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

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Or possibly just mock ups. We have never seen these before or since that parade. The lower portion is clearly a AK74 but the upper body?
It looks a lot like the K11 so much so, I suspect more a dummy. It’s an old doctrine for some Armies SF units to cover themselves as enemy troops and infiltrate behind the lines for sabotage. To do this they often clone uniforms and visually modify vehicles and equipment. The DPRK is said have bought and built clones of American and South Korean small arms.
Do I have evidence of this, No I admit this. Yet it has as much potential as them launching a OICW program. All we have is photos and unless Norinco sold them the tech ( no I am not saying they did). I doubt the DPRK could cook up a airbursting OICW and field them in such numbers. It’s a highly sophisticated technological system. Fielding such should be a bragging point yet this is the DPRK who has shown an exceptionally limited technology base.

Click to expand...

===

I don't see this is particularly sophisticated.

For the airburst grenade, you'd need a laser rangefinder and a wire that calculates and communicates the timing to the grenade.

For the OICW capability, you'd need something that can transmit data across devices (gun camera to helmet lens).

The challenge is less doing it, but doing it well. For instance, since this is all electronics based and the computation can be done by an iPhone computer, you can just source stuff from Shenzhen. But is the material going to be reliable and durable? How well would it function under EM jamming?

In the Chinese OICW concept, it seems as though the datalink works for multiple devices, i.e, a commander can get a view from his point man's camera. This, however, is a technically sophisticated concept and requires a network. This, in contrast, is something I doubt the North Koreans would be interested in doing.

Likewise, we have no notion of the OICW weight; the North Koreans, given that the construction looks like a lot of metal and that there's a seeming stress in how the soldiers are carrying it, might have ended up developing a counterpart showpiece system that's very heavy, especially since, unlike the Chinese, they didn't go to bolt-action for weight reduction.

Remember, the American OICW didn't die because it was too technically challenging, it died because it was overweight.

The problem of OICW is the difficulty to shrink the whole package down to the dimension and mass that still viable as a standard AR for its user; the problem further complicated by the requirement of a semi-auto system with a magazine.

Thus, without some tech such as powered exoskeleton, OICW system is hard to make it viable, unless to make the air-burst munition launcher system a separate weapon.

As for N.Korea...my hunch leans towards "for parade" for one the system is way too clunky for actual use, and secondly they never showcase it in any other propaganda newsreel, for if it's a real deal, by the characters of Pyongyang they'd make a show of it, or at least we'd see Fat Boy Kim made an "inspection" of the troops in that full get-up...that said, it's more likely as prop because Pyongyang need to show they're not only got "last-gen" tech.

Inst said:

===

I don't see this is particularly sophisticated.

For the airburst grenade, you'd need a laser rangefinder and a wire that calculates and communicates the timing to the grenade.

For the OICW capability, you'd need something that can transmit data across devices (gun camera to helmet lens).

The challenge is less doing it, but doing it well. For instance, since this is all electronics based and the computation can be done by an iPhone computer, you can just source stuff from Shenzhen. But is the material going to be reliable and durable? How well would it function under EM jamming?

In the Chinese OICW concept, it seems as though the datalink works for multiple devices, i.e, a commander can get a view from his point man's camera. This, however, is a technically sophisticated concept and requires a network. This, in contrast, is something I doubt the North Koreans would be interested in doing.

Likewise, we have no notion of the OICW weight; the North Koreans, given that the construction looks like a lot of metal and that there's a seeming stress in how the soldiers are carrying it, might have ended up developing a counterpart showpiece system that's very heavy, especially since, unlike the Chinese, they didn't go to bolt-action for weight reduction.

Remember, the American OICW didn't die because it was too technically challenging, it died because it was overweight.

Click to expand...

The problem is the timing chips in the shell. The explosive shell is preset by the range finder, that’s sophisticated. The DPRK doesn’t really have an indigenous technology base. They import computers and cars as knock down kits from the PRC.
The US 20mm and 25mm air burst rounds were expensive about $24.00 a shot. We don’t know how much the Chinese are or the South Korean but I doubt the DPRK could afford such. They have spent the majority of their modernization budget on a Nuclear program. No brand aircraft in a barely flying Airforce and a few new naval ships that wouldn’t last long in a actual fight. Tanks that though upgraded are hardly cutting edge.
are you telling me that a nation with barely operating electrical grid, is capable of creating such a system?

