052/052B Class Destroyers
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
Carlo Kopp, for example, thinks it is unlikely the HQ-9 is ARH:
I have been rethinking this assumption for a while now. The land-based version of the HQ-9 uses TVM and has a dedicated fire control radar, the C-band HT-233, paired with the Type 305B search radar. Yet when used in the naval role, all of a sudden it's ARH? I think we need to revisit the possibility that the Type 346 is a C-band or X-band AESA like the APAR system on the Zeven Provincien class "frigates".
Carlo Kopp, for example, thinks it is unlikely the HQ-9 is ARH:
Personally this would be one of the most exciting developments for the CCL, more than any other missile system IMO, VLA's or VL ASCM's. It would be a massive force multiplier for 054A's if it could be quad-packed into their hot launch VLS tubes.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
There is not enough literature out there on naval HQ-9, unfortunately. However there has been semi consistent claims that SAPARS is S band, which led people to believe HHQ-9 must be ARH.
So it's a question of X band SAPARS vs SARH/TVM HHQ-9 (with consistent reports for the land based verison) or S band SAPARS (again, with consistent claims for its S band function) and ARH HHQ-9. It isn't out of the question for the naval SAM to utilize the same fuselage and motor but utilize different electronics.
Quad packable SAMs are definitely a highlight. This Sky dragon SAM/DK-10 looks like a fine missile, with its advantage lying in its guidance mode, compared to ESSM. The advantage of CCL also means a non regular number of cells can be fitted aboard smaller ships if need be, giving them some similar firepower that a larger ship may have.
Personally the most exciting prospect of the CCL VLS is that it allows the PLAN to finally focus on building a larger surface combatant with multiple roles as well as the prospect of carrying new types of munitions as they are developed.
Also, the potential for older surface combatants to be fit with numbers of VLS and loaded with LACMs to be used as missile trucks in a SAG is also an attractive prospect.
There is not enough literature out there on naval HQ-9, unfortunately. However there has been semi consistent claims that SAPARS is S band, which led people to believe HHQ-9 must be ARH.
So it's a question of X band SAPARS vs SARH/TVM HHQ-9 (with consistent reports for the land based verison) or S band SAPARS (again, with consistent claims for its S band function) and ARH HHQ-9. It isn't out of the question for the naval SAM to utilize the same fuselage and motor but utilize different electronics.
Quad packable SAMs are definitely a highlight. This Sky dragon SAM/DK-10 looks like a fine missile, with its advantage lying in its guidance mode, compared to ESSM. The advantage of CCL also means a non regular number of cells can be fitted aboard smaller ships if need be, giving them some similar firepower that a larger ship may have.
Personally the most exciting prospect of the CCL VLS is that it allows the PLAN to finally focus on building a larger surface combatant with multiple roles as well as the prospect of carrying new types of munitions as they are developed.
Also, the potential for older surface combatants to be fit with numbers of VLS and loaded with LACMs to be used as missile trucks in a SAG is also an attractive prospect.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
The problem with this kind of ship is that it most probably would take the cost of 2 type 052C/D destroyers. And keeping in mind that china still has a lot of very old ships to replace, i dont think that they want to sacrifice their numbers like that. at least not for the foreseable future. Unless they significantly increase their shipbuild efforts.
The problem with this kind of ship is that it most probably would take the cost of 2 type 052C/D destroyers. And keeping in mind that china still has a lot of very old ships to replace, i dont think that they want to sacrifice their numbers like that. at least not for the foreseable future. Unless they significantly increase their shipbuild efforts.
Mysterre
Banned Idiot
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
This is not really a significant issue. A 054A is already more potent than a Luda, and they are not necessarily going to replace 1 for 1. Cruisers have a definite role in a future CVBG or SAG, so I'm confident you will see these ships being built, likely within the next 10 years or so, by the time the carrier crew is trained and more or less up to snuff, ready to form the core of a CVBG.
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
I think that is exactly what we will see. Over the last decade chinese shipbuilding has sky rocketed... and it's too early to tell whether it has plateaued yet, which I do not believe it has with their blue water and carrier ambitions.
And like mysterre said, you don't need to replace ships on a one to one basis. In fact it would be unwise, almost impossible to. The couple of ship construction projections that have been put up with some little scant credibility behind them put cruiser type ships to be constructed in parallel with DDGs, so destroyer production shouldn't be compromised.
But let's wait and see. Personally I think the current number of destroyers produced (052C/D) along with frigates will make very potent escorts for liaoning and a very formidable "starter kit CVBG". But if PLAN seriously wants to pursue a long term carrier force of 3-5, then they need a larger number of destroyers and also the inclusion of heavier hitting cruisers.
I think that is exactly what we will see. Over the last decade chinese shipbuilding has sky rocketed... and it's too early to tell whether it has plateaued yet, which I do not believe it has with their blue water and carrier ambitions.
And like mysterre said, you don't need to replace ships on a one to one basis. In fact it would be unwise, almost impossible to. The couple of ship construction projections that have been put up with some little scant credibility behind them put cruiser type ships to be constructed in parallel with DDGs, so destroyer production shouldn't be compromised.
But let's wait and see. Personally I think the current number of destroyers produced (052C/D) along with frigates will make very potent escorts for liaoning and a very formidable "starter kit CVBG". But if PLAN seriously wants to pursue a long term carrier force of 3-5, then they need a larger number of destroyers and also the inclusion of heavier hitting cruisers.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
You don't need to increase shipbuilding capacity if you have an excess of spare capacity already.
According to my sources, civilian orders for ships at Chinese yards have fallen by up to 30%, when you consider the total tonnage of ships China builds annually, that's a massive drop.
I think the entire PLAN modernization process has been accelerated and expanded to help cushion Chinese yards against the global economic downturn.
I think that might have been a factor in the PLAN ordering so many 052Ds in the first batch, and since the outlook does not predict the global economy to get out of it's current funk any time soon, I would fully expect 052D production to continue, maybe even accelerate, and for 054A/B production to continue as well.
The rumored indigenous carrier contract and sudden interest in LHDs may also be more examples of future projects being brought forward and/or expanded.
You don't need to increase shipbuilding capacity if you have an excess of spare capacity already.
According to my sources, civilian orders for ships at Chinese yards have fallen by up to 30%, when you consider the total tonnage of ships China builds annually, that's a massive drop.
I think the entire PLAN modernization process has been accelerated and expanded to help cushion Chinese yards against the global economic downturn.
I think that might have been a factor in the PLAN ordering so many 052Ds in the first batch, and since the outlook does not predict the global economy to get out of it's current funk any time soon, I would fully expect 052D production to continue, maybe even accelerate, and for 054A/B production to continue as well.
The rumored indigenous carrier contract and sudden interest in LHDs may also be more examples of future projects being brought forward and/or expanded.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
re: PLAN Type 052 Class Destroyer
looking good, so that means we have 4 x Type 052C and 3 x Type 052D there
that means
currently 2 x Type 052C 170 and 171 in SSF
and these 4 x Type 052C going to 150-153 in ESF
then 2 x Type 052D could go to finish off flotilla in SSF which would be 172 and 173
then the 3rd Type 052D will be the first to go to NSF as 117
looking good, so that means we have 4 x Type 052C and 3 x Type 052D there
that means
currently 2 x Type 052C 170 and 171 in SSF
and these 4 x Type 052C going to 150-153 in ESF
then 2 x Type 052D could go to finish off flotilla in SSF which would be 172 and 173
then the 3rd Type 052D will be the first to go to NSF as 117