052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

CottageLV said:

Type 45 is still much more advanced. It's engine supplier is Rolls Royce, one of the best in the world. They have access to the latest electronics, similar to those in the USN.

Click to expand...

And the chinese do not? I'm not saying type 45 does not have its advantages, ie it has SMART L in addition to SAMPSON, and its combat management is probably better than the initial batch of 052C (think console, CIC design) but beyond that, simply saying "they have the latest electronics, one of the best engine suppliers" doesn't actually say anything of substance.

Personally I think both type 45 and 052C are very similar. Both are in the 7000 - 8000 ton range, both are air defence destroyers with advanced AESA radars. Both are equipped with 48 potentially long range SAMs. Although 052C is more capable in the sense it has greater anti ship/strike capability with 400km ranged YJ-62, while type 45 has to rely on helicopters armed with their own small anti ship missiles.

Their weaponry are almost 100% American, except for some minor guns.

Click to expand...

... I wonder if you know what ship you're talking about.
Type 45 is equipped with sea viper SAM, a naval development of the european aster 15/30 missile. The main gun is british, the minor guns I'm not sure about, the ship has no anti ship missiles to speak of... the only "100% american" weapons are the phalanx ciws and those have only been equipped recently on some ships. (hyperwarp already mentioned it but i'll mention it again lol)

And you shouldn't say "100% american" as if that immediately means they are endowed with the best the world has to offer. Look at anti ship missiles -- the likes of YJ-62 and even brahmos have significant range or speed advantages over harpoon.

They have one of the oldest continuous professional navy in the world. I'm sure they know how to properly build ships.

The most important of all are their personnel. They have a long tradition being a professional navy. Centuries of experiences make them really good at training the best sailors and officers. Even the mighty German fleet can't defeat them in the high seas.

Click to expand...

There's no denying they historical precedents and achievements, but that's not really relevant to a type 45 and 052C comparison. We're assuming a situation where both navies can operate their vessels competently

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

in this day and age we need vast naval fleets, not because we like to wage war, we've done all that, but to protect our oceans, we need to protect the seas, we have national parks on land we need national parks in the sea

we need more global co-operation to police the high seas, we need to work together to protect and millions of sqaure miles which are being fished illegally by industrial scale fishing trawlers which have nets that extend for 15 miles emptying the oceans of wildlife and ripping up everything in their path

100s of millions of people rely on the Indian Ocean for their daily lives and to survive, preserving and protecting it is vital for the future of us all

in this day and age globalisation has brought strain on all our resources, and the Oceans being the main tagret, and we need to use them intelligently, however this globalsaition has brought with it illegal and blackmarket gangs which have only interest in profits

trade by sea is rising at a exponential rate, pollution and rubbish are being emptied into them and irriversible damage has happened, this is our planet so its our duty to look after it, because no one else will

so my point here is, as a scientist we do not want machines for war and killings, but for peace and stability, naval fleets which will bring countrys closer and provide secuirty for us all, so future generations can see and experience what we have around us today

Chinese Naval fleets will be vital for peace in the region and rest of Asia, it has to rise to bring law and order and to be a source of help in times of natural disasters, like earthquakes and tsunamis

yes be prepared for war and equip yourself, but there is also the flip side of the coin, a side which is almost entirely missed

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

kroko said:

I agree. Comparing major world navies is just an "academic" exercice. Something that military fans love to do. But almost certainly will never happen.

The US and USSR´s navies engaged in a far more confrontational relationship during 45 years (and soviet navy was more powerful than PLAN today). Barring the cuba crisis of 1962, nothing ever came out of it. Just a monumental waste of resources.

I think that its ok to discuss PLAN ships, but futile to compare to others. China only started building modern warships 20 years ago. They still have a long way to go. Perhabs we may have this discussion in 20 years but not now.

Click to expand...

Not a waste of resources at all. sort of like the nuclear deterent. If one side does it and the other does not, it is much more likely that the side with it will use it much more often to influence things in a manner which most nearly fits their perception of their interests.

When both sides do it...though there is a lot of firep[ower out there, that is precisely the point. makes it much less likely that they will actually go at it...thoguh clearly not impossible because World History teaches us that on occassion, world's navies clash.

with the overriding nuclear deterrent, that is just one mre reason a major escalation will not occur, even if a small regional confrontation occurs.

So, as a result, IMHO, neither is a "waste".

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:

When both sides do it...though there is a lot of firep[ower out there, that is precisely the point. makes it much less likely that they will actually go at it...thoguh clearly not impossible because World History teaches us that on occassion, world's navies clash.
".

