Khand-e

Well, as many of you may know, my wife was in the PLA and later the PAP in "frontline" roles (though, the latter is more of a counter terrorist/military police unit contrary to what a certain retarded inbred on the wot forums thinks), so, yeah, listening to her has given me some insight on the topic even though she was never really bothered being with a vast majority of male peers.

I guess culturally, it's worked well (and still does) for some countries like the USSR/Russia, China, and Taiwan among others, but to be honest, this topic is kind of a mess so, while I don't really want to get into the mud slinging, I can talk about it in private I guess if you want to hear my sides and what I've heard.

Anyway, this has caused alot of uncertainty on photos of 5.8mm cartridges, to the point I'm going to do alot research into the DBP-10 to find anything I potentially missed, which happens often due to mistranslations and other issues.

Here's one good example in my next feature (I know I said the QBZ-03, but want to do this.) the Squad Automatic Weapon variant of the QBZ-95-1, the QBB-95-1

This is obviously, as stated above, based on the QBZ-95-1 family, the main differences being that it has a more robust frame and construction, and includes things such as a sturdier bolt, a longer, heavier barrel (23.5") with an integrated bipod that allows for longer, more reliable sustained fire an increased muzzle velocity of 3,200 feet per second with DBP-10, and the ( obsolete soon, see above) feature to tolerate and feed the DBP-88 heavy round unlike it's rifle and carbine counterparts, although it can still use the standard 30 round box magazines.

Why did I choose this as an example of mistranslations affecting reliable data? well, It uses drum magazines primarily to fulfill It's SAW role better, however, many western sources quote the drum magazine at 75 rounds, a few however quote it at 80 rounds, you'd think since 75 gets quoted more often it would be correct, but....80 is actually correct, the reason this happened was because of confusions with some western sources confusing it's drum capacity with the older, design improved versions of the 7.62x39mm RPK/Type 81 drums, the thinner 5.8mm round allowed the drums intended for it to be slightly redesigned internally for a few extra rounds.

Moral of the story is...Mandarin to English and vice versa being very difficult compared to other languages, coupled with the fact you're dealing with military topics which have some secrecy to them at times can lead to alot of mistakes that get stated as fact, some minor, some large.

No, the left round is DBP-87.

No offense but you worded it kind of poorly, anyway, I got this asking around on Tiexue.

Left to right: Steel cored 7.62x54mm, Steel cored 7.62x39mm, DBP-95 (corrected, at least according to the post on it), and almost certainly DBP-88 (notice how far the core protrudes up the nose, and how, despite being seated so deeply in the case It's still actually longer then DBP-87, also the case has an incorrect primer pocket for what the DBP-10 case uses.

Hmmm? No, the one on the right very definitely is DBP-10. The DBP-10 jacket is made from the H90 gilding metal alloy, which that bullet has.

The confusion was over the other cartridge in the original source of that image, which is probably DBP-88, but I'm not sure.

I have my doubts the left round is DBP-88 for some various reasons.

Eh, I could think of alot worse.

Oh also, there were alot of somewhat surprising revelations from said airshow I can post about but.... not sure if anyone really cares. (mostly about military matters)

I don't know, I don't fully pay attention to all space related topics because ....reasons (I really should though) so this article comes a bit late, around the time of the recent 2014 Zhuhai air show, however, this board tends to sperg out alot over space related things alot, so I present this as a minor contribution. But yeah, tread lightly, you get put behind a pay link if you click too many articles. (Think 5 is the limit)

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1636424/china-unveils-first-mars-rover-and-exploration-system-red-planet

So, one thing I have point out that I find out somewhat odd is, compared to alot of space capable nations (and only 1 of 3 to demonstrate manned space flight), China seems oddly...apatheic about doing much with their program, even though said rover (which is just a rather simple mock up at this point) is supposed to be launched by 2020, even that is uncertain, I sometimes question why so little is done with their program but, next to their Nuclear program, their space program is probably their most secretive and strange areas regarding government programs so... *shrug*

I know one thing that may keep them hesitant (which is even mentioned a bit in said link) is they had a moon rover earier and, despite remaining functional after landing for a short time, eventually the power source froze up from a combination of extremely cold temperature and the fine, dust like enviorment of the moon eventually taking it's toll. and was unable to be rebooted from the earth, which may have been seen as a big enough setback to take everything completely back to the drawing board for future missions.

Though, choice quote for Collimatrix.

Questions including whether the rover should carry a nuclear power source and the types of scientific experiments on board have yet to be answered.

Huzzah for happy accidents!

We need to fish for certain others now, like Meplat.

also, after checking the one comment, I noticed this gem.

