Then I have several questions. Why do PLA 155mm uses brass cased charge? 155 NATO is fine without using it and Norinco had proven with PLZ-45 it can make 155 NATO that works, so why reinvent the wheel just to accomodate the brass case?I found the old post, it was actually from last year
Funny, the same question came up after, just how many 152mm shells are left in inventory?Some high-resolution images of PLZ05 firing...www.sinodefenceforum.com
If you ask me, they probably are NOT doing anything as complicated as recasing ammo. My guess is sticking with conventional charge bags is a matter of training and conservative procurement strategy.
Back to PLZ-45 again, that was for export, never adopted by PLA itself, yet it was probably one of the more advanced pieces of military equipment produced in China at the time. Finally after quite some time, they adopted PLZ-05.
Is there any advantage to the brass cased system that PLA deem super important to the extent of developing a whole new standard or they just did it because they can? That is what I'm really curious about.
Also, I believe training and conservative procurement policy is just a meh reason. After all, the arty units will have to retrain with all the new equipment anyway, so why not adopt the latest standard (modular charge)?
If by Conservative procurement policy you mean PLA want something that definitely works, then they can just use 155 NATO if they really want to make the move/ just keep the soviet 152. Pakistan opted for SH-15, which IRRC is 155 NATO. It's a good standard well tested by countless NATO operations, so if 155 PLA doesn't have any significant performance boost compared to 155 NATO and at least have compatible shell across the two standards, then I consider this to be a vanity project.
Another good thing from adopting 155 NATO/ keeping Soviet 152 is compability with allies. I know PLA might not consider this important right now, but compability with allies might start to become more important if China want to start backing them.
Costwise it'll also make sense to use either NATO/Soviet standard. With NATO you get to piggyback on Norinco production line, as well as commonality with Pakistan if and when they need some assistance. The same can be said with Soviet standard, though probably to a lesser degree as some countries start to switch from soviet to NATO standard. However, 155 PLA most likely will still be placed last costwise if there's no compability with the other two system as the only current user is PLA and I'm not sure if there's any other country that's lining up to adopt it.
P.s. sorry for the rant, but considering many think of the current PLAGF to be the stepchild in terms of funding, I fully believe they can better use the R&D fund elsewhere.