PLA Small arms
- Thread starter Vanguard1688
- Start date
No indication it was accepted into service, most likely just test bullet to simulate performance of US 6.8x51mm against Chinese ballistic plates and armor.
Honestly, I much prefer the russian 6.02x41mm intermediate cartridge to the 6.8 battle rifle round. An upscaled 5.8 would be much more viable than a "magnum" round like the 6.8, especially after what we see in the recent wars.
I still can't understand the performance of 5.8x42mm with such low pressure. Putting the spec into ballistic calculator shown that DBP-10 need to have pressure at least 46,000 psi to reach the performance listed. Pressure of 5.56x45mm also increase from 55,000psi to 62,000 psiwhen they switch from 55gr to 62gr bullet. Either DBP-10/DBP-191 weaker than advertised or they have higher pressure what currently known.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
If there is a mis-match between pressure and performance, I would suggest that pressure is far more likely to be the one that is off. If the round cannot achieve the kinetic performance promised, that will easily be flagged by units from general usage and basic testing. Whereas it would be far more difficult to test chamber pressure, and so long as the rounds are not so hot as to cause above acceptable levels of malfunctions, I don’t think anyone would really look that closely to flag discrepancies.
The low pressure requirements on the rounds was probably a mix of old overly-frugal thinking carrying over requiring a silly service life for barrels that is unattainable with the performance demanded; and also owning to heightened safety considerations for the 95, as you really don’t want a kaboom from a super hot load on a bullpup. Additionally, as manufacturing capabilities modernised and improved, they were probably more happy to reduce the safety margins as manufacturing tolerances vastly improved.
The most obvious cost of going with higher pressure loads would be increased wear and tear on the barrels and reduced barrel life. For which they have a convenient excuse for: the PLA’s continued cheapness with using corrosive powder. Indeed, it’s probably the same old timers who insisted on the barrel life requirements who also refused to allow the use of slightly more expensive non-corrosive powder. So they are probably less inclined to make a massive fuss out of the issue if the question of barrel life came up and everyone pointed the finger of blame at corrosive powder.
I mean, if DBP-10 really have 42,000 psi pressure it would have the same muzzle energy from its 71gr bullet out of 18.2 inch barrel as M855A1 have from its 62gr bullet out of 14.5 inch barrel.
Since QBZ-191 have thicker barrel and higher quality steel and coating for its BCG, I wont be surprised if they standarized on 46,000+ psi.
I mean I think the PLA intended for the DP10 to be mostly used for close quarters because that is what the intermediate cartiges are for especially since PLA prioritised armor piercing and stopping power which is why GIGN surprisngly uses 7.62x39 over 5.56
