052C/052D Class Destroyers

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Lethe said:
I like some of the ideas here regarding differing equipment fits, but I'm not sure you could get an AAW design into a hull much smaller than 052D/E. What would you cut?

If anything I think there could be well a call for an ASW-focused 052 series to provide a long-range, high-performance counterpart to the smaller 054Bs, akin to the Spruance and Knox/Perry combo. Of course the 052 hull may not actually be suitable for a dedicated ASW ship, but something in that general size region.

The larger ASW ships would primarily accompany carriers, amphibs, supply ships, and other high value units on longer deployments. High speed and high endurance. The smaller ASW ships would operate mostly within the first two island chains, or independently on long-range "show the flag" deployments that don't call for high speed transit.

Broadly speaking I don't think people take ASW seriously enough relative to the threat, when even just a few short years from now it will clearly be the predominant threat to China's ability to secure its waters (and protect its HVUs). In the late 1980s USN operated 90 blue water ASW frigates (Knox/Perry) and 30 ASW destroyers (Spruance). China today confronts an undersea threat of similar magnitude and requires a response of similar magnitude. The stuff that other nations around the world are doing today is irrelevant because it is occurring in an entirely different context (i.e. basically an absence of threat and very limited funds resulting in sub-optimal decisions regarding design and fleet structure). One needs to look to the Cold War for guidance.
Click to expand...

The future fleet structure for surface combatants had been discussed before at good length; the prospect of a common destroyer or heavy frigate hull for asw and aaw had been discussed as well.

But at this stage it seems like fzgfzy is pretty insistent in his belief that we will see an 054B class as well as an 052E class as well as continuation of the 055 class with a follow on 055A class.

The question IMO now becomes when will they arrive, how many of each will be built, and what exactly each class will look like.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
There are China watchers at the PDF that is questioning the accuracy and relevance of fzgfzy,
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Tam said:
There are China watchers at the PDF that is questioning the accuracy and relevance of fzgfzy,
Click to expand...

I'm aware of what some of them are saying. I myself do not take every claim fzgfzy (or indeed other big shrimps) as complete gospel, but I do think there's been enough persistence on the topic of ship classes like 054B, 055A, and 052E such that it's enough to give us some sensible parameters for limiting the scope of discussion about future fleet structure.
 
M

Mirabo

Junior Member
Registered Member
A lot of 'big shrimps', including fzgfzy, are under constant scrutiny by their fellow PLA watchers. It's no secret that they are about as reliable as the rest of us.

But they are still relevant. Why? Because they make sensible guesstimates that most other people aren't informed enough to make. The more familiar one becomes with the subject area, the less relevant the 'big shrimps' become for that individual.

That being said, it's still interesting to hear their thoughts, just as it's interesting to hear anyone's thoughts (provided that they are well-informed). Just remember to take everything with a grain of salt - not just from the 'big shrimps', but literally everything. Make your own observations where you can.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
Those who accused the leakers or "big shrimps" of being unreliable are asking beyond the permissible level of public circulation of military information. If any one, including fzyfzy and pop3 will to be providing accurate technical information, they will be sitting in a small room drinking tea with some strangers.

Some information are vague and distorted as a safety net for the leakers avoiding drinking tea. As China military watchers, we know the pattern of information disclosure, First there is a rumour as always, some partial fuzzy information from the shrimp, then a blur picture, and finally the real stuff in clear photo and statement from the spoke person from the authority.

The rule of game in China watching is to take the message with a grain of salt, filtering out fake news and data, and constantly tracking the development with peripheral / circumstantial events and development as supporting evidence.

Also, no one that posted messages on internet can provide 100% accurate information on China's military. Certainly not a single Big Shrimp.
 
Last edited:
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Lethe said:
I like some of the ideas here regarding differing equipment fits, but I'm not sure you could get an AAW design into a hull much smaller than 052D/E. What would you cut?
Click to expand...

Going from 7000 tons to 5500 tons is not much smaller in my book.