"Lets give the Philippine navy a nice used Destroyer or Aircraft Carrier and make it LOOK like it too was run aground. Surprise!!!!"

.....In what possible universe would this ever work in the Philippines' favor?

Conclusion to the above after discussing it: the above is not a DBP-10, this is evident in the fact the DBP-10 has a very sturdy copper (or, brass if you will) alloy jacket known as H90 which is not present on that projectile.

And for a very reasonable price (and minimum order of at least 5 metric tons), you, too, can make bullet jackets out of this wonderous alloy grade!

http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/H90-Brass-Alloy-Gilding-metal-brass_1298120927.html

Note: I decided I'll make a separate thread about Taiwan at a later date so it's less cluttered.

So yeah, I made a vehicle and vehicle weapons thread, might aswell make a small arms thread dedicated to the PLA too, while the focus is on the newest and upcoming generation, I may add some older designs when I feel like it.

11/28/14 Made some slight updates after receiving new information.

So, let's start off with the 5.8x42mm round, which as you probably know, is the latest round issued to front line troops and, while it's in essence a SCHV round, Olifant and I have decided is supposed to act like a GPC in the PLA's doctrine (why GPC advocates think a SCHV is completely incapable of being a GPC is a mystery.) How does it perform?

Well, This 6mm projectile (Sorry Olifant, I had to do it!) has 2 main variants, the "Short" standard 72 grain round, the DBP-10, which replaced the older, lighter 64 grain DBP-97/95 rounds in service and will eventually replace the DBP-88. (see below) It features a "special hard" H90 double copper/brass layered steel cored gliding metal jacket, which is very hard by bullet jacket standards and allows it to stay together under high stress, a hard cast lead-antimony fused core and an improved sub caliber hardened tool steel penetrator superior to that from the 87 and 95, the core is approximately 4mm wide which combine to give this round excellent armor/material penetration (12+mm RHA at 300mm, compared to 10mm in the older series) and "barrier blind" characteristics. Because of several aerodynamic improvements over the older 87 and 95 series, This is also a quite accurate round with a flat trajectory and excellent energy retention over long distances. It's also worth noting that, because the pressure is significantly increased in the DBP-10 compared to the older rounds from 42,000 psi to 58,000-60,000 psi, it maintains It's rather impressive velocity of 3,000-3,050 feet per second from standard service rifles (18.5 inch barrel and 20.5 inch respectively) despite the heavier round. Giving it an overall muzzle energy of around 1,500 ft/lbs or just over 2,000 joules. for comparison, the 5.56x45mm M855A1 weighing 62 grains gets 2,970 feet per second from a 14.5 inch M4A1 barrel for 1215 ft/lbs or around 1650 joules (I Don't know how fast it travels from the M16 unfortunately), and the 5.45x39mm 7N22 from a 16.5 inch AK-74M barrel achieves 3,000 feet per second, for 1140 ft lbs or around 1550 joules (math is rounded mind you, I'm lazy), so while the 5.8x42mm does get slightly higher raw performance then It's 2 main counterparts as advertised, which is helped by the longer barrel lengths used by the PLA's service weapons, It's not a massive advantage really.

And, while the DBP-10 does have alot going for it, it does also have it's flaws, the most prominent being that the design that gives it excellent material penetration and barrier blind ability means it doesn't tend to shatter like other high velocity rounds upon hitting softer flesh, usually ice picking right through a target leaving an exit hole only slightly larger then the entrance, the DBP-10 is noted to have slightly better terminal effectiveness then the 87 and 95  (partially due to the longer, more tail heavy bullet being more likely to yaw/causing a bigger wound channel when it does in soft flesh and when shattering bone), though this wasn't a massive priority in the design.

And the "Long" Heavy round meant for MGs and Sniper/DM Rifles, the DBP-88. This 77 grain projectile can't be used in the standard QBZ-95 rifle, carbine, or the QBZ-03 rifle due to the fact it's about 6mm longer then the standard projectile on account of the extended tool steel penetrator that starts in the nose as opposed to the base like the DBP-87 and 95, however, this heavy, long bullet is perfect for sharpshooters and machine guns that can suppress from far away, as the bullet offers even better energy retention, flatter trajectory, very good accuracy, and retains it's penetration power quite well compared to the DBP-87 and 95, being able to still punch through 3-4mm of RHA at 1km (may not sound like much, but for a small round that's pretty good.)  this particular version is set to be scrapped as the PLA wants ammo standardization between all weapons, However, There's some evidence that a dedicated "Match Grade" round will be made for 5.8mm DMRs and Sniper rifles, previously thought to be an Ap round but that's no longer believed to be the case.

