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

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Functions for a system like this very depending on want. generally though you want a range finder to select get the distance of a object and a interface to then input the desired point of Airburst so a round knows to punch through a window and explode in a room rather then on the window or to explode over the enemy position and not on the wall behind them. you also want some Enhanced vision and magnified aiming. if your trying to compare based on the size of the optics and systems remember that the XM29 was a product of the late 90's early 2000's. If you consider the overall scale of the sight for this not just the optic but the base on which it sits which I believe to be part of the FCS and compare to the sighting system on the XM29 The Chinese unit is actually a little bigger. the system on the Neopup is rather basic and seems to lack airburst well the K11's sighting system is includes Day night, Thermal modes.
I suspect the PLA may skimp on the thermal and possibly use a more simplified night vision mode but the system has the size for a range finder and simple ballistic computer functions.

I have however never seen a picture I am satisfied with in regards to the the controls.

Click to expand...

Instead of a complicated GUI based interface to adjust parameters such as aim point, I suspect they developed a user interface that does NOT require GUI, and hence can cut out a lot of electronics.

My guess is that the gun will detect the type of grenade as it is cambered. To establish the range, aim somewhere else (behind, ahead, on the side, etc) to establish the range, such as the expected range plus one meter, and half pull the trigger -- and that will programed the round in camber. Then aim at the actual target and fully pull the trigger to launch the grenade.

Note also you can use existing optical and night sight for this kind of interface, hence further reduce cost.

simplified Grenade ballistics computers have been done before Nemo and in this case I suspect a even more simple system then your suggesting. The Right side of the ZH05 has no interfaces but the left is a number of interfaces. including a collection of small buttons on the FCS module, 5 larger buttons clustered over the apex of the angled grip and a selector switch. those 5 buttons i believe are the heart of the system, they are I believe wired to the FCS which in turn is wired to the bolt to interface with the round. I suspect that those buttons are meant to be used by the thumb of the shooter. those buttons likely being Lase, mode ,up, down, reset.
Lase of course for range, mode allows the user to cycle the there selected round, up and down being in meter or half meter increments for programmable ammo and reset to clear out the data.
I suspect that when the user is lining up and taking aim at the back of the FCS is a simple illuminated probably red LCD display.
The two scopes are likely factory zeroed to the rifle. as the user selects a target he flips the selector to grenade and presses the lase button. the FCS lases the target. the shooter opens the bolt inserts a round and thumbs the mode button cycling through the available options until the LCD gives him the round of his choice. in the case of programmable he then adjusts where he wants the burst and now adjusts his aim. normally there is a gyroscope reads angle of the weapon and signals to the user when they have the weapon at the best point to achieve desired point of impact. Fn F2000 GL for example has a system that uses lights and there EGLM has a option for a similar system. once the user gets the green light he pulls the trigger,

China should get something like the trackpoint. It's a game changer.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

simplified Grenade ballistics computers have been done before Nemo and in this case I suspect a even more simple system then your suggesting. The Right side of the ZH05 has no interfaces but the left is a number of interfaces. including a collection of small buttons on the FCS module, 5 larger buttons clustered over the apex of the angled grip and a selector switch. those 5 buttons i believe are the heart of the system, they are I believe wired to the FCS which in turn is wired to the bolt to interface with the round. I suspect that those buttons are meant to be used by the thumb of the shooter. those buttons likely being Lase, mode ,up, down, reset.
Lase of course for range, mode allows the user to cycle the there selected round, up and down being in meter or half meter increments for programmable ammo and reset to clear out the data.
I suspect that when the user is lining up and taking aim at the back of the FCS is a simple illuminated probably red LCD display.
The two scopes are likely factory zeroed to the rifle. as the user selects a target he flips the selector to grenade and presses the lase button. the FCS lases the target. the shooter opens the bolt inserts a round and thumbs the mode button cycling through the available options until the LCD gives him the round of his choice. in the case of programmable he then adjusts where he wants the burst and now adjusts his aim. normally there is a gyroscope reads angle of the weapon and signals to the user when they have the weapon at the best point to achieve desired point of impact. Fn F2000 GL for example has a system that uses lights and there EGLM has a option for a similar system. once the user gets the green light he pulls the trigger,

Click to expand...

I didn't know about these buttons. However, now I know about it, I disagree with your interpretation.

Those buttons are meant to be pressed by thumbs. If those buttons have functions as you said, then why only thumb buttons, and uniform spacing of the buttons? Surely it would be more ergonomic by having up, down operated by index and middle fingers instead? And all these buttons operated by thumb may be more complicated than need to be in a fire fight. For example, your mode button is really not needed -- because the round itself is single purpose -- surely it would be much easier to let the round identify itself rather than having to select it manually?

Instead, I think it's something even simpler -- each of the buttons are preset offsets -- +2x, +x, 0, -x, -2x-- since the setting you are going to need are limited by the blast radius of the rounds. Just by pressing each of the buttons will cause lasing (range finding) and add the offset. Since there are no separate trigger for the rifle, those buttons may also have a dual purpose -- select grenade instead of rifle. So all you needed to do is press once and hold to select the range and grenade, then press trigger to fire. To use the rifle, simple release the button, and rifle can fire by default if no grenade is loaded (because the gun knows whether a round is cambered or not, because it needed to identify and program the round anyway.

Note this does not need special sights, and can operate with iron sight if necessary -- hence increase robustness.

