Infantry Combat Equipment (non-firearm): Vests, Body Armor, NVGs, etc.

Discussion in 'Army' started by by78, Nov 30, 2017.

  1. Broccoli
    Offline

    Broccoli Junior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    521
    Russia is bigger and their ground forces are 350k so if we look China and India both have far more soldiers than Russia in their ground forces.

    I think eventually China & India will have around 500k soldiers serving on their land forces as training and equipment become similar level as US army's... aka not cheap.
     
  2. TerraN_EmpirE
    Online

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,745
    Likes Received:
    10,138
    Twice the land mass but where the PRC has 1.4 Billion people the Russian population is only about 146 million. Much of Russia is empty space Pock marked with abandoned Soviet “ghost cities” single industry centered population centers where in all was built to cater to that sole industry until the Russian Economic collapse and fall of the Soviet state resulted in abandoning.
    Hundreds of Prypiat like cities home only to fading memories lost back to nature.
    India also has a huge population roughly equal to the Chinese.
    I agree that there will come a decline for the PLA numbers. The main mechanism being an aging population with limited growth resulting in declining ability to serve. On a smaller scale this is more or less what we see in Japan. In the PRC the one child policy accelerated a population decline that occurs with a high standard of living. IE less demand for children as said children live longer creating the “Nuclear family” model.

    The Indian population is harder to figure on. The dramatic population economic differences mean that you have a dramatically poor poverty line with a modern growing urban center attached at the hip.
    The rural areas population encuraged to have lots of children in hope that some will survive to adulthood due to a high death rate by low living standards. Sits right next to a thriving urban population with modernization of medical technology that allows more children to survive into becoming functional adults.
    Without an artificial population control like the one child policy the Indian population seems to have no limits. This means that the only break on a massive land Army is the economic constraints of The Indian state.
     
    Equation and vesicles like this.
  3. vesicles
    Offline

    vesicles Major

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    5,051
    I agree with TerraN_EmpirE. One more thing is the economy of Russia. Even at the current scale and size, Russia is having great difficulties keeping its military in good shape. Much of their equipment is poorly maintained because of lack of funds. They have to stop many of their weapons programs because of lack of funds. It would be completely crazy to expect them to expand their personnel at this point.

    I also agree that, as China continues to modernize their military, they will continue to decrease the size of their armed forces, to make them more lean and mean. However, I don’t think 500k is the number. With the population of 1.4 billion, 500k sounds a little insufficient. With the domestic troubles in Xinjiang and Tibet and potential future conflict with Taiwan, as well as the new Silk Road and their ever-expanding trade routes in the oceans to protect, they need to keep the number a little higher than 500k.

    Unlike the US, who doesn’t have to worry about her neighbors, China still has a number of neighbors who might cause trouble at moment’s notice. It’s massive borders with Russia and India may require significant numbers to guard.
     
    Equation likes this.
  4. Biscuits
    Offline

    Biscuits Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    751
    China has approx 4 million vs 5 million total for USA. So the PLA is actually undermanned, especially considering US has only 1/4th the population of China and only 0.75x of China's economy.

    I think they can keep it slightly below US army sizes, since not all US army will be in one place at one time. That would also give them more funding to equip soldiers with next generation equipment that can prove useful against smaller opponents and in peacekeeping, where it doesn't make any difference if you have 4 million or 5 million, since only a few thousand will be deployed anyways.

    Whether they have to downsize or not depends on what sort of budget they get. Currently, they just kit out maybe 500-800k troops and the rest work as national guard using surplus stuff. Equipping all PLA Land Force alone would not be possible without sharply raising the budget.
     
  5. FriedRiceNSpice
    Online

    FriedRiceNSpice Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,632
    Likes Received:
    222
    Downsizing active personnel makes sense, but not total. I think this is what has happened over past two decades anyways- active personnel are not disbanded, just moved over to PAP or reserves. If the unthinkable happens and the homeland is threatened, either from internal or external threats, the PAP and reserves can easily and quickly be mobilized to support PLA ground forces.
     
    N00813 and KIENCHIN like this.
  6. TerraN_EmpirE
    Online

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,745
    Likes Received:
    10,138
    Your US numbers are wrong. The Total US DOD is 2.86 million across all services.
    The largest being the US at 1.18 million across all arms.
    Also your economic numbers are based on the PPP yet as we have seen of late that figure doesn’t make the Chinese economy stronger. The Nominal still holds especially when you have a export based economy.
     
  7. Biscuits
    Offline

    Biscuits Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    751
    That’s omitting US reserves, well, we can also omit PLA reserves.

    China’s economy is 18% exports... So that’s not a very convincing factor to base anything on. I didn’t say anything about that China’s economy would be is stronger than it is on paper...?
     
  8. TerraN_EmpirE
    Online

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,745
    Likes Received:
    10,138
    If by reserves you mean foreign armies perhaps.
    That’s counting reserves and guard.
    thats from the DOD it’s self 1.3 million active
    826,000 reserves and Guard and 730,000 Civilians!
     
  9. FriedRiceNSpice
    Online

    FriedRiceNSpice Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,632
    Likes Received:
    222
    Well, for economists PPP is usually considered more meaningful figure. Unless things have changed since I graduated from university, since at least that was what I learned in econ class. In IBanking we also consider PPP more meaningful in most comparison and analysis, but it usually doesn't come up that often.
     
    KIENCHIN and N00813 like this.
  10. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,130
    Likes Received:
    1,195
    Like hell it does. China manufactures its own weapons and the soldiers are paid in Yuan. Nominal makes no sense.

    Especially when you are comparing against the US which has the reserve currency of the world. Not using PPP will always provide extremely bogus comparisons.
    We aren't talking about Saudi Arabia here. Which basically imports all its weapons and pays mercenaries to fight for them.
     
    mr.bean, jobjed and KIENCHIN like this.
Loading...

Share This Page