Hello I'm relatativly new to this forum and I have been checking out a good number of interesting threads for quite a while and I've yet to find one that details PLA marksmanship standards so I finally decided to post. Therefore I'm just wondering how accurate a PLA infantryman is with his weapon and how does it compare to other nations military.
Marksmanship
- Thread starter Adriatick
- Start date
When we first went to the firing range with our Kalashnikoviks, I scored 92 (from 100) at 150 mm to standart size target. It ment that the shots where mostly at "9-ring", inside 30 cm diameter circle. That was my first time firing an assault rifle. Well to be honest, 10 years of sports shooting beforehand perhaps had little effect.
I shot the best score at that round and only few other guys came even near. The average score in the whole battery was around 60-65. It wasen't considered anyway good and we sure did get some "constrcutive feedback" from our drill instructors. So we kept on practising and tough I was only able to rise my score to 94, the rest of the battery improved and the average score raised over 70. As we where in the artillery, the time in the firing range was far less than normal infantry soldiers. Anyway in our battery, every guy could hit a mansized target at 150 meters and that was considered sufficient enough.
Now that was in finnish army, but as we were conscripts, there were whole lotta bunch from different backrounds and physicaland mental ability. It would be roughly good example for random survey of general marksmanship. Now in PLA I belive that as the servicetime is longer and at least the infantry troops will get alot of firingrange time, the average marksmanship level is as good as in any country. The weapon doesen't make much difference as the marginal accuracy differences between various assaultrifles is lost in the general statistical errors. Its all down to how much firingrange time you get. And as that doesen't need any high-tech equipment or othervice sophisiticated training methods I belive that the general level of marksmanship is quite similar in all armies that actually have a military training. PLA soldiers are as good as americans, indians, french, swedish...well perhaps slightly better and only small step behind of us finns who naturally are the best soldiers that there is
I shot the best score at that round and only few other guys came even near. The average score in the whole battery was around 60-65. It wasen't considered anyway good and we sure did get some "constrcutive feedback" from our drill instructors. So we kept on practising and tough I was only able to rise my score to 94, the rest of the battery improved and the average score raised over 70. As we where in the artillery, the time in the firing range was far less than normal infantry soldiers. Anyway in our battery, every guy could hit a mansized target at 150 meters and that was considered sufficient enough.
Now that was in finnish army, but as we were conscripts, there were whole lotta bunch from different backrounds and physicaland mental ability. It would be roughly good example for random survey of general marksmanship. Now in PLA I belive that as the servicetime is longer and at least the infantry troops will get alot of firingrange time, the average marksmanship level is as good as in any country. The weapon doesen't make much difference as the marginal accuracy differences between various assaultrifles is lost in the general statistical errors. Its all down to how much firingrange time you get. And as that doesen't need any high-tech equipment or othervice sophisiticated training methods I belive that the general level of marksmanship is quite similar in all armies that actually have a military training. PLA soldiers are as good as americans, indians, french, swedish...well perhaps slightly better and only small step behind of us finns who naturally are the best soldiers that there is
Well, maybe the best rifles (Sako), and all that beautiful hunting ground, so maybe the Finnish Army is starting off with a little bit of an unfair advantage in the recruit pool that it can draw upon.
For the PLA infantry, marksmanship depends upon a few factors. The first is that they receive only 2 month's basic training and no infantry trade training before being sent to their unit where they receive on-the-job-training, and after the first four months of that, they are considered "trained". Still, as long as the leadership is competent and training resources sufficient, PLA infantry should be reasonably proficient at weapons handling and shooting with rifles out to 300 metres (the generally accepted minimum standard worldwide for infantry).
Given that PLA soldiers can only serve two years before they are automatically demobilized (unless they are subsequently accepted for 1-3 months NCO training), they have only a short time to get their skills up to a high standard, and about half of the training year in a PLA infantry unit is concentrated upon unit, not individual training. The other half, of course, the unit devotes to providing 2 months' basic training (or detaching its officers and NCOs from the unit to do so) for new recruits and then spending 4 more months on in-unit individual training for those new recruits. There's not a lot of time for troops to achieve high marksmanship levels (except fot the naturally talented).
