PK 18 Battlefield Rifle , SMG PK 21 (AK-103) and PK-10 are way forward

[Thorough Pro]

The answer to the most frequently asked stupid question "why not go for xyz?", is a question itself
why should we go for xyz?
Who says xyz is good? or
Meets our requirements? or
Is affordable? or
Aligns with our self-sufficiency objectives?

Because you read its name somewhere or watched a youtube video made by some self-proclaimed internet expert after shooting 200 rounds through it?

In this specific case, what was the basis of your suggestion for AK203?
Because its a new model?
Because "203" is supposedly bigger hence better than "103"?
Or perhaps you think you watched that youtube before anybody else?

I really want to understand the demented mindset of internet warriors who keep suggesting some 20 different things in 20 different threads in a single day. They think they are such big experts that they can suggest battleships in one thread to nuclear subs in the other, to jet fighters to attack helos to artillery to tanks to guns to AAM to AGM to SAM and everything else not mentioned here.

and when you say, "why not go for?" who the heck are you asking? other internet warriors like yourself or do you seriously think that COA reads this forum to get expert advice and suggestions from here?

I am all for healthy debate, but if you think like something and think that might be good for the defence forces, then make your case with facts and why you think, what you think.

So it has passed all tests ??? Also Turkey can help us improve PK 18. And as for AK 103 why not got for AK 203
View attachment 586229

 

[Zarvan]

The answer to the most frequently asked stupid question "why not go for xyz?", is a question itself
why should we go for xyz?
Who says xyz is good? or
Meets our requirements? or
Is affordable? or
Aligns with our self-sufficiency objectives?

Because you read its name somewhere or watched a youtube video made by some self-proclaimed internet expert after shooting 200 rounds through it?

In this specific case, what was the basis of your suggestion for AK203?
Because its a new model?
Because "203" is supposedly bigger hence better than "103"?
Or perhaps you think you watched that youtube before anybody else?

I really want to understand the demented mindset of internet warriors who keep suggesting some 20 different things in 20 different threads in a single day. They think they are such big experts that they can suggest battleships in one thread to nuclear subs in the other, to jet fighters to attack helos to artillery to tanks to guns to AAM to AGM to SAM and everything else not mentioned here.

and when you say, "why not go for?" who the heck are you asking? other internet warriors like yourself or do you seriously think that COA reads this forum to get expert advice and suggestions from here?

I am all for healthy debate, but if you think like something and think that might be good for the defence forces, then make your case with facts and why you think, what you think.

AK-203 is better. It's more compact plus it has pica-tinny rail rail better muzzle and lot of other changes. And you want to bet with me that in a year or even in few months they would be turning this AK-103 into pretty much similar to something AK-203. How much you want to be ????

You already have made these changes in Type 56. So it makes no sense going for AK-103 with AK-203 already is there with same changes even better. @Thorough Pro

The answer to the most frequently asked stupid question "why not go for xyz?", is a question itself
why should we go for xyz?
Who says xyz is good? or
Meets our requirements? or
Is affordable? or
Aligns with our self-sufficiency objectives?

Because you read its name somewhere or watched a youtube video made by some self-proclaimed internet expert after shooting 200 rounds through it?

In this specific case, what was the basis of your suggestion for AK203?
Because its a new model?
Because "203" is supposedly bigger hence better than "103"?
Or perhaps you think you watched that youtube before anybody else?

I really want to understand the demented mindset of internet warriors who keep suggesting some 20 different things in 20 different threads in a single day. They think they are such big experts that they can suggest battleships in one thread to nuclear subs in the other, to jet fighters to attack helos to artillery to tanks to guns to AAM to AGM to SAM and everything else not mentioned here.

and when you say, "why not go for?" who the heck are you asking? other internet warriors like yourself or do you seriously think that COA reads this forum to get expert advice and suggestions from here?

I am all for healthy debate, but if you think like something and think that might be good for the defence forces, then make your case with facts and why you think, what you think.

The suggestions made by this so called internet warrior are the ones which are done by Armed Forces around the world. You are not special that you don't need those things.

 

[Army research]

AK-203 is better. It's more compact plus it has pica-tinny rail rail better muzzle and lot of other changes. And you want to bet with me that in a year or even in few months they would be turning this AK-103 into pretty much similar to something AK-203. How much you want to be ????

You already have made these changes in Type 56. So it makes no sense going for AK-103 with AK-203 already is there with same changes even better. @Thorough Pro

The suggestions made by this so called internet warrior are the ones which are done by Armed Forces around the world. You are not special that you don't need those things.

I can attach picatinny rails to my Enfield No5 'jungle carbine ', replace wood with moulded camo polymer furniture , add bipod ,laser, add a 50000$ predicting x32 scope ,

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Whether an AK-103 clone or licensed AK-103, I think the idea behind the PK21 is to equip LEAs, FC, Rangers, etc, with a durable and easy-to-use rifle. Heck, I think most of the regulars will end up with the PK21 as well, while SOFs and LCBs switch over to the PK18 (in lieu of imported M4s).

 

[Zarvan]

Whether an AK-103 clone or licensed AK-103, I think the idea behind the PK21 is to equip LEAs, FC, Rangers, etc, with a durable and easy-to-use rifle. Heck, I think most of the regulars will end up with the PK21 as well, while SOFs and LCBs switch over to the PK18 (in lieu of imported M4s).

