What's new

Army should be looking for a NEW Sub Machine Gun (SMG)

Type-56 is SMG right? What makes it SMG? And why can't G3 be called SMG? Actually, PA, especially FC hardly makes any distinction b/w these two (according to what I think). Type-56 is widely used in FATA by FC and PA. There's no weapon especially set for guard duties.
The HK417 is designed more for use as a "designated marksman" rifle or battle rifle than an assault rifle, with its increased accuracy, penetrative power and effective range weighed against higher cost, decreased rate of fire, and a smaller magazine capacity (although fully automatic fire is selectable).
HK 417 as you said is a battle rifle or DMR, due to its weight, overall length, a heavier round, low ammo capacity, it is not effective in CQB, also AK variants can be more cost effective because of low per unit price, and you can always pick up the ammos from fallen enemy, Another thing can be the training, AK is a weapon which many in our country have fired atleast once in a lifetime also a very familiar system so training a solider with this weapon system is easier than HK,
The reason you see soliders with G-3 on guard duties is due to the fact that MP5a2 proved to be ineffective to take down incoming bomber or a group of terrorists wearing body armor so atleast something is better than nothing.
It was Mp-5 with the MP's and other checkpoint guards about some years back. But then the ineffectiveness of the weapon against body armor at some range was learnt, it could not neutralize a suicide bomber threat at a range (assuming he had body armour on), so now you see Type 56.
I second that, back in the days, MP-5a2 was in use with JCOs,NCOs, and MPs, now these days only see Mp5a2 with MPs controlling the traffic at rush hours, and just for the reference I live in Rwp cantt westridge
 
For all the above posts, please watch this video. It would help explain why different weapon caliber and sizes are suitable for different situations. G-3 or HK416/7 is suicidal for CQC/CQB.

This second video can also help understand the point, though it is 1 hour video.

It's a modified variant. We would now be going off the topic and the actual topic is losing it's interest, but it is not a Type-56 but AK-47.

YouTube is blocked at the moment. But I will InshaAllah watch it as soon as possible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Following is the Chinese Type-56 AK that the Pakistan Army wants to replace. This is to clear some prevailing confusion here on what does the said gun look like. Those not familiar with reasons on why such a replacement is required should read my earlier posts.

Not only this gun has some operating and maintenance problems, but its receiver is stamped and generally when the gun is abused during battle, it jams! Also it has no provision for mounting of a Picatinny Rail for putting on the red d.o.t sights or other CQB accessories.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Not only this gun has some operating and maintenance problems, but its receiver is stamped and generally when the gun is abused during battle, it jams! Also it has no provision for mounting of a Picatinny Rail for putting on the red d.o.t sights or other CQB accessories.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The Pakistan Army did not know that before ? Did they not test the Chinese Type-56 AK ? When they did buy it and how many ?
 
The Pakistan Army did not know that before ? Did they not test the Chinese Type-56 AK ? When they did buy it and how many ?

As XYON has mentioned, the Type-56 was inducted as stop gap urgent use, it is probably better then the MP5 in CQB because of its lethality and range having 7.62x39 as its ammo instead of 9mm of MP5, and on top of that what I know is SMG has an effective range of 300 meters compared to MP5 which is 100 meters

Indeed thank you for the info, this weapon has major problem if it does not have Picatinny rail where nothing could be mounted on it but I am concerned also about the financial aspect
 
Indeed the Chinese Type 56 is very cheap (US$96) as compared to the tested European SMG's! However what good is cheap when it fails during the heat of the battle? Is our fighting soldiers life has become so meaningless that we place in his hands something so cheap that he has to pay with his life just because the Army wanted to save a few dollars?? This is also one of the reasons that the GHQ in its original RFQ did not invite any Chinese make for the SMG! An SMG or Assault Rifle is something where 'cheap' can ultimately be costly in terms of high fatalities of your own soldiers! That is what has happened in WANA. As a weapons expert & in the heat of the battle, I would rather prefer any other gun in 7.62x39mm then a Chinese Type 56!!! That is why even in the black market, the RUSSIAN version of the AK-47 costs more due to its better quality!

As the saying goes, When you Pay with PEANUTS!! You are most likely to get MONKEYS!!!