Similar problems exist in the US Army. Infantry there receive only 13-14 weeks' training before being sent to their unit, which then has to spend part of its time training the new infantry recruits up to standard (if it has time and resources to do so.) In their 9th week of basic training, US Army recruits only have to qualify out to 100 metres with a rifle. Not exactly cutting-edge standards. So whatever is missed in the final 4-5 weeks of infantry training that US Army infantry receive, the units the troops are sent to have to make up the difference, if they can. The main difference is that the US Army doesn't automatically discharge its troops after only 2 years' service.
So the regular PLA infantry should have reasonable marksmanship standards, especially compared to US Army infantry, but they shouldn't be expected to necessarily have the same marksmanship and weapons handling standards of European-style professional armies (as opposed to short-service conscript armies).
(Sako), and all that beautiful hunting ground, so maybe the Finnish Army is starting off with a little bit of an unfair advantage in the recruit pool that it can draw upon. For the PLA infantry, marksmanship depends upon a few factors. The first is that they receive only 2 month's basic training and no infantry trade training before being sent to their unit where they receive on-the-job-training, and after the first four months of that, they are considered "trained". Still, as long as the leadership is competent and training resources sufficient, PLA infantry should be reasonably proficient at weapons handling and shooting with rifles out to 300 metres (the generally accepted minimum standard worldwide for infantry).
Given that PLA soldiers can only serve two years before they are automatically demobilized (unless they are subsequently accepted for 1-3 months NCO training), they have only a short time to get their skills up to a high standard, and about half of the training year in a PLA infantry unit is concentrated upon unit, not individual training. The other half, of course, the unit devotes to providing 2 months' basic training (or detaching its officers and NCOs from the unit to do so) for new recruits and then spending 4 more months on in-unit individual training for those new recruits. There's not a lot of time for troops to achieve high marksmanship levels (except fot the naturally talented).
Similar problems exist in the US Army. Infantry there receive only 13-14 weeks' training before being sent to their unit, which then has to spend part of its time training the new infantry recruits up to standard (if it has time and resources to do so.) In their 9th week of basic training, US Army recruits only have to qualify out to 100 metres with a rifle
. Not exactly cutting-edge standards. So whatever is missed in the final 4-5 weeks of infantry training that US Army infantry receive, the units the troops are sent to have to make up the difference, if they can. The main difference is that the US Army doesn't automatically discharge its troops after only 2 years' service. So the regular PLA infantry should have reasonable marksmanship standards, especially compared to US Army infantry, but they shouldn't be expected to necessarily have the same marksmanship and weapons handling standards of European-style professional armies (as opposed to short-service conscript armies).
aquilis182
New Member
When we first went to the firing range with our Kalashnikoviks, I scored 92 (from 100) at 150 mm to standart size target. It ment that the shots where mostly at "9-ring", inside 30 cm diameter circle. That was my first time firing an assault rifle. Well to be honest, 10 years of sports shooting beforehand perhaps had little effect.
I shot the best score at that round and only few other guys came even near. The average score in the whole battery was around 60-65. It wasen't considered anyway good and we sure did get some "constrcutive feedback" from our drill instructors. So we kept on practising and tough I was only able to rise my score to 94, the rest of the battery improved and the average score raised over 70. As we where in the artillery, the time in the firing range was far less than normal infantry soldiers. Anyway in our battery, every guy could hit a mansized target at 150 meters and that was considered sufficient enough.
