QTS-11 OICW. 5.8 mm Heavy and 20 mm Air Burst.

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I think the ZH-05's rate of fire disadvantage is overstated. Infantrymen are inherently limited in the number of grenade rounds they can carry, meaning that semi-automatic or fully-automatic grenade launchers will run out of ammo quickly. Moreover, many targets require the firing of only one or two grenades; situations can be imagined where having 6 grenades in the magazine could be useful, but these would be relatively uncommon. Finally, since the ZH-05's bolt-action mechanism results in a lighter and cheaper rifle, it could be possible to increase the number of ZH-05s issued to a fireteam and a squad, increasing its resistance against casualties by having more men both trained and habituated to the rifle, as well as partially compensating for its lower rate of fire by having more firing platforms
Sorry Inst. I Don't think so. A grenadier today carries about 24-26
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
grenades, now that is with a 40mm round. Even the slightly smaller Russian or Chinese are probably around the same And that is on top of there conventional 180 ( 6 magazines these are not counting any loaded in the weapon ) or so rounds of assault rifle ammo.
Now then these new launchers are automatically going to be allowing a larger grenade load as they are at best half the size. So lets be generous and assume that the Xm25's rounds are 3/4ths the size of a 40mm and we get a still generous load of 36 rounds not counting any loaded. For the K11 or ZH05 or PAW20 a full 48 rounds but lets adjust for the sake of a 5 shot magazine to 35 for the XM25 and 45 for the K11. That's still plenty of ammo. now we have not dropped due to the weight of the weapon being stand alone on the XM25 but even if we dropped it back to 25 rounds that's still a good number of shots.
and historically speaking Inst every time a Army has imposed draconian limitations on rate of firing to save Ammo it's been a disaster. Infantry Combat is based on two infantry forces running into each other and is won by who brings the most bang in the fastest manor.
 

Inst

Captain
Consider the AGL-30. It has a 29-grenade magazine and can fire at a rate of 400 rounds per minute. See what I'm saying? Even if belt-fed, you'd go through ammunition rather fast.

As to rate of fire advantages, watch the recoil on the soldier here.
The recoil is such that his rate of fire is between 20 rounds per minute to 60 rounds per minute, especially once you calculate his need to reprep the rangefinder. A bolt action rifle typically fires about 15 rounds per minute.

One of the major advantages of a ZH-05 over the K11 and the XM-25 is that with a bolt action, it is much lighter than its counterparts, being only 2 pounds heavier than an M16. Consequently, a PLA squad could theoretically field double the ZH-05s compared to a XM-25, especially since the ZH-05 also has a carbine section, putting the rate of fire up to 30 rounds per minute, well within the range of an XM-25.

Another factor is that an XM-25 quite possibly could be overkill. One round of an XM-25 might be enough to wipe out a fireteam hidden under defilade. Consequently, why would you need the semi-automatic fire? The M16 is actually an excellent example of such. While the M16 can deliver faster bullets than the M4, as well as handle the recoil better due to its higher mass, US troops in Iraq swapped to the lighter and more ergonomic M4 over the M16, despite the M16's efficiency advantages.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Consider the AGL-30. It has a 29-grenade magazine and can fire at a rate of 400 rounds per minute. See what I'm saying? Even if belt-fed, you'd go through ammunition rather fast.
Apples and Water Mellon, AGL 30 is a fixed position weapon for mounting on a vehicle or from a fixed position, and has a automatic fire mode. Semi automatic means each pull of the trigger resorts in one shot. Automatic means pull the trigger and it will fire till it runs out of ammo.

As to rate of fire advantages, watch the recoil on the soldier here.
The recoil is such that his rate of fire is between 20 rounds per minute to 60 rounds per minute, especially once you calculate his need to reprep the rangefinder. A bolt action rifle typically fires about 15 rounds per minute.
subjective any weapon of that class is going to kick, Also as stated this is Semiautomatic not fully automatic the shooter has to intentionally pull the trigger for follow on shots..
One of the major advantages of a ZH-05 over the K11 and the XM-25 is that with a bolt action, it is much lighter than its counterparts, being only 2 pounds heavier than an M16.
Incorrect, K11 is bolt action repeater.
The stated weight of the current XM25 is 16 pounds with reduced weight optic. The Current weight of the K11 is 14 pounds the listed weight of the ZH05 is 8 pounds however I question that weight As unlike you stated the listed weight is actually Identical to that of the M16A4 not lighter then. I have since then spotted a second weight listing of 11 pounds this means a 2 pound difference between K11 and ZH05 and a 3 pound difference between M16 and Zh05.
Consequently, a PLA squad could theoretically field double the ZH-05s compared to a XM-25, especially since the ZH-05 also has a carbine section, putting the rate of fire up to 30 rounds per minute, well within the range of an XM-25.
Assuming it's cost effective.


