"new" SMG with chinese armed police with pictures!


zaky

Junior Member
Both of you are right.
But I am talking about an apocalyptical scenario when according to Murphi`s law "Anything that can go wrong, will,". In this kind of situations using same calibers from different kind of weapons can result misunderstandings. I say can, not will. Using same calibers create possibility from mistakes not necessarily will result it.
I post here a fragment of Viktor Suvorov “Inside the Soviet Army” book.

Source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The author describes how the soviets choose the calibers from his weapons.

"When the Soviet Union first displayed the BMP-1 infantry combat vehicle
in a parade, its designation and the calibre of its guns were unknown:roll. From
careful examination of photographs, Western analysts concluded that the
calibre of the gun must be between 70 and 80mm. In this range there was only
one gun--the 76mm, which is still, as it has been for many years<,> a
standard weapon in both the Soviet Army and the Soviet Navy. This gun was
the most widely distributed of all Soviet artillery weapons before, during
and after the war and its calibre occurs again and again in designations of
Soviet equipment (e.g. T-34-76, the SU-76, the PT-76). Since this seemed a
safe deduction, Western handbooks listed the new Soviet vehicle as the
BMP-76.
Then several BMP-1s were captured in the Middle East and carefully
examined. To the amazement of the specialists, it was established that the
calibre of the gun was 73mm. This was virtually the same as the 76mm, so why
were the Soviet designers not using this trusted calibre? Why the variation?
Meanwhile, photographs of new Soviet tanks--the T-64 and T-72--had
begun to appear in Western journals. Painstaking analysis showed that the
calibre of the gun carried by both these tanks was 125mm. But this calibre
did not exist, either in the USSR or elsewhere. Many of the experts refused
to accept the analysts' conclusion, asserting that the new tanks must have
122mm guns. 122mm--like 76mm--is a standard calibre, which has been in
continuous use since before the Revolution. The 122 howitzer is the largest
in use in the Soviet Army. Most heavy armoured vehicles had and still have
guns of this calibre--the IS-2, IS-3, T-10, T10-M, SU-122, ISU-122, IT-122
and most recently the new, self-propelled `Gvozdika' howitzer, even though
this appeared considerably later than the T-64. But then the new Soviet
tanks began to appear abroad and all doubt ended--they did have 125mm guns.
What was all this about? Why were all previous standards being abandoned?
What lay behind it all?

2


The switch from existing calibres was not the result of a whim; rather,
it was a carefully thought-out policy--one which has a long history. It was
initiated by Stalin himself, a few hours before Germany's surprise attack on
the USSR.
It was on the eve of the war that the Soviet naval and coastal
artillery were first issued with the excellent 130mm gun. This was
subsequently used as an anti-tank gun and as a field gun and finally, in a
self-propelled variant. Also just before the war, in the spring of 1941, a
highly successful rocket launcher was developed in the USSR. This was the
BM-13, which could fire 16 130mm rockets simultaneously. It later became
known to the Soviet Army as the `Katyusha' and to the Germans as the `Stalin
Organ'. Naturally, the existence of both the gun and the rocket launcher
were kept entirely secret.
In the first days of June 1941 the new rocket launcher was shown to
members of the Politburo, in Stalin's presence. However, it was not fired,
because artillery shells instead of rockets had been delivered to the test
range. The mistake was understandable, in view of the great zeal with which
secrecy was being preserved--how could the ordinance officers possibly have
known of the existence of the 130mm rockets, which bore no resemblance to
artillery shells?
Knowing Stalin, those present assumed that everyone responsible for
this mistake would be shot immediately. However, Stalin told the Chekists
not to get involved and went back to Moscow.
The second demonstration took place on 21 June at Solnechnogorsk. This
time everything went off very well. Stalin was delighted with the rocket
launcher. Then and there, on the range, he signed an order authorising its
issue to the Soviet Army. However, he directed that henceforth, in order to
avoid confusion, the rockets should be referred to as 132mm, not as 130mm.
Accordingly, while the rocket launcher continued to be known as the
BM-13 (13cm being 130mm), the rockets were henceforth referred to, despite
their true calibre, as 132mm. That very night the war began.
During the war, projectiles of all types were fired in enormous
quantities, reaching astronomical totals. They were transported for
thousands of kilometres, under constant enemy attack. While they were being
moved they had to be trans-shipped again and again and this was done by
schoolboys, by old peasants, by convicts from prisons and camps, by German
prisoners and by Soviet soldiers who had only been in the army for two or
three days. Orders and requisitions for the rockets were passed hastily by
telephone from exchange to exchange and made all but inaudible by
interference. But there were no mistakes. Everyone could understand that `We
need 130s' was a reference to artillery shells and it was equally clear that
`1-3-2' meant rockets.
In 1942 the design of the rockets was modernised and their grouping
capability and destructive effect was improved. In the process, they became
slightly thicker, and their calibre was increased to 132mm--thus coming to
match their designation.