Updates: I've found some new documentation that surprisingly suggests the DBP-10 isn't just a compromise round between the DBP-95 and DBP-88, but actually outperforms it in basically every category, almost assuring the DBP-88 will infact be retired as planned/

First off, the main service rifle, the QBZ-95-1, aka the best Bullpup style AR.ever.

QBZ-95-1 Rifle and QBZ-95G Carbine

QBZ-97 Export model with a flat top kit. (note the STANAG mag well and how much deeper it runs.)

Actual FTU kit installed on older QBZ-95.

With various accessories. (a vertical and angled foregrip also exists but isn't shown here.)

So yeah, bow down inferior bullpup rifles to your clear overlord, the QBZ-95-1 is, as you may have guessed from the name, an improvement from the older QBZ-95 first seen in 2010, mainly addressing feedback regarding ergonomic comfort and controls, aswell as some other improvements like a thicker barrel with an improved muzzle brake,this rifle will rule you, it has plenty of accessories for almost any mission yet keeps modularity to a reasonable level, is very reliable and quite durable, pretty accurate (not amazing, but for a service rifle its quite decent) while also featuring light recoil due to it's well made recoil buffering system, and is quite light and rather spacious, and somewhat simple, however easy to use iron sights.

The Carbine variant is mostly the same, however it does fire notably faster under the same circumstances as the full size rifle, one oddity however is that the front handguard is so short on the carbine variant it actually has nowhere to mount the 35mm grenade launcher or bayonet the full sized rifle can.

Specifications to sperg over

Caliber - 5.8x42mm DBP-10 (5.56x45mm using STANAGs in the QBZ-97 export variants)

Official rate of fire - 650-750 rpm for older variants, 700-750 for QBZ-95-1 on fully automatic. (800-900 rpm for QBZ-95G)

Action - Gas operated, rotating bolt with short stroke piston.

Fire modes - Semi automatic - 3 round burst (optional) - fully automatic.

Magazine capacity - 30 round box magazine

Barrel Length - 20.5" (14.5" for QBZ-95G)

Overall length - 745mm (610mm for QBZ-95G)

Weight - 3.00 kg (6.6 lbs)  (2.7/6.0 lbs for QBZ-95G) Unchambered with an empty magazine inserted.

Effective Range - 600m point targets (400m for QBZ-95G)

Note to the above, I made a mistake on the weights and quoted the older versions which are heavier, it's been corrected.

------

I'll add content as I feel like doing so.

Be sure to check my other topics covering other branches of the PLA

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/80-the-plan-present-and-future-or-the-rapid-modernization-of-the-chinese-navy-and-marines/- Regarding the Navy, Marines, and Weapons used by them and also land based anti ship defense systems.

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/10-vehicles-of-the-pla-or-glorious-fear-mongering-about-china-over-wars-that-will-probably-not-happen-now-with-content/- Regarding land based vehicles, armor, and weapon systems

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/87-the-plaaf-and-airborne-a-look-at-the-past-present-and-the-future/- Regarding the PLAAF Aircraft and weapon systems, helicopters, and the Airborne.

To be fair, it's not like China hasn't been screwed over on Oceanic territory before in the past. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/24/obama-in-japan-backs-status-quo-in-island-dispute-with-china, plus, as mentioned before, they pretty much always get painted as the villain or aggressor in any situation regardless of what actually happens.

But hey, at least the Philippines have a much better track record on not being agressive at all in oceanic territory disputes and they themselves wouldn't manage to hurt relations between then and their allies! (Not that it matters.)

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20130511000117&cid=1101

....wait, what was I saying?

http://imgur.com/gallery/HXSUbOY

Welp, now dumb "WIND POWER IS THE FUTURE!" hippies are complaining about NIMBY.

I don't think irony of this level is safe to be around.

Well you see, China is the "villain" in this story so doing something completely insane is not only perfectly acceptable, but just shows how brave they are are for.... being stationed on a moored ship against said country.

Well, he's an "authority" on defense topics who constantly hijacks any threads regarding eastern or non aligned nations (particularly Russia and China though) and says how anything talked about in the thread is merely propaganda and people are merely being "X nation fanboys" and how everyone else BUT HIM is merely being biased and blind to the truth of..... his words, no matter how overwhelming the actual evidence to the contrary to him is. He'll then just ignore that and go into butthurt manchild mode until the thread dies or he gets banned because clearly his word isn't the final matter on any topic.