Now that was in finnish army, but as we were conscripts, there were whole lotta bunch from different backrounds and physicaland mental ability. It would be roughly good example for random survey of general marksmanship. Now in PLA I belive that as the servicetime is longer and at least the infantry troops will get alot of firingrange time, the average marksmanship level is as good as in any country. The weapon doesen't make much difference as the marginal accuracy differences between various assaultrifles is lost in the general statistical errors. Its all down to how much firingrange time you get. And as that doesen't need any high-tech equipment or othervice sophisiticated training methods I belive that the general level of marksmanship is quite similar in all armies that actually have a military training. PLA soldiers are as good as americans, indians, french, swedish...well perhaps slightly better and only small step behind of us finns who naturally are the best soldiers that there is
100 targets you say?... Im not easily impress but thats too damn much we only fire at 40 targets in the U.S. (not including infantryman) but heres were we have the advantages... we fire to mansized target from 50mts to 300mts,
not only to 150mts... I score 37 out of 40 in BCT with an M16A2 the funny part is that I miss 3 50mts targets due we have mush less time to take them down than farter targets. but if you hit 94 out of 100 with a Kalashnikovik
you're a hell of a shooter. My respects to you!
well 100 meaning ten rounds to a target with scales of one to ten like in standart sport shooting. 94 is roughly 9.5 average score for each round.
But then again, I have been practicing sport-shooting since I was 10 years old
We also had this offical test for shooting skills where we shot 12 rounds, and each of them needed to hit the target. First six where shot at 150meter (three from prone, three from laying down position) to targets that where shown only few secconds, and then 6 rounds in 50 meter from standing position. I naturally got all twelve hit into the targets and I also scored 108 out of 120 points wich earned me one day vacation.
But then again, I have been practicing sport-shooting since I was 10 years old
We also had this offical test for shooting skills where we shot 12 rounds, and each of them needed to hit the target. First six where shot at 150meter (three from prone, three from laying down position) to targets that where shown only few secconds, and then 6 rounds in 50 meter from standing position. I naturally got all twelve hit into the targets and I also scored 108 out of 120 points wich earned me one day vacation.
aquilis182
New Member
Well, maybe the best rifles
For the PLA infantry, marksmanship depends upon a few factors. The first is that they receive only 2 month's basic training and no infantry trade training before being sent to their unit where they receive on-the-job-training, and after the first four months of that, they are considered "trained". Still, as long as the leadership is competent and training resources sufficient, PLA infantry should be reasonably proficient at weapons handling and shooting with rifles out to 300 metres (the generally accepted minimum standard worldwide for infantry).
Given that PLA soldiers can only serve two years before they are automatically demobilized (unless they are subsequently accepted for 1-3 months NCO training), they have only a short time to get their skills up to a high standard, and about half of the training year in a PLA infantry unit is concentrated upon unit, not individual training. The other half, of course, the unit devotes to providing 2 months' basic training (or detaching its officers and NCOs from the unit to do so) for new recruits and then spending 4 more months on in-unit individual training for those new recruits. There's not a lot of time for troops to achieve high marksmanship levels (except fot the naturally talented).
Similar problems exist in the US Army. Infantry there receive only 13-14 weeks' training before being sent to their unit, which then has to spend part of its time training the new infantry recruits up to standard (if it has time and resources to do so.) In their 9th week of basic training, US Army recruits only have to qualify out to 100 metres with a rifle
So the regular PLA infantry should have reasonable marksmanship standards, especially compared to US Army infantry, but they shouldn't be expected to necessarily have the same marksmanship and weapons handling standards of European-style professional armies (as opposed to short-service conscript armies).
