PLA Small arms

by78 said:

Yet more mods... They've been experimenting around for a while now with the type 95, and I think it's about time that they completely re-design the upper and lower receivers instead of dicking around with these unwieldy mods. Get rid of that carrying handle please. Just let it go... It will make the re-design much easier.

In any event, I suspect the PAP and Airborne will get first dibs at whatever they come up with next...

Speaking of the Airborne troops, this is allegedly the new kit they will be sporting....

Click to expand...

I think all of those products, including the last picture, are all ones offered by a private company.


I think most the Chinese QBZ-95 mods we've seen over the last few years, with full top rails and all that, were just pictures from Runze Jingsong, and there's a whole list of them here:

So clearly it's an aftermarket dedicated mod for the QBZ-95... and it's doubtful whether the Chinese military itself will buy into the product, but I personally doubt it.


And the last picture you posted is also just a promotional image from Runze Jingsong, not any sort of official picture from the PLA at all.

Now I wonder if this new assault rifle is destined for the Airborne corp...

Click to expand...

Going back to the picture in #865, I think that this gun looks like a carbine version of the gun on the right in #865's photo.

I wouldn't be surprised if this photo and that photo are showing variants of the next generation assault rifle for the Chinese military.

After all these years they still haven't modernized the QBZ-95 with the modern features that you'd expect, so I wouldn't be surprised if they thought it would be a good idea to go for a clean slate rifle instead of working with the limits of QBZ-95.

Bltizo said:

Going back to the picture in #865, I think that this gun looks like a carbine version of the gun on the right in #865's photo.

I wouldn't be surprised if this photo and that photo are showing variants of the next generation assault rifle for the Chinese military.

After all these years they still haven't modernized the QBZ-95 with the modern features that you'd expect, so I wouldn't be surprised if they thought it would be a good idea to go for a clean slate rifle instead of working with the limits of QBZ-95.

Click to expand...

Is the PLA abandoning the bullpup for the next iteration of standard small arms, or are they going to work on both a bullpup and convention design? Any clues on what directions they are going to go?

by78 said:

Is the PLA abandoning the bullpup for the next iteration of standard small arms, or are they going to work on both a bullpup and convention design? Any clues on what directions they are going to go?

Click to expand...

No idea, still early days -- but let's put it this way, over the last few weeks we've had a couple of pictures of seemingly two new designs of new conventional assault rifle, and no bullpup. We also have seen the PLA seemingly unwilling to adopt more modern features onto the QBZ-95/-1, which despite being a decent rifle by all accounts, suffers from some limits both of its design (such as non reciprocating handle) as well as its configuration (ejection port being a bit too close to the user's face, even in the QBZ-95-1 which tries to solve this).

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if the PLA just decided to abandon the bullpup configuration for its next generation assault rifle in general.
Even the French are looking to replace their bullpup FAMAS with a new conventional configuration rifle, either HK416 or FN SCAR.

This new rifle looks sort of like SCAR or ACR, and at the moment I would not be disappointed at all if they develop a rifle family around this new type, and assign QBZ-95 variants to second line roles eventually.

by78 said:

Is the PLA abandoning the bullpup for the next iteration of standard small arms, or are they going to work on both a bullpup and convention design? Any clues on what directions they are going to go?

Click to expand...

Almost who sings the praises of Bullpups And points to the nations who have adopted them as there service rifle often forget that every adopter of the Bullpup also retained or adopted a Conventional rifle as a supplement. Every single one Whether M4's or G36's for Special ops or Conventional rifles for Main line infantry with Bullpups for Special ops there is always a Bullpup partnered with a conventional.

Bltizo said:

I think all of those products, including the last picture, are all ones offered by a private company.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I think most the Chinese QBZ-95 mods we've seen over the last few years, with full top rails and all that, were just pictures from Runze Jingsong, and there's a whole list of them here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So clearly it's an aftermarket dedicated mod for the QBZ-95... and it's doubtful whether the Chinese military itself will buy into the product, but I personally doubt it.


And the last picture you posted is also just a promotional image from Runze Jingsong, not any sort of official picture from the PLA at all.

Click to expand...

We've seen photos of the QBZ-95 "flat-top" upgrade under evaluation with PAP/PLA forces, so it I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss the eventuality of it entering service, albeit likely in small numbers. A procedure such as a reduction of the carrying handle likely isn't exactly a complicated process; there are probably multiple companies, Norinco included, that produce these variants.

We also know that EMEI exports a dedicated handle-less variant of the QBZ-95, dubbed T97NSR-A.