Another factor is that an XM-25 quite possibly could be overkill. One round of an XM-25 might be enough to wipe out a fire team hidden under defilade.
the Xm25 fires the 25x40mm round. The actual blast radius of such a round would be larger then the Zh05 or K11 however it's effective blast radius would be maybe a couple meters. beyond that wounding effects would be minor. In point of Fact many have decided to push for Airbristing 40mm rounds not just because of the proliferation of conventional 40mm Nato under barrel and stand alone launchers but also due to the larger warhead.

The M16 is actually an excellent example of such. While the M16 can deliver faster bullets than the M4, as well as handle the recoil better due to its higher mass, US troops in Iraq swapped to the lighter and more ergonomic M4 over the M16, despite the M16's efficiency advantages.
apples and Pineapples.
The M4 is the M16. The M4 carbine is a short barreled M16 with modified feed ramps and a telescopic but stock. The Key reasons for adoption of M4 carbine fleet wide now in ALL 4 US military services are 1) improved ergonomics, the M16's A2 stock was designed to be fired from the prone on a range by a soldier wearing traditional Alice Web gear. Not a Solder fighting from a vehicle or in a building Wearing body armor.
2) The Addition of Body armor and Proliferation of Accessories meant that the heavier M16 was less well liked
3)despite claims of the Superior Performance of the 20 inch M16 in actual testing Accuracy, Muzzle velocity and range differences are negotiable, Farther more the Recoil of the 5.56mm and other modern Intermediate cartridges are such that frankly there is really no issue between the two farther more the Ar15 series was designed with a internal buffer assembly and straight line structure meaning that recoil is already quite well neutralized.
 

Inst

Captain
I'll give a longer response later. Regarding the ZH-05's weight, it's quoted at 5 kg loaded and you're fudging numbers. The M16 weighs 4 kg loaded; the total weight difference is not 3 pounds, but 2 pounds. Previous versions of the ZH-05 were semi-automatic with a 3 round magazine, but the PLA encouraged its removal to improve reliability and weight. This suggests that the ZH-05 is viable as standard issue, with the QBZ-95 derivatives functioning as a light carbine.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I'll give a longer response later. Regarding the ZH-05's weight, it's quoted at 5 kg loaded and you're fudging numbers. The M16 weighs 4 kg loaded; the total weight difference is not 3 pounds, but 2 pounds..
Exact weight of a M16A2 /A4 is 8.79 pounds loaded or 7.18 lb empty and that is stock Configuration ( IE No optic, lights, Grips, paint, Suppressor, Hider, Or any other accessories)
Would you like me to back that?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
< Official US GOVERNMENT
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
< Offical US GOVERNMENT
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


so 8.79 pounds for a Stock M16A4 now when I went to school we were taught that when rounding anything over .5 is rounded up. so 8.79 become 9, farther more because the given weight is Stock IE from the factory condition that is before the addition of modern combat accessories ergo 9 pounds is presumably actually light for a loaded M16A4 The given weight of a ZH05 is stated as 11 pounds ergo 2 pounds difference however, they never state loaded or empty So guess what?
We can play around!
7.18 pounds vs 11 means 3 pounds.
the PLA encouraged its removal to improve reliability and weight. This suggests that the ZH-05 is viable as standard issue, with the QBZ-95 derivatives functioning as a light carbine.
Which is fine, However I am not someone who warships the soil the PLA Marches upon.
I am comparing system vs system and Role vs Role and I find oddities an lacking in many of the PLA's Doctrine like there lack of proper snipers or The Choice of Bolt action single shot vs Repeater. The Choices of Beijing are the choices of Beijing.
I am not, subject to the Choices of Beijing.
The command of the PLA Chose single shot. this must be looked at in discussion of the system externally and in a as non bias manor as possible. this means not simply lambasting it as a clone and dismissing it nor fawning all over it and proclaiming the PLA walks upon water with this.
We are discussing the End resuilt of the Choices of Beijing in comparison to systems that fall into a similar category.
So Yes the PLA chose to go single shot. but no that does not mean that it was necessarily the end all option.
 

Inst

Captain
You know what, I'd have been inclined to give you your points, like the possibility that you actually do need more than 15 rounds per minute FP on a OICW, but you're a rude ass.

Here's the sourcing on the loaded 5 kg weight:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Insignius

Junior Member
Single shot bolt action is fine. The system itself is very rugged from what can be seen so far, and possible feeding issues of the grenade launcher solved from the beginning. The weapon still retains the advantages of similiar systems of providing the infantryman with the capability to fire accurate and long range airburst grenades that take advantage of their high velocity and flat trajectory compared to 40mm underslug grenade launchers or similiar caliber AGLs.