Stalin's decision had proved correct and, as a result, a series of
artillery weapons with unusual calibres were developed during the war. They
appeared, of course, only when an unusual shell or rocket was designed. For
instance, in 1941 a start was made with the development of a huge mortar
which was needed to fire a 40 kilogram bomb. The calibre of the mortar could
have been, for instance, 152mm, like the great majority of Soviet guns and
howitzers. Obviously, however, a howitzer shell would be unsuitable for a
mortar and vice versa. A mortar fires a particular type of projectile, which
must itself be of a certain calibre. This was the requirement which resulted
in the development of the 160mm mortar. Immediately after the war, 40mm
grenade launchers appeared. There had never before been a weapon of this
particular calibre in the Soviet Army. There were 37mm and 45mm shells. But
a grenade launcher uses its own type of projectile and a special calibre was
therefore selected for it.
Soviet designers took steps to correct past mistakes, which had been
tolerated until Stalin's sensible decision. The calibre of the standard
Soviet infantry weapon is 7.62mm. In 1930, a 7.62mm `TT' pistol was brought
into service, in addition to the existing rifles and machine-guns of this
calibre. Although their calibre is the same, the rounds for this pistol
cannot, of course, be used in either rifles or machine-guns.
In wartime, when everything is collapsing, when whole Armies and Groups
of Armies find themselves encircled, when Guderian and his tank Army are
charging around behind your own lines, when one division is fighting to the
death for a small patch of ground, and others are taking to their heels at
the first shot, when deafened switchboard operators, who have not slept for
several nights, have to shout someone else's incomprehensible orders into
telephones--in this sort of situation absolutely anything can happen.
Imagine that, at a moment such as this, a division receives ten truckloads
of 7.62mm cartridges. Suddenly, to his horror, the commander realises that
the consignment consists entirely of pistol ammunition. There is nothing for
his division's thousands of rifles and machine-guns and a quite unbelievable
amount of ammunition for the few hundred pistols with which his officers are
armed.
I do not know whether such a situation actually arose during the war,
but once it was over the `TT' pistol--though not at all a bad weapon--was
quickly withdrawn from service. The designers were told to produce a pistol
with a different calibre. Since then Soviet pistols have all been of 9mm
calibre. Why standardise calibres if this could result in fatally dangerous
misunderstanding?
Ever since then, each time an entirely new type of projectile has been
introduced, it has been given a new calibre. Naturally, shells for the BMP-1
gun are not suitable for the PT-76 tank--that was already obvious when work
on the design of the new vehicle and of its armament was begun. Therefore it
should not have a 76mm gun but something different--for instance, a 73mm
one. The shells for the new T-62 tank were of a completely new design and
would obviously not be suitable for use in the old 100mm tank guns. In that
case, the calibre here too, should be something quite different--for
instance, 115mm. The same went for the T-64 and T-72. Their shells had to be
quite different from those of the old heavy tanks. So that the old and the
new types of ammunition should not be mixed up, it was decided that the new
shells should be 125mm whereas the old ones were 122mm. There are dozens of
similar examples.
There are exceptions. In some cases it is essential to use a particular
calibre and no other. For example, the 122mm, 40-barrel multiple rocket
launcher must be of precisely that calibre--no more and no less. Its rockets
are therefore given a special designation; they are called `Grad' rockets.
This is the only way in which they are ever referred to--they are never
called `122mm' rockets. One makes this a habit from one's very first day.
Then, if someone orders `1-2-2' he is referring to howitzer shells, but if
he orders `Grad', he means rockets.

