The 88 is an improvement on the Navy’s Type 76 37mm anti-aircraft gun, and it uses Navy ammunition
Your document refers to the Type 76 cannons, not the Type 74 cannons, of the PGZ 88
Probably won’t matter what the real life stats are, they’ll just base it on the russian 37mm and that might be fine
1 Like
Type 76 cannons have induction coils/programmers like the PGZ09
whereas the Type 74 guns only have a liquid cooling system
The Type 88 does not use the original naval gun
No, the Type 76 is not derived from the Type 74, as the number indicates their year of development. This can easily be seen with the Type 76, which is also called PJ-76. The Type 74, on the other hand, is an older system, based on Russian 37mm naval guns.
(61-K or V 11 canon)
And we can clearly see the same cooling system on the base of the cannons, and not a coil-based programming system.
I’m sorry, but your document doesn’t explain anything; it’s just a comparison of the Type 74 and 76 guns plus those of other air systems, without clearly indicating that the Type 74 uses a HE-VT shell model.
For the moment, this is the most reliable source we have on the use of shells.
The brochure cannot prove to be completely accurate，Moreover, there is an issue with the artillery shell image. The PGZ88 should use the Navy 37
My image source comes from "现代火炮工程实践 "
1 Like
In your diagram, the velocity of the 37mm shell is only 880, whereas the velocity of the PGZ88 shell should be 1000
37-76 for TYPE 76 CANNON!!! The PGZ 88 HAS TYPE 74 CANNONS!!!
The Type 74 are improved Type 65
The Type 76 is completely different from the Type 74 because the Type 76 has a rate of fire of around 800 rounds per minute, while the Type 74 does not. And in the development block, it’s clear that the PGZ88 doesn’t have a rate of fire of 800 rounds per minute.
And we can clearly see that the shape of the 37-65 and 37-76 shells is not the same !!!
The PGZ 88 does not fire modern 37mm shells, therefore no HE-VT on the PGZ
I have emphasized many times that the PGZ88 utilizes the Navy’s Type 76 37mm gun, not the Army’s Type 74
880 refers to the ammunition speed, which is 880 meters per second
Moreover, the Type 74 cannot achieve a projectile velocity of 1000m/s, whereas the Type 76 can
So it can’t be Type 74, it must be Type 76
a derivative of the Type 74 gun because this gun has a mobile gun base then adapted to a turret, but it remains a Type 74 gun
Your image, once again, refers to the Type 76 without mentioning the PGZ 88 or the Type 74, which you claim is a derivative of the 76, but it isn’t, Type 65 < 74 < 76
It’s even possible that we’ll have the “Type 74SD”, it looks like the version of the PGZ 88 that will have a laser system.
No, I just meant that the Type 88 uses a gun improved from the Type 76 for the Navy, not one improved from the Type 74. They are different specifications, one for the Navy and one for the Army
PGZ88 has only been produced in one batch, and there are no upgraded or modified models
The locking system of PGZ88 is optoelectronic, so a laser rangefinder is necessary
My image source comes from "现代火炮工程实践 "
I think you need to notice that the shell in this page doesn’t match the vehicle in the picture, as the shell have a muzzle velocity of 880 m/s for AP-T\866 m/s for HE(-T) while the vehicle needs shells which have a muzzle velocity of 1000m/s.
And in another picture below, you will find a kind of shell which have a muzzle velocity of 1000m/s, which also noticed that the shells are used by Type 1976 twin-37mm AA gun