055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I don't see anyone talking about it yes he get armed with twice as many missiles than a 052D but there are more big increase for ASW capacity with 2 Z-18F much more capable than only 1 small Z-9C or Ka-28 which are enough medium ASW helos.

The main radar Type 346A or B ? is identical for size etc... with 052D or different as we can see now ?
 
Last edited:
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Jeff Head said:
They just decided to show the neatest, loeast revealing pictures with the offical launch.

For their own reasons...whatever they are.

I would love to see them too. The VLS. The hangar doors. The exact size of the landing pad. The ports on the back side for all sorts of things like VDS and ATAS, etc.

Anyhow...we will know soon enough.
Click to expand...
Curiously we have see only it 2/3 of the ships
CH Type 055 Destroyer dernier profil - Copie.png
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
some time ago I asked here about Type 055 propulsion and
Nov 1, 2016
Bltizo said:
...
055, expected to be COGAG: four QC-280s.
Click to expand...
now indeed
"Though already "known", the spokesperson of the Chinese MoD has confirmed two days ago that Type 055 uses a type COGAG propulsion."

(it's an automatic translation of the tweet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)

congratulations to watchers!
 
Iron Man

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
longmarch said:
Why we still can't settle on 128 vs 112 :(

It's 112 for sure. Otherwise they would have shown it. It's that simple.

A little disappointing but that's the way it is. Think it this way: maybe they save the space for something more important than a few VLS.
Click to expand...
What they are showing or not showing has no relation to how many tubes are in the back VLS section. The only reason for secrecy would be OPSEC vs US intelligence, but as of 2 days ago OPSEC is completely gone given US satellites can now see the entirety of the launched 055 in fine detail. We are the only ones who can't see the back end.

Jura said:
"Though already "known", the spokesperson of the Chinese MoD has confirmed two days ago that Type 055 uses a type COGAG propulsion."
Click to expand...
Anything other than COGAG for a ship of this size and China's known selection of available GT's would be utterly shocking. It has also been widely rumored that IEP is not ready for this batch of 055s, so this announcement comes as more of a "meh" than anything else.

antiterror13 said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
There is so much juicy butthurtness from the Indians in the comments section it's delicious. :D
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
For LACM,
052D and maybe 055 use or later CJ-10 a variant of DH-10 etc... 1500 - 2000 km or a LACM variant of YJ-18 and in this case he have surely a superior range ( also smore big warhead size* ) than AShM - about 300 km - what range ?

And it is certain exist YJ-18 LACM variant ( exact designation ? ) ?

Make sense the range is superior for LACM less fast no supersonic so consumes much less fuel.

*
CJ-10 ~ 1500 - 2000 km, warhead 500 kg, accuracy 5 - 10 m

All LACM have superior range and more big warhead with similar AShM
 
Last edited:
Iron Man

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
FORBIN said:
For LACM,
052D and maybe 055 use or later CJ-10 a variant of DH-10 etc... 1500 - 2000 km or a LACM variant of YJ-18 and in this case he have surely a superior range ( also smore big warhead size* ) than AShM - about 300 km - what range ?

And it is certain exist YJ-18 LACM variant ( exact designation ? ) ?

Make sense the range is superior for LACM less fast no supersonic so consumes much less fuel.

*
CJ-10 ~ 1500 - 2000 km, warhead 500 kg, accuracy 5 - 10 m

All LACM have superior range and more big warhead with similar AShM
Click to expand...
Note sure what you're asking, but YJ-18 is poorly suited as a LACM variant given its shorter range relative to actual LACMs. Far better to just use a dedicated LACM like the CJ10.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top