052C/052D Class Destroyers

jobjed said:

Hence the disclaimer ceteris parabis. We don't know the context of the 052D and Burke's radars so we shouldn't be too hasty in our convictions. Like I said, I'd personally wager on the 052D's superiority but I won't export that inclination to someone else because I don't have a single shred of evidence for it. If Iron Man wishes to hold reservations on the 052D's capabilities vis a vis the Burke, it's a completely valid position as of this moment, in the absence of any evidence to support or dissuade his choice.

Click to expand...

I feel like this discussion about AESA vs PESA in context of 052D's radar/sensor capability has not addressed the core issue, which is related to assumptions about "other factors".

Iron Man is obviously right in saying that the real world performance of an AESA and PESA is dependent on a whole host of "other factors" that has been listed and which I won't repeat here (but software etc being one of the common ones listed), where one system may have superior "other factors" which allow the performance of one type of radar to be superior to the other type. Obviously assuming just because a radar is an AESA doesn't mean it is automatically superior to a PESA if the latter has superior "other factors" like software, or even array size or whatever.
But I think what the "AESA > PESA in every condition" crowd are trying to say, is that holding all of those "other factors" to be equal, then AESA should be superior to PESA every time.

So I think in the context of 052D, I think what people are arguing about is really about how the 052D compares with other ships (like the Burke/SPY-1 as repeatedly brought up) in terms of those "other factors," rather than AESA vs PESA itself.
That is to say, the way I've read the last few pages is that the underlying disagreement is not really about the performance type of radar that 052D uses versus another type (AESA vs PESA), but rather about how the "other factors" of 052D compare with the "other factors" of said different ship. So I see the "AESA > PESA in every condition" crowd arguing in the favour of 052D are indirectly saying that 052D's "other factors" should be at least equal to say, the "other factors" of a Burke.

Bltizo said:

So I see the "AESA > PESA in every condition" crowd arguing in the favour of 052D are indirectly saying that 052D's "other factors" should be at least equal to say, the "other factors" of a Burke.

Click to expand...

I didn't argue for that possibility because I haven't come across any evidence, neither concrete nor ampliative, that would suggest the 052D's "other factors" are superior to the Burke's. However, I have a gut feeling that they are so I'd wager the 052D is all-round superior. Nonetheless, I don't have any evidence for my gut feeling so I'd keep it to myself and not force it on others. That is why I don't see the purpose of this argument in the first place; it's just a contest of "I think, you think" without evidence for either side's position. Just establish the facts of what we know, and leave the personal gut feeling/conjectures to oneself.

jobjed said:

I didn't argue for that possibility because I haven't come across any evidence, neither concrete nor ampliative, that would suggest the 052D's "other factors" are superior to the Burke's. However, I have a gut feeling that they are so I'd wager the 052D is all-round superior. Nonetheless, I don't have any evidence for my gut feeling so I'd keep it to myself and not force it on others. That is why I don't see the purpose of this argument in the first place; it's just a contest of "I think, you think" without evidence for either side's position. Just establish the facts of what we know, and leave the personal gut feeling/conjectures to oneself.

Click to expand...

And you won't get it. Not in this lifetime. Thus my uncertainty, and really anyone else's uncertainty who is of a reasonable, rational disposition. Fanbois also know this (I think), which is why they are trying SO hard to push the "AESA is invariably greater than PESA" so they don't have to come to grips with the far more complex reality of the fact that this is just a totally and embarrassingly incorrect assumption. We won't ever know how one system will compare to the other in terms of overall capability, mostly because this is understandably a highly desirable (and thus classified) piece of information. Talking about it with any degree of confidence is a perfect setup to get shot down in flames.

Following the few pages of arguments, let me put my own view forward. I believe that the PLA Navy Type 052 should be equal or even greater than the Arleigh Burke class, just imagine the superiority that the Type 055 would bring to the bigger picture, a Type 052D and Type 055 combo would be bad news for any Navy in the world. Those arguing about the 'other factors' like elctronics, processing, software , experience etc etc, well just remember the embarrassment of the 'USS Fitgerald'. The US Military is without a doubt a fearsome foe, and since the fall of the Soviet Union, it had enjoyed unprecedented Technological and numerical military superiority in the 1990's and and 2000's, but I believe that has changed and that superiority will only begin to deteriorate further in the decades to come. So many times, i believe that the U.S Military is being overrated, and that their Commanders believe in their own 'invincibility', while the truth is no-one is invincible, and I am sure the PLA can drive home that point with the Type 052D in any theater of conflict.
So anytime somebody comes up with the same old 'other factors' etc etc to describe the superiority of the Arleigh Burke Class, I will say, remember the USS Fitzgereald.

Bltizo said:

But I think what the "AESA > PESA in every condition" crowd are trying to say, is that holding all of those "other factors" to be equal, then AESA should be superior to PESA every time.

Click to expand...

No, in fact this presupposition was implicitly rejected earlier on in this thread with all the AESA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PESA and "better is just better" nonsense and all the mocking of the importance of software and "experience", by which I assume is referring to hardware and software development experience (despite the melodramatic hyperbolic rhetorical whinery). So no, the initial presumption of "all other things" in fact being equal has most definitely NOT been present in any way, shape, or form.

