any reason why PLA go with disk type instead of drum spin ?
drum type is the best because : big drum on the side , spin it with thumb and index to correct your sight like brainless , easy to use , comfortable to use standing , prone , or any position you can think of
disk type feel kind of weird/uncomfortable tbh ... your hand need to place in weird position above you rifle to spin the disk everytime you want to correct the sight
Here’s my answer.
A high-resolution image of CS/LR42 chambered for 5.56mm.
Note the placement of the LPVO’s ocular lens. Right on top of the BUIS. The disk form has a flatter surface than the AR style or HK drum.
farther we regularly see that the QBZ191 is meant to use a rifle mounted night vision device with an eye cup that extends beyond the hump of the rear sight. Finally drum sight are a fixed hight about 3cm from the base to the top of the drum give or take.
The QBZ191 series was designed to mount optical sights both magnified and reflex types. In the latter case a flip up sight can cowitness through a disabled holographic or red dot sight.
Full disclosure: I have never handled a real HK 416 rifle, only gas airsoft clone. But the rail height argument should be the same.
I am guessing it has something to do with rail height and height over bore. Also there is a good chance that PLA is evolving away from iron sight as primary sighting device.
That’s as good a chance as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. They adopted the QBZ191 with at least 3 sighting systems.
So if you compare QBZ-03 and QBZ-191, you will notice that 191 has stock that is in-line with the bolt akin to AR-15, whereas 03 is not. As such, the distance between the top of the stock and the top of the upper receiver will be different. Now you might ask, why can HK 416 get away with drum rear sight? If you pay attention to the height of the top rail on HK 416 compared to "normal" AR-15, you will notice that HK 416's top rail is higher. And when you mount sight that was designed for regular AR-15, you will no longer have a good cheek weld (personal experience). Now that is not to say you can't get away with drum rear sight, but since it was designed as an integral part of the rifle, there would have to be a rear sight tower in order to actually make it usable, and that would be a snag risk. Hell, some people advocate not mounting any BUIS in the first place because of the snag risk.
A number of AR type rifles have a raised rail system. The HK416 started with the drum system but more modern types use a flip up post. With the trend to magnified optics and LPVOs the drums just get in the way.
Also, QBZ-95 and QBZ-03 was designed before the advent of Pic rails and quick detach optics, and so iron sight was designed as the primary sighting device and optic-mounting was more of an afterthought, whereas QBZ-191 is clearly designed with mounting optics in mind. Notice that a lot of the features present on 95 are missing in 191 (e.g. night sight). In other words, the iron sight on 191 was designed to stay out of the way unless needed, and was not meant to be used as the primary means of aiming.
The reality is more complicated. The “Picatinny Rail” more aptly called the Mil STD 1913 rail or M1913 rail doesn’t start with the Picatinny Arsenal and if anything it parallels the development of the QBZ95. As the two timelines are both starting in the 1970s then working through the 1980s and finalizing around the same early 1990s. The development program for the SOPMOD kit starts with the Modular Close Combat Carbine Project in 1989.
The M4 carbine is adopted in 1994 with a pic rail well the QBZ95 is in 1995. So it’s just that the Chinese were isolated. The QBZ95 does have a rail system built into its Handle it’s just highly proprietary and troublesome. A number of early publicly photos clearly show optics mounted but few if any then made it to the rifle ranges.
By the time the QBZ03 emerges a number of foreign rifles were well into the adoption of M1913 rails.
Rather what seems to have happened is that the Chinese government was too far into the process and not as interested in getting rail systems going as at that point in the early stages of the new millennium optics on rifles were still fairly rare. The British, Canadians, Austrians were stand outs with Germany transitioning and the rest were the preview of Special Forces. Of course after 2004 the rail revolution hits hard and fast.
Having been here a long long time I can say that at some point we saw where rather than modifying the QBZ95 into the QBZ95-1 the PLA threw in the towel and started a clean sheet.