As to the US program, No what finally killed it was cost and company infighting. On top of which was the emergence of a cheaper alternative.

MwRYum said:

The problem of OICW is the difficulty to shrink the whole package down to the dimension and mass that still viable as a standard AR for its user; the problem further complicated by the requirement of a semi-auto system with a magazine.

Thus, without some tech such as powered exoskeleton, OICW system is hard to make it viable, unless to make the air-burst munition launcher system a separate weapon.

As for N.Korea...my hunch leans towards "for parade" for one the system is way too clunky for actual use, and secondly they never showcase it in any other propaganda newsreel, for if it's a real deal, by the characters of Pyongyang they'd make a show of it, or at least we'd see Fat Boy Kim made an "inspection" of the troops in that full get-up...that said, it's more likely as prop because Pyongyang need to show they're not only got "last-gen" tech.

Click to expand...

Glad I am not the only one who thinks it’s a prop.
Think Kim watched Die another Day?
The first appearance of the North Korean OICW could be just as fake as the second.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The problem is the timing chips in the shell. The explosive shell is preset by the range finder, that’s sophisticated. The DPRK doesn’t really have an indigenous technology base. They import computers and cars as knock down kits from the PRC.
The US 20mm and 25mm air burst rounds were expensive about $24.00 a shot. We don’t know how much the Chinese are or the South Korean but I doubt the DPRK could afford such. They have spent the majority of their modernization budget on a Nuclear program. No brand aircraft in a barely flying Airforce and a few new naval ships that wouldn’t last long in a actual fight. Tanks that though upgraded are hardly cutting edge.
are you telling me that a nation with barely operating electrical grid, is capable of creating such a system?

As to the US program, No what finally killed it was cost and company infighting. On top of which was the emergence of a cheaper alternative.

Glad I am not the only one who thinks it’s a prop.
Think Kim watched Die another Day? View attachment 62127
The first appearance of the North Korean OICW could be just as fake as the second.

Click to expand...

It's special operations units, so if they wish to splurge on gold-plated weapons for SpecOps, they can do so.

And like I said, the parts can have their corners cut; Chinese chipmaking, especially for low-quality chips, can be rather inexpensive.


At the time of posting, a low-end mobile SoC cost $4.

===

I think the big question with these types of weapons ultimately come down to doctrine. As you've said, there's definitely an element of showmanship; the Chinese and the Koreans fielded their OICW-type weapons as support weapons within a squad. The idea of an entire SpecOps unit fielded with OICW-type weapons is somewhat unrealistic, and similar to the North Koreans trying to deceive.

But I'd deny that these are strictly props; the weapon seems to show extreme detail that goes beyond what would be necessary for a prop. All of these weapons seem heavy; i.e, the OICW was constructed out of metal instead of plastic, which would have made more sense for a prop.


Here's regular soldiers touting it.

So we're basically arguing between "it's a prop" or "it's a bad OICW".

===

One thing I have difficulty believing, unfortunately, is that the QTS-11 is around 100k USD a pop or even 10k USD. A mass-produced OICW needn't be expensive; a military laptop costs 4000 USD, and this is just a polymer gun attached to a grenade launcher, then attached to laser rangefinder and a computer. If the base production price of the gun kit is around 2k USD, and the electronics comes out to around 4k for limited runs, you could have something very cheap.

A lot to counter point so here goes. In 2 parts.

1. It’s not just chips which by the way there is no evidence of DPRK production of. It’s the battery pack. The 20mm HEAB shell needs its own battery. And thats before the High explosive, fragmented casing and then the case primer and propellant. All of which needs to be assembled to make a round. You say the chips cost $4. Okay for the US or China but that’s per round now you need at least a Few thousand rounds. Do you think that the DPRK a notoriously bad economy could sustain that?
2. Doctrine for the DPRK is that their SF units are used for false flags. They infiltrate assassinate, sabotage by Midget subs, biplane, tunnels into ROK territory dressed as ROK troops armed with copies of ROK weapons* [note for later]
3. Part of it is a real weapon. Part of it is not. The level of detail has been seen on some fake guns made by Hollywood. In this case like the Bond gun it’s built off a real gun. An AK74 clone produced by the DPRK as the type 88. Additionally let me show you a video that might make things more interesting as to level of Details.
   It has controls dials functional bolt handles and magazine yet is a dummy.