As XYON has mentioned, the Type-56 was inducted as stop gap urgent use, it is probably better then the MP5 in CQB because of its lethality and range having 7.62x39 as its ammo instead of 9mm of MP5, and on top of that what I know is SMG has an effective range of 300 meters compared to MP5 which is 100 meters

Indeed thank you for the info, this weapon has major problem if it does not have Picatinny rail where nothing could be mounted on it but I am concerned also about the financial aspect
 
Indeed the Chinese Type 56 is very cheap (US$96) as compared to the tested European SMG's! However what good is cheap when it fails during the heat of the battle? Is our fighting soldiers life has become so meaningless that we place in his hands something so cheap that he has to pay with his life just because the Army wanted to save a few dollars?? This is also one of the reasons that the GHQ in its original RFQ did not invite any Chinese make for the SMG! An SMG or Assault Rifle is something where 'cheap' can ultimately be costly in terms of high fatalities of your own soldiers! That is what has happened in WANA. As a weapons expert & in the heat of the battle, I would rather prefer any other gun in 7.62x39mm then a Chinese Type 56!!! That is why even in the black market, the RUSSIAN version of the AK-47 costs more due to its better quality!

As the saying goes, When you Pay with PEANUTS!! You are most likely to get MONKEYS!!!

Agreed, nothing is more valuable then a persons life and it is even more valuable when it is one of a soldier, who has agreed upon to do every thing it takes to defend the motherland and its people, Xyon the Chinese cost wise is cheap and very cheap, keeping in mind the quality, what is your idea regarding the European weapons, what could be there value for the quality they offer?
 
In short, good metallurgy, quality construction, strength, machined interchangeable components, reliability, etc etc!! Its the same argument as to why prefer a German or a Japanese Car over say a Chinese one!!

Agreed, nothing is more valuable then a persons life and it is even more valuable when it is one of a soldier, who has agreed upon to do every thing it takes to defend the motherland and its people, Xyon the Chinese cost wise is cheap and very cheap, keeping in mind the quality, what is your idea regarding the European weapons, what could be there value for the quality they offer?
 
In short, good metallurgy, quality construction, strength, machined interchangeable components, reliability, etc etc!! Its the same argument as to why prefer a German or a Japanese Car over say a Chinese one!!

Xyon, what kind of tests are conducted in order to know the quality of the weapon ? I believe there is drop test which I know, what else ?
 
Quality of the weapon is determined through its metallurgy. That is gauged by using a boroscope to see the inside of the barrel and inspect it for pits or any damages or irregularities caused by using bad metals, visually inspect the quality of the overall components and the construction of the gun, firing of rounds after extreme temperature tests (-35 to +70 deg cent), water immersion test, mud immersion test, sand immersion test, drop test (to see if the weapon misfires), reliability tests where hundreds of rounds are fired on full-auto to see how the gun and its metal performs etc etc. All theses tests give a pretty clear picture of how a quality built weapon performs compared to that of a lesser quality.

Xyon, what kind of tests are conducted in order to know the quality of the weapon ? I believe there is drop test which I know, what else ?

Because it was NOT OFFERED!! End of Story!

Why don't they consider Sig 556 Russian Rifle R556762R16B, 7.62mmX39mm?
 
Because it was NOT OFFERED!! End of Story!

What is testing criteria to test the weapon in PA and how they tested and selected Czech Sa vz 58 Compact, did they performed dust tests, so have you knowledge about stoppage ratio against rest of two offered guns? Or here is no test but MUK MUKA?
 
Quality of the weapon is determined through its metallurgy. That is gauged by using a boroscope to see the inside of the barrel and inspect it for pits or any damages or irregularities caused by using bad metals, visually inspect the quality of the overall components and the construction of the gun, firing of rounds after extreme temperature tests (-35 to +70 deg cent), water immersion test, mud immersion test, sand immersion test, drop test (to see if the weapon misfires), reliability tests where hundreds of rounds are fired on full-auto to see how the gun and its metal performs etc etc. All theses tests give a pretty clear picture of how a quality built weapon performs compared to that of a lesser quality.

Thank you for the info, very informative indeed, so what I understand is all the above tests have been performed for the 3 weapons, what is the next stage? how will the Army select and procure the best weapon for the best price? have all the 3 weapons passed the complete tests ? it sure is a good competition to check the performance of the 3 weapons..
 
Yes all weapons were tested professionally, openly, fairly and under an announced program. Process of selection is on-going at this stage. I will let you know when I know more!

Quality of the weapon is determined through its metallurgy. That is gauged by using a boroscope to see the inside of the barrel and inspect it for pits or any damages or irregularities caused by using bad metals, visually inspect the quality of the overall components and the construction of the gun, firing of rounds after extreme temperature tests (-35 to +70 deg cent), water immersion test, mud immersion test, sand immersion test, drop test (to see if the weapon misfires), reliability tests where hundreds of rounds are fired on full-auto to see how the gun and its metal performs etc etc. All theses tests give a pretty clear picture of how a quality built weapon performs compared to that of a lesser quality.

Thank you for the info, very informative indeed, so what I understand is all the above tests have been performed for the 3 weapons, what is the next stage? how will the Army select and procure the best weapon for the best price? have all the 3 weapons passed the complete tests ? it sure is a good competition to check the performance of the 3 weapons..
 
Back
Top Bottom