I think it's license thing not clone

 

[HRK]

I think it's license thing not clone

just to add to your post: Kalashnikov Concern Concludes Cooperation Agreement with Pakistan

but the question is, it was related to civilian small arm and no other report is available which indicates licence agreement for AK-103 ....

 

[Thorough Pro]

AK-203 is better.

Better in what way? Is it shorter? lighter? more accurate? more reliable? more durable, higher rate of fire? longer sustained fire? longer effective range? easier to carry? easier to deploy? easier to maneuver? easier to handle? easier to operate? easier to maintain? cheaper to buy? cheaper to maintain? higher resistance to jamming? higher resistance to corrosion? What are your criteria for saying it is better? and in comparison to what?

Who is the judge? who is saying it is better? you? The internet expert? or the end-user?

If you are saying it on behalf of the end-user, then who is the end-user? PA, PN, or PAF?
If PA, then which branch? for what specific role?

Answer these logically then I'll come to the second sentence of your post.

By the way, I don't bet on anything that is not in my control, besides if I did, I would still be waiting for my winnings on Eurofighters, SU35's, FN Scar's and a hundred other things.

It's more compact plus it has pica-tinny rail rail better muzzle and lot of other changes. And you want to bet with me that in a year or even in few months they would be turning this AK-103 into pretty much similar to something AK-203. How much you want to be ????

You already have made these changes in Type 56. So it makes no sense going for AK-103 with AK-203 already is there with same changes even better. @Thorough Pro

The suggestions made by this so called internet warrior are the ones which are done by Armed Forces around the world. You are not special that you don't need those things.

These are called "Attachments" not changes, just like wearing a shoe does not mean you changed your feet.

You already have made these changes in Type 56. So it makes no sense going for AK-103 with AK-203 already is there with same changes even better. @Thorough Pro

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

PK21 to me looks like a regular type 56 that has bony metal stock.

Can you highlight the differences??

Better in what way? Is it shorter? lighter? more accurate? more reliable? more durable, higher rate of fire? longer sustained fire? longer effective range? easier to carry? easier to deploy? easier to maneuver? easier to handle? easier to operate? easier to maintain? cheaper to buy? cheaper to maintain? higher resistance to jamming? higher resistance to corrosion? What are your criteria for saying it is better? and in comparison to what?

Who is the judge? who is saying it is better? you? The internet expert? or the end-user?

If you are saying it on behalf of the end-user, then who is the end-user? PA, PN, or PAF?
If PA, then which branch? for what specific role?

Answer these logically then I'll come to the second sentence of your post.

By the way, I don't bet on anything that is not in my control, besides if I did, I would still be waiting for my winnings on Eurofighters, SU35's, FN Scar's and a hundred other things.





These are called "Attachments" not changes, just like wearing a shoe does not mean you changed your feet.

 

[Thorough Pro]

I don't have any info on the weapon to give an opinion

PK21 to me looks like a regular type 56 that has bony metal stock.

Can you highlight the differences??

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

PK21 to me looks like a regular type 56 that has bony metal stock.

Can you highlight the differences??

I'd give it more credit than that. Compared to the AK-103, it looks identical.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

The stock confuses me. If it's really AK103 why didn't they change the type 56 bony metal stock??

Front part does look like Ak103 tho.

I'd give it more credit than that. Compared to the AK-103, it looks identical.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The stock confuses me. If it's really AK103 why didn't they change the type 56 bony metal stock??

Front part does look like Ak103 tho.

Likely to position it as a SMG-like solution. Reduce the length/'wieldiness' or weight without shortening the barrel, basically. I'm sure a proper stock could be made available if asked upon, not a big deal to add.

@Foxtrot Alpha

Is it our fault that POF didn't get the CZ or SCAR? Lol!

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...competition-2016.426049/page-347#post-9956961

 

[Zarvan]

Better in what way? Is it shorter? lighter? more accurate? more reliable? more durable, higher rate of fire? longer sustained fire? longer effective range? easier to carry? easier to deploy? easier to maneuver? easier to handle? easier to operate? easier to maintain? cheaper to buy? cheaper to maintain? higher resistance to jamming? higher resistance to corrosion? What are your criteria for saying it is better? and in comparison to what?

Who is the judge? who is saying it is better? you? The internet expert? or the end-user?

If you are saying it on behalf of the end-user, then who is the end-user? PA, PN, or PAF?
If PA, then which branch? for what specific role?

Answer these logically then I'll come to the second sentence of your post.

By the way, I don't bet on anything that is not in my control, besides if I did, I would still be waiting for my winnings on Eurofighters, SU35's, FN Scar's and a hundred other things.





These are called "Attachments" not changes, just like wearing a shoe does not mean you changed your feet.

Yes most of the things you mentioned. It has better rate of fire plus better accuracy better ergonomics along with pictanni rail and other things which you are going to add sooner or a little later. But don't believe and soon when either on their own or buying directly from Russia I mean AK-203. All the improvements which have been made AK-203 will be soon be made in AK-103 which we are buying.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Ak also came out with a .308/7.62x51 rifle which is interesting.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Caliber is the same? really? you are just digging the hole deeper

Design, barrel, trigger mech and caliber is same as G3 so only difference is bolt....