re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Trolling of course. If Chinaguy is really Chinese then I'm Barack Obama's secret Muslim boyfriend.
Trolling of course. If Chinaguy is really Chinese then I'm Barack Obama's secret Muslim boyfriend.
052/052B Class Destroyers
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Maybe they could put the cold-launched missiles here when they carry them.
Maybe they could put the cold-launched missiles here when they carry them.
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
That's what I was thinking actually. A cold launch will probably be enough to boost the missile to a height that's taller than the back wall and probably angled to the side as well. You really only have to be careful with the row of 8 cells closest to that wall anyway.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
i guess it was on cdf then where i mentioned the images of land based hq9 being launched. the missile gets ejected five times its length into the air, then the rocket motor gets ignited. we're talking at least 30 meters clearance over the launch deck and easely over 20 meters of clearance over tallest part of neighbouring superstructures. I watched s300 missiles get launched and i must say it seems as if they don't get ejected as high up as hq9, it seems their engine fires at around 2,5 times their length into the air. Incidentally, s300v missiles get fired into the air a lot, more or less five times their length. It seems the makers of hq9 went that route instead...
as for quad packing - while pl12 with a booster would be a terrific asset - i just don't see that being used anytime soon. 3,3 meter long containerss have to be there for a purpose, any only purpose i can think of for such a fairly short but fat container is to hold four relatively short and probably boosterless missiles. Probably hot launched if that is more efficient, as there is certainly enough area for that and the exhaust in 0.85 * 0.85 meter container.
And with such a missile available, i don't see another, fairly similar system by role if not by range, to be developed soon for the 7 meter containers. It may come eventually, of course, but i wouldn't hold my breath over its perceived urgency for PLAN.
Plus, pl12 means heavier missile and booster means additional weight on top of that, requiring perhaps too demanding of a booster for the exhaust in the container. Even if four such missiles could be packed within 0.6 by 0.6 meter square, the remaining area for exhaust may not be enough to handle firing of a 300+ kg missile.
i guess it was on cdf then where i mentioned the images of land based hq9 being launched. the missile gets ejected five times its length into the air, then the rocket motor gets ignited. we're talking at least 30 meters clearance over the launch deck and easely over 20 meters of clearance over tallest part of neighbouring superstructures. I watched s300 missiles get launched and i must say it seems as if they don't get ejected as high up as hq9, it seems their engine fires at around 2,5 times their length into the air. Incidentally, s300v missiles get fired into the air a lot, more or less five times their length. It seems the makers of hq9 went that route instead...
as for quad packing - while pl12 with a booster would be a terrific asset - i just don't see that being used anytime soon. 3,3 meter long containerss have to be there for a purpose, any only purpose i can think of for such a fairly short but fat container is to hold four relatively short and probably boosterless missiles. Probably hot launched if that is more efficient, as there is certainly enough area for that and the exhaust in 0.85 * 0.85 meter container.
And with such a missile available, i don't see another, fairly similar system by role if not by range, to be developed soon for the 7 meter containers. It may come eventually, of course, but i wouldn't hold my breath over its perceived urgency for PLAN.
Plus, pl12 means heavier missile and booster means additional weight on top of that, requiring perhaps too demanding of a booster for the exhaust in the container. Even if four such missiles could be packed within 0.6 by 0.6 meter square, the remaining area for exhaust may not be enough to handle firing of a 300+ kg missile.
Schumacher
Senior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Forgive him. Some are just upset we now have photos of 64 cells, despite insiders pretty much saying from day one there are.
Forgive him. Some are just upset we now have photos of 64 cells, despite insiders pretty much saying from day one there are.
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
From my previous posts I have already stated multiple times that I would be shocked if there were no rear VLS, but what does this have to do with the rear VLS's proximity to the rear wall? You need to wake up and get a clue. If you can't follow the discussion, you shouldn't be posting dumb, snide remarks.
Forgive him. Some are just upset we now have photos of 64 cells, despite insiders pretty much saying from day one there are.
From my previous posts I have already stated multiple times that I would be shocked if there were no rear VLS, but what does this have to do with the rear VLS's proximity to the rear wall? You need to wake up and get a clue. If you can't follow the discussion, you shouldn't be posting dumb, snide remarks.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Well, just take a look at this pic of the Tico, they have similar beam but that 64 cell MK41 is only a little larger than the 32 cell VLS on the 052D, so I do believe the cells are large, and as the GJB indicated it will quad pack missiles. Which missile is another questions, not anything in HQ16's class that's for sure, a sino-ESSM derived from PL12 is the most likely option. The range will have to be greater than 15km otherwise they might as well just put a few 24 round HQ10 launchers around the ship.
.JPG)
Well, just take a look at this pic of the Tico, they have similar beam but that 64 cell MK41 is only a little larger than the 32 cell VLS on the 052D, so I do believe the cells are large, and as the GJB indicated it will quad pack missiles. Which missile is another questions, not anything in HQ16's class that's for sure, a sino-ESSM derived from PL12 is the most likely option. The range will have to be greater than 15km otherwise they might as well just put a few 24 round HQ10 launchers around the ship.
Schumacher
Senior Member
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
A dumb post is one which thinks PLAN hasn't considered something as obvious as the VLS proximity to the wall and they will compromise safety without having a satisfactory solution to it.
This is not to say the pros are always right can't be questioned but fanboys need to be smarter about it. Spend more time to think why the designers do it their ways and how they might have fixed stuffs instead of thinking you know better because that's the fastest way to show how little one knows.
A dumb post is one which thinks PLAN hasn't considered something as obvious as the VLS proximity to the wall and they will compromise safety without having a satisfactory solution to it.
This is not to say the pros are always right can't be questioned but fanboys need to be smarter about it. Spend more time to think why the designers do it their ways and how they might have fixed stuffs instead of thinking you know better because that's the fastest way to show how little one knows.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Yeah seriously, do they think all these professional engineers are morons or something?
Yeah seriously, do they think all these professional engineers are morons or something?
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
From someone who has shown just about zero knowledge of his own, this is pretty hilarious. The only solution to the proximity problem is the cold launch method, which has already been discussed but which in your drooling haste to respond, must have skipped over as you frenetically typed what you thought was an awesome comeback. It's not a "safety" problem, so I don't really know WTH you are talking about. Try getting with the program. On the other hand, this is not a perfect solution because it limits the flexibility of those cells closest to the wall. Some day the PLAN may switch over to a new hot launch LR SAM, and the inconvenience of this current arrangement will be felt much more obviously. Just because PLAN designers probably found a solution to scorched paint and heat-damaged metal doesn't mean it's a perfect one or one that can't be critiqued. Perhaps if you had any imagination this would not be as much of an issue as it is for you now.