PLA Small arms

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
The ironic part is that infantry is still a crucial component of the ground forces as evidenced by Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. As a matter of fact, the future infantry will deal with much more complex tasks and problems, yet the PLA infantry still trains their infantrymen as if they are disposable conscripts.
I feel like even in a Taiwan scenario PLAGF infantry would still be pretty low on the priority list. IMO the much better trained and equipped marine corps would be doing the heavy lifting in such a scenario with normal PLAGF infantry landing en masse only to maintain control after most of the high intensity conflicts are done.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
Sorry for the off topic responses. These will be my last responses as the topics we are discussing can become rabbit holes.
Out of all the lessons of the Ukraine-Russia war, I don't think the importance of basic infantry is one of them.
Ukraine is struggling immensely because of several variables, and the lack of infantry is one of them. That is one of their major concerns as their span of control is incredibly limited. They can’t afford to assault and are struggling to defend due to the imbalance in manpower. Yes, they are trying to compensate with drones, but jammers are still effective as most drones are still wireless. Previously, infantry was considered to be outdated, but clearly that is not the case.
I feel like even in a Taiwan scenario PLAGF infantry would still be pretty low on the priority list. IMO the much better trained and equipped marine corps would be doing the heavy lifting in such a scenario with normal PLAGF infantry landing en masse only to maintain control after most of the high intensity conflicts are done.
When it comes to planning, you want to have every tool in your kit ready to go. I can assure you that the Indians and Russians didn’t expect their plan to go sideways when they launched their respective operations. Plus, just marines doing the work isn’t enough, but that is off topic.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
It's kinda wild to me. Every other branch has implemented younger people's thoughts into the training design and uses new techniques. Even within the PLAGF, this practice is being used, such as with the artillery teams, and it has brought greater results in all aspects. But the general infantry sector seems to have stuck with the old farts who cannot adopt to modern warfare.
To be fair, the PLA infantry are adapting to the drone threat and utilizing drones much more effectively than their US counterparts are doing.
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
The ironic part is that infantry is still a crucial component of the ground forces as evidenced by Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. As a matter of fact, the future infantry will deal with much more complex tasks and problems, yet the PLA infantry still trains their infantrymen as if they are disposable conscripts.
I think in the last 30 years, there has been a lot of back and forth as to the future of what infantry looks like.
For the PLA, that would go even further back to the 80's. The Vietnam conflict finally got rid of semi-autos for good (which was way too long).
Then we had lessons for the Gulf War, which really deemphasized infantry.
Then we had the War on Terror which overemphasized things like house clearing, special forces, urban fighting, etc.
Now we are looking at the Ukraine war which is drone-drone-drone.
We've seen the PLA pick up bits and pieces of things from all of these conflicts, so it's possible that either there is no overall strategy in place yet, or in the process of things going back to the drawing board, the old (bad) habits stick around in the absence of replacement.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
I think in the last 30 years, there has been a lot of back and forth as to the future of what infantry looks like.
For the PLA, that would go even further back to the 80's. The Vietnam conflict finally got rid of semi-autos for good (which was way too long).
Then we had lessons for the Gulf War, which really deemphasized infantry.
Then we had the War on Terror which overemphasized things like house clearing, special forces, urban fighting, etc.
Now we are looking at the Ukraine war which is drone-drone-drone.
We've seen the PLA pick up bits and pieces of things from all of these conflicts, so it's possible that either there is no overall strategy in place yet, or in the process of things going back to the drawing board, the old (bad) habits stick around in the absence of replacement.
I am really curious about how they view those conflicts. It seems that they just follow trends rather than anticipate them or even just understand them. To be fair, the US does the same, and that is why everyone, for the lack of a better term, shits on their generals.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
To be fair, the PLA infantry are adapting to the drone threat and utilizing drones much more effectively than their US counterparts are doing.

I was going to mention that. But if AR actually ends up too “easy” there will be no impetus to ever improve… not that I think high casualty is good.

This is why I recommend they roll out the pain pellet training to lower level. Wear plate too low? Get a bruise. Only way to fix the issue really.
 

Leakage

New Member
Registered Member
Sorry for the off topic responses. These will be my last responses as the topics we are discussing can become rabbit holes.

Ukraine is struggling immensely because of several variables, and the lack of infantry is one of them. That is one of their major concerns as their span of control is incredibly limited. They can’t afford to assault and are struggling to defend due to the imbalance in manpower. Yes, they are trying to compensate with drones, but jammers are still effective as most drones are still wireless. Previously, infantry was considered to be outdated, but clearly that is not the case.

When it comes to planning, you want to have every tool in your kit ready to go. I can assure you that the Indians and Russians didn’t expect their plan to go sideways when they launched their respective operations. Plus, just marines doing the work isn’t enough, but that is off topic.

Ukraine isn't struggling, Russia is seconds worlds worst army so far they are losing to Ukraine. I don't know what Trump and your FAFO friends are telling you but Russia hasn't managed to take down Ukraine at all.
 
So delusional they had to reach out North Korea for help. That says a lot about how its going on. Ironically America supposedly the country with the best Army in the world ranked Russia the second best.

They should leave it to Europe instead.
No serious military analyst would rate Russia as second best. At best, a very distant third. NK asked Russia for a chance to get combat experience and Russia obliged them, the NK troops are but a drop in the bucket. Despite all the issues and problems with the Russian military, it is the Ukranians that are losing and struggling much more. What good would leaving it to the Europeans do?
 
Top