too bad they discontinued with type-81, it's only Chinese AR that seen battleground in Vietnam although remake into type-03 no body know it's performance in real conflict. Too bad to they gave up Soviet 7.62mm, this type of round is everywhere, and China ever use and make it so logistic is not the matter. For me stick to Soviet M43 7.62 round is because when you middle of nowhere and the opponent use this type of round, many army and guerilla fighter still prefer good ol' AK and it's round. Same happen to stick with 5.56 too in case PLA struggle with NATO caliber user in the future.
QBZ-03 Assault Rifle
- Thread starter Maphisto86
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
PLA cavalry are not just border patrols but often serve as extras in ancient Chinese dramas like Han Wu Da Di.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I find it amazing too still see Horses cavalry used As active component of a Armed Forces in Roles other then Ceremonial details. Of Course the Mongolian Steps are Well known since the Time of the Khans for horse Cavalry.
antiterror13
Brigadier
It shows you know nothing about PLA doctrine, that's one of the two the main reasons why PLA move to 5.8 .. I won't tell you the first one which is extremely important
... the second reason is the performance of 5.8 is better than the Russian and the NATO onesIt shows you know nothing about PLA doctrine, that's one of the two the main reasons why PLA move to 5.8 .. I won't tell you the first one which is extremely important
The first one is exactly correct.
I may be don't know anything about PLA doctrine, all that I mean if there any possibility, that's all.
my basic opinion is from US army battle experience is Vietnam, Iraq, Afghan, and other places, they m-16 jammed, they 5.56mm unreliable in stopping power, and when they out of ammo, they got only two choice:sitting duck or using enemy small arms and they ammo, sometime they carried out they mission with what they enemy left about: reliable, good powerful AK.(even lack accuracy, below 300m they nasty).
The US SF AR in future will have capability to compatible with AK mags and ammo, even Russian 7.62x54R.
if 5.8x42 mm powerful than Russian and NATO small caliber is good for China, I would like to see it performance in conflict. But I wonder and doubt if 5.8 will powerful enough than 7.62mm that usually for sniper and MG because I read Chinese sniper and MG using same caliber.
my basic opinion is from US army battle experience is Vietnam, Iraq, Afghan, and other places, they m-16 jammed, they 5.56mm unreliable in stopping power, and when they out of ammo, they got only two choice:sitting duck or using enemy small arms and they ammo, sometime they carried out they mission with what they enemy left about: reliable, good powerful AK.(even lack accuracy, below 300m they nasty).
The US SF AR in future will have capability to compatible with AK mags and ammo, even Russian 7.62x54R.
if 5.8x42 mm powerful than Russian and NATO small caliber is good for China, I would like to see it performance in conflict. But I wonder and doubt if 5.8 will powerful enough than 7.62mm that usually for sniper and MG because I read Chinese sniper and MG using same caliber.
That i know from PLA rules didn't allowed using another ammo other than issued by army.
At the first US army also have same rule, for national pride and security, but battlefield not a boot camp, in war need adaptive, effective, more mobile at the same time.
Vietnam NVA and VC sometime using captured US arms and using it against US army during Vietnam war.
I hope type-03 AR will same reliable like it predecessor.
At the first US army also have same rule, for national pride and security, but battlefield not a boot camp, in war need adaptive, effective, more mobile at the same time.
Vietnam NVA and VC sometime using captured US arms and using it against US army during Vietnam war.
I hope type-03 AR will same reliable like it predecessor.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The 5.56mm NATO is still the standing long arm of the US and Nato (UK, France( when they feel like it), Germany, Italy, Spain, Ect... Ect...)
The M4A1 however as it stands today is not that much of a change vs the M16A1 interns of operation the main changes being a collapsible stock, 14.5 inch heavy chrome lined barrel, integration of m1913 mill spec rail interface system and improved buffers. current plans DO NOT call for integration of 7.62x39mm, PLA issued 5.8mm or 7.63x54mm Russian long Rounds.
There are systems currently being offered as part of the US army "Dual Carbine Strategy" that do have compatibility with the 7.62x39mm. However the Nato standard is still the requirement with options for more exotic fare. The PLA has Developed variants of most of it's systems for 5.56x45mm Nato Spec these are however primarily aimed at export costumers. they have also offered 7.62x39mm but once more for export ( although limited use is possible in Specialized sub commands) Use of the 5.8mm round in LMG and DMR ( sniper semi auto weapons) is a doctrinal decisions the failings of which being effective range. However there are still equivalents in other nations the Us M16A4SDMR, UK L86DMR or even closer the German HK SL8-2 ( never adopted but evaluated for the job) on the LMG side the Well known FN minimi, HK MG4 and others.
The M4A1 however as it stands today is not that much of a change vs the M16A1 interns of operation the main changes being a collapsible stock, 14.5 inch heavy chrome lined barrel, integration of m1913 mill spec rail interface system and improved buffers. current plans DO NOT call for integration of 7.62x39mm, PLA issued 5.8mm or 7.63x54mm Russian long Rounds.
There are systems currently being offered as part of the US army "Dual Carbine Strategy" that do have compatibility with the 7.62x39mm. However the Nato standard is still the requirement with options for more exotic fare. The PLA has Developed variants of most of it's systems for 5.56x45mm Nato Spec these are however primarily aimed at export costumers. they have also offered 7.62x39mm but once more for export ( although limited use is possible in Specialized sub commands) Use of the 5.8mm round in LMG and DMR ( sniper semi auto weapons) is a doctrinal decisions the failings of which being effective range. However there are still equivalents in other nations the Us M16A4SDMR, UK L86DMR or even closer the German HK SL8-2 ( never adopted but evaluated for the job) on the LMG side the Well known FN minimi, HK MG4 and others.
You have to think from the PLA's point of view. Currently their main mission is adequately defending china. Logistic matters are more severe for the attacking forces away from their home base and is often not much of an issue for the defending forces. The vietnam war is not a convincing argument because north vietnam didn't have a established arm industry back then and relies on chinese and soviet supplies as well as captured weapons.