Click to expand...

as a student of history, one would note that Anglo-German Naval Arms Race at beginning of last century clearly contributed towards the worsening relationship between Germany and G.Britain.... eventough Queen Elizabeth has a german husband and was Kaiser Whehlem II's maternal grandmother.

German naval strategy and the rationale behind the naval arms program was clearly designed more of a deterent to bring Britain to the table to negotiate a solution. rather then a explicit challenge to Britain's global naval superority.. it is even reflected in its battleship designes miost of its battleships were designed for short sorties into northsea... with limited fuel bunkers.

Britain however could not accept germany as a naval power and choose to out build Germany instead. Germany responded in kind and reasoned that Britain would hard pressed to acheive local superority in north seas.

so, no naval arms race never contributes to world peace, it is a fallacy of first degree and only the hegemonic power (used here with out bias) would argue with.

If we exchanged GB with US and Germany with China today. and North Seas with Pacific. Clearly it is tempting to draw equivalencies.

China needs to protecting its access to raw resources, its sealanes and its vulnerable coastal cities, while US sees chinese naval force clearly as regional challenger that is eroding its local superiority, thus shifting nearly 50% naval assets over and the talk about "anti-anti-access" (nevermind what kind of access it wants... ie. ability to hold hostage one's most vulnerables and use such as leverage to extract geopolitical gains )and air-sea battle (clear equivalent to 80s soviet european scenario air-land battle.)

bottomline is the madness needs to stop. US should take a page out of history and agree to a detent.

On a wider note,

One, however biased, I think, should recognize that rise of china today has coupled with OUT the usual external territorial aggression that marked nearly all previous generation of world powers, wether it is Spain, Dutch, the British, France, Germany, Japan, Soviet Russia, or United States. Its territory actual shrunk compare to its previous apex. only post 1949 did its territories shrinkage stopped.

it has effectively achieved a world #2 status simply through existing world trade system and relentless hard work of its people.

That, I think shuold count for something.
If such pacific historical trajectory of super power is seen as aggressive and thus is countered with military alliances, then the next power coming along would hesitate to imitate china. for that a peaceful trajectory clearly did not have its intended affect... alturistically speaking or not.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

i.e. said:

no naval arms race never contributes to world peace, it is a fallacy of first degree and only the hegemonic power (used here with out bias) would argue with.

If we exchanged GB with US and Germany with China today. and North Seas with Pacific. Clearly it is tempting to draw equivalencies.

China needs to protecting its access to raw resources, its sealanes and its vulnerable coastal cities, while US sees chinese naval force clearly as regional challenger that is eroding its local superiority, thus shifting nearly 50% naval assets over and the talk about "anti-anti-access" (nevermind what kind of access it wants... ie. ability to hold hostage one's most vulnerables and use such as leverage to extract geopolitical gains )and air-sea battle (clear equivalent to 80s soviet european scenario air-land battle.)

Click to expand...

Sorry, ie. you can find and use examples in history to prove your point...but that occurs when the balance gets very skewed and or one or the other power is seeking abject dominance over others in the area.

The Cold War is a good example of the oppositie. Based on the principles I outlined above (and you forgot to take into consideration the addition of the overriding nucler deterrence I mentioned), peace was maintained.

Clealry, once war does break out, then both sides are going to go "all out" (usually if they are both maritime powers) to win and exert control.

But, as I stated above, with maritime powers that are backed by the nuclear deterrent, both work to mitigate the tendancy and temptation to escalate to full blown war...also used here without bias.

The US is not "angry that China is getting a big Navu," the US is just as concerned about its nation's interests which are tied to its vital allies as the Chinese are. The major flash point is either Taiwan or the SCS, where the US would view agression there by the PLAN as an attempt to do the very thing you indicate the Chinese will not do. And if they do not, I predict there will be no problem, and that is there is a relatively small, though "hot" incident, it will be quickly resolved.

Time will tell, but what has to occur, both sides need a detent. one side cannot do it alone. Both have to views (and have reason to view - so it is a two way street) the other as non-belligerent. Not seeking to take things by force, and not trying to antagonize or militarily bully the other's vital allies without very good and obvious reasons that are seen globally.

I pray trhta will occur...but it cannot be this "US should do this or that." it should be "the US and CHina together should agree to do this or that," when that happens, tensions are diffused.

As it is, the movement of and redeplying of assets occurs by every nation based on what it deems are in its national interests. There re reasons for it and both sides need to work to play them down.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:

I pray trhta will occur...but it cannot be this "US should do this or that." it should be "the US and CHina together should agree to do this or that," when that happens, tensions are diffused.

As it is, the movement of and redeplying of assets occurs by every nation based on what it deems are in its national interests. There re reasons for it and both sides need to work to play them down.

Click to expand...

