Search results

On the news i always here about how in the last decade or so, the better looking president has won in the US. In Canada, there will most likely be a new election. If you compare there recent speeches, they are very similar, and citizens cannot tell who said what. Leave Politics to the...

After using the 95 for a long time, they should be used to it. This means that 1.Soldiers are not training with the gun enough or 2.There is something wrong with it But there are only a couple of critics

What's the point of putting a scope over a holographic? I've seen this before. Does it help you lock on to a target faster? But those look like a special scope:undecided:

Must be a recent pic. He's wearing that new interceptor-style body armour.

QLZ-87 Carried by a Bolivian marine. QLB-06. Why is this gold?

They just painted it. But theres change INSIDE the hull. After all, the hulls fine, as it was just bought as a hull.

Pictures from Sina. Kind of looks like an HK-416. If China is indeed making more conventional designs such as the QBZ-03, does it mean that the rumors about the QBZ-95 not performing properly are true? ?5.8mm?³?-QBZ-2010??2?_½_?_?_ [/IMG]

Off topic but anyone else think this guy's profile pic is amazing?

A group of militia winning against the Chinese military when they are outnumbered. Is this supposed to make the Chinese military look bad or the American Military?

I hear China's helicopter fleet has low firepower, due to French roots. How does this compare? Pretty sure this was inspired by previous helicopter designs and experience, should get those Hinds and improve em :devil:

Are the pictures of the subs taken Dalian?

The original QBZ-95 could be fired after being submerged in mud, water, or dipped in sand. And don't bullets fall apart if they're fired underwater? And as for jamming, the original QBZ-95 was supposed to jam less than the M-16 or M-4.

China`s infantry definitely does not use the SKS, we have millions of QBZ`s and even the type 56 is mainly for militia:sniper:.

Instead of saying whose weapons are better, lets ALL give post some numbers

Yeah, standard NATO=5.56x45mm(so all allied troops can use them, very clever) and QBZ-95=5.8x42mm "light" QBZ-95G=5.8x42mm "heavy" They should really come up with a SCO round:sniper: 5.8x42mm is supposed to have better penetration

I doubt the United States will get that SMG, they didn't get the QBZ, but Canada did XD. BTW, correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't buying a SMG harder than buying a rifle (easier to conceal, etc.)?

Yeah, but they know that selling a rolls royce engine to China will just be another technology in the hands of the Chinese, which will be copied and possibly later improved:cheers:

You got a point, but maybe they should of cut production sooner, maybe when the B-2 came out. I still kinda think spending the F-117' money on more strike fighters would be better, but again, the United States needs less deaths for public support.

But that's for defence:azn:, they'll still be useful, and not every country has a stealth fighter. The F-117,on the other hand, has been retired after extremely high maintenance costs and not seeing much action. But i guess the stealth could've saved some lives during the gulf war.

Kind of a waste of money, they buillt 64 of them 42 million each, just to retire them of service after fighting countries like Iraq, when a F-15E could've done the job:argh:. They're probrably going to be put into service again if another major conflict happens again, right?