PTL-02 firing a 100mm gun launched missile.
Wheeled 122mm SPHs firing with direct aim.
Wheeled 122mm SPHs firing with direct aim.
Self Propelled Gun/Rocket Launcher
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
Guys, does anyone know what is the function of the hole with cap under the PLZ-05 barrel? Is it for ejecting spent shell case? Also, if it is, then is it done automatically or manually?
P.s. I noted that both PLZ-05 and PCL-181 use brass-cased ammunition. Is it 155mm or 152mm? I'm curious because Wiki and many other English publications state 155mm, but IRRC the current NATO standard uses bag charge instead of brass-cased charge. If it is 155mm doesn't it mean PLA will have to develop yet another standard for the charge separate from NATO and Russian standard? That would sound like PLA is wasting time reinventing the wheel, just because they can.
P.s. I noted that both PLZ-05 and PCL-181 use brass-cased ammunition. Is it 155mm or 152mm? I'm curious because Wiki and many other English publications state 155mm, but IRRC the current NATO standard uses bag charge instead of brass-cased charge. If it is 155mm doesn't it mean PLA will have to develop yet another standard for the charge separate from NATO and Russian standard? That would sound like PLA is wasting time reinventing the wheel, just because they can.
Look at all the goodies used during a recent high-altitude exercise.
Yes.
Automatically.
155.
The only problem of that is for export vehicles since we never use NATO shells ourselves. Meanwhile we have a uni-modular charge system for export that's better than traditional NATO bag charges.
May I ask what standard the new PLA 155mm is based on? Does it use the uni-modular charge developed for export but encased in brass-case just like old Soviet standard?
Also, what is the benefit of replacing the Soviet standard used by PLA? I'm in the opinion that both Soviet and NATO standard is comparable and completely fine for the task they're supposed to do.
The only logical reason I can think of why military will change what works is either because something much better arrived or for compatibility with allies. If I'm not mistaken the new PLA 155mm is only used by PLA, so compatibility with allies theory should go out the window. That leaves better performance as the reason, but I don't think the stats available on the internet indicated the new 155mm standard as much better compared to previously existing ones. Did PLA develop a whole new 155mm standard just because they can? I'm really confused...
p.s. I believe currently NATO is also contemplating/ already started doing the move to uni-modular charge system you speak of.
I actually had this question earlier in the thread. Whether there was a picture of the modular charge shell. If I understand the concept correctly, you stack the charges up instead of throwing bags away.
I think I am misunderstanding you, but what did you mean that "NATO standard uses bag charge instead of brass-cased charge"? I am only familiar with 105mm ammo, but the casing for the charge bags was brass.
I think the move to standardize on 155mm is based on market forces more than anything. Who are the major users of 152mm at this point? Plus, PLZ-45 was the first big export success. I think there was a post in this thread a few pages back detailing how they were upgrading 152mm guns, but the 152mm inventory is towed guns (thus old), and due for attrition replacement anyway.