052/052B Class Destroyers
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Certainly some very nice developments regarding this ship, I guess in time we will see the full layout but some aspects are already clear
Regarding the qaulity of the photos you can bet your bottom dollar we can only see what we are allowed, if China didnt wat us to see any pictures we won't simple as that
The Chinese authority's obviously know about these pictures being taken of their vast military machine, and they want that only to the limit they set without crossing the line
They paraded the J16 on a back of a truck through a residential area and express way and in the next months issues of airforce magazines the pictures were in no less than half a dozen issues whereas J20 was unleashed like a storm, magazines and writers didn't even know what to write about it because they had no clue what hit them
Chinese authoritys like to expose themselves now and again so enjoy it but don't push it otherwise we lose the little info we already get
as for Type 052D if authoritys wanted us to see clear shots we would have them but so far that time hasnt arrived, but big shout out to all the journalists and camera people who actually take the time to go and take these amazing pictures for us you do a great job and keep it up!
Certainly some very nice developments regarding this ship, I guess in time we will see the full layout but some aspects are already clear
Regarding the qaulity of the photos you can bet your bottom dollar we can only see what we are allowed, if China didnt wat us to see any pictures we won't simple as that
The Chinese authority's obviously know about these pictures being taken of their vast military machine, and they want that only to the limit they set without crossing the line
They paraded the J16 on a back of a truck through a residential area and express way and in the next months issues of airforce magazines the pictures were in no less than half a dozen issues whereas J20 was unleashed like a storm, magazines and writers didn't even know what to write about it because they had no clue what hit them
Chinese authoritys like to expose themselves now and again so enjoy it but don't push it otherwise we lose the little info we already get
as for Type 052D if authoritys wanted us to see clear shots we would have them but so far that time hasnt arrived, but big shout out to all the journalists and camera people who actually take the time to go and take these amazing pictures for us you do a great job and keep it up!
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
it does seem as if they used up all of the real estate from 052c for the new VLS. And that is a lot - roughly 9 by 12 meters of deck space.
Since this is an AAW destroyer, long range SAM missiles are a given. And since 052c already had infrastructure for actively guided missiles, it seems ludicrous that 052d would install additional radars for semi active guidance.
Therefore i am guesstimating all the SAM missiles in those new VLS will be active guided. Question, however remains: Is the new VLS big enough (bigger than one on 054a) to hold hq9 missiles? Or are we going to see a new variant of hq16? (which would have to have considerably longer range and be actively guided. And at the same time it would mean PLAN gave up on hq16.)
HQ9 of course seems like a better bet, as it is already tested and is surely a good long ranged missile. But the downside is that it doesn't really offer much anti-missile defense, meaning the ship is left with only point defense anti missile systems.
Some new HQ16 variant would offer better anti-missile defense, another layer, not just for the ship which launched the missile but also area protection against incoming missiles, giving better protection to the whole fleet.
Would long range anti-aircraft protection suffer? That is hard to say. A more manouverable missile, but slower, with smaller warhead and smaller radar array.
Up until half a decade or so I would say it is good enough, as USN had just sm-2 variants which suffered from similar issues. But now that USN is pursuing sm-6, which is closer to Hq9 philosophy of intercepting targets - i am not so sure.
Ideally, the new destroyer should carry in that VLS both hq9 and hq16, but somehow that seems like the biggest leap of 'em all.
it does seem as if they used up all of the real estate from 052c for the new VLS. And that is a lot - roughly 9 by 12 meters of deck space.
Since this is an AAW destroyer, long range SAM missiles are a given. And since 052c already had infrastructure for actively guided missiles, it seems ludicrous that 052d would install additional radars for semi active guidance.
Therefore i am guesstimating all the SAM missiles in those new VLS will be active guided. Question, however remains: Is the new VLS big enough (bigger than one on 054a) to hold hq9 missiles? Or are we going to see a new variant of hq16? (which would have to have considerably longer range and be actively guided. And at the same time it would mean PLAN gave up on hq16.)
HQ9 of course seems like a better bet, as it is already tested and is surely a good long ranged missile. But the downside is that it doesn't really offer much anti-missile defense, meaning the ship is left with only point defense anti missile systems.
Some new HQ16 variant would offer better anti-missile defense, another layer, not just for the ship which launched the missile but also area protection against incoming missiles, giving better protection to the whole fleet.
Would long range anti-aircraft protection suffer? That is hard to say. A more manouverable missile, but slower, with smaller warhead and smaller radar array.
Up until half a decade or so I would say it is good enough, as USN had just sm-2 variants which suffered from similar issues. But now that USN is pursuing sm-6, which is closer to Hq9 philosophy of intercepting targets - i am not so sure.
