PLA Small arms

Which is fine, In Theory. But you are firing blind.
An RPG will take out a wall to and again firing blind, but with a point. if you blow out a wall with an RPG or other system infantry can get inside that building via the door they just made.
a 12.7mm round used like that is a major potential trouble point. If you are taking fire from behind that wall, Okay. but if you are just shooting into the wall.
The Main aim of the type 89 is to try and give PLA squads a heavy weapon to replace the loss of there GPMG's and allow them to stretch there range.
The .338 is an Anti personal round and does that, the .50 BMG of the XM312 could have done that the 12.7x108mm of the Kord or QJZ89 does that. That is it's aim.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Which is fine, In Theory. But you are firing blind.
An RPG will take out a wall to and again firing blind, but with a point. if you blow out a wall with an RPG or other system infantry can get inside that building via the door they just made.
a 12.7mm round used like that is a major potential trouble point. If you are taking fire from behind that wall, Okay. but if you are just shooting into the wall.
The Main aim of the type 89 is to try and give PLA squads a heavy weapon to replace the loss of there GPMG's and allow them to stretch there range.
The .338 is an Anti personal round and does that, the .50 BMG of the XM312 could have done that the 12.7x108mm of the Kord or QJZ89 does that. That is it's aim.

Click to expand...

Of course the gunners won't be firing blindly into the walls hoping to hit in the first place, in most cases the defenders will almost always take positions in places where they can return fire easily, which is the whole point of fortifications. This includes windows, entry points and firing slits. So the gunners focus their fire there.
Lets say you fire one round of RPG into the wall and made a whole, fine that good, but you still haven't got the guys inside and you are most likely out of RPGs or logistics demand you cannot use them so freely. You still have to enter the building that is most likely defended to the hilt and risk multiple loses. With the .50 HMG the squad can work in tandem with the gunner to lay penetrating fire to take out dug in defenders, where using an RPG in doors is just suicide.
The idea that the .338 can so easily replace the .50 in the multitude of things it is required to for is really ridiculous.

A few more photos from the 2018 Police Exhibition in China:

The PX18 striker-fired pistol from Zhejiang:


The new police .357 Magnum revolver (6-round chamber):


(The LP5 pistol is shown beside it)

SinoSoldier said:

A few more photos from the 2018 Police Exhibition in China:

The PX18 striker-fired pistol from Zhejiang:
View attachment 47039

The new police .357 Magnum revolver (6-round chamber):
View attachment 47040

(The LP5 pistol is shown beside it)

Click to expand...

You could have just labeled them both in one shot.
So this PX18 5.8 or 9mm?

Actually, there are plenty of sensible designs, at least better than the crap their military are using.

Viktor Jav said:

Second part of the training. All of that just for a few minutes of shooting, honestly I was somewhat disappointed. Was expecting to see them shooting at least a full clip on full auto.

Click to expand...

That HMG is known for sacrificing a lot on reliability for portability, for they put a priority in man portability due to lack of vehicle back in the day. Now, they such design a replacement, and follow the tried-and-tested GPMG trend that's being perfected by both the Western Bloc and Russia, instead of trying to be "unique" and adopting all sorts of evolutionary deadend.

MwRYum said:

Actually, there are plenty of sensible designs, at least better than the crap their military are using.

That HMG is known for sacrificing a lot on reliability for portability, for they put a priority in man portability due to lack of vehicle back in the day. Now, they such design a replacement, and follow the tried-and-tested GPMG trend that's being perfected by both the Western Bloc and Russia, instead of trying to be "unique" and adopting all sorts of evolutionary deadend.

Click to expand...

Well so far I have yet to come across any news of Chinese HMGs malfunctioning. Morevore the W85 HMG which is in a similar weight class, has seen wide spread use in Syria by both sides. So its performance for such a light HMG must at least be acceptable.
And the idea of making firearms more portable is not solely a Chinese desire either. The Russian HMG Kord and its predecessor the NSV both shave more 13 kg off the Ma Deuce though they did not go to such lengths as the Chinese had done. And I will not pin the Chinese desire for such a light MG on a lack of vehicles either, during the time it was designed and produced (1970s-80s). China's economy was basically in war time production overdrive. Were their vehicles dated ? Yes. But were they lacking in numbers ? Sure as hell no.
To be sure China still needs a true GPMG that is below 10 kg for its fire teams, and the capacity to carry more rounds than just 3x50 rounds per person. But that is a different matter altogether.
And this is not the skimpiest HMG that China had ever design. The QJZ-89 at least still have a conventional HMG look and body size with all the proper housing, take a look at this one the W95:

This "machine gun" is practically just a gun tube and a receiver taped together. It does not even have a proper handle or trigger !

More stuff 2018 Beijing Police Equipment Convention


JH-16-1


CS/LS7

CS/LS5

looks like a serious attempt to get into the HK MP5 market.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

looks like a serious attempt to get into the HK MP5 market.

Click to expand...

cs/lr7 seems to have an AR-style recoil spring hmmmm

Dfangsaur said:

cs/lr7 seems to have an AR-style recoil spring hmmmm

Click to expand...

Not necessarily, but even if so not a bad thing either.
The SIG MPX also has a structure there used for attaching but stock modules, If you look at that structure (we Should call it a Receiver Extension) on the CS/LR7 there is a part of it protruding below the stock which looks to me like a means of locking the stock in place. Where as a AR 15 receiver Extension is for the buffer spring used to reduce felt recoil. if properly tuned this can really tame a Automatic weapon's movement. But lots of Weapons that don't use buffer systems like the AR15 sport "Pseudo Buffer tubes" This is because of the popularity of the CAR15 ( M4 Carbine) in that the length of pull but stock is widely supported with options for customization or ease of training and familiarity So some weapons emulate it as a means of mounting a butt stock.
Because of the Diameter and short length of the extension on the CS/LR7 unless someone in the know state that it is or we see a field strip I think we should hold out judgment.