PLA News, Pics, and Discussion

TerraN_EmpirE said:

First Who could really fight the PLA in the PRC? To the west (India) is high mountain country where heavy armor fails by being to heavy for roads and to rbbed of power by thin air. To the south is marshland and jungle where heavy armor suffers from bogging down and getting stuck in trees and mud with poor roads. to the east is the pacific where heavy armor sinks. about the only good tank land is the Gobi, and parts of the north land( Mongolia). but they run into the frozen marsh of (Russia) Siberia. Heavy armor is good if you have a good flat plains and open space to maneuver. Heavy armored units are fine if you intend to fight at home or at fixed locations.

Light can mean reduced weight armored vehicles, but it can also mean reduced sized deployment elements. Brigades and Regiments as opposed to divisions. It's easier to move less vehicles at a time.

Click to expand...

You forgot the central asia border to the west. Regardless, just because you dont have good terrain, that doesnt mean that heavy armour arent useful/necessary. They are, armies just have to know how to use them. Also choosing the time of the year can negate the weather adversities. Why do you think india choose the month of december to advance over east pakistan? because it was the dry season.

Dated information. When compared to modern tracked IFV's many modern Tracked and Wheeled armored vehicles are in fact the same weight with the same armor levels with the same weapons load outs. They can also carry the same number of troops if not more.

Click to expand...

Check this globalsecurity article. See what they say about wheeled vs track.

Orthan said:

You forgot the central asia border to the west. Regardless, just because you dont have good terrain, that doesnt mean that heavy armour arent useful/necessary. They are, armies just have to know how to use them. Also choosing the time of the year can negate the weather adversities. Why do you think india choose the month of december to advance over east pakistan? because it was the dry season.

Click to expand...

First Most of China's boarder neighbors could't match the PLA in in terms of ground armor numbers and forces. I dn't feel like trying to go line by line as being blunt there are only really two or three parties who need apply. Russia, India and one of the Koreas. Russia has the armor for it but politically and economically no they need China. India Runs into the wall of the Hindu Kush, And the Koreas are more interested in carving up each other. out side of those it's Amphibious operations to get armor into or out to China.
Second I think you missed something in my points.
That being that weight reduction is not the only necessary meaning of light here.
Light can also mean smaller units of action. I doubt that the PLA will replace all it's tanks and IFV's. Much like the US and other nations who enacted Wheeled combat units, They retained a good number of Armored units reorganized to make them more expeditionary.

Check this globalsecurity article. See what they say about wheeled vs track.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Check the dates of that little blerb. It's based on stuff from over a decade ago, and Talks alot about Christie Suspensions. The Last Christies were built in World war 2!!
Also It's loaded with Dated information and Straw man arguments. For example

Since the Army was engaged in Afghanistan and Transformation was emerging as the defining component of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld’s policies, by 2002 the new Stryker 8x8 wheeled vehicles and the brigade fielding them drew considerable attention, both positive and negative, from the defense community, the media, and the general public. A renewed debate occurred, for example, over the effectiveness of tracked versus wheeled combat vehicles. Commentators compared the Stryker’s performance with that of the M113A3. Critics claimed that the wheeled infantry carrier version was too lightly armed when compared to similar vehicles fielded by other armies and that it was less capable than either the M113A3 or the Bradley because it lacked an amphibious capability.

Click to expand...

by 2002 The Bradley lost it's amphibious capacity in the M2A2 upgrade circa 1988 due to increased armor weight. The M113A2 also lost the M113 Amphibious capacity The Same Year Ozzy Osbourne became the Pince of Darkness, 1979!

Today A large number of wheeled combat vehicles are in the 30-35 ton weight class. The Boxer, VBCI,Terrex 3, AMV, and Piranha V. a good number of Tracked IFV Sit in that same weight range. M2A3, Warrior, CV90, ASCOD, Puma, Tulpar and even the prototypes of the Kurganets-25

Next Technology advanced, Commercial industry prefers Wheeled vehicles and through them was developed inline drive where all the wheels on one side of the vehicle to pull together when combined with the increased ground clearance and a central tire inflation this has allow better off road performance.

Of course as I said above I doubt that the PLA or any army will go totally wheeled in the near future, Where they might go is following like the US and using wheeled units for missions that don't demand heavy armor or where the current options offer less protection or Where Expeditionary capacity is a absolute need. Like Peacekeeping operations, Infantry units, Airborne and Marine elements.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

There are different types of Grenades that do different jobs. What it looks like is not important what it does is.
Now the Grenades in question look small but that's actually about the right size for a modern hand grenade. The last known issued Fragmentation grenade for the PLA was the Type 86P which uses a plastic shell infused with metal pellets it works like a Claymore mine.
. View attachment 45649
In terms of pull pin go boom this is about the state of the art because like a bayonet, you can't improve it that much.
Now the new grenade is a bit different.

So why are they different? well they are probably not meant for the same job. Form follows function. and grenades are not just for frag. Teargas, Smoke, Incindiary Flashbang, Antitank, Offensive, defensive, Rifle assisted.
The can shape makes me think these are Offensive grenades, Now before any one asks, a Offensive grenade is a Concussion grenade designed for minimal fragmentation. They are intended produce casualties by explosive shock especially against enemy forces inside structures. they can also be used for demolitions.
For comparison this is a Grenade that the US has been testing, the Nammo Talley Scalable Offensive Hand Grenade
View attachment 45650
Note the can like shape and plastic looking body.

Click to expand...

Called it. Lightweight Offensive hand Grenade.

AZaz09dude said:

Click to expand...

Well...a weird scene, if you lads knows what that implies...

very cool:


from the collection of DF-16 firing I noticed in Russian Internet:

MwRYum said:

Well...a weird scene, if you lads knows what that implies...

Click to expand...

You mean the lone Chinese soldier on duty with all the Japanese guys standing around?

PiSigma said:

You mean the lone Chinese soldier on duty with all the Japanese guys standing around?

Click to expand...

To be honest, Chinese and Japanese soldiers in the same frame isn't anything remotely new, what's "new" is to have Chinese soldier on guard duty while Japanese soldiers milling about idly in the background.

Well There all Blue Brain buckets, So causing a problem is kinda pointless. of course there is still some missing context. I mean the Japanese Troops could be engineers talking about some project or something.

Your are all reading riddles into the picture.