052/052B Class Destroyers

i.e.

Senior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

I think ie was saying some dimensions of the AGS could be done more cheaply, and in some cases better (i.e. range, payload) by putting existing MRLS onto smaller ships. Obviously putting an MRLS onto a destroyer is stupid, you could use that space for a much greater number of VLS tubes.

I imagine the new 130mm gun should have some extended range/precision strike munitions being developed for it, hardly a difficult task for the industry's experience with similar artillery munitions. The ERGM meant for the US navy's mark 45 127mm guns was cancelled but was meant to have a range of some 110km compared with AGS's LRLAP's 190km.

LRLAP's 190 km range is still in fantasy land.

an MRLS would have a longer range with bigger payload vs a tubed artillery. give the same level of flight control and guidance technology.

on the other hand MRLS based solution the recoil is none and weight is much lighter , so you can reconfigure your existing ships with less problems.

some of these MRLS has strap down inertial "trajectory guidance" and GPS/ inertial correction all the way down to impact. so they are nothing but cheaper short range ballistic missiles.

hell if the rocket artillery has a strap down inertial guidance on ascende phase then I don't teven think a stabilized mount is necessary

something like the modular PHL-03 system they did on ShiChang would be great on something like a 071 replacing the fwd gun on a mission basis.

best part is. it doesnt cost a billion+ dollar program with a fancy acronym and a program office to get into service.
 
Last edited:

plawolf

Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

This line of discussion reminds me of the old space pen joke.

It was discovered that the old fountain pen does not work in 0-G, so NASA spent millions and years developing a state-of-the-art space pen that works in 0-G, upside down and under water.

The Russians used a pencil.
 

s002wjh

Junior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

LRLAP's 190 km range is still in fantasy land.

an MRLS would have a longer range with bigger payload vs a tubed artillery. give the same level of flight control and guidance technology.

on the other hand MRLS based solution the recoil is none and weight is much lighter , so you can reconfigure your existing ships with less problems.

some of these MRLS has strap down inertial "trajectory guidance" and GPS/ inertial correction all the way down to impact. so they are nothing but cheaper short range ballistic missiles.

hell if the rocket artillery has a strap down inertial guidance on ascende phase then I don't teven think a stabilized mount is necessary

something like the modular PHL-03 system they did on ShiChang would be great on something like a 071 replacing the fwd gun on a mission basis.

best part is. it doesnt cost a billion+ dollar program with a fancy acronym and a program office to get into service.

MRLS is larger than shells, shells only need one tube to lunch it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The Advanced Gun System (AGS) was originally being developed as part of the DD-21 program, but is now intended for the replacement DD (X) program. This weapon was formerly known as the Vertical Gun for Advanced Ships (VGAS), but as of September 1999 the Navy decided to abandon the truly vertical mounting design and instead utilize a more conventional turret configuration.
As a vertical gun system, this weapon could have used only guided munitions. With the more traditional design, both conventional as well as guided munitions may now be used. The concept of this weapon is thus similar to that of the 5"/62 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mod 4 program. Ballistic round development for AGS has been reportedly postponed or cancelled and none of the existing US Army or NATO 155 mm projectiles can be adapted for use in AGS.

The design of this weapon will include a fully automated ammunition magazine to reduce the crew size and to maximize the ammunition capacity. Ammunition for this weapon will use a separate propellant canister, which will be used for both conventional and guided munitions. Proposed projectiles include guided land and surface attack munitions as well as ballistic projectiles using course correcting fuzes (CCF). Planned CEP accuracy for guided weapons is 20 to 50 m (22 to 55 yards). An AGS firing Long Range Land Attack Projectiles (LRLAP) at 12 rounds per minute was considered to be equivalent to one 155 mm artillery battery (6 guns) firing at 2 rounds per gun per minute. However, as part of a weight reduction program, BAE in 2005 derated the ROF of the AGS down to 10 rounds per minute.

In October 2001 the first prototype was successfully proof-tested, firing eleven test projectiles at pressures ranging from 50% below normal to 50% above normal. In April 2003 Lockheed-Martin was selected over Raytheon to continue development of the Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP). This phase includes the manufacturing of 15 rounds to conduct flight tests and support the AGS Critical Design Review (CDW).

A September 2004 GAO report stated: "While development of the advanced gun system is proceeding as planned and has even overcome early challenges in design and development, the current plans do not include fully demonstrating the maturity of the subsystem. Land based testing of the gun system, including the automated mount and magazine, is planned for the summer of 2005 and flight tests for the munition are set to complete in September of 2005. However, the two technologies will not be tested together until after ship installation. Program officials cited lack of adequate test facilities as the reason for the separate tests."

In June 2005, a Northrop Grumman press release stated that "The LRLAP Guided Flight-four (GF-04) gun test marked the longest successful guided-projectile test in history. The LRLAP, fired at the San Nicolas Island test facility at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, Pt. Mugu, Calif., (NAWC-WD), flew a guided trajectory to an impact location more than 59 nautical miles down range."

