Infantry Combat Equipment (non-firearm): Vests, Body Armor, NVGs, etc.

Blitzo said:

Yeah but if the PLA ever was in a situation where infantry fights at night were common place and a major cause of casualties then chances are:
1. It's not an important conflict for the PLA to begin with, or
2. It's an important conflict for the PLA and they have already lost in the aforementioned much higher yield domains and have been reduced to a semi-irregular insurgent force like the Taliban.

Click to expand...

Given the scenarios you mentioned it does make it logical on why the PLAGF isn't getting new Infantry kit but rather PAP and Police forces because if China does gets into a insurgency, PLAGF will not be the frontline force but rather PAP which is why they get the modernization rather PLAGF.
This is how the Chinese security forces operated since Xinjiang Conflict and HK 2019 riots.

A potato said:

Given the scenarios you mentioned it does make it logical on why the PLAGF isn't getting new Infantry kit but rather PAP and Police forces because if China does gets into a insurgency, PLAGF will not be the frontline force but rather PAP which is why they get the modernization rather PLAGF.
This is how the Chinese security forces operated since Xinjiang Conflict and HK 2019 riots.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Indeed, and it's why it is an observable phenomenon/recurring meme that PAP infantry are better equipped than regular PLA.

Blitzo said:

Indeed, and it's why it is an observable phenomenon/recurring meme that PAP infantry are better equipped than regular PLA.

Click to expand...

I think people both underestimate AND overestimate how much a full infantry equipment revamp would cost. 1,000,000 PLAGF personnel, let's say 500,000 on the frontlines ready for new kit. On the low end: $200 plates, $50 plate carrier, $50 boots, $200 helmet, $1000 NVG, $100 laser, $100 optic, $100 suppressor, $200 training... That's $2000 per soldier, and 1 billion USD in total. If you're a planner in the CMC, would you rather 9 or 10 new J-20s or an infantry equipment refresh that needs to be constantly replaced and updated? It's expensive.

But on the other hand (but as a reminder, on the low end), it's really just a 10 J-20 upfront payment, plus maybe 1 J-20 every year after to keep things up to date. That's not an *exorbitant* cost to perhaps *double* the capability of 500,000 soldiers.

zlixOS said:

I think people both underestimate AND overestimate how much a full infantry equipment revamp would cost. 1,000,000 PLAGF personnel, let's say 500,000 on the frontlines ready for new kit. On the low end: $200 plates, $50 plate carrier, $50 boots, $200 helmet, $1000 NVG, $100 laser, $100 optic, $100 suppressor, $200 training... That's $2000 per soldier, and 1 billion USD in total. If you're a planner in the CMC, would you rather 9 or 10 new J-20s or an infantry equipment refresh that needs to be constantly replaced and updated? It's expensive.

But on the other hand (but as a reminder, on the low end), it's really just a 10 J-20 upfront payment, plus maybe 1 J-20 every year after to keep things up to date. That's not an *exorbitant* cost to perhaps *double* the capability of 500,000 soldiers.

Click to expand...

Plus logically speaking it dosen't make sense to use a conventional military for COIN operations which is why Nato struggled with Iraq and Afghanistan. You use Paramilitary police for it which is why PAP exists.

zlixOS said:

I think people both underestimate AND overestimate how much a full infantry equipment revamp would cost. 1,000,000 PLAGF personnel, let's say 500,000 on the frontlines ready for new kit. On the low end: $200 plates, $50 plate carrier, $50 boots, $200 helmet, $1000 NVG, $100 laser, $100 optic, $100 suppressor, $200 training... That's $2000 per soldier, and 1 billion USD in total. If you're a planner in the CMC, would you rather 9 or 10 new J-20s or an infantry equipment refresh that needs to be constantly replaced and updated? It's expensive.

But on the other hand (but as a reminder, on the low end), it's really just a 10 J-20 upfront payment, plus maybe 1 J-20 every year after to keep things up to date. That's not an *exorbitant* cost to perhaps *double* the capability of 500,000 soldiers.

Click to expand...

I too made this point elsewhere. Infantry equipment might not be expensive but they are still expensive enough that a full modernization of the branch would cost the same as 2-3 daduis of J-20s or a few 055. The latter are obviously much more impactful for China in the present time.

zlixOS said:

I think people both underestimate AND overestimate how much a full infantry equipment revamp would cost. 1,000,000 PLAGF personnel, let's say 500,000 on the frontlines ready for new kit. On the low end: $200 plates, $50 plate carrier, $50 boots, $200 helmet, $1000 NVG, $100 laser, $100 optic, $100 suppressor, $200 training... That's $2000 per soldier, and 1 billion USD in total. If you're a planner in the CMC, would you rather 9 or 10 new J-20s or an infantry equipment refresh that needs to be constantly replaced and updated? It's expensive.

