QBZ-191 service rifle family

Bltizo said:

Okay you need to be a bit more specific.

Which service rifles after QBZ-95 has the PLA actually inducted?

Because after QBZ-95, the only one they did indict was the QBZ-03 which was intended as a complement to QBZ-95.
The only other rifle could be the QBZ-95-1, but that's a variant of the original QBZ-95.


So, not including original QBZ-95, the PLA has only inducted 1 wholly new service rifle in the form of the QBZ-03. The QBZ-95-1 can be considered a variant of the original QBZ-95.


The Chinese arms industry produces some new service rifles every few years for export yes, and some designs are for trial.
However in terms of service rifles that are actually adopted by the PLA, there's only been the QBZ-95, QBZ-03, and QBZ-95-1.

... And now this new service rifle whose designation we still don't know.

Click to expand...

The QBZ-03 is one that I am referring to, there are of course earlier variants of the rifle shown here but they have reworked the barrel and muzzle of the gun.
I also count rifles that are trialed but never made it into production either mass or limited. The PLA are so far rather picky in what they want in the new rifle. Which I do not find surprising since it will dictated a major shift in the entire exisiting logistics of the PLA .
The interesting part in this is what the PLA finds in this new rifle that is not existing or can't be replicated in the earlier QBZ-03. Because insofar there is nothing that seriously differentiates the latter from the former.

Viktor Jav said:

1)The QBZ-03 which is only found in the PAP, selected units of the Militia, and the Airborne Corps. Even thought it was shown in full parade back then. Which is a tad shame.
2) Another rifle which was not named which seems to be the Chinese attempt at the AR-15 which generated quite a bit of fuzz but then fizzled off.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for the pictures.
3) And finally this one which is seems to be another variant of the above said rifle with redesigns to the muzzle and barrel (3 vents instead of 2).

Click to expand...

I see only two "service rifles" from your sources: QBZ-03 is in service, so is QBZ-95. Both of them built around the 5.8mm round. So only two "service rifles" in the last 20+ years, until the arrival of this new rifle in conventional layout.

So what exactly did you mean by:

Another year another new service rifle, does anyone has any idea how far this particular one will go ?

Click to expand...

Viktor Jav said:

The QBZ-03 is one that I am referring to, there are of course earlier variants of the rifle shown here but they have reworked the barrel and muzzle of the gun.
I also count rifles that are trialed but never made it into production either mass or limited. The PLA are so far rather picky in what they want in the new rifle. Which I do not find surprising since it will dictated a major shift in the entire exisiting logistics of the PLA .

Click to expand...

The QBZ-03 was designed as a conventional counterpart to the QBZ-95, and it was obviously not intended for widespread service like the QBZ-95.

Counting rifles trialled by the PLA as "adopted" is not really fair.

If you count the number of service rifles trialled by the US military as a whole then you will get over a dozen types over the years.


So in terms of the actual new types of rifles adopted by the PLA, there's really only the QBZ-03. Counting major QBZ-03 or QBZ-95 variants, you get maybe one or two major variants in service.


All in all its quite reasonable and hardly the excessive number of rifles types adopted by the PLA that you suggested.


... Meaning when the PLA does actually adopt a new service rifle, it usually means something. In the case of this new service rifle, what has been rumoured and suggested is that it is intended to replace older service types. Which makes sense given how much of a step up it is compared to both QBZ-95 and QBZ-03 in terms of ergonomics, ability to mount optics and accessories and so on.

by78 said:

I see only two "service rifles" from your sources: QBZ-03 is in service, so is QBZ-95. Both of them built around the 5.8mm round. So only two "service rifles" in the last 20+ years, until the arrival of this new rifle in conventional layout.

So what exactly did you mean by:

Click to expand...

Excatly what I said, that China had attempted, or tried to attempt, to design and build a new generation service rifle. But insofar none of them seem to have much success. I also counted rifles that are trialed but never made it into mass or limited service and production. I should have been clearer on that.
I used the words "another year another service rifle" because apart from Russia, China is currently the only nation that has made this much serious attempts to design a completely new rifle.

