Seem to be running CrabTac FMLC, an S&S Plateframe inspired design. Much better suited for a maritime/tropical environment compared to Jiaolong's maritime PC, a relatively
Frogman transporter.
Seem to be running CrabTac FMLC, an S&S Plateframe inspired design. Much better suited for a maritime/tropical environment compared to Jiaolong's maritime PC, a relativelybackwardsconservative design which has the same complaints of trapping moisture and heat that the Type-19/21 vest does.
View attachment 133442
View attachment 133443
If SOF reform continues successfully, we should start to see a separate procurement system appear and deliver modern, optimal solutions to the areas that are needed. Relying on individual and small unit level purchases for proper basic kit does not work at the scale that the PLA is aiming to achieve.
The plate frame was designed for modularity it’s been adapted to any number of configurations with the maker S&S offering accessories to tailor configurations for maritime and conventional use. However although it has some advantages in not being an enclosed carrier in trapping heat and moisture that’s not just due to the open cell design. S&S gives a bit of stand off in the base configurations allowing ventilation between the wearer and the plates.Seem to be running CrabTac FMLC, an S&S Plateframe inspired design. Much better suited for a maritime/tropical environment compared to Jiaolong's maritime PC, a relativelybackwardsconservative design which has the same complaints of trapping moisture and heat that the Type-19/21 vest does.
View attachment 133442
View attachment 133443
If SOF reform continues successfully, we should start to see a separate procurement system appear and deliver modern, optimal solutions to the areas that are needed. Relying on individual and small unit level purchases for proper basic kit does not work at the scale that the PLA is aiming to achieve.
@plawolfI seriously doubt the PLA is looking to build a massive US-style tier one SOF organisation since the US itself has now belatedly realised that was a massive strategic error by sinking a significant proportion of its resources into a very small force that has a disappointingly small impact in a near-peer fight. Especially since the opportunity cost of having so many tier one teams are conventional weapon systems like new gen artillery, amour and SAMs etc that is proving to be a massive shortcoming for the US and NATO ground forces at large.
The PLA already have a massive SOF headcount. The main difference is that PLA SOF are focused on supporting the wider PLA in traditional combined arms operations, rather than being an independently deployable force for almost any scenario.
The PLA is developing its own tier one equivalents, but those are likely to be only a fraction of the US headcount for such units. It is almost certainly not going to be on a scale as to require a dedicated procurement channel, as they will likely only want small quantities of a vast array of different specialist gear.
The PLA tier one units will likely operate as strategic assets for very specific, singular missions, whereas the bulk of the SOF work will remain with the PLA’s existing SOF units. So these will be a brand new capability added to the PLA rather than the new standard most PLA SOF units will be built to.