Iron Man said:

No, in fact this presupposition was implicitly rejected earlier on in this thread with all the AESA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PESA and "better is just better" nonsense and all the mocking of the importance of software and "experience", by which I assume is referring to hardware and software development experience (despite the melodramatic hyperbolic rhetorical whinery). So no, the initial presumption of "all other things" in fact being equal has most definitely NOT been present in any way, shape, or form.

Click to expand...

I thought that was a possible meaning too, but then I read the last paragraph of post #1836: "... which is automatically a million times better than anything the dumb commie chinese can bring out in the year 2017 (and who are also seemingly incapable of upgrading their hard and software)" -- which suggests to me that he believes the idea that Chinese hardware and software (aka the 'other factors') being inferior to a comparison system (SPY-1/burke in this case) is not a reasonable one to take, ignoring the rhetoric that's been thrown around.


I wouldn't be surprised if the "other factors" part of the conversation was lost in the background or even ignored, if insignius or others assumed it to be a given that the 052D/346A's performance in the "other factors" should at least be equal to that of a Burke/SPY-1, and forming the unaddressed foundation of the "AESA always superior to PESA" position. Of course that's my interpretation of the possible reasoning behind the discussion based on the posts that were made. I find it hard to believe that he or others would believe anything as fallacious as "any AESA is always superior to any PESA" without a few qualifiers behind that position.

One more thing, how many agies got updated from their 1980's computer?

szbd said:

One more thing, how many agies got updated from their 1980's computer?

Click to expand...

I think for the purposes of comparison it would only be fair to look at the latest block software and hardware package for the aegis combat system whether it's a burke or tico, or at least one which was produced at a similar period to when 052D's was.

Bltizo said:

I thought that was a possible meaning too, but then I read the last paragraph of post #1836: "... which is automatically a million times better than anything the dumb commie chinese can bring out in the year 2017 (and who are also seemingly incapable of upgrading their hard and software)" -- which suggests to me that he believes the idea that Chinese hardware and software (aka the 'other factors') being inferior to a comparison system (SPY-1/burke in this case) is not a reasonable one to take, ignoring the rhetoric that's been thrown around.


I wouldn't be surprised if the "other factors" part of the conversation was lost in the background or even ignored, if insignius or others assumed it to be a given that the 052D/346A's performance in the "other factors" should at least be equal to that of a Burke/SPY-1, and forming the unaddressed foundation of the "AESA always superior to PESA" position. Of course that's my interpretation of the possible reasoning behind the discussion based on the posts that were made. I find it hard to believe that he or others would believe anything as fallacious as "any AESA is always superior to any PESA" without a few qualifiers behind that position.

Click to expand...

That was all part of his inferiority-complexed rant, which I'm pretty sure he did not directly connect to AESA vs PESA, where he was so very explicitly derisive about non-hardware factors, which both myself and another poster were talking about before he jumped in and directly attacked them with his melodramatic and logically fallacious argumenta ad passiones. That added to his explicit statements about AESA >>>>>>> PESA and other similar silliness makes it pretty clear to me that he was in fact claiming that AESA is ALWAYS superior to PESA and that discussions of other factors are just pie-in-Chinese-face lies and condescensions.

szbd said:

One more thing, how many agies got updated from their 1980's computer?

Click to expand...

I assume you're referring to "Aegis"? This depends on if you're talking about Ticos or Burkes. I believe all the Burkes have been updated to Baseline 6 Phase III standard (starting from the early 2000's), and are in various stages of being updated to Baseline 7 (and more recently 8), depending on the ship. I'm not sure all Burkes will receive Baseline 7 because this is the BMD update IIRC, but I think all the Ticos will (if they survive budget cuts).

Iron Man said:

...


I assume you're referring to "Aegis"? This depends on if you're talking about Ticos or Burkes. I believe all the Burkes have been updated to Baseline 6 Phase III standard (starting from the early 2000's), and are in various stages of being updated to Baseline 7 (and more recently 8), depending on the ship. I'm not sure all Burkes will receive Baseline 7 because this is the BMD update IIRC, but I think all the Ticos will (if they survive budget cuts).

Click to expand...

according to a knowledgeable member
#7735 kwaigonegin, Jun 12, 2017
(in
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
thread)

kwaigonegin said:

These are the 4 primary variants of the AEGIS baseline 9 capability upgrade.

9A: Upgrade for Ticos that does not include BMD capabilities.

9C: Upgrades Burke DDGs with the Lockheed Martin Multi-Mission Signal Processor that will allow the destroyers to switch between BMD and IAMD.

9D: Is a variant of the 9C program for new construction ships, starting with the planned John Finn (DDG-113).

9E: Is the Baseline 9 variant for the Navy’s Aegis Ashore program.

Click to expand...

anyway what would be the answer to the question of
#1867 szbd, 52 minutes ago

szbd said:

One more thing, how many agies got updated from their 1980's computer?

Click to expand...

? by 'the answer' I mean an integer number: