Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army

[Reichmarshal]

I dont know wt the fuss is all about
Type 56 was inducted to serve a particular purpose ie war on terror was a CQB affair n type 56 is a CGB weapon.
Now G3 is a assault rifle with a great range n good stopping power at great ranges n is well suited for conventional battle field.

Now if u can differentiate the two for their specific roles u will understand their roles n their employment in those roles

 

[iLION12345_1]

I dont know wt the fuss is all about
Type 56 was inducted to serve a particular purpose ie war on terror was a CQB affair n type 56 is a CGB weapon.
Now G3 is a assault rifle with a great range n good stopping power at great ranges n is well suited for conventional battle field.

Now if u can differentiate the two for their specific roles u will understand their roles n their employment in those roles

Type 56 is NOT a CQB weapon. Anyone who thinks a full sized AK platform rifle is an SMG or a dedicated CQB platform doesn’t know the first thing about firearms. They are only considered as such here out of necessity and a lack of other options.
Most modern militaries don’t even consider an M4A1 a CQB platform and here we are calling a full fledged assault rifle that’s over 100MM longer than an M4A1 a CQB weapon.

It’s much more usable for CQB than a G3 of course, and its induction (or rather of the original Type 56-Is) was started in a hurry when the PA realized that their then standard SMG (MP-5), did not have the penetration or stopping power to take down a terrorist high on six different kinds of drugs (the western solution for that was higher power rounds for PDWs and Modern SMGs like the 5.7MM), however the military has doubled down on it and continued to purchase it much after the WoT, in fact there have been no more G3s purchased in several years now, yet thousands of Type 56s and other AKs keep coming in (the number of Type 56 and AK variants outnumber G3s in the PA at the moment), specifically to replace the G3, everyone on the LOC as well as the western border has been using Type 56s for several years now, most sentries in all cantonments carry Type 56s as well, if you can’t see it in person, just look at pictures or documentaries. Even the standard training firearm is now a Type 56. PA has purchased several thousand optics, rails and other attachments and upgrades for both its new Type 56-IIs as well as modernizing many of its older AKs. Yet nothing as such for the G3.

The G3 is in no shape or form better than the Type 56-II in conventional warfare in the hands of our troops. Most of them are not built for it. Every military in the world has adopted smaller calibers, our terrain and circumstances are not unique enough to not do the same, the only reason is a lack of money and incompetence.

The most distance an average soldier can effectively engage at without magnified optics will be 300M (and this is at the standards of the US, UK and Canadian armed forces, I don’t know what the PA standards are, but let’s assume they are slightly lower), this is also the effective range of both the Type 56-II and the G3 (the G3s is definitely a bit higher, but you’re not hitting anything there without a magnified optic).
However in an actual combat scenario, accuracy beyond 150M is going to be average at best, regardless of the rifle, and within these ranges (300M and below), the Type 56-II is more accurate (due to significantly smaller size and weight, better ergonomics and significantly less recoil) and hence more deadly than the G3. A level 3 armored plate will stop both rounds just the same, and will penetrate level 3A just the same, so penetration is not a factor (unless cover is involved) actually hitting the enemy definitely is, something that is significantly easier to do with a Type 56 than a G3 (for most soldiers).

The G3 is outdated, maybe PA still has some specific roles for it marked out, but I wish they didn’t. It needs to be replaced, it will get soldiers killed.​

 

[Reichmarshal]

Type 56 is NOT a CQB weapon. Anyone who thinks a full sized AK platform rifle is an SMG or a dedicated CQB platform doesn’t know the first thing about firearms. They are only considered as such here out of necessity and a lack of other options.
Most modern militaries don’t even consider an M4A1 a CQB platform and here we are calling a full fledged assault rifle that’s over 100MM longer than an M4A1 a CQB weapon.

It’s much more usable for CQB than a G3 of course, and its induction (or rather of the original Type 56-Is) was started in a hurry when the PA realized that their then standard SMG (MP-5), did not have the penetration or stopping power to take down a terrorist high on six different kinds of drugs (the western solution for that was higher power rounds for PDWs and Modern SMGs like the 5.7MM), however the military has doubled down on it and continued to purchase it much after the WoT, in fact there have been no more G3s purchased in several years now, yet thousands of Type 56s and other AKs keep coming in (the number of Type 56 and AK variants outnumber G3s in the PA at the moment), specifically to replace the G3, everyone on the LOC as well as the western border has been using Type 56s for several years now, most sentries in all cantonments carry Type 56s as well, if you can’t see it in person, just look at pictures or documentaries. Even the standard training firearm is now a Type 56. PA has purchased several thousand optics, rails and other attachments and upgrades for both its new Type 56-IIs as well as modernizing many of its older AKs. Yet nothing as such for the G3.

