PLA Small arms

Blitzo said:

Given your enthusiasm for small arms, I'm sure you don't need me to describe how for a weapon to be a viable small arm, requires very high demands for size, reliability, logistics... that's even assuming the weapon can achieve satisfactory rate of fire, accuracy, kinetic performance to begin with.


Yes, it makes sense to pursue a variety of technological pathways for future small arms, and sure, eletromagnetic launch small arms are worth doing applied research for.
Applied R&D is worth doing across a variety of domains.
But applied R&D for a test rig or concept doesn't mean a test rig or concept is anything near resembling a viable weapon.



I hope you're not seriously suggesting that you expect to see a EM launch small arms by 2030, in a manner where it would have sufficient performance, reliability and reason to replace conventional small arms.

Heck, for 2030, I would be impressed if the PLA are able to issue LPVOs with a FF handguard kit for their 191s in wide numbers.

Click to expand...

Aniah said:

Oh yeah, I agree with your points. I was more thinking along with the lines of a true working rifle or at least something that looks like a tangible prototype by 2030. I don't think we will see this be used in any large or small military use until a couple of decades more but I'm still very enthusiastic about this.

Click to expand...

Blitzo said:

Considering how "conservative" small arms development around the world is (for good reason), if you're expecting an actual tangible prototype of a EM rifle that is practically non-inferior to a contemporary conventional rifle in domains of performance+reliability+cost+size+weight+logistics, then I think 2030 should be more like 3030.


Applied R&D projects for exotic small arms will always happen now and then, including for EM small arms. But they are likely all going to start, and then abandoned in short order, because every time they'll realize it's a waste of time and money and resources to actually turn into a viable small arms weapon, and that conventional small arms are perfectly adequate for the mission they are intended for.
(Not to mention small arms do very little of the killing on the modern battlefield, and applied R&D efforts are better spent elsewhere in other domains.)


We will probably see some glorified technology demonstrators emerge every few years, but functionally entirely impractical for war.

Click to expand...

Aniah said:

I should've worded it better but I meant similar as it is now in the hands of the engineers. I didn't think we would get anything close to the standard rifles we have now for the next couple of decades and even then you and Terran already mentioned all the problems. Maybe I should've just said I wonder how this project and general railgun progress would look by 2030. 8 years is a lot of time and I'm just excited to see any improvements to railgun tech by then regardless of how big or small the improvements are.

Click to expand...

Aniah said:

Outside of that, I just want to say you guys are really cruel in kicking down my hopes and dreams. /jk

Click to expand...

tygyg1111 said:

Re: the pistol railgun in the SCMP article, was there any indication of battery / power source life?

Click to expand...

broadsword said:

An idea is locating the battery in the conventional propellant cavity of the bullet instead of the gun itself. So it becomes expendable. Whether feasible or not with current technology, I don't know.

Click to expand...

TerraN_EmpirE said:

It’s more than “Some” internal changes. The CS/LR7/QCQ171 as a SMG was designed as an Pistol caliber weapon it uses a straight blow back operation. To modify it to an intermediate caliber would demand a complete reengineering of the method of operation. In essence you would be designing a completely new rifle with ergonomics copied from the CS/Ls7. Now that’s not impossible it’s just not as easy as you lay it out.

The MP5 and the SIG MCX were designed in the reverse, as to were 9mm ARs and AKs. They took a rifle and redesigned it into an SMG. In the case of the MP5 we have the G3 as the basis it’s operation tracks back to the WW2 Mauser STG44 prototypes. It was always rifle caliber weapon. The roller delay blowback operation was designed for full caliber cartridges to protect the user from out of battery events.
The Sig MPX is little more than a 9mm MCX using a rotating bolt short stroke gas piston system. Again the rotating bolt was designed for rifle cartridges to prevent out of battery. as the higher pressure point of the cartridge requires a method of ensuring that the opening of the chamber happens at a safe point and not at maximum pressure causing a catastrophic failure.

the QCQ171’s blowback though is dependent on unobstructed travel of the bolt propelled via the firing of the cartridge. In a pistol caliber cartridges out of battery really isn’t a big deal. The pressure points are far lower the safety margins are higher. All you need to delay premature opening of the bolt is the mass of the bolt. Blow back bolts are heavier as a result.
Designing our hypothetical “QBZ171” would require a complete overhaul of the receiver ( not just to accommodate the longer cartridges and magazines), increasing the mass of the bolt isn’t an option as the bolt mass needed would weight would need to significant to counter the pressure of an Intermediate cartridge. You would basically have a rifle weight of 50 lbs. 45 lbs of that being the bolt alone. Clearly not a practical solution.
Shifting to a delayed blowback system like the HK roller system could solve this but recoil is higher, the system runs dirtier and cost of manufacturing is higher to. This is why HK switched to piston systems with the G36.
Obviously the piston system would solve this gas operated guns are softer shooting weapons and cheaper to make.

AR and AK conversions like the Colt SMG and Vyntaz basically replace the rotating bolt and gas systems with a blowback system. Which is a lot easier to do. Basically you are putting an SMG bolt bolt into the body of an AR.
Now you are correct that in training of handling having a family of weapons makes sense. Generally though the adaptation of rifle to SMG is the preferred not just as the engineering but also as the rifle is far more common than SMG. With The PLA they chose to retain aspects of their established rifle general ergonomics over a complete rewrite of the manual of arms (Obviously not to QBZ95 but rather to QBZ03 QBZ81/QBZ88). The Russians with AK 12/AK15/AK19 and the US XM5 similarly show this preference.

Click to expand...