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

2=GT said:

View attachment 45001 View attachment 45002 View attachment 45003

Click to expand...

I see the logic behind the choice of left eye for the flip down display, and it will probably also be able to show maps, video feeds from other assets like other soldiers, drones, satellites etc. However, the problem with this current set up is that is will be awkward to use NVGs.

Having NVGs on the right eye would force the soldiers to shoot from the hip, or have to flip the monocle up to use his scope for aimed shots. Neither scenario ideal.

My preferrrdd choice would be to have added the mount to the left side of the helmet.

The display would then be able to either flip down from the side, allowing an NVG monocle to also be equipped. Or better yet, for the display to flip up to the eye, so it sits either near the chin like a tac mike when not used, or ideally, sit in front of the cheek. A slight tilt of the screen should then allow the troopers to see it in their peripheral vision or with a slight glance down even in the ‘rest’ position.

That would allow them to make use of tactical maps and external video feeds just as effectively with compromising their situational awareness.

The display could be flipped up to the eye for corner aiming or if detailed examination of maps or video is desired.

UGL grenades might look underpowered because they explode on impact on the ground, spreading just the upwards arc with fragments. An airburst grenade covers all arcs and might be even deadlier. Of course, bigger is always better when it comes to explosives, but as said before, accuracy has its merits and a smaller grenade of maybe 30 grams of explosives accurately exploding 30cm over your head is deadlier than a 40mm exploding on the ground 5 meters away from you.

@TerraN_EmpirE

I'm sure that the PLA can fix its problems with the armor-piercing issue eventually, but it's interesting in the directions different militaries are going in. The US is moving up to 7.62 to deal with bad armor piercing, and the PLA might move to grenades instead.

Inst said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

@TerraN_EmpirE

I'm sure that the PLA can fix its problems with the armor-piercing issue eventually, but it's interesting in the directions different militaries are going in. The US is moving up to 7.62 to deal with bad armor piercing,

Click to expand...

Inst, No it's not.The US is not moving to 7.62 it's retained 7.62x51mm, in the GPMG, Sniper and SDMR roles that expanded into Special forces.
There was talk of a new general issue 7.62x51mm rifle based of the SDMR but that was not to be. it was not to be because,

1. 1 there really isn't a need right now.
2. 2 the budget was in flux,
3. 3 by the time the order would have been placed the Army has already started looking at another option. the 7.62x51mm was meant to be a filler until that next system is ready for prime time.
4. The new XM1158 round that was to be the heart of said interim rifle costs $12.98 a shot the round it is aimed to replace the M993 is $2.90. The M855A1 about $.36 now. the Core of the XM1158 is Tungsten. Tungsten is a strategic material the main producers are China, Russia and Canada. Of those the US DOD can't source from China or Russia.
5. The problem with a Battle rifle that is a 7.62x51mm rifle for general issue if you give up the weight and ammo capacity of the Assault rifle and intermediate caliber round. Which is contrary to what the US Army has wanted. That is where Textron and the Army have been looking at cased Teliscoped ammo for the Next Generation Squad Weapons program has been aiming at a 6-6.5mm CT round. the round needing the mass to maintain velocity, the small size to keep the weight down.

and the PLA might move to grenades instead.

Click to expand...

The Grenade rounds of the QTS11 are lighter then those that are in the K11 PAWS 20, were in the XM29. And XM29's round was considered under powered for the job. Grenades are expensive and complex far more so then even the $13.00 round. Weight more and take up more space placing more logistics strain on both the soldier and army as a whole. from every practical perspective a Grenade launcher round will not replace a general issue infantry round, The PLA place a Emphasis on AP performance in the 5.8x42mm which is known to have a steel perpetrator core, It's likely to continue that into the future.

Once again, the QTS-11 carries more payload than the deceased XM29 round. Second, if you're hit in an unprotected area by fragmentation, armor won't help you. Third, while the Interim Combat Service Rifle has been canceled, the NGSW looks to be in the 6.5mm range. Fourth, reports concerning the move out from M4s state that the caliber is too small to penetrate modern Russian body armor.

Inst said:

Once again, the QTS-11 carries more payload than the deceased XM29 round.

Click to expand...

Do you have a link for that?
The weight listing gave a smaller round weight @ 85 grams then that of the Xm29 round 29 grams meaning that Because of that reduced mass and size you have a limited effective volume of material to either Fragment or explode this means it is either equal to with a reduced propellant charge or less then. Not Larger.

Second, if you're hit in an unprotected area by fragmentation, armor won't help you.

Click to expand...

If you get hit by any round in an unarmored spot you are screwed. the Main effect of this is supposed to be Air-burst fragmentation. but with a small warhead you are not going to get a lot of effects. unless you basically hit the target. We went through this several weeks ago. a Direct hit from a bullet is more likely to be lethal.
[/quote] Third, while the Interim Combat Service Rifle has been canceled, the NGSW looks to be in the 6.5mm range.[/quote] Yes that's what I said. The ICSR was Aborted and the NGSW is aimed to go forward based around a 6 to 6.5mm round. 6.5 low drag seems to be the round as Textron has shown data and prototypes in that form.

Fourth, reports concerning the move out from M4s state that the caliber is too small to penetrate modern Russian body armor.

Click to expand...

What reports?
Because this is not a off the shelf round there is no way that the Russians or Chinese have tested it yet. 5.56x45mm might have some issues against modern armor ( when it's worn, Note that the Russians have actually worn armor very rarely in recent conflicts. In fact almost never.) the point of NGSW is to correct this.
We can however use RDECOM's Data.

Which shows that a 6.5mm CT round has better performance aspects then the 7.62x51mm in maintaining Energy in both impact to target and out to 1200m And Energy is king. The round in question was a 125 grains (8.09986 grams) low drag projectile. for the record the 7.62x51mm M80A1 is 130 grains ( 8.42386 grams) well a 5.56mm round tends to only 62 grains. So I am not sure about what you are talking about.
A 6.5mm Ct low drag round with a hardened perpetrator would be able to maintain it's muzzle velocity longer then a 7.62x51mm round and distribute more of that energy on impact with a plate allowing the core perpetrator to have more energy to push through armor after the Jacket has been destroyed.

Typo correction the round of the XM29 was 92grams not 29. That means that there is a 7gram wait difference between it and the grenade of the QTS11.

DSA 2018: PLA fields integrated rifle/grenade launcher
11th April 2018 - 01:15 GMT | by

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in Hong Kong

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has fielded on a limited basis the QTS-11 individual integrated combat system. The new weapon, in the hands of a reconnaissance battalion in the 112th Mechanised Infantry Division of the Central Theatre Command, appeared on CCTV footage in January being examined by President Xi Jinping.
.

Click to expand...

Really the only important part the rest is review.

A small photo showing a squad of soldiers armed with QTS-11 (formerly known as ZH-05).

(800 x 454)