Pakistan's Service Rifle (G-3, Type-56) Replacement Competition 2016.

[Neurath]

They'll probably replace the HK G3 with something from the West and the Type-56 with something Russian.
I don't expect to see Pakistani made guns in service any time soon.

 

[Yasser76]

They'll probably replace the HK G3 with something from the West and the Type-56 with something Russian.
I don't expect to see Pakistani made guns in service any time soon.

I would not be surprised to see if Pak Mil s closely following how Chinese small arms fair up during the winter stand off with India....

 

[Neurath]

I would not be surprised to see if Pak Mil s closely following how Chinese small arms fair up during the winter stand off with India....

Chinese arms are unlikely. The modern ones haven't been able to prove if they're reliable yet. Lets see what happens in the winter.

 

[Yasser76]

Chinese arms are unlikely. The modern ones haven't been able to prove if they're reliable yet. Lets see what happens in the winter.

Many of the ones evaluated have not been tested that much in combat imagine

 

[Zarvan]

Many of the ones evaluated have not been tested that much in combat imagine

Chinese assault rifles have no chance. Not one bit. It will be either Turkish or European.

 

[Yasser76]

Chinese assault rifles have no chance. Not one bit. It will be either Turkish or European.

Why so? We have been using Type 56 for many years.

 

[Yasser76]

Only their older weapons were reliable. Now they're mainly junk and haven't seen combat.

I don't know enough on both in terms of toughness to make a comparison. However for China to adopt it across entire PLA when they could of easily license made something else is a statement surely?

 

[retaxis]

Chinese QBZ 191 is a beast

https://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/news/2019/october/QBZ-191_New_Chinese-made_assault_rifle_carbine_5.8x42mm_caliber_925_001.jpg

https://i1.wp.com/asiatimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Nat-Int.png?w=1134&ssl=1

 

[Neurath]

chinese modern weaponry is all pieces of shit, we should avoid them like the plaugue
russian, american or european weapons are what we should look at

I agree. The Chinese are good at making tanks, for that we only have to look at the South Sudanese and Sudanese war where Type 85s decimated T-72s.
Other than that, we should look towards European and Russian equipment. The Americans have it good but they create a lot of problems in the buying/selling process. The Europeans have it equally good as the Americans without any shitty terms and conditions.
As far as the Russians are concerned, they can supply guns to Pakistan especially better AKs since the Pakistan Army is already familiar with the AK platform.
Turkey's also becoming a good option now, however they have most of their stuff very expensive right now, lets see if they make something we have the ability to buy and operate.

 

[donkeykong]

The new qbz 191 is better and more reliable than ak12 and more moddable than scar h

 

[Metal 0-1]

The new qbz 191 is better and more reliable than ak12 and more moddable than scar h

Nice Joke. Gave me a chuckle.

But AK-12 and SCAR are both reliable and better than QBZ 191.

 

[Raja Porus]

So whats the status. Its been more than five years since this thread was started

 

[retaxis]

Nice Joke. Gave me a chuckle.

But AK-12 and SCAR are both reliable and better than QBZ 191.

Proof?

Why pakistan doesnt make its own assault rifle like little israel does?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

ow they're mainly junk and haven't seen combat.

chinese modern weaponry is all pieces of shit, we should avoid them like the plaugue
russian, american or european weapons are what we should look at

What qualifies as 'junk'? Based on what empirical data?

The only thing you could claim with certitude is that 'they haven't seen combat', but even there one could question what 'combat' is defined as and why it is necessary if stringent testing has been carried out in different conditions.

And pardon me for being flippant, but do you really need bullets flying at you and shells exploding near you to confirm if a rifle is going to perform as advertised?

I would suggest members refrain from such broad statements (junk, useless, low quality etc) when talking about various weapons systems.

For one, we have members from multiple countries on this forum, and no one likes products manufactured by their nation referred to in such broad, derogatory terms.

Second, statements such as these (junk, useless, lower quality), given the lack of supporting information, reduce the quality of the discussions and forum.

 

[Neurath]

What qualifies as 'junk'? Based on what empirical data?

The only thing you could claim with certitude is that 'they haven't seen combat', but even there one could question what 'combat' is defined as and why it is necessary if stringent testing has been carried out in different conditions.

And pardon me for being flippant, but do you really need bullets flying at you and shells exploding near you to confirm if a rifle is going to perform as advertised?

I would suggest members refrain from such broad statements (junk, useless, low quality etc) when talking about various weapons systems.

For one, we have members from multiple countries on this forum, and no one likes products manufactured by their nation referred to in such broad, derogatory terms.

Second, statements such as these (junk, useless, lower quality), given the lack of supporting information, reduce the quality of the discussions and forum.

I apologize, will make sure the right form of language is used and I give supporting information.