PLA Small arms

by78 said:

I was curious, so I did a supplier/product search on Alibaba.com for Picatinny rails and optical sights, and wow, I got thousands of hits out of Mainland China. Of course, as you said, many are knockoff products, non-military grade, or suppliers with no R&D capabilities.

BUT.

The sheer number of suppliers and products on offer tells me that a robust industrial base is there for firearm accessories, and should the Chinese military opt for fancy rails and red dot sights in the future, it'll have no problem whatsoever arming the troops with something decent.

Click to expand...

There are red dot sights and then there are red dot sights. I've had both, and there is a world of difference. I question whether some or even many of these Chinese manufacturers have the rigorous R&D/QC practices that would be necessary for a demanding customer market or the PLA.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Okay so we covered the first half now as to the second. Sol let me let you in on a little secret. Europeans love guns.
Germany and France have legal civilian guns.
Turkey and Italy have legal civilian guns.
Israel, and Switzerland Love guns.
Austrians own guns.
Russians have a booming civilian gun industry.
Canadians love guns
So where does that no gun European myth come from? England. The English killed there entire gun industry and tossed them all away. And not only for themselves most of the commonwealth did the same. And what happened? Gun crime remains. Because when the gun became illegal those that kept them became criminals and when the civilians who obey the gun laws tuned there's in the Criminals rejoiced and kept their guns. Knowing that chances of being resisted dropped.
Legal gun ownership is not unique to the US. Its just not talked about or as free elsewhere.
In the US we enjoy the second Amendment and yes have a wide wide choice. But we are not unique in that. Remember those QBZ97 mods are Canadian. That's because if you were living in Canada you could buy one.

Click to expand...

I am well aware that guns are legal in Europe and other countries and that there are gun enthusiasts all over the world. I'm talking about the market and the culture, both of which are almost exclusively here in the US. I don't have numbers, but I'm willing to bet that the US market is larger than the rest of the world combined.

Most of the "sights" made in China on the market are, to simply put, to make your airsoft looks the part, but not empty your piggy bank while doing it. Thus, for those of us who play airsoft or cosplay COD for fun, to sport a real deal EOTech sight is just telling everyone you literally burn stacks of Benjamins at home for heating, if you know what I mean.

But then again, ever since Magpul chopped their PTS line of products, we only got the more expensive (relatively, though, not by that much) made-in-USA Magpul parts to choose, and have less shops carry them because some parts falls under the Export Licence restriction, and not that many people in HK has such.

Well I don't do any airsoft so my sights have to be the real deal. That LE6920 I have pictured is always loaded (except in that photo) and kept in my safe for defense of my home and my life if the need ever arises, so it has to work all the time every time. I think most customers in the US are as demanding with their sights as I am, and a military establishment like the PLA would be even more so. I think NORINCO or other major Chinese arms manufacturers are able to make mil-spec accessories like what we see in this country, but like I said before, I suspect the smaller companies will not be able to do so (at least consistently). But regardless of big or small, Chinese arms companies have not made any significant penetration into this market. And by market I mean the gun market, not so much the airsoft or cosplay market.

Solaris said:

Well I don't do any airsoft so my sights have to be the real deal. That LE6920 I have pictured is always loaded (except in that photo) and kept in my safe for defense of my home and my life if the need ever arises, so it has to work all the time every time. I think most customers in the US are as demanding with their sights as I am, and a military establishment like the PLA would be even more so. I think NORINCO or other major Chinese arms manufacturers are able to make mil-spec accessories like what we see in this country, but like I said before, I suspect the smaller companies will not be able to do so (at least consistently). But regardless of big or small, Chinese arms companies have not made any significant penetration into this market. And by market I mean the gun market, not so much the airsoft or cosplay market.

Click to expand...

Well that scale of small manufacturing just don't exist in China simply because PLA don't issue the requirement for such grade of optics and accessories, while those in China mostly blaming PLA's almost brutal reliabilty requirements which can wipe off any well-known western-made accessories anyway. So pretty much you'd need the PLA get a general or two in the right place to make such a call, and get enough budget allotted into those directions, before PLA or China as a whole comes up with their own line of modular accessories.

