Check the recent discussions in this this thread:
https://defence.pk/pdf/posts/13534051/
Archer, NORA B52 K2 and several other wheeled SP options are available on the market and the SH-15 has done
absolutely nothing to distinguish itself from the competition. They’re all equally good on paper, each has some strengths and weaknesses. How they performed in trials; only the relevant militaries know.
The SH-15 doesn’t have an auto-loader, hence it lacks the RoF of SP guns with auto-loaders, it also lacks any remote firing capability by extension and has lower ground clearance than some of its rivals. All of these were pointed out by the PA during trials and this also led to PA considering other systems, or considering two systems at once.
On the other hand, it’s lighter, cheaper and easily transportable. It’s accuracy and range on paper is on par with its rivals, not better or worst (again, results may vary in trials). It’s the perfect SP for China because they designed it around their requirements, the lack of an auto-loader was a compromise china was willing to make to make the gun easily airlift-able, that has more advantages for China than the auto-loader, but it may not for every country. Pakistan tends to go with the Chinese options because they give a better deal + ToT while having equivalent or close enough performance to competitors (more often than not they’re also just simply the better option altogether, like in the case of the VT-4 and the Z-10ME, but other times they’re a compromise, like in the case of the J-10C).
What I’m trying to say is, the SH-15 is a very good artillery system that matches its competitors, it has its own strengths and weaknesses, it’s not anything more special than another system of its class however, it’s not revolutionary, so please stop claiming so, and to the people shilling for western systems, if PA picked the SH-15, that should end all the debates anyways, because it was the best performing gun in PA trials by that decision.
