TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I am not quite happy with where I left off so I will expand with a few bonus points.
First Whose keen eyes will note I added a * at one pint in my post. Why did I do that? BEcause the History of the Assault rifle class is one mixed with the lesser spoken need of reduced cost. The STG44, MP44, MP43, Mkb42 were created for a number of reasons, one of which was Material and manufacturing. If you ever get the chance to see a real one you will note that it’s actually mostly stamped sheet metal with some Bakelite and a cheaply cut wooden stock Around the critical parts. This is also true for the FG42. These were weapons built to forego then standard high end gun making for slapped together simple low cost machining. They were as much a product of the expediency of cost as weapons like the Sten gun or Grease gun.
Post war The Russians introduced 4 AK types as they intended at first to like the STG Stamp the guns out cheaply by the millions. But the first attempts could pass Quality control these are the type 1 AK47. Stamping is cheap unless you have to scrap a lot of receivers because they cant be used. So they redesigned and went back to Milling Not as cheap but good enough to get off the ground floor. That would be the basis of the Type 2, then farther reformed with the type 3 until the AKM when they got the stamping right.
In the AR Stoner and company who worked for Fairchild Aircraft realized that cheaper than stamped steel is forged aluminum, You use the higher end materials in the parts that need it the barrels the bolts the springs the gas system well the rest can be aluminum and Polymer.
The AK would eventually trade off it’s wooden furniture for polymers but is still a stamped sheet metal receiver in most makers. By the late 70’s you get the AUG which pushed the Bullpup form and more and more use of polymer construction. Plastics had advanced significantly and by then were cheaper yet still suitable for non stressed portions of rifles. Today most modern weapons are a composition of steel, aluminum and polymers. That can be good or bad depending on situation and material. Poor choices of Aluminum caused issues on early AR’s in Vietnam. Poor choices in polymers caused issues in some weapons particularly in extreme heat or cold or humidity. Improper protection of steel has cause rifles to fail.
The AK has issues with adapting it to rail systems. This is because it mounts it’s barrel trunion is mounted rigidly to the lower receiver, access to the bolt and internals is via a removable top cover. This is the opposite of both the AR and STG44. Who have removable magazine wells/Trigger group pistol grip assemblies. ( the STG44 in fact breaks down very similarly to a MP5 because the STG is in many ways the grandmother of the HK rifle series. ) by having the top cover as opposed to a upper receiver the cover has a lot of give between it and the lower. This means that it’s inconsistent for mounting optics. This is why when the Russians developed the AK sighting system they used a side mount it’s also part of why the AK rear sight is so far forward. The fore end is better suited to a rail system as a result but it has a short length and slight inconsistency on mounting between makers. The best spot to mount a sighting system would be onto the trunion where the rear iron sits but thats a very small spot.
The QBZ95 was the result of the time it was introduced and the environment there in. Optics had existed. The AUG had had a fixed powered scope for 20 years by 1995. But it was still a rarity. The makers of the QBZ95 seem to have aimed to introduce reduced material costs for the rifle. Which when talking about one of the largest armies of the planet makes some sense.
The choice of bullpup we know was an option but I think the PLA were making the same choice the French had with the FAMAS. PLA Small arms
That is they were looking at less and less the PLA as a infantry centric “People’s army”, and more as modern mobile mechanized force. The shorter length being a benefit if your troops are in vehicles more than on foot.
However as we known in the long run the QBZ95 was rushed to service Issues like the fire selector and different loads of the 5.8x42mm ammo would plague it for years. At the same time it was being introduced two western weapons were emerging that made a large degree of it’s design obsolete. The Colt M4 and HK G36. The Colt M4 standardized a optical mounting system the M1913 rail system that would become standard on just about every new rifle post 2010. The G36 came right from the factory with both a red dot sight and magnified optic. Although QBZ95 is claimed to have a Proprietary accessory rail. That rail was likely intended Primarily for a Night vision device and to a lesser extent a fixed power scope occasionally seen mostly at trade shows and almost never seen in use. As the 90’s ended and new millennium was on and soldier digitalization modernization rose, Rifles with accessory systems became the standard. The Proprietary rail suddenly wasn’t enough. Offering only a small space to mount it needed modification. Offering not the space above the Handle it needed augmentation so we start seeing retrofit and replacement kits. Trying to adapt the rifle to fit the needs. We also get the QBZ95-1 refit but it doesn’t seem to go far. The QBZ03 then the QST11 Emerge showing first an alternative a conventional rifle with folding stock that offers the same length for travel in vehicle but a more conventional mode of operation. And then the QST11 looking to leg up in lethality for urban as a all in rifle soldier system.
Now we see the QBZ-191 in the parade last year with optics and accessories as well as Submachine guns taken off the rack. Clearly indicating a rethink. A move from the late 80’s mind set to the modern one where optics and NVG as well as communications all factor as part of the small arms package. The weapon as a chassis on which sensors are mounted.
