PLA Small arms

by78 said:

Allegedly a spec sheet on the 'Candle Dragon' S200 smart scope.

– Detection/Identification range: ≥600m
– Onboard ballistic computer
– Optical magnification: 3 - 12X
– Night vision
– Display (OLED) resolution: 1920x1080
– Sensor resolution: 4K
– Field of view (@1000 yards): 8.7 degrees
– Focus distance: 10m to infinity
– Multi reticle system
– Laser range fighter
– Built-in wind/humidity meter
– Built-in storage: 64GB
– Built-in Wifi and Bluetooth
– 21700 milliamp battery (6-10 hours)
– Weight: 1.1kg
– Operating temperature: -40 to 55 degrees Celsius

Click to expand...

Can the sight be used as a regular scope if the battery ran out, or is this all digital and therefore no backup function?

The Observer said:

Can the sight be used as a regular scope if the battery ran out, or is this all digital and therefore no backup function?

Click to expand...

Yes, it can.

by78 said:

Allegedly a spec sheet on the 'Candle Dragon' S200 smart scope.

– Detection/Identification range: ≥600m
– Onboard ballistic computer
– Optical magnification: 3 - 12X
– Night vision
– Display (OLED) resolution: 1920x1080
– Sensor resolution: 4K
– Field of view (@1000 yards): 8.7 degrees
– Focus distance: 10m to infinity
– Multi reticle system
– Laser range fighter
– Built-in wind/humidity meter
– Built-in storage: 64GB
– Built-in Wifi and Bluetooth
– 21700 milliamp battery (6-10 hours)
– Weight: 1.1kg
– Operating temperature: -40 to 55 degrees Celsius

Click to expand...

That's interesting. I have to wonder why they went for 3-12, given that most scopes these days makes more sense to have a minimal magnification of 1x. Even if it is reducing the maximum magnification say to 10x, that would be a more than worthwhile tradeoff given 1x is more useful.

The battery life is also a bit low, given it seems the NGSW-FC is said to have a battery life of "multiple weeks" from what I've seen and read, though I am not sure if they are measuring the battery life in the same way.

QIUSIYU said:

View attachment 120973

Click to expand...

This a QSW06?

Blitzo said:

That's interesting. I have to wonder why they went for 3-12, given that most scopes these days makes more sense to have a minimal magnification of 1x. Even if it is reducing the maximum magnification say to 10x, that would be a more than worthwhile tradeoff given 1x is more useful.

The battery life is also a bit low, given it seems the NGSW-FC is said to have a battery life of "multiple weeks" from what I've seen and read, though I am not sure if they are measuring the battery life in the same way.

Click to expand...

Sounds like it would be suited for marksmen with DMRs, Snipers, and machine gunners rather than standard infantry.

Aniah said:

Sounds like it would be suited for marksmen with DMRs, Snipers, and machine gunners rather than standard infantry.

Click to expand...

Possible, but with a scope of that geometry, and given it is positioned on a QBZ-191, I suspect they are probably still considering what it should be used for (if at all), but the issue is that from the outset it doesn't come with 1x magnification to begin with imo.

I get the feeling that for some reason perhaps the PLA (and industry) doesn't yet understand the benefits of LPVOs with 1x magnification, and possibly that the industry may be unable to produce good quality or good yield glass/mechanisms for LPVOs with 1x magnification.

Blitzo said:

Possible, but with a scope of that geometry, and given it is positioned on a QBZ-191, I suspect they are probably still considering what it should be used for (if at all), but the issue is that from the outset it doesn't come with 1x magnification to begin with imo. I get the feeling that for some reason perhaps the PLA (and industry) doesn't yet understand the benefits of LPVOs with 1x magnification,

Click to expand...

There was a huge debate in the US gun community about LPVO's vs Prism sight + Red Dot combinations. For example, LPVO's are more fragile in design than Prism optics and its 1x magnfication isn't as good as red dots. In addition, the latter is still lighter than the lightest former. The only major pro about LPVO's is its variable zoom. In short, I think the PLA does understand it and balanced the pros and cons along with feedback from troops that tested the equipment in force on force training and tests.

Blitzo said:

and possibly that the industry may be unable to produce good quality or good yield glass/mechanisms for LPVOs with 1x magnification.

Click to expand...

For LPVO's, considering the fact that budget/entry Primary Arms and Vortex Optics source from China (and they are really good for its price), I highly doubt that.

LawLeadsToPeace said:

There was a huge debate in the US gun community about LPVO's vs Prism sight + Red Dot combinations. For example, LPVO's are more fragile in design than Prism optics and its 1x magnfication isn't as good as red dots. In addition, the latter is still lighter than the lightest former. The only major pro about LPVO's is its variable zoom. In short, I think the PLA does understand it and balanced the pros and cons along with feedback from troops that tested the equipment in force on force training and tests.

Click to expand...

Well, one of the higher end optics sets is having a LPVO with a top or side mounted red dot. The variable zoom and greater zoom is still greater than what you'd get out of a prism as well.

The reason the US army has moved to tamgo6 1-6 and USMC with VCOG 1-8 imo is ultimately indicative.

For LPVO's, considering the fact that budget/entry Primary Arms and Vortex Optics source from China (and they are really good for its price), I highly doubt that.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, though I've always wondered if the glass and key internal mechanisms are sourced domestically in those products.

Blitzo said:

Well, one of the higher end optics sets is having a LPVO with a top or side mounted red dot. The variable zoom and greater zoom is still greater than what you'd get out of a prism as well. The reason the US army has moved to tamgo6 1-6 and USMC with VCOG 1-8 imo is ultimately indicative.

Click to expand...

LPVO's with red dots make the rifle even heavier. Considering the fact that infantry have to ruck a lot, those grams/ounces matter. As for the variable zoom, I agree. It is the LPVO's major pro that makes it stand out. Finally, for the US Army and Marines adopting the Tango6T and VCOG respectively, they both believe future infantry fights will be done at a distance, not because it is the end all be all.

Blitzo said:

Perhaps, though I've always wondered if the glass and key internal mechanisms are sourced domestically in those products.

Click to expand...

I believe the glass is definitely made in China.

LawLeadsToPeace said:

LPVO's with red dots make the rifle even heavier. Considering the fact that infantry have to ruck a lot, those grams/ounces matter. As for the variable zoom, I agree. It is the LPVO's major pro that makes it stand out. Finally, for the US Army and Marines adopting the Tango6T and VCOG respectively, they both believe future infantry fights will be done at a distance, not because it is the end all be all.

I believe the glass is definitely made in China.

Click to expand...

To clarify, I'm not saying LPVOs (or LPVO with small red dot) are the perfect optics setup for all scenarios.
There are absolutely cases were a proper red dot or holographic sight are better (+/- magnifier), or cases where a prism sight is more practical or more cost effective.

What I am saying is that if the purpose is to have a variable optic for an assault rifle or DMR (which looks like what this one is intended for?, then in TYOOL 2023, not having a 1x magnification seems like an oversight.
I am aware that of course DMRs with variable optics without 1x magnification also exist, including recent ones, but there is also a spectrum of DMRs.


As for the glass of Chinese made branded LPVOs, I personally have not read anything definitive, and in fact I've read they are imported from Japan.