PLA Small arms

SanWenYu said:

In this particular set of photos, by their age, how many are wearing eye glasses, and what the red banner says, I think these men are very likely the GA's staff of command. including the commanders and the staff members. It is thus reasonable that they are trained to use SMG.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but there are other examples as well

Could just be re-training from pistol to also SMG, to re-familiarise.
It's likely PLA could see real action within the next few years.

Personally I think the old carbine is the best small rifle with 60cm length and 14 inch barrel.

QCQ171andQJZ171

Two more images of QJZ-171.

gelgoog said:

I think a good question is why bother with this SMG in military use when a carbine like QBZ-192 would have a similar form factor and way better capabilities including range and penetration. Not to mention it wouldn't make logistics more difficult by adding yet another ammo caliber to the ground forces.

Click to expand...

I think you are forgetting that not every target is armoured in level 4 ballistic plates and taking pot shots at you from 400m+ out in open country.

I always cringe when I see armed police patrol in cities with assault rifles because the likelihood for collateral damage is going to be massive if they ever need to use them in anger. You can place a perfect headshot on a purp and still kill like 3 civilians if they happened to be lined up behind your target if you are using 5.56/5.8/7.62.

One of the big benefits I can see with SMGs is in patrolling and securing captured urban population centres and in post conflict policing and counter-insurgency operations.

In such missions, it would be very unlikely to run into heavily armoured enemy frontline combat troops, and instead your opfor are likely to be in civilian dress and unarmored doing hit and run attacks rather than trying to outshoot your infantry in pitched battle.

And if the enemy does dig in/gets cornered behind cover, you can always bring up the vehicle mounted 50 to chew them and their cover up.

I agree that 9mm is better for police actions to avoid collateral damage. But in the military context it makes little sense.

gelgoog said:

I agree that 9mm is better for police actions to avoid collateral damage. But in the military context it makes little sense.

Click to expand...

It totally makes sense if you think the how long the PLA will need to garrison Taiwan province vs how long the actual fighting would probably last.

plawolf said:

I think you are forgetting that not every target is armoured in level 4 ballistic plates and taking pot shots at you from 400m+ out in open country.

I always cringe when I see armed police patrol in cities with assault rifles because the likelihood for collateral damage is going to be massive if they ever need to use them in anger. You can place a perfect headshot on a purp and still kill like 3 civilians if they happened to be lined up behind your target if you are using 5.56/5.8/7.62.

One of the big benefits I can see with SMGs is in patrolling and securing captured urban population centres and in post conflict policing and counter-insurgency operations.

In such missions, it would be very unlikely to run into heavily armoured enemy frontline combat troops, and instead your opfor are likely to be in civilian dress and unarmored doing hit and run attacks rather than trying to outshoot your infantry in pitched battle.

And if the enemy does dig in/gets cornered behind cover, you can always bring up the vehicle mounted 50 to chew them and their cover up.

Click to expand...

The over penetration issue in an assault rifle class is exaggerated. First 5.56, 7.62x39, 5.45 and 5.8mm are not likely to penetrate body armor of level 4 without highly specialized armor piercing ammunition and even then only at ranges of less than a hundred meters. The general threat is concern of barrier penetration. IE stray shots passing through general construction materials such as Cinderblock, Brick, drywall, stucco, slate, wood, glass and aluminum often used in siding or bodywork on cars.
For general purposes military and police agencies have different ammunition restrictions.
Military as a rule of thumb is restricted to hardened penetration rounds in the form of full metal jacket rounds. Usually Steel cored ammunition which Will generally defeat the aforementioned materials.
Law enforcement agencies have a wider range of types due to less restrictions. Types like hollow points and other soft nose rounds defeat human targets yet are more easily stopped by barriers.
Of course these differences are only going to be present in cases of nations where in the command of the Police agency has its own logistics system separate from military agencies.

Farther in some states the choice of weapons is limited based on what is available. Well in general a LEO in the US, UK or other highly developed economies would have a greater choice of arms allowing the agency to select its long and short arms of choice. A less developed nation’s LEO will often be given whatever is available often being the same arms as the national army so a third world nation is going to issue to its LEO the same AK it issues to its army.
Finally the PLA is a military organization which means it’s likely that the QCW171 using full metal jacket 9x19mm which will easily penetrate the same soft barrier of wood, drywall, aluminum, glass and ecta. Though it may not penetrate thick layers of it or cinderblock it will still pass through. Unless the Chinese rechambered them in Makarov or 7.62 pistol they would still overpen.