PLA Small arms


Aniah

Senior Member
Registered Member
None Issue solved by training . It the same way , for left hand writers, there is no left hand shooter in PLA , they are taught to use right hand instead.

For other applications, I don't think it is a major problem , standard issued AK also doesn't have a ambidextrous handle.
Also the gun in the photo is QJB-201/QJS-161 (the designation isn't clear right now) .It is a squad light machine gun , not a assault rifle.
It need to have a ambidextrous handle is even lower , it is mainly used with the bipod prone , and charged with the right hand since it need to be polled quite bit more force then a assault rifle.
I don't think people were thinking of left-handed shooters when it comes to ambidextrous handles but rather more that it would be more ergonomic and easier to have it on the left side.
 

wssth0306

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't think people were thinking of left-handed shooters when it comes to ambidextrous handles but rather more that it would be more ergonomic and easier to have it on the left side.
Same augment , a training issue ,the user can be trained to get used to it.
In reality it is a quality of life change not a necessity, and not all users will feel the need to have it on the left side.
 

by78

Lieutenant General
Possibly the same scope again. Obviously, compared to the tradition NVG (third image), the augmented reality feature makes a world of difference.

52310986322_f33f3e92e9_k.jpg
52312228470_9fae92f603_k.jpg

52312095578_0330d5a318_k.jpg


Again, possibly the same scope.

52325504255_8da5ecf499_k.jpg
 

Aniah

Senior Member
Registered Member
Same augment , a training issue ,the user can be trained to get used to it.
In reality it is a quality of life change not a necessity, and not all users will feel the need to have it on the left side.
I question that. At what point does one stop saying "it's a training issue" because you can also apply that to bolt hold open, bolt release, and adjustable stock and sights. At the end of the day, all of it is training issues but the point the original poster and me were trying to make is improving the platform so it's better. I think the PLA are starting to get this as well and all the modernization going on right now seems like dipping their toes in the water to test it.
 

wssth0306

Junior Member
Registered Member
I question that. At what point does one stop saying "it's a training issue" because you can also apply that to bolt hold open, bolt release, and adjustable stock and sights. At the end of the day, all of it is training issues but the point the original poster and me were trying to make is improving the platform so it's better. I think the PLA are starting to get this as well and all the modernization going on right now seems like dipping their toes in the water to test it.
Good question ,it makes trivial difference in my opinion in the bigger picture of peer combat because the nature of small arms.
These advancements are from a Civilian perspective of fire arm use ,and imagining the battle field with infantry shooting each other like we have seen in none peer environment of war on terror.

I my opinion the combat effective fire power of a infantry squad at end of 1945 with M1 m1 Garand and BAR is about is about 70% (excluding ,un-organic to the squad, and the IFV) of that infantry squad of a 2022 , the main cause of the difference is due to magazine size , and the amount of ammo they carry , and sights.
This also means that just about every mission carried out today by a infantry squad can be carried out by one from 1945 , it would take them longer , but modern infantry squad fire and mauver remained the same.
What did change drastically is everything else in the battle space , a infantry squad has a IFV now days which has more powerful of a cannon and sensors then the infantry can hope to carry, and the firepower and information on call for a squad is now logarithmically higher then back in WW2 both in direct and direct , the kill chain completion time went from few minutes to dozens seconds.
This is back up with the fact ,that most combat casualty is not a gun shot ,still to this day they the most casualty are caused by shrapnel , this means that by far the most important weapon for the squad is it's eye and radio, not the gun in their hand.

So from this perspective I would agree with you that yes , the things you said is a improving the platform, but I would dwell to much on it, even if it is the perfect small arms , it matters a little in a battel space when you are been shelled from a enemy you can't see .
Or even you can see it often it armored and you might not have a can opener for that threat.
 

Kirk

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Have you tried the Maxim 9? It's also from SilencerCo but it's a full package, integrally suppressed. Seems pretty cool but I've never been able to fire it myself.
I tried it once and wasn’t a fan. The trigger isn’t as smooth as Glocks or Sigs and it gets really hot fast. It’s not a “range” gun. The plus is that the recoil is almost non noticeable. It is very quiet compared to other suppressed guns. The thing looks ugly when you mount a light on it too.

I can see how it can be a good home defense gun because of the low recoil and noise level. I can’t even imagine how quiet it would be if you run subsonic rounds with it.

On the civilian side I would never pay a stamp for one gun when I can buy a silencer that can work on a multiple guns.
 

Staedler

New Member
Registered Member
Seems strange to have the UI elements be the same color as the digital outlines. In crowded environments like the last photo, the outlines and the UI meld together and the UI becomes hard to make out. Would look like an easily fixable issue. Perhaps they're not expecting it to need to do much digital outlining in actual use?
 

el pueblo unido

Junior Member
Registered Member
Seems strange to have the UI elements be the same color as the digital outlines. In crowded environments like the last photo, the outlines and the UI meld together and the UI becomes hard to make out. Would look like an easily fixable issue. Perhaps they're not expecting it to need to do much digital outlining in actual use?
Some of the training groups have already been using these fusion goggles in drills for PAP, the UI looks pretty bright in contrast, mostly just for spotting targets by two recon members from the squad on the higher position. they also applied a drone with heat vision if you check the earlier section of the video

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

1662944791776.png
 

Top