Bltizo said:

The QBZ-03 was designed as a conventional counterpart to the QBZ-95, and it was obviously not intended for widespread service like the QBZ-95.

Counting rifles trialled by the PLA as "adopted" is not really fair.

If you count the number of service rifles trialled by the US military as a whole then you will get over a dozen types over the years.


So in terms of the actual new types of rifles adopted by the PLA, there's really only the QBZ-03. Counting major QBZ-03 or QBZ-95 variants, you get maybe one or two major variants in service.


All in all its quite reasonable and hardly the excessive number of rifles types adopted by the PLA that you suggested.

Click to expand...

I see where you are getting from, but that is how I see the matter. And I am not unfairly criticizing the PLAN on this, obviously they will have to go through a vast number of designs to get something they they want.
While the QBZ-03 never made it into widespread service, it is obvious now that China wants a conventional design rifle for replacement. The question is why they did not go with the QBZ-03 in the first place ?

Viktor Jav said:

Excatly what I said, that China had attempted, or tried to attempt, to design and build a new generation service rifle. But insofar none of them seem to have much success.

Click to expand...

What are the rifles that failed to enter service?

Viktor Jav said:

I also counted rifles that are trialed but never made it into mass or limited service and production. I should have been clearer on that.

Click to expand...

Again, examples please.

Viktor Jav said:

I used the words "another year another service rifle" because apart from Russia, China is currently the only nation that has made this much serious attempts to design a completely new rifle.

Click to expand...

Really? Are you not aware of German and U.S. efforts?

by78 said:

What are the rifles that failed to enter service?



Again, examples please.


Really? Are you not aware of German and U.S. efforts?

Click to expand...

The rifles of which the pictures I have linked to. And I am aware of German and US efforts, but those are not the ones in discussion here, and if asked my reponse would most likely be the same for this Chinese new service rifle

Viktor Jav said:

I see where you are getting from, but that is how I see the matter. And I am not unfairly criticizing the PLAN on this, obviously they will have to go through a vast number of designs to get something they they want.
While the QBZ-03 never made it into widespread service, it is obvious now that China wants a conventional design rifle for replacement.But I will wonder why they did not go with the QBZ-03 in the first place which already has a production line in place.

Click to expand...

Let's leave all that aside for a moment and first acknowledge that the PLA have only adopted one new type of service rifle (QBZ-03) after the original QBZ-95, therefore what you wrote "another year another new service rifle" is misleading and inaccurate in the context of this new service rifle.

====

Yes, the PLA clearly now want a conventional configuration rifle, but they also want a rifle that is more ergonomic, modular and able to accommodate accessories and optics easier than what the QBZ-03 could do as well.

Thus we see this new service rifle.

Bltizo said:

Let's leave all that aside for a moment and first acknowledge that the PLA have only adopted one new type of service rifle (QBZ-03) after the original QBZ-95, therefore what you wrote "another year another new service rifle" is misleading and inaccurate in the context of this new service rifle.

====

Yes, the PLA clearly now want a conventional configuration rifle, but they also want a rifle that is more ergonomic, modular and able to accommodate accessories and optics easier than what the QBZ-03 could do as well.

Thus we see this new service rifle.

Click to expand...

Ok then, so let us make it clear as in " Another year another attempt at a new service rifle". 2 more extra words so clear up the matter.

Viktor Jav said:

The rifles of which the pictures I have linked to. And I am aware of German and US efforts, but those are not the ones in discussion here, and if asked my reponse would most likely be the same for this Chinese new service rifle

Click to expand...

As part of developing a new service rifle it means various competing designs are evaluated. That process can take years and evaluate multiple designs.

For the PLAs new service rifle, we have had rumours and indications that they've been evaluating designs for the last couple of years and they had settled on a design to go with, and that we would see the new service rifle (i.e. the one they are committing to) during the parade.


In other words, the rifle we are seeing now should be the rifle that is now their new service rifle that they're going to buy on large numbers.