3


Western analysts find it hard to understand why the Soviet Union has
turned away from its old, well-tried standard calibres. Soviet analysts, for
their part, wonder why Western designers stick so stubbornly to old
specifications. The British have an exceptionally powerful 120mm tank gun.
An excellent weapon. They also have a useful 120mm recoilless gun. One of
them was developed some time ago, the other more recently. Obviously, they
use quite different shells. Why not use different calibres--one could be
120mm, the other 121mm? Or leave the calibres as they are; just change the
designation of one to 121mm. Why not?
The same applies to West Germany and to France. Both countries have
excellent 120mm mortars and both are working on the development of new 120mm
tank guns. Of course this works well enough in peacetime. Everything is
under control when the soldiers are professionals, who are quick to
understand a command. But what happens if, tomorrow, middle-aged reservists
and students from drama academies have to be mobilised to defend freedom?
What then? Every time 120mm shells are needed, one will have to explain that
you don't need the type which are used by recoilless guns or those which are
fired by mortars, but shells for tank guns. But be careful--there are 120mm
shells for rifled tank guns and different 120mm shells for smoothbore tank
guns. The guns are different and their shells are different. What happens if
a drama student makes a mistake?
The Soviet analysts sit and scratch their heads as they try to
understand why it is that Western calibres never alter."
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
thats why you need military slang:D :D
And best way to create it is to create first some pretty
difficoulty pronounched designation to each type of equipment and then
make the troops use them and everyone that has been in army knows how long exactly those offical names last and gets replaced by soldiers own nick names...
 

goldenpanda

Banned Idiot
Why would border guards have sub machine guns (correct me if im wrong), since submachine guns have less effective range and firepower as an assault rifle? Isn't the new SMG designed for CQB? If they were border guards wouldn't it be wise to weld Type 95 assault rifle
On the Burma border the guards are always in close contact with civilian traffic. Part of their job is to fight drugs. It's more of a SOF job than territory patrol.
 

f.hind

New Member
I heard that PLA SOF do regularly operate on the border and even inside Laos/Burma/Vietnam against drug smugglers. Opinions on this?
 

Ryz05

Junior Member
I heard that PLA SOF do regularly operate on the border and even inside Laos/Burma/Vietnam against drug smugglers. Opinions on this?
That's not surprising considering how American SOF operate in South American to stop drug smugglers. Also, does PLA SOF deal with human traffickers? Human trafficking is a problem in China, as stated on the CIA World Factbook.
 

Chengdu J-10

Junior Member
Umm whats your point? Cant figure out what point you are trying to give? US SWAT forces are always in contact with civilians and they use both M-4 carbine and MP5 submachine. The Beijing SWAT for the olympics are using the assault rifle Type-95 and I think there will be alot more people there then the border. Also at really confined spaces and extreme close range. If what you saying is this that close contact with people means submachine guns should be used then the Beijing SWAT should be using the Type-79/85 or even the Type-05. But all in all if you are looking for a more compact gun I suggest that the PLA finally bring out the never seen in operational status the Type-95 carbine. Dying to see this in operational status within PLA or PAP. Refering to Goldpanda.
 

goldenpanda

Banned Idiot
Controlling border against drugs is not like SWAT, where the main goal is to protect civilians, not to mow them down. SWAT will try to encircle terrorists and pick them off with accuracy and range. Border troops go around in jungles, looking for drugs, checking on civilians that may just pop a gun up at you.

Just a reasonable speculation from me. Certainly the guys that choose these guns know more about their needs than me or you.
 

Norfolk

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Both of you are right.
But I am talking about an apocalyptical scenario when according to Murphi`s law "Anything that can go wrong, will,". In this kind of situations using same calibers from different kind of weapons can result misunderstandings. I say can, not will. Using same calibers create possibility from mistakes not necessarily will result it.[/I]
Quite right, Zaky. All sorts of wild and woolly things can happen, even in peacetime. Someone who is tired, careless, or missed a few points during a lecture or during orders can really gum up the works. And it DOES happen, and when it does, it's just a huge mess.

Presumably the Chinese have throughly tested this 5.8X21mm cartridge and are satisfied with its performance, but...given the much lower mass the 5.8mm must have compared to the 9X19mm, even a much higher velocity for the 5.8mm round doesn't, on the face of things at least, seem to make for a round with much in the way of stopping power. Unless the bullet itself is not of conventional construction.
 
Last edited:

Top