Or to have Norinco / Poly comes up with their own subsidary division to do these things, throw a few onto the international market or as a "gift" to make a name for themselves outside (or with the PAP), to get the PLA interested enough to get onboard.

I don't think the PLA not developing a common rail system has anything to do with technology or mentality being 'stuck'.

The decision is based on pragmatism and prioritisation.

Sure, having a rail and all the newest gadgets is cool, but even in the US military, the majority of accessories are simply not used. Sure they could be useful, but the very limited chance of that particular situation coming up is offset by the weight penalty of having to lug that thing around with you all the time.

Adding a common rail is pretty basic and easy. The issue comes with the accessories themselves. Quality accessories are very expensive. There is no getting around that as you get what you paid for. On top of that up front acquisition cost, you also have to consider the additional operating costs and expanded logistics footprint that will cause.

Even as recently as Iraq II, the US, and UK military in particular, were having serious logistics deficiencies with basic stuff like body armour and batteries. This was before powered accessories became common place, and vital equipment like NVGs were sometimes rendered effectively useless by a lack of batteries.

All of that cost is simply not necessary or justifiable for accessories that don't get used most of the time.

As far as I can see, the only really useful accessory the PLA could implement would be issuing optics as standard on their rifles. Even then I would prefer normal optics to the fancy powered red dots and ECOGs. Ideally, I would like a side flip mount so s shooter could quickly switch between the scope and irons, but its not a must.

Beyond that, I don't think any accessory is a real need, more of a want. But I would priorities funding for things like NVGs, body armour and personal tac radios for all troopers before allocating funds to accessories.

plawolf said:

I don't think the PLA not developing a common rail system has anything to do with technology or mentality being 'stuck'.

The decision is based on pragmatism and prioritisation.

Sure, having a rail and all the newest gadgets is cool, but even in the US military, the majority of accessories are simply not used. Sure they could be useful, but the very limited chance of that particular situation coming up is offset by the weight penalty of having to lug that thing around with you all the time.

Adding a common rail is pretty basic and easy. The issue comes with the accessories themselves. Quality accessories are very expensive. There is no getting around that as you get what you paid for. On top of that up front acquisition cost, you also have to consider the additional operating costs and expanded logistics footprint that will cause.

Even as recently as Iraq II, the US, and UK military in particular, were having serious logistics deficiencies with basic stuff like body armour and batteries. This was before powered accessories became common place, and vital equipment like NVGs were sometimes rendered effectively useless by a lack of batteries.

All of that cost is simply not necessary or justifiable for accessories that don't get used most of the time.

As far as I can see, the only really useful accessory the PLA could implement would be issuing optics as standard on their rifles. Even then I would prefer normal optics to the fancy powered red dots and ECOGs. Ideally, I would like a side flip mount so s shooter could quickly switch between the scope and irons, but its not a must.

Beyond that, I don't think any accessory is a real need, more of a want. But I would priorities funding for things like NVGs, body armour and personal tac radios for all troopers before allocating funds to accessories.

Click to expand...

I think you mean Trijicon's ACOG. Speaking of which these optics have become pretty much standard issue throughout the US military at this point, at least the overseas deployed units.

It's not about being or looking cool. No military including the US will buy or use anything to look cool. Small arms accessories are force multipliers for ground troops just like AEWC aircraft are force multipliers for fighters. You don't technically need them for you to do your job, but it can make things many times easier or more effective. IMO the PLA has definitely been both lax and stingy regarding keeping their weapons and acquisitions up to modern standards. Take the 5.8mm DBP87 cartridge. The PLA tried to save money by using lacquered steel casings, corrosive primers, and dirty powder before seeing them perform badly and massively upgrading the design. Back when the Chinese military was dirt poor being stingy could be excused. Not anymore. Another perfect example is the QBZ-95 itself. It took international exports and feedback from international gun enthusiasts for NORINCO to produce the T97NSR, which I feel is a significantly better platform ergonomically than the military version. But IMO even the T97NSR could still stand to see some additional improvements.

