052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

i.e. said:

btw, nearly all of their programs you see today, you see their origins in 90s, but really accelerated after 99.

Click to expand...

As an aside (I am not getting into the general argument, it's a sidetrack, for one thing), that's not actually that unusual, 20 year development to maturity cycle is normal these days. Look at anything from the SC-21 and ATF to Eurofighter.

That's both a factor of the increasing complexity of system integration in large scale programs, and of the post Cold War draw-down.

---------- Post added at 03:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:14 AM ----------

Bltizo said:

More importantly it also looks larger (namely wider) than 052C's SAPARS. SAPARS is a rectangle, this thing is like a bloody square.

The fact that it's flatter/thinner, and that there is no curve is consistent with some newer naval APARs being fielded, such as the USN's own SPY-3.

Personally I don't expect this new radar to be fielded on 052D, if 052D is indeed a "derivation" off 052C. The issues the USN has been having with putting AMDR aboard flight 3 burkes is an example to that. Rather, I expect this radar might be for the 10k ton ddg/cg, although seeing it aboard a test ship so early compared to the projected date of launch for the 10k ton ddg is quite unprecedented... hmm

Click to expand...

Do we have a scale for that? That's the 892 Hua Luogeng so if anybody has the dimensions for the mast we can compare it with the H/LJG 346.

ps I am not really sure what sort of a breakthrough it might be. We've seen the H/LJG 346 without the curved cover and it seems to be just as flat. Speculation is that the cover is part of the cooling system but I've always been a bit skeptical of that. Assuming it's true then it might be a breakthrough in wiring or cooling!

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Preux said:

Do we have a scale for that? That's the 892 Hua Luogeng so if anybody has the dimensions for the mast we can compare it with the H/LJG 346.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately we don't have a scale, but simply compare this new radar's shape to 346. 346 is sort of a rectangle, while this is a square. If we assume the two are of equal height (which i'm not sure of -- I think the 346 aboard 052C at least is a bit shorter compared to this new PAR), then this new PAR is at least a good deal wider than 346.

ps I am not really sure what sort of a breakthrough it might be. We've seen the H/LJG 346 without the curved cover and it seems to be just as flat. Speculation is that the cover is part of the cooling system but I've always been a bit skeptical of that. Assuming it's true then it might be a breakthrough in wiring or cooling!

Click to expand...

Yes, it's been said that this new radar could just be 346 with a new cooling system/rewired or what not, but then you have to wonder what they've been doing for the last 6 years or so since 346 became mature. Simply developing a new cooling system?? and would such a mediocre improvement actually warrant PLAN interest, unless it yielded gains in many other areas as well?

So for me the only two plausible ideas, are;
1: This is a larger, new variant of 346 with performance gains in addition to a possible new cooling system. I believe 346 has already shown it can be scalabe -- I believe the arrays on Varyag are larger than that on 052C, and that 052C's arrays are larger than the test arrays originally aboard 891.
2: this is a completely new radar, and the presence of that rod beneath the array which is a longer version which we see with 346 is only incidental. Just because you see a pitot tube on most fighter's nose cones doesn't mean all the radars underneath are related. Indeed, if you look at it that way, one should assume that this is indeed a new radar.
Further, type 346 was already quite mature by the mid 2000s, would it not make sense for them to develop a follow on for a new generation of surface combatant? Now look back to the projection of 052D and the 10k ton ddg/cg, and that they are due to be revealed within a few years. It would make sense for the associated new radar system to be tested, no?
Although the issue which arises, is how different does one radar need to be with another for them to be counted as "different" rather than a further "variant".

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Unfortunately we don't have a scale, but simply compare this new radar's shape to 346. 346 is sort of a rectangle, while this is a square. If we assume the two are of equal height (which i'm not sure of -- I think the 346 aboard 052C at least is a bit shorter compared to this new PAR), then this new PAR is at least a good deal wider than 346.

Click to expand...

