High Precision Sniper (or Marksman) Rifle
- Thread starter challenge
- Start date
plawolf
Lieutenant General
The SVD was a good enough rifle for the role it was intended as - a designated marksman rifle. Detractors compare it's accuracy to top of the range dedicated sniper rifles and sniff, but that is just armchair commentary.
When you are in the thick of the fighting with bullets zipping around and targets popping up quickly from multiple directions, you will appreciate the value of a 'good enough' semi-auto SVD or Type 88 compared to a bolt action sniper.
The two types of weapons were designed for two vastly different roles. And the Type 88 is reported to be superior to the SVD in pretty much all regards except for maybe wounding characteristics since the SVD uses a much larger bullet.
The Type 88 and SVD will not win you sniping competitions, but in real life, where it doesn't matter whether you can shoot someone through the eye so long as you hit his head, the two weapons would be much more useful than pure sniper rifles in the sub-1km range, just as the US is finding the M14 useful in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the British are introducing the 'sharpshooter' semi-auto, which is effective up to 900 yards.
When you are in the thick of the fighting with bullets zipping around and targets popping up quickly from multiple directions, you will appreciate the value of a 'good enough' semi-auto SVD or Type 88 compared to a bolt action sniper.
The two types of weapons were designed for two vastly different roles. And the Type 88 is reported to be superior to the SVD in pretty much all regards except for maybe wounding characteristics since the SVD uses a much larger bullet.
The Type 88 and SVD will not win you sniping competitions, but in real life, where it doesn't matter whether you can shoot someone through the eye so long as you hit his head, the two weapons would be much more useful than pure sniper rifles in the sub-1km range, just as the US is finding the M14 useful in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the British are introducing the 'sharpshooter' semi-auto, which is effective up to 900 yards.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Really depends on where he is hit, by what kind of bullet and if he was armored.
NATO troops have reported numerous incidents in Iraq and 'stan where standard 5.56mm rounds made good hits in 'critical' areas like the chest, but with little effect because of over-penetration. This was also experienced by the Japanese during WWII.
The standard Chinese 5.8mm was about on par with the NATO 5.56mm in tests against ballistic soap and livestock, and the sniper 5.8mm round, the 5.8×42mm DBP-88 'heavy' round has more charge to give it a greater range, but this also increases the chances of over-penetration when it hits naked flesh.
The Chinese have put armor penetration as a higher priority than wounding characteristics in the 5.8mm, and ironically, you may actually have a better chance of surviving without your body armor compared to if you worn it, especially at close ranges.
Incidently, I think the NATO 5.56mm also shares this characteristic with the 5.8mm, which may be one of the reasons why the PLA seems to be so slow in equipping it's soldiers with body armor even though China is now one of the world's biggest manufactures of the stuff.
Chinese infantry are almost all mechanized now, especially the core combat divisions. So their IFVs will protect them against small arms fire until they are ready to disembark, which will probably be in the 100-200m range if not lower. At such close range, the odds of body armor stopping a burst from 5.56mm or 5.8mm is on the low side, and indeed, if you were hit and the rounds penetrated your body armor, chances are you will suffer far more serious injuries as the small cal rounds would have deformed and/or tumbled after penetrating the armor to cause far more damage than if they went straight through. In addition, the added weight and bulk of the armor would slow you down and reduce your flexibility and mobility, making it more likely that you will be hit.
So against opponents skill using AKs, body armor would be a massive plus, but if you are facing opponents with 5.56mm rounds, you should either equip your guys with top of the range stuff, or not bother at all if all you have are mid-range armor. But I digress...
NATO troops have reported numerous incidents in Iraq and 'stan where standard 5.56mm rounds made good hits in 'critical' areas like the chest, but with little effect because of over-penetration. This was also experienced by the Japanese during WWII.
The standard Chinese 5.8mm was about on par with the NATO 5.56mm in tests against ballistic soap and livestock, and the sniper 5.8mm round, the 5.8×42mm DBP-88 'heavy' round has more charge to give it a greater range, but this also increases the chances of over-penetration when it hits naked flesh.
The Chinese have put armor penetration as a higher priority than wounding characteristics in the 5.8mm, and ironically, you may actually have a better chance of surviving without your body armor compared to if you worn it, especially at close ranges.
Incidently, I think the NATO 5.56mm also shares this characteristic with the 5.8mm, which may be one of the reasons why the PLA seems to be so slow in equipping it's soldiers with body armor even though China is now one of the world's biggest manufactures of the stuff.