Coming back to the topic of accessories, nobody including me is saying that every PLA soldier should be armed with red dots, magnifiers, IR lasers, strobe lights, NV scopes, etc. But some of them should. And probably more than currently are. At the very least the PLA's elite infantry divisions' or brigades' units should all be getting something like the ACOG (usually set at a fixed 3x or 4x magnification). Feedback from Afghanistan and Iraq have shown these units significantly improve accuracy at medium ranges without having to resort to a heavier and more expensive formal riflescope. SOF units should have access to a much wider range of accessories. Yet I have not seen even a single red dot or IR laser/illuminator (a la AN/PEQ-2) on any PR photos of Chinese SOF units, whereas they are ubiquitous throughout US SOF units. And I strongly disagree that these accessories are not being used most of the time by units that equip them.

As for rails, they just need to start using them, no excuses. The lack of emphasis on ergonomics in the Chinese military is appalling to me (just look at even some of the more modern control consoles in PLAN ship CIC's). Rails allow the end user to position accessories on the rifle according to the needs of that user's body type and personal preferences rather than at only one specific attachment point. It's time the PLA moves into the 21st century with this stuff.

Add a correction for Wolf not all sights are powered. Trijicon Acog and Mepro series optics battery less.. Well most models some of the newest ones do use batteries but mostly for added features the Acog for example mounts a smaller sight in a configuration akin to the German G36. That second sight requires battery. The latest Mepro adds a IR illumination and laser options that use batteries.
Primarily however They use fiber optics to gather ambient light which is then reflected by the sight at night these gun sights use a small amount of tritium to Glow. This is actually old technology the same techniques were used in the Susat from the 1980s and the Ecluded eye sight from the 1960s.
Acog is one of the most popular American Military gun sights not quite standard issue as there are others in the Army but standard for the USMC for sure.

now I would argue the PLA does have a Acog but its more or less the PSO based design we see from time to time on QBZ rifles and CQ carbines. But these are rather crude by western standards. There large ungainly and mounted even higher up then the existing irons well blocking the same.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

now I would argue the PLA does have a Acog but its more or less the PSO based design we see from time to time on QBZ rifles and CQ carbines. But these are rather crude by western standards. There large ungainly and mounted even higher up then the existing irons well blocking the same.

Click to expand...

Yeah hopefully those monstrosities are not going to be mass-produced in any form. BTW have you seen any photos with PLA red dots or lasers mounted on rifles?

I think all y'all are real cute thinking that infantry or anything infantry use, let alone small arm accessories, actually matter.

Small arms accessories ain't force multipliers. ARTILLERY is force multiplier. Them and tanks and trucks and the entire trail that keeps a combined arms offensive going.

China still has 130mm arty and rockets, as well as thousands of ZTZ-59 vanillas, no D, no G, no nothin in service. You see that priority list? Guess where infantry and his kit is at?

Tough on the poor bloody infantry, but that's the truth. An infantryman with an outdated rifle is still an infantryman and will perform his duties adequately. Outdated armour, in adequate army aviation, inadequate air power, inadequate situation awareness, communcations, command, artillery, they'll lose you the war real easy. And the PLA isn't burning money nearly fast enough for the INFANTRY to start getting their shit. And I think they got their priority straight.

Preux said:

I think all y'all are real cute thinking that infantry or anything infantry use, let alone small arm accessories, actually matter.

Small arms accessories ain't force multipliers. ARTILLERY is force multiplier. Them and tanks and trucks and the entire trail that keeps a combined arms offensive going.

China still has 130mm arty and rockets, as well as thousands of ZTZ-59 vanillas, no D, no G, no nothin in service. You see that priority list? Guess where infantry and his kit is at?

Tough on the poor bloody infantry, but that's the truth. An infantryman with an outdated rifle is still an infantryman and will perform his duties adequately. Outdated armour, in adequate army aviation, inadequate air power, inadequate situation awareness, communcations, command, artillery, they'll lose you the war real easy. And the PLA isn't burning money nearly fast enough for the INFANTRY to start getting their shit. And I think they got their priority straight.

Click to expand...

I think you're real cute for thinking that what infantry uses DOESN'T actually matter. If the military thought like you, their soldiers would be walking around holding nothing but their yaks in their hands whilst talking nonstop about D and G and using harsh language on their enemies. lol