I was being lazy and hope somebody with the actual numbers would do the work. You know how deceptive scaling can be. I assume the 892's dimensions are known to some extent.

Bltizo said:

Yes, it's been said that this new radar could just be 346 with a new cooling system/rewired or what not, but then you have to wonder what they've been doing for the last 6 years or so since 346 became mature. Simply developing a new cooling system?? and would such a mediocre improvement actually warrant PLAN interest, unless it yielded gains in many other areas as well?

Click to expand...

Well, my point was that we have no idea what this meant - it could be a simple increase of the number of elements (381 per panel for the 346), miniaturization of the elements - or even actual wiring and cooling improvements, which is by no means trivial. AESA radars generate a great deal of heat and interference and both have an adverse impact on performance and if the 14 (if it's them) managed to do away with the need of the dielectric panel altogether... well, I can't possibly say what improvement in performance it'll bring but it'll probably allow for longer continuous use, better quality of beam, etc. In other words, not necessarily mediocre or trivial.

Bltizo said:

So for me the only two plausible ideas, are;
1: This is a larger, new variant of 346 with performance gains in addition to a possible new cooling system. I believe 346 has already shown it can be scalabe -- I believe the arrays on Varyag are larger than that on 052C, and that 052C's arrays are larger than the test arrays originally aboard 891.
2: this is a completely new radar, and the presence of that rod beneath the array which is a longer version which we see with 346 is only incidental. Just because you see a pitot tube on most fighter's nose cones doesn't mean all the radars underneath are related. Indeed, if you look at it that way, one should assume that this is indeed a new radar.
Further, type 346 was already quite mature by the mid 2000s, would it not make sense for them to develop a follow on for a new generation of surface combatant? Now look back to the projection of 052D and the 10k ton ddg/cg, and that they are due to be revealed within a few years. It would make sense for the associated new radar system to be tested, no?
Although the issue which arises, is how different does one radar need to be with another for them to be counted as "different" rather than a further "variant".

Click to expand...

Depends on what exactly you are thinking - I think we are all a bit blinded by how fast China had come in the past decade or so... to put things in perspective, the SPY-1 series was developed 40 years ago and in operation for at least 30 years, and is still going strong, it's certainly not implausible for this to be another 346.

Of course, 'another' 346 is a bit misleading, as the difference between the different marks of SPY-1s are pretty substantial, too. So in essence you are correct, there really isn't much point speculating until they give us the performance parameters... maybe a documentary on CCTV in 20 years. Or a panel in the 2029 national day parade. Or possibly the 20th Zhuhai Air Show.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Preux said:

Well, my point was that we have no idea what this meant - it could be a simple increase of the number of elements (381 per panel for the 346), miniaturization of the elements - or even actual wiring and cooling improvements, which is by no means trivial. AESA radars generate a great deal of heat and interference and both have an adverse impact on performance and if the 14 (if it's them) managed to do away with the need of the dielectric panel altogether... well, I can't possibly say what improvement in performance it'll bring but it'll probably allow for longer continuous use, better quality of beam, etc. In other words, not necessarily mediocre or trivial.

Click to expand...

good point.

Depends on what exactly you are thinking - I think we are all a bit blinded by how fast China had come in the past decade or so... to put things in perspective, the SPY-1 series was developed 40 years ago and in operation for at least 30 years, and is still going strong, it's certainly not implausible for this to be another 346.

Click to expand...

Yes that's definitely true. A counter example, is that SPY-3 and AMDR are both AESA radars with seperate sets for X and S band which seem to be intended for similar purposes. One wonders why SPY-3 can't be scalable down or up to AMDR size.

Of course, 'another' 346 is a bit misleading, as the difference between the different marks of SPY-1s are pretty substantial, too. So in essence you are correct, there really isn't much point speculating until they give us the performance parameters... maybe a documentary on CCTV in 20 years. Or a panel in the 2029 national day parade. Or possibly the 20th Zhuhai Air Show.

Click to expand...