Okay so now the details it’s self. We can see no additional inputs of range adjustments like on the XM29, K11. Now they could be on the other side or not. Doesn’t really matter. What we can also see is an AK selector lever, muzzle device. This is as I said an AK74.

This is important because. First it rules out it being a QST11
The Profile is clearly wrong and although Norico could if it so chose rechamber the QST11 to 5.45x39mm there is no evidence for it doing so. Also it would be easier than trying to mate the grenade launcher to an AK74.
Because of the way an AK operates In order to clean, maintain the weapon to field strip it, unlike an AR that breaks down with the receiver halves separating shotgun style. The AK breaks up. All the parts come out the top. The top that in this is covered by the body of the “grenade launcher“ portion. (note on the image above what appears to be a captive pins on the QST11 indicating where the lowers receiver likely pivots for access to the Rifles inners.)
So we have a real rifle here but it’s been bolted into this shell. Also note that the XM29(both the mock up and real as they did have working prototypes), QST11 and K11
[Incidentally K1, we will com back to in a moment]

These weapons selector switch’s rather than Ak style levers, it’s easier to get to and smaller as well as more easily mated to the solenoid Or extended arm for firing the weapon by the single trigger pack. Functional weapons need a functioning trigger pack. As this is two weapons in one that means two trigger packs. That have to be mated to the single firing trigger. They can be mated by either a mechanical sear in the rifles trigger pack that when the selectors is switched to will Bypass the rifle trigger and engage a arm acting like the arm of a bullpup that will mechanically actuate the firing hammer of the Grenade launcher. Or will disengage the rifle firing group and engage an electrical solenoid transmit via wire to the grenade launchers electrical trigger pack ( the later was the XM29). However that requires a heavy degree of modifications to the trigger system so much so it’s easier to start over from scratch.
yet Clearly it is an AK74 receiver. We can see the Magazine latch, selector lever, reinforcing rib. Pistol grip trigger group, trigger guard. All AK. Yet we have this upper structure. Take a moment now and look at it. Is it metal?
Parts of it are clearly but not all. I snagged this off military today because look at the way it gleams in the light.
the AK and the launcher don’t quite play the same way with the light. That could indicate a difference in materials or treatment. Even the barrels have a different effect. I would expect that the barrels should react the same yet they don’t seem to. Now the DPRK isn’t known for its polymers. If you look back at my Type 88 slide you will note they prefer metal to plastic this said the magazine in these is clearly a polymer type possibility imported as the ones above are metallic. One possibly is that it’s polymer and they finally have the polymer tech, another is that it’s fiberglass, a third is that it’s aluminum or that they gave it a different treatment and it’s steel like the AK. I can’t say for sure but it just doesn’t seem right that it reacts so uniformly across the upper body until the AK even the lens cap looks like it’s all one piece. Which is why I think it’s a fake. But a fake with that asterisk we’ll both of them. Look at K11. The profile is close very close the rifle will work. That’s the function. Get into a guard post of the ROK looking like a friendly. A little more refined version would be close enough to pass for K11.

Finally to cover your last point. The reason for the price point of QST11 As well as XM25 vs a military laptop is that military laptop are COTS machines. You can buy the base model commercially The boards and parts are sourced and Software added. It’s duel role technology.
These type of rifles cost more as they are single role low volume costumer machines often with little to no common parts. Because they are low production volumes it costs more to build them in lots than general issue weapons due to overhead of machining, training and support.

A happy kid at a PLA open house.

DQLH12-20

Looks larger than I expected. Guess what you can't achieve by diameter, you do with length. And being airburst, I guess the explosive package distributed along the length can be better leveraged.
Generally, at this point I doubt that mass producing smart weapons is such an expensive endeavor for China anymore. Just seeing how the HJ-12 has finally arrived to frontline units, indicating cabbage price has been achieved, these weapons should become more visible as well soon.

Insignius said:

Looks larger than I expected. Guess what you can't achieve by diameter, you do with length. And being airburst, I guess the explosive package distributed along the length can be better leveraged.
Generally, at this point I doubt that mass producing smart weapons is such an expensive endeavor for China anymore. Just seeing how the HJ-12 has finally arrived to frontline units, indicating cabbage price has been achieved, these weapons should become more visible as well soon.

Click to expand...

To make OICW actually viable, powered armour or exoskeleton, as well as completely new explosive chemical (try antimatter) and the full setup be self-contained within a 20-30mm projectile will be required.