Bltizo said:

Going back to the picture in #865, I think that this gun looks like a carbine version of the gun on the right in #865's photo.

I wouldn't be surprised if this photo and that photo are showing variants of the next generation assault rifle for the Chinese military.

After all these years they still haven't modernized the QBZ-95 with the modern features that you'd expect, so I wouldn't be surprised if they thought it would be a good idea to go for a clean slate rifle instead of working with the limits of QBZ-95.

Click to expand...

The rifle you refer you is definitely not related to the one shown in #865; numerous components, including the magazine catch, receiver, handguard, and the overall shape, are quite different. The stock is similar but the top portion of it seems to be more flush with the receiver in the first rifle.

SinoSoldier said:

We've seen photos of the QBZ-95 "flat-top" upgrade under evaluation with PAP/PLA forces, so it I wouldn't be so quick as to dismiss the eventuality of it entering service, albeit likely in small numbers. A procedure such as a reduction of the carrying handle likely isn't exactly a complicated process; there are probably multiple companies, Norinco included, that produce these variants.

We also know that EMEI exports a dedicated handle-less variant of the QBZ-95, dubbed T97NSR-A.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think it may be possible that a small number of the QBZ-95s may enter service with the aftermarket mods that Runze Jingsong (or other companies produce), and I've also been hoping that Norinco would make a domestic QBZ-95-1 variant of the T97NSR-A.

But I definitely do not think it is possible for any substantially modified QBZ-95 (whether it's an after market mod of a domestic variant of the T97NSR-A) to enter service en masse in any meaningful form.

The rifle you refer you is definitely not related to the one shown in #865; numerous components, including the magazine catch, receiver, handguard, and the overall shape, are quite different. The stock is similar but the top portion of it seems to be more flush with the receiver in the first rifle.

Click to expand...

I think the two guns may be related -- though they obviously are not the same gun. The handlethey may be variants of each other, and/or may have been taken at slightly different stages of the development period.

The latest picture over at CDF even suggests that this new rifle may have been designed with relatively high degrees of modularity... so if they really are trialling such a weapon, there's a good chance we can't rely on our traditional measures of identifying rifle types based on 100% similarity, as the same rifle type may now be using a whole variety of official modular parts, from the stock to the handguard and barrel itself.

Bltizo said:

Yes, I think it may be possible that a small number of the QBZ-95s may enter service with the aftermarket mods that Runze Jingsong (or other companies produce), and I've also been hoping that Norinco would make a domestic QBZ-95-1 variant of the T97NSR-A.

But I definitely do not think it is possible for any substantially modified QBZ-95 (whether it's an after market mod of a domestic variant of the T97NSR-A) to enter service en masse in any meaningful form.

Click to expand...

I don't think any of us realistically expects the upgraded Type 95/03/81 variants to become the mainstay of the PLA. They have so far performed just one MLU on the QBZ-95, despite it being relative outdated compared to Western and some Southeast Asian designs. In fact, it' not unreasonable to assume that even the new rifles would only enter service in small quantities, leaving the QBZ-95 as the main service weapon for many years to come.

Bltizo said:

I think the two guns may be related -- though they obviously are not the same gun. The handlethey may be variants of each other, and/or may have been taken at slightly different stages of the development period.

The latest picture over at CDF even suggests that this new rifle may have been designed with relatively high degrees of modularity... so if they really are trialling such a weapon, there's a good chance we can't rely on our traditional measures of identifying rifle types based on 100% similarity, as the same rifle type may now be using a whole variety of official modular parts, from the stock to the handguard and barrel itself.

View attachment 32277

Click to expand...

Rifles that differ in their receivers (which essentially defines internal configuration) are not likely to be "variants" of each other. Additionally, it would be illogical for the PLA to have two variants of the same family competing for the same tender when the modularity of the rifle serves to remove that need in the first place.

I haven't done a more meticulous comparison yet, but the second rifle may be a QBZ-03 derivative.

SinoSoldier said:

I don't think any of us realistically expects the upgraded Type 95/03/81 variants to become the mainstay of the PLA. They have so far performed just one MLU on the QBZ-95, despite it being relative outdated compared to Western and some Southeast Asian designs. In fact, it' not unreasonable to assume that even the new rifles would only enter service in small quantities, leaving the QBZ-95 as the main service weapon for many years to come.

Click to expand...

Honestly, who knows?
Maybe they've decided to only do a limited MLU of the original QBZ-95 (in the form of QBZ-95-1) because they knew they were hitting a dead end with it anyway, and decided on a stop-gap before looking to do a mass replacement with a clean sheet design.
Or maybe they will continue being relatively cheap and only issuing truly modern rifles to more capable units while the rest continue working with QBZ-95s.

