052/052B Class Destroyers

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

antiterror13 said:

The rumour said 12 052Ds will be built .. nobody really knows for sure

Click to expand...

Twelve Type 52D DDGs coupled with Six Type 52C DDGs would be a very potent force indeed, particularly concentrated in the Wstern PAcific.

Not so much if it were employed in world-wide sea lane protection, like the US. Then the PLAN would need more.

But with 18, the PLAN has enough to provide adequate escort for capitol ships like carriers and LHDs, as well as some left over for SAGs involved with other, individual sea lane protection for their own nation.

And...they are impressive vessels.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Blackstone said:

052E? What are its differences with 052D? Is there any publication on the 055?

Click to expand...

note that he said rumours? That's all it is. It's most likely going to be 8 052D and then the next generation of destroyer/cruiser. But this is all speculations until we see them. As with all PLAN projects, wait and see. Things come along pretty quickly, we don't need to waste time speculating.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

SinoSoldier said:

Personally I think that the cruiser will be built simultaneously with the destroyer; there's no way they can make the cruiser in large enough numbers to substitute destroyers. Essentially they already have all the technology needed to build a modern one.

Click to expand...

A while back I think one of the reason they didn't build 10k ton+ cruiser or destroyer is because they have problem with engines that can power ship that size. Is that still a problem.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

jackliu said:

A while back I think one of the reason they didn't build 10k ton+ cruiser or destroyer is because they have problem with engines that can power ship that size. Is that still a problem.

Click to expand...

4 QC-280's in a COGAG arrangement should easily meet propulsion needs for a 12KT cruiser.

Perhaps we will see an emerging pattern in PLAN's future:
Frigates - 4KT, 32 VLS tubes, primarily ASW
Destroyers - 8KT, 64 VLS tubes, primarily AAW
Cruisers - 12KT, 128 VLS tubes, AAW and land attack/strike

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

What happen to 150 and 151? Has it commission yet?

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Mysterre said:

4 QC-280's in a COGAG arrangement should easily meet propulsion needs for a 12KT cruiser.

Perhaps we will see an emerging pattern in PLAN's future:
Frigates - 4KT, 32 VLS tubes, primarily ASW
Destroyers - 8KT, 64 VLS tubes, primarily AAW
Cruisers - 12KT, 128 VLS tubes, AAW and land attack/strike

Click to expand...

Wouldn't the ratios imply 96 as opposed to 128 VLS tubes for the Cruisers?

Also, if the PLAN moves in a SSG or SSGN direction, would they still need a CG/CGN component?

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

t_co said:

Wouldn't the ratios imply 96 as opposed to 128 VLS tubes for the Cruisers?

Also, if the PLAN moves in a SSG or SSGN direction, would they still need a CG/CGN component?

Click to expand...

A nuclear submarine laden with land attack cruise missiles won't perform the same roles as a cruiser, apart from the land attack mission. You can also fit larger radars aboard cruisers, more SAMs and other missiles etc, there's more space for command facilities compared to a destroyer.

I mean that's like suggesting USN should replace their ticos with ohio SSGNs.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

t_co said:

Wouldn't the ratios imply 96 as opposed to 128 VLS tubes for the Cruisers?

Click to expand...

At some point there is only so much space you need for propulsion, hangar, C&C, crew quarters, etc. By way of an example, a 10,000 ton Ticonderoga class cruiser can carry 128 cells and a 9,000 ton AB destroyer can carry 96 cells. PLAN ships will be loading less cells/ton because CCL cells are bigger than Mk 41 hot launch cells.

t_co said:

Also, if the PLAN moves in a SSG or SSGN direction, would they still need a CG/CGN component?

Click to expand...

The only things an SSGN can do is land attack/strike and possibly spec ops insertions depending on how quiet they are. Cruisers will be expected to perform the entire range of missions from ASW, to ASuW, AAW, and land attack/strike.

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

Vid showing the control system for Shtil-1 on 052B

[video=youtube;_cA_bUdq3FA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cA_bUdq3FA[/video]

re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer

I think one reason that PLAN will not go for the 9KT destroyer is that QC-185 has not matured to the point of fitting on the next-gen Destroyer/Cruiser.

Going directly to the 12KT Cruiser/Destroyer actually makes more sense to me: as well as the roles you laid out below that the 12KT Cruiser would play, I think it could also serve the fleet command role, e.g., in a future amphibious assault group consisting of LHD's, LPD's, cruisers/destroyers/frigates. This would require extra electronic and communication equipment as well as extra staff. All of them require extra space. In addition, I think these cruisers can also play ABM role. 9KT class destroyer is a very incremental step up from the 052D and does not have enough differentiation.

Let's wait and see.

Mysterre said:

4 QC-280's in a COGAG arrangement should easily meet propulsion needs for a 12KT cruiser.

Perhaps we will see an emerging pattern in PLAN's future:
Frigates - 4KT, 32 VLS tubes, primarily ASW
Destroyers - 8KT, 64 VLS tubes, primarily AAW
Cruisers - 12KT, 128 VLS tubes, AAW and land attack/strike

Click to expand...