The weight of a XM25 or XM29 styled system and the burden it presents for the infantryman (as well as the sacrifice of a rifleman) cant be made up by the increase in theoretical firepower. It simply cant. For all those who served an army as an infantryman, equipment weight and bulk are the biggest concerns, as you wont be in a firefight 24/7, but more often than not, on patrol.

I would rather chose the light weight and compactness of the ZH-05 over the bulk of the XM25 any day.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Inst, rounds per minute is a fallacy. Theoretically a M4 cabine could go to 800-900 round per minute but the magazines are not that large and the barrel would over heat.
The importance is follow on shots. The ability to repeat or adjust the same action as needed. The K11 and M25 are both 5 round magazine weapons. Why? Because the function is for use on targets that you shouldn't need more then a handful of rounds. But you might need more than one shot.
Now the PLA figures that that means it should be fine with a single shot. Okay fine but that is a bit of wishful thinking. That said they did keep weight down to 11 pounds. That's impressive, however to argue that that is the be all end all ?

The main reason wolf and myself were feuding was he claimed that a soldier using a ZH05 could match the speed of follow up for a semi auto. That is not a realistic argument. Every time a single shot weapon has gone against a equal weapon that is repeater the repeater has the faster rate of fire. A corrective action for a semiautomatic XM25 would be to use the first miss and then adjust like a sniper. For the ZH05 it would mean starting back to zero.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
The main reason wolf and myself were feuding was he claimed that a soldier using a ZH05 could match the speed of follow up for a semi auto. That is not a realistic argument. Every time a single shot weapon has gone against a equal weapon that is repeater the repeater has the faster rate of fire.

Feeding? I didn't realised you were taking it so personally ;)

However, I must object to your summation of you original point.

What I said was:

I suppose, for the primary mission of the smart grenade launcher - to take out enemies in hard cover with perfectly timed air bursting grenades, a well trained soldier could almost engage multiple targets as fast with the bolt action as he could with a semi-auto.

That bolded qualifying remark makes a hell of a difference to both the nature of my claim, and also the nature of the weapons we are talking about.

A smart grenade launcher is not a spray and pray weapon. If your first shot missed, then that is almost certainly because the shooter misjudged the distance he programmed the grenade to airburst at.

In that case, shooting off a second grenade as fast as you could have pulled the trigger would not have made any difference but waste two grenade rounds instead of one.

You will need a few seconds to determine what went wrong the first time, and then either adjust the original aim point, or just start from scratch if that's easier/quicker.

My point is, that a well trained soldier could reload the ZH05 in that time relying almost entirely on muscle memory, while he concentrates to correct the aiming, and as such, in a realistic scenario, the soldier using the ZH05 should be able to get a second, adjusted shot off nearly as fast as someone using a semi-auto smart grenade launcher who also had to recalculate and readjust.

A corrective action for a semiautomatic XM25 would be to use the first miss and then adjust like a sniper. For the ZH05 it would mean starting back to zero.

Nope, a sniper just need to point and shoot. He doesn't need to programme where his bullet is supposed to air burst.

For someone using a smart grenade launcher, he needs a few seconds to recalibrate his targeting computer to ensure it sets the fuse correctly.

And as I have already pointed out, someone using a ZH05 does not need to take the weapon from the shoulder to reload, he could do it easier than regular soldiers could change mags while keeping their weapons shouldered and aimed. Indeed, someone using the ZH05 should be using the time it takes to reload to reprogramme his targeting computer.

And nope, they do not need to be lying prone and have the rounds laid out in front of them to use my suggested method or one similar to that they developed from playing around with the weapon, although I think you might be forgetting we are talking about smart grenade launchers a little if you are imagining scenarios where soldiers are charging forwards and popping off grenades from the hip.

I have never seen or even heard of someone shooting the XM25 on the move, since that would make all the effort that has gone into giving them precisely controllable detonation points a rather useless exercise.

If you want to do that, its better to use a hand held semi-auto or even fully automatic conventional grenade launcher, which the PLA also has operationally deployed.

In my view, the smart grenade launcher is going to have an effect on squad based infantry combat much like introducing tanks to the static trench warfare of WWI.

Now, rather than being stuck in a prolonged pinging contest, or get cut to ribbons trying to charge a well defended enemy position, infantry squads can call up a buddy with the smart grenade launcher to take out the enemy holed up behind cover keeping your guys pinned, so they can rapidly advance to newer positions and do it all over again.

Just like the introduction of the tank, the key is to use them to break open enemy defensive positions quickly and then rapidly advance to take said position and get the enemy on the back foot before he could regroup to counter your break through.

With these things on the battlefield, finding yourself a nice solid piece of cover and setting up camp is going to be a hell of a less health option.

That makes shoot and scoot manoeuvring combat doctrines more important in a near-pear infantry brawl, where the enemy are liable to be shooting their own smart grenades right back at you as soon as he spots a nice juicy target.

