Since it doesn't have trigger guard I would say it's dummy gun for trainning.Found this by accident while I was searching for something else....
PLA Small arms
- Thread starter Vanguard1688
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Lack of a trigger guard does not mean lack of a trigger.
A number of rifles feature removable trigger guards for cold weather use.
A number of rifles feature removable trigger guards for cold weather use.
MwRYum
Major
That thing doesn't even have case ejector port, so my take is that those are airsoft - AEG I believe, cheaper - and the venue is the compulsory military orientation programme for university / high school students. Well c'mon people, that "recruit" long hair is quite a giveaway.
vesicles
Colonel
Yep, exactly. If you note the whole bunch of people in the background all wearing white top and black bottom, same as the guy holding the "weapon" in question. This is a school discipline training, most likely high school since college students don't usually wear uniforms.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Well it keeps making the rounds.
We know that NORINCO has flat top options for the QBZ95.
"the bullpup layout does not allow for a collapsing or folding buttstock". well only for a small amount of of Collapsing but generally accurate. there is no way to fold a bull with out a total redesign of the weapon
"In the event of a case or chamber failure," absolutely!
The Chinese Adopted the QBZ95 in a bit of a rush they wanted a propaganda piece when they took back Hong Kong. so the end product was rushed. They have refurbished it, adding with a Selector above the pistol grip, changing the chambering redesigning the scope mount, but still they have most of the same design issues.
Personally I think the QBZ95 could be saved but it would require a more extensive second round of redesign.
All true to a point.
We know that NORINCO has flat top options for the QBZ95.
"the bullpup layout does not allow for a collapsing or folding buttstock". well only for a small amount of of Collapsing but generally accurate. there is no way to fold a bull with out a total redesign of the weapon
"In the event of a case or chamber failure," absolutely!
The Chinese Adopted the QBZ95 in a bit of a rush they wanted a propaganda piece when they took back Hong Kong. so the end product was rushed. They have refurbished it, adding with a Selector above the pistol grip, changing the chambering redesigning the scope mount, but still they have most of the same design issues.
Personally I think the QBZ95 could be saved but it would require a more extensive second round of redesign.
MwRYum
Major
Takes them long enough to catch on, must be post-SHOT Show time dry season for gun news I think...
And subsequent discussion flooded with all the usual "China steals design again" BS...heh, never heard they said that at Croatia's VHS or Czech's CZ-805 and etc...bah, even if China managed to pioneer plasma battle rifle they'd dizz it all the same, now they'd claim Hollywood got there first!
Alright, ranting aside, thing is Chinese small arms development, until 2000s, has always been behind the curve by generations, more so if the project is of officially sanctioned type. Now, MIL-STD-1913 was codified in 1995, although the whole modular accessory system has been knocked around for some time before that, it's still a relatively novel idea when comes to integrate modularity of such degree into a gun design. So surprise when Chinese sets out to make QBZ-95, those ideas were not integrated into the design.
And when you consider for decades till 2010s, Chinese arms industry has a habit of incorporating quirky ideas to show "innovativeness", unlike private initiatives take the practical "tried and true" approach of things (which the result like CS-LR series, not stunning in performance, but at least it meet the par).
Now, couple with the accessory system rapidly matured during 2000s (thanks to US war in Iraq and Afghanistan, war once again drive innovation and progress, so to speak), something not even the Chinese MOD can put their heads into the sand any longer...of course, with a defence budget increased to 1.9% GDP, a lot more of work can now be done...
In any case, 95-1 is to address the quarks, now it has to be seen if that new rifle series really going to be full replacement of the QBZ-95-1 series. Hopefully, "intentional leak" of troop trial photos would be forthcoming in the coming months, then perhaps issuing to PLA HK garrison as its unofficial début...
I'd almost argue that part of the reason Chinese small arms development has been so slow and backwards over the past few decades is because the small arms side of things was not seen as a big priority by the military overall. Air force, navy, second arty and C4ISR got the big chunk of new money whereas the army was forced to make do with smaller increases in funding.
I imagine that forced the army to partially develop its doctrine for small arms according to the limited funding they had, and modularity and especially having a universal rail system for all kinds of fancy and expensive optics just weren't part of the equation. No use developing a rifle that can mount all kinds of nice sights if you're not intending to buy sights to begin with.
But now with a further increasing budget, having the navy/airforce/rocket forces/strategic support having caught up to their adversaries a little bit more (thus not having to hog as much as of the PLA's resources as before, though definitely still the lion's share), I think the army is able to finally develop a slightly more expensive service rifle that has the ability to equip itself with optics in larger numbers which they could not afford to do in previous years and decades.
So I think this new service rifle's emphasis on having the ability to mount optics via its rail suggests the army is seriously looking at introducing at least one kind of relatively common optic for those rifles in decently sized numbers, which is something they probably couldn't quite do in previous years.
Of course, it seems they've also taken onboard a few other lessons, like being modular (as it seems to be a modular rifle family with different kinds of stocks, handguards, receivers barrel lengths and potentially even calibres) and what looks like increased ergonomics (collapsing and foldable stock), and likely a floating handguard too.
There's obviously still a lot we dont' know about this new service rifle family, but if they get the basics right and it truly is a new family of service rifles I think this thing could be a big winner.
Last edited:
It seems the XY-series of sniper rifles are viewed favourably by the PAP and PLA and has a decent chance of being chosen to be the PLA and PAP's new precision rifles. This is an published in the PLA Daily newspaper yesterday. They gave a bunch of interesting specifications and info:
I really like the Lapua round and hope the PLA will adopt that instead of the 7.62mm if they also intend on keeping the 5.8mm CS/LR4 in service, since the 7.62mm is not as compact as the 5.8mm and not as lethal as the 8.6mm so it's stuck in an uncomfortable location between the two.
- Accuracy: ≤ 0.5MOA for distances up to 300m, and ≤ 1.0MOA for distances up to 800m. Average MOA from 100-800m is 0.72MOA. At 300m under ideal conditions, the MOA is 0.17.
- Barrel life: 10,000 rounds listed on the brochure. In practice, maintaining accuracy even after 20,000 rounds isn't an issue.
- In May this year, a panel of firearms experts gathered in Beijing to evaluate this weapon. Their evaluation was that this weapon ranks first amongst its peers within China, incorporating technologies and philosophies that had no precedent amongst Chinese firearms. The overall performance of the weapon is comparable to its peers internationally.
I really like the Lapua round and hope the PLA will adopt that instead of the 7.62mm if they also intend on keeping the 5.8mm CS/LR4 in service, since the 7.62mm is not as compact as the 5.8mm and not as lethal as the 8.6mm so it's stuck in an uncomfortable location between the two.