PLA Small arms

Aniah said:

@TerraN_EmpirE, have you seen the new CMMG dissent? My original thought was to do something similar to this rifle. Outside of the mag well and the mag release, the general layout is very similar. Something like the dissent would be a great PDW.

View attachment 92188


View attachment 92190

Click to expand...

@Aniah
Basically a take on the same concept as the Sig MCX Rattler that US Socom just adopted as a PDW the LVAW, could even go back to the 1980s Big hair and the HK 53 basically an MP5 in 5.56.
Generally I consider the CMMG Dissent as having inferior ergonomics to the MCX. Otherwise not that far removed.
Now as to could it be done? My first question is what caliber? PRC domestic 5.8x21mm used in the QCW 05 seems to be on withdrawal. The Dissent is Chambered in 5.7x28mm, 5.66x45mm and .300blk. This is important because the method of operating changes. 5.7x28 and 5.8x21mm can easily operate by a blowback system as P90 and QCW used blowback operation. ergo you would only need to modify the bolt barrel and magazine the CS/LS7 to one of the two. Easy peasy lemon squeezee. Heck could throw in 4.6x30mm HK.

5.8x42mm, .300blk and 5.56x45mm are better suited to gas systems. You can operate 5.7x21 with a gas system so likely 5.8x21 as well yet the pressure points are very light. If you look at the Dissent animation on the CMMG site you can see they show a gas tube but an AR curved magazine


Buffer tube less AR15 are rare but they do exist.
So then we come back to “ 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.” As you already have to accommodate the longer cartridges of an intermediate caliber and design a new longer larger stronger receiver group and bolt assembly. you might as well just put a gas system in it.
In which case it’s now a “QBZ 171” not a QCW 171. Basically a completely new rifle. With the question of how do you justify it vs the QBZ192 or whatever we are
Calling the 10” barrel carbine or the QCW 171? This is the PLA Small arms thread after all. My answer is that this capacity set doesn’t at least for 99% of the PLA it would be unjustified. Beijing just green lit the QBZ191 and QCW 171 series and trying to throw a new PDW class weapon in the mix doesn’t seem realistic for mass investment. Where such a weapon form that perspective might make sense is in a specialist role like the LVAW is to Socom or the VSS series is to Speznatz units.
The VSS was designed in the 1980s to offer Russian SF units a weapon to make up for the short comings of Soviet suppressor engineering. Despite the suppressor and rifle being crude the 9x39mm was an inspiration. A very scary quiet cartridge designed for a rifle the size of an MP5SD able to engage out to Ak ranges.
The LVAW and SURG that was adopted in the last few years by US SOCOM being more or less far more sophisticated systems but fulfilling a similar task when partnered with the .300blk. The MCX was designed for this task again a rifle the size of an MP5SD just as quiet yet also able to engage targets at ranges of an M4. The PLA doesn’t have anything that matches that niche. Outside of that I can’t see a real justification without a major doctrine rewrite or procurement overhaul in the middle of a procurement overhaul.
The only other way I could see such a weapon from the PRC/CCP MIC would be a major revision of QBZ-191 service rifle family
As being blunt it’s starting to look a little dated.

Aniah said:

Someone got their hands on one of the CS/LS 7 and done a full review on it. Though it's unfortunately not in English it does have a lot of close-ups of the weapon and disassembly of the gun near the end.

Click to expand...

Wait, I thought it didnt have an underside picatinny rail?

TerraN_EmpirE said:

So then we come back to “ 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.” As you already have to accommodate the longer cartridges of an intermediate caliber and design a new longer larger stronger receiver group and bolt assembly. you might as well just put a gas system in it.

Click to expand...

That's the thing, I know that they won't be making a new PDW anytime soon since the 192 just came out and is doing quite well, I just can't understand why they didn't do what you said during the new rifle development years ago. There are rumors that the designers behind the 191 originally wanted to make their own SCAR or ACR-like rifle and here they have a great layout for it but didn't choose to take it. Take this with some salt but the PLA higher-ups wanted a right-side reciprocating charging handle so the original plan was dropped and the 191 came to be. A theoretical QCW 171 seems to me would have been the better rifle. If the CS/LR 17 does get continued development, I hope they do what you said. Even the new AK 521 looks better than the CS/LR 17 we have now.

Aniah said:

Take this was some salt but the PLA higher-ups wanted a right-side reciprocating charging handle so the original plan was dropped and the 191 came to be. A theoretical QCW 171 seems to me would have been the better rifle.

Click to expand...

When the US Socom issued the SCAR requirements it included a reciprocating charging handle.
This didn’t come from the Seals, or the Delta, or the Rangers or the Para guys. It didn’t come from the gunsmiths or the technicians. It wasn’t FN or Robinson or Colt or HK. It came from the Procurement Staff office. It came from a committee who argued that the Ak, the FAL had a reciprocal charging handle and they were reliable…

@Blitzo has said that the QBZ191 was influenced by the HK416. In terms of its operating system I agree, however it’s ergonomics I think were copied from the Sig 556 classic with deletion of the folding buttstock and insistence of commonality of the QBZ95 magazines.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

When the US Socom issued the SCAR requirements it included a reciprocating charging handle.
This didn’t come from the Seals, or the Delta, or the Rangers or the Para guys. It didn’t come from the gunsmiths or the technicians. It wasn’t FN or Robinson or Colt or HK. It came from the Procurement Staff office. It came from a committee who argued that the Ak, the FAL had a reciprocal charging handle and they were reliable…

@Blitzo has said that the QBZ191 was influenced by the HK416. In terms of its operating system I agree, however it’s ergonomics I think were copied from the Sig 556 classic with deletion of the folding buttstock and insistence of commonality of the QBZ95 magazines.

Click to expand...

Leave it to bureaucracy to ruin anything potentially good.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

When the US Socom issued the SCAR requirements it included a reciprocating charging handle.
This didn’t come from the Seals, or the Delta, or the Rangers or the Para guys. It didn’t come from the gunsmiths or the technicians. It wasn’t FN or Robinson or Colt or HK. It came from the Procurement Staff office. It came from a committee who argued that the Ak, the FAL had a reciprocal charging handle and they were reliable…

@Blitzo has said that the QBZ191 was influenced by the HK416. In terms of its operating system I agree, however it’s ergonomics I think were copied from the Sig 556 classic with deletion of the folding buttstock and insistence of commonality of the QBZ95 magazines.

Click to expand...

I’d be careful with throwing around the word, “copy” for ergonomics. When it comes to firearm ergonomics, typically a standard will start to emerge after decades of use since experience and practicality trumps uniqueness.

Inspiration, Imitation, influence, emulate,
Look under the skin of the QBZ191 we have a short stroke piston running down a extended receiver.
Under the skin of the Sig 550 we have a long stroke piston that is just as often called a Swiss AK with a folding stock.
its a “copy” in that the intent would be to gain function established in another product. It’s not a copy as in an exact unlicensed replica like the CS/LR36 of the HK416.

As I said this is my opinion. The QBZ191 looks a lot like the QBZ03 but that guns also looks a lot like the Sig 550 series. In terms of stock and hand guard, break down controls.
Where the 556 comes in is the hand guard. In the era of rail systems only a very small number of weapons choose that almost entirely polymer with a very small number of connections.

QJB201

QJY88