PLA Small arms

I see them standing while loading the HMG. In real combat, they'll be sitting ducks for their enemy's fire power.

SteelBird said:

I see them standing while loading the HMG. In real combat, they'll be sitting ducks for their enemy's fire power.

Click to expand...

Well the training was more of a generic "get gun from point A to point B and fire" rather then any actual battlefield conditions. I am sure they have other training that covers that.
What I am more impress is the inherent ease of moving the gun which in no small part is due to its light weight. Few .50 cal HMGs can be slung so nonchalantly across the back with just one hand on the barrel.

Viktor Jav said:

while the QJZ-89 is the lightest HMG that I know off, it is still no PKM/M240 weight class.
Hopefully I am wrong and the Type 67 is still in widespread service, or the PLA had finally decided to adopt the Type 80. Otherwise, PLA squads may one day find themselves somewhat short handed in a fire fight.

Click to expand...

The only other Weapon I can think of that could compete in terms of Weight and range is the LWMMG from GDLS which fires a .338 (8.6mm) Norma magnum round normally used in sniper rifles and is about the same weight as an FM MAG ( M240).There was also the XM312 which although the Weapon portion was heavier, when combined with it's tripod was about the same weight as the Type 88 and Tripod that was however canceled with the XM307 due to the latter's low rate of fire.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The only other Weapon I can think of that could compete in terms of Weight and range is the LWMMG from GDLS which fires a .338 (8.6mm) Norma magnum round normally used in sniper rifles and is about the same weight as an FM MAG ( M240).There was also the XM312 which although the Weapon portion was heavier, when combined with it's tripod was about the same weight as the Type 88 and Tripod that was however canceled with the XM307 due to the latter's low rate of fire.

Click to expand...

Both are valid contenders, but I don't think that the .338 can compete in terms of stopping power to the 12.7x108. While the XM312 was unfortunately canceled .
P.S : And I don't think the LWMMG can even come into the same weight category of the QJZ-89. Even without the tripod it already weights near twice the weight of the LWMMG. Without it, accurate fire would be impossible.

Viktor Jav said:

Both are valid contenders, but I don't think that the .338 can compete in terms of stopping power to the 12.7x108. While the XM312 was unfortunately canceled

Click to expand...

Well True but then again Stopping power is a bit mute. I mean if you are using it against Infantry even armored infantry both would be more then enough. Against soft Vehicles yes the 12.7x108mm has the edge. and against armored vehicles neither would really do the job. I mean most modern armored vehicles are rated to the 14.5mm. About the only place that the 12.7x108mm really hold that edge I think is absolute is against the light armored utility vehicle class. up armored humvees and very light aircraft.

Viktor Jav said:

And I don't think the LWMMG can even come into the same weight category of the QJZ-89. Even without the tripod it already weights near twice the weight of the LWMMG. Without it, accurate fire would be impossible.

Click to expand...

100% which I think gives the LWMMG an edge for infantry. it's light enough to replace a GPMG like an M240 and can be fired from a bipod.
both are aimed at a similar goal that is to give a infantry unit a weapon that has the reach of a HMG. but where the 89 is a HMG the LWMMG is something in between.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Well True but then again Stopping power is a bit mute. I mean if you are using it against Infantry even armored infantry both would be more then enough. Against soft Vehicles yes the 12.7x108mm has the edge. and against armored vehicles neither would really do the job. I mean most modern armored vehicles are rated to the 14.5mm. About the only place that the 12.7x108mm really hold that edge I think is absolute is against the light armored utility vehicle class. up armored humvees and very light aircraft.

Click to expand...

Well HMGs are also expected to be used against light infantry cover like dirt bags and thin walls, so there is that. So even if the LWMMG comes into service the 12.7 caliber will still be a very important service round for decades to come.
What a HMG provides is a platform that can be used against infantry and at the same time be able to knock out any light cover and vehicle without resorting to something like a RPG-7.

I don't know about "Knocking out" more like punching through. I mean its not an Explosive shell All it can do is hopefully kill any one on the other side of the wall assuming it does pierce, which is still not an absolute against thick masonry, large stone or a good barrier of Dirt.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

I don't know about "Knocking out" more like punching through. I mean its not an Explosive shell All it can do is hopefully kill any one on the other side of the wall assuming it does pierce, which is still not an absolute against thick masonry, large stone or a good barrier of Dirt.

Click to expand...

Bigger caliber means that it can bite off thicker chunks of fortifications. Even if it does not punch all the way through, a HMG can degrade a lightly fortified area to a point where it is non-usable.
And if a .50cal can't kill a person through a wall that it punched through, there is not much expectation that a .338 with its lower kinetic power can.

All it can do is put a small hole in the wall not blow out part of the wall that is the job of a high explosive. It doesn't "Bite" It holes. And as for the kill in that the target has to be in the path of that round. Where as a RPG or recoiless launcher will take out a large portion of the wall and anyone around it for a set distance. As such it's not a substitute for a RPG. It's just another means of trying to suppress the enemy.

As this video shows the after effects of a .50 cal is much greater when it exits then when it enters, plus when there is multiple layers of fortifications the RGP round will really be stumped whereas a .50 cal can just blitz right through.
And how many time would one find themselves with an RPG or recoiless rifle with the appropriate round for fortifications ? A normal .50 cal belt can be used in near any situation whereas most squads usually carriers a limited amount of RPG rounds which is future divided up into anti fortifications and anti vehicle rounds. Whereas multipurpose warheads costs much more and are still somewhat unreliable, 2 things which means alot in both a short and protracted conflict.
Sure it is no real substitute for a explosive rocket but it is sure a lot better than any smaller caliber , which is the point I am trying to make. The more wide spread applications for a .50 cal makes it a much more flexible round that the .338 magnum.