The problem with your argument is that it is the US that has the overwhelming advantage here. It is the US (the media, the scholars) who is always talking about the "china threat" and how its important to keep the US as "the undisputed pacific superpower". It is the US who always say that PLAN ships must play by the "rules". What would the US reaction be if china started to navigate aircraft carriers near its coast ? lol. Why does the US needs to increase its pacific fleet to 60% of its total fleet, if china has no aircraft carriers, no cruisers, no LHD, noisy as hell submarines, and few modern ships ? lol (even if they get them it will be in ridicule numbers compared to US).

I agree that both sides must work together. But it is the US who needs to make the most effort. It is the predominant power.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

@Jeff Head

I did not say "US is Mad"
I said it is mad that with all the history that provided us that in this day and age this kind of cycle can continue.

I agree both have to work at it. just like in a marriage. unless one can get a divorce move to another planet. we are all stuck on this earth.

but US clear can give more as it is the preeminent power. China on the other hand is pretty modest in what is it trying to do, and behaving as if its leadership understood cycles of arms race do cause unstable situations. if one measures its behavior with other powers that was up and coming during its day its pretty modest. even factor in all of the hypes.

after all, global leadership is what US strive for, and is in a position to give, what demonstrate good global leadership other then act first in a detente.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

The world is like a giant prisoner's dilemma. With over a hundred players.

It is very difficult to make the first step. The trust isn't there. And not making the first step feeds back to the mistrust, and it goes on.

That doesn't mean we should stop trying, but reality is reality.

Hopefully we will muddle through this one without a major war like the Cold War.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

kroko said:

The problem with your argument is that it is the US that has the overwhelming advantage here. It is the US (the media, the scholars) who is always talking about the "china threat" and how its important to keep the US as "the undisputed pacific superpower". It is the US who always say that PLAN ships must play by the "rules". What would the US reaction be if china started to navigate aircraft carriers near its coast ? lol. Why does the US needs to increase its pacific fleet to 60% of its total fleet, if china has no aircraft carriers, no cruisers, no LHD, noisy as hell submarines, and few modern ships ? lol (even if they get them it will be in ridicule numbers compared to US).

I agree that both sides must work together. But it is the US who needs to make the most effort. It is the predominant power.

Click to expand...

Well, the largest body of water in the world is, by far, the Pacific, so having a majority of your fleet there, which touches (via the Indian Ocean) so much of the World, makes sense.

Second, the US positions its fleet according to its interests and its peceived threats, whether from China, North Korea, or a number of other potential adversaries around the Pacific rim, including Russia.

Finally, just because one power is stronger, doe not at all translate into the need for that one to work harder or "do more," for that reason alone. Such logic is flawed. They ahve to mutually work together.

China is building rapidly, and with very modern vessels of all types, from Carriers, to very effective DDGS, to very effecte FFGs, to LPDs, to SSNs top SSBNs, to SSs, etc. It is very impressive what they are doing. And they are all conentrated pretty much in the China Sea area.

The US sees and realizes this and is responding, because the US, on the other hand is spread all over the globe. The US has always had more ships in the Pacific than anywhere else...but those are split between the eatern pacific, the western pacific...and a fleet for th Inidan Ocean.

Now they are going to put more ships in thelocal area so that the fleet over near asia in the Pacific is stornger to ensure that there is sufficient force in the area to serve as a deterrent for anyone. As Ilong as no one starts firing, the fleet will have served its primary purpose...to deter hostilities. In the unfortunate and tragic even that we all pray does not happen and a conflict erupts, the US wants to have enough force there to handle any contingency.

That's all.

I expect as China's naval force grows, they will seek to do the same.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

i.e. said:

@Jeff Head

I did not say "US is Mad"
I said it is mad that with all the history that provided us that in this day and age this kind of cycle can continue.

I agree both have to work at it. just like in a marriage. unless one can get a divorce move to another planet. we are all stuck on this earth.

but US clear can give more as it is the preeminent power. China on the other hand is pretty modest in what is it trying to do, and behaving as if its leadership understood cycles of arms race do cause unstable situations. if one measures its behavior with other powers that was up and coming during its day its pretty modest. even factor in all of the hypes.

after all, global leadership is what US strive for, and is in a position to give, what demonstrate good global leadership other then act first in a detente.

Click to expand...

"Mad" is not the official word. "Concerned" is the official word. Concerned that another country post-Cold War wishes that the US does NOT have overwhelming military dominance and control over their own strategic interests. Who would dare think that, and why would anyone want such a thing? Such retarded (and ultimately rhetorical) questions were typical of those asked by people like Rummy when China was just starting to modernize its armed forces. I remember watching a news conference many years when he was fielding questions from the audience and a US military officer got up to the mike and put him to shame when he kept asking why why why LOL