Sorry I'm not quite certain that I understand; as bullpup rifle type95 has longer barrel then M4(type95 - 520 mm , M4- 370 mm).
As for type of SF units I'm talking about PLA SF and not SWAT style units in PAP and police...
New Speacial forces pictures
- Thread starter petty officer1
- Start date
Sorry I'm not quite certain that I understand; as bullpup rifle type95 has longer barrel then M4(type95 - 520 mm , M4- 370 mm).
As for type of SF units I'm talking about PLA SF and not SWAT style units in PAP and police...
Chengdu J-10
Junior Member
Yeah i was referring to SWAT type Special forces as SWAT requires compacted rifles in which the Type 95 standard rifle isn't necessary while the Type 95 carbine (ARC95) has an overall shorter length. An with your last post I disagree the bullpup configuration Type 95 rifle has an overall length of 746mm while the M4 carbine has an overall length of 757mm(retracted stock)...So thus the ARC95 measuring 609mm overall length is more suited for SWAT in CQB as its barrel length and overall lenght is way shorter then the Standard Type 95 rifle.
eckherl
New Member
What about the British SAS, they have been around alot longer than their U.S counter parts.
Why would they be over-rated, they are actually one of the best groups out there that can conduct covert operations. Also who do you think was responsible for training the Viet Cong and NVA forces against the French and U.S.
Welcome to SDF, but please note that we do not allow for double posting. Just use the edit button on the bottom of your post.
Thank you.
Last edited by a moderator:
aquauant
Junior Member
VC and NVA lost most of the tactical battles with US. US "lost" strategically and politically, but not tactically, kind of like Iraq now. Maybe korean war is a better reference.
Carbine TYPE 95? Kind of like saying carbine SA80. Any shorter, it will be just spray and pray. the SAS still uses M16A2/M4 carbine in the field.
While I dont want to go into my SF is better than your SF, one can take a look at their selection process to gauge what kind of recruits they are having.
I also heard from some news sources which I now forgot that Chinese SF has participated in some kind of world SF game, or something like that. If I heard correctly, Chinese SF did quite well against other SF from western countries. It was from Chinese media though. I dont know how objective it is.
Carbine TYPE 95? Kind of like saying carbine SA80. Any shorter, it will be just spray and pray. the SAS still uses M16A2/M4 carbine in the field.
While I dont want to go into my SF is better than your SF, one can take a look at their selection process to gauge what kind of recruits they are having.
I also heard from some news sources which I now forgot that Chinese SF has participated in some kind of world SF game, or something like that. If I heard correctly, Chinese SF did quite well against other SF from western countries. It was from Chinese media though. I dont know how objective it is.
eckherl
New Member
Yes they did lose when going toe to toe in organized skirmishes, but when it came to gorrila warfare tactics, setting up ambushes including mechanical they were some of the best.
RavenWing278
Junior Member
i've always been confused as to why the PLA and it sub-branches (PAP -militia) use different types of helmets. So far, i've seen 7 different kinds of helmets in service with the PLA, and 3 different types withing PLA special forces. Not only does this make the PLA look unprofessional but also the balistic protect of the helmets apart from the PASGT-type are a suspect. any thoughts on this issue?
well it migth be that PLA tests various concpets for new head gear and does this with its most prestige forces with other hand are also the ones enjoing most of the publicy....you have to take notice that there are millions of heads to be covered, and thats a big investment to make...so any hasty solution to produce the physically best (read= most expensive) one migth not be so wise. They are propaply seeking the most cost effective solution.
szbd
Junior Member
Yes China is testing the helmets. The first helmet entered service in 80s, and it's made of steel. It got bad reputation among soldiers coz it's heavy, not stable and not comfortable. Then a big scientist (academician of China Academy or sth like that) led a team and spent more than 10 years to develp morden non-metal helmets. They got big investment. When they developed a capable prototype (claimed outperformed US helmet) it's already close to 2000.
RavenWing278
Junior Member
yes but logistically speaking, wouldn't it be easier to fit ur armed forces with one type of helmet?
RedMercury
Junior Member
As with other equipment in the PLA, logistics is punted to trade for other considerations. You see very heterogeneous gear because new things are constantly being put under trials, or procurement can only afford to give high priority units the better, more expensive stuff. Also, as high priority units get better stuff, they hand their old stuff to the lower priority units, who in turn pass their gear down, all the way to reserve/militia or mothball. BTW, PAP and militia are not a sub-branches of PLA.