PLA Small arms

LawLeadsToPeace said:

The ironic part is that infantry is still a crucial component of the ground forces as evidenced by Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. As a matter of fact, the future infantry will deal with much more complex tasks and problems, yet the PLA infantry still trains their infantrymen as if they are disposable conscripts.

Click to expand...

I feel like even in a Taiwan scenario PLAGF infantry would still be pretty low on the priority list. IMO the much better trained and equipped marine corps would be doing the heavy lifting in such a scenario with normal PLAGF infantry landing en masse only to maintain control after most of the high intensity conflicts are done.

Sorry for the off topic responses. These will be my last responses as the topics we are discussing can become rabbit holes.

totenchan said:

Out of all the lessons of the Ukraine-Russia war, I don't think the importance of basic infantry is one of them.

Click to expand...

Ukraine is struggling immensely because of several variables, and the lack of infantry is one of them. That is one of their major concerns as their span of control is incredibly limited. They can’t afford to assault and are struggling to defend due to the imbalance in manpower. Yes, they are trying to compensate with drones, but jammers are still effective as most drones are still wireless. Previously, infantry was considered to be outdated, but clearly that is not the case.

Tomboy said:

I feel like even in a Taiwan scenario PLAGF infantry would still be pretty low on the priority list. IMO the much better trained and equipped marine corps would be doing the heavy lifting in such a scenario with normal PLAGF infantry landing en masse only to maintain control after most of the high intensity conflicts are done.

Click to expand...

When it comes to planning, you want to have every tool in your kit ready to go. I can assure you that the Indians and Russians didn’t expect their plan to go sideways when they launched their respective operations. Plus, just marines doing the work isn’t enough, but that is off topic.

Aniah said:

It's kinda wild to me. Every other branch has implemented younger people's thoughts into the training design and uses new techniques. Even within the PLAGF, this practice is being used, such as with the artillery teams, and it has brought greater results in all aspects. But the general infantry sector seems to have stuck with the old farts who cannot adopt to modern warfare.

Click to expand...

To be fair, the PLA infantry are adapting to the drone threat and utilizing drones much more effectively than their US counterparts are doing.

LawLeadsToPeace said:

The ironic part is that infantry is still a crucial component of the ground forces as evidenced by Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. As a matter of fact, the future infantry will deal with much more complex tasks and problems, yet the PLA infantry still trains their infantrymen as if they are disposable conscripts.

Click to expand...

I think in the last 30 years, there has been a lot of back and forth as to the future of what infantry looks like.
For the PLA, that would go even further back to the 80's. The Vietnam conflict finally got rid of semi-autos for good (which was way too long).
Then we had lessons for the Gulf War, which really deemphasized infantry.
Then we had the War on Terror which overemphasized things like house clearing, special forces, urban fighting, etc.
Now we are looking at the Ukraine war which is drone-drone-drone.
We've seen the PLA pick up bits and pieces of things from all of these conflicts, so it's possible that either there is no overall strategy in place yet, or in the process of things going back to the drawing board, the old (bad) habits stick around in the absence of replacement.

supersnoop said:

I think in the last 30 years, there has been a lot of back and forth as to the future of what infantry looks like.
For the PLA, that would go even further back to the 80's. The Vietnam conflict finally got rid of semi-autos for good (which was way too long).
Then we had lessons for the Gulf War, which really deemphasized infantry.
Then we had the War on Terror which overemphasized things like house clearing, special forces, urban fighting, etc.
Now we are looking at the Ukraine war which is drone-drone-drone.
We've seen the PLA pick up bits and pieces of things from all of these conflicts, so it's possible that either there is no overall strategy in place yet, or in the process of things going back to the drawing board, the old (bad) habits stick around in the absence of replacement.

Click to expand...

I am really curious about how they view those conflicts. It seems that they just follow trends rather than anticipate them or even just understand them. To be fair, the US does the same, and that is why everyone, for the lack of a better term, shits on their generals.

LawLeadsToPeace said:

To be fair, the PLA infantry are adapting to the drone threat and utilizing drones much more effectively than their US counterparts are doing.

Click to expand...

I was going to mention that. But if AR actually ends up too “easy” there will be no impetus to ever improve… not that I think high casualty is good.

This is why I recommend they roll out the pain pellet training to lower level. Wear plate too low? Get a bruise. Only way to fix the issue really.

Leakage said:

Not at all, Putin reached out to Kim Jong Un, he didn't ask for Soldiers but obviously he knew that Kim Jong Un would give him some. Not to mention it only made it worse why would he accept such a proposal if it's gonna end up screwing over the Russians.

I will also Mention that the IDF trained by US Special forces was also ranked by US as one of the best armies out there, Yet they are being completely destroyed by a Rebellious Group filled with untrained people outdone by Hamas in close combat and long range combat which is just pathetic.

Click to expand...

If you want to discuss the Ukraine War there is a thread for it.

As for the IDF's difficulties, combatting non-state actors in asymmetric warfare is a difficult task for any conventional military. If you believe that there is any military in the world that wouldn't struggle with doing so, please feel free to name them.

Aniah said:

I thought this practice was to train soldiers to be able to hold their aim for longer periods of time without their arms getting tired. Just aiming with an AR for a while can get tiring, so I believe this is to help train the arm stamina rather than aiming accuracy.

Click to expand...

You can say it's carry-over habit from the days when PLA suffers scarcity issues, especially munitions.

Scientific approach would consist of:

1. proper weight training to tone the muscles;
2. proper diet to ensure soldiers gets the necessary nutrition;
3. regimented exercise scheme to build endurance;
4. more shooting practice to horn marksmanship...

LawLeadsToPeace said:

I am really curious about how they view those conflicts. It seems that they just follow trends rather than anticipate them or even just understand them. To be fair, the US does the same, and that is why everyone, for the lack of a better term, shits on their generals.

Click to expand...

I think it is quite a difficult task to anticipate and understand. We do see some anticipation, all the smartphones/tablets and digital gear. They are using SMS through Beidou. Those things are here to stay.

If someone joined a Western military in the late 90's, early 00's, you basically did basic training still in the WWII style, clearing trenches, fire team movement, etc. Then five years in, you were doing kill houses, IED identification, etc. After ten years of that, it moves back to the older stuff, was that decade a huge waste of time?

In some ways, yes, a lot of those lessons were applicable only to that war being fought at that time. However, at the same time you have to train for the war you are fighting, not the next one...

The PLA has the luxury of not fighting any wars for a long time, but too many priorities related to modernization. Obviously infantry is lower on that list.

One thing that better infantry does is it shows to other countries, when you are participating in multinational exercises, that you are a professional army. When the PLA shows up with worse gear than thailand, for example, it's not exactly a good look for the worlds's no. 2, soon to be no. 1 military. In any other case, infantry might not be high on the priority list for AR, but it's the number 1 tool for holding ground. No matter how good your air force or navy is, ultimately you will have to go in by foot and clear out houses to actually take territory and defend against insurgency. For that reason, infantry should be placed way higher on the priority list and at least be trained, equipped, and provided quality logistics up to perhaps a 2010s US standard, think a 052D or J-20 moment, but for the infantry. It's not looking good that the previous infantry equipment upgrade program was cancelled and now apparently infantry equipment is regressing back to pre-2019 equipment levels (bare helmets with new camo being seen more and more for example)