He's also funny in the sense where he claims how Eastern nations accomplish nothing or can just copy the west, when he's someone from Poland who hides behind US tech all the time as opposed to his clearly #1 military innovator nation of Poland for bizarre reasons.

Basically, he's a complete fucking idiot nearly on the level of Mike Sparks and it fucking baffles me he has even a remote shred of credibility left in the defense discussion community with anyone.

By the way, I know that's somewhat of a rushed description, but my wrists are hurting for some reason so I was just trying to explain it in laymans terms while trying to finish and rest my arms.

Sorry.

Ok, let's go with say, a 30 degree slope, which a vast assortment of shells in WW2 were tested against, basically, when a plate is facing completely perpendicular, It's exactly as "thick" as it will be on paper performance wise,  however, when you lay out out at 30 degrees, suddenly the projectile has to penetrate it at a diagonal, so, even though the plate didn't get thicker, it effectively still has to penetrate more of the plate then it would if it were facing perfectly upright because it now has to get through said diagonal angle as opposed to a perfectly straight path.

However, when a slope gets to around 60 degrees or more, this is where many projectiles really struggle, because, at least in the days prior to modern long rods and improved fuzes, projectiles require a good "bite" angle or there's a large risk of the projectile, particularly a higher velocity one simply deflecting due to the fact it can't keep that bite on the target and smash it's way through, or, even worse, a strike at a steep angle will also subject a projectile body to severe uneven distribution of impact stress which can cause it to shatter outright, a projectile that shatters will basically lose almost any chance it has of penetrating due to the loss of the strength of the projectile and the energy now being disspated everywhere in several smaller fragments instead of focused in one large one.

Ironically, as I've pointed out before on how this affects smaller, higher velocity rounds worse due to them being more likely to deflect or shatter at such high speeds, this is why, even though APDS and APCR from guns such as the 20 pounder and various 90mms the US used late and post war have similar or higher penetration "on paper" then the slower 120mm AP round of the M58 gun, the former would bounce off something like the front of a T-54/55 or IS-3 even at point blank range, whereas the M103 could penetrate them at a pretty good distance.

As for HEAT, It's not that the shells themselves couldn't penetrate, infact, 90mm M348 HEAT could penetrate even the front of an IS-3 or potentially an IS-4, the problem is, mainly with earlier HEAT designs, they had terrible fuzing, and with the M348, which is noted here because it's one of the most notorious cases due to it's particularly flawed design, it was based solely on the nose striking at a good enough angle to reliably detonate the fuze while facing the armor plate (the fact the M348 was designed without a well designed standoff didn't exactly help this), however, if the slope is so steep the round glances off before the fuze can be triggered, well.... It's basically useless.

How sloped are we talking? when you get past around 60 degrees you see some pretty dramatic changes in effect.

Well, to put things simply, I'm glad to finally get this thread, as this will mark me being able to cover all aspects of the PLA in detail and to link them all up content wise, so away we go!

Well, this thread will obviously deal about the 1 area that hasn't been covered yet, which is of course the Air Force and Airborne, a bit into the past, and most the present and future, without further ago, I'd like to start off with aircraft designs, with a majority focus on local designs, without further ado, lets begin shall we?

The current primary air-to-air fighter - The J-10B

Full fuel load plus various weapons.

Underside shot with x1 extra fuel tank and loaded with ordnance.

Back shot showing the use of rear mounting space.

Basically, people are speculating for days how good the J-20 and J31 will be, what roles they'll fill, how much of a threat they'll be, etc etc, that's all well and good, but regardless, for the time being, the J-10B is the backbone of the PLAAF's Multirole fighter divisions.

While the J-10B is certainly an older design, It is by consequence one that's had more production time and time to come out with further updates and big fixing, which has resulted in a very solid all around design.

As for the design itself, It's a single engine, single seat (not counting trainer variants) design that uses a tailless canard delta design, though a large delta wing is mounted towards the rear of the fuselage with an accompanying pair of canards mounted directly below and slightly behind the cockpit. the design is made from various, fairly rare light weight, high strength metal alloys and composite arrays which, while increasing the cost somewhat, gives it a light weight frame without sacrificing strength or toughness. Also, due to the delta-canard style airframe design and the unstable airframe (I just said colli's favorite phrase next to "nuclear fusion"), It's also equipped with a redundant fly by wire system that prevent the very tight turn capable design from literally disabling or destroying itself at high speeds.

The frame itself comes by default with up to 11 hard points, however this can be increased to up to 15 when the mission requires it, as for the Avionics, while no huge specifics are known about it, It has 3 LCD multi function displays linked to a helmet mounted sight featuring a holographic heads up display and visual targeting.