First Whose keen eyes will note I added a * at one pint in my post. Why did I do that? BEcause the History of the Assault rifle class is one mixed with the lesser spoken need of reduced cost. The STG44, MP44, MP43, Mkb42 were created for a number of reasons, one of which was Material and manufacturing. If you ever get the chance to see a real one you will note that it’s actually mostly stamped sheet metal with some Bakelite and a cheaply cut wooden stock Around the critical parts. This is also true for the FG42. These were weapons built to forego then standard high end gun making for slapped together simple low cost machining. They were as much a product of the expediency of cost as weapons like the Sten gun or Grease gun.
Post war The Russians introduced 4 AK types as they intended at first to like the STG Stamp the guns out cheaply by the millions. But the first attempts could pass Quality control these are the type 1 AK47. Stamping is cheap unless you have to scrap a lot of receivers because they cant be used. So they redesigned and went back to Milling Not as cheap but good enough to get off the ground floor. That would be the basis of the Type 2, then farther reformed with the type 3 until the AKM when they got the stamping right.
In the AR Stoner and company who worked for Fairchild Aircraft realized that cheaper than stamped steel is forged aluminum, You use the higher end materials in the parts that need it the barrels the bolts the springs the gas system well the rest can be aluminum and Polymer.
The AK would eventually trade off it’s wooden furniture for polymers but is still a stamped sheet metal receiver in most makers. By the late 70’s you get the AUG which pushed the Bullpup form and more and more use of polymer construction. Plastics had advanced significantly and by then were cheaper yet still suitable for non stressed portions of rifles. Today most modern weapons are a composition of steel, aluminum and polymers. That can be good or bad depending on situation and material. Poor choices of Aluminum caused issues on early AR’s in Vietnam. Poor choices in polymers caused issues in some weapons particularly in extreme heat or cold or humidity. Improper protection of steel has cause rifles to fail.
The AK has issues with adapting it to rail systems. This is because it mounts it’s barrel trunion is mounted rigidly to the lower receiver, access to the bolt and internals is via a removable top cover. This is the opposite of both the AR and STG44. Who have removable magazine wells/Trigger group pistol grip assemblies. ( the STG44 in fact breaks down very similarly to a MP5 because the STG is in many ways the grandmother of the HK rifle series. ) by having the top cover as opposed to a upper receiver the cover has a lot of give between it and the lower. This means that it’s inconsistent for mounting optics. This is why when the Russians developed the AK sighting system they used a side mount it’s also part of why the AK rear sight is so far forward. The fore end is better suited to a rail system as a result but it has a short length and slight inconsistency on mounting between makers. The best spot to mount a sighting system would be onto the trunion where the rear iron sits but thats a very small spot.
The QBZ95 was the result of the time it was introduced and the environment there in. Optics had existed. The AUG had had a fixed powered scope for 20 years by 1995. But it was still a rarity. The makers of the QBZ95 seem to have aimed to introduce reduced material costs for the rifle. Which when talking about one of the largest armies of the planet makes some sense.
The choice of bullpup we know was an option but I think the PLA were making the same choice the French had with the FAMAS. PLA Small arms
That is they were looking at less and less the PLA as a infantry centric “People’s army”, and more as modern mobile mechanized force. The shorter length being a benefit if your troops are in vehicles more than on foot.
However as we known in the long run the QBZ95 was rushed to service Issues like the fire selector and different loads of the 5.8x42mm ammo would plague it for years. At the same time it was being introduced two western weapons were emerging that made a large degree of it’s design obsolete. The Colt M4 and HK G36. The Colt M4 standardized a optical mounting system the M1913 rail system that would become standard on just about every new rifle post 2010. The G36 came right from the factory with both a red dot sight and magnified optic. Although QBZ95 is claimed to have a Proprietary accessory rail. That rail was likely intended Primarily for a Night vision device and to a lesser extent a fixed power scope occasionally seen mostly at trade shows and almost never seen in use. As the 90’s ended and new millennium was on and soldier digitalization modernization rose, Rifles with accessory systems became the standard. The Proprietary rail suddenly wasn’t enough. Offering only a small space to mount it needed modification. Offering not the space above the Handle it needed augmentation so we start seeing retrofit and replacement kits. Trying to adapt the rifle to fit the needs. We also get the QBZ95-1 refit but it doesn’t seem to go far. The QBZ03 then the QST11 Emerge showing first an alternative a conventional rifle with folding stock that offers the same length for travel in vehicle but a more conventional mode of operation. And then the QST11 looking to leg up in lethality for urban as a all in rifle soldier system.
Now we see the QBZ-191 in the parade last year with optics and accessories as well as Submachine guns taken off the rack. Clearly indicating a rethink. A move from the late 80’s mind set to the modern one where optics and NVG as well as communications all factor as part of the small arms package. The weapon as a chassis on which sensors are mounted.
