052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

"Not feasible" or "not necessary" imply entirely different things about the internal arrangement of the 052C's stern spaces. The fact is the external arrangement of the 052C, including all the hatches, cameras, lights, and helo control room that currently occupy the starboard side, do not suggest to me that it is not possible to place a second hangar there, and that was my point.

Click to expand...

And that's based on assumption that it's empty inside that space, which is hard to believe. To make room they'd have to move what's already there to other parts of the ship, and the rearranging will cascading to almost everything inside the ship. If it's feasible then they would have already done so, since PLAN fielded three types of destroyers with twin hangars. If it's not feasible but necessary, then PLAN would ask Jiangnan to make take the hard route and making all those aforementioned changes to the design to incorporate the second hangar. The absence of the hangar on new built 052Cs suggest that PLAN doesn't really care of the additional hangar.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

hmmwv said:

And that's based on assumption that it's empty inside that space, which is hard to believe. To make room they'd have to move what's already there to other parts of the ship, and the rearranging will cascading to almost everything inside the ship. If it's feasible then they would have already done so, since PLAN fielded three types of destroyers with twin hangars. If it's not feasible but necessary, then PLAN would ask Jiangnan to make take the hard route and making all those aforementioned changes to the design to incorporate the second hangar. The absence of the hangar on new built 052Cs suggest that PLAN doesn't really care of the additional hangar.

Click to expand...

I never made any kind of assumption about that space being empty. I already said that space was likely being used but could be merely seen as a "luxury", on this very page even, but clearly you missed that post. Luxury would mean things like extra storage space or recreational space for the crew, more fuel, etc. The absence of two hangars on the new construction destroyers doesn't necessarily mean it's not feasible to do so. It could mean either the PLAN feels it's not needed for their current requirements, or that PLAN believes the helo shortage will last much longer than you assume it will. Neither of these possibilities mean a second hangar cannot be build at that location because of structural or space concerns.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

I never made any kind of assumption about that space being empty. I already said that space was likely being used but could be merely seen as a "luxury", on this very page even, but clearly you missed that post. Luxury would mean things like extra storage space or recreational space for the crew, more fuel, etc. The absence of two hangars on the new construction destroyers doesn't necessarily mean it's not feasible to do so. It could mean either the PLAN feels it's not needed for their current requirements, or that PLAN believes the helo shortage will last much longer than you assume it will. Neither of these possibilities mean a second hangar cannot be build at that location because of structural or space concerns.

Click to expand...

Well that's still based on the assumption that the space is a luxury, which I disagrees, for a ship of 052C's size it packs a lot of weapons that take a lot of internal space, I would say that if it's possible for them to squeeze in another hangar they would have done so over luxury items such as recreational space or extra storage.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

hmmwv said:

Well that's still based on the assumption that the space is a luxury, which I disagrees, for a ship of 052C's size it packs a lot of weapons that take a lot of internal space, I would say that if it's possible for them to squeeze in another hangar they would have done so over luxury items such as recreational space or extra storage.

Click to expand...

There's no further point in arguing in circles. The plain fact is that the motivation for the PLAN to have 1 or 2 hangars on any destroyers is not available to either of us; what they "would have" or "should have" done consists of pure speculation at this point.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

There's no further point in arguing in circles. The plain fact is that the motivation for the PLAN to have 1 or 2 hangars on any destroyers is not available to either of us; what they "would have" or "should have" done consists of pure speculation at this point.

Click to expand...

Well, without beloaboring the point, I believe there is ample room for a second hangar on the other side of the VLS tubes structurally on the vessel.

For whatever reason...other more important equipment, HVAC, access to the rear deck...whatever, the PLAN has chosen not to use it for that purpose. If they wanted to, however, they could have done so, and could probably refit them that way if they had the mind. Like I say, structurally there's room just like there is on the other side.

Maybe it was simply that they viewed the Type 054A FFGs as having that role, or other of their DDGs. Whatever reason, the current Type 052C do not have it.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

i.e. said:

as a student of history, one would note that Anglo-German Naval Arms Race at beginning of last century ...

Click to expand...

I'm including such a broken quote because I have no intention of returning to this debate. I don't mean it as a challenge; rather, I'm simply curious as to your source on this. If your remember where you read or saw this, I would appreciate this information.

Preux said:

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...

I would think that money would be poured into, first and foremost, increasing the efficiency of the TR modules, such that a greater portion of the power consumed becomes radio energy, and a smaller percentage becomes heat. This would allow you to increase the power of the modules themselves, and/or pack them closer together, to produce a stronger radar with the same power consumption. I would also mean reduced cooling requirements. If the curved cover indeed has something to do with cooling, then this may be just the development were seeing here.

kroko said:

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 ??

Click to expand...

It could also be economic stimulus, or a response to a perceived threat. In either situation, you may go with what is already tried and tested, rather than something new.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Red Moon said:

I would think that money would be poured into, first and foremost, increasing the efficiency of the TR modules, such that a greater portion of the power consumed becomes radio energy, and a smaller percentage becomes heat. This would allow you to increase the power of the modules themselves, and/or pack them closer together, to produce a stronger radar with the same power consumption. I would also mean reduced cooling requirements. If the curved cover indeed has something to do with cooling, then this may be just the development were seeing here.

Click to expand...

What would be neat is if the PLAN is pouring more money into R&D for GaN MMIC's, which is the frontier of AESA technology at this point.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Red Moon said:

I'm including such a broken quote because I have no intention of returning to this debate. I don't mean it as a challenge; rather, I'm simply curious as to your source on this. If your remember where you read or saw this, I would appreciate this information.

.

Click to expand...

Nearly all near modern european history mentions the Anglo-German naval race as a contributing factor leading up to ww1. the references are too many to mention.

Re: DDG 052C Thread

bd popeye said:

Why does a replinishment ship need VLS?? Hell's bell's. Makes no sense to me..It's just taking up space that could be used for supplies. that is the ships job...Also this system must just cramp the crew.

I would love to see what the berthing area on a PLAN ship looks like.

Click to expand...

That's the 891 test bed vessel.

They've been using 891 for years as a test ship...sort of like we use that last Spruance class destroyer.

They put new VLS, new sensors, PARS, all sorts of systems on that baby and then test them out and tweak them before committing them to the line.

Here's one of many pics:



The replenishment ships they have are altogether different of course, like the newer 888. AOR type vessel.

Anyhow, that's how I see it.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

some maybe comparing the Type 052C with Daring Class, but a few years ago a camera team visited on board a Type 45 Destroyer, the commander of the ship stated that its the most advanced air defence ship in the world, it may not do alot of multi-tasking but what it does, it does extremely well

its dedicated air defence can engage and track targets 100s of kms away, and during the excercise Typhoon fighters were flying mock raids against the ship and Type 45 managed to engage all fighters on all occasions

the commander then went on to say, if the Falklands war happened today, a single Daring Class DDG could hold off the entire Argentinian air force single handedly, maybe a slight overkill but if the Royal Navy commmader who commands the ship makes this statment the ship must be good

Type 052C is no doubt a very good destroyer, but i dont think it can match up to Daring Class in terms of air defence

nevertheless Type 052C is a overall very good multi-functional destroyer, plus it has on-board air defence, anti-ship, land attack and sub-surface atttack capabilitys which is a great assets to have

having a fleet of 16 DDGs of the class Type 052C/D will put China in a very good positon in terms of surface fleet