PLA Anti-Air Gun systems
- Thread starter MIGleader
- Start date
A new (export?) AA gun, the LD35. I don't recall seeing it in the flesh. Maybe it will show up at the next Zhuhai Airshow.
From the Arabic sales guide posted in the Zhuhai thread, the vehicle labeled LD-35 was shown with 4 SAMs, I believe it is the same system previously shown as SWS-2. It is using WZ-551 type chassis.
This one looks like the same turret without SAMs on ZBL-08.
Any idea why PLA chose 625 (25mm) instead of CS/SA5 (30mm)? is it because they still have 25mm ammo in the PLAGF logistic chain (from PGZ-95 SPAAG and Type 87 Towed AA)?
Another thing, I looked up Chinese 25mm ammo (25×183mmB) and it looks like the ammo is only used in PLAGF. A quick search says it's a bored-out and longer-cased derivative of the 2A14's 23x152mmB cartridge (RU 23mm)
So my question is, why bother developing that ammo when there are similar ones out there? For example, Russian 23mm or NATO 25mm are both available, and China does use RU 23mm in the PLAAF (J-10 cannon) and most importantly in PLAGF (Type 85 Towed AA the ZU-23-2 copy).
To me, it feels like a waste of time and effort, especially when you already have comparable ammo in your logistic chain.
So my question is, why bother developing that ammo when there are similar ones out there? For example, Russian 23mm or NATO 25mm are both available, and China does use RU 23mm in the PLAAF (J-10 cannon) and most importantly in PLAGF (Type 85 Towed AA the ZU-23-2 copy).
To me, it feels like a waste of time and effort, especially when you already have comparable ammo in your logistic chain.
I theorise the 25mm caliber came about when the PLA was unable to import from both sides of the iron curtain in the period of time between Tiananmen to the collapse of the USSR and decided it was easier and cheaper to just neck up an existing cartridge or it could just simply be that the PLA thought it could just go it's own way on some weapon RnD.
The "unable to import theory" doesn't sound right because they already have RU 23mm before developing the 25mm ammo, and I don't think there's such a big difference between 23mm and 25mm in AA performance (both in speed and payload).
IMO PLA wanting to go its own way sounds much more plausible. It's around the era when PLA chose to go its own way despite having off-the-shelf designs to be adopted. For example, developing 5.8mm ammo even though 5.45mm/5.56mm can be adopted.
However, in this case, they already adopted RU 23x152mm with the ZU-23-2 copy, so I don't get why they still want to develop the 25mm ammo.
p.s. I made a mistake on PLAAF 23mm. It uses a shorter 23x114mm, not 23x152mm like ZU-23-2.