I think that is a signifiant part in the PLA wanting a bolt action grenade launcher, since shoot and scoot is actively encouraged by the weapon itself, and the operator is going to be a great deal less likely to be tempted to stay in one place for longer than is healthy popping off round after round and making himself a priority target for enemy smart grenade launchers.

The PLA squad is expecting to be moving most of the time from cover to cover, rather than holed up behind one particularly choice piece of cover for the whole battle.

That is why they want to keep the weight down, and also why retaining the assault rifle was a critical factor.

Another think you are discounting is the fact that because the ZH05 is so light, and still retains the assault rifle, the PLA can field two in a squad, one for each fire team.

At best, a squad of US troopers will only get one XM25 because of the weight, and also the loss of a rifleman for every XM25 deployed.

One-on-one, the XM25 has the edge over the ZH05 in many scenarios. However, in a realistic operational scenario, where its two ZH05 against one XM25, it's hard to think of any scenarios where the XM25 comes out on top.

I think that is a key doctrine difference between the PLA and most western armies.

The PLA always expects to be fighting someone at least as well trained and equipped as themselves, if not having better gear. OTOH, western armies typically train to beat the crap out of a hopelessly outmatched foe for minimal losses, a trend that was developed in the decade and a half of near constant warfare against such rag-tag foes in the middle east and elsewhere.

The Chinese value effect, whereas the wars western armies have been fighting recently, and their highly casualty averse leaders and general public forces western armies to put efficiently above all else.

You are think of using smart grenades like how western armies are training to use them - to find a nice, safe bit of cover, where the enemy has almost no chance to hit you, and then just pick them off at your leisure.

I'm sure that would work wonders in Iraq or Afghanistan, but won't work nearly so well if the enemy also got smart grenade launchers to shoot back with.

That is why the PLA is fielding the LG5, that is their XM25 counter. The LG5 is the one supposed to be tucked in nice and safe in cover away from harm, since they have the range advantage that allows them to hit XM25 users well beyond the range of the XM25.

The ZH05 is for more close and personal encounters, which is why they were more keen to keep the automatic rifle component and weight down to a minimum.

The expectation of and preference for fast, fluid combat is probably also a big factor in the PLA's lack of enthusiasm in snipers, and prefer DMR instead - they expect the front lines to be be so fluid and fast shifting as to make snipers a great deal less effective. By the time a sniper has picked out a good hide and set up shop, the battle would have moved so much as to either be out of range, or so close as to force him to relocate, but that's another topic.

To sum up, the general combat doctrinal differences between the PLA and western armies led to the design of very different next gen smart grenade weapons for very different intended combat styles.

The XM25 is just a grenade launcher. The soldier using it will only be interested in shooting grenades. He is going to be doing that in good cover, and likely to stay in that nice bit of cover for most, if not the entire length of an engagement.

The ZH05 is an assault rifle with smart grenade launcher capability.
The soldier using that is still a rifleman. He and the rest of his squad intends to use their rifles first and most, only turning to the smart grenade launcher to clear enemy from good cover so they can advance and keep moving.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I think Wolf has outlined things up very well.

In an age where smart grenades (and airborne surveillance from handheld drones) is the norm - infantry warfare moves much more to a scoot and shoot model - versus finding a good piece of static cover.

In that sort of scenario, the excess weight and cost of the XM-25 along with the reduced lethality of its grenades is a significant disadvantage. Yes, the XM-25 can put out more grenades at a time, but given a blast radius of 3m, multiple grenades in the same location at the same time don't really add anything. So they would need time to retarget anyway, otherwise they would be wasting grenades.

In comparison, I would expect the ZH-05 airburst grenade to have a significantly larger blast radius due to the expensive electronics being replaced by more high explosive, despite being a smaller grenade than the XM-25.

Plus in infantry/land warfare, numbers matter way more than in naval or air combat.

In the vast majority of encounters, it is physically impossible to be strong everywhere, which is why land warfare commanders always keeps strategic reserves to block breakthroughs, or to punch through weak points in the enemy line and create their own breakthroughs.

Therefore the excessively high cost and weight of the XM-25 grenade launchers matters because it will affect how many are deployed. Plus it is more likely that a ZH-05 equipped force will get the first grenade in.

On a side note, Trackingpoint has demonstrated that long-range snipers no longer require any skill.

Target identification could be performed by a camera system with movement/shape recognition software on a smartphone. Then just hold the trigger and move the barrel around, then the computer will fire when it is the perfect shot. I guess you could do the same with the LG-5 sniper/anti-sniper/ grenade launcher as well.

Alternatively, EXACTO has demonstrated guided bullets which would be perfect for long-range sniping as well.
 
Last edited:
Top