The G3 is in no shape or form better than the Type 56-II in conventional warfare in the hands of our troops. Most of them are not built for it. Every military in the world has adopted smaller calibers, our terrain and circumstances are not unique enough to not do the same, the only reason is a lack of money and incompetence.

The most distance an average soldier can effectively engage at without magnified optics will be 300M (and this is at the standards of the US, UK and Canadian armed forces, I don’t know what the PA standards are, but let’s assume they are slightly lower), this is also the effective range of both the Type 56-II and the G3 (the G3s is definitely a bit higher, but you’re not hitting anything there without a magnified optic).
However in an actual combat scenario, accuracy beyond 150M is going to be average at best, regardless of the rifle, and within these ranges (300M and below), the Type 56-II is more accurate (due to significantly smaller size and weight, better ergonomics and significantly less recoil) and hence more deadly than the G3. A level 3 armored plate will stop both rounds just the same, and will penetrate level 3A just the same, so penetration is not a factor (unless cover is involved) actually hitting the enemy definitely is, something that is significantly easier to do with a Type 56 than a G3 (for most soldiers).

The G3 is outdated, maybe PA still has some specific roles for it marked out, but I wish they didn’t. It needs to be replaced, it will get soldiers killed.​

Maray bhai why do u take things in literal terms.....
No matter wt u call the type 54 was inducted in PA as an SMG for the cqb opps in WOT .....n guess wt it replaced..... mp 5 in the smg role, which if u go in the details is nothing but a machine pistol.

The g3 is a good weapon n will shoot consistently n accurately for long duration upto 500 m, it has great stopping n penetration power.

 

[SQ8]

Type 56 is NOT a CQB weapon. Anyone who thinks a full sized AK platform rifle is an SMG or a dedicated CQB platform doesn’t know the first thing about firearms. They are only considered as such here out of necessity and a lack of other options.
Most modern militaries don’t even consider an M4A1 a CQB platform and here we are calling a full fledged assault rifle that’s over 100MM longer than an M4A1 a CQB weapon.

It’s much more usable for CQB than a G3 of course, and its induction (or rather of the original Type 56-Is) was started in a hurry when the PA realized that their then standard SMG (MP-5), did not have the penetration or stopping power to take down a terrorist high on six different kinds of drugs (the western solution for that was higher power rounds for PDWs and Modern SMGs like the 5.7MM), however the military has doubled down on it and continued to purchase it much after the WoT, in fact there have been no more G3s purchased in several years now, yet thousands of Type 56s and other AKs keep coming in (the number of Type 56 and AK variants outnumber G3s in the PA at the moment), specifically to replace the G3, everyone on the LOC as well as the western border has been using Type 56s for several years now, most sentries in all cantonments carry Type 56s as well, if you can’t see it in person, just look at pictures or documentaries. Even the standard training firearm is now a Type 56. PA has purchased several thousand optics, rails and other attachments and upgrades for both its new Type 56-IIs as well as modernizing many of its older AKs. Yet nothing as such for the G3.

The G3 is in no shape or form better than the Type 56-II in conventional warfare in the hands of our troops. Most of them are not built for it. Every military in the world has adopted smaller calibers, our terrain and circumstances are not unique enough to not do the same, the only reason is a lack of money and incompetence.

The most distance an average soldier can effectively engage at without magnified optics will be 300M (and this is at the standards of the US, UK and Canadian armed forces, I don’t know what the PA standards are, but let’s assume they are slightly lower), this is also the effective range of both the Type 56-II and the G3 (the G3s is definitely a bit higher, but you’re not hitting anything there without a magnified optic).
However in an actual combat scenario, accuracy beyond 150M is going to be average at best, regardless of the rifle, and within these ranges (300M and below), the Type 56-II is more accurate (due to significantly smaller size and weight, better ergonomics and significantly less recoil) and hence more deadly than the G3. A level 3 armored plate will stop both rounds just the same, and will penetrate level 3A just the same, so penetration is not a factor (unless cover is involved) actually hitting the enemy definitely is, something that is significantly easier to do with a Type 56 than a G3 (for most soldiers).

The G3 is outdated, maybe PA still has some specific roles for it marked out, but I wish they didn’t. It needs to be replaced, it will get soldiers killed.​

Do you know the Mp-5 was rejected as a field weapon by the PA evaluation team and yet inducted due to “special interests”?