And as for what I think could be cut? Well, part of the savings could come from smaller crew. If 052 indeed has a crew of 280, there's room to spare. British Type 45 has a crew of 190, even though it's a bit larger ship in tonnage. So 50+ sailors should be able to be cut. That alone should result in 60+ square meters of internal deck space and 150 cubic meters of internal volume. Probably more, with smaller kitchen/mess/toilet space allowance. Fewer workstations perhaps and so on.
Various technology improvements may also shave some cubic meters. Electornics doesn't need to be as bulky or require as much cooling space?
Smaller displacement may require less volume spent on propulsion, again saving some space.

The deck gun may not need to be 130mm. Perhaps go with a smaller one fit for a frigate. Again some cubic meters spared.

The helicopter hangar and deck would eat into the saved space, though. If they're to house Z20, rather than Ka29/Z9.

Number of HQ9 missiles may not need to be as huge, though. 052C was deemed as good enough with 48. So with perhaps a new VLS block, using just 4 cells instead of 8, better distribution of VLS blocks could be achieved throughout the ship. 56 VLS cells overall may be enough for the whole ship. Given that there are also 055 ships being built.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Totoro said:
Going from 7000 tons to 5500 tons is not much smaller in my book.

And as for what I think could be cut? Well, part of the savings could come from smaller crew. If 052 indeed has a crew of 280, there's room to spare. British Type 45 has a crew of 190, even though it's a bit larger ship in tonnage. So 50+ sailors should be able to be cut. That alone should result in 60+ square meters of internal deck space and 150 cubic meters of internal volume. Probably more, with smaller kitchen/mess/toilet space allowance. Fewer workstations perhaps and so on.
Various technology improvements may also shave some cubic meters. Electornics doesn't need to be as bulky or require as much cooling space?
Smaller displacement may require less volume spent on propulsion, again saving some space.

The deck gun may not need to be 130mm. Perhaps go with a smaller one fit for a frigate. Again some cubic meters spared.

The helicopter hangar and deck would eat into the saved space, though. If they're to house Z20, rather than Ka29/Z9.

Number of HQ9 missiles may not need to be as huge, though. 052C was deemed as good enough with 48. So with perhaps a new VLS block, using just 4 cells instead of 8, better distribution of VLS blocks could be achieved throughout the ship. 56 VLS cells overall may be enough for the whole ship. Given that there are also 055 ships being built.
Click to expand...

There is a tendency for ships of the same category or role to become larger even if armament may not necessarily increase.
I imagine things like increased automation, increased crew comfort, increased internal hardware for sensors, communications, battle management, as well as the possibility of having IEPS may all mean that a ship of equal armament and/or category or role may be larger than its previous generation of ship in the same category or role.

That said, I think going for a two tier surface combatant fleet of 055s + a new 5.5-6k ton frigates/destroyers divided between AAW and ASW may not be a bad decision assuming enough ships are bought of all types.... but at this stage it seems like the PLAN will be continuing with the three tier structure for its blue water capable surface combatants, and there's only so much detail or depth that we can imagine or speculate about as to how much difference in cost or capability a 5.5k ton ship can have.



I think if we want to talk about prospective future fleet structure we can move it to a different thread, like here:

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/plan-surface-combatants-2020.t8082/page-3
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Comparing with other navies the Chinese may want to keep the three tier structure simply because of cost concerns.
One of the main issues China has is lack of anti-submarine warfare capabilities. A new frigate class which is dedicated to the role would go a long way in addressing this.
 
T

Tetrach

Junior Member
Registered Member
Literrally every navies have been based on a "three tier structure". There's nothing special from China about this topic.

Isn't the Type 054A good enough for ASW ? Also the development of a carrier fleet and extended anti-submarine air assets have greatly improved the Chinese capabilities in this regard.
 
P

PanAsian

Major
China's maritime geography is simply too militarily disadvantageous so it must always maintain a numerically large "garrison" force to secure the seas within the 1st island chain, they also need a significant "forward defense" force if they want to contend the seas between the 1st and 2nd island chains in order to truly secure the seas within the 1st island chain. In order to do so economically it makes sense for them to have a near seas hi-lo and far seas hi-lo ship types.

It may eventually make sense to combine the near-hi and far-lo ship types into a single one if China sees a higher threat environment and is willing to invest more in such a capability. AA and missile defense needs will be primary drivers for such an investment. The carriers and AA surface combatants would be more equal escorts for each other rather than necessarily the latter escorting the former.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top