During the switch from the A to B variant, the nose mounted radar has been switched to an improved AESA design, which are all the rage in the PLA (and other militaries) right now. and a far more powerful radar unit in itself at that. Other improvements from the A to B include: a more powerful, reliable engine variant, radar absorbent material applied throughout the aircraft aswell as cutting off some sharp edges for smoothed out angles, an Electronic warfare and EMP package, a divertless supersonic inlet, and IRST sensor to give more options on tracking targets, a MAW, RAM coated Canopy, and a completely replaced set of internal electronics with a new generation of solid state electronics.

So basically, the J-10B sort of is the unsung hero of the skies over China while people instead pay attention to newer, shinier things.

Specifications.

Length - 51 Feet/ 15.50 meters

Wingspan - 32 Feet/9.75 meters

Height - 17.80 Feet/5.43 meters

Wing Area - 356.3 Feet²/33.1 meters²

Weight (Empty) -  21,500pounds/9,750 kilograms.

Weight (Loaded) - 28,600 pounds/12,400 kilograms

Maximum Takeoff Weight - 42,500 lb/19,277 kilograms

Top Speed - Mach 2.2 at Altitude, Mach 1.2 Sea level.

Range - 1,600 km with Airborne refueling, 1,100 km without.

Ferry range - 2,000 Miles/3,200 kilometers.

Service Ceiling - 60,000 feet.

Maximum G loading - +10/-3

Armament/Loadout Options. - x1 Twin barreled 23x115mm cannon, 3,600 rounds per minute.

Options for - (might cut out some older variants to save space)

90mm unguided rocket pods.

PL-9C Short range Air to Air missiles

PL-12B/PL-12D Long range Air to Air missiles

LD-10 Anti radiation missiles.

YJ-9K Anti Ship missiles.

PL-9 Air to surface missiles.

GB2/3 family of Precision guided bombs.

LS6 "Standoff" Guided glide bombs.

FT1 Satellite guided bombs.

Standard 250kg and 500kg unguided bombs.

Up to 3 external drop tanks for extended range.

---------------

Welp, that took longer then I thought, but I'm glad I have the 4 threads I really want down now, I plan to update all of them if there's interest and when I feel like I can.

Anyway, later, more planes, helos, and the Airborne coming.

Be sure to check my other topics covering the other branches of the PLA.

http://sturgeonshous...d-units-thread/- Regarding Infantry, small arms, and infantry support weapons.

http://sturgeonshous...w-with-content/- Regarding land based vehicles, armor, and weapon systems

http://sturgeonshous...vy-and-marines/- Regarding the Navy, Marines, and Weapons used by them and also land based anti ship defense systems.

Do you have any information on Chinese heavy tank projects (such as the 113)?

Late response but yeah, have some things I can dig back up, might take a bit since between lots of new games and preparing for holiday seasons, I'm kind of pre occupied at the moment.

For now though, since you mentioned the 113, this was something I helped out with that was posted on the wot forumsa  while back, there were bits he couldn't translate he needed help on.

It starts out with the wot version then goes into the real life history of the designs,  among some other tanks like the 111 and 122 medium. (check the comments for more.)

http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2082270787#27885055493l

http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2086694352

I'll post some book scans when I can, just tell me whatever parts you want translations of.

They have some truly great posters, but overall...

Overall...

Too many Damians.

Wow, you mean there's actually a forum Damian hasn't been banned from still?

"something with a brain attached"

Hey look, It's a Rhino!, Humans and Rhinos are perfect physiological matches between each other, right? grab the test rig boys!

" There are those engineers and politicians who say it takes years to develop and field a military cartridge and weapon system. I call, “Bull Shit”, when we were bombing them into dust and the Russians were crushing them under foot, the Germans fielded an entirely new cartridge along with the first assault rifle, and in two years managed to produce nearly half million of these assault rifles.   There are those engineers and politicians who say it takes years to develop and field a military cartridge and weapon system. I call, “Bull Shit”, when we were bombing them into dust and the Russians were crushing them under foot, the Germans fielded an entirely new cartridge along with the first assault rifle, and in two years managed to produce nearly half million of these assault rifles."

....How did this glorious little tidbit not get quoted just for the laugh factor?

You should totally get on TS so I can rant to you about it.

But more or less yeah, only "It doesn't seem to work after decades of development yet its flaunted as one of the best mbts by its creator and blind fanboys despite the amount of technical problems that have hindered it's development" would be longer, but more accurate I guess.

I just got done ranting about how the K2 is the East Asian Arjun in many ways.

You totally missed out.