In June 2005 United Defense won a $376 million contract from the Naval Sea Systems Command for the continuation of design, development and test of the AGS, including the fully automated gun, magazine and the Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP), for use aboard the Navy's new DD(X) Destroyer. In July 2005, BAE Systems, who purchased United Defense, awarded Lockheed Martin a $120 million contract for for further development and testing of LRLAP. This cost-plus-award-fee contract covers additional development and tests during 2006-2008 and support to AGS qualification testing during 2009-2010. More than 100 projectiles will be delivered and tested under this contract. Full-rate production is expected to begin in 2011.

A 21 September 2005 US Naval Sea Systems Command press release regarding a rate of fire test for AGS conducted on 31 August 2005 stated: "The test successfully demonstrated a sustained maximum rate of fire of at least ten rounds per minute in eight round bursts, and unloaded eight complete rounds from a pallet in 45 seconds or less. The event also tested a sustained firing capability and reliability by demonstrating the AGS Engineering Development Model gun and magazine are capable of unloading several pallets of ammunition."

A U.S. Department of Defense press release dated 7 April 2006 announced that "the first DD(X) destroyer will be designated DDG 1000. As the lead ship in the class, it will also be named in honor of former Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Elmo R. "Bud" Zumwalt, Jr."

A BAE press release dated 26 April 2007 announced that Naval Sea Systems Command had added a $108.9 million cost-plus-award-fee modification to the previously awarded contract for completion of the design, development and integration of the Advanced Gun System (AGS) for DDG-1000.

Perhaps unsurprisingly given the high cost overruns associated with this project, Defense News reported in a 22 July 2008 article that the USN appears ready to halt the DDG-1000 program at only two ships rather than seven - which was already down from the originally planned 32 ships - and to instead build eight to eleven up-rated Arleigh Burke DDG-51 class destroyers, construction of which had been slated to end in 2012. The same article states that the Navy is investigating using the SPY-3 radar system and the AGS gun on these new DDG-51 destroyers.

Land Attack Guided Projectile About 100 nm (180 km)
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

^ Your point being?

Developing a massive new gun and a ship to hold it isn't exactly cheap. Modern MRLS on smaller ships on the other hand are much more affordable, potentially offering greater range and payload at similar accuracy but with lower sustainable fire on individual ships.

Let's face it, comparing a gun like AGS with the MRLS+small ship option is apples and oranges. PLAN can use the latter because their coastal bombardment will only be mainly focused in support of amphibious operations at taiwan, and you can expect a good number of vessels, potentially military and commercial, to be fielding these add ons. The USN does it at greater distances from its shore, so smaller single purpose ships will be less viable. What works best for one does not necessarily work for the other, but again I'd expect the PLAN to be looking into ERGM type munitions for the new 130mm gun.

Which makes me wonder why the US didn't just modernize their 127mm guns and invest in ERGM instead of going for the new and expensive AGS/LRLAP instead even when the two would offer similar capability...
 

escobar

Brigadier
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

DDG Luda class 131 decommissioned. Replaced by 052C 150

2007090673f8b990aab63d0.jpg
 

IronsightSniper

Junior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Nope.

1. Reload for a navalized system with mechanical auto reloaders, I do not think is 20 minutes.

2. range for the original baseline is 70 km. for the chinese copy (PHL-03) it is cited around 150 km.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I suspect with same type of tricks LRLAP is playing, i.e. rocket assist for the warhead it could be much higher.

3. If AGS is designed soley to fight puny insurgents with its 11 kg warhead then fine. In front of some more serious resistence I would wonder how much good that 11 kg spitwad will do.

4. and who says SMERCH type of rocket artillery couldn't use GPS/inertial/terminally IR-radar guided munition to achieve the same type acuracy? actually wouldn't it be easier because , wait, most rocket artillery in service already has all the pletory of guided munitions.
and the hw design requirements for these sensored warheads are less strigent because rocket artillery don't have to deal with the m-teenth Gs of accelleration when coming out of a overloadedsuperbigcaliber gun tube.

Nope.

1. AFAIK, not many ships even use transplanted MLRS as a replacement for guns (mostly because any competent navy knows that you can't replace the gun), and even at that, the one I do know of that uses MLRS, the Russian Zubr (it's technically a landing craft) basically uses a Navalized BM-21, and even then, it's main purpose is for mine clearing, not to mention the fact that it's still "manually" loaded.

3. lol. 11 kg of HE is not puny. If you or I were hit with it, I think we can conclude that we're dead. Remember, the AGS is not a normal gun. The LRLAP is not a normal round, since it weighs about 5 times more than what a regular 155 mm projectile from a land-based SPG would weigh, with twice the explosives, by the way. This is coupled by the fact that it's actually accurate, unlike most rockets. That means you can put pin-point rounds here and there in a jiffy, whilst with a MLRS, you'd put a few rounds there, hope it lands where you want it to, wait for a few more rockets to be loaded, etc.