But on the other hand (but as a reminder, on the low end), it's really just a 10 J-20 upfront payment, plus maybe 1 J-20 every year after to keep things up to date. That's not an *exorbitant* cost to perhaps *double* the capability of 500,000 soldiers.

Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if actual front line infantry totalled anything like 500k. More like 1-200k actual footsloggers. Rest is arty, armour, loggies, int/comms, engineers, aviation, MPs, service support, etc.

Blitzo said:

It's not a controversy to say PLAGF infantry procurement leaves a lot to be desired, but imo it is a bit of a controversy for people to focus on it so disproportionately.

Click to expand...

My brother in christ we are posting in the infantry kit and rifle threads on sinodefenceforum dot com. If there was anywhere where it would be justified to focus so disproportionately on PLA infantry kit and rifle procurement decisions it is here. And we can do so while also acknowledging that this a a low yield domain that isn't crucially relevant the PRC's strategic level main efforts. If anyone finds this level of criticism here harsh to the point of controversy it says more about the state of procurement than us.

Or if you don't want actual detailed specifics and discussion on the state of PLA infantry kit in the PLA infantry kit thread, you are more than welcome to stick with the surface level observations and statements from people who don't even know what they don't know. In which case you might as well just go on twitter. Were you not the one advocating for a higher standard of posting on this forum? lol

AZaz09dude said:

My brother in christ we are posting in the infantry kit and rifle threads on sinodefenceforum dot com. If there was anywhere where it would be justified to focus so disproportionately on PLA infantry kit and rifle procurement decisions it is here. And we can do so while also acknowledging that this a a low yield domain that isn't crucially relevant the PRC's strategic level main efforts. If anyone finds this level of criticism here harsh to the point of controversy it says more about the state of procurement than us.

Or if you don't want actual detailed specifics and discussion on the state of PLA infantry kit in the PLA infantry kit thread, you are more than welcome to stick with the surface level observations and statements from people who don't even know what they don't know. In which case you might as well just go on twitter. Were you not the one advocating for a higher standard of posting on this forum? lol

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what your point is.

We can rightfully discuss how the PLA make suboptimal infantry procurement decisions or have low prioritization for infantry equipment, while simultaneously acknowledging that well geared infantry is rightfully very low on the priority list for their overall strategic needs.

If other threads had disproportionate consternation over a relatively unimportant domain of equipment or hardware it would also be valid if not prudent to point it out.

The prior post talking about the idea of IG reels of soldiers being killed from NOD equipped opfor is the sort of lack of context (i.e. what would it take for a conflict to reach that stage) the discussion is suffering from:
"How many paragraphs of justifying mediocrity would it take to console the parents of sons who ended up on someone else's highlight reel that goes viral on IG reels?"

My answer is that if a conflict has reached such a point, then chances are the rest of the PLA has already been degraded if not outright obliterated, in which case there are probably bigger worries being faced.

Now by all means, I'm a major proponent of criticizing PLA infantry procurement decisions. But let's not overstate the consequences of those procurement decisions by coming up with unrealistic or strategically irrelevant scenarios.

zlixOS said:

I think people both underestimate AND overestimate how much a full infantry equipment revamp would cost. 1,000,000 PLAGF personnel, let's say 500,000 on the frontlines ready for new kit. On the low end: $200 plates, $50 plate carrier, $50 boots, $200 helmet, $1000 NVG, $100 laser, $100 optic, $100 suppressor, $200 training... That's $2000 per soldier, and 1 billion USD in total. If you're a planner in the CMC, would you rather 9 or 10 new J-20s or an infantry equipment refresh that needs to be constantly replaced and updated? It's expensive.

But on the other hand (but as a reminder, on the low end), it's really just a 10 J-20 upfront payment, plus maybe 1 J-20 every year after to keep things up to date. That's not an *exorbitant* cost to perhaps *double* the capability of 500,000 soldiers.

Click to expand...

Indeed, if we compare it outright between services like that it is true.

However I suspect the issue is that each service gets a set piece of the pie to work with, and they are thus comparing between different assets/procurement within their own service.

Maikeru said:

I'd be surprised if actual front line infantry totalled anything like 500k. More like 1-200k actual footsloggers. Rest is arty, armour, loggies, int/comms, engineers, aviation, MPs, service support, etc.

Click to expand...

As an aside, does the PLAGF have any such doctrine as the USMC's "every Marine a rifleman"?

People clown PLAGF on infantry equipment but don’t dare to clown NATO troops for their inexperience and lack of investment in FPV/small combat drones. If I have 10,000 dollars to invest, I’d rather put it in the latter than the former.