Interesting but little points to clarify U.S. Army Infantry trainning takes 15 weeks not 13 to 14 (dont worried, not a big deal) soldiers are required to qualify hitting at least 23 out of 40 to qualify as a marksman including 50m to 300m targets by the time I take BCT in FT Jackson, SC we where not infantry and in the qualification day the platoon hit an overrall of 26 to 28 out of 40. And thats was in week 5 out of 9 maybe thats was because we take like 10 groping, zeroing then practicing in the range. I still remember that right after PT, breakfast, and personal hygiene time (wich was very short) we practice all day until 1700hrs and we just take breaks to eat go pi or po and drink water (wish was dependeing on the temperature if go so high they gave us more time to rest) (I was talking about my personal experience in The U.S. Army BCT.) When I was asigned to my duty station in the Army Reserve we take a kind of BCT Refreshment course of 4 weeks before we go to Iraq and almost all (not all) soldiers score as sharpshooters instead of a marksman that means 30 to 35 out of 40 in U.S. Army standards off course most of the soldiers where mush older tho thouse that I see in BCT and AIT but still a good score. I actually get 37 out of 40 and qualify as an expert marksman (I have to confess that I take additional practice when I came back from trainning cause Im in the Reserve and have a lot of free time, so I join to a civilian armory and practice) we where just a lawndry and textiles company so we havo not nearly the same time in the fireing range. (Now I talk about my figures) I think based on my experience in the U.S. Army that U.S. infantry may have the same marsmanship standards of the rest of the U.S. Army but scince they have more time practicing they should have a better overrall score than us Combat Support soldiers. I also figured that thouse U.S. Army infantry soldiers (talkking about overrall, not all) should be at least sharpshooters (those guys who serve in the U.S. Army Infantry correct my guess if Im wrong). I wonder how the PLA clasify their marksmanship skilled and how they rate marksmans, sharpshooters and expert marksmans. Our friend Gollevainen tells us than the PLA practice with 100 targets and the average of his battery was 70 with 100m to 150m. Thats sound a reasonable distance taking in consideration that they use Kalashnikovs. Thats make me formulate another question whats the minimun for qualify as a marksman in the PLA?
aquilis, you've got some pretty good skill there shooting 37 out of 40
, and there's not as many US Army infantry soldiers who shoot that as you might think, even though they should receive more official time on the range than CSS. It's good that you're taking it upon yourself to keep and hone your markmanship skills; that's dedicated and it's smart. I shot 58 out of 60 on the CF PWT Level 1 my last time (which was quite a while ago now...), but I was in the Infantry anyway. As far as how the PLA scores marksmanship, we'd probably need someone from the PLA to clue us in there; but I suspect the 5.8mm round of the Type 95 is not exactly a slouch when it comes to accuracy. As for the AK, well I doubt that anything more than an absolute minority of AK users would qualify as marksmen, at least using the 7.62x39mm round; 5.45x39mm round is somewhat better. As to how much range time and what sort of shooting applications PLA infantry get to have, it's easy to speculate but not so easy to confirm.
aquilis182
New Member
aquilis, you've got some pretty good skill there shooting 37 out of 40
As far as how the PLA scores marksmanship, we'd probably need someone from the PLA to clue us in there; but I suspect the 5.8mm round of the Type 95 is not exactly a slouch when it comes to accuracy. As for the AK, well I doubt that anything more than an absolute minority of AK users would qualify as marksmen, at least using the 7.62x39mm round; 5.45x39mm round is somewhat better. As to how much range time and what sort of shooting applications PLA infantry get to have, it's easy to speculate but not so easy to confirm.
Well thanks but, I talk before about my platoon too back in BCT I say what I see they overrall score like 26 to 28. U.S. Army standards for sharpshooter are at least 30 out of 40, I guess (all I can do scince I never wen't to an infantry company) based on that I can guess the U.S. Army infantry should be something like 30 out of 40 (say again talking about overall, not all of them) scince they take much more practice than us, in my case I take my free time as an army reserve (weekend warrior, if you like to call me
) I use my personal time to go to an armory thats why I score more than overrall soldiers. About for 5.45mm vs 5.56mm even the russian admit the 5.45mm is less acurate than the nato 5.56mm I wonder why?
Last edited:
Re: Spyware link!
Not an expert on 5.45mm or AK-74 (let alone the AN-94), but the Russian 5.45mm round is lighter than the NATO 5.56mm round, and I think the latter requires a tighter rifling twist than the former.
aquilis, delete the link you have posted. That's a spyware program; my security system can handle it:nono:, but someone else might not have as good a security system.
About for 5.45mm vs 5.56mm even the russian admit the 5.45mm is less acurate than the nato 5.56mm I wonder why but you can chek at: [] the info is in spanish but you can use it to translate it
Not an expert on 5.45mm or AK-74 (let alone the AN-94), but the Russian 5.45mm round is lighter than the NATO 5.56mm round, and I think the latter requires a tighter rifling twist than the former.
aquilis, delete the link you have posted. That's a spyware program
; my security system can handle it:nono:, but someone else might not have as good a security system.