That said, I think the Chinese military will eventually have to move onto a more modern family of mass service rifles eventually. Whether it's going to happen sooner (where this new rifle family may come in) or later, is another question...

Rifles that differ in their receivers (which essentially defines internal configuration) are not likely to be "variants" of each other. Additionally, it would be illogical for the PLA to have two variants of the same family competing for the same tender when the modularity of the rifle serves to remove that need in the first place.

I haven't done a more meticulous comparison yet, but the second rifle may be a QBZ-03 derivative.

Click to expand...

I think the receivers of the guns we're talking about are similar, I think the "different receivers" is actually just different stocks instead... Though we don't exactly have a clear first picture to see the details of the receiver itself.
However what is fairly distinctive is the handguard on the rifle on the right in that first photo, which seems to correspond very closely with the rifle in the second photo.

And I never suggested it was two variants of the same rifle competing for the same tender? The pictures we see may merely be variants of the same rifle undergoing trials, going for a single tender for a family of rifles.
Or it may even be differing test configurations for different variants of the same rifle undergoing trials.

I.e.: instead of merely being different rifles being trialled for a replacing a single type of rifle, the pictures (rifle on the right in the first picture, and the rifle in the second picture) may well be different variants and configurations of a single modular rifle type, for a tender meant to replace multiple rifle types in service, carbine, assault rifle, SAW/IAR, DMR --

That said I'm not sure if the rifle on the left in the first picture is the same as the rifle on the right in the first picture -- that may well be a different competing design, or an alternative configuration of the same rifle variant (probably assault rifle variant).

A few thoughts
First on Caliber.
5.8mm is the standard of the PLA but has fount no real export interest, however as we should all know Caliber is variable, The AR 15 has been rechambered for Soviet 5.45x39mm( AK74) The AK has been chambered for 5.56x45mm NATO. The AK74 is more or less a Rechambering of the AKM from 7.62x39 to 5.45x39mm. And the Type 97 is a QBZ95 carbine rechambered from 5.8x42 to 5.56x45mm. basically If we are seeing a new carbine in 5.8x42mm It doesn't mean that it will not be offered for export. If NORINCO found a buyer interested they could sell QBZ95's chambered for 5.45x39mm It's only a matter of he bolt face , barrel, Springs and getting the magazines to feed and fit.

Second on Changes
When I looked at the images I also pulled up avalible images of the QBZ03 to compare. The ejection port and charging handle as well as barrel and rear sights lined up The Trigger guard and magazine well/catch are close if not identical.
The upper however has been turned into a monolithic rail, the Opening of the ejection has been changed from squared to rounded, The selector appears to have changed and is now possibly ambidextrous.
If any thing the more I look at the new weapons and back at known images of the Type 03 I am starting to feel the Type 03 Is more and more frankly Unrefined. It's like they were trying to rush production. Not as haphazard or Crude as the Volkssturm weapons of the end of the second world war but almost like they were looking to rush something to production so they took the cleaner prototypes and build lines around them. Like the MKb 42 vs the STG44. you can see the roots but there are alot of unnecessary parts and a lot of finishing needed. Which arguably given the known issues of the QBZ 95 may be true.

Accessory
I know Wolf and some others are sold on the PLA never touching Pic rails. However they are the world standard and even in this form. All needed would be to replace the upper and hand-guard to A PLA standard if they wanted.

Bltizo said:

Honestly, who knows?
Maybe they've decided to only do a limited MLU of the original QBZ-95 (in the form of QBZ-95-1) because they knew they were hitting a dead end with it anyway, and decided on a stop-gap before looking to do a mass replacement with a clean sheet design.
Or maybe they will continue being relatively cheap and only issuing truly modern rifles to more capable units while the rest continue working with QBZ-95s.

That said, I think the Chinese military will eventually have to move onto a more modern family of mass service rifles eventually. Whether it's going to happen sooner (where this new rifle family may come in) or later, is another question...

Click to expand...

QBZ-95 series has been around for about 20 years now and with just one improved model, other major powers in such a timeframe would've introduced more iterations and improved models, but for one the Chinese only begin to have more money to throw at the infantry small arms in recent years (i.e. able to issue a bid for new rifle designs); secondly for an army that has suffered isolation and lack the chance to be tempered by real combat, lessons and improvements come slow - until the last 5 years, that is.

Would the new rifle design signify the latest mindset change - from "innovation for innovation's sake" to re-embrace pragmatism, even if it has to look more "Western"?