon as possible.
Furthermore, if the optics aren't being used regularly, the whole QBZ 191 series of weapons is being ineffectively utilised. The 191 series has much greater accuracy than previous generations of Chinese small arms, this is exacerbated by the fact that these flip up iron sights are as they are designed, back up sights. They will not provide the level of accuracy or durability required for full-time combat use that may be afforded by built in iron sights that are designed for regular use.
Honestly maybe we are reading too much into this picture?
Perhaps the rifle is issued earlier than the optic? (sometimes gear rollout is gradual, I have seen some troops get the new camo uniform but still wear the old carriers whereas other get the new carrier system but still wear the old uniform)
If the optic is not made by the same factory as the rife it is entirely possible that it is not issued together with the DMR, but will come at a later date.
Another possible reason for not having a scope is that the soldiers do not want to damage the optic in a training exercise. PLA officers are known to do this pretty often. For example, QBZ95 comes out of the factory with a magnified optic, but it is not often used in the field because many officers do not want to bear the responsibility of damaging that piece of equipment.
Honestly with the mass rollout of the new rifle we will soon discover how the PLA will use it.
Perhaps the rifle is issued earlier than the optic? (sometimes gear rollout is gradual, I have seen some troops get the new camo uniform but still wear the old carriers whereas other get the new carrier system but still wear the old uniform)
If the optic is not made by the same factory as the rife it is entirely possible that it is not issued together with the DMR, but will come at a later date.
Another possible reason for not having a scope is that the soldiers do not want to damage the optic in a training exercise. PLA officers are known to do this pretty often. For example, QBZ95 comes out of the factory with a magnified optic, but it is not often used in the field because many officers do not want to bear the responsibility of damaging that piece of equipment.
Honestly with the mass rollout of the new rifle we will soon discover how the PLA will use it.
The guy in the middle has his iron sights flipped down. Also are those helmet coverings from the early 2000’s? They definitely don’t look like modern helmet coverings.Airborne troops training in Xinjiang.
by78
General
They look like temporary or jury-rigged coverings, probably to cover up the blue digital camo coverings that normally come with the standard issue airborne helmets.