We got leaked info on new naval systems every now and then in the 2000s, I expect we'd get some more info on this new radar in coming years as well, depending on when/which platform it will actually be fitted aboard (052D, or a later surface combatant)

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Yes that's definitely true. A counter example, is that SPY-3 and AMDR are both AESA radars with seperate sets for X and S band which seem to be intended for similar purposes. One wonders why SPY-3 can't be scalable down or up to AMDR size.

Click to expand...

This is off topic - PM me and I'll be happy to talk about it a bit. Suffice it to say it is a fell tale. A fell tale!

We got leaked info on new naval systems every now and then in the 2000s, I expect we'd get some more info on this new radar in coming years as well, depending on when/which platform it will actually be fitted aboard (052D, or a later surface combatant)

Click to expand...

Well, yes. But we also got leaked a lot of junk data (correct but misleading data) and a lot of pure rubbish. I am not holding my breath, considering we still don't know what the 346 can do. Be nice if we could, of course.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Considering the gradualist approach of the PLA maybe they'll put the new radar on a 052C (052C+?) before to switch to next ships.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Those pictures seem a fair representation of what 052D should look like in my mind as of now.

Click to expand...

Are those fan pics, or something more official?

Having 72 VLS Hot cells, and two of the FN-3000L launchers would be a significant upgrade to the Type 052Cs, which, IMHO are already very decent vessels. Although I wouldn't give up entirely on the GUN CIWS systems, maybe two of them amidships to augment the FL-3000N systems, or peprhaps a couple of those auto fire 25mm guns we see on the new Type 056 OPV. You simply need those types of weapons to ensure that any suicide bomber small craft can be dispatched at close quarters..

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Further, type 346 was already quite mature by the mid 2000s, would it not make sense for them to develop a follow on for a new generation of surface combatant? Now look back to the projection of 052D and the 10k ton ddg/cg, and that they are due to be revealed within a few years. It would make sense for the associated new radar system to be tested, no?
Although the issue which arises, is how different does one radar need to be with another for them to be counted as "different" rather than a further "variant".

Click to expand...

Some talked about it as a dual band radar.

The current 346 L-band is selected because of compromise between accuracy and range.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Bltizo said:

Unfortunately we don't have a scale, but simply compare this new radar's shape to 346. 346 is sort of a rectangle, while this is a square. If we assume the two are of equal height (which i'm not sure of -- I think the 346 aboard 052C at least is a bit shorter compared to this new PAR), then this new PAR is at least a good deal wider than 346.

Click to expand...

Compare the ship´s grating (you know the bars that protect crew from falling off a deck). if we assume that both have the same height for both ships, then we can assume that the two PARS have about 3+something times the grating height, in other words have the same height. In addition, 346 is not square, but its almost. This new PAR is not a square. Its also a rectangle, more so than 346, in which the base is considerably wider than the height. Thats why the (correct) impression that its much wider than 346.

Franklin said:

This ship is supposed to be build along side the seventh Type 052C right now.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Taking into acount that these ships havent been produced since a good number of years, why would they build these new 052C, if 052D is right around the corner ??

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Jeff Head said:

Are those fan pics, or something more official?

Having 72 VLS Hot cells, and two of the FN-3000L launchers would be a significant upgrade to the Type 052Cs, which, IMHO are already very decent vessels. Although I wouldn't give up entirely on the GUN CIWS systems, maybe two of them amidships to augment the FN-3000L systems, or peprhaps a couple of those auto fire 25mm guns we see on the new Type 056 OPV. You simply need those types of weapons to ensure that any suicide bomber small craft can be dispatched at close quarters..

Click to expand...

Yes, gun-based CIWS have a usefulness with small watercraft that missile-based CIWS cannot handle well. Since both of the CIWS positions are centerline, you could replace just the rear 730 with the HQ-10 system. That would give you a roughly 270 degree coverage with the 730 and maybe 290-300 degrees with the rear HQ-10. I'm not seeing any room amidships for a remote-controlled autocannon.