Chinese infantry are almost all mechanized now, especially the core combat divisions. So their IFVs will protect them against small arms fire until they are ready to disembark, which will probably be in the 100-200m range if not lower. At such close range, the odds of body armor stopping a burst from 5.56mm or 5.8mm is on the low side, and indeed, if you were hit and the rounds penetrated your body armor, chances are you will suffer far more serious injuries as the small cal rounds would have deformed and/or tumbled after penetrating the armor to cause far more damage than if they went straight through. In addition, the added weight and bulk of the armor would slow you down and reduce your flexibility and mobility, making it more likely that you will be hit.
So against opponents skill using AKs, body armor would be a massive plus, but if you are facing opponents with 5.56mm rounds, you should either equip your guys with top of the range stuff, or not bother at all if all you have are mid-range armor. But I digress...
Red___Sword
Junior Member
Indeed, as fierce as Chinese People's Volunteer Army that consists 90% of foot soldier and Arty as few as relics, the statistic shows PVA's arty took almost half the socre overall. - Took PVA for example is because that's the first war that China actually have some arty assets to play with at the first place.
But to the topic, modern PLA doctrine for mechanized infantrys is that don't bother to hold still and absorb the enemy arty firepower, but to mobilize yourself anytime you are in a disadvantage position - I think.
So, you see modern pictures that PLA recon rough-bones got more and more all sorts of gears (including vasts) while regular mechnized infantrys remain "slim" - protect from shreds? sits in an IFV!
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Firstly, I think that large casualties from artillery came from before the age of mechanized infantry, when troops had to charge across open ground on foot. With troops now normally mounted up in IFVs, shrapnel becomes less of an issue, and if artillery does kill, it is because a shell has bullseyed an IFV, in which case body armor will hardly made a difference.
Ask Americans just how well vests stop IEDs. They might give you some protection if you are hit by small to medium sized bits of shrapnel, but if a shell or grenade lands at your feet, it's time to stick your head between your legs and kiss your arse goodbye, vest or no vest.
As Red Sword already pointed out, the PLA's main counters to enemy artillery is to get close ASAP as well as the PLA's own artillery counter battery fire and air force strikes etc.
On the way in, the infantry will be riding in IFVs, which will protect them far better than any vest.
In addition, artillery does not just kill with shrapnel, the concussion wave is also a big killer, especially with newer thermabatic warheads. Against those, no vest gives much protection.
But I seem to remember reading a story about have the PLA's artillery corps got body armor first. This would make sense since these guys would normally be out in the open and will also be a primary target for enemy artillery in addition to being a lot less mobile than mech infantry (I am taking about traditional towed artillery instead of the self-propelled ones here btw), so their chances to taking casualties from shrapnel would be higher and it would seem that that is enough to justify equipping them with vests.
noone536
Junior Member
this is off topic but you guys have to know that now days most war would be in an urban enviroment and in cases like this i think the body would be very helfull. i am sure the united army have consider all the things that you guys have said but they still eqip their troop with body armor. to get back to topic does anyone know how the js family sniper compare to their american counter parts?
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Actually, urban combat would be precisely the kind of place where engagement ranges are massively reduced. The US equip its troops with body armor for many reasons, and they do help against old-school AK47 rounds that all the foes NATO forces have fought so far use.
I just question just how effective the same body armor would be against modern, small cal rounds that are optimized precisely to defeat modern ballistic body armor.
I just question just how effective the same body armor would be against modern, small cal rounds that are optimized precisely to defeat modern ballistic body armor.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
That would depend on the Armor the range of firing, point of impact, rounds and barrel length.
The US and Nato are being fairly proactive in armor development pushing too try an cover any possible threat rounds. Remember the forces encountered in Iraq are in urban fighting the forces in Afghanistan are more traditional rural and open.
Having read a few reports from Iraq I feel it must also be stated that not all the insurgents were packing Just Ak's also encountered were larger caliber SVD /PSL's fireing the older 7.62x54mm as well as supposed " Friendly" rounds from either battle field pickup or importation word is a few DIO Model S-5.56 assault rifles ( Iranian Clones of Chinese Clones of the Ar15 ) were also encountered. factoring this current American body armor (SAPI) does in fact allow coverage against a set range up too M60 ball ammo.
The US and Nato are being fairly proactive in armor development pushing too try an cover any possible threat rounds. Remember the forces encountered in Iraq are in urban fighting the forces in Afghanistan are more traditional rural and open.
Having read a few reports from Iraq I feel it must also be stated that not all the insurgents were packing Just Ak's also encountered were larger caliber SVD /PSL's fireing the older 7.62x54mm as well as supposed " Friendly" rounds from either battle field pickup or importation word is a few DIO Model S-5.56 assault rifles ( Iranian Clones of Chinese Clones of the Ar15 ) were also encountered. factoring this current American body armor (SAPI) does in fact allow coverage against a set range up too M60 ball ammo.