 

[Reichmarshal]

Do you know the Mp-5 was rejected as a field weapon by the PA evaluation team and yet inducted due to “special interests”?

Now it makes sense.....with its mag falling off consistently specially the older model....always wondered who was the idiot who approved it

 

[iLION12345_1]

Maray bhai why do u take things in literal terms.....
No matter wt u call the type 54 was inducted in PA as an SMG for the cqb opps in WOT .....n guess wt it replaced..... mp 5 in the smg role, which if u go in the details is nothing but a machine pistol.

The g3 is a good weapon n will shoot consistently n accurately for long duration upto 500 m, it has great stopping n penetration power.

Brother I take things as they are mentioned, if you say something literally, I cannot take it sarcastically.

I do not deny the Type 56 was initially inducted for that role, however it has outgrown that years ago, it has effectively replaced the G3 in the PA.

Any modern military Rifle can Shoot at 500M yes, and at those ranges the G3 and it’s cartridge will retain more energy than a Type 56, but most soldiers cannot hit that far, not even with a magnified sight, which the average PA soldier does not have.
50-250 meters is a more realistic firefight range, in which the Type 56 will always outperform the G3. The G3 is not a good weapon for the PA in 2023, even if itself is an excellent weapon, such is the unfortunate reality, I simply do not want to see it in the hands of the troops again.

Do you know the Mp-5 was rejected as a field weapon by the PA evaluation team and yet inducted due to “special interests”?

Now it makes sense.....with its mag falling off consistently specially the older model....always wondered who was the idiot who approved it

I am aware, I guess H&K wasn’t going to settle with just Selling us the G3 and MG3, they made quite a bit of money setting up the POF and selling all those licenses, and in the process some in the PA got rather close to the company…

 

[SQ8]

Now it makes sense.....with its mag falling off consistently specially the older model....always wondered who was the idiot who approved it

An idiot who made money off it. Less said the better - its bullet is on the ground at 480yds(or less at times) according to the horse who evaluated it and submitted the initial not recommended for local production and only suggested token CQB needs(leave alone the “field weapon” thappa) before a chamakta howa sitara shoulder pad wala who had a lot to gain with local production contracts/kickbacks overruled it.

 

[Reichmarshal]

An idiot who made money off it. Less said the better - its bullet is on the ground at 480yds(or less at times) according to the horse who evaluated it and submitted the initial not recommended for local production and only suggested token CQB needs(leave alone the “field weapon” thappa) before a chamakta howa sitara shoulder pad wala who had a lot to gain with local production contracts/kickbacks overruled it.

Its an over glorified machine pistol....nothing more nothing less...so for a pistol 480 yards is long distance...well beyond its range

Ps always found it funny when the rp or the mp wala had a "romaal" tied to the mag with the main body....what a country

 

[Signalian]

you need force multipliers with the necessary uptodate tech.

Those are UAVs for surveillance/detection and UCAVs for taking out enemy armor. Communication hackers/jammers to disrupt enemy coordination between command and frontline assets. Real-time decision making C4I stations in the air and on the battlefield for field commanders to make decisions on the move. Versatile weapon systems which can fire long range ammunition to thin out enemy forces before it makes an entry into friendly territory. On the defensive side, a Medium to high altitude air defense system (medium and low altitude AD are already in service), that can take out CMs and other long range guided missiles of all types.

I consider jamming and hacking communication systems as top priority to blind the enemy and all its assets reliant upon comms.

 

[Path-Finder]

I consider jamming and hacking communication systems as top priority to blind the enemy and all its assets reliant upon comms.

I just want there to be a good ratio of tech 1:1 hardware. not to be leaning in one direction and neglecting others areas.

 

[Signalian]

I just want there to be a good ratio of tech 1:1 hardware. not to be leaning in one direction and neglecting others areas.

Combined warfare is 1:1, as you say ?

 

[Path-Finder]

Combined warfare is 1:1, as you say ?

cyber+technological gizmos 1:1 oldschool

 

[Signalian]

cyber+technological gizmos 1:1 oldschool

I would say it depends upon many factors. The 1:1 ratio cannot apply in every scenario.

 

[Path-Finder]

I would say it depends upon many factors. The 1:1 ratio cannot apply in every scenario.

all I am saying is that there is a culture developed where modernisation happens and that is fantastic. but sometimes you have to revert back to the steam engine as its needed again. it doesn't happen in every scenario but its a good balance to have where possible.

 

[farooqbhai007]

Size comparison b/w T85UG, AK-1, AZ

Upgraded T85UG(T85-IIAP)