Verum said:

China should get something like the trackpoint. It's a game changer.

Click to expand...

I'm sure something like it is avail for special forces, but until the price comes down, its too expensive to issue to regular infantry for majority of non first world countries.

Personally, I have mixed feelings regarding this product in game hunting. It helps in scoring humane one shot kills, but doesn't feel like "fair game" to four legged critters.

nemo said:

I didn't know about these buttons. However, now I know about it, I disagree with your interpretation.

Those buttons are meant to be pressed by thumbs. If those buttons have functions as you said, then why only thumb buttons, and uniform spacing of the buttons? Surely it would be more ergonomic by having up, down operated by index and middle fingers instead? And all these buttons operated by thumb may be more complicated than need to be in a fire fight. For example, your mode button is really not needed -- because the round itself is single purpose -- surely it would be much easier to let the round identify itself rather than having to select it manually?

Instead, I think it's something even simpler -- each of the buttons are preset offsets -- +2x, +x, 0, -x, -2x-- since the setting you are going to need are limited by the blast radius of the rounds. Just by pressing each of the buttons will cause lasing (range finding) and add the offset. Since there are no separate trigger for the rifle, those buttons may also have a dual purpose -- select grenade instead of rifle. So all you needed to do is press once and hold to select the range and grenade, then press trigger to fire. To use the rifle, simple release the button, and rifle can fire by default if no grenade is loaded (because the gun knows whether a round is cambered or not, because it needed to identify and program the round anyway.

Note this does not need special sights, and can operate with iron sight if necessary -- hence increase robustness.

Click to expand...

I disagree for a number of reasons.
First as to why the Thumb? Placement ergonomics. The PLA Doctrine is based on the right handed shooter this means that the operation is always meant for the right index finger to be placed at the trigger the right middle, right ring and right pinky to be on the pistol grip with the right thumb on the left side of the receiver and grip. If we look at it we also find that like the AK the bolts of the ZH05 are right hand operated. now well operating the bolt or aiming the weapon the shooter has to cradle and support the weapon. With a right handed shooter that's the job of the left hand. the problem is that the left hand index,middle ring and pinky are going to be on the right side of the weapon if they are supporting it and sitting low on it to. but the buttons on the ZH05 are placed asymmetrically on the left side on the under the FCS but well above the location of where a palm would be the only digit that could be there is a thumb.
Now Why a mode to select the type of round being loaded why not have the system integrate the round? Cost, power simplicity. If every time you open the bolt of the launcher the system interrogates looking for a round it's going to be eating up power. and if all your rounds have to respond to interrogation they all have to be wired even when they don't need it. AP or SMOKE or Training or Maker rounds Don't need to be interfacing with all the functions of the weapon just Fragmentation Air burst and maybe one other round. but by having the weapon check each round once loaded you need micro chip a response system into them all. this would increase the price of the rounds drive up there complexity reduce there available warhead yield it's unnecessary when one or two taps on a button could do the same thing. now your pre programmed destination off set does make some sense but a zero button doesn't as once you lase you have the range.

adeptitus said:

I'm sure something like it is avail for special forces, but until the price comes down, its too expensive to issue to regular infantry for majority of non first world countries.

Personally, I have mixed feelings regarding this product in game hunting. It helps in scoring humane one shot kills, but doesn't feel like "fair game" to four legged critters.

Click to expand...

We have seen Chinese made scopes and sights with integrated rangefinders but I doubt they have anything like Tracking point just yet. Even the US who has the worlds largest military budget would have a hard time issuing them to general issue. the Cost of a Daniel Defence M4A1 carbine is $1800.00 commercially that carbine is the same unit used by Tracking point to construct there TP AR 5.56mm which is retails for about $7500.00
the system is complex and intricate and right now tactically best left to specialists like snipers.

Not sure if u guys noticed, but the PLA marine on board the 071 visiting Europe right now carries this weapon.

kwaigonegin said:

Not sure if u guys noticed, but the PLA marine on board the 071 visiting Europe right now carries this weapon.

Click to expand...

But why that's not photographed?

TerraN_EmpirE said:

I disagree for a number of reasons.

Now Why a mode to select the type of round being loaded why not have the system integrate the round? Cost, power simplicity. If every time you open the bolt of the launcher the system interrogates looking for a round it's going to be eating up power. and if all your rounds have to respond to interrogation they all have to be wired even when they don't need it. AP or SMOKE or Training or Maker rounds Don't need to be interfacing with all the functions of the weapon just Fragmentation Air burst and maybe one other round. but by having the weapon check each round once loaded you need micro chip a response system into them all. this would increase the price of the rounds drive up there complexity reduce there available warhead yield it's unnecessary when one or two taps on a button could do the same thing. now your pre programmed destination off set does make some sense but a zero button doesn't as once you lase you have the range.

Click to expand...

Power is not an issue. Note it only need to interrogate the round when any button is pressed in my scheme -- so there would be no continuous/periodic interrogation. As for the fuses -- they are likely controlled by microcontrollers/microprocessors, so adding functionality is merely adding software -- cost is negligible.

kwaigonegin said:

Not sure if u guys noticed, but the PLA marine on board the 071 visiting Europe right now carries this weapon.

Click to expand...

Do we have a photo?

I understand it's been used by the Chinese Marines on anti-piracy missions, but I haven't seen a photo of one at port calls. They are probably locked away from the public.