4. Because the Smerch doesn't. If you're arguing hypotheticals, don't, because we're talking about what could happen, and the Smerch doesn't use terminal guidance for it's le massif warheads. For submunitions, it does, however. This means that though you can put a round generally where you want it, it won't spread it's munitions where you want them to go. Which, while, the AGS can put a round there, and it'll go there. But however, if you really want a MLRS that actually is comparable in performance to the AGS, go with the M270 with the M30 combo. GPS guided rockets that disperse unguided submunitions. If you ensure that the rocket goes where you want it to go, you don't need guided submunitions for the rest of the job.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

1: We're talking ships around the size of shichang, which can be easily adopted from civilian analogues with the non deck penetrating MRLS aboard shichang

6131d1328433642-071-lpd-landing-craft-148_72972_40520b5e3ec7ef0.jpg

navalMRLS.jpg

6132d1328433787-071-lpd-landing-craft-060817154558870.jpg

Hmmvw's description in the 071 thread "It's a containerized 300mm MLR module tested on Shichang, it's alleged that the launcher base doesn't penetrate any deck, and the container behind it houses rocket reloads and independent power supply and fire control system. Such system can be retrofitted to ships such as 071 (maybe clear some space on the bow deck) or 074 (open vehicle deck) to provide sustained fire support for the landing party, similar to a capability LPD17's original concept proposed."

3: 11 kg of HE compared to the payload of a 300mm rocket can be considered relatively small.

4: This whole discussion of MRLS vs guns was assuming the MRLS had precision guidance, and is not exactly a hypothetical weapon. China already offers a wide variety of guided MRLS systems "similar to Smerch"

AR-3 rocket brochure, you can make out ~50m CEP with rockets of range ~200km
index.php


Obviously precision guidance isn't far away. Although I'm not sure if the PLA's PHL03 300mm's have precision guided rockets, but the technology's there and it's already been demosntrated on ships.
index.php
 

i.e.

Senior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

^ Thanks Blitzo

I was just too lazy as usual to dig these up. Shichang is basically a container ship btw, its hulls are not really modified that much.


so, instead of billion dollar programs to R/D big guns, and put these on dedicated land attack destroyers and 12000 ton cruisers sporting, that essentially to drop 155 artillery shells.

at on set of a mission, one can just basically bolt these things onto drafted containers ships and amphibious auxiliaries.

There is a saying in chinese,
富人有富人的活法,穷人有穷人的活法.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

China already have laser guided artillery (tubed) shells. Compared to that, precision guidance for MLRS would be far easier to implement. The reason China has not deployed this is because of costs and the way they do business with their MLRS and the kind of targets they intend to use their MLRS against.

Something else to consider is that the Chinese version of the CBU97 sensor fused weapon has a MLRS version, and most Chinese MLRS has cluster bomb versions.

Why pansy about lazing individual targets and picking them off one at a time when you can just fire off a salvo of MLRS rockets with CBU97s to take out all armor in a massive area, and follow that up with another salvo of MLSR with anti-personnel cluster bombs to take out any infantry that survived the CBU97s?
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

China already have laser guided artillery (tubed) shells. Compared to that, precision guidance for MLRS would be far easier to implement. The reason China has not deployed this is because of costs and the way they do business with their MLRS and the kind of targets they intend to use their MLRS against.

And satellite guided rounds like excalibur for artillery too, from PLA daily reports -- though there are already many chinese rocket systems with sat guidance (SY-400, and multiple MLRS). For general purpose precision strike, satellite guidance would be more useful than laser or even sensor fused imo. But hey, that's another advantage for MLRS, being able to support a variety of payloads.

At the training range, the satellite-guided new-type artilleries of the “red” army launched shells towards the amphibious tanks of the “blue” army
Mechanized infantry division kicks off new training session

(Source: PLA Daily) 2011-01-13

  A mechanized infantry division of the Nanjing Military Area Command has conducted five confrontation drills in succession between the “red” and “blue” armies since the training session of this year kicked off in January. The reporters found that it was a new move taken by the division to start training session with drillings of highly difficult subjects.

  At the training range, the satellite-guided new-type artilleries of the “red” army launched shells towards the amphibious tanks of the “blue” army which were beyond the shooting range, in a bid to test the "precision strike under verge conditions”, a prize-winning training subject last year in the army group. While the “blue” army was unwilling to be outdone, under the coverage of electromagnetic interference, a group of new-type amphibious tanks launched a sudden attack on the “red” army’s flank side.

  "The troops were greeted by highly difficult subjects at the beginning of the new training session, thus their enthusiasm in training has been blazed up", an officer told the reporters, and a lot of servicemen in the division had the same feeling.

  A training schedule of the division showed that nearly one hundred confrontation drillings involving highly difficult training subjects would be staged in succession in the next few days.

  By Ouyang Hao and Li Dingjiang

Editor:Ouyang
 
Top