Sorry , maybe it is Satellite 卫星导航系统 guided mortar shell
Self Propelled Gun/Rocket Launcher
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
Saw this from 大包CG, so potentially 120 rockets. So the vehicle at the back is just an unmanned launch platform?
Possible, or they might revamp/rethink how they do maintenance for this platform (if say 8 of these vehicles, maybe have a smaller 'squad' of dedicated people to maintain and repair always following it?)So they basically eliminate the crew for ammunition carrier. And now its crew have to do the maintenance for two tracked platform
Or something like that? Anyways, it's definitely something the PLA have thought about (maintenance of the vehicle) and must have come up with something.
Although innovative, I am concerned about the overall mobility(strategic and tactical) and weight of the vehicle when it has to carry the rocket reloads together otherwise why would other countries not develop MLRSes with the ammo carrier and launcher function combined.
Note there is a truck chassis version according to the image.Allegedly from a NORINCO presentation. A new generation 155mm self-propelled howitzer. Not sure if this is for export or domestic use. The turret might be unmanned. It reminds me of a NORINCO export howitzer that also has an unmanned turret (3rd image).
What theater command?
I had a discussion about this system with an ex-US Army Sergeant on Quora. His comment has a lot of true points. The same number of trucks would be needed to supply it anyway. Because the loader can not go to the supply point on its own.
What this system achieves is it reduces the frequency of resupply and it should have great off-road mobility. It is a pure harsh and undeveloped terrain system. I can think of two scenarios in which China can benefit from this system. Fighting Indians in the Himalayas and fighting Taiwanese in the Taiwanese mountains. Other than that it is a needlessly complex MRL. Weight optimizations and crew member reduction (which can be a bad thing) are simply wouldn't worth it.
Another commentator wrote that it could be great for nations whose industrial capacity and population are small but the military is relatively large, like the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
The said comment:
Is there a shortage of trucks? Crew members to drive trucks? Have you ever seen how all vehicles go through transmissions and engines in military operations? And you think constant excess loads makes that … better?
You need spare crewmen because of casualties in war.
Hoe do you move ammo to the guns if you need to move the ammo and the guns? As it’s supply depot to guns that matter …
How do you separate the ammo from the guns for sustained fire? Or does you enemy just enjoy you making it easy to take out both at the same time?
This does nothing that just bringing in a second truck doesn’t already do. That truck can be any truck, any flatbed or cargo truck. It doesn’t have to be a specifically designed trailer.
That you break down a truck into its component pieces doesn’t magically make this a technical marvel. Trucks are cheap. Trucks are easy. Truck drivers are easy to train. If attaching a trailer made things better, then every tank would be towing a trailer. They don’t.
Articulated vehicles like the one you show, have been mostly retired. When they were in use, and as a case in point, do you know how they got their ammo? Trucks. With engines, transmissions, and crew members.
Articulated vehicles are far from the most common vehicles in any military. Which only adds to the ‘not a game changer’ critique.
ETC - 72nd GA, 73rd GA
STC - 74th GA
WTC - 76th, 84th 85th GA
NTC - one GA
So, most probably 7 PHL16 Battalions already