Ideally, the new destroyer should carry in that VLS both hq9 and hq16, but somehow that seems like the biggest leap of 'em all.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Maybe they could squeeze 48 HQ-9 in front when they change to more compact hot launch, and put 32 HQ-16 VLS at the back. Then you'd have the anti-air capability of type 054A and type 052C in one go. This also means that they won't need the type 054A for the carrier groups as they might not be fast enough for top speed requirements anyway, so you can potentially make the carrier group more compact.
Maybe they will have one of the other type 51 ships in the battle group for carrying the anti-ship armament, which reserving this vessel purely for anti-air role.
Maybe they could squeeze 48 HQ-9 in front when they change to more compact hot launch, and put 32 HQ-16 VLS at the back. Then you'd have the anti-air capability of type 054A and type 052C in one go. This also means that they won't need the type 054A for the carrier groups as they might not be fast enough for top speed requirements anyway, so you can potentially make the carrier group more compact.
Maybe they will have one of the other type 51 ships in the battle group for carrying the anti-ship armament, which reserving this vessel purely for anti-air role.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
052C already had infrastructure for ARH missiles? I thought HQ 9 was SARH.?
And I think the question as to whether this "new" VLS ( it may well be the same VLS aboard 054A) is meant to fire HQ-9 orHQ-16, or both, is dependent on whether this new VLS can fire both cold and hot launched missiles, or whether HQ-9 can be modified for hot launch (not impossible as land based HQ-16A is cold launched while naval HHQ-16 is hot launched).
Further, it is interesting that there does indeed seem little to no space for launch racks for ASHMs, so this can mean one of two things – one, the PLAN decided their new DDG doesn't need dedicated surface strike capability and can rely on 64 SAM and expected VLA like weapons. Or, the new VLS can fire AShMs as well, which as repurcussions for its ability to fire LACMs (as many AShMs are similar in size to LACMs). Of course we've been speculating this may be a new common VLS for a while now, years ago when we first heard of 052D. I suppose it's another waiting game to see how the die roll.
052C already had infrastructure for ARH missiles? I thought HQ 9 was SARH.?
And I think the question as to whether this "new" VLS ( it may well be the same VLS aboard 054A) is meant to fire HQ-9 orHQ-16, or both, is dependent on whether this new VLS can fire both cold and hot launched missiles, or whether HQ-9 can be modified for hot launch (not impossible as land based HQ-16A is cold launched while naval HHQ-16 is hot launched).
Further, it is interesting that there does indeed seem little to no space for launch racks for ASHMs, so this can mean one of two things – one, the PLAN decided their new DDG doesn't need dedicated surface strike capability and can rely on 64 SAM and expected VLA like weapons. Or, the new VLS can fire AShMs as well, which as repurcussions for its ability to fire LACMs (as many AShMs are similar in size to LACMs). Of course we've been speculating this may be a new common VLS for a while now, years ago when we first heard of 052D. I suppose it's another waiting game to see how the die roll.
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Not exactly the same. The superstructure is different to accommodate a slightly larger AESA panel, which means upgrading from 052C to 052D standard would be too expensive and impractical. I would hazard a guess and agree that it is likely we are looking at the same 8 6-round revolver VLS modules = 48 missiles, unless a new missile has been developed to go along with the new radar system. I'm not sure the PLAN would adapt the HQ-9 to hot-launch unless they are extremely confident of its reliability as well as its compatibility with hot-launch VLS modules. There would definitely have to be some software changes to deal with the change in flight profile.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Doesn't the first picture effectively prove that the 052D is using the new square celled universal VLS?
the second picture seems to give a strong indication that there is no lengthening of the hull as the proportions does not seemed to have changed much compared to the 052C. The circled area is just where the AShM launchers would have gone on the 052C, and they may just be not yet installed here as there seem about the same amount of room left there.
The hanger has been changed and I cannot see any signs of VLS cells on top of the hanger any more, although there is what appears to be a big round hole with no sign of the rear CIWS, so that might go on the hole at the front of the hanger instead of right at the rear as on the 052C.
Wish they would just post some decent pictures of this new ship already.
I guess it's saying there's another 32 cell VLS in there.
Doesn't the first picture effectively prove that the 052D is using the new square celled universal VLS?
the second picture seems to give a strong indication that there is no lengthening of the hull as the proportions does not seemed to have changed much compared to the 052C. The circled area is just where the AShM launchers would have gone on the 052C, and they may just be not yet installed here as there seem about the same amount of room left there.
The hanger has been changed and I cannot see any signs of VLS cells on top of the hanger any more, although there is what appears to be a big round hole with no sign of the rear CIWS, so that might go on the hole at the front of the hanger instead of right at the rear as on the 052C.
Wish they would just post some decent pictures of this new ship already.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Here's an enlarged image of a previous posted pic. I think it was over at FYJ it was noticed in front of the left side frame of the archway of the building behind it, they say it's a FL-3000 on the rear part of the ship. I can't tell if that's something on the 052D, behind it or on top of the structure in front.
Here's an enlarged image of a previous posted pic. I think it was over at FYJ it was noticed in front of the left side frame of the archway of the building behind it, they say it's a FL-3000 on the rear part of the ship. I can't tell if that's something on the 052D, behind it or on top of the structure in front.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
I think it's just an optical illusion, the last pic you posted shows there is nothing on top of the hangar, certainly no HQ-10.
---
xpost from CDF:
I think this VLS we are seeing is as completely new system. If you look at pictures of 054a and it's VLS, you can just see how much space there is left on both sides of it. Considering 052c and 054a have the same beam, and that this new VLS seems to offer not much more clearance on both sides compared with the VLS of 052C, it must follow that this is a new VLS.
Of course, clearer pictures from different angles may prove it is the same VLS as 054a, but if it is not, and it is a different, larger VLS, I think we can logically conclude that 052Ds VLS is meant to fire something beyond HQ-16 and CY-X, otherwise PLAN would have simply installed 054As VLS instead.
Also, posted by hongjian showing what looks quite accurate to be the 052D's VLS configuration overlaid on top of 052C model:
Here's an enlarged image of a previous posted pic. I think it was over at FYJ it was noticed in front of the left side frame of the archway of the building behind it, they say it's a FL-3000 on the rear part of the ship. I can't tell if that's something on the 052D, behind it or on top of the structure in front.
I think it's just an optical illusion, the last pic you posted shows there is nothing on top of the hangar, certainly no HQ-10.
---
xpost from CDF:
I think this VLS we are seeing is as completely new system. If you look at pictures of 054a and it's VLS, you can just see how much space there is left on both sides of it. Considering 052c and 054a have the same beam, and that this new VLS seems to offer not much more clearance on both sides compared with the VLS of 052C, it must follow that this is a new VLS.
Of course, clearer pictures from different angles may prove it is the same VLS as 054a, but if it is not, and it is a different, larger VLS, I think we can logically conclude that 052Ds VLS is meant to fire something beyond HQ-16 and CY-X, otherwise PLAN would have simply installed 054As VLS instead.
Also, posted by hongjian showing what looks quite accurate to be the 052D's VLS configuration overlaid on top of 052C model:
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
I have to say, it does make me suspicious that they wouldn't just post an unadulterated photo, since if this picture were real, who the hell would want to see a blurry black and white modification of the original instead of the original itself? OTOH a picture like this one would be very easy to PS. We'll just have to wait for some clearer photos of the deck.
Also the mid-section VLS seems a little too close to the walls. Any ascending missiles would do a fair bit of damage to those walls (over the long term) as well as any exposed electronics or other hardware on the roofs. Also, this middle section VLS takes up an ENORMOUS amount of internal space that was previously already occupied, and IMO would almost certainly necessitate a lengthening of the hull to accommodate this VLS. If what we are seeing is legit, it looks like 8x8=64 air defense missiles. If no FCR's get installed, we are looking at active terminal homing and either an HQ-9 adapted to hot-launch or a new active missile altogether. Frankly I'm hoping for a new active missile that can accept a booster so they can send that puppy out to 200+ km.
Wow, I didn't even see that photo! Hmmm...
I have to say, it does make me suspicious that they wouldn't just post an unadulterated photo, since if this picture were real, who the hell would want to see a blurry black and white modification of the original instead of the original itself? OTOH a picture like this one would be very easy to PS. We'll just have to wait for some clearer photos of the deck.
Also the mid-section VLS seems a little too close to the walls. Any ascending missiles would do a fair bit of damage to those walls (over the long term) as well as any exposed electronics or other hardware on the roofs. Also, this middle section VLS takes up an ENORMOUS amount of internal space that was previously already occupied, and IMO would almost certainly necessitate a lengthening of the hull to accommodate this VLS. If what we are seeing is legit, it looks like 8x8=64 air defense missiles. If no FCR's get installed, we are looking at active terminal homing and either an HQ-9 adapted to hot-launch or a new active missile altogether. Frankly I'm hoping for a new active missile